Gnosticizing Scripture: Finding Deeper and more "Spiritual Meaning" In Scripture
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2021
- Gnosticizing Scripture: Finding Deeper and more "Spiritual Meaning" In Scripture
What happens when one decides to find a deeper, more spiritual meaning behind a given text, not only a meaning that is profound but specifically unique to your circumstances? Well, you gnosticize that mug.
Look, I believe God still speaks today outside of scripture. I don't think that it is impossible or even unlikely that God would speak to you as you read the Bible. However, there has been this novel form of preaching and Bible reading that has been circulating In the charismatic movement that looks a great deal like Gnosticism, and this kind of reading Is really hurting people.
We have no plans of bride bashing or bullying people who preach differently than we do. but we do hope to bring up some serious concerns and we hope that it can help those who are not even aware of the dangers.
Donate (Paypal)
www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Exclusive Content (Patreon)
/ theremnantradio
__________________________________________________________________________________
We're social!
Facebook: / theremnantradio
Instagram: / theremnantradio
___________________________________________________________________________________
Our Favorite Books
www.amazon.com/shop/theremnan...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Rowntree's Church Wellspring
wellspringdfw.org/
___________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Miller's Church Reclamation Church
reclamationdenver.com/
___________________________________________________________________________________
Conference
propheticreformationokc.com/
___________________________________________________________________________________
Kairos Classroom: Use Promo Code Remnant for 10% off
kairosclassroom.com/classes
“Quoting the bible doesn’t make it biblical”
- Josh Lewis
🤯
Amen!
I am glad; i believe in the continuation of the gifts of the Spirit, but the way and manner we handle the scripture is troubling. God bless you guys for daring to go where many are fearful to go. Bless
Great teaching guys! 2 Things I took from this episode that gave so much clarity:
1) The text cannot mean now what it did not mean to the original audience. I listen to P. Chandler often and heard him say that as well and wondered if it was going to be stated here and it was! Confirmation! 😊
2) There is a difference between prophecy and teaching. This REALLY helped free me from the guilt of Jer 29:11 being my “life verse”! My personal application for a specific time in my life does NOT make my application a GENERAL one. I can use it to encourage ME because it was given to and even for ME only for that season but in my life.
So again, thank you!
This whole episode comes down to the rampant abuse of ISOGESIS and the neglect of honest and faithful EXEGESIS of the text. This is how the slippery slope of apostasy has taken over the modern church.
The wonderful thing to know is that there has been a move of the Spirit to get our bad doctrine cleaned up. It is happening in very noticable ways around the body and I'm grateful I'm a part of it. Keep up the great work Remnant Radio 😇✝️🛐💯
Love your comment.
Please don't take offense, I mean none- it's spelled exegesis and eisegesis. Ok, God bless brother :)
@@VeryBasicBible LOLOL Nine taken Stuped spill chekers. 😆🤣
@@VeryBasicBible nong
Man. What a good episode. Thank you Josh and Michael for teaching this with kindness and conviction. Love you guys!
This is the funniest graphic ever of all your videos- anytime it pops up when I'm scrolling through RUclips I just crack up.
The only thing that brings me pause in your definition of gnosticizing scripture is the statement made, I believe by Michael, that if you are hearing something new in a teaching it should give you concern. Too many churches teach the traditions of their denominations and not the original meaning of the text according to the intention of the author. So therefore, in many instances one will hear "new things" that are actually in line with the teachings of the early church that have been obfuscated or even cast aside because of tradition. So I would say that the gnosticization of scripture would more accurately be defined as interpreting a hidden meaning that does not align with the original intent, whether the hearer is aware of the original intent or not. Remember Jesus excoriated the Pharisees for rendering the law to no effect because of their traditions.
This is excellent! My thoughts exactly.
To add, I've always heard that you should never preach a "new revelation" never been taught anywhere before... but for many people, there may be things in the word they have never heard before simply because most people don't study the word as they should. Not all new things we hear and learn are bad.
Thank you for saving me from writing a long comment. What she said. 👆🏻
@Linda Rarey that is a great observation. I would agree! Good comment
This is exactly what I was thinking, and I completely agree with how you put it. I remember having this experience myself of learning "new things". They absolutely were new to me, but were definitely in line with scripture. My biggest example is how the Biblical feasts and so many other things in the OT point to and were fulfilled in Jesus. It was absolutely mind blowing to me!
We're always going to be learning new things, or understanding things better as we dive into the scriptures more.
I agree.
Thank you guys. I had been horribly guilty of "gnosticizing" and as I'm continuing to relearn how to understand Bible study, these warnings and pitfalls are so helpful for me to listen to. I really appreciate how you give examples of the wrong way and then explain the correct way. It's so helpful.
GREAT job on this video. I will be sharing with several others! So many great points made, but particularly, you navigated so well the dangerous, inevitable slippery slope sloppy hermeneutics provide. You gentlemen are excellent teachers and thinkers in the Faith. For the past month or so I've been listening to you guys and I really appreciate the gracious, loving dynamic of the team, as well as the wise, fair, responsible, discerning, edifying, informative variety of content on this channel. Keep up the good work...all glory be to Christ!
I have been following your content for sometime and this series is by far the best I've listened to. I am in Kenya and our churches here are struggling with this sana. So we have pastors doing that quite a lot and like Michael Miller has said, because it hasn't rub that itch that they have been cultured to have, they will treat what your saying as 'infant level revelation' and wait for some 'mature revelation'
A friend of mine once told me a story of when a young guy was doing an expository preaching and he was calm and very collected as he was preaching. After he was done the pastor of that church came and said thank you for that word but now let us hear the deeper mature word of God. This is the same kind of struggle I also have at our church. People would respond more to those kinds of gnosticizing of scripture even by running to the pulpit and giving (which is a whole different issue) but when a preacher goes through a text, it's treated like some cute puppy-dog eyes sermon which is quite sad.
I'm super grateful for this content God bless you. We need to have more solid biblical and yet very charismatic theologians.
Regarding seeing parallels in my own life while reading Scripture, I've found it helpful to remember that any personal application will never contradict any clear command. (Edited for poor grammar)
This is a great episode. You have addressed something that has been driving me nuts but that I have not heard addressed by others.
Namely, taking biblical accounts, making oneself the protaganist replacing the actual biblical protaganist, then turning a historical account of real events into self-centered metaphor.
For example, stories about David are his own and God's stories. We can and should have our own stories about what God has done in our lives without stealing and diminishing biblical accounts.
When David was on the run for his life from Saul in the Negev, that was a genuine, extremely dangerous period of his life. His experience in the Negev is not, for example, a metaphor for my stressful day at work.
Over the years I have been taught WHAT to think much more than HOW to think about doctrine and biblical reading. Looking at what the Bible says about the Bible is, I believe, one of the most important skills you can give a person. It can protect them from wrong teachings from the pulpit all the way to their heart.
I have to push back a bit on some of this personally, not that I’m anyone special… I’ve never been in full agreement with a lot of the sentiment in this specific video. I feel using scripture as allegory can really benefit the church. Let me make a small case.
Jesus did it.
When Jesus compared his death and resurrection to that of Jonah should people have said, “No, no Jesus the author’s intent of the book of Jonah was simply to say that we should preach to the unlovable and maybe even that we should not be too attached to our creature comforts then we are about saving the lost.” Does He get a pass because He is Jesus or because He is using Jonah as a typology of Himself? Is it not then good to search for typological truths of Christ in the Old Testament? If that verse were not in the Bible and someone tried that same thing today should we berate them and say that they are prostituting scripture to make their own “apostolic” point?
Also, if a preacher uses Saul’s armor to preach about using your own gifts (a biblical truth) what’s the difference between that and Paul using the human anatomy as an allegory of the church. Should someone have stopped Paul and said, “No Paul God made the human eye ball for people to see, not for you to twist and prostitute His creation for your point!” It is the biblical/unbiblical thing that is the problem NOT the method by which the truth is given.
That guy at the end of the video was allegorizing scripture to preach something unbiblical. We use proper hermeneutics to understand the truth of scripture and then sure go ahead and use that truth in an allegorical sermon.
Topical/allegorical preaching is a benefit to the church because stories stick. If a person uses Peter warming himself by the fire instead of being by the side of Christ to allegorize how we should not warm ourselves by the world, I would venture to say that THAT would stick in someone’s mind more than just going straight to Romans 12:1 and preaching expositorally (is that a word?) AND you can USE Romans 12:1 in the allegorical sermon. Again, it’s the biblical/unbiblical thing that is the problem NOT allegorical vs expository. Also, as a former youth pastor I would never choose one over the other. I would preach an expositional sermon, to get into deep truths AND I would, at times, preach allegorically as well. I wouldn’t negate topical/allegorical preaching and say that it isn’t good to do EVER do that.
Thoughts??
Love this channel though, I tell anyone I can to check it out!
Refer to GK Beale and his works. What many people say Jesus did has very clear contextual reasons. Beale does a good job of showing how this is the case.
@@michaelmiller5024 Thank you for the response! I will look it up and give it a whirl. Any particular book or RUclips video that may deal with this topic specifically that you might recall?
@The Logical Pentecostal, I’m no pastor, but Jesus is “the word was God” “The Word became flesh” John 1:1 John 1:14.
So maybe Jesus can in fact apply allegorical teaching/typology to himself, the bible is all about Him, after all. Start to finish.
Of course I know you already know that- not being snarky or anything,
@@chelseybushore3740 Well you certainly raise an interesting point thank you for reading my comment. 👍🏻
@@christskingdomiscoming5964 My question would be why does one thing have to lead to the other. If a preacher preaches from a text of scripture allegorically he is just doing that, preaching from a passage in scripture allegorically, no extra spirituality should be given to the person that’s just what they are preaching. No “apostolic-ness” no higher status just a person preaching a point from an allegorical angle. Feel like this is a false dichotomy of sorts. One thing should NOT lead to the other.
Excellent work guys! Thank you both!
I need more of these. My mom is in these type of teachings. At first they sound incredible and all but is not in context. They say the whole bible is a parable and thats why it must be interpret spiritually and not just at the letter at face value. Because if you do you will be like the jews who do everything at the letter to literal.
This was a GREAT episode! Keep it up guys 🙏🔥
lol, you guys always have a video to answer the weird things that I’ve seen in charismatic churches.
I love the Holy Spirit and all of His works. There’s just something about over spiritualizing things that I can’t stand. Maybe it’s because I feel like the Bible is already really special so we don’t need to make it more special.
And I always walk away from those kind of sermons thinking “well nothing was really said today.” Lol
This was so helpful! Thank y’all!
Man, i really wanted to catch this one! Looks like I got a running show!
Top notch episode! Thank you!
Thanx, Gentlemen 🌹🌹🌹
Thank you so much.
That was funny... I powered up my xbox (so I can waste more time waiting) and your clip 'froze' at exactly the same time. I thought I wouldn't be able to play pinball and was sad. Very interesting.
Amen it's all about Jesus
I think what it is, are people notice patterns, but they don't understand that what they perceive is a pattern.
You can understand a story as literal, but you can also find meaning in it that is transcendent and applies to many aspects of reality, that's what you can conceptualize as Logos.
(I'm not defending weird DNA portal theories, speaking generally)
I'll give a simple example that we often find in the modern evangelical church
Just as you have some who claim revelations are unfolding now, and Revelation 13:16 is a literal microchip or whatever. They are wrong to think that Revelation is literally describing specifically what is happening in 2021, but they are not totally wrong in making parallels, because (not to be redundant with the word) it's a pattern that continues to unfold itself, and has throughout history.
Everyone is a Christian until it gets biblical.
Just do what Jesus says ( Mark 16:14-18) and we don’t have to worry about demonic doctrine. “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,”
I Timothy 4:1 NKJV
I just found out that my church is giving the enneagram test to all new people to the church and the kids!!! I am upset but I am going to bring it to leadership. I can not sit back and say nothing. I am hoping they will be able to hear the truth 🙏
Amen!!! Emmegram was downloaded to a guy , while he was on a long and heavy psychedelic drug trip. No me gusta.
One year later I'm curious how that turned out
AMEN!!!!
One helpful resource for a topic like this, is Frances Young's book called: "Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture." It is about the Early Church, but this gives a more expansive nuance to this method of "gnosis." In short, every Christian, orthodox or heretic, believed in a higher, spiritual sense of the Scriptural text. What was contested was how one was to discern this higher meaning. Her book is one of the "must reads" for the time period, and can help inform modern Christians on Biblical hermeneutics, or at least in sharing a Christian heritage of Christian hermeneutics.
So glad I found this channel. Any recommendations for a church in Tulsa?
I had an argument with my mother just about this a few days ago. She was trying defend someone who preached this way. It's something I just can't tolerate. Feels like the saying "Fake it, till you make it." But they just robbing people from their faith.
I am just at the beginning of this sessions where you are presenting the meaning of "gnosticizing" the scriptures. From what I've heard so far, I think you might categorize me in this classification. I would be interested in finding out if I was correct in this assumption. I find that authors I relate to are considered "mystics", etc. From my vantage point, I see a.harmonious relationship between what is read. Either way, or both ways are edifying to the follower of Christ; and He receives the glory for it. Would enjoy personally speaking with you and find out what judgements you would have. Nee, Guyon, Brother Lawrence, etc. are refreshing to me.
Solid solid video
I would love to hear your take on the infamous, "If my people who are called by my name.."
Man, I feel so energized by these shows. Yet, I'm increasingly discouraged by the amount of people mishandling scripture and works of the Holy Spirit. I've heard you mention tips here and there on how we should handle people in these circles but I wonder if there are any good books that would give extensive thought to these things. I'm certainly feeling stuck in between 2 schools of thought...cessationists on one hand and hypercharismatics on the other side. It's always one or the other.
I find myself in the same middle ground position between poles. Books are no different. What has worked for me is allowing the Holy Spirit, and not man, to guide me. After prayer, study, and meditation, I take a doctrinal position. Paul said we should be moving towards the building and perfecting of our faith. Knowing the whole counsel of God has helped me to discern the truth from error. It is a process that takes perseverance with patient endurance. God rewards the diligent.
Illumination is mistaken for revelation. Love the show
Doesn't this happen just as much in mainstream evangelical settings as it does in charismatic settings? As someone raised in evangelical settings, I never heard New Testament passages about physical healing miracles taught in the context of literal physical healing, it was always taught as a metaphor for emotional or spiritual healing. When I started to learn about healing prayer, I had to reprogram myself to read those passages literally. John Wimber was very helpful 😊
Thank you, brothers - well needed message. Have you considered a Jewish hermeneutic such as midrash and the reading process acronised as pardes?
As far as setting people up for failure due to hermeneutics, beyond Gnosticizing the scripture, there's also the issue of people giving as much weight in general to prophecy as to scripture (as an example, if we spend our time listening to prophets going 'on and on about angelic visions' as Paul negatively refers to these types - I mean self-proclaimed prophets whose primary "ministry" is telling about inconsequential details of all this stuff they claim to have seen in heaven, going on and on about random stuff, claiming they go to heaven as often as they go to the grocery basically - just one example though, people let "anointed" (judged by "that'll preach" feelings) prophets lead us anywhere and everywhere and in many churches there is no mechanism or expectation to SIFT (or judge/discern) the prophecies - like they said here, you're considered unspiritual or lacking faith for doing the very thing the Bible told us to do (judge the prophecies).... Kind of a ramble, sorry, not super organized thoughts.
A very good book to read is "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth" by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart. I highly HIGHLY recommend getting this book.
Aside from the bits about DNA, the preaching from the video toward the end sounded like it was straight out Bk I of Irenaeus’ Against Heresies; the title for the video was quite apt.
Great episode guys! The advertisement about taking Greek at the end, the guy says the temple is not speaking about individuals but the church. We are the temple both individually and corporately, can someone fill that guy in please.
Also I’m Pentecostal and never in my life heard David and Goliath preached like that. Thank God lol
I really enjoy the episode! I do have a question. In Galatians 4:21-31, it seems that Paul is allegorizing or spiritualizing the story of Abraham, Isaac, Sarah, Ishmael, and Hagar to prove a point. How should we look at this?
I think the issue is see is that they say the Word of God is alive... but yet they treat it as if it has no other meaning than what is plainly written on the pages, which means that it's actually dead and not speaking to people...
The HG inspired these men to write the things they did, but I don't believe that they had full revelation of what they were writing and the magnitude of it. The HG did and that is why it's those who are born again with that spirit inside can understand spiritual things of the Word and get help for life... but yet the historian's and atheists and others who read it without the spirit inside, seem to get no help or understanding from it.
And to add, they are basically saying it's wrong to find allegory in the bible, but clearly Paul himself did this as he said it himself here in Galatians. I would like to see their reply to this as well..
Of course, many teacher aid the word get way too deep into bible allegories, but you shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater...
We can’t go to every reference where it appears to be out of context. Check out GK Beales books on all of this. He will show how the text are usually employing a typology, not allegory.
@@michaelmiller5024 Gotcha! Will start looking into his content! Thank you!
Exactly, same as Ephesians 5 regarding the bride of Christ. Paul switches from the relationship of a marriage between a man and woman to the mystery of Christ and the church. The Bible is full of similitude and allegory. Just read the gospels. None of the disciples understood with the natural mind.
Would this be an example like Jesus wore crown of thorns. and in the garden after it was cursed it became thorns and thistles representing the curse?
Hey guys 👋🏽 I love your show and what you all do.
I’m in a huge conundrum with my church and would love your thoughts. I attend Celebration Church in Jacksonville, FL where Dr. Michael Heiser is the director of the Awakening School of Theology. Our senior pastor recently stepped down to pursue our global missions church.
Based on your thorough explanation in this video, our new lead pastor “gnosticises” scripture every Sunday. I’ve noticed something off and wrong about the way he teaches scripture ever since he became our lead pastor less than a year ago, but I didn’t know what to make of it. You both hit the nail on the head for me; this is exactly what he does with scripture and, quite frankly, it infuriates me. We are gravely lacking sound doctrinal teaching and I see it everywhere in similar churches. We are being misled to believe we are the victims and heroes in every story of the Bible and nearly every message is about “what God can do for me.” It’s never taught in context or brings us closer to the knowledge of Christ. My conundrum is this: how do I confront the pastor of our mega church in an effective and graceful manner? And how is it possible for the church to tolerate such teaching when Dr. Michael Heiser (whom I believe is a great and sound biblical teacher) is the director of our school of theology?? I find it so disheartening and conflicting. I’ve been attending Celebration for 5 years now. I would like to confront our leadership, but it seems I have no place to do so. Please help.
I pray for you ❤.
In all honestly the best you can do is try to confront it with as much gentleness as possible. If it’s a doctrinal issue like the one we’ve addressed in this video then it is an issue for the elders to deal with but members are still responsible to confront it. I think it is important to recognize that you may not be able to bring about change and have to leave.
@@michaelmiller5024 Is there a way to contact you, pr the production for question or tips etc on something you are have mentioned and that I would love for you do go deeper on , but not proper to mention here in the public post? Best regards. You guys have helped me so much.
@@michaelmiller5024 Thank you for your response. This was helpful.
G.K. Beale's book mentioned by Mr. Miller: I looked this up and there are many books listed in Amazon for him. Can anyone help me determine which book is being referred to here? This sounds like a book I would want to read and have in my library as a valuable reference w.r.t. typology, illusion, metaphor and similar literary mechanisms used in Scripture. Thank you in advance for any assistance provided.
I could go on and on with praise for what you guys do here, BUT let me just say, "Love You Guys!"
I honestly believe there’s nothing wrong with this type of preaching. To say it is not church if on Sundays this is how the word is preached is a bit extreme, untrue in fact. In my church we regularly have people preach like this and we also have people preach and teach the Bible as you guys say it should. It’s very balanced in my view. Elders are also there to make sure people don’t go overboard.
So if you feel like that kind of preaching is okay then justify it by using scripture. I’m open to hearing a counter-argument. Why do you think the author of those letters would approve?
@@michaelmiller5024 Paul in Galatians 4 uses Sarah and Hagar to explain the two covenants with Hagar being said to represent Mount Sinai. The author of Genesis wasn’t talking about covenants when telling the story of Abraham and the two women. According to you guys, Paul was wrong to do that.
Just as no one thinks the author of Genesis was talking about and old covenant and Mount Sinai when he wrote about Hagar, no one thinks, as per your e.g, that the stones actually represent the five gifts. The speaker is using that scripture to emphasise the point just like Paul did. There’s a difference between saying a scripture means something and that a scripture illuminated something
I also didn’t say I like it. But to say it’s not church when you have brothers and sisters in Christ gathered to fellowship, worship is extreme
I think what Miller said about God speaking through the bible extrabiblically was very well put. Yes, God can and sometimes does use the bible "out of context" to tell people things, but when he does, the use of the bible is no different from god using a tv show or a comic book. It's what scripture says in context which makes it special.
.
However, I'm not 100% sure whether I'm happy about your solution. Saying "I was reading the bible and god said to me..." is something worth doing when you want to give a prophetic word quickly, and don't have time for further elaboration.
But when you're deliberately stripping the prophetic word of the context of how you received it you're reducing the chances of catching any misinterpretations. E.g. god says "this person is going to feed many just like I did to five thousand people"; it's interpreted as feeding the homeless because the relevant person is a big advocate for the homeless, but actually they were deciding whether or not to host a large evangelistic meal for several thousand international students and the word was actually for that. If you said "I was reading the bible and god said you'd be feeding the homeless" you'd miss that.
I think a better solution is to (yes) say "I was reading the bible and god said to me..." when you have a short amount of time; but take the time to make the distinction when you have a long amount of time, then go through how you actually got the word.
.
On the Mary and Martha thing; I don't know what methodology the guy used to come to that interpretation but I don't think his interpretation of the first part was that bad. In a sense, Mary was praying as praying is communicating with God and that's what Mary was doing (with Jesus, and Jesus is God). She wasn't praying to the Father or the Spirit, of course, but I would say it applies to prayer about as much as it does to teaching. The second part is kind of weird though, the incident with Lazarus was months to years later in real time and they appear in different gospels so the gospel writers were hardly linking them.
Great episode on how we gnosticize the bible. I would like to see you guys do an episode on how we got here. I have thought about this for a number of years and have my own conclusions, but would be great to hear others thoughts. I will say that I think the main reason we have so many people doing this and so many wanting this is because our general gospel presentation is itself gnostic in nature. No where is the gospel presented without some articulation of our goal as getting to heaven. But this very notion that we need to escape this world to get to heaven is itself gnostic. But in reality we get resurrected physical bodies that are not suited for an eternity in heaven but here on earth. We will rule with Jesus on earth forever not in heaven. Our inheritance, which is a house and plot of land in the new Jerusalem, is here on earth not in heaven. So in short I believe we got here because we never present the gospel outside a gnostic framework of needing to escape this world for a better one. A more biblical gospel presentation would ask the hearer "have you been redeemed by Jesus so that you are part of the first resurrection of the dead or are you going to be in the second resurrection a 1000 years later and have to stand before God in judgement".
Excellent home school/Wednesday evening study content... new age practices that have been normalized as well as hermeneutical error
Is there a discussion forum on this somewhere connected to this channel
They have a FB page, but no actual discussion forum (to my knowledge, at least).
Just what do you mean by gnostizing scripture ?
Just a follow up with my last comment regarding the story of Mary and Martha, nowhere in that story, does it explicitly say to spend time in God’s word… So obviously, we have to draw some implications and applications, right?
Why does Luke say stone and Matthew say stones in the temptation? In all translations.
Not a bad video. I agree about Gnosticizing a text.
Historical Critical method (HCM) of interpretation is fine but it is not complete. My problems with only interpreting texts through HCM is that the authors of scripture often did not use it. How does one appropriate a Christological interpretation of the OT or typology if one only can interpret scripture by the meaning of the original human author? There are many literary forms in scripture that seem to suggest multiple meanings or multiples ways of interpreting it based on one's vantage point. I do not think there was always one meaning for every story in Scripture. What is one meaning or interpretation exactly mean anyways? I think it is harder to define than some think. Is typology a meaning of an OT text or an application based upon the meanings of the OT and NT texts? there are many other issues but this is why I think HCM, which is somewhat new, is not enough but one tool in understanding scripture.
Oh and I also do not think we can always know for sure what the original author meant. I do not think it is a total mystery but I do not see how we can be so certain many times.
Hey any brothers and sister willing to help here. Was it wrong for me to say to the kids the youth when I was going over the woman at the well that Jesus is waiting at the well for you patiently waiting to save you. I understand that He was waiting to tell her He was the Christ as well. Was what I did eisegesis?
Hi brother, I have not seen this video yet but am scrolling through the comments before watching (I’m a fan of this channel)
Just wanted to offer my grain of salt for your question because it sounds like the times I get concerned I may be taking Scripture out of context. My rule of thumb is that first and foremost we read the text to get insight into who God is, His character. Because God never changes, we can count on Him being the same God, with the same character, all the time-whether we are reading of His acts toward somebody in Scripture, or counting on how he will be toward us, or toward someone we know. So while I am not literally the woman at the well, I can count on Jesus having the same character toward me as He did toward her, because He never changes. The application and implications might end up being the same as simply plugging my name into the story, but the interpretation starts by zooming out and looking at God first, then zooming in again at any specific situation and looking at how His character will be the same toward me as He was toward that person in Scripture.
Here’s a little example to help me think of it logically:
A. In the story of the woman at the well, Jesus is patient and kind toward a sinful and hurting person (who then responded to Him in faith).
B. Jesus never changes (Hebrews 13:8)
C. If A and B are true, then it must follow that Jesus is always patient and kind toward a sinful and hurting person (who then respond to Him in faith).
So then…
A. Jesus is always patient and kind toward sinful and hurting people.
B. I (or my friend) am a sinful and hurting person.
C. Therefore, Jesus is patient and kind toward me (or my friend).
I hope this helps!
Hey I’m 30 minutes in, so maybe you will address this, but what do you do with the beginning of Hebrews. So I want to affirm what you guys are saying, but it seems to me that the authors of the New Testament under the inspiration of Holy Spirit will seemingly cherry pick verses out of context in the Old Testament to make their point. A lot of scriptures that are applied to Christ in the New Testament, to me it seems, can be outside of the original authors intention. It makes me think with the Holy Spirit being the originating author, is this necessarily a bad thing to do? Paul seems to take a verse quoted in Isaiah about being a light to the gentiles and applies that to himself. It seems like he read a verse that had to do with Israel/messiah and the Lord applied that verse to Him as well.
Well said. Time to start asking some out of the box, Holy Spirit led questions
Well said. They got it wrong on this one imo.
Hey, this is an excellent point! I believe that the only hidden message in the Old Testament is about Christ. The revelation of the OT interpreted by the NT authors out of context almost every time that I am aware of is an arrow to Christ and the spreading of the Gospel. Example: Acts 2, Galatians 4:21- end Hebrews 1 and 2. All of these messages are point directly to the message/Gospel of Christ. These revelations are not about granting secret spiritual power or anointing or financial breakthrough or anything directly concerning us. I hope that makes sense. Also, feel free to respond and tell me your thoughts. I wish they would have communicated this in the episode though but I know they have other episodes specifically addressing this that you can watch.
@@olusolaisrael6776 Hey check out my response to this comment!
@@jesussays216 Hey check out my response to this comment!
I like nearly everything yall said, but can you pls explain why a prophetic word should be taken seriously while simultaneously isnt viewed as authoritative?
I do not represent the people of Remnant, but I believe they are referring to the infallibility of scripture. The Bible has been "canonized" by some of our church forefathers. The word cannon has to do with authoritative measurement of accuracy. So, we can measure things outside the recorded Word by the Word. It does not change.
Again, that is my take on their statements. BTW, isn't the format and witnessing their hearts encouraging to see. I really appreciate the material they produce. I'c like to see more of the body of Christ operating like this. Thanks guys.
@@johnmyers6372 yeah I agree this is super encouraging!! And its all stuff I've been battling with for over a year now with churches, so its refreshing. And yeah thanks for the explanation, and I agree with it, that every private revelation must be compared with the Word. But at what level is prophecy authoritative/not authoritative in one's life? If its from the Spirit, isn't it already authoritative? I check it against the scripture, the prophecy checks out, then what? Would it be wrong of me to not act in that? Cuz if it'd be wrong then I'd call it authoritative, since im being held accountable for how I act on the knowledge. And maybe I'm mixing this up or getting too into the details but yeah
@@marystahlschmidt3661 Hi Mary, May I ask what you mean by "what level is prophecy authoritative"? And, are you born again? I do not mean to offend here, I am just trying to find the best way to answer you.
Sorry Mary. They will not let me post the reply I had for you. Didn't think censorship would take place here. Would like to know what they based their decision on. Don't want to be in conflict with them.
@@johnmyers6372 I am born again! I'm not offended at you asking; I have been dealing with church inconsistencies /lies within the past year so its something I'm refreshed to hear the truth about is what I meant!
Hmm, well, what i mean is this-- if Scripture is authoritative, then we must take it seriously. We all agree! But then if someone gives us a private revelation, why should we take it seriously or valid if we don't consider it authoritative?
Basically, anything that Bill Johnson teaches is Gnosticism. He'll start with one Bible verse and then spiritualize it so much and add so many other verses to it that at the end its something so far off--like listening to Abe Simpson talk and ramble forever.
I appreciate this episode because this is a needed conversation, but I think it can be pressed a little too far off. Michael says that Martha and Mary have nothing to do with prayer because it’s not mentioned in the text. But we have to be able to draw some logical implications from the text… What does it mean by Mary listening to Christ? how do we listen to Christ today? Through the word of God only? Or are you suggesting that we shouldn’t try to listen for the voice of God in prayer? Also, I appreciate Michael’s story about Philippians 4:13 not applying to winning the Super Bowl, but my question is, what do “all things“ mean? in the context that Paul uses it he’s mentioning God, giving him strength to live in lack and abundance. Is this what he means by all things, just strength to live in lack and abundance? Do “all things” only mean “some things”? Where do we draw the line as to what “all things” might mean? again, I appreciate the topic and it’s great to expound on, but sometimes we can push it a bit too far and over correct.
There are many levels to the bible, there are many mis translations, Christianity comes from the Gnostic text, there are many people that use the Bible to control. Like you!
🤦♂️
The levels of this comment is a real marriage of all bad. Jewish kabbalah, New Age, Gnosticism, satanical and list just goes on...
@@Kintizen Tell me what is the truth to existence? Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, Hinduism, Atheist why should I trust a 4th century Roman Emperor, one that hid thousands of religious text from the cannon? Life is no accident, it would be like sending a tornado thru a junkyard and leaving a Jeep behind. Call yourself a Christian? If so wanna burn some witches, or some scientists? That's what they did. Today there is no clear answer to the question of existence, there is only speculation, those that use speculation to control are no better than the Christians that burned witches.
Leads to weirdness in the church.
Why wouldn’t the scripture carry spiritual meaning along with the meaning of its time??? ..( idk the exact word for that..) he gave us the scriptures for application to our life. It’s personal…it’s a roadmap, but if we take that all out we just have a historical Jesus and nothing applies to us. I’m not understanding….
There’s spirit and truth?
A person born of God does not sin. His seed remains in him.
Really?
1John 8-10
8"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."
That scripture means that a child of God doesn’t continuously live in sin.
Where there is no law there is no sin where there is no sin there is no death.
@@austinp1998
Exactly!
Salvation represents our position before God, not that we are already perfect.
@@swartetc
Which proves that there is still sin in your flesh, for you (and all of us) surely will die!
When you get saved, your spirit is brought to life.
Then, we grow in Christ.
Your body will not be saved until the resurrection.
I think I see where you are going now. You are not discounting the types and shadows that are all throughout scripture, but the authority that is set ON the types of shadows as doctrine, New orthodoxy or foundational truths. Am I getting close to your target?
Should the Bible be taken literal? If it's not literal history then it shouldn't have a literal interpretation
Is it possible to read something and realize something you once missed? I would think so and that’s probably where “rhema word” comes from not “John 3:16 is actually about (insert super spiritual blah blah here)”
As ALL things, prophecy is fulfilled in either of 2 ways. Was Jonah a false prophet? Or was Nineveh overturned?
The story of Jonah has (2) 'fish' a single 'large fish' in the sea, and 'many fish' on the land - Ninevah means 'house of fish'. Jonah was in the sea for (3) days, and Ninevah takes (3) days to cross. The 'worm' that destroyed the 'tree of knowledge' that gave Jonah comfort is 'the' son of man. (see Job 25:6)
The 'son of man' is a person's 'master'? Thus the LORD said to my Lord (master). Psalm 110.
Knock knock.
🙋♂️
So....why in the world do you still embrace generational curses?
When a NT writer quotes a OT passage you must first take the context of the NT passage and go back to the OT citation and read the entire chapter in the OT and plug the NT context into the OT passage. This is proper biblical hermeneutics. For example Matthew 2:16-18. Thus was fullfilled and spoken by Jeremiah the prophet. Go to jeremiah 31. It's not a future event after 1948. We need to be cautious of people gnosticizing futuristic prophecy and take it in its historical content. There is a spiritual meaning also because God spoke in parables. Jesus tells you how to interpret isaiah 27 with his sower and the seed explanation. Listen to what Jesus and the apostles taught you and remember to pray and read a chapter over and over to gain understanding. Last but not least the testimony of Jesus Christ is the Spirit of prophecy. Revelation 19:10
If you get a "special revelatory interpretation" of scripture and it doesn't point back to both scripture and Christ, then I personally don't think it's from Holy Ghost. I think it's more of an eisegetical perspective or interpretation of the text. If it doesn't point back to scripture and back to Christ.
Any time Holy Ghost give me an interpretation of scripture, He will always give me more scripture that connects with it. Like with John 8:58, Jesus basically calls Himself God. And Holy Ghost will send me back to Exodus, with Moses and the burning bush, and then He'll take me to John 1 and Colossians 1, and how it says that Christ created ALL THINGS. And basically it will show that Jesus is God, and how Jesus is God (that's just an example, there are many more times where that's happened.)
I remember watching a video where Kenneth Copland said how ever time he reads when Jesus said "I am.." Kenneth goes "Yes, I am too..." and that's completely blasphemous, it doesn't point to Christ or to scripture at all, that's not only eisegesis, but it's completely heretical, and I'm just gonna call it as is. It's not from Holy Ghost.
But yeah, I believe that it has to point back to scripture and Christ in order for that revelatory interpretation of scripture to be from the Holy Ghost.
I don't see it as a coincidence that the charismatic circles are fraught with such nonsensical ideas about God and scripture
You guys should consider the messianic prophecies. Obviously, God hides meanings in the texts that are outside of people's perceptions. Like when Jesus came and the people in His time thought that the Messiah was supposed to liberate them from Roman oppression. Later He revealed that He came to suffer. That is, fulfilling the Man of Sorrows prophecy written in Isaiah. Was that not also taken out of context? Because if Isaiah meant to communicate that the Messiah would come to suffer, don't you think that the Israelites would have recognized the Messiah quickly? There's no indication in the context of the passage in Isaiah that suggested that was talking about the Messiah. We only know after it had all happened. Also when you look at the psalm that says ,"you shall not leave my soul in Sheol" or that "no bone in His body shall be broken", nowhere in those psalms does it say it was talking specifically about Jesus. Yet in the gospels, they make references to those parts. I can give more examples, but again, you guys are wrong on this one. God has hidden many levels of revelation or knowledge under the surface. Sometimes it's not that people make things up and attach an interpretation to a text. It's at that point they either make a connection and see something they couldn't before, or God unveiled something hidden under the text. So the Scriptures actually have multiple meanings. Also, if you're not able to see it, it's not that you're carnal. It's because you haven't reached the point where you can see it or God unveil it to you, or it's not assigned to you. If you open your mind and your heart, you will be able to receive more revelation. The writers of the Bible didn't know that the words have other meanings. God is the one who inspired and hid the knowledge.
Absolutely true!
You say that so and so person who is mangling the text is your brother in Christ, but isn't it more compassionate to note also that they ought be disciplined by the Church and put out of fellowship until they repent? When I hear you say "he is a brother" I understand that to be an affirmation to the effect of "we find this guy basically ok", but Miller seems to with reference to Galatians take a more conservative line in noting the congregation is accountable for what it allows to be preached. So do you need a new descriptive category for people who you think are brothers (though identify no fruit on which to make that case other than your own charity) and are mangling the texts they 'preach'...like some ecclesiological naughty step that dodgy preachers get put on until they repent and conform to the right handling of scripture? I fear for you that you too often affirm when you should rebuke and you do this at both the expense of the errant preacher who will continue in ignorance and at the expense of people who know no better and will listen to these unrepentant preachers on account of your affirmation.
That’s because in Galatians it was an entirely different gospel being preached. The people we are referencing are mishandling a text, usually teaching what is true. Mishandling a text but still within faith and a brother vs Galatians teaching an entirely different gospel, not in the faith and false teacher.
We don’t want to blur those lines. Some people are wrong and some people are leading you to other gods…very different repercussions.
Bad practice? Look brethren, while I understand your concern, why would we go about telling another man's servant?
I think you and the nostics are both wrong in a way. Jesus life and sacrifice and grace makes it all about you not all about him. You make it all about Jesus but he makes it all about you. What the nostics miss is our will and his will. So for us it's all about him and his will for us and for him its all about us and his will for us. If his Church is his bride then he has made it all about us.
If my marriage is about what I can do for my wife and her marriage is about what she can do for me instead of what we can get out of it we will have a marriage similar to our relationship with God.
Unless the Lord builds the house, he that labors does so in vain. It is empty, worthless, and of no value of building up the body of Christ.
This can be allegorical or exposition. It makes no difference in what method the painter paints the picture. If they are not gifted, inspired, or moving out of a miraculous moment of creative genius, it still turns out to be refrigerator art.
The Holy Spirit has to be actively involved in order to show forth the purpose, and glory of God in that teaching.
Mere knowledge of a text in the grammatical context, doesn't build life in the Spirit. It is only by the revealed knowledge, by the Spirit, is the body edified.
The chief cornerstone, and the foundations of the apostles and the prophets, will always accomodate any truth, or reported truth that is real. Anything that comes from outside those boundaries, is quite subject to erroneous beliefs.
As many have already mentioned, Jesus taught a lot in allegories. He made mention of Isaiah, or Hosea but there is no record of Him saying "now turn in your scrolls" to..... He uses examples of seeds, plants, rocks, relational situations, and more. His goal was to communicate a truth, just as the Father presented it.
God loved us so much that He sent us the Word (words are used to communicate meaning). The Living Word came from throne of God, in the spirit, to communicate to us who were living in the flesh, according to the flesh.
Words have creative power. Jesus spoke that we might have the light to see clearly, and make wise decisions. He gave us only what the Father gave Him to give us.
When He was leaving He promised to send us the Holy Spirit and He would lead us unto ALL truth. He told us that the Holy Spirit would not speak of (or on) His own. But He would only say what would be given to Him say.
Jesus and the Holy Spirit, both, only said what was given to them to speak. We are exhorted to only speak what is given us to speak, when we come before kings and rulers. We are not to plan what we are going to say.
I must have a pretty high opinion of myself if I think I can teach, either exposition or allegorical, without being led by His Spirit.
Our dependence is to grow more and more upon Him; not away from Him. That way gets more narrow, and few walk that way. They would rather walk, and speak, and teach from what THEY know. After all, they've done the study, or had the revelation, and know what is good and what is evil. They are like God so they can speak in His stead.
My responsibility is to guard, and judge, my own heart. I am to walk in tight communion with my Father, and speak only what He speaks. After all, I am re presenting Him.
Striving to find mysterious meanings is very dangerous because there are voices waiting for the opportunity to deceive us. If we walk with, and follow our Shepherd, we hear His voice and we won't follow another.
Let's don't ever get ahead of the Lord. Nor let us lag behind.
Are we; are you going to teach, or even speak without knowing it is what our Father is wanting to say.
Much love, .........
Oh... and I CAN TEACH you what I know. But this guy is walking on the edge of a cliff. I think his analogies are just stretched too far for you to understand what he is saying.
I can show you the 'door' - but you have to 'walk through it'.
its all garbage
What cracks me up is you obviously can’t stop watching us!
The only authentic meaning of scripture is to see that Jesus is Jehovah , Emmanuel , God with us , so when He speaks about the Serpent lifted up to save every Jew poisoned by the living serpents , by a look of faith, this is a actual historical fact from Israel's history , but God manifest in the Flesh, Jesus, fulfills this historical fact for the whole world by becoming that Serpent of Brass slain on the cross at Calvary to slave the whole world , so He is the fulfillment of every prophetic picture , and I come into the prophetic picture because I have been poisoned by the Old Serpent the Devil with his sin of disobedience , as a member of the human race , who inhabit the whole world world mankind, who can obtain eternal Life by believing in the Son that God the Father sent to be lifted up on Calvary's Cross, and not condemned because He was condemned to die for me, and if believe in this Son I will be saved , these words spoken by God manifest in the Flesh condemns the Calvinism that you condone
This preacher has not only butchered the bible, but is bordering on heretical 😔🙏