two witnesses

Sometimes Scripture has more than one meaning, too, ya know.

 

This is the fundy forum right? I mean, do you get to decide which passages have more than one meaning? Amazing.

 

Whatever is that supposed to mean? Oh, I get it - it's a joke, right?

[ June 06, 2003, 10:36 AM: Message edited by: SheEagle9/11 ]

 

This is the fundy forum and you are advocating that Scripture has more than one meaning.

This is amazing to me. What Scripture has more than one meaning? Can you give an example? Is that what you personally believe, what your church believes, or what Larkin believed?

I expect this stuff from others, but never here. Oh well...

 

Perhaps this might be the subject of another thread. I am perfectly aware this is the fundy forum, I was one of the ones who wanted it.

Are you unaware that some Scriptures may have more than one meaning? Right off, the eye of the needle & camel could be one such verse. Nothing mysterious, no numerology or way out theology, but some verses have layers of meaning.

Or has that never happened to you. I have read Scriptures that spoke to my heart in one way one time and another way on reading the same passage another time.

I HOPE I'm never so full of myself that I can't listen to the leading of the Holy Spririt. I HOPE I'm never so full of myself that I can't grasp deeper meanings (like meat rather than milk) of Scripture.

But what do I know. I'm not a theology student, just an old dog (or sheep) who has walked with the Lord for many, many years.

PS: If you have some bone to pick at, pick at some liberal modernist who denies the virgin birth or the deity of Christ or something. Good Grief!

[ June 06, 2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: SheEagle9/11 ]

 

No Scripture has more than one meaning, ever.

What do you not get. This is the exact same attitude that the liberals have. They merely change which verses have multiple meanings.

They say the multiple meanings apply to homosexuality, issues about Christ, Scripture, God, and the rest.

How can you verify whether or not God did not speak to their heart on an issue? You have made yourself as the final authority.

It is the same thing, just a different focus.

I expected to NEVER see this on the non-liberal forum.

 

OK, Preach, I'll just rely on you to be the sole & final authority on interpretation of Scripture from now on.


NOT!

 

How great is this: I am arguing with someone over the number of meanings Scripture can have.

Where are ya Murph? Bob? Do you guys believe this stuff?

 

Hey, sometimes one speaks cryptically or with a double meaning.

Jesus called himself the "son of man" a lot. Was this being humble or was this identifying himself with this reference:

Dan 7:13-14
13 "I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.
14 "And to Him was given dominion,
Glory and a kingdom,
That all the peoples, nations and men of every language
Might serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away;
And His kingdom is one
Which will not be destroyed.
NASU

Perhaps a little bit of both.

 

Yep, where are you guys? The thread has gone way off in a tangent. The moment the two witnesses of Revelation was explained to be scripture, Israel and the House of Judah, the flesh & the law, or something other than two people, this thread should have been locked already!

But because I merely suggested that sometimes Scripture can mean more than one specific thing, I am accused of being a liberal - a defamation of my character. A liberal! REALLY! The worst accusation someone could make about me. The gravest of offenses! Call me an old bag if you want to, but don't call me a liberal...EVER!

[ June 06, 2003, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: SheEagle9/11 ]

 

are you stating that (if) scripture has two meanings that you have to be a liberal.?

I would say that if someone who strictly holds to the "words" of God only being completely literally interpreted. would put that person in a minority among fundamentalists and their interpretations.

a person relying on their own personal viewpoint without First Gods intervention of the actual meaning would instill within me a question.
do i understand God before I read his scripture or do I rely on my carnal mind to create what He is saying to me by guessing what was initially expressed.

God teaches my spirit first..not my mind.

He show me through faith what is truth. through wisdom and understanding. together they represent knowledge of my God and my self.
then I turn to the sciptures to parallel the knowledge into words, that my carnal mind can store for later witnessing to others, and also to feed (to teach) myself .
wisdom and understanding is given to us first spiritually and then we use Gods words of scripture to understand in our carnal reckonings.
when I read in his book and find similar peoples with similar experiences and interpretations that I already know within my spirit (by faith) is truth. I hold those truths through experience through faith (understanding).

in revelation..the witnesses are symbolic
(as is also the enemy that they battle against)

the two "witnesses" are wisdom and understanding.

you may call them law and grace..
ok..together within us. That works.

written on our hearts and expressed through our lives...together.

jesus our lord (the word) (wisdom) and the
holy spirit (teacher of understanding)

(cant those two Gods be considered two "men"?)

the combination of these two working in the believers life in the process of sanctification.

and then theres the laver and alter in the OT.

the renewing of our minds, and works of God in our life through sacrifice of our flesh.
or living in grace through faith.

Pro 2:2 So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, [and] apply thine heart to understanding;

and then theres a final thought.. the work of God has no Glory of flesh. no contribution of selfish flesh has a part in Gods work of salvation. "man" being represented as the two witnesses here cannot be representing any carnal man but someone that contains a holy body. bodies that can not "die".

actually the "beast" in this vision represents carnal man..the sinful false sacrifice before God.

God is fighting against carnal flesh via wisdom and understanding.. His two witnesses within us..

its symbolic.

remember paul when he says works without faith is dead...same idea. wisdom without understanding is dead.
faith without works is dead. works without faith is dead. (or incomplete).
they both complement each other to form a whole comprehension.

or tounges
without interpretation ?..

faith (wisdom) with works (understanding).
tounges (wisdom) with interpretation (understanding).
revelation (wisdom) with interpretation (understanding).
doctrine (wisdom) with interpretation (understanding).
law (wisdom) with grace (understanding).


hear what the spirit says. rev 13:9

ear and eyes of faith.
ears (wisdom) and eyes (understanding)

God always teaches us in two ways and both are vital together to know God.

we hear the law (wisdom)...
and express in Love (understanding).


Me2

 

This is the fundy forum right? I mean, do you get to decide which passages have more than one meaning? Amazing. </font>[/QUOTE]Perhaps she meant Scriptures can have more than one application.

There is only one correct interpretation, but there is a multitude of applications.

 

Murphy,

I didnt say that Gods scriptures were not inspired nor that they were not inerrant.

I was taking the view from the readers vantage point.

without God..the bible is just another book.
inspired or not. just another book waiting to express Gods thoughts in a language our carnal mind can grasp.

think about all the translations of Gods scriptures. what about those people without a translation. Can God speak to those spirits. sure.
but those with a translated version can more easily put together more complex ideas which God presents to the individuals.

Now if you have an opinion of the "two witnesses".
I'll be glad to listen, but be assured. I'll not personally judge you and Gods relationship with You. or even tell you that you're wrong in how you translate Gods scripture.
Its Gods and Your relationship. Who am I to Judge.

Think about this murphy. God can use any book He wants to teach you. any book. Its just this one is specifically talking about Himself.

or isnt this bullitin board inspired or not to some degree. Isnt God with us speaking thru Us.

Or is That too Liberal for you?.

Me2

 

Then I guess you don't believe there are types of Christ throughout Scripture. How sad. You've only cheated yourself from the deeper blessings of God's Word.

 

Types were not two meanings. The Law itself looks forward to a fulfillment one day. That would be part of the interpretation then, wouldn't it.

I just reject your esoteric nonsense about Scripture having two meanings. As I pointed out, it is the same attitude of the liberals. You just pick different areas. You couldn't argue that point. You just tried to play the martyr.

I will ask again, Murph or Bob, where are you? Is this the "fundy forum" or the "non outright liberal forum" or "more conservative than the theology forum forum"?

Just consider where this will lead you theologically people. I still can't believe this. I am so grieved.

 

There is a sometimes a thin line between grief and Holy Spirit conviction. Perhaps it is conviction for calling me a liberal when you know in your heart of hearts I am not.

 

Yes they are. There is the literal meaning AND the prophetic or type of Christ meaning.

But you are playing the semantics game because pride will not allow you to admit when you were wrong to jump all over me unjustly. Pride goeth before a fall.

And besides, you should have more respect for the old sheep, including me. I was studying Scripture before you were even born.

 

1. No they aren't. You show me where you have the liberty to declare any passage to have two meanings.

2. Again, the law was by nature incomplete and always looked forward to the Christ to usher in a New and final covenant. Not the same thing you are saying.

3. No semantics. You are trying to downplay the fact that your reasoning is parallel to the liberals. Answer that and stop dodging it.

4. Excellent Scripture and truth.

5. I get it. Since you are old, you get a pass at bad theology. Forget it, bad theology is bad theology. I will tell you this, if such teaching was going on in the church I attend, and I knew about it, it would be addressed in a very firm manner.

6. We all need to continue also. Tell me, how many meanings does Gen. 1:1 have? What about Gen. 1:2? What about Gen 1:3? Get the point?