- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi KW,
To infer is to draw conclusions from evidence or premises.
Evidence is debatable and premises are individual biases.
Why do folks ever expect agreement from inferences?Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 27 2009,11:24) Hi KW,
To infer is to draw conclusions from evidence or premises.
Evidence is debatable and premises are individual biases.
Why do folks ever expect agreement from inferences?
I assume you realize that is what we attempt to do on this forum. That is why we have debates. The evidence we use to debate in from scripture and occasionally other sources and the reason we debate is to discover the truth about God and what He teaches us.It is correct that we interpret the evidence differently but it is also true that their is only one true interpretation of the evidence and that interpretation is God's. I strive to seek that interpretation by asking, seeking, and taking every opportunity to learn. I hope others do the same.
It is true we need to be wary of “implications” which are deceptive and even “hints” can lead us down a wrong path if we are not careful to watch our doctrine.
Can you show me in scripture where it is explicitly written that baptism means an immersion in water? I ask this as much of the doctrine we chose to believe come from implicit conclusion because scripture was not written to unbelievers who had not learned the message of gospel but rather to believers who had heard and to at least some extent held to it. That puts us at a disadvantage when we try to discover what was preached to unbelievers of which we all were at one time.
Hi TT,
You love inference but where does scripture offer this as useful in finding truth from Scripture?Quote (Not3in1 @ April 12 2007,09:34) Ah – this is a good forum. I hope it catches on. There are many topics that I have noticed that are built on inference. One that I am interested in is the JW theory that Jesus is Michael. I would add to your definition and include: Inference is implicit-type scriptures that are used for a particular slant. In other words, the teaching (like the Trinity) should be EXPLICITLY taught somewhere in scripture.
1. Somewhere it should read: There are three persons in the One God who is Jehovah. Or something explicit like this.
2. Somewhere it should read: Jesus pre-existed his birth and was a person before he was born on earth.
3. Somewhere it should read: Jesus was Michael the archangel before he was born a man, and give the name Jesus.You see, the problem with inference is that some of it IS needed? Is it not? I mean, one of the doctrines that you hold to – that Jesus existed as a person before his birth on earth is based somewhat on inference. You have to acknowledge that “wisdom” is Jesus and so on. But it never states explicitly that Jesus is wisdom. Do you see? So, I'm a little confused on how we do not infer some things, and still come up with truth.
If we say everything has to be explicitly stated (not based on inference), then most of us would have to give up parts of our personal theologies. Maybe?
I would go further and say that if inference is the source of a doctrine it probably is not true.Example; “Jesus is Michael, the Archangel” cannot be truth, becasue Psalm 8 tells us man and the son of man is made lower than Elohim, and since Michael is Elohim, Jesus cannot be Michael.
AND Heb 2:16 tells us he did not take on the nature of angles.
AND Psalm 148:1-6 tells us ALL angels were created by God, and no trinitarian believes Jesus was created. It therefore become a contradiction in doctrines for a trinitarian to say Jesus was Michael the archangel.
Example: pre-existence of Jesus; cannot be truth because too many times we are told of Jesus being begotten (“gennao), which is a Greek word translated into at least five different words in Englsih; begot, begotten, born, bear, birth.
The word gennao MEANS “to cause to be.” If Jesus had a cause to be, he had a beginning. And he was “Gennao of the Spirit in Mary.” [Mat 1:20]
I can think of NO inference that represents truth, that is not berified, as you so very well put it, by scripture that states it clearly.
Hi ,
TT gave us in another thread this classic on how logic and inference are useless tools in interpretation of Scripture.” The Messenger shared God's name thus inferring that He shared God's nature and was therefore God. “
SIGH..
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 25 2010,14:17) Hi,
Inference has always divided men from truth.
Do you know what inference is?It is comming to an conclusion using well grounded reasoning based on true premises from the document.
For example Jesus reached the conclusion that there is a resurection from the dead because the Lord is a God of several “dead” individuals and the Lord is God of the living and not the dead.
Premise 1 is true and is ” the Lord is a God of several “dead” individuals “
Premise 2 is true though I do not believe it is in the old testiment Scripture and it is “the Lord is God of the living and not the dead” note:I believe dead in this context means never to be resurected.
Therefore the Conclusion is also true and it is “there is a resurection from the dead”
A conclusion based on untrue premises and/or poorly grounded reasoning is unproven even though it may be either true of false.
Since one scripture does not the bible make the implication of one scripture can be in conflict with scripture as a whole and thus be untrue. I believe this is because aparently true premises can be untrue.
Hi KW,
Was Jesus learning or teaching?
Did you not know he was filled with the Spirit of truth.
Your reasoning is fallacious because it relies on human eyes but you are enamored of it?God is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob.
They are yet alive to God as they were anointed of the living Spirit.Nick Hassan wrote:
Quote They are yet alive to God as they were anointed of the living Spirit.
Where is that explicitly written in scripture?
Perhaps instead it is implied.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 25 2010,15:49) Hi KW,
They are alive to God[Lk20.38]
Sons of the resurrection they are sons of God
I can see where you get that from scripture though it certainly is not explicitly stated therein. Still there is only two choices and they are not son of damnation.KW
inference,would this be something that allow men to make is own reasoning upon the word of God ,and so by pass the Holy spirit understanding given by the spirit of Christ and God??
maybe this is why we have all those different view
the word of God is an living word but unless you are with Gods spirit how can you know that it is??
many try and would like to understand the word of God ,because it is the word of God and by this try to enjoy 15 minutes of fame from the word of God,ans so make others to believe that they know something ,but is that truth ??
making men logical inference may be at the totally opposite end of it all in God s view.
Quite so T,
Folks assemble their own personal foundations and then wonder why nobody can dialogue with them.Hi,
This is the 'strong' base that trinity relies on.
Take away thus and therefore from KJ and he will never post again.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 26 2010,05:25) Quite so T,
Folks assemble their own personal foundations and then wonder why nobody can dialogue with them.
Nick………Think about that , Guss who that fits most here? Or have you and T left yourselves out of that hypotheses or perhaps you are above this. Heres something you might think about < "HE WHO CONDEMNS ANOTHER CONDEMNS HIMSELF". O by the way that is In scripture, in case you have not noticed.peace and love………………..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 06 2010,16:29) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 26 2010,05:25) Quite so T,
Folks assemble their own personal foundations and then wonder why nobody can dialogue with them.
Nick………Think about that , Guss who that fits most here? Or have you and T left yourselves out of that hypotheses or perhaps you are above this. Heres something you might think about < "HE WHO CONDEMNS ANOTHER CONDEMNS HIMSELF". O by the way that is In scripture, in case you have not noticed.peace and love………………..gene
genei do not judge any one and so is Nick,just because we see what lays in front of us does not mean we judge the person,only but the works in front of us,
it maybe true in your case this is why you are so upset with it i guess??
Pierre
Pierre,
You posted me on March 26 and for some reason I did not respond at that time. My apologies.
I believe your concern that when interpreting scriptures men who infer what it means can read into scripture false revelations which are not from God but rather from the ruler of this world.
That does not make seeking that God does not infer but only that Satan chooses to misuse the practice of reading inferences in the same way he misused prophecy.
God chooses to use human languages in scripture and inferences are common in human languages as much is left unsaid that the speaker or writer assumes his hearer will understood by what is said either at the time or at another time. One example of the later is many scriptures which state anything is possible for God do not include the words but doing evil. Scripture omits those words because it assumes anyone who knows God knows he cannot commit evil.
For this reason those who delete those inferences from God's word are falling into one of the Devil's snares.
It is thus only when we are guided by God that the truth will be revealed to us. Trust in God. Trust in his Son.
Your fellow student,
Kerwin
One example of inference is found in Luke 8:19-21. Jesus answers the someone who let him know his mother and brothers were visiting him that his mother and brothers by stating that his mothers and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into action.
The logical conclusion based on the evidence from that passage is that those who are related through the spirit of righteousness are closser than those related through blood.
He did not explicitly state that but he did assume you would understand that from what he did state and it was part of his lesson.
That inference came from God through Jesus and we can understand it by listening to the Spirit of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
