Mike’s schtick reminds me of the Maxwell Smart’s “would you believe ?” routine – like a used car salesman who keeps lowering the cost of the car he’s trying to sell “would you buy it for this much?”
The Bible can get interpreted properly
when we do that interpreting
by using material that comes from within the Bible itself.
If you take that approach you will never understand it. It's a foreign book to our western ways. Also, the Bible doesn't give exhaustive historical accounts that show the context it was penned. It actually takes secular sources such as Flavius Josephus and his works:
4.1The Jewish War
4.2Jewish Antiquities
4.3Against Apion
4.4Spurious works
Not only secular works but "rejected books" such as The Septuagint, the same Septuagint that Jesus, Peter, and Paul used in their time.
We are told to study to show outselves approved unto God...not let intrepret scripture itself to show ourselves approved.
Whats really gonna bake your noodle is I just explained (few posts ago on Romans) how God is bringing salvation to Israel as we speak, yet, your dispensationalist pov has Israel's salvation at a future date in the 6th admin. Error.
The Bible can get interpreted properly
when we do that interpreting
by using material that comes from within the Bible itself.
You just affirmed what has been proven here dozens of times. (The 2nd time established it.) We do the interpreting. You finally got it right!
What you got wrong is “using material from within itself.” Material? Not just internal evidence, also, external evidence must be utilized.
No matter how (H-O-W) you parse it, the Bible cannot and does not ever interpret itself. “The Bible interprets itself” is a stupid sentence that should never be repeated.
How stupid? Four crucified stupid, that’s how.
Edited by Nathan_Jr Bronze idols will not please God.
HOWEVER, we want to avoid private (one's own) interpretation in the process.
And how do we do that?
Hint:
Remember the figure of speech includes the word "itself."
II Peter 1:19,20,21 (KJV)
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
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.
===========================================
How many decades ago were we discussing how vpw's explanation of these verses were completely wrong? vpw said that 1:20 was warning us not to "privately interpret" the verses of the Bible- while doing exactly that with that verse.
These verses explain the ORIGIN of Scripture. It's a more sure word of prophecy that wasn't of someone's "letting-loose" (to use a familiar phrase), nor by the will of man long ago, but rather the result of holy men of God who spoke as directed by The Holy Ghost.
This "one's own letting-loose" thing meaning how to avoid approaching the Bible, that was an elementary mistake that, as often happened, was the result of elevating the wording of the 1611 King James Version over the texts from which it came. Often, vpw came out with a lengthy explanation with rambling analogies, all stemming from the exact phrasing in the King James Version. However, when one goes back to the texts- Stephens, Nestle, etc, one finds nothing of the kind. vpw got hung up on the exact phrasing of the King James Version as if it was AUTHORITATIVE in its exact phrasing, rather than a translation of texts more authoritative than itself.
So, to avoid "one's own private interpretation" as referred to in I Peter 1:20, don't try to write something by your will and claim it's Scripture. (BTW, trying to write something by God's Will and claim it's Scripture is self-defeating, so don't try that, either.)
Did Wierwille say Scripture interprets itself or didn't he?
YES! He did say that phrase, and then he moved on to the details.
VPW used the figure of speech "The Bible interprets itself" to summarize the topic, and to make it memorable. That that phrase NOT to supply the details, but to summarize them, figuratively.
It is a self referential mnemonic, easy to remember, and signifies great importance, being a figure of speech.
He then spends lots of time in the film class explaining what he means by that catchy phrase. He spends many pages on it in the book. It is a highly detailed topic, and it served me well.
I don't focus on the summary at the beginning of the topic, the figure of speech, the self referential mnemonic. That has a limited purpose; the meat comes later in the details.
It is a self referential mnemonic, easy to remember, and signifies great importance, being a figure of speech.
Except that it’s none of these things. (We’ll, it’s memorable, because it’s absurd and illogical and hateful towards God.)
The phrase can only cause confusion and spiritual retardation. It should never be spoken or written. UNLESS, one intends to defecate in the mouth of God.
VPW used the figure of speech "The Bible interprets itself" to summarize the topic, and to make it memorable. That that phrase NOT to supply the details, but to summarize them, figuratively.
No he didn't. He stole the concept from Bullinge's How to Enjoy Reading the Bible. It's not figurative the way Bullinger used it and it wasn't figurative when wierwille presented it and it's not figurative with twi still teaching it the same way to this day. Your moving your own boundaries cause you got caught contradicting yourself yet again.
“The Bible interprets itself” is a deterministic belief . No other agency is needed to explain it - it is self-explanatory. Logically some ideas are easily communicated / understood if there is common ground - everyone knows what a human being is for example. But ancient documents written so long ago in other languages, other cultures, within other worldviews will need explanation and clarification for modern folks to get some idea of what they were talking about…wow wee wow - this session is like the Advanced Class of the NT canon thread
Prophecy did not come by the will of man, yet they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The human - unique and imperfect elements (writing style, cultural and worldview peculiarities) of Scripture indicates a collaborative effort. In other words, the meeting of “the wills”. God’s will and the will of each individual writer. That would be impossible in a deterministic universe.
This apparently “freewheeling” universe seems even to be exemplified in the Godhead for in Luke 22:42 we read Jesus prayed not my will but thine be done.
Edited by T-Bone I was determined to revise this post
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
330
267
271
186
Popular Days
Nov 12
118
Nov 13
107
Nov 20
105
Nov 9
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 330 posts
T-Bone 267 posts
OldSkool 271 posts
Nathan_Jr 186 posts
Popular Days
Nov 12 2022
118 posts
Nov 13 2022
107 posts
Nov 20 2022
105 posts
Nov 9 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personall
waysider
This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collecte
Charity
I agree with So_Crates when he said "Here's a wild idea: why don't YOU become meek and I'll tell you about all the fruit in my life since I stopped making PLAF the center of my life." There have
Posted Images
So_crates
And just what do you think the protest is over? The phrasing?
You can play word games all you want, it just shows your inability to deal with the issue at hand.
Note Saint Vic himself used the phrase:
https://thewaymagazine.com/scripture-interprets-verse-right-written/
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Mike, you so funny!
Mike’s schtick reminds me of the Maxwell Smart’s “would you believe ?” routine – like a used car salesman who keeps lowering the cost of the car he’s trying to sell “would you buy it for this much?”
Edited by T-Boneadd more Kool-Aid
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
If you take that approach you will never understand it. It's a foreign book to our western ways. Also, the Bible doesn't give exhaustive historical accounts that show the context it was penned. It actually takes secular sources such as Flavius Josephus and his works:
4.1The Jewish War
4.2Jewish Antiquities
4.3Against Apion
4.4Spurious works
Not only secular works but "rejected books" such as The Septuagint, the same Septuagint that Jesus, Peter, and Paul used in their time.
We are told to study to show outselves approved unto God...not let intrepret scripture itself to show ourselves approved.
Whats really gonna bake your noodle is I just explained (few posts ago on Romans) how God is bringing salvation to Israel as we speak, yet, your dispensationalist pov has Israel's salvation at a future date in the 6th admin. Error.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
You just affirmed what has been proven here dozens of times. (The 2nd time established it.) We do the interpreting. You finally got it right!
What you got wrong is “using material from within itself.” Material? Not just internal evidence, also, external evidence must be utilized.
No matter how (H-O-W) you parse it, the Bible cannot and does not ever interpret itself. “The Bible interprets itself” is a stupid sentence that should never be repeated.
How stupid? Four crucified stupid, that’s how.
Edited by Nathan_JrBronze idols will not please God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Actually, this is the literal, according to usage by Saint Vic:
The bible can only get interpreted properly
When you let me do the interpreting
By using my materials
Which I claim come from within the bible itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
and the Bibe can be erroneously interpreted too - like Bullinger's 4 crucified which wierwille stupidly parroted!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
More literals:
Rain is wet
Snow is cold
General Allity is general
Captain Obvious is well, obvious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Dat’s riiiiight!
Still, the Bible never interprets itself, even erroneously. Never. Ever.
Mike finally got it right. So, so right. WE interpret the Bible. Proud of ya, Mike!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
And to think he likely ponied up another $100 to be told the bible intrepretes itself again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
PFAL: Session 4
How The Word Interprets Itself
Listening With A Purpose
2. What is the threefold way all Scripture interprets itself?
4. What are the four ways Scripture interprets itself in the verse?
Ruh Roe!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
HOWEVER, we want to avoid private (one's own) interpretation in the process.
And how do we do that?
Hint:
Remember the figure of speech includes the word "itself."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
We got private interpretation in the process.
HINT: I won't mention any names, but his initials are Saint Vic
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Yo, Mike
Did Wierwille say Scripture interprets itself or didn't he?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
II Peter 1:19,20,21 (KJV)
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
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.
===========================================
How many decades ago were we discussing how vpw's explanation of these verses were completely wrong? vpw said that 1:20 was warning us not to "privately interpret" the verses of the Bible- while doing exactly that with that verse.
These verses explain the ORIGIN of Scripture. It's a more sure word of prophecy that wasn't of someone's "letting-loose" (to use a familiar phrase), nor by the will of man long ago, but rather the result of holy men of God who spoke as directed by The Holy Ghost.
This "one's own letting-loose" thing meaning how to avoid approaching the Bible, that was an elementary mistake that, as often happened, was the result of elevating the wording of the 1611 King James Version over the texts from which it came. Often, vpw came out with a lengthy explanation with rambling analogies, all stemming from the exact phrasing in the King James Version. However, when one goes back to the texts- Stephens, Nestle, etc, one finds nothing of the kind. vpw got hung up on the exact phrasing of the King James Version as if it was AUTHORITATIVE in its exact phrasing, rather than a translation of texts more authoritative than itself.
So, to avoid "one's own private interpretation" as referred to in I Peter 1:20, don't try to write something by your will and claim it's Scripture. (BTW, trying to write something by God's Will and claim it's Scripture is self-defeating, so don't try that, either.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
YES! He did say that phrase, and then he moved on to the details.
VPW used the figure of speech "The Bible interprets itself" to summarize the topic, and to make it memorable. That that phrase NOT to supply the details, but to summarize them, figuratively.
It is a self referential mnemonic, easy to remember, and signifies great importance, being a figure of speech.
He then spends lots of time in the film class explaining what he means by that catchy phrase. He spends many pages on it in the book. It is a highly detailed topic, and it served me well.
I don't focus on the summary at the beginning of the topic, the figure of speech, the self referential mnemonic. That has a limited purpose; the meat comes later in the details.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Why?
if you imitate victor and stand on his shoulders, how will you avoid his private interpretation?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Except that it’s none of these things. (We’ll, it’s memorable, because it’s absurd and illogical and hateful towards God.)
The phrase can only cause confusion and spiritual retardation. It should never be spoken or written. UNLESS, one intends to defecate in the mouth of God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
No he didn't. He stole the concept from Bullinge's How to Enjoy Reading the Bible. It's not figurative the way Bullinger used it and it wasn't figurative when wierwille presented it and it's not figurative with twi still teaching it the same way to this day. Your moving your own boundaries cause you got caught contradicting yourself yet again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's not a mnemonic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
“The Bible interprets itself” is a deterministic belief . No other agency is needed to explain it - it is self-explanatory. Logically some ideas are easily communicated / understood if there is common ground - everyone knows what a human being is for example. But ancient documents written so long ago in other languages, other cultures, within other worldviews will need explanation and clarification for modern folks to get some idea of what they were talking about…wow wee wow - this session is like the Advanced Class of the NT canon thread
Prophecy did not come by the will of man, yet they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The human - unique and imperfect elements (writing style, cultural and worldview peculiarities) of Scripture indicates a collaborative effort. In other words, the meeting of “the wills”. God’s will and the will of each individual writer. That would be impossible in a deterministic universe.
This apparently “freewheeling” universe seems even to be exemplified in the Godhead for in Luke 22:42 we read Jesus prayed not my will but thine be done.
Edited by T-BoneI was determined to revise this post
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"Every good boy deserves favor" is a mnemonic. SCUBA is a mnemonic. The ABC song is a mnemonic. ROY G. BIV is a mnemonic.
"The Bible Interprets Itself"...not a mnemonic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
MY GOSH! Who knew? (*_*)
And all this time I thought The Bible Intreprets Itself was a memory peg!!! Say it aint so!!!!! AHHHH!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.