The Upper Room

Q: Trinity in connection with a - hypothetical future - Jesus

3:24 AM

@GratefulDisciple I would prefer to have a strong willed wife than an apathetic one

But definitely a source of conflict

Elisha and his Brethren

12:06 PM

0

(Being otherwise completely ignorant) I assume that the Old Testament is a true subset of Judaism, with prophecies of a coming Jesus, I wonder if there is an opinion in Judaism about the view of a parallel to trinity in Judaism (noting that the Holy Ghost is mentioned as a concept in Judaism). My...

christianity

2:48 PM

@GratefulDisciple Yup, agreed 100%. You'll probably have noticed I try to avoid mentioning specific affiliations, but I'll say it is a somewhat-large Protestant denomination with a long history that shares full fellowship with various churches throughout the world. (And also that "full fellowship" is not something we take lightly. It's a closed-communion denomination.)

I wish I could say we had accountability, and... well, we somewhat do. Not as much as I'd always prefer, however. I left a church over doctrinal issues. The pastor knew he was in the wrong, too.

@LukeHill Just about everything to do with Mary. Infallibility of the Pope. Praying to dead people. The usual Protestant objections, for the most part. I also think de jure Catholicism looks suspiciously like works-righteousness, though I seem to recall we've had a previous argument over that point.

4:30 PM

Hello, I am a new user learning how to formulate an overview question that can attract a range of answers from a variety authorities, without offending any scoped objectivity requirements. Since the topic is love (an emotion), it seems that a purely textbook definition will be lacking. My question would be along the lines of:

"In John 21:15-17, how does Jesus get Peter to understand the Agape type of love he needs to learn when Peter is still restricted by the limits of the Phileo type of love he understands?"

4:49 PM

I would hope for answers that show something about Jesus starting with the word Agape, but then changing to Phileo the third time. Also how this seems similar to Jesus about Lazarus (John 11:11-14) who attempts to correctly describe Lazarus as "sleeping" (since his soul/spirit is asleep although his physical body is dead), but this confuses people so Jesus has to change his wording to "Lazarus is dead" to make the miracle he is about to do more clear.

8:12 PM

@jKevinBarr You may want to try our sister site BH.SE for this type of question, since you're starting with a Bible verse and trying to glean more meaning out of this. But since your primary intent is in the realm of speculation "how does Jesus get Peter to understand ..." it may not be answerable since no Christian group have enough data from Bible alone.

However, I did a little search and found this blog article that maybe what you're looking for. The blog article author uses what I know to be one of the top commentators of the Gospel of John (Andreas Kostenberger) along with other well known Bible scholars such as D.A. Carson, Darrell Bock, and Craig Blomberg.

Similarly, if your trying to guess Jesus's intention through "dumbing down" for the sake of audience (like with Lazarus), remains speculative although can be inspiration for personal devotion. Unfortunately this type of question is not suitable for either sites.

But if your focus is word study, you can definitely ask in BH.SE. Here's a good blog article comparing agape and phileo use in NT: Is "Agape" a special kind of love?

The type of overview question in C.SE usually has to do with theology, not multiple Bible interpretation for interpretation's sake (like what you're asking here), but interpretation that yields different doctrines such as teaching about baptism, Lord's support, spiritual gift, etc. because usually authorities (like Lutheran, Catholic, etc. do not publish "official" interpretation unless to support a doctrine).

But I maybe wrong, since this question seems acceptable. So if you're adventurous, give it a try but don't get discouraged if after trying to revise it after responding to comments that it ends up to be closed.

Q: How would you define this list of breakaways from Judaism?

8:31 PM

@Matthew I think Catholic Mariology is the only argument I'm sympathetic towards, though I do think Protestants will have a hard time finding an explicit or implicit contradiction within scripture. It seems to me that all arguments revert back to a question of Church authority, so that's the debate worth having.

Elisha and his Brethren

0

I don’t know so much about history and theology, but I saw the following list and I was hoping that someone could help me understand it; I saw an author classify the following groups as “Breakaways from Judaism”; Jewish Idol worshipping sects during second temple Hellenized Jews of second temple...

history hashkafah-philosophy gentiles theology christianity

@LukeHill I'd agree I can't think of any scripture that overtly contradicts the immaculate conception. I'm not aware of any scripture supporting it, either, nor do I understand why it's necessary. If Mary was sinless, why did we need Jesus? If Mary's sinlessness was necessary for Jesus to be sinless, why didn't Mary's parents need to be sinless for Mary to be sinless?

(Some day I should probably try to read up on Catholic beliefs in that area...)

@Matthew I myself am not super educated on the topic. I know where I could find a bunch of answers to all your questions if you are interested.

Its hard, because the catholic tradition is so rich and has like 2000 years worth of content to read up on so it becomes difficult to have knowledge in every area.

So I tend to focus on the papacy as my primary study since its truth can confirm the rest of Catholic teaching.

8:47 PM

@GratefulDisciple Thank You @GratefulDisciple. It seems as though I am still attempting to gain Spiritual enlightenment from a textbook here. I am learning the difference between C.SE and other help sites (like the one you just referred me to, and GotQuestions.org among many others). I like having this objective and highly focused C.SE site but always feel a sense of relief and comfort when I go back to the other sites.

@LukeHill I am interested in what Catholics have to say on the matter. I'll reserve judgment whether that constitutes "answers". 🙂

@Matthew ha! Very funny. Perhaps it will not be a satisfying answer (as I find when I prod on sola scripture) but it will be an answer nonetheless

@GratefulDisciple I previously did a quick perusal of the BH.SE site but did not join. I can look up possible definitions for Bible words at other reference sites, what I was looking for was how the different definitions and usages of a word creates different context, but that puts me off topic again unless I am soliciting how the context is derived by a specific denomination. But the BH.SE site may get me closer if I am careful.

9:03 PM

@LukeHill Oh? What's wrong with Sola Scriptura? (And, more importantly, how do you reconcile such problems with Galatians 1:8?)

9:14 PM

@jKevinBarr I'll share / help what I can to get you answers, regardless of whether it's a question for C.SE / BH.SE, or refer you to another resource. Did the 2 blog articles address your question?

@GratefulDisciple I read part of this blog entry until I ran into a problem with it. Which revealed why I have hopes for making use of this site. Other sites are willing to mix ideas and fact about God together, but there is no interaction, it is either I get it or I don't. This site allows for lots of interaction but is limited to peer-accepted facts along very narrow paths.

@GratefulDisciple As I grapple with the meaning of Agape vs Phileo, I can read definitions as used by specific groups at C.SE, discussions that mix faith and dogma at other sites, and considered fiction and statements by authors like C.S. Lewis, then make a decision on my own (after prayerful inquiry). Thank you for your part in it!

@jKevinBarr You're welcome. I happen to be very familiar with C.S. Lewis's "The Four Loves"; he started from the meaning of those 4 Greek words in Greek literature and used them to organize various types of love the way he saw them in real life (he is a literature professor) and discuss the relationship of those 4 loves with what the New Testament teaches (which is the theology of love).

On the other hand, the blog article does what a trained Bible interpreter do in analyzing meaning of the words as used in the Bible and as meant by the Bible authors. So quite different than C.S. Lewis's approach. Neither is right and wrong, it really depends what you're trying to do.

Another angle is theological literature, and here different Christian groups may have competing understanding of Agape vs. Phileo vs. Eros vs. Storge. For example, Catholic Josef Pieper reacted very strongly in his book Faith, Hope, Love against Lutheran Anders Nygren's famous book Agape and Eros.

9:35 PM

@GratefulDisciple Good, but with the blog entries the problem I ran into is that they both to minimize agape and elevate phileo. I agree with their reference to them having a significant overlap, but the limit of the charity of phileo, (laying down one's life for a friend), is less than the charity of agape, Christ sacrificing Himself for all who accept what He is.

Also the authors attempt to say that agape examples between people mean that agape is not a special type apart from phileo, but these verses could be trying to understand God's perspective of love (even as described between people) as opposed to peoples' understanding (phileo) of it. One section even suggests that maybe a phileo bond between people could be more significant than agape would be.

@jKevinBarr I see both blog entries as reaction against people who mistake the greek word agape as 100% divine and phileo as 100% human. He's saying that we need to be careful not to draw too much meaning from the distinct word alone, but more from the whole passage's meaning.

I think it is a critical distinction to make, that agape is not fully understandable by people, hence my suggested question I started with.

@jKevinBarr I see. But you already see how opinions differ. One suggestion is to find a book about love by an author you trust (maybe from a Christian denomination you trust) because it seems to me what matters at the end is how to understand Christian love regardless of the words used and we both lack seminary education that teaches how to understand the Bible in Greek properly.

I enjoyed CS Lewis' description of Storge, it reminded me of the feeling we are striving for when we try to go back home, but as the saying goes, you can' go back home again.

Some people do inductive Bible study using Strong's Greek concordance, which you may want to do with various online tools available. Personally, I don't feel confident doing that because I feel that method neglects critical (but difficult) necessary tasks like consulting theological dictionaries, extra-Biblical material that elucidates a word's meaning, narrative analysis of the book, etc.

Even scholars don't agree on key words. I recently read a book solely dedicated to analyze how Matthew understands "righteousness": Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought.

@jKevinBarr I found C.S. Lewis's "Four Loves" book extremely helpful for my own practice of Christianity. If that's the end goal of your study, then maybe it should be sufficient, combined with sermons by pastors you trust on key passages. There are tons of materials out there. If you're a Calvinist, John Piper has a library of his sermons and articles indexed by Bible verse.

9:54 PM

I always refer to resources like Strong's etc and interlinear Bibles, but I agree it is very easy to get lost in the weeds doing that, so yes blog type sites and other authors and this C.SE for balance are necessary.

John Piper also has Bible study "labs" organized by chapter.

@jKevinBarr For exegesis, personally I use BH.SE and C.SE only for starting point, or bypass them altogether, preferring professionally written commentaries instead. Biblehub has older commentaries online. I also like Precept Austin.

Again, it really depends on what you are aiming for (hope I don't sound like a broken record). If academic integrity is important to you, there's no bypassing seminary education, or at least get familiar with the type of resources available so you can consult them depending on the tasks (this is the level where I'm at).

Another example, if you're interested in what "faith" means for Paul, you cannot avoid learning something about "New Perspective in Paul". One in my reading list is Nijay Gupta's 2020 book Paul and the Language of Faith.

He's the co-editor of the upcoming 2nd edition of the highly acclaimed evangelical reference work: IVP Dictionary of Paul and His Letters.

My method is simple. I start with "God, what are you trying to teach me with this?" Frequently, He answers with events, a new email devotional, or some seeming coincidence that lets me know He is living in me, guiding my conscience, renewing my mind, by pointing me at things and things at me. The kind of thing that the outside world would think is foolishness.

@jKevinBarr Sounds great. I also ask God the same question with some events in my life, and when reading the Bible devotionally. And on a parallel track I try to also study the Bible academically (with the theologians / Bible scholars I trust) and study theology. In my opinion God can speak through theology and commentaries too. St. Augustine certainly did.

If I struggle with understanding a Bible passage etc, I assume He is not steering me to learn it now. If the idea keeps appearing to me, I decide that He is pointing out a shortcoming in me that I need to collect insight from others about (part of "do not forsake the assembling together of yourselves")

That is how I ended up on C.SE in the first place, looking for clarity on predestination/free will.

10:11 PM

@jKevinBarr I'm sure different people have their own preference to deepen their faith. As long as we're not duped by false teachers, there is no right and wrong.

The more we let Him teach us, the more discernment we have! Certainly it makes us better at recognizing eisegesis from exegesis.

@jKevinBarr That issue is quite controversial though. Calvinists have their theories, Arminians have another, and Catholics have theirs too, although all owe something from St. Augustine. I'm happy with the philosophical explanation I shared with you on that meta answer, which basically bypass the dilemma and leaves me just to trust God and focus on living for Christ every day. But you may have your specific concerns. May I ask which denomination you belong?

Well the crux of it is that like Paul bemoaning the fact that people were trying to claim a pedigree because of who baptized them, or divide into different groups because of ideas about holidays or food, or Jesus complaining about leaders being distracted with endless genealogies or carrying larger containers of scholarly references, I prefer to focus on a generic Protestant approach.

@jKevinBarr OK Good to know so I can forward you resources for that group.

Gotta go. Talk to you later.