Why Luther rejected James- it refuted his faith alone doctrine

You are right. Satan is a Scripture twister who actually quotes Scripture, but in an alien context, in an out of context manner, for example, the three temptations in Matthew four and Luke four.

Exactly. Satan quoted Scripture accurately, but he misused it. Jesus quoted MORE Scripture that put what Satan quoted into proper perspective.
The Lord has provided people multiple examples of Satan's method of exegesis being an error which leads to more errors. Unfortunately, there are still some who try to teach others that Satan's method of interpretation is a good or correct method of exegesis which leads to a right understanding of the intended meaning of Scripture if they use it, or someone else holding to the same false story use it.
Again, what Satan was trying to do was get Jesus to sin. It seems that simple to me. Jesus didn't fall for it, but fought back against him using MORE Scripture. So should we all!
 
Exactly. Satan quoted Scripture accurately, but he misused it. Jesus quoted MORE Scripture that put what Satan quoted into proper perspective.

Again, what Satan was trying to do was get Jesus to sin. It seems that simple to me. Jesus didn't fall for it, but fought back against him using MORE Scripture. So should we all!
The one sin Jesus could commit when Satan proposed the divine rock bakery scheme? Would be to get out of the Father's will by making the stones into bread by means of his own powers of Deity. He would cease depending fully upon the Father and Holy Spirit as we are supposed to do in Christ!

If Jesus had taken up the powers of His Deity to do so? Jesus would have stepped outside of the Father's plan. He would have ceased being as a man while under temptation. For Jesus had to remain living as a man to qualify for producing our faith and being the correct sacrifice on the Cross. For Jesus while under temptation had to continuously live as man. Because He had to be the one to pioneer our faith that later will be handed over to us in the Church to live by...

"Fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith.
For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame,
and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God."


Hebrews 12:2​


Until his death on the Cross? He had to remain always being as a perfect man of God (not as God).

He had to do so in order to place himself in a position of being like us to test the faith he was perfecting to prove it good for believers who are not God.

Jesus had to remain as we are by being fully dependent upon the Father and Holy Spirit for all his needs. Satan was tempting Jesus to cease depending fully upon the Father and Holy Spirit.

That faith He tested and perfected now has been prepared and given us. Benefiting those who walk in the Spirit and continue growing in knowledge of the Truth.


But be growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
To him be glory both now and forever! Amen."

2 Peter 3:18

grace and peace........
 
Even some bright kid could understand.

That is.. "If" he is bright.

https://deeperstudy.com/if-conditional-sentences-as-a-tool-for-interpreting-the-new-testament/

...............
Setting aside the practice as either valid or invalid, IF this is merely a tool, it's functional role is if no greater value than that of using any other available tool. In their best light, tools are only as good as the people who use them.
You've raised some interesting problems, one of which places significant doubt on not only readily available translations as the word of God but also any repository of Greek texts of the same. For unless one cannot only read and understand koine Greek with great proficiency then renderings of the text in any language become as fiction, myths and rumors. Or would you like to submit a choice rendering that can be trusted without advanced language skills?
Were the Jesus seminar folks proficient in koine Greek? I bet at least some of them were. Are you familiar with that group? At the end of the day they would vote on their interpretation of Jesus' works and reduce much of the miraculous content of Jesus' ministry to a category of likely didn't happen or something similar.

Thanks again,

Nic
 
All I see is debaters technique being used to avoid the real issue....

I went ahead and showed some here how the Lord God of Israel was having two natures in union. I gave more than one passage from the OT.

And what do I get for it? Diversions and a big stink over the detail of N.B.


But? There was no nota bene about what was important?


Deity and Soul are two different natures. The Lord God of Israel's Soul is the very soul that entered the body God provided through Mary!
That is how having been eternally existing in the form of God... made himself to be a man.

God is spirit. God is not Soul....


But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father
in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is spirit, and
those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”


John 4:23-24​



God is "spirit." Not Soul..


Note how the Lord God of Israel is described as having two natures in union!!!!!!! ;)

So.. N.B.

'You will eat the old supply and clear out the old because of the new. Moreover,
I will make My dwelling among you, and My soul will not reject you.'I will also walk
among you and be your God, and you shall be My people."
Lev 26:10-12



And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah,
so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel.
Jdges 10:16



Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one,
and anyone loving violence his soul certainly hates."
Ps 11:5



“Bring no more futile sacrifices; Incense is an abomination to Me. The New Moons,
the Sabbaths,
and the calling of assemblies— I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred
meeting. Your New Moons and your appointed feasts My soul hates; They are a trouble
to Me, I am weary of bearing them..
Isa 1:13-14​


Some here should stop making a fetish out of their debater's technique and learn Eternal truth that is being laid out before you!

The Soul of Jesus was in heaven being in union with God before the Incarnation!


“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I AM!”



Nota bene!

His Soul was always being before Abraham was born!





............
 
All I see is debaters technique being used to avoid the real issue....

I went ahead and showed some here how the Lord God of Israel was having two natures in union. I gave more than one passage from the OT.

And what do I get for it? Diversions and a big stink over the detail of N.B.


But? There was no nota bene about what was important?


Deity and Soul are two different natures. The Lord God of Israel's Soul is the very soul that entered the body God provided through Mary!
That is how having been eternally existing in the form of God... made himself to be a man.

God is spirit. God is not Soul....


But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father
in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is spirit, and
those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”


John 4:23-24​



God is "spirit." Not Soul..


Note how the Lord God of Israel is described as having two natures in union!!!!!!! ;)

So.. N.B.

'You will eat the old supply and clear out the old because of the new. Moreover,
I will make My dwelling among you, and My soul will not reject you.'I will also walk
among you and be your God, and you shall be My people."
Lev 26:10-12



And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah,
so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel.
Jdges 10:16



Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one,
and anyone loving violence his soul certainly hates."
Ps 11:5



“Bring no more futile sacrifices; Incense is an abomination to Me. The New Moons,
the Sabbaths,
and the calling of assemblies— I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred
meeting. Your New Moons and your appointed feasts My soul hates; They are a trouble
to Me, I am weary of bearing them..
Isa 1:13-14​


Some here should stop making a fetish out of their debater's technique and learn Eternal truth that is being laid out before you!

The Soul of Jesus was in heaven being in union with God before the Incarnation!


“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I AM!”



Nota bene!

His Soul was always being before Abraham was born!





............
Yet, I thought you were an advocate reasoning?
If you don't want people to engage what you say, then you are decrying to your intended audience to ignore you, aren't you?
My efforts is often one that prefers a look and feel of sincere communication, maybe I fail at that from time to time, I'm okay with that knowing my motive and offer my apologies.
I must of missed something, I don't sleep much, but what is N.B.?
I'm beginning to think one of us is posting in the wrong thread? It could be me? No, I just checked, it's not me.
So please help me out, how does this last reply tie into the recent discussions of koine Greek, Matt 4, exegesis?

Thanks.
p.s.
It seems your comment I quoted here belongs in a free will topic you've been having elsewhere.
You may feel free to disregard this response I've made here.🙃🙂
 
Last edited:
The one sin Jesus could commit when Satan proposed the divine rock bakery scheme? Would be to get out of the Father's will by making the stones into bread by means of his own powers of Deity. He would cease depending fully upon the Father and Holy Spirit as we are supposed to do in Christ!

If Jesus had taken up the powers of His Deity to do so? Jesus would have stepped outside of the Father's plan. He would have ceased being as a man while under temptation. For Jesus had to remain living as a man to qualify for producing our faith and being the correct sacrifice on the Cross. For Jesus while under temptation had to continuously live as man. Because He had to be the one to pioneer our faith that later will be handed over to us in the Church to live by...

"Fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith.
For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame,
and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God."


Hebrews 12:2​


Until his death on the Cross? He had to remain always being as a perfect man of God (not as God).

He had to do so in order to place himself in a position of being like us to test the faith he was perfecting to prove it good for believers who are not God.

Jesus had to remain as we are by being fully dependent upon the Father and Holy Spirit for all his needs. Satan was tempting Jesus to cease depending fully upon the Father and Holy Spirit.

That faith He tested and perfected now has been prepared and given us. Benefiting those who walk in the Spirit and continue growing in knowledge of the Truth.


But be growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
To him be glory both now and forever! Amen."


2 Peter 3:18

grace and peace........
So?
 
appear before the Lord
Sometimes a person can dig so deeply they abandon what the text plainly says altogether.
Christ hidden treasure

My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col 2:2-3

He is the Word! Hidden within the Word are treasures needing to be dug out.
Imagine wanting to share a treasure and others being offended?
Might make the one who wants to share the treasure to be better off selfish?

I think what Satan did was trying to get Jesus to sin, which would have made it impossible for Him to become the perfect sacrifice for sin for us, and thus, there would have been NO salvation whatsoever for anyone.

Honestly, this ain't rocket science or brain surgery....
We know Satan is always trying to get all believers to sin.

The question not being answered for Matthew 4:3 is?


"The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

How could Jesus turning stones into bread be a sin?

grace and peace ..............................
 
Last edited:
appear before the Lord

Christ hidden treasure

My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col 2:2-3

He is the Word! Hidden within the Word are treasures needing to be dug out.
Imagine wanting to share a treasure and others being offended?
Might make the one who wants to share the treasure to be better off selfish?
 
appear before the Lord

Christ hidden treasure

My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col 2:2-3

He is the Word! Hidden within the Word are treasures needing to be dug out.
Imagine wanting to share a treasure and others being offended?
Might make the one who wants to share the treasure to be better off selfish?
Hi GeneZ,
Pick a cult, sect, heresy or established Christian entity and you will likely find all have a reasonable embrace what you quote [Col 2:2-3]. The problem is the practice rather than the quote.
I won't ask a fourth time on how you know what you know to be true.
Lutherans are not without a laid out practice for understanding scripture, we refer to this practice as the norming of scripture. We can discuss that in more detail, if you're interested?

Often you don't address much of my talking points, but I'll throw a few more in your direction and see if we get anywhere.

For what purpose does a bible in the hands of a rank and file member serve? Based on the limited feedback you've given me this far, I can only surmise it's to give a generalized backdrop for what should come under scrutiny from the pulpit to advance a hidden understanding.

Why do you advocate for placing doubt over God's word in translation? There exists no original autographs? Yet you insist translations are misleading and advanced language skills in koine Greek are necessary to presumably receive the right proclamation thereby a right understanding. Even if a person gets that proclamation more accurate, it still hinges on fallen reason to interpret that derived conclusion, doesn't it? At what point do you put your reason aside and allow or permit faith to embrace whatever you have left? And at this point, I'm thinking how confident are you in this result? You mentioned earlier that these results may change and that exegesis is merely a tool. Tools can be helpful, but again they're only as good as the people who use them and none of us are without sin.

Maybe I'm wrong, but with my small, fallen skill-set, I lack the confidence to redact and edit the job translators have done in regards to the scriptures. There are certainly a number of translations available that without too much effort, one can find a general consensus of educated opinion on any particular pericope.
 
Last edited:
Hi GeneZ,
Pick a cult, sect, heresy or established Christian entity and you will likely find all have a reasonable embrace what you quote [Col 2:2-3]. The problem is the practice rather than the quote.
I won't ask a fourth time on how you know what you know to be true.
Lutherans are not without a laid out practice for understanding scripture, we refer to this practice as the norming of scripture. We can discuss that in more detail, if you're interested?

Often you don't address much of my talking points, but I'll throw a few more in your direction and see if we get anywhere.

For what purpose does a bible in the hands of a rank and file member serve? Based on the limited feedback you've given me this far, I can only surmise it's to give a generalized backdrop for what should come under scrutiny from the pulpit to advance a hidden understanding.

Why do you advocate for placing doubt over God's word in translation? There exists no original autographs? Yet you insist translations are misleading and advanced language skills in koine Greek are necessary to presumably receive the right proclamation thereby a right understanding. Even if a person gets that proclamation more accurate, it still hinges on fallen reason to interpret that derived conclusion, doesn't it? At what point do you put your reason aside and allow or permit faith to embrace whatever you have left? And at this point, I'm thinking how confident are you in this result? You mentioned earlier that these results may change and that exegesis is merely a tool. Tools can be helpful, but again they're only as good as the people who use them and none of us are without sin.

Maybe I'm wrong, but with my small, fallen skill-set, I lack the confidence to redact and edit the job translators have done in regards to the scriptures. There are certainly a number of translations available that without too much effort, one can find a general consensus of educated opinion on any particular pericope.
Because you refuse to/ can not accept my explanation....,which I did give. Does not mean you are a"cult barometer."

Why do you advocate for placing doubt over God's word in translation?

Translation?

Have in your library a Kenneth Wuest NT translation.
https://www.christianbook.com/the-new-testament-an-expanded-translation/9780802808820/pd/1229

Add to that ... see if you can locate a Williams NT translation.
http://www.sprawls.org/williams/

Many mainstream translations are watered down for those first learning to read the Bible... Then, they never realize those translations are only tools to introduce them to the Word of God.

There are RICHES to be found in the original languages only, that will be found by those who crave to grow and mature and realize the fullness in Christ that God wants us all to have.
Because they are united in love, I work so that they may be encouraged by all the riches
that come from a complete understanding of Christ. He is the mystery of God.
God has hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge in Christ. " Col 2:3-4​

The Word of God has treasures that even some translators do not find. Their job is primarily to get out a white bread translation for the masses, designed to be pleasing to believers wanting to read the Bible for themselves. Yet, the original languages are like 'whole grain' presentations. Having wording that those accustomed to while bread wording can find distasteful and hard to chew on. That is what is happening here.

N.B. Some here think they are intellectually superior and find it offensive when they are shown a deficiency of their own. Understood.
That is when they attempt to bring down another that offended them. Understood.

Just the same. Matthew 4:3 does contain a first class conditional clause "if." It does. Some here balked and felt offended and wished to minimize its importance. That was wishing to suppress the truth when that happened.

And, not all. Its time for some of us to grow up a bit more than we have been. God wants believers always growing in Christ, and will at times challenge us to snap us out of our complacency. It has happened to me enough times to know. It makes one feel for the moment stupid. I know how it can first be met with suspicion..
Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but one who hates correction is stupid."
Prov 12:1​

When first confronted by something I could not discover on my own? Taught through gifted teachers? In the moment it happened? Realized how stupid I would have remained if I refused the correction.

That is why God will only give more grace to the humble. For humiliation when needed is an awakening when God does it.
How we choose will determine our progress in maturing in Christ.

Will it be? White bread translations that are soft and easy? Or, organic whole grains that we need to chew on?

... Jesus said that He is the Bread of Life.


grace and peace ......
 
Because you refuse to/ can not accept my explanation....,which I did give. Does not mean you are a"cult barometer."
Your explanation had problems, I could list them again, but you have yet to address any of them. Part of which were the stalwarts you upheld. Lutherans disagree with their position as I alluded to in an earlier reply about varying perspectives and starting points. But that avenue too was also avoided by you.
Translation?

Have in your library a Kenneth Wuest NT translation.
https://www.christianbook.com/the-new-testament-an-expanded-translation/9780802808820/pd/1229

Add to that ... see if you can locate a Williams NT translation.
http://www.sprawls.org/williams/
Thanks for these, this was like pulling teeth, why not offer something when asked the first time? I did a cursory search with each of these, some cited examples were Williams on justification. The snippet I found I couldn't disagree with, but it wasn't earth shaking for me either, but maybe that's the Lutheran background where justification is concerned. Lutherans have a reputation for having a thorough response on justification. In fact, if anything, Lutherans expound a lot, especially in matters of doctrine.
For your preferred method when suggested that the law condemns, you came back with a silly answer about gravity. I would think that vested Christians with a desire to seek out the "nuggets," as you have suggested, would have a more prepared response than that. Perhaps you haven't mined for law nuggets just yet? Not to be condescending but I know sometimes without a formal catechism (and I don't know if you make use of one or not), it may take a person awhile to cover certain topics, especially if a greater curiosity is placed elsewhere. This is one reason why Lutherans are liturgical, so that, all of scripture is covered and not just the parts we either enjoy or happen to study along the way. This is also why Lutherans have a catechism and class instructions on the catechism.


Many mainstream translations are watered down for those first learning to read the Bible... Then, they never realize those translations are only tools to introduce them to the Word of God.
Many different versions are watered down some of accused of this are very good in some areas of doctrine. I guess we haven't established if doctrine constitutes a nugget or not for you?
Am I opposed to digging deeper? Of course not, who would be? But I've come to trust the consistency of the particular view I embrace, probably just like most who answer such a charge. Most people agree with self.

There are RICHES to be found in the original languages only, that will be found by those who crave to grow and mature and realize the fullness in Christ that God wants us all to have.
Because they are united in love, I work so that they may be encouraged by all the riches
that come from a complete understanding of Christ. He is the mystery of God.
God has hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge in Christ. " Col 2:3-4​

The Word of God has treasures that even some translators do not find. Their job is primarily to get out a white bread translation for the masses, designed to be pleasing to believers wanting to read the Bible for themselves. Yet, the original languages are like 'whole grain' presentations. Having wording that those accustomed to while bread wording can find distasteful and hard to chew on. That is what is happening here.
Perhaps that's what you make of things, it doesn't make it so.
N.B. Some here think they are intellectually superior and find it offensive when they are shown a deficiency of their own. Understood.
This is easily defended. I can see where one side may arrive at such of view, but communication is a two-way street and as far as I can tell, you have no idea how Lutherans go about scripture.
That is when they attempt to bring down another that offended them. Understood.
That too, seems like an imaged reality. Just because a person points out objections to your position and you miss that, doesn't necessitate you were being brought down in retailiation. That seems immature or perhaps a haste in judgement. It could be a person that has issues with what you're saying and advocating is attempting to illustrate why they personally object to open up further dialogue? Thinking benefit of the doubt in these exchanges might be good advice for all of us.
Just the same. Matthew 4:3 does contain a first class conditional clause "if." It does. Some here balked and felt offended and wished to minimize its importance. That was wishing to suppress the truth when that happened.

And, not all. Its time for some of us to grow up a bit more than we have been. God wants believers always growing in Christ, and will at times challenge us to snap us out of our complacency. It has happened to me enough times to know. It makes one feel for the moment stupid. I know how it can first be met with suspicion..
Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but one who hates correction is stupid." Prov 12:1​

When first confronted by something I could not discover on my own? Taught through gifted teachers? In the moment it happened? Realized how stupid I would have remained if I refused the correction.

That is why God will only give more grace to the humble. For humiliation when needed is an awakening when God does it.
How we choose will determine our progress in maturing in Christ.

Will it be? White bread translations that are soft and easy? Or, organic whole grains that we need to chew on?

... Jesus said that He is the Bread of Life.


grace and peace ......
Thank you for this. It has occurred to me that maybe you're not experienced with Lutheran practice and perhaps Lutherans? Perhaps you are use to encountering a different mindset or Christian background that is more familiar to you. I say this because as I continue to read your response, it has the feel of projection and not true dialogue. Maybe I've had something to do with that, if that's the case I'm sorry.
As far as correction is concerned, it can happen from outside our inner circles, but that's met with a bit more difficulty because we have a vested interest in our community where we thrive already.
I can't stress this enough, knowing more about how Lutherans do scripture would go far in garnering respect for your criticisms as I suspect the reverse is true.
Thanks again for your participation here.

Peace...
 
Last edited:
Your explanation had problems, I could list them again, but you have yet to address any of them. Part of which were the stalwarts you upheld. Lutherans disagree with their position as I alluded to in an earlier reply about varying perspectives and starting points. But that avenue too was also avoided by you.

Thanks for these, this was like pulling teeth, why not offer something when asked the first time? I did a cursory search with each of these, some cited examples were Williams on justification. The snippet I found I couldn't disagree with, but it wasn't earth shaking for me either, but maybe that's the Lutheran background where justification is concerned. Lutherans have a reputation for having a thorough response on justification. In fact, if anything, Lutherans expound a lot, especially in matters of doctrine.
For your preferred method when suggested that the law condemns, you came back with a silly answer about gravity. I would think that vested Christians with a desire to seek out the "nuggets," as you have suggested, would have a more prepared response than that. Perhaps you haven't mined for law nuggets just yet? Not to be condescending but I know sometimes without a formal catechism (and I don't know if you make use of one or not), it may take a person awhile to cover certain topics, especially if a greater curiosity is placed elsewhere. This is one reason why Lutherans are liturgical, so that, all of scripture is covered and not just the parts we either enjoy or happen to study along the way. This is also why Lutherans have a catechism and class instructions on the catechism.



Many different versions are watered down some of accused of this are very good in some areas of doctrine. I guess we haven't established if doctrine constitutes a nugget or not for you?
Am I opposed to digging deeper? Of course not, who would be? But I've come to trust the consistency of the particular view I embrace, probably just like most who answer such a charge. Most people agree with self.


Perhaps that's what you make of things, it doesn't make it so.

This is easily defended. I can see where one side may arrive at such of view, but communication is a two-way street and as far as I can tell, you have no idea how Lutherans go about scripture.

That too, seems like an imaged reality. Just because a person points out objections to your position and you miss that, doesn't necessitate you were being brought down in retailiation. That seems immature or perhaps a haste in judgement. It could be a person that has issues with what you're saying and advocating is attempting to illustrate why they personally object to open up further dialogue? Thinking benefit of the doubt in these exchanges might be good advice for all of us.

Thank you for this. It has occurred to me that maybe you're not experienced with Lutheran practice and perhaps Lutherans? Perhaps you are use to encountering a different mindset or Christian background that is more familiar to you. I say this because as I continue to read your response, it has the feel of projection and not true dialogue. Maybe I've had something to do with that, if that's the case I'm sorry.
As far as correction is concerned, it can happen from outside our inner circles, but that's met with a bit more difficulty because we have a vested interest in our community where we thrive already.
I can't stress this enough, knowing more about how Lutherans do scripture would go far in garnering respect for your criticisms as I suspect the reverse is true.
Thanks again for your participation here.

Peace...

I had a biography of Luther that I believe was translated from German into English. I may still have it in my library. I noted how my pastor reminded me of Martin Luther in his strict adherence to the original languages and being fearless in the face of religious oppression.. Sola Scriptura... Luther himself taught exegetically, for he was skilled in the original languages. Just like my pastor.

When I was working for a German chef some of his staff (who attended a nearby Bible college) were balking about some things my pastor was teaching. I discussed why they were upset with the chef owner.

I explained to the chef how the Bible school students read English translations that can be timid and would water down the intended meaning. I gave him one passage as an example.. And told him what the Hebrew actually said, and what their translations said.

We were in the kitchen while discussing this matter during a quiet time... Chef walked over to a shelf and took down a book. It was his Luther translation in German. He read the passage in Luther's German. He then looked up and told me that my pastor was correct. Luther was not timid in translating.

Years ago I purchased the video of the movie "Luther" ( https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0309820/ ) and sent it as Christmas presents to relatives.
I have no problem with Luther himself.

grace and peace ........................
 
Even some bright kid could understand.

That is.. "If" he is bright.

https://deeperstudy.com/if-conditional-sentences-as-a-tool-for-interpreting-the-new-testament/

...............
That is an indirect way of acknowledging that the English translation of the conditional in Matt. 4:3 is correct.

Now that the original story telling has been excluded through the grammarians the question is what does Matthew 4:3-4 say? Once a person identifies what the passage actually says then he will see what it means because there are no dark words and the context clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
So then?


What do you believe Matthew 4:3-4 is telling us? Since you are obviously a genius on the matter?
It isn't a matter of genius or greater than average intellect, but a matter of obedience to the word of God, a matter of attentive listening to the word of God.
It should be easy to make it known for our edification. Tell us, please. So that we may become built up in the Truth.


thank you! Awaiting your response.
Not to be funny, but it means what it says. The tempter asked, If you are a son of God... Jesus gave him the answer that every son of God should give, Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word from God.

See the Scriptures, the law and the prophets, for examples of how God did this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
It isn't a matter of genius or greater than average intellect, but a matter of obedience to the word of God, a matter of attentive listening to the word of God.
OK then... is the KJV always just as much the Word of God as the Greek text?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
Did you intentionally link to someone who interprets Matt 4:3 in a manner that is contrary to the grammar and grammarians previously cited?
Its not perfect. Yet, he lays down the conditional clauses for "if" as they stand.

One thing he said was having an answer that he missed.


A protasis with multiple conditions joined by ‘and’ requires that all of the conditions must be true for the result to follow. For example, in Mark 16:16, according to the longer ending of Mark, Jesus says, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved….” Jesus joins two participles by ‘and,’ making both, not just one or the other, conditions for salvation. A person who believes but refuses to be baptized will be lost; likewise a person who is baptized without trusting Christ is just getting wet. Jesus tells the apostles, “If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit” (John 15:5). Jesus spells out the relationship in terms of mutual abiding. It will not work if the relationship is one-sided."

He forgot something about the new age that was about to be entered into.

When Jesus said; "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved."? Jesus was speaking about what was soon to take place.

The author of that page made the assumption concerning baptism. Jesus was speaking of the upcoming church age. For then, those who believe will be baptized by the Spirit, and will be saved. The author of that page was thinking of the past age baptism vs the new baptism that makes us into a new creation in Christ.

Errors are found everywhere. Even from those who do have accurate things to say. Myself included I am sure.

That is why we all will be accountable for ourselves only by what we choose to believe.

And, by the way....

If I had a natural gift for a great memory, and could cite all sorts of data? And, out of maybe envy, resentment, or fear, of someone whom I see as a challenge? Choose to misuse their collection of data to attack truth when presented? I will be held accountable before the Lord in great shame while looking down at my feet of my resurrection body.

We all need by grace to learn to drop our old ways of establishing ourselves before others from our natural strengths. For when I am strong (in my own eyes)? I am being weak in the Lord....

by grace, not naive.....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
OK then... is the KJV always just as much the Word of God as the Greek text?
It is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek text. The English language, as well as all other spoken languages, is capable of conveying the word of God to people limited to one non biblical language or multiple non biblical languages.

The command was to disciple all peoples by baptizing them and teaching them all that Jesus has commanded them. The command was not first teach them Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek so that you can then disciple them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
It is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek text. The English language, as well as all other spoken languages, is capable of conveying the word of God to people limited to one non biblical language or multiple non biblical languages.

The command was to disciple all peoples by baptizing them and teaching them all that Jesus has commanded them. The command was not first teach them Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek so that you can then disciple them.
Those teaching them knew the original languages, or at least the Septuagint. Paul spoke Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew.

Besides.. Mark 16:9-20?

[The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9–20.]

Therefore? “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved?"

May not even be the Word of God. Yet, we know that those who believed in the risen Christ were all baptized by the Spirit.

Take your pick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
Your explanation had problems, I could list them again, but you have yet to address any of them. Part of which were the stalwarts you upheld. Lutherans disagree with their position as I alluded to in an earlier reply about varying perspectives and starting points. But that avenue too was also avoided by you.

Thanks for these, this was like pulling teeth, why not offer something when asked the first time? I did a cursory search with each of these, some cited examples were Williams on justification. The snippet I found I couldn't disagree with, but it wasn't earth shaking for me either, but maybe that's the Lutheran background where justification is concerned. Lutherans have a reputation for having a thorough response on justification. In fact, if anything, Lutherans expound a lot, especially in matters of doctrine.
For your preferred method when suggested that the law condemns, you came back with a silly answer about gravity. I would think that vested Christians with a desire to seek out the "nuggets," as you have suggested, would have a more prepared response than that. Perhaps you haven't mined for law nuggets just yet? Not to be condescending but I know sometimes without a formal catechism (and I don't know if you make use of one or not), it may take a person awhile to cover certain topics, especially if a greater curiosity is placed elsewhere. This is one reason why Lutherans are liturgical, so that, all of scripture is covered and not just the parts we either enjoy or happen to study along the way. This is also why Lutherans have a catechism and class instructions on the catechism.



Many different versions are watered down some of accused of this are very good in some areas of doctrine. I guess we haven't established if doctrine constitutes a nugget or not for you?
Am I opposed to digging deeper? Of course not, who would be? But I've come to trust the consistency of the particular view I embrace, probably just like most who answer such a charge. Most people agree with self.


Perhaps that's what you make of things, it doesn't make it so.

This is easily defended. I can see where one side may arrive at such of view, but communication is a two-way street and as far as I can tell, you have no idea how Lutherans go about scripture.

That too, seems like an imaged reality. Just because a person points out objections to your position and you miss that, doesn't necessitate you were being brought down in retailiation. That seems immature or perhaps a haste in judgement. It could be a person that has issues with what you're saying and advocating is attempting to illustrate why they personally object to open up further dialogue? Thinking benefit of the doubt in these exchanges might be good advice for all of us.

Thank you for this. It has occurred to me that maybe you're not experienced with Lutheran practice and perhaps Lutherans? Perhaps you are use to encountering a different mindset or Christian background that is more familiar to you. I say this because as I continue to read your response, it has the feel of projection and not true dialogue. Maybe I've had something to do with that, if that's the case I'm sorry.
As far as correction is concerned, it can happen from outside our inner circles, but that's met with a bit more difficulty because we have a vested interest in our community where we thrive already.
I can't stress this enough, knowing more about how Lutherans do scripture would go far in garnering respect for your criticisms as I suspect the reverse is true.
Thanks again for your participation here.

Peace...
Other than be a master of being critical? Teach something.
 
Back
Top