| Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| | ==Examples== | | ==Examples== |
| | | | |
| − | ===Example 1.=== | + | ===Example 1. The Past carries through - in some way=== |
| | | | |
| | We are so used to living in the Christian or Christian influenced world that we just assume monogamy, one man and one woman, to be the starting position from which we build our married life. We view polygamy as a deviation perhaps of Islam, paganism, and view the polygamy of the biblical forefathers - Abraham, and Jacob with their wives (and concubines) in particular, but King David, King Solomon (surely his many wives got him in trouble!) as well, as something special and antiquated, and basically bracketed out from our consciousness. In addition, we encounter the problems of the modern mission field involving multiple marriages of recent converts to the Lord. What to do? "Require" that they divorce all their wives but one? Which one should they keep. The first? Any other criteria? Perhaps, divorce none and have a polygyomous church grow up? And what of the benefit that has accrued in certain situations by polygamous marriage - such as tribes where the men have almost been wiped out in wars and an overabundance of starving woman and children? Who would take care of them but the remaining men? What is the solution? | | We are so used to living in the Christian or Christian influenced world that we just assume monogamy, one man and one woman, to be the starting position from which we build our married life. We view polygamy as a deviation perhaps of Islam, paganism, and view the polygamy of the biblical forefathers - Abraham, and Jacob with their wives (and concubines) in particular, but King David, King Solomon (surely his many wives got him in trouble!) as well, as something special and antiquated, and basically bracketed out from our consciousness. In addition, we encounter the problems of the modern mission field involving multiple marriages of recent converts to the Lord. What to do? "Require" that they divorce all their wives but one? Which one should they keep. The first? Any other criteria? Perhaps, divorce none and have a polygyomous church grow up? And what of the benefit that has accrued in certain situations by polygamous marriage - such as tribes where the men have almost been wiped out in wars and an overabundance of starving woman and children? Who would take care of them but the remaining men? What is the solution? |
| Line 13: |
Line 13: |
| | We can see that a bishop or overseer, in I Timothy 3:2, is to have only one wife, is, first of all, not speaking in referance to divorce and remarriage , but to the situation of polygamy. Then we can see, the wisdom of the rule of one wife for elders of the church - there is just too much to do and be responsible for in the work of the church that any more than one wife will deprive from the church and deprive from the family. Then we can see, that these are not iron clan rules, deviation from which is sin, but good and responsible quides that Paul is giving Timothy for the chosing of the leaders (and servants) of the Church. Then we can see, how it all fits in with the other guides - Don't chose a man that can't love and manage his own family, nor a man that has a bad reputation or drinks too much to lose sobriety, etc. And we can understand that all that needs to apply to our own situation in our century. And we can see that these were recommendations primarily to Timothy who had a task probably different from most of us, so we must truly learn the principles behind to make the wisdom of God's Word then applicable and real for our lives today. And we can see that the activity of the Holy Spirit did not end with the first century- and must not end for us in this century, by we must learn, and be enabled by Him to now apply what He has already told us in the Holy Scriptures for our present generation with its particulur problems. | | We can see that a bishop or overseer, in I Timothy 3:2, is to have only one wife, is, first of all, not speaking in referance to divorce and remarriage , but to the situation of polygamy. Then we can see, the wisdom of the rule of one wife for elders of the church - there is just too much to do and be responsible for in the work of the church that any more than one wife will deprive from the church and deprive from the family. Then we can see, that these are not iron clan rules, deviation from which is sin, but good and responsible quides that Paul is giving Timothy for the chosing of the leaders (and servants) of the Church. Then we can see, how it all fits in with the other guides - Don't chose a man that can't love and manage his own family, nor a man that has a bad reputation or drinks too much to lose sobriety, etc. And we can understand that all that needs to apply to our own situation in our century. And we can see that these were recommendations primarily to Timothy who had a task probably different from most of us, so we must truly learn the principles behind to make the wisdom of God's Word then applicable and real for our lives today. And we can see that the activity of the Holy Spirit did not end with the first century- and must not end for us in this century, by we must learn, and be enabled by Him to now apply what He has already told us in the Holy Scriptures for our present generation with its particulur problems. |
| | | | |
| − | ===Example 2.=== | + | ===Example 2. Telling without saying=== |
| | | | |
| | Telling without saying. | | Telling without saying. |
| Line 43: |
Line 43: |
| | *Note: the seat as a sign of authority is very ancient. For example, In Tel Dan in the north of the Galilee, one can see the 4 holes for the 4 posts of the King of Israel's judgement seat and to the left of it the seat of the city elders, just outside the winding main road leading to the top of the tell and within the outer city gates. This is where he rendered judgement in the Norther Kingdom of Israel. In the 1st century, the brother of Herod Antipas, Philip rendered judgement, according to Josephus, all throughout his Tetrachies of Gaulinitis, Trachonitus, and Batanea in the Decapolis, by traveling from place to place setting up his portable seat. It is this Phillip which gave the name to Caesarea Phillipi by the Banias at the foot of Mt. Herman where Jesus asked His disciples, Who do men say that I am? | | *Note: the seat as a sign of authority is very ancient. For example, In Tel Dan in the north of the Galilee, one can see the 4 holes for the 4 posts of the King of Israel's judgement seat and to the left of it the seat of the city elders, just outside the winding main road leading to the top of the tell and within the outer city gates. This is where he rendered judgement in the Norther Kingdom of Israel. In the 1st century, the brother of Herod Antipas, Philip rendered judgement, according to Josephus, all throughout his Tetrachies of Gaulinitis, Trachonitus, and Batanea in the Decapolis, by traveling from place to place setting up his portable seat. It is this Phillip which gave the name to Caesarea Phillipi by the Banias at the foot of Mt. Herman where Jesus asked His disciples, Who do men say that I am? |
| | | | |
| − | ===Example 3.=== | + | ===Example 3. Feeling the texture. Taking the hint.=== |
| | | | |
| − | Feeling the texture. Taking the hint.
| |
| − |
| |
| | Coming down low, often gives a true view of how things really are and how they differ from each other. | | Coming down low, often gives a true view of how things really are and how they differ from each other. |
| | | | |
| Line 57: |
Line 55: |
| | From close to the ground - two stories, two Feedings, two messages (with one Church to embrace them both), and two real occurances. . | | From close to the ground - two stories, two Feedings, two messages (with one Church to embrace them both), and two real occurances. . |
| | | | |
| − | ===Example 4=== | + | ===Example 4. What is real is real in many ways=== |
| | | | |
| | What is real is real in many ways and the smallest of matters are great with portent. | | What is real is real in many ways and the smallest of matters are great with portent. |
| Line 75: |
Line 73: |
| | The inclusion of these words of Jesus concerning His fulfilling of the Law, are from the times of Jesus on earth and no invention of the later Gentile dominated church. At the later time, there would have been no need for these Jewish oriented and Jewish pervaded discussion concerning the Mosaic Law. The Church was dynamic and in transition and full of real life. | | The inclusion of these words of Jesus concerning His fulfilling of the Law, are from the times of Jesus on earth and no invention of the later Gentile dominated church. At the later time, there would have been no need for these Jewish oriented and Jewish pervaded discussion concerning the Mosaic Law. The Church was dynamic and in transition and full of real life. |
| | | | |
| − | ===Example 5.=== | + | ===Example 5."The Gates...the Gates!"=== |
| − | | |
| − | "The Gates...the Gates!" | |
| | | | |
| | "And I say to you , You are Peter ("rock" in Greek - Petros, and in Aramaic - "Cepha", and upon this Rock, I will build my Church, and the gates ("pulai" in Greek, "sha'ar" in Hebrew) of Hell shall not prevail against it." Matt. 16:18 | | "And I say to you , You are Peter ("rock" in Greek - Petros, and in Aramaic - "Cepha", and upon this Rock, I will build my Church, and the gates ("pulai" in Greek, "sha'ar" in Hebrew) of Hell shall not prevail against it." Matt. 16:18 |
| Line 117: |
Line 113: |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| − | ==='''Example 6.'''=== | + | ==='''Example 6.''' Beyond the words but through the words === |
| − | Beyond the words but through the words | |
| | | | |
| | Judaism has often been described as Orthopraxy - "straight doing" instead of Orthodoxy - "straight opinion or believing". Though not entirely true, there is much truth in this. But Christianity has a lot of orthopraxy in it - for being a believer is not just a matter of believing the meaning of words. | | Judaism has often been described as Orthopraxy - "straight doing" instead of Orthodoxy - "straight opinion or believing". Though not entirely true, there is much truth in this. But Christianity has a lot of orthopraxy in it - for being a believer is not just a matter of believing the meaning of words. |