The Doctrines of Devils - A new thread - traditional viewpoint

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Max Kennedy, Mar 12, 2011.

  1. Max Kennedy

    Max Kennedy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a new thread as invited at the end of the old one, this time taken the opposing commentary in view, since despite the naysaying, there is another view in the literature.

    These verses were particularly instrumental in the discussion of "if it is ok to kill people or not", and "if casting charms or other superstitions are real or not". For instance see Reginald Scot (books burned), Roger Williams (fled to RI), Thomas Ady, George Burroughs (preacher falsely accused and killed), John Webster etc. These works are also similar to those that talked about priestcraft, another form of superstition, and in turn are similar to abolitionist books at a later time proclaming that the bible condemns slavery.

    I only posted the above to show that there have been whole books written on these passages, and that it played a role in ending superstition, which is a sin and needed to be ended. There is a long history of writing about the superstitions of priestcraft, starting in the 12th century, including the bells, holy water, crosses, and other things thought to drive away devils.

    It shows a certain amount of ignorance to say these verses have nothing to say about superstition, when a whole lot of people have been persecuted over them from superstition.

    I note two things.
    This, despite the charges of some, is not church doctrine one way or the other of any denomination I know. Claiming authority that you do not have as anyones teacher, when only God is, would be wrong. This is how I understand the verses, as God has led me to understand them. And no one has a right to insist that another person understand scripture differently than he has in truth been lead by God to understand them. Only God is our teacher.

    Two, the only difference between the two viewpoints, is that the one side attempts to make this a general thing about false doctrine from devils - which is said elsewhere in scripture. The other says that, and re-emphasing old wives tales and superstitions, which would cause both the forbidding to marry and (new age style) fasting.

    Both are true. But no church has a problem believing there is false doctrine. Churches argue (and violate acting like a Christian) over false doctrine all the time.

    Many have a problem with the sin of superstition. The catholic church is well known for it, where it is called priestcraft. But I am seeing that the protestant churches also have this problem - which is why you are seeing increasing amounts of a strong delusion in this society. God is absolute sovereign. He shares His glory with no one.

    http://kingjbible.com/1_timothy/4.htm

    1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: 5For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

    6If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. 7But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. 8For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. 9This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
    ------

    It is not right to judge another man's servant, place yourself before God and another, etc. God is my teacher. So I humbly put these facts before you the reader, that you may be wrong about how you are interpreting scripture if you have another view. It goes against the historical view mentioned above for instance, which may not be the only understanding. A Christian who is a mature Christian knows how to discuss without being demanding, so I don't insist you believe, and know that someones conscience may see something another does not yet see.

    This discussion so far (from the last thread), as near as I can see, avoids the discussion about what is superstitious and old wives fables, which would led to improving apostate churches. That is what I actually believe is the important thing here. Apart from pride - which could I suppose be a knee jerk reaction from devils - making it a doctrine of devils again, don't all churches believe already that satan is the cause of much lies among churches from many other scriptures? But this one emphasis old wives fables and superstitious undertakings like not marrying or abstaining from food, or other bodily excercises - which forbidding to marry and fasting are and is quoted right after old wives fables.

    REPENT SINNER. It is not funny. Just admit you're wrong.
     
    #1 Max Kennedy, Mar 12, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2011
  2. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no end of TRADITION in the realm of intepretation in regard to many biblical texts but TRADITION is not the guide for rightly dividing the word of Truth! Context is the guide. Who cares what TRADITION of men may say or not say in regard to any specific text except those who place TRADITIONS on equal authority with God's Word?? Do you place it on equal authority with God's Word? It is God's Word that determines the validity of human traditions and interpretations (Isa. 8:20) not vice versa.


    The true ignorance is ignoring the contextual grammar and development of thought in this text. This text is an expressive warning against those who shall "depart from the faith" and why they depart from the faith. However, you completely ignore this contextual definition of the subject. These "spirits" or "demons" are only introduced to define the ultimate source for seducing "some" to depart from 'the faith." However, you have flip flopped the entire context and made the subject to be "superstitions" promoted ABOUT demons rather than the true and clear objective of this text which is defining demons as the source of seducing "some" in departing from "the faith."

    The immediate preceding context identifes "the faith" from which they depart and it includes the congregation as the "pillar and ground of THE TRUTH" (I Tim. 3:15) as well as the Person and Redemptive work of Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 3:16). It is the essentials of Salvation and service. The particular application of forbidding to marry and from eating certain meats had to do with the ascetic groups (Gnostics, Jewish gnosticism; etc.) of that day which includes such things as part of ones personal salvation or a salvation by works. It certainly includes much more than these two examples as John explicitly points out that spirits/demons are the source of all false doctrines (1 Jn. 4:1,6).

    Again, your interpretation repudiates the true subject that is identified and stated in the text, which is departure "from the faith" through the seductive influence of spirits. That seductive influence is clearly and explicitly stated to be in the form of "doctrines" that originate with demons. That is the cause for this departure from "the faith."

    You do not violate acting like a Christian by identifying the source of false doctrine with demons (1 Tim. 4:1; 1 Jn. 4:1,6). False doctrine does not originate with the Spirit of Christ but with demons and that is clearly taught here and in 1 John 4:1,6.

    This text has NOTHING to do with "supersitition" but with the declaration and causes for "some" departing from the faith! Supersititons and traditions of men are simply ADDED examples of things that originate not with the Spirit of God but with demons.


    Many claim to be servants of the Lord but the Lord himself warns against simply accepting that claim (Mt. 7:15-20) and so does the apostle John (1 Jn. 4:1). Instead, their fruits are to be inspected and their teaching is to be tried and we are to conclude by comparing their fruits and teaching to the Scriptures whether they are servants of God or Satan and self (Isa. 8:20). If they speak not according to God's Word they are to be regarded as without light in regard to what they are saying and if they preach another gospel they are to be regarded as "ACCURSED." If they teach things that seduce others to depart from "the faith" once delivered they are to be regarded as instruments of demons and their doctrines originating with demons.

    No one is challenging your liberty to believe what you like. That is your freedom to do so. However, if you are insisting that what you present or teach should not be tested by the scriptures or that it is wrong to condemn teaching that the Scriptures condemn then that is not charity but sloppy agape and rebellion against God's Word.

    No one has the right to judge anyone but everyone has the right to side with God's Judgements revealed in His Word. You can stand with Him or stand against him - that is your choice. However, for those who choose to stand with God's judgements, it is wrong to accuse them of judging others when in fact God's word has judged and they simply stand with God's Word.

    For example, the Scriptures make the judgement that all who preach another gospel are to be regarded as "accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9). It is not judgemental to agree with that assessment by God's word and identify those who preach a false gospel as such.

    Again, you are confusing I Timothy 4:7 with verses 1-6! Verse seven simply adds to the list but does not change the subject introduced in verse 1. The subject is the declaration that some will depart from the faith and identification of the reason for that departure which is traced to seductive doctrines originating with demons. You are taking verse 7 and making it the subject and thus flip flopping the whole text to suit your own false conceptions.
     
  3. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Tim. 4:1 ΒΆ Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith

    Now some on this forum disagree with Paul and would revise his words to mean this:

    "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that in the latter times some shall embrace superstitious about devils...."


    Now this may represent the "traditional" view but it certainly does not represent Paul's actual words!
     
  4. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    And you are wrong about this "thing".
    God gave us the Scriptures.
    Then, God gave us pastors, teachers, evangelists to teach us.
    The institution that he has ordained in this dispensation of grace, or this church age is the local church. We receive teaching from the local church, that institution which God ordained.

    Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Ephesians 4:8)
    And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; (Ephesians 4:11)
    For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: (Ephesians 4:12)

    Concerning the above Scripture, Christ gave evangelists, pastors, and teachers, to the local churches of today for the maturity of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.
    You are wrong. God has given us teachers.
    You are making a distinction where there is none to be made. Look at the KJV:

    If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. (1 Timothy 4:6)
    --This verse is the start of a new paragraph, a new topic, a break from the previous verses. The entire chapter is not given to doctrine of demons. Paul is now taking up another subject, as he concludes the previous. Thus you have made a false dichotomy. There are no two opposing points of view. Verses 6 and 7, especially verse 7 has nothing to do with verses 1 to 5.
    Both are not related.
    Some have a problem with hermeneutics, eh?
    I recognize that for false doctrine but not "old wives tales," as verse 7 uses the term.
    Many protestant churches have many different problems. I don't have clue of what you are talking about.
    Who is judging servants? I haven't seen that going on here. Has slavery returned to America?
    I always place myself before God. He is my Lord and Savior. I wouldn't have it any other way.
    Is He your only teacher?
    Aaaah, I see. You just inferred that you are a Gnostic; you have higher information; that your view is right by the right of your own higher intellect and source of inner knowledge. You are right and the rest of the world is wrong. Pure Gnosticism.
    There is only one interpretation of Scripture--God's interpretation.
    It is the reader's duty to find out what God's interpretation is. That is, what is God saying to the reader? God is not saying two different things (or more) to the same people. He has but one message. He is a God of order, not of confusion. It seems to me that you are the one that is confused, not God.
    Paul was writing to Timothy who was not apostate. His church in Ephesus was not apostate. His advice to Timothy would be well for you to take as well:

    But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. (1 Timothy 4:7)
    --That is a good truth to abide by. It is sad that on this board you are not taking the advice given but actually doing the opposite.
    That is not what is being discussed here, and that response only indicates that you have not understood the entire discussion on "doctrines of demons."
    Verse seven has nothing to do with verses 1 to 5. You must keep Scripture in its context, not out of context. Like I said, they are in a different paragraph as they should be. There are different topics discussed in the chapter. There is no reason to connect forbidding to marry to an old wives tale. In fact it is an absurd idea since it is not one, and has no foundation in history or any ancient literature. It is only your imagination here; perhaps your "gnosticism" speaking here.
    Good advice. Are you going to take it.
     
  5. Max Kennedy

    Max Kennedy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    A couple of more insults from two posters, an appeal to authority (ie "your" interpretation - I listed a whole slew of Christians who have understood it the same way), but really everyone ought to be able to read the bible themselves.

    These verses have originally been used around justifications for murdering people. I am not sure what the difference between *false doctrines of devils* is suppose to be apart from *false doctrines*, since men are fully capable of lying themselves without needing a demon, but I suppose by demonizing false doctrine, it encourages some to murder others if you don't agree with them. But not reading the next two to three lines to see what the context is - old wives tales, bad doctrine,and physical excercise, is hard to see. At least I am not "demonizing" your motives. Isn't "demonization" itself demonic? Perhaps the way I have presented of reading it is better because of that, because it doesn't allow it.

    Roger Williams and George Burroughs in particular from the authors cited above were both famous baptists persecuted in disputes which revolved around issues including these verses and cause of conscience, although Burroughs may have been false accused of being a baptist. Since this is a baptist board, I would think that would relevant.

    For those who are born again, Jesus Christ is our teacher. Matthew 23:8. The insistence that everyone understand every verse in the bible exactly the same as some of the posters has suggested, which is impossible, is probably caused from lack of that. This certainly isn't a tenent of any official church doctrine I am aware of, but some of the posters are acting like it is. When you allow that God is everyone's teacher, the need to be angry (or murder), doesn't exist. Old wife fables is what the verses mean. It's the unrighteous desire to be others teachers above the Lord that causes the hate you see many places. It is why I am sure Jesus is coming back soon. He is with me, so I can not understand how he is not with you.

    Jesus Christ teaches us to be gentle for one. Call no man your teacher.
     
    #5 Max Kennedy, Mar 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 14, 2011
  6. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    Your profile says TA.
    Doesn't that mean "Teacher's Assistant"?? :sleeping_2:
     
  7. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems that you interpret "insults" to be any kind of critique of what you write or any condemnation of any position you take???????? Are you above error? Are you the final authority?


    Are the traditions of men your authority? They must be your authority because when your "Traditional" interpretation is challenged by what the text actually says, its grammar, its structural development - you believe you are being insulted!!!!!

    Paul tells Timothy explicitly what the subject is ("some shalll depart from the faith") and yet you reject Paul's explicit definitive subject and substitute it by statements taken six verses later. Does the word "hermeneutics" ring any kind of bell with you?


    1 John 2:29 says it is the Holy Spirit that is our teacher. Jesus said that He would send "another comforter" who would teach us! Do you actually believe the Holy Spirit teaches contrary to the Word of God which is inspired by the Holy Spirit??? Is God the author of confusion????


    So you believe God is the author of confusion! He can lead one person to understand a certain text one way and lead another person to understand the same text in a completely opposite sense?????? The Holy Spirit has a contextual based purpose for every text and that is why Paul tells Timothy to "rightly divide" the word of truth! If we allow Scripture to interpret scripture then we will come to the same meaning the Holy Spirit designed that text to convey. Paul tells the church at Corinth that they should have the "same mind" but you imply that such does not need to be the case.



    Only if you are blind in both eyes and missing all ability to read and follow a contextual line of thought! Paul tells you precisely what the subject is about "some shall depart from the faith" and he tells you precisely what is the cause behind this departure ("giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils" and he tells you precisely the consequences in regard to the person being seduced (lying....seared conscience) and examples of such doctrines (forbidding to marry, commanding to abstain from meats) but you believe you know better than what Paul explicitly and clearly states!!!!


    Have you ever read Ephesians 4:11? Have you ever read Acts 13:1-2? Have you ever read 1 Cor. 12:28?


    Since Christ expressly warns against false prophets and teachers and says that we can know them by their "fruits" (Mt. 7:15-20). Since John tells us not to believe what everyone says but try the spirits (1 Jn. 4:1). May I ask you how do you know that Christ is with you?? What Biblical basis do you have to make such a claim???? Is that insultive to you that some one asks for Biblical evidence for your claims???
     
  8. Max Kennedy

    Max Kennedy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, and you will notice I did not appeal to anyone believing me - an appeal to my authority, but just to read the bible and ask the Lord.
     
  9. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    You are an assistant to a teacher. What does he/she think about that approach? Is that the approach you also teach your students to gain knowledge? They don't need to listen to you, just read the Bible and ask the Lord for guidance. You are just a teacher, not even that--the assistant of a teacher; someone (in your own opinion) who is expendable. Your own view--do away with the teachers and depend fully on the Lord. Don't you teach your students that? You are not being hypocritical are you?
     
  10. Max Kennedy

    Max Kennedy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Even pagans argue more honestly. I already listed several reasons why this isn't an honest way to discuss anything with others, you can ask others for more examples. Rebuke your brother frankly so you do not take part in his guilt.

    It also says don't argue with those who are clamorous, probverbs 9, and to let your greeting return to you to the houses that don't greet you back, and to shake your shoes of the dust to those cities that don't receive you. So I'm going to follow the Lord's advice and not argue with you.

    The verses in the next two-three sentences are about physical excercises, which both fasting, and forbidden to marry is what pagans often consider them to be.

    If you don't allow doctrines of devils to be superstition, it makes no matter because old wife fables is, and the whole thing is one thought.

    The things I see that could be a problem to yourself with your interpretation of these verses is this:

    It ignores superstitution. Superstition includes religous superstitution - which, for instance, Pilgrims Progress shows it used this way in when the Pilgrims are in court at Vanity Fair.

    It promotes the idea that doctrines of devils means all false doctrine - which clearly isn't the meaning, because men may be mistaken or lie to themselves, without any help from a devil. It equally has the tendancy to demonize all those with anything viewed as false doctrine as demonic - as opposed to simply being wrong. This seems to be somewhat the thought of a large part of the religious persecutions in the past - but God says to put away all wraith from you.

    Futhermore, it isn't *objective*. Knowing that false doctrine can come from devils does not mean that anyone holding a false doctrine got it from a devil. Some got it from their belly. There is no objective way to know this, which makes such accusations false by their nature.

    The way I've read it keeps all meanings intact, does not led one to accuse others falsely, and also mentions the next few verses in context. I certainly also believe in devils, that they create false doctrines at times, and that fasting and forbidding to marry are examples. The next few verses on old wives fables and physical excercises show they aren't the only examples.

    With that, I'm letting my greeting return to me.
     
    #10 Max Kennedy, Mar 19, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 19, 2011
  11. Max Kennedy

    Max Kennedy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    I said I disagreed. I gave a list of books showing the disagreement is historical, and gave some examples, which is enough. The right thing is to leave, and be careful that I am with Jesus and not get involved with anything that goes against His Word. So with that, I leave you as well.
     
    #11 Max Kennedy, Mar 19, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 19, 2011
  12. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is certainly your right to disagree with anyone and with anything you like.



    No one accused you of standing alone. Providing evidence of a traditional viewpoint is certainly a scholarly approach.





    Which is enough for what? To prove others take your view? Certainly! To prove your view is correct? Hardly! Error has its tradition and supporters as well.




    So, you think that merely expressing your disagreement and providing a list of people who share your position proves you are right and is the end of all dispute and therefore the proper response is to accuse everyone who provides contrary evidence and condemns your position as error as insulters and take your marbles and go home?????


    I fully agree that you should be careful that you are "with Jesus"! Indeed, we have provided evidence you are not "with Jesus" in regard to your position, much less, with Paul who wrote it. YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANYTHING TO DEMONSTRATE we are in error or that our position is not the position of Christ, Paul and the Holy Spirit who inspired these words! You have only ASSERTED a position but have not demonstrated that your position is exegetically sound or in agreement with the context.

    What arrogancy! You have not provided ANY EXEGETICAL BASIS to demonstrate that the position we advocate is "against His Word." We have provided EXEGETICAL and GRAMMATICAL evidence that your position "goes against His Word." What arrogant elitism "So with that, I leave you as well."

    I will tell you exactly why you are leaving! You cannot respond to the contextual evidence we have presented - period! If you could, you would but since you can't, you stoop to such personal insults and elite arrogancy.
     
    #12 Dr. Walter, Mar 19, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 19, 2011

Share This Page

Loading...