An Experiment in Context Twisting

[martincisneros]

Context is the only way to read the Bible.  But the Bible being the Bible creates a bit of a multi-level aspect to that contextual issue.  But context is the only way to read the Bible, even if it makes you do what everybody in the Bible tells you to do, which is to study to show yourself approved as a workman that needeth not to be ashamed.  There's the issue of context within the frame-work of the whole epistle of the New Testament that you're reading from, context from the issue of the whole Body of Jesus' teachings and particularly after the Cross as would be interpreted for us by Luke and Paul since they wrote the most in/of the New Testament.  And then there's the issue of from the perspective of how such and such further elaborates or is held in check by the Covenants of the Bible under consideration, and the Character of God.  Just depends on how deep of an issue we're talking with how far you need to go with context.  It's true that 353 passages regarding the Universal Restoration of themselves don't establish the Universal Restoration. 

You need all of the supporting texts with regards to the character of God, His unchanging Purpose, the Unity of His Person and His Purpose, His Wisdom and Power to see His purpose carried out, His ability to have thoughts that wouldn't be the thoughts of the carnal [vengeful] mind, and every other thing that's consistent with the whole of His Creation, His design for His Creation, and His holiness and intent for obedience and holiness for all.  Helps to know, as Paula White would say that "God's original intention is His final decision."  If you want to make a doctrine for the futility of man, then you've established ET conclusively.  If you want to make a doctrine for the obliteration of consciousness upon physical death, then you've established ET conclusively.  But if His intent was His image ruling and reigning in additional demensions of space and time as His very own family, then you've gone a long way towards proving the Universal Restoration -- although, then it's a matter of finding out whether God governs Creation as a fallen tyrant or as the Father of worlds we've yet to discover and fellowship with in the Covenant of His Blood.

[jabcat]

Amen, Martin.  That's why sometimes I say things like "deeper layers" of scripture and the WHOLE context of scripture.  Evil and/or blinded hearts can play nasty tricks with the Word of God, whether using context or rejecting it.  Context isn't the problem, it's the evil and/or blinded hearts doing the twisting.  But "be not deceived..God will not be mocked".

[Paul Hazelwood]

I agree with a lot of what Martin says.  The issue with context is not to pit one context against another, it is to demonstrate the hope that is within us and explain that this is the only context I am going to study from and leave it at that.

I responded once to the assertion that "God does not impose his will upon us"  the first words out of someones mouth when I pointed out a verse like John 6:44 that makes that line of reasoning questionable was indeed as we are discussing here.....  "thats out of context"  "your twisting scripture"

Thats when I responded with what I have said,  I am not going to argue against their context,  but I am not twisting scripture from the context that God corrects those he loves, so if he corrects those he loves then John 6:44 is not out of context with that aspect of things.


Just like a figurative and literal context for the word aionios,  even some UR people disagree with me, but that's ok, I simply am not bound by another persons context in the first place.

[legoman]

Good point Martin.  The contexts are multi-leveled.

The ETer starts with a very large "global" context - some people will go to hell for eternity.  Then every other verse in the bible has to be modified to fit in with this context.

Thus, if you don't believe in eternal torment, you automatically are taking the universalism verses out of context (from the point of view of the ETer).

The URer starts from the other direction.  The overall "global" context is that God will save everyone.  Then every verse is viewed as fitting in with that context.

The trick is seeing which view has no contradictions, or "context adjustments" - A.K.A. rewriting plain meaning of scriptures.

[jabcat]

Amen Paul...Amen lego.  As always, the problem's not the Word...the problem is me.  (But God's fixing us  :bigGrin:).

[chuckt]

No problem  :laughing7: (if you notice I haven't posted at CARM much lately).

yes you have left me stranded  :grin:

[legoman]

No problem  :laughing7: (if you notice I haven't posted at CARM much lately).

yes you have left me stranded  :grin:

Sorry about that.  It is frustrating over there.  Apart from the obvious "no universalism" rule, I find it interesting the responses you get about "UR" themes.  Quite often you just get completely ignored, or you get the same old tired lines - No God won't override our free will, or No, God will only save whom He wants, blah blah blah.

Every A vs. C argument rehashed over and over and over and over and over and over again while the lone UR voice is ignored.

Did you read my thread about "All the ends of the earth" being saved?  I got maybe 2 responses from Calvies, pretty much the main theme was completely ignored.  No one cared about the possibilities of what those verses were saying.  Possibly the rules are too stifling there, I don't know.

Later,
Legoman

[willieH]

I think 100 man are many man. So the many means 100 men. 200 tops.

"MANY" is a matter of perspective and relativity...

Numbers are a matter of perspective and relative to the scenario...

10 or even 5 men can be considered "many men"... try fighting TEN or FIVE MEN at once!  :mshock:

Or keeping track of 5 or 10 young children at once (by yourself), walking down a busy street...   :heat:

On the other hand... The word "MANY" could be easily applied to 5,000 (which by themselves can be considered many), but in a comparitive CONTEXT of  FIVE  BILLION that "5K number" shrinks to almost NOTHING, and a lesser term must be applied to it... like, ...FEW!

How about TIME?  ...10 seconds isn't very much time when you are taking a 200 question test --- or when trying to complete running 1500 meters --- or changing a transmission in a car... etc...

But see how MUCH TIME 10 seconds IS in the context of accidently placing your finger on a STOVE BURNER --- or when that car falls off its jack and upon YOUR CHEST --- or your mother-in-law who has already been visiting for a month  stays TEN more SECONDS! (jus kidn' about the last one!  :laughing7: ...maybe!   :pointlaugh:)

Scenario's often change the perspective and relativities of NUMBERS, within the experience...

...willieH   :boogie: