• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Sloppy Hermeneutics

NeoPatriarch

NeoPatriarch

Member
Real Person
Male
Words have meanings. Thoughts are expressed in the Bible for God's purpose.

Christians are not given liberty to impose their own personal beliefs upon the text. To express your personal belief in such a way to deceive your listener into believing God said something he did not specifically say is a lie.

Isn't that right?
 
*stepping into the trap*

sounds reasonable to me :?
 
That's basically what this entire ministry is built on, actually believing what God says in the Bible is true and we can't impose our own ideas of marriage onto His word.

Two in the trap...
 
*nervous anticipation*
 
For example:

I enjoy Wretched Radio and Way of the Master. They use a method for sharing the gospel. Law to the proud grace to the humble. So they begin by sharing the law.

"How many lies have you told?"

"What do you call someone who tells lies?"

"Have you ever stolen anything?"

"What do you call someone who steals?"

And in this way they convict the sinner of his guilt. It works great when preparing some one to hear the Gospel.

However the third or fourth question will be about lust.

Speaking to a man they might say, " Have you ever looked at a woman with lust?"

BUT when they speak to a woman they will say something like, "Have you ever lusted after a man? Jesus said, whosoever looks upon someone to lust after them commits adultery."

The question to the man is arguable, but the statement to the woman is deceptive.

I think the worse offense is to place that deception in the mouth of Christ.

Am I picking nits, or is this a bad practice?
 
first, they would do well to understand scripture;
(not saying that i do, but at least i try)

Mat 5:28 But 1161 I 1473 say 3004 unto you 5213, That 3754 whosoever 3956 looketh 991 on a woman 1135 to 4314 lust after1937 her 846 hath committed adultery 3431 with her 846 already 2235 in 1722 his 846 heart 2588.
Mat 13:17 For 1063 verily 281 I say 3004 unto you 5213, That 3754 many 4183 prophets 4396 and 2532 righteous 1342 [men] have desired1937 to see 1492 [those things] which 3739 ye see 991 , and 2532 have 1492 0 not 3756 seen 1492 [them]; and 2532 to hear 191 [those things] which 3739 ye hear 191 , and 2532 have 191 0 not 3756 heard 191 [them].
Luk 15:16 And 2532 he would fain1937 have filled 1072 his 846 belly 2836 with 575 the husks 2769 that 3739 the swine 5519 did eat 2068 : and 2532 no man 3762 gave 1325 unto him 846.
Luk 16:21 And 2532 desiring1937 to be fed 5526 with 575 the crumbs 5589 which 3588 fell 4098 from 575 the rich man's 4145 table 5132: moreover 235 2532 the dogs 2965 came 2064 and licked 621 his 846 sores 1668.
Luk 17:22 And 1161 he said 2036 unto 4314 the disciples 3101, The days 2250 will come 2064 , when 3753 ye shall desire1937 to see 1492 one 3391 of the days 2250 of the Son 5207 of man 444, and 2532 ye shall 3700 0 not 3756 see 3700 [it].
Luk 22:15 And 2532 he said 2036 unto 4314 them 846, With desire 1939 I have desired1937 to eat 5315 this 5124 passover 3957 with 3326 you 5216 before 4253 I 3165 suffer 3958 :
Act 20:33 I have coveted1937 no man's 3762 silver 694, or 2228 gold 5553, or 2228 apparel 2441.

lust is nothing more than a desire. if a man does not have a desire for any certain woman, he probably will never get married. the objective is to never desire a woman who is committed to another man. (nothing was ever said about coveting thy neighbor's daughter, just do not covet his wife ;) )

with poly in play, an un-attached female can desire, lust after, covet, ANY man, married or not :!:
if she is attached, her choice has been made.

finding someone attractive is not the same as desiring them, but it can become desire in .3 nano seconds :shock:
 
so yes,
words DO mean things
 
Thanks Steve.

You have wonderfully illustrated an argument, against an understandable reading of the English. I can understand the misreading that Way of the Master teaches, and I can respect someone who thinks that this reading is true even though you and I do not agree.

However, to twist that text to make it applicable to women seems unethical and deceptive.

So is it wrong to lie about what scripture says if we believe the statement itself is true? Additionally, should we risk being wrong and compounding our error by placing those errors in different words?

( No trap, I just want to highlight and warn against a sloppy and dangerous practice.)
 
FollowingHim said:
That's basically what this entire ministry is built on, actually believing what God says in the Bible is true and we can't impose our own ideas of marriage onto His word.

Two in the trap...
Click to expand...
Glad to hear that. I think that approach is the only honest one.
 
steve, neo or anyone,
After thinking about it for all of 30 seconds, I was wondering if anyone is aware of any references in the Bible which are not directed specifically at men with regards to lust. In other words, are there any verses that are general enough to apply to both men and women, Or are there verses which specifically tell women not to lust. I can't think of any off of the top of my head and thought I would throw it out there to everyone to see if you had anything.
Thanks!
Chris
 
I was wondering about that. My only question is around the word Thou shall not covet / You shall not covet and whether or not it applies universally to both genders. I spent a few minutes looking it up and haven't found a definitive answer. It's the word chamad which seems to have uses as a feminine noun or verb. But I can't find much else. I'm guessing the word is gender neutral but it does seem odd to tell a woman not to covet her neighbor's wife. :)
If it weren't for that part of it I believe it would have a slam dunk application to both male and female.
Certainly let me know if you find anything!
Chris

ps: btw, can we call you Neo for short? :) Brings back memories of the Matrix. :)
 
I guess a woman could covet another man's wife if she wanted to take her from her husband as her own sisterwife.

Feel free to call me Robert
 
Robert, I hadn't thought of that... clever! :lol:
 
As I read it, the tenth commandment tells you not to covet anything that belongs to your neighbour. It gives a few examples (house, wife, slaves, animals) but these appear to primarily be aimed at illustrating the main point - don't covet anything he owns. It applies equally to both genders, as it would be wrong for either a man or a woman to covet his donkey. It's nothing to do with lust, I don't feel that way about donkeys personally... :shock: It only applies to wives in that they are the property of their husband - just like his house or donkey.
Exodus 20:17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”
Click to expand...
However, if a woman desires to have a man as her husband, she is not seeking to own him, quite the opposite - she is seeking to have him own her! It never says "do not desire to be owned by your neighbour" (or "do not desire to give your neighbour another ox" to take the illustration away from marriage). This commandment is NOT about the neighbour himself, only about desiring his belongings.

The Way of the Master is not lying, as they do believe their interpretation of lust to be correct. They just haven't seriously sat down and reevaluated their presuppositions in the light of scripture. Their teachings are clearly completely wrong for women, and almost completely wrong for men.
 
i do believe that if a committed/married woman is reading romance novels (porn for women) she will most probably end up lusting after the image that has been created for her by the author.
while this does not result in theft or atempted theft from anyone else, it does usually result in dissatisfaction with her own situation.
 
FollowingHim said:
It's nothing to do with lust, I don't feel that way about donkeys personally...
Click to expand...
I think the point is the word "lust" is an unlawful desire not necessarily a sexual one.


FollowingHim said:
The Way of the Master is not lying, as they do believe their interpretation of lust to be correct. They just haven't seriously sat down and reevaluated their presuppositions in the light of scripture. Their teachings are clearly completely wrong for women, and almost completely wrong for men.
Click to expand...
My point is that by putting words in the mouth of God they compound their unwitting error. We can do the same is we make a similar practice of re-word-ing what the Bible says.
 
Okay, everyone, did a little moderation on the thread. If your post was deleted, don't take it personally. I am just resetting the clock back a little bit to get the discussion back on track.

I think this is a valuable discussion, and deserves further investigation on our parts. I encourage you to continue to participate, but remember to do so with respect and love to one another...and no implied accusations with that statement!

Blessings,

Doc
 
With so many Bible versions available to us today, there is a bit of difficulty seeing what the text really says. I know I am guilty at times of not being cautious enough and making correlations cross topic that may not be appropriate. We all need to be cautious on this, but as Doc has said one of our major goals here is to allow free discussion within limits of profitability coupled with grace and love.

Considering the meaning of the word "lust" in Matthew 5:27 and the 10th commandment, I have seen the point regarding using the Law in evangelism and how cautious we need to be with it. Ray Comfort uses the KJV for the most part, but has done his own take on it called the "Comfort-able read King James" which is the exact same text, but replacing "thee" and "thou" with more appropriate terminology for today. He did not translate from the Hebrew or Greek, but simply went through his KJV with readability in mind. I have "The Evidence Bible" which Ray Comfort edited and there are many notes regarding evangelism that are helpful. Some, however, go along with this vein and dabble in the opinion side of things.

I have more than once written to Living Waters, but no response has ever come. I did get an email from Ray Comfort once while in California, but he did not address my complaint. We ended up not meeting for dinner as our family moved after the death of our son, so maybe he would have taken this on in person? Now that the ministry is globally known, I doubt Ray ever gets his own emails anymore, so getting to talk to anyone is unlikely. I do have contact with Shane Martin who works there, but have not broached the topic with him. Maybe that should be my next step, but I have to wonder if I am just beating my head against the wall.
 
I would love to see a Patriarchal Study Bible made like the Evidence Bible. Wouldn't that be sweet? Footnotes and mini articles would make for a strong learning tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top