@Wrangler @APAK
You may already be familiar with what I’m about to show you, so please forgive me if I’m repeating things you already believe and know.
I'm trying to show how important the record of Scripture is to those who approach it with the care it deserves.
just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Luke 1:2
The term 'eyewitnesses' is used only once in all of Scripture, and it highlights individuals like Luke the physician—men of strict integrity, 'attendants on the word.'
It’s the word from which we get 'autopsy' (ow-top'-tace). Isn’t it fitting that a physician would use such a term?
To paraphrase what Luke is saying here,
'We are going to conduct an autopsy on the Word of God'
Why?
To determine the cause of "Life"
And who does Luke lead us to but 'The Word made Flesh,' the manifestation of the Holy Spirit’s power upon a humble servant of the Lord, Mary.
Everything about Jesus is recorded 'in the Word of God,' and it is through servants of the Word, like Luke and John, that we are given the task of understanding him in terms familiar to them at that time.
John was a Hebrew, trained as a Hebrew, understood as a Hebrew, schooled in the Law and the Prophets, making him the best person to show us
'in the beginning'.
So heres the issue:
Do we base our understanding of John 1:1 on the culmination of philosophical musings of men, or do we accept the careful examination (autopsy) of those servants of the Word of God, who were entrusted with recording these truths through the inspiration of God?
You see the interpratation of any text can only happen if we use the skills and techniques used by the writers at the time.
Let me give you an example:
Take Luke 1:5
In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah,
who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron.
Where do we go to learn of this “Course of Abiah”?
Would we go to a council of men to discover the origins of such a group?
No, we wouldn't
The eighth course was in David’s kingdom 1 Chron 24:10
"The seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abijah." It means “Yahweh is father”. (Consider Romans 1:4 and the context of what is about to happen!
)
"Abijah" is derived from the Hebrew words
"ab" (father) and
"Yah" (a shortened form of Yahweh).
Now, I doubt there is a single person here who would disagree with this example. If they were given time they would be able to search the Scripture and discover that David arranged the priestly divisions.
According to 1 Chronicles 24:1-3, King David, along with Zadok the priest and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, divided the descendants of Aaron into 24 groups for service in the Temple.
This example, and I could provide many more like it, teaches us how to study and interpret the Bible using the Bible itself. Yes, extra-biblical tools are very helpful, but we must acknowledge, for those deceived in this forum, that the Bible—the Word of God—is, in and of itself, our teacher, not the works of men (myself included)
Once you approach the Word of God with the preconceived notions of men, you are already at risk of misinterpreting the text.
Now I know you both know this, but I sense many don't.
F2F
