Christian tradition

[~Clay]

A recent post from someone looking for the scriptures that foretell the coming one-world government got me thinking about how much we abuse scripture. Why is that?

First there's the clear mythology - These are stories that we tell that we know aren't supported by scripture, like the three wise men coming to visit the baby Jesus at His birth. Nowhere does scripture state the number of maji (plural, so we only know that there was more than one) and they didn't visit the baby Jesus in the manger, they visited the child in the house! (Matt 2:9-11)

And I am so tired of hearing how Peter was "restored" three times for his denials of Christ in John Chapter 21 when it was clearly another failure on Peter's part (not to beat up on him, he just had not yet received the full measure of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost).

But my biggest is probably the quote that never appears in the Bible -

What the enemy intended for evil, God intended for good.

This is a misquote of Gen 50:20 where Joseph said to his brothers

As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.

But this is even further clarified five chapters earlier in Gen 45 where Joseph says to his brothers about their treatment of him -

vs 5 - God sent me before you to preserve life

vs 7 - God sent me before you to preserve a posterity for you

vs 8 - So it was not you who sent me here, but God

Then there are the "partial quotes" - usually of convenience.

Some that really bother me are:

James 4:7 - Resist the devil and he will flee from you

Rev 12:11 - And they overcame by the blood of the lamb and the word of their testimony

Phil 3:10 - That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection

1 Cor 2:9 - Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has entered into the mind of man what God has prepared for those who love him

What is wrong with those quotes?

They are incomplete!

• Submit to God, Resist the devil and he will flee from you.
  
• And they overcame by the blood of the lamb and the word of their testimony and they did not love their lives to the end [other translations say - and they did not love their life even when faced with death)
  
• That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings
  
• Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has entered into the mind of man what God has prepared for those who love him (10) but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
  

So why do we do that? Why do we have mythical stories about three wise men visiting a newly born baby Jesus, and distorted stories about Peter being restored three times by Jesus, and misquoted and incomplete scriptures that typically leave out the inconvenient parts?

This really bothers me.

So now that I have vented somewhat, is it not really a big deal?

Is it okay to be sloppy with scripture and is it just my problem that it bothers me ... ?

Are there similar examples that bother you ... ?

~clay

[tjhawks1]

I've always thought the three wise men got passed down by word of mouth. It's very possible and I also could be dead wrong. But to answer about how we all misuse scripture, I think of two things. First it's us believing the lies of the devil. When the devil tempts Adam and Eve he misquotes God. When tempting Jesus he misuses scripture. The other reason we do it is because of our pride. I know I struggle with admitting I'm wrong.

[nebula]

I agree Clay.

I am not going to guess the why. Aside from our tendency to follow what was taught to us and what people repeat, I don't know why it initially got taught wrong.

I have other examples:

* Why do we pray, "Lord, be with me," or "Lord, be with so-and-so," when the Lord said: "I will never leave you nor forsake you." (Heb. 13:5)?

* "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." (Matt. 16:18)

This verse is more often than not taught and understood as defense rather than offense - that is, people see this as "the gates of Hades" attacking the church and not being able to prevail . . . when in actuality, gates are the structures of a city that are attacked. Thus, the implication is the gates of Hades will not prevail when we go on the attack.

*"Church" - speaking of church . . . "Church" is a mistranslated word. The word ekklesia correctly translated is simply "a gathering" or an "assembly."

When Jesus never called us His "church." He called us, "His assembly." (Research the etymology of the word "church" sometime . . . it's rather disturbing.)

[nebula]

I would like to ask how did Peter fail in John 21.

I've heard of this. The reason we miss what happened was because the word "love" in English is split into 4 words in Greek. So when any of those 4 are used, the translators write "love" without distinguishing them.

The first time Jesus asked Peter, "Do you love Me?" He asked, "Do you agape Me?"

Peter answered, "Lord, You know I philio You."

The second time, Jesus asked the same thing, and Peter answered the same thing.

The third time, Jesus asked, "Do you philio Me?"

That's why Peter felt hurt when Jesus asked this the third time.

(Of course, I've never heard anyone mention if ancient Arabic, the language they actually spoke in Israel back then, had the same break-downs for the word "love" or not. But this is what is recorded in the Greek text.)

[OneLight]

There are many traditions passed down through our lives that we have accepted. Some from the church themselves. It is very interesting when we step back, out of our doctrinal stances, and look at His word and compare it to our beliefs. You may be surprised as what you find not to be scriptural.

[EricH]

I would like to ask how did Peter fail in John 21.

I've heard of this. The reason we miss what happened was because the word "love" in English is split into 4 words in Greek. So when any of those 4 are used, the translators write "love" without distinguishing them.

The first time Jesus asked Peter, "Do you love Me?" He asked, "Do you agape Me?"

Peter answered, "Lord, You know I philio You."

The second time, Jesus asked the same thing, and Peter answered the same thing.

The third time, Jesus asked, "Do you philio Me?"

That's why Peter felt hurt when Jesus asked this the third time.

(Of course, I've never heard anyone mention if ancient Arabic, the language they actually spoke in Israel back then, had the same break-downs for the word "love" or not. But this is what is recorded in the Greek text.)

Actually, this is not an example of Peter falling again. It is an example of repentance on his part. Let me show you why I think this is the case from the text.

Peters 3-fold denial of Jesus came on the heals of his assertion that even though all would fall away, he (Peter)would never fall away and was willing to even die with Jesus if necessary (John 13:36-38). As usual, Peter over estimated his ability to follow-through. He believed he was stronger than he was.

When Peter denied Jesus three times, the text tells us he was standing at a "charcoal fire" the temple police had made, to warm himself (John 18:18). The Greek term for charcoal fire (anthrakia) is used only one other time in the NT, in John 21:6. In that instance the fire was built by Jesus to feed his disciples. This also happens to be the passage where Jesus quizzes Peter regarding Peter's love for him. This use of a prop (like a fire) is commonly used to tie narratives together.

Jesus asks the same question 3 times (corresponding to the three denials of Peter).

Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?" (John 21:15 CSB) - Greek word used by Jesus is Agape (unconditional love)

"Yes, Lord," he said to Him, "You know that I love You." (John 21:15 CSB) - Greek word used by Peter is Phileo (brotherly love)

A second time He asked him, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" (John 21:16 CSB) - Greek word used by Jesus is Agape (unconditional love)

"Yes, Lord," he said to Him, "You know that I love You." "Shepherd My sheep," He told him. (John 21:16 CSB) - Greek word used by Peter is Phileo (brotherly love)

He asked him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" (John 21:17 CSB) - Greek word used by Jesus is Phileo (brotherly love)

Peter was grieved that He asked him the third time, "Do you love Me?" He said, "Lord, You know everything! You know that I love You." "Feed My sheep," Jesus said. (John 21:17 CSB) - Greek word used by Peter is Phileo (brotherly love)

What we have here is actually an example of someone who has repented and now understands their own limitations. When Jesus asks Peter if he loved Him unconditionally, Peter responded that he loved him in a brotherly way. Only the final time does Jesus change the verb to Phileo in agreement with Peter (indicating the repentance is complete). We see no indication from Jesus that he views Peter as being in sin. On the contrary, after each of Peter's affirmations, Jesus commissions him for ministry.

The text seems to tie this passage to the denial both through the unique use of the Greek term for charcoal fire (as a narrative tool) and Jesus' insistence that Peter affirm him three times just as he denied Him (coming to agreement on the terms after the third affirmation). Peter's more accurate self view is an indication that he has learned an important lesson. Namely, that in our own power we cannot exercise agape. It was not until they received the Spirit later that Peter would have been capable of unconditional love.

We need to be careful of accusing people who disagree with us of believing what they do simply because of tradition. They may have reasons based on the text that have led them to their conclusions. It may be that we have made a "tradition" out of parting with excepted interpretations.

One other note. We should be cautions of putting too much weight on the use of agape and phileo in John. That is because John seems to use them interchangeably at times. For example, when he refers to himself as the disciple that Jesus loved, sometimes he uses agape and sometime phileo (with no apparent rhyme or reason).

[EricH]

But my biggest is probably the quote that never appears in the Bible -

What the enemy intended for evil, God intended for good.

This is a misquote of Gen 50:20 where Joseph said to his brothers

As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.

But this is even further clarified five chapters earlier in Gen 45 where Joseph says to his brothers about their treatment of him -

vs 5 - God sent me before you to preserve life

vs 7 - God sent me before you to preserve a posterity for you

vs 8 - So it was not you who sent me here, but God

Then there are the "partial quotes" - usually of convenience.

I am not sure what your issue is here. It was the brothers that sold him into slavery. It was Potipher's wife that falsley accused him of rape. Yet the text tells us in all of this it was also God's hand at work. The principle is that God is soveriegn even over the evil intentions of other in our lives to achieve His purposes

[nebula]

Actually, this is not an example of Peter falling again. It is an example of repentance on his part. Let me show you why I think this is the case from the text. . . .

Thank-you so much Eric for that explanation!!!

There was something I believe the Holy Spirit quickened in me about the incident, but it didn't make sense with the explanation I understood based on the Greek words used. Now it makes sense! So thank-you.

So, what was quikened in me?

The similarity between Jesus asking Peter 3 times, "Do you love me?" with the vision he had on a rooftop where 3 times he was told to kill and eat the unclean animals, and all three times he refused because they were unclean.

Both times, the Lord was impressing on Peter that He had something new, strange, and outside his parameters to do - and it took the threefold repetition to impress it upon him that this was indeed the calling He had for him . . . or soemthing like that.

[nebula]

i think the only misquote of the Bible that really bothers me is I Timothy 6:10 "For the love of money is the root of all evil...." so often it is quoted "Money is the root of all evil" which totally changes the meaning of the verse.

Actaully, it says: "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil."

[~Clay]

I would also like to add, that the wise men are probably considered three people since there were three types of gifts brought to Christ. That is just a guess.

Yes, Ruck1b, I have heard the same thing- three gifts = three wisemen.

~clay