• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Prayers to Mary (and other Saints) (Christians)

BornAgain

Active Member
Yes. As many paths as there are people.
You think reading the bible and mixing it with your mysticism is the way to go. Not even the radical Essenism, with their angel’s theory, would agree with your delusional religion, and you want to mix this or add this to Christianity?

So, I was right when I wrote this the other day,

Therefore, it was inevitable that someone -LIKE YOU- would try to add Christianity -the born again- to this Greek Persian Occult Casserole and challenge the apostles’ writings back then and today.

And you answered me sarcastically,

“This is an interesting in-your-head version of history you have here.”

READ AND UNDERSTAND THIS VERSE.

Jn 5:39 Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;

You proudly announced in this forum that you read the bible. The bible is pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ. The New Testament is the last revelation of God to humanity and the next one is judgment.

This is what you wrote, “Yes. As many paths as there are people.”

Jn 5:39 amp You search and investigate and pore over the Scriptures diligently, because you suppose and trust that you have eternal life through them. And these [very Scriptures] testify about Me!
 

BornAgain

Active Member
Christianity itself is a blending of many philosophies. Don't fool yourself it's not. That doesn't mean it's not valuable.
“A blending of many philosophies” WOW! How did you come up with that conclusion?

So, you agree that your religion is nothing but “PLURALISM”

How about your confession -AGAIN- that you believe that, “There is only one God.”

Ex 20:3 Thou shalt have no other/HETEROS/DIFFERENT gods before me.

So, this is the “OPEN MINDED” religion you are talking about, mixing your gods to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

YOU WROTE:
“The word I use for that is simple: Idolatry. It places your BELIEFS (which are your mental ideas), above God. If God does one thing, that is changing your mind. According to you, you should block this at all costs.”

Tell me who does have the mental idea of “PLURALISM” here?

Your idea of mixing the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with your gods and your religion, OR me, the stubborn, pigheaded, close minded born again Christian?

Who is the idolater? You or me?
 

BornAgain

Active Member
I read it in the Bible and the rest of the Apostolic Tradition (writings/teachings/lives of the students of the Apostles, and their students, etc, etc), of which the Bible is a part. You cannot properly interpret the Bible without the guidance of the Apostles and their Tradition, as it says in Acts 8:

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him.
This is a very good point. The Eunuch was reading the end of Isaiah C52 and C53, THE GOSPEL OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. From these two chapters in the Old Testament, it was pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament Books.

Jn 5:39 Ye search the scriptures O.T., because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;

The Lord Jesus Christ was talking to the Jews here, and since the NT was not written yet at that time, Christ was saying, to the Jews, “ye search the Old Testament” and what the O.T. were saying is right “here in front of you”.

My point is, when the Eunuch asked Philip, “of whom speaketh the prophet this?”

Ac 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

So, the point is, because of the Old Testament pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ to the N.T., the New Testament, the one we are reading today, was written with the same purpose, but the GOOD NEWS is, it is not pointing anymore to Christ, but the reality of who Christ is, in the NT, from the Old Testament. So, when Christ said, "these -OT SCRIPTURES- are they which bear witness of me" STANDING RIGHT IF FRONT OF THEM
 
Last edited:

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You think reading the bible and mixing it with your mysticism is the way to go. Not even the radical Essenism, with their angel’s theory, would agree with your delusional religion, and you want to mix this or add this to Christianity?
My mysticism? Do you even understand what mysticism is? There have been Christian mystics throughout the ages. But, yes, according to you everyone but you and how you think is "wrong". Meister Echkart, John of the Cross, Theresa of Avila, etc, all of them were wrong!, so says the authority "BornAgain" on the Religious Forums in the year 2013.

Don't you find this a tad bit ironic and silly? I do. :)

So, I was right when I wrote this the other day,

Therefore, it was inevitable that someone -LIKE YOU- would try to add Christianity -the born again- to this Greek Persian Occult Casserole and challenge the apostles’ writings back then and today.

And you answered me sarcastically,

“This is an interesting in-your-head version of history you have here.”
Well, it's true. You make this up without support of scholarship. It's hack theology.

READ AND UNDERSTAND THIS VERSE.

Jn 5:39 Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;
Yeah. What?

You proudly announced in this forum that you read the bible. The bible is pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ. The New Testament is the last revelation of God to humanity and the next one is judgment.
"The New Testament is the last revelation of God to humanity and the next one is judgment." This is your belief. I don't agree with this with how you think. You're just parroting church doctrine. That doesn't make it true.

This is what you wrote, “Yes. As many paths as there are people.”

Jn 5:39 amp You search and investigate and pore over the Scriptures diligently, because you suppose and trust that you have eternal life through them. And these [very Scriptures] testify about Me!
Yeah? And, how is what I say a contradiction to this? You're on your path, I'm on mine. That's pretty simple to understand. You're doing yours by going the concrete-literal approach to God and knowledge. I'm not.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
“A blending of many philosophies” WOW! How did you come up with that conclusion?
By looking at comparative religions. By understanding the teachings of many cultures. By looking at history and literature. By having an open mind and reading what modern scholarship has exposed.

How do you come to your views? By doing the same, or by closing yourself off to this sort of knowledge at all expense? My bet is on the latter, but that's your chosen path for you.

So, you agree that your religion is nothing but “PLURALISM”
"Nothing but pluralism"? I'd never characterize it that way. No. It's not pluralism. But in reality, in this modern age, and even in the Hellenistic period of early Christianity, there was and continues to be a blending of ideas. That's simply how reality works. If you don't wish to understand this, then you're free to bury your head in the sand if it makes the world appear simpler and safer for you.

How about your confession -AGAIN- that you believe that, “There is only one God.”

Ex 20:3 Thou shalt have no other/HETEROS/DIFFERENT gods before me.

So, this is the “OPEN MINDED” religion you are talking about, mixing your gods to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
How am I "mixing" gods? I just think God is much bigger than your small ideas, or my own. How I see it is that God encompasses everything. God is found in all paths, and no single path is the Truth itself. They are roads, not the destination. Fingers pointing at the moon, are not the moon itself. You appear to mistake the two.

YOU WROTE:
“The word I use for that is simple: Idolatry. It places your BELIEFS (which are your mental ideas), above God. If God does one thing, that is changing your mind. According to you, you should block this at all costs.”

Tell me who does have the mental idea of “PLURALISM” here?
Not me.

Your idea of mixing the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with your gods and your religion, OR me, the stubborn, pigheaded, close minded born again Christian?

Who is the idolater? You or me?
Any one who shouts they have the truth of God and shuts their mind off to knowledge is.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
“A blending of many philosophies” WOW! How did you come up with that conclusion?
I wanted to come back to this after reading up this morning on the history of the Q document in NT scholarship in a book I have. I came across this I wanted to quote to show you this is hardly just some fiction I've made up.

After Streeter's work [in the 1920's], Q studies were put on hold while New Testament scholars worked on other questions felt to be more pressing. One question, still unresolved since the turn of the century, threatened the Protestant desire to think of early Christianity as a pure, uncontaminated religion. Study after study had shown that early Christianity was not a unique religion but had been "influenced" by the religions of late antiquity. Especially troubling was the similarities of the early Christian message to Jewish apocalyptic thought, a discovery that linked Christianity too closely with Judaism on the one hand, and estranged the modern church from its origins on the other. Also unsettling was the discovery that early Christianity bore a distinct resemblance to the Hellenistic mystery cults, particularly where it mattered most, namely in their myths of dying and rising gods and in their rituals of baptism and sacred meals. Whether or not early Christianity differed from the religions of surrounding cultures became a burning issue that diverted attention away from Q and the quest for the historical Jesus.

~ Q, The Lost Gospel, Burton Mack, pg. 22,23​

So, as you accuse me of doing this, I say in response, it's already been done 2000 years ago. I just recognize this. That's the only difference.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
This is a very good point. The Eunuch was reading the end of Isaiah C52 and C53, THE GOSPEL OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. From these two chapters in the Old Testament, it was pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament Books.

The Lord Jesus Christ was talking to the Jews here, and since the NT was not written yet at that time, Christ was saying, to the Jews, “ye search the Old Testament” and what the O.T. were saying is right “here in front of you”.

So, the point is, because of the Old Testament pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ to the N.T., the New Testament, the one we are reading today, was written with the same purpose, but the GOOD NEWS is, it is not pointing anymore to Christ, but the reality of who Christ is, in the NT, from the Old Testament. So, when Christ said, "these -OT SCRIPTURES- are they which bear witness of me" STANDING RIGHT IF FRONT OF THEM
This doesn't answer what I was getting at. How do you explain that Philip had to interpret the Scriptures for the eunuch, in order for the eunuch to understand their true meaning, if all you need is the Spirit to interpret the Bible, and you don't need anyone to teach you how to interpret it?
 

BornAgain

Active Member
God is found in all paths, and no single path is the Truth itself.
You call yourself a Christian -a follower of Christ- but you do not believe that there is only one way to God, and that is Christ only.

Jn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

You added the word “Christian” to your religion, but why are challenging the apostles’ writings with your mix-up theory of paganism, and still denying “PLURALISM”

Therefore, it was inevitable that someone -LIKE YOU- would try to add Christianity -the born again- to this Greek Persian Occult Casserole and challenge the apostles’ writings back then and today.

My suggestion is when Jesus said'*I am the way, the truth and the life.*

He was referring to a state of consciousness which is freed from the past and lives in inner freedom, where God's indwelling presence is experienced.

No one can come to this state of inner freedom unless people grow into this state as Jesus did.
Suggestion is like a proposal, isn‘t it. To whom you are suggesting this theory of yours? To the apostles who wrote the FOUR GOSPEL in the New Testament? Or, are you suggesting to yourself or to your mind. Do you think that your suggestion is relevant to the mind of God who just happened to be the author of the one you are questioning?

You use words only you could understand and you want to add this to christianity to make it simpler and open minded.

Example of state of consciousness, Michael Jordan, when he was playing basketball he must go into this “zone”, this dynamic state of consciousness zone of greatness subjectively and as player of course, so he could play objectively like Michael Jordan, otherwise he is just another player without the quality, of a basketball player, like Michael Jordan. In other words, Michael Jordan could not do what he did if he could not get into that “zone”, that dynamic state of consciousness zone of being a great basketball player he was.

For a regular person to get into this state of consciousness zone of greatness as a basketball player, like Michael Jordan, is almost impossible. It takes a lifetime of practice to get into that state of consciousness.

Another example is, martial artist. A martial artist can break layers of hollow blocks with just one blow, but he must enter into this “zone” or state of consciousness to be able to break this layers of hollow blocks, otherwise, its his hand that will break.

State of consciousness: you could walk into the Sahara Desert without feeling the heat, or walk from North Pole to South Pole and not feel the freezing cold. Who could do all these things? Anyone could, but only in the mind/subjectively and not objectively.

What they are talking about here is the state of consciousness in a subjective form, or in reality, it does exist only in the mind.

Christ earthly ministry according to these blasphemers’ theory was in the state of consciousness, that it exist only in the mind and not in the flesh, or in other words, Christ in the flesh did NOT REALLY exist at all in the bible. If we all agree with this theory, then, we should tear parts of the pages of the New Testament to satisfy their theory about Christ’s earthly ministry.

So, when Christ said, Jn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Their theory was, the apostle John was in the state of consciousness when he was writing the book of John. In other words again, John’s gospel existed ONLY in the mind of John the apostle and not in the flesh.

They must be thinking about the gaps between Christ’s earthly ministry and the dates the synoptic gospel and John’s gospel were written. Their thoughts were, how could they, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, have remembered all those things [I guess they do not read the bible]?

Jn 14:26 But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you.

Their answer or SUGGESTION was, these FOUR APOSTLES were in the STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS when they were writing the four gospels. In other words, all four gospels did not exist in the flesh, but only in the mind of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

This kind of heresy existed during the apostles’ time, especially during the apostle John’s time. In the beginning of John’s epistles we can read his concern about this heresy.

1Jn 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
1Jn 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
1Jn 1:4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.

The tradition identifying Cerinthus as the opponent of 1 John also depends on Irenaeus. He preserved a description from Polycarp of an encounter between the apostle and Cerinthus in a public bathhouse, which John hurriedly left so that he would not have to bathe in the same place with such an enemy of the truth. Irenaeus also described in some detail the heresy of Cerinthus. Cerinthus, he said, denied the virgin birth of Jesus. After his baptism, Christ descended on Jesus in the form of a dove from God in heaven, and he began his ministry of preaching and miracles. Christ departed from Jesus on the cross, and it was only Jesus who suffered and rose again

Polycarp of Smyrna (mid-second century) appears to have been depending on 1 John when he asserted that whoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is antichrist.

2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

Today, these blasphemers took Cerithianism into another level of extreme heresies or what we call today, modern heresy. It is like mixing and drinking their own potion.

The question is how does one get into this so-called, “inner freedom”?

One has to get into this state of consciousness as if one is Christ himself.
OR, according to them, one could become like Christ if one wants to.

This is what they say, "I am the Way", is to become Christ ourselves.
Then I or you will say "I am the Way" as well, not in our separate ego-self, but our divine Identity.”

It does not mean that one has to believe in Jesus as the Son of God or one with God, or the only way, truth and life, but to enter into the state that Jesus entered.
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

According to them, if one would want to enter into the state of consciousness like the four gospel writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, one has to write his own theory about Christ’s earthly ministry. If one could write his own theory about Christ earthly ministry, then one could become Christ also in his own STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS. It’s more like dualism/Gnosticism. You could be a rock star if you want to, just close your eyes and reflect on what a rock star you want to be, but the minute you open your eyes you are back to reality. In other words, for example, if one writes, “Jesus said, I am the best”, one could just reflect on this verse as if one is really Christ himself, therefore, one could say “I am the best” as if one is really the Christ himself.

That is why they call this mystics. Nothing but fantasy. They do not believe that Christ existed at all in the bible. Pure heresy taken to the most extreme.

The question is: is Jesus the only one who had this experience? I do not hold this view and it is not necessary.

Jn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The apostle John wrote, “Jesus saith unto him”.

These blasphemers said,
“The question is: is Jesus the only one who had this experience? I do not hold this view and it is not necessary.”
 

BornAgain

Active Member
This doesn't answer what I was getting at. How do you explain that Philip had to interpret the Scriptures for the eunuch, in order for the eunuch to understand their true meaning, if all you need is the Spirit to interpret the Bible, and you don't need anyone to teach you how to interpret it?

Ac 6:3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.
Ac 6:4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.
Ac 6:5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:

We are talking about Philip the evangelist here. As you can read in verse 3 “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom”

2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Tell me, what is your understanding of the Holy Spirit?

Try to understand this,

The things to be revealed by GOD are "unsearchable" because they are beyond the grasp of human knowledge.

Jeremiah 33:3 Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty*"UNSEARCHABLE"*things, which thou knowest not.
 
Last edited:

BornAgain

Active Member
I wanted to come back to this after reading up this morning on the history of the Q document in NT scholarship in a book I have. I came across this I wanted to quote to show you this is hardly just some fiction I've made up.

After Streeter's work [in the 1920's], Q studies were put on hold while New Testament scholars worked on other questions felt to be more pressing.

One question, still unresolved since the turn of the century, threatened the Protestant desire to think of early Christianity as a pure, uncontaminated religion.

Study after study had shown that early Christianity was not a unique religion but had been "influenced" by the religions of late antiquity.

Especially troubling was the similarities of the early Christian message to Jewish apocalyptic thought, a discovery that linked Christianity too closely with Judaism on the one hand, and estranged the modern church from its origins on the other.

Also unsettling was the discovery that early Christianity bore a distinct resemblance to the Hellenistic mystery cults, particularly where it mattered most, namely in their myths of dying and rising gods and in their rituals of baptism and sacred meals.
Whether or not early Christianity differed from the religions of surrounding cultures became a burning issue that diverted attention away from Q and the quest for the historical Jesus.

My mysticism? Do you even understand what mysticism is? There have been Christian mystics throughout the ages. But, yes, according to you everyone but you and how you think is "wrong". Meister Echkart, John of the Cross, Theresa of Avila, etc, all of them were wrong!, so says the authority "BornAgain" on the Religious Forums in the year 2013.

During Paul’s time the majority of the Gentiles were pagans like you. So, when they became Christians through Paul’s preaching -“I DIE DAILY”- of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, some of these converted pagans to Christianity wanted to retain OR go back to some of the rituals about their idols or gods, described in V10.

Read and understand these verses.

Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Gal 4:10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
Gal 4:11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

You are comparing their writings, Meister Echkart, John of the Cross, Theresa of Avila to the apostolic writings. You really want to challenge the apostolic writings with your hocus-pocus religion. Its not going to work. You know why? All these religions your are mixing-up have different foundations. Its like medicines, some of them interacts from each other because they have different chemistries. Your mixing-up of religions will interact with each other. A very good example is YOU. You want the bible to interact with your mysticism. So, what did you do? Add the word “Christianity, Christian” to your religion and call it “Christian mystics”

Ac 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

In this verse did you see any name attached to the word “CHRISTIANS”?​
 
Last edited:

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Those who resort to name-calling proclaim their lack of substance in a discussion. I'm not sure how you define being born again, but to me it means at the least a humble heart. Your words reek.
 

BornAgain

Active Member
Study after study had shown that early Christianity was not a unique religion but had been "influenced" by the religions of late antiquity.

Especially troubling was the similarities of the early Christian message to Jewish apocalyptic thought, a discovery that linked Christianity too closely with Judaism on the one hand, and estranged the modern church from its origins on the other.

Also unsettling was the discovery that early Christianity bore a distinct resemblance to the Hellenistic mystery cults, particularly where it mattered most, namely in their myths of dying and rising gods and in their rituals of baptism and sacred meals.
FOLLOW ALL BLUE LETTERS

Do you remember this?
I wrote:
So, I was right when I wrote this the other day,

Therefore, it was inevitable that someone -LIKE YOU- would try to add Christianity -the born again- to this*Greek Persian Occult Casserole and*challenge the apostles’ writings*back then and today.

And you answered me sarcastically,

YOU WROTE:
“This is an interesting in-your-head version of history you have here.”

And your response was,

“Well, it's true. You make this up without support of scholarship. It's hack theology.”

HACK THEOLOGY!! Look up and read your post again.

You are admitting unconsciously what you were denying consciously.

2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Because of your unbelief you will never see the TRUTH, and the TRUTH IS CHRIST.
 
Last edited:

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
We are talking about Philip the evangelist here. As you can read in verse 3 “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom”
Yes. Your point is?

2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
No prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. What, then, makes us think that we can come up with our own interpretations of Scripture? We are to hold fast to the traditions we were taught, and contest for the Faith delivered once unto all the Saints. Our interpretation of Scripture must adhere to the Apostolic Tradition, and our understanding of Scripture must be informed by this Tradition.

Tell me, what is your understanding of the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit is the third Person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father, co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial with the Father and the Son. But something tells me that's not quite what you had in mind... Care to specify your question?

Try to understand this,

The things to be revealed by GOD are "unsearchable" because they are beyond the grasp of human knowledge.

Jeremiah 33:3 Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty*"UNSEARCHABLE"*things, which thou knowest not.
I understand that far better than you know.
 

BornAgain

Active Member
Our interpretation of Scripture must adhere to the Apostolic Tradition, and our understanding of Scripture must be informed by this Tradition.
Can you provide a side by side example of the apostolic writings and apostolic tradition?

Can you tell the difference between the two?

Apostolic Age or writings was the period in the history of the first generation of the Christian church when the apostles were alive, beginning with the Day of Pentecost and ending with the death of the apostle John near the end of the first century. Our only source for the period is the New Testament, especially Acts and the Epistles.

You have to understand where you are, as a Gentile, in the bible. From Genesis to Revelation are the very words of the almighty God.

The law of Moses, are they for the Gentiles, or just for the Jews and Gentiles proselytes only?

Can you find God’s messages to the Gentiles in the book of Acts and Paul’s epistles?
 

BornAgain

Active Member
This doesn't answer what I was getting at. How do you explain that Philip had to interpret the Scriptures for the eunuch, in order for the eunuch to understand their true meaning, if all you need is the Spirit to interpret the Bible, and you don't need anyone to teach you how to interpret it?
MY ANSWER WAS:
We are talking about Philip the evangelist who was “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom”

YOU WROTE:
“Yes. Your point is?”

Philip was “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom” and that was the reason why he was able to explain the scripture to the Eunuch.

No prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

I believe that what throws you off here is the word “INTERPRETATION” The writers of the scriptures did not put their own construction upon the ’God-breathed’ words they wrote.

Prophecy, Propheteia in Greek, signifies the speaking forth of the mind and counsel of God.

How did Moses write Genesis? Was it from his own interpretation or God spoke to Moses?
I believed that from Genesis to Revelation are the very words of God, therefore, they are God’s prophecy to humanity. Did God write the bible? With all my heart, YES!

How? holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
 

BornAgain

Active Member
What, then, makes us think that we can come up with our own interpretations of Scripture?
The same way Philip explained to the Eunuch. Philip did not come up with his own explanation or interpretation, about the Lord Jesus Christ, to the Eunuch. Philip was not rewriting the Old Testament or the book of Isaiah when he was explaining to the Eunuch about the Lord Jesus Christ, he was “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom” like Stephen in,
Ac 6:9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
Ac 6:10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.

Today when we read the bible, how do we understand God’s messages to us? With the help of the Holy Spirit, otherwise no one can understand the bible.

When I wrote this to you:

This is a very good point. The Eunuch was reading the end of Isaiah C52 and C53,*THE GOSPEL OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. From these two chapters in the Old Testament, it was pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament Books.*

Jn 5:39 Ye search the scriptures O.T., because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;*

The Lord Jesus Christ was talking to the Jews here, and since the NT was not written yet at that time, Christ was saying, to the Jews, “ye search the Old Testament” and what the O.T. were saying is right “here in front of you”.

My point is, when the Eunuch asked Philip, “of whom speaketh the prophet this?”

Ac 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.*

So, the point is, because of the Old Testament pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ to the N.T., the New Testament, the one we are reading today, was written with the same purpose, but the*GOOD NEWS*is, it is not pointing anymore to Christ, but the reality of who Christ is, in the NT, from the Old Testament. So, when Christ said, "these -OT SCRIPTURES- are they which bear witness of me" STANDING RIGHT IF FRONT OF THEM.

What was your response to this?

“This doesn't answer what I was getting at. How do you explain that Philip had to interpret the Scriptures for the eunuch, in order for the eunuch to understand their true meaning, if all you need is the Spirit to interpret the Bible, and you don't need anyone to teach you how to interpret it?”

Now, how did you think I was able to explain all these to you?

From my own interpretation? NO!

Was I re-writing the Old Testament and the New Testament? NO!

There is no way I could explained all these things to you from my own knowledge.

I WROTE TO YOU:

The things to be revealed by GOD are "unsearchable" because they are beyond the grasp of human knowledge.

Jeremiah 33:3 Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty "UNSEARCHABLE" things, which thou knowest not.

What was your response to this?

You wrote:

“I understand that far better than you know.”

Did you?

Ro 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
 
Last edited:

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
You know one thing that helps a lot? Actually explaining the evidence that you slap down and how you're using it. Don't just toss out a line of Scripture. Actually EXPLAIN how you're using it. You'll be far more understandable.
 

BornAgain

Active Member
You know one thing that helps a lot? Actually explaining the evidence that you slap down and how you're using it. Don't just toss out a line of Scripture. Actually EXPLAIN how you're using it. You'll be far more understandable.

SURE!

THAT'S ALL YOU GONNA SAY?

You should read first -so you could understand- before commenting.

Human pride!

You know human always have this thought that pride is their best ally, when in fact it is their worst enemy.

“As long as you are proud you cannot know God. A proud man is always looking down on thing and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down you cannot see something that is above you.”*
C.S. Lewis,*Mere Christianity

Just say I did not understand!
 
Top