Taught By Whom?

[DaveW]

I get sick of people who revert their argument to "you were obviously taught that" whenever someone disagrees with them.

The claim of Darby gets thrown around here from time to time, as does the Claim of Ruckman, or Calvin.

Now there is nothing wrong with pointing out an alignment of teaching, but using it as an argument in itself is not valid.

For myself, I never went to a big Bible college anywhere, and all my instructors were and are working Pastors, not classroom intellectuals.
I never heard of Ruckman until after I was in the ministry.
I never heard of Darby until I joined this site.
I never knew anything about Scofield for many years, apart from that his name was on a Bible.
I didn't know much about Spurgeon apart from reading some of his sermons.

For many years due to having a full time job and trying to pastor as well as having a young family my preaching study was entirely from the Bible, for the pure reason that I did not have the time to consult commentaries or other pastors.
If I didn't understand something, I wouldn't preach it - even at times saying to the people that I don't understand the verses so we would just miss them until I did.
It was during those years that I formed much of my doctrinal stand.
As a result my position on most things I have commented on here is the result of my own personal study of God's Word, and is not influenced by "darcalruckin" or anyone else.
There are things I don't understand and that I therefore don't engage with here.

But when I do comment it is because I have seen something in a Bible passage that disagrees with what someone here has said - not because I read it in some commentary.

So there is enough of my history to show that I do not follow after any man.
If what I teach aligns with a man, then maybe in that item he also is Biblical, in spite of whatever else that man may teach.

And, to finish, I am just a man. What I believe to be Biblical will be influenced by all sorts of things.
I hope that if something I currently stand on is not Biblical that I can learn.

But throwing unfounded accusations will not make me listen to you.

Show me from the Bible - but don't expect me to blindly follow what you say either.
I will check it against the Bible, and if it doesn't fit, I will throw it away with the rest of the rubbish.

Yours sincerely,

Dave.

[Covenanter]

I appreciate your stand, Dave, against those who impose their doctrine on Scripture.

 

The late lamented Tony Benn is quoted as saying:  "A faith is something you die for, a doctrine is something you kill for. There is all the difference in the world."

[ASongOfDegrees]

I appreciate your stand, Dave, against those who impose their doctrine on Scripture.

 

The late lamented Tony Benn is quoted as saying:  "A faith is something you die for, a doctrine is something you kill for. There is all the difference in the world."

ha ha ha ha ha! 

[Arbo]

Excellent post, DaveW.  

[Arbo]

The claim of Darby gets thrown around here from time to time, as does the Claim of Ruckman, or Calvin.

 

(...)

For myself, I never went to a big Bible college anywhere, and all my instructors were and are working Pastors, not classroom intellectuals.
I never heard of Ruckman until after I was in the ministry.
I never heard of Darby until I joined this site.
I never knew anything about Scofield for many years, apart from that his name was on a Bible.
I didn't know much about Spurgeon apart from reading some of his sermons.
 

 

 

"A faith is something you die for, a doctrine is something you kill for. There is all the difference in the world."

 

 

I sometimes think that many regard theologians, celebrity preachers, and authors too highly.  I wonder if they rely on these  'learned' men of Christianity simply because they have answers (right or wrong) to questions that are better accepted by faith.  

[ASongOfDegrees]

The problem is not many in here check things against the bible. I've seen a lot of laziness when it comes to searching the scriptures in this forum. If you ask a question about a doctrine (which all scripture was given for) or a passage of scripture you should at least read and consider the passages someone may give that contradicts what you already believe. Complaining about someone "always having the last word" or throwing terms like "Ruckmanite" around seems disingenuous. . 

 

Example:

 

Hebrews 8:22- And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 

It's clear as the noon day sun that this verse says that animal blood did remit sins (well, almost all). Yet, no matter how many times I've pointed this out not one person in this forum has dealt with the verse at hand but continue on like it doesn't even exist. All I hear is, "they were saved in the OT like we are today" without even trying to explain the text. And if they can't explain it you hear terms like "Ruckmanite", or you are accused of being a meanie.

 

IMO, if you don't want an answer to a question (like Hebrews 6:6-8) or you only want an affirmation of what you already believe then don't ask the question.

 

Remember, "iron sharpens iron". 

[DaveW]

I wasn't complaining about the last word, I was having a joke, as the vast majority of people realised.

And it doesn't take much study to realise that your emphasis of Hebrews 9:22 is incorrect - at least not when you understand what the word "better" means.

Or the word "pattern"....

Or the word "figure"......

And strangely enough, I also didn't need to be taught that by anyone, because the VERY CHAPTER ITSELF explains what it means for anyone who has an ear to hear.

[Covenanter]

The problem is not many in here check things against the bible. I've seen a lot of laziness when it comes to searching the scriptures in this forum. If you ask a question about a doctrine (which all scripture was given for) or a passage of scripture you should at least read and consider the passages someone may give that contradicts what you already believe. Complaining about someone "always having the last word" or throwing terms like "Ruckmanite" around seems disingenuous. . 

 

Example:

 

Hebrews 8:22- And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 

It's clear as the noon day sun that this verse says that animal blood did remit sins (well, almost all). Yet, no matter how many times I've pointed this out not one person in this forum has dealt with the verse at hand but continue on like it doesn't even exist. All I hear is, "they were saved in the OT like we are today" without even trying to explain the text. And if they can't explain it you hear terms like "Ruckmanite", or you are accused of being a meanie.

 

IMO, if you don't want an answer to a question (like Hebrews 6:6-8) or you only want an affirmation of what you already believe then don't ask the question.

 

Remember, "iron sharpens iron". 

Dave was gracious enough not to point out that your rant about "a lot of laziness when it comes to searching the scriptures in this forum" showed your own laziness in not checking the reference Heb. 8:22.

 

Are we to understand that the entire old covenant worship & sacrificial system was fully valid apart from Christ & Calvary? Certainly such worship & sacrifices offered in repentance & faith were valid, & were accepted by God, to such an extent that the covenant blood sprinkled in Ex. 24 (quoted in Heb. 9) was accepted to such an extent that the 70 elders were allowed the sight of God:

⁶ And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. ⁷ And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient. ⁸ And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.

⁹ Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: ¹⁰ and they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. ¹¹ And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

 

It was valid as pointing to Christ & Calvary, but not valid apart from that significance.

 

The old covenant believers were truly saved, as Jesus testified to the Saducees - I AM - God of the living.  But they would not have been saved apart from Christ & Calvary.

[allen32]

a lot of people read the bible but don't steady the word i try to do both. it good to read throw the bible in a yr. but also take  one if the books in steady it. so take i couple hr.a day and do it and have fun learning god word. 

[heartstrings]

The problem is not many in here check things against the bible. I've seen a lot of laziness when it comes to searching the scriptures in this forum. If you ask a question about a doctrine (which all scripture was given for) or a passage of scripture you should at least read and consider the passages someone may give that contradicts what you already believe. Complaining about someone "always having the last word" or throwing terms like "Ruckmanite" around seems disingenuous. . 

 

Example:

 

Hebrews 8:22- And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 

It's clear as the noon day sun that this verse says that animal blood did remit sins (well, almost all). Yet, no matter how many times I've pointed this out not one person in this forum has dealt with the verse at hand but continue on like it doesn't even exist. All I hear is, "they were saved in the OT like we are today" without even trying to explain the text. And if they can't explain it you hear terms like "Ruckmanite", or you are accused of being a meanie.

 

IMO, if you don't want an answer to a question (like Hebrews 6:6-8) or you only want an affirmation of what you already believe then don't ask the question.

 

Remember, "iron sharpens iron". 

Psalm 51

16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.

17The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

 

Psalm 50

7Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God.

8I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt offerings, to have been continually before me.

9I will take no bullock out of thy house, nor he goats out of thy folds.

10For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

11I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine.

12If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.

13Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?

14Offer unto God thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the most High:

15And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.

 

 

Hebrews 10 

 

For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

and here it is right here, brother.......

7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.  That is a direct quote from the Lord Jesus. I believe He's saying that all of that OT was written about HIM. By comparing scripture we can see that all of those sacrifices were merely a "shadow" of the "image" (the real thing) and could NOT make anyone "perfect". In other words the sacrifices and the "blood of bulls and goats" never saved a single soul. It was always the real "image" which brought salvation through whatever "light" or of realization of "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world", calling on His name,(Genesis 4:26, John 1:12) or believing His Word (Genesis 15:6). They were all saved by grace through faith which would include coming to God in faith with a "broken and contrite spirit" . But sheep. bull or goat blood never saved anybody, ever. It is true, "without the shedding of blood is no remission", but there was only ONE type of blood which would do it: The Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[DaveW]

I should probably add to the OP that even with the greater time I have had over the past few years doing only part time work, and my current situation with more study time, I still spend the first part of any study with only the Bible, reading other men's comments only when I have established a baseline understanding.

My study and preaching Bible does not even have cross references in it - the only notes are definitions of archaic words, the vast majority of which are not new to me in any case.

I make a concerted effort not to be influenced by any man's ideas over the Word of God.
I do concede however that every man is influenced by many things in his life, and this will colour my understanding.

[EKSmith]

 I have not been called to pastor a church as brother Dave, but I too have had my training by very good pastors in which God has done His ordaining work through them in the ministry God has called me to. I to have felt the very same things in my heart when being confronted by those whom seem to have the answer to all of Gods Word and when you disagree with them and see it to be contrary to Gods word  they revert their argument to "you where Obviously taught that" or even accuse you of using doctrines of man, when this happens I will question the authority in which they have learned , reading a commentary or a book written by man or another bible other than the KJB , I have found that many will follow after such with their attacks, and even using a single form of scripture unrelated to the subject to try and prove them to be wise and correct, just as a novice unlearned of the truths of God's Word, though if someone attacks I humble myself and pray   

 

 I trust only in God's Holly Word, it is my hearts desire and my devotion to study God's word submitting myself to allow the Holly Spirit to guide me in all things concerning Gods Word, I know the closer I get to God the more Satan attacks and knowing this, God's Word gives me the strength to endure all things.

 

I don't set my thoughts on Theologians or authors of books, my thoughts are set upon God's Word  '' the Gospel ' the good news" of the lord Jesus Christ "and sharing this with the lost in this world, even if there be only just one left who would trust Jesus as their savior. l'll go

 

Brother Dave I'll be praying for your ministry ' God Bless my friend                      

[heartstrings]

A few unscriptural things I have been taught from the pulpit and in Sunday School in an IFB church...

 

Adam and Eve were never naked, they were shrouded in (I forget what that was)

Angels 'cohabited' with women and produced the giants.

The resulting giants did not have souls.

Satan went to heaven to accuse Job.

Every person inherits their blood from their father.

Noah's son, Ham, committed a homosexual act on his father.

The curse of Canaan produced the Black race.

Black people were consigned/intended to be a race of slaves.

Moses' "Ethiopian" wife was not black.

Behemoth was a dinosaur.

There was a pre-adamic earth complete with cities.

The verse about "touch not mine anointed" means not to oppose, offend, disagree with the pastor/preacher.

Sheep are stupid, you are a sheep, I am the "undershepherd"

The most important thing, to God, is His glory.

One thing learned, IFB is still BEST, KJB is BEST........but study the scriptures for yourself.

[Covenanter]

I should probably add to the OP that even with the greater time I have had over the past few years doing only part time work, and my current situation with more study time, I still spend the first part of any study with only the Bible, reading other men's comments only when I have established a baseline understanding.

My study and preaching Bible does not even have cross references in it - the only notes are definitions of archaic words, the vast majority of which are not new to me in any case.

I make a concerted effort not to be influenced by any man's ideas over the Word of God.
I do concede however that every man is influenced by many things in his life, and this will colour my understanding.

 

I have always used a cross-ref Bible, & used the cross refs. That avoids making a "interpretation" based on a single text. I try not to interpret Scripture, as that implies saying what the Scriptures mean, rather than what they say.

 

Many contributors to this forum have established a "scheme of interpretation" & they see that interpretation where the context teaches something completely different.

 

e.g. The "last days" is interpreted as referring to yet future "end times" when in context it usually refers to the Gospel times, & particularly the last days of the old covenant. The OC effectively ended at Calvary, with the inauguration of the new & everlasting covenant in the blood of Jesus, but because of God's longsuffering & concern for the Jews to come to repentance, he allowed a generation of 40 years before the destruction of Jerusalem, & the temple. During that time, many thousands of Jews recognised Jesus as their Messiah.

 

When reading the prophets, the opening verses normally establish the times of writing, the kings in power, & the threats to the nation. Then we can see that "the day of the LORD" is often a specific judgement, such as Assyria or Babylon, rather than the return of the Lord Jesus. In Joel 2 it refers to the then occurring judgment of the plague of locusts, & concludes with the Gospel promise quoted in Acts 2.

 

Joel 2:²⁸ And it shall come to pass afterward,
that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh;
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your old men shall dream dreams,
your young men shall see visions:
²⁹ and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids
in those days will I pour out my spirit.
³⁰ And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth,
blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.

³¹ The sun shall be turned into darkness,
and the moon into blood,
before the great and the terrible day of the Lord come.
³² And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered:
for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance,
as the Lord hath said,
and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call.

 

Acts 2:¹⁶ But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; ¹⁷ And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: ¹⁸ and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: ¹⁹ and I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: ²⁰ the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: ²¹ and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

Peter speaks of the last days following Calvary, & Calvary being the day of the Lord - the long promised day when the promised salvation is accomplished. The sun was turned to darkness when Jesus hung on the cross. And now we call on the name of the Lord Jesus - aka the LORD Jehovah.

[Covenanter]

Sorry you've left your thread, Dave.

 

I have a reluctance to "interpret" or to impose a system of interpretation, though I do have some basic lines of thought based on Scripture. These include:

The OT has types & patterns relating to Jesus & his saving work;

The covenants in the OT relate to & are superceded by the New/everlasting covenant in the blood of Jesus;

All believers in all ages are saved by the redeeming blood of Jesus;

Believing Jews & Gentiles comprise one redeemed people of God under the new covenant;

Jesus is coming again for resurrection & judgement.