Keep up the good work. Hermeneutics is very needed everywhere. When I was a young Christian I had so many questions from reading the Bible. The more I read, the more questions I had. Eventually after asking pastors and church leaders for help, I realized that not one I asked could help me. So I quit reading the Bible because of so many unanswered questions and and an increasing frustration. After going to seminary I was determined that every person I met with and every church I pastored would study hermeneutics. I am retired now, but I still teach hermeneutics in the church and with each man I meet with. It is amazing what happens to the people when they realize there are answers and they have tools to help them. Evangelism increases and the teaching becomes better. The people expect more of themselves and study more.
The tanakh and gospels made a lot more sense after I earned my doctorate and had studied other holy scriptures. In academia, you learn exegesis and how to formulate a cogent thesis, and you learn when there simply isn't enough textual support for a given thesis. You also learn the difference between Scripture and dogma. The biggest lie people believe is that you can be an expert on holy scripture having only ever studied one book. I had great teachers and great mentors, who saved me from falling victim to a limiting ideology.
@@LiRoss-w7o No I don't. There are some books I would recommend. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: Fourth Edition by Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart Reconnecting God's Story to Ministry: Cross-cultural Storytelling at Home and Abroad by Tom A. Steffen (This is an excellent book on why stories were told and the details of stories. They are not stories as we think of stories. Jesus told stories that when given some thought result in many thoughts. Older and younger people benefit from the stories in the Bible. They will different things in the stories). Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes: Patronage, Honor, and Shame in the Biblical World by E. Randolph Richards & Richard James Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible by E. Randolph Richards & Brandon J. O'Brien Reading the Bible with Rabbi Jesus: How a Jewish Perspective Can Transform Your Understanding by Lois Tverberg Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes: Honor and Shame in Paul's Message and Mission by Brad Vaughn Once you begin to realize that about 1-2 percent of the people could read and write then you will understand scripture better and not be susceptible to artificial ways of interpretation. Narratives must be interpreted as stories. For example many stories are repeated in the Old and New Testaments. The exodus is referenced in the Old and New Testaments. All of scripture was read out loud. The part that is missing in reading is an active voice and all that goes with the voice. When someone reads the Bible flat they are reading in a way that it was never intended to be read. Scripture is active, but someone can read it as though it were dead. Think about how someone would have heard the Bible read in a society that could not read and write. Notice in Hebrews 11 how many stories are referenced. Some years ago a man and I were talking and he asked me how many stories I thought people in the church could tell. I told him "three" and he said "two." The average American knows some doctrine but they can tell almost no stories. For example tell yourself the story of Jonah and see how much of the story you can tell. People in oral societies have an oral Bible they have memorized. People like that have a part of their brain that is far more developed than reading societies. Those who deal with younger people know they do not read as much and listen to videos, podcasts, etc. To be able to reach them we must reach them in ways that communicate with them. A lot of how we talk is in stories. However we do what is most convenient.
Who is, Dale Knight? I realize your mention is an allusion to a portion of something Paul wrote to Timothy, but I am uncertain as to whom you intend to address by it. Therefore I ask what I ask.
8:45 is the key issue. The only legitimate meaning is what the speaker or author intended. It isn't so easy. Real listening and speaking is hard work. “ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant” ― Alan Greenspan
Great stuff. I also love the Virkler book. It's easy to read, has really good exercises, and there are great helps available from the publisher. Keep up the great work.
When I learned to take a text in context with a cotext ask why the text was written and to whom the bible really opened up to me chapter and verse separation were added in the 12and 15 hundreds context is king
Pay attention to grammar. 1 timothy 1.15 "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." Paul did not say I WAS but I AM (Present tense.) There is a big difference. Most commentators "interpret" Paul as speaking of his pre-Christian life. (Past tense.)
My issue with this is that nowhere else does Paul talk about anything but his victory over sin through the indwelling Holy Spirit. It’s difficult to see how, if he is was, at the time of that writing, “the chief of sinners“ he could also exhort believers to “follow me as I follow Christ“. Paul saw himself as an example of how to live victoriously over sin by The spirit of God. We have to allow the possibility that Paul was using the present tense for rhetorical emphasis here. Another option is that, since Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, he was indeed ‘the chief of sinners”. OK that last one was a joke. :)
In order to obtain a copyright from a derivative work it must change about 10%. This means about 78,000 word changes from the KJV which does not have a copyright. Is it any wonder we have so much confusion and division ? Was this by design knowing the entire meaning of a sentence can be changed sometimes by a single letter.
Traditional Jewish interpretation principles include: P'Shat (i.e. the plain, exegesis derived, meaning of the text) Remez (a hint from the text, not directly conveyed by the P'Shat) Drash (a type of eisegesis, an allegorical or homiletical approach) Sod ("secrets") Obviously, the methods apart form P'Shat (plain exegesis) can be problematic and/or abused due to their subjectivity. Interestingly enough, many of the Tanakh (OT) quotations in the New Testament are not P'Shat, but rather applications of the other techniques. For example, Matthew's application of Hosea 11.1 in Matthew 2:15 is clearly "Remez," because obviously Hosea wasn't originally referring directly to Yeshua (Jesus), but it does hint at the deeper truth that in some sense Yeshua is identified as Israel.
I'm in a school for supernatural ministry. But I still don't know how to do exegesis, hermenuetics. I'm looking for someone to take me through an easy way to explain. Step by step.
Been reading in the Book Of Philippians today. In the first chapter Paul prays that the Macedonians will have the knowledge and discernment of “superior things.” In trying to determine the content or meaning of these “superior things”, this video reminded me of the dangers of isogesis. Thanks Darryl.
Gonna just come out and say it. Why do you always recommend Masters Seminary books over other works? I'd have posited a much better foundation is laid by Grant Osbourne's The Hermeneutical Spiral than anything compiled by Abner Chou.
Chou’s builds on Osborne’s work with D A Carson. The Hermeneutical Spiral has lots of good points but it is not addressing the same subject matter. Chou is specifically addressing how hermeneutics works throughout the biblical text. Spiral is an introduction to hermeneutics. Also I’d recommend Virklers work over Spiral. It is more accessible. Virkler predates Master’s too. Besides that, what is wrong with works written by Master’s faculty? Thanks for your provocative comment! 👍
At 3:23, you refer to doing exegesis on what “Jesus wrote,” but apparently you meant to say “Jesus said,” because the New Testament doesn’t mention Jesus personally writing anything except on the ground in John 8:6. (And some liberal critics claim that He didn’t even write that, given that they question the authenticity of that Bible passage - a passage that I believe is both authentic and inspired). In any event, Jesus SAID many teachings that His apostles WROTE afterward. (Actually, I just noticed that this is my second time posting this observation in the past year. I still stand by my prior observation that Jesus is the co-author of the book of Revelation, according to its opening verses, but Jesus let the apostle John do the actual writing as Jesus dictated some passages and created visionary images.)
Friendly correction: You refer to New Testament writers doing exegesis on what "Jesus wrote," but I assume you meant exegesis on what "Jesus said." Although Jesus Christ inspired New Testament writers, and is the main subject of their writings, He is not documented as personally writing anything besides some words in the dust during the trial of the adulteress in John 8:6. Additionally, the book of Revelation credits the post-ascension Jesus as a co-author, calling the book "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him" (Revelation 1:1), but the book goes on to reveal that the apostle John did all the actual writing, while Jesus inspired John's visions and occasionally dictated short passages like Revelation 21:5-8. Beyond those examples, Jesus didn't *directly* write anything. Instead, "holy men of God spoke [and wrote] as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." 2 Peter 1:21; see 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Enjoying your videos! Keep up the good work!😀
I've found that exegesis interpretation in the N.T. for individual believers is based on what salvation view they ascribe to. For example, a catholic with interpret scripture much different than a protestant. Catholics have a salvation foundation based on works where protestants base their interpretation of basic salvation teaching of faith alone. All interpretation for both of these religious bodies is done in order to line up with their foundational teachings regarding salvation Pentecostals base their biblical interpretation on the foundation of faith and obedience to Acts 2:38 the first sermon preached on salvation. First and foremost though, being able to rightly interpret the Word is based on having the indwelling Holy Spirit who is the teacher that helps us understand correctly the Word. " The anointing that you recieved of him abides within you and you need no man to teach you" ( 1John 2:27) Unfortunately neither catholic or protestant believers have the indwelling Holy Spirit thus they are building their exegesis on a false foundation.
RN,....Yes, correct. Neither the catholics nor the protestants have the Holy Spirit guiding them. I am curious as to who you think does have the Holy Spirit guiding them?
@@tonybasoni8443 Thanks for the reply. First of all I have know believers who have recieved the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in " tongues" who have returned to their protestant denominations hopefully to spread the truth. I think ultimately their pastors will tell them to quit telling others about it. Then it would come down to them either leaving the church or keeping it to themselves. The majority of those that do actually have the Holy Spirit would be pentecostals, particularly apostolic pentecostals. I know there would have been no way before I recieved the Holy Spirit I could have understood the scriptures without some man telling me their meaning and trusting my salvation on whether or not they knew what they were talking about.
@@robertnieten7259 ,....Thank you as well for your reply. However, you are very much mistaken here. The Pentecostals of any kind have nothing whatsoever to do with God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit, nor the Christianity of the Bible. They have another gospel and another christianity. It is in reality the christianity and gospel of the accursed and of the spiritually dead and blind. Anyone that speaks in tongues has with 100% certainty exposed that they are 100% outside of the kingdom of God and are just steeped in self delusion and self deception, and a 100% fake christianity. There absolutely is no speaking in tongues. That 100% fake manmade unbiblical nonsense only comes from those who are totally outside of the kingdom of God, and completely lack any actual Biblical understanding.. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!
@@tonybasoni8443 Thanks again. If the apostles, including Paul, were to be ascribed a church today it would be the apostolic pentecostal. If you take Peters' teaching on what it takes to be saved in Acts ch 2 it lines up with what Paul taught in Acts ch 19.
@@robertnieten7259 ,....Sorry Robert, but you are 100% wrong. Jesus, the apostles, or any real Christian would never ever have anything to do with the 100% apostate apostolic pentecostal church. Absolutely, positively not! You have been snared into a 100% fake christianity. You must get away from that ungodly cult and learn the actual truth of Gods word. You have not correctly understood Acts Ch. 2, nor Acts Ch. 19. You being carnal have understood these verses carnally and not spiritually (correctly). Those who become snared into the 100% fake pentecostal cult are those who are carnal (spiritually dead) and do not understand the Bible due to being spiritually dead (carnal). You can only be deceived and cannot understand Biblical truth. The church is there to deceive you, absolutely not to bring you to Jesus and Biblical truth.
@@KillerofGods While MacArthur is popular among some reformed and evangelical circles I don't believe he is well known for critical biblical scholarship but rather for defending specific doctrines. Regardless of your opinion of him, the MacArthur study bible will reflect only things that John MacArthur agrees with so even if he is a reliable source it is always good to allow many voices to inform your study.
@@dalbinator I don't know the guy, only seen a few clips of him. So idk what he teaches too much. I'm also not very familiar with reformed, evangelical, baptist, etc.
@@oterosocram25 Cool thanks for the recommendation. Yeah idk too much about what each dominations believe or pastors. I have liked the clips I've seen of macarthur though, he seems like a good pastor.
@@bma - Why? I know Him as my Saviour. I don't exit Jesus nor iso Jesus. And even though I have heard Herman has some neutics, I'm less concerned about theological viewpoints than what is actually said. Jesus is Jesus. He is the Word made flesh. He was crucified to die for Sin. He was entombed. He is roused after three days and three nights. I don't need exe this nor isolate that to understand the Evangel. The Evangel is simple enough a child can understand. It takes a theologian to fuck it up. If the common person doesn't get it, or has it wrong while they think it's right, then guaranteed a theologian messed something up somewhere, as they tend to do.
@@davidjames468Thanks for sharing your view David. But it sounds like you're expecting us to simply believe your interpretation without investigation?
I swear I must be a chosen one, because the stuff I read in the bible manifests. For example, I read exodus and the chapter about manna and quail. Then some girl out the blue contacts me and tells me her name is Manna. Then another chick messages me on Linkedin name Mariam. Moses sister is also named Mariam. People need to explain that for me. God has been showing up in the form of storm clouds, lightning, and rainbows. Jesus, the cross, and ball of sentient light (I can stare into) was there supporting me. A dove suddenly flew from the ground in the middle of the night when I headed to my house. I don't think I am a regular dude. I keep seeing the number 144, 144k, on license plates. The clock. As likes, as views. Its crazy. That bible is a magic book, I think people need to see it as that and stop getting so anal about it.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
Keep up the good work. Hermeneutics is very needed everywhere. When I was a young Christian I had so many questions from reading the Bible. The more I read, the more questions I had. Eventually after asking pastors and church leaders for help, I realized that not one I asked could help me. So I quit reading the Bible because of so many unanswered questions and and an increasing frustration. After going to seminary I was determined that every person I met with and every church I pastored would study hermeneutics. I am retired now, but I still teach hermeneutics in the church and with each man I meet with. It is amazing what happens to the people when they realize there are answers and they have tools to help them. Evangelism increases and the teaching becomes better. The people expect more of themselves and study more.
@christsavesreadromans1096 it is a Bible church
this is wonderful!!! do you perhaps have your lessons online, please. I want to learn!
The tanakh and gospels made a lot more sense after I earned my doctorate and had studied other holy scriptures. In academia, you learn exegesis and how to formulate a cogent thesis, and you learn when there simply isn't enough textual support for a given thesis. You also learn the difference between Scripture and dogma. The biggest lie people believe is that you can be an expert on holy scripture having only ever studied one book. I had great teachers and great mentors, who saved me from falling victim to a limiting ideology.
@@LiRoss-w7o No I don't. There are some books I would recommend.
How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: Fourth Edition by Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart
Reconnecting God's Story to Ministry: Cross-cultural Storytelling at Home and Abroad by Tom A. Steffen (This is an excellent book on why stories were told and the details of stories. They are not stories as we think of stories. Jesus told stories that when given some thought result in many thoughts. Older and younger people benefit from the stories in the Bible. They will different things in the stories).
Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes: Patronage, Honor, and Shame in the Biblical World by E. Randolph Richards & Richard James
Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible by E. Randolph Richards & Brandon J. O'Brien
Reading the Bible with Rabbi Jesus: How a Jewish Perspective Can Transform Your Understanding by Lois Tverberg
Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes: Honor and Shame in Paul's Message and Mission by Brad Vaughn
Once you begin to realize that about 1-2 percent of the people could read and write then you will understand scripture better and not be susceptible to artificial ways of interpretation. Narratives must be interpreted as stories. For example many stories are repeated in the Old and New Testaments. The exodus is referenced in the Old and New Testaments. All of scripture was read out loud. The part that is missing in reading is an active voice and all that goes with the voice. When someone reads the Bible flat they are reading in a way that it was never intended to be read. Scripture is active, but someone can read it as though it were dead. Think about how someone would have heard the Bible read in a society that could not read and write. Notice in Hebrews 11 how many stories are referenced. Some years ago a man and I were talking and he asked me how many stories I thought people in the church could tell. I told him "three" and he said "two." The average American knows some doctrine but they can tell almost no stories. For example tell yourself the story of Jonah and see how much of the story you can tell. People in oral societies have an oral Bible they have memorized. People like that have a part of their brain that is far more developed than reading societies. Those who deal with younger people know they do not read as much and listen to videos, podcasts, etc. To be able to reach them we must reach them in ways that communicate with them. A lot of how we talk is in stories. However we do what is most convenient.
Most needed to all growing believers to know exegesis in interpreting the Scriptures.
Forever learning and never coming to understanding.
Who is, Dale Knight? I realize your mention is an allusion to a portion of something Paul wrote to Timothy, but I am uncertain as to whom you intend to address by it. Therefore I ask what I ask.
All false religions in a nutshell. There is only one truth to understand.
Excellent explanation of how to study scripture. I use exegesis to isogesis scripture or passages of scripture. Thank you.
8:45 is the key issue. The only legitimate meaning is what the speaker or author intended. It isn't so easy. Real listening and speaking is hard work. “ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant” ― Alan Greenspan
Matthew might disagree
Love this! Some very important points. Thanks Darryl.
That s the best video i found on thins topic. Please make more videous like this!!🙏🏽😊
Thank you for this. Very helpful.
Great stuff. I also love the Virkler book. It's easy to read, has really good exercises, and there are great helps available from the publisher. Keep up the great work.
Thanks Dr Lamerson!
Didn’t know the explanation in psalms were added notes
When I learned to take a text in context with a cotext ask why the text was written and to whom the bible really opened up to me chapter and verse separation were added in the 12and 15 hundreds context is king
Thank you, very helpful my brother.
Pay attention to grammar. 1 timothy 1.15 "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." Paul did not say I WAS but I AM (Present tense.) There is a big difference. Most commentators "interpret" Paul as speaking of his pre-Christian life. (Past tense.)
My issue with this is that nowhere else does Paul talk about anything but his victory over sin through the indwelling Holy Spirit. It’s difficult to see how, if he is was, at the time of that writing, “the chief of sinners“ he could also exhort believers to “follow me as I follow Christ“. Paul saw himself as an example of how to live victoriously over sin by The spirit of God. We have to allow the possibility that Paul was using the present tense for rhetorical emphasis here. Another option is that, since Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, he was indeed ‘the chief of sinners”. OK that last one was a joke. :)
In order to obtain a copyright from a derivative work it must change about 10%. This means about 78,000 word changes from the KJV which does not have a copyright. Is it any wonder we have so much confusion and division ? Was this by design knowing the entire meaning of a sentence can be changed sometimes by a single letter.
Please do a video breaking down Leighton Flowers Exegesis of Romans 9.... also great channel thank you.
Loved this video
Why the music? I was glad it stopped again 😅
Traditional Jewish interpretation principles include:
P'Shat (i.e. the plain, exegesis derived, meaning of the text)
Remez (a hint from the text, not directly conveyed by the P'Shat)
Drash (a type of eisegesis, an allegorical or homiletical approach)
Sod ("secrets")
Obviously, the methods apart form P'Shat (plain exegesis) can be problematic and/or abused due to their subjectivity.
Interestingly enough, many of the Tanakh (OT) quotations in the New Testament are not P'Shat, but rather applications of the other techniques. For example, Matthew's application of Hosea 11.1 in Matthew 2:15 is clearly "Remez," because obviously Hosea wasn't originally referring directly to Yeshua (Jesus), but it does hint at the deeper truth that in some sense Yeshua is identified as Israel.
I'm in a school for supernatural ministry. But I still don't know how to do exegesis, hermenuetics. I'm looking for someone to take me through an easy way to explain. Step by step.
Excelente! Thank you brother
there is isogesis by the prophets and new testament as well if I understand it correctly
What do you mean by this? An example will help
Been reading in the Book Of Philippians today. In the first chapter Paul prays that the Macedonians will have the knowledge and discernment of
“superior things.”
In trying to determine the content or meaning of these “superior things”, this video reminded me of the dangers of isogesis.
Thanks Darryl.
this is sweet
Are you an accredited college ?
No, we are not a college at all! We provide a membership for ordinary people who just want to read and study the bible in the original languages.
"Heedings"
Gonna just come out and say it. Why do you always recommend Masters Seminary books over other works? I'd have posited a much better foundation is laid by Grant Osbourne's The Hermeneutical Spiral than anything compiled by Abner Chou.
Chou’s builds on Osborne’s work with D A Carson. The Hermeneutical Spiral has lots of good points but it is not addressing the same subject matter. Chou is specifically addressing how hermeneutics works throughout the biblical text. Spiral is an introduction to hermeneutics. Also I’d recommend Virklers work over Spiral. It is more accessible. Virkler predates Master’s too. Besides that, what is wrong with works written by Master’s faculty? Thanks for your provocative comment! 👍
Chou's teaching on hermeneutics is Excellent! It's Weird how you think everyone at the Masters Seminary is identical to John MacArthur.
Ah Who What Where When Which Why How.
At 3:23, you refer to doing exegesis on what “Jesus wrote,” but apparently you meant to say “Jesus said,” because the New Testament doesn’t mention Jesus personally writing anything except on the ground in John 8:6. (And some liberal critics claim that He didn’t even write that, given that they question the authenticity of that Bible passage - a passage that I believe is both authentic and inspired). In any event, Jesus SAID many teachings that His apostles WROTE afterward. (Actually, I just noticed that this is my second time posting this observation in the past year. I still stand by my prior observation that Jesus is the co-author of the book of Revelation, according to its opening verses, but Jesus let the apostle John do the actual writing as Jesus dictated some passages and created visionary images.)
Friendly correction: You refer to New Testament writers doing exegesis on what "Jesus wrote," but I assume you meant exegesis on what "Jesus said." Although Jesus Christ inspired New Testament writers, and is the main subject of their writings, He is not documented as personally writing anything besides some words in the dust during the trial of the adulteress in John 8:6. Additionally, the book of Revelation credits the post-ascension Jesus as a co-author, calling the book "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him" (Revelation 1:1), but the book goes on to reveal that the apostle John did all the actual writing, while Jesus inspired John's visions and occasionally dictated short passages like Revelation 21:5-8. Beyond those examples, Jesus didn't *directly* write anything. Instead, "holy men of God spoke [and wrote] as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." 2 Peter 1:21; see 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Enjoying your videos! Keep up the good work!😀
You’re right. Thanks for pointing that out. :)
"In the volumne of the Book it is written of Me." Keep the main thing the main thing!
eeak sa Jesus!
I've found that exegesis interpretation in the N.T. for individual believers is based on what salvation view they ascribe to.
For example, a catholic with interpret scripture much different than a protestant. Catholics have a salvation foundation based on works where protestants base their interpretation of basic salvation teaching of faith alone. All interpretation for both of these religious bodies is done in order to line up with their foundational teachings regarding salvation
Pentecostals base their biblical interpretation on the foundation of faith and obedience to Acts 2:38 the first sermon preached on salvation.
First and foremost though, being able to rightly interpret the Word is based on having the indwelling Holy Spirit who is the teacher that helps us understand correctly the Word. " The anointing that you recieved of him abides within you and you need no man to teach you" ( 1John 2:27)
Unfortunately neither catholic or protestant believers have the indwelling Holy Spirit thus they are building their exegesis on a false foundation.
RN,....Yes, correct. Neither the catholics nor the protestants have the Holy Spirit guiding them. I am curious as to who you think does have the Holy Spirit guiding them?
@@tonybasoni8443 Thanks for the reply. First of all I have know believers who have recieved the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in " tongues" who have returned to their protestant denominations hopefully to spread the truth. I think ultimately their pastors will tell them to quit telling others about it. Then it would come down to them either leaving the church or keeping it to themselves.
The majority of those that do actually have the Holy Spirit would be pentecostals, particularly apostolic pentecostals.
I know there would have been no way before I recieved the Holy Spirit I could have understood the scriptures without some man telling me their meaning and trusting my salvation on whether or not they knew what they were talking about.
@@robertnieten7259 ,....Thank you as well for your reply. However, you are very much mistaken here. The Pentecostals of any kind have nothing whatsoever to do with God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit, nor the Christianity of the Bible. They have another gospel and another christianity. It is in reality the christianity and gospel of the accursed and of the spiritually dead and blind.
Anyone that speaks in tongues has with 100% certainty exposed that they are 100% outside of the kingdom of God and are just steeped in self delusion and self deception, and a 100% fake christianity. There absolutely is no speaking in tongues. That 100% fake manmade unbiblical nonsense only comes from those who are totally outside of the kingdom of God, and completely lack any actual Biblical understanding..
Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!
@@tonybasoni8443 Thanks again. If the apostles, including Paul, were to be ascribed a church today it would be the apostolic pentecostal.
If you take Peters' teaching on what it takes to be saved in Acts ch 2 it lines up with what Paul taught in Acts ch 19.
@@robertnieten7259 ,....Sorry Robert, but you are 100% wrong. Jesus, the apostles, or any real Christian would never ever have anything to do with the 100% apostate apostolic pentecostal church. Absolutely, positively not!
You have been snared into a 100% fake christianity. You must get away from that ungodly cult and learn the actual truth of Gods word.
You have not correctly understood Acts Ch. 2, nor Acts Ch. 19. You being carnal have understood these verses carnally and not spiritually (correctly). Those who become snared into the 100% fake pentecostal cult are those who are carnal (spiritually dead) and do not understand the Bible due to being spiritually dead (carnal). You can only be deceived and cannot understand Biblical truth. The church is there to deceive you, absolutely not to bring you to Jesus and Biblical truth.
Basics of exegesis - 1st step: throw out your Macarthur Study Bible!
What's wrong with it?
@@KillerofGods While MacArthur is popular among some reformed and evangelical circles I don't believe he is well known for critical biblical scholarship but rather for defending specific doctrines. Regardless of your opinion of him, the MacArthur study bible will reflect only things that John MacArthur agrees with so even if he is a reliable source it is always good to allow many voices to inform your study.
@@dalbinator I don't know the guy, only seen a few clips of him. So idk what he teaches too much.
I'm also not very familiar with reformed, evangelical, baptist, etc.
You don’t know John MacArthur, John is a very reliable Bible teacher, one of the best in our time, for sure.
@@oterosocram25 Cool thanks for the recommendation. Yeah idk too much about what each dominations believe or pastors. I have liked the clips I've seen of macarthur though, he seems like a good pastor.
I don't care about neither exegesis nor isogesis. Just Jesus.
Cool! But to know about Jesus you'll need to do either exegesis or eisegesis or you won't know Him from scripture, right?
@@bma - Why? I know Him as my Saviour. I don't exit Jesus nor iso Jesus. And even though I have heard Herman has some neutics, I'm less concerned about theological viewpoints than what is actually said. Jesus is Jesus. He is the Word made flesh. He was crucified to die for Sin. He was entombed. He is roused after three days and three nights. I don't need exe this nor isolate that to understand the Evangel. The Evangel is simple enough a child can understand. It takes a theologian to fuck it up. If the common person doesn't get it, or has it wrong while they think it's right, then guaranteed a theologian messed something up somewhere, as they tend to do.
@@davidjames468 what do u mean by saviour? And what do u mean by word made flesh?
@@davidjames468Thanks for sharing your view David. But it sounds like you're expecting us to simply believe your interpretation without investigation?
What is evangel? Can you explain it for me? Any explanation you give me will be a form of exegesis. You are already doing it unawares.
1st step rip verses out of the Bible and put random ones together to make what seems to be a Christian narrative
I swear I must be a chosen one, because the stuff I read in the bible manifests. For example, I read exodus and the chapter about manna and quail. Then some girl out the blue contacts me and tells me her name is Manna. Then another chick messages me on Linkedin name Mariam. Moses sister is also named Mariam. People need to explain that for me. God has been showing up in the form of storm clouds, lightning, and rainbows. Jesus, the cross, and ball of sentient light (I can stare into) was there supporting me. A dove suddenly flew from the ground in the middle of the night when I headed to my house. I don't think I am a regular dude. I keep seeing the number 144, 144k, on license plates. The clock. As likes, as views. Its crazy. That bible is a magic book, I think people need to see it as that and stop getting so anal about it.
Chosen one, you say? Do you think you are more important than Jesus Christ?
I keep seeing 69 everywhere.does that means I'm the chosen one too?🗿🤨🤨