Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Rob Bowman

Holy Spirit's teaching in John 14:16

Recommended Posts

Note: The title of this thread was supposed to be "Holy Spirit's teaching in John 14-16," not "14:16."

In this brief study, I want to dispel a common misunderstanding of the teaching of Jesus about the Holy Spirit in the Gospel of John. It is extremely common for people to understand certain statements in John to mean that the Holy Spirit teaches each individual whom he indwells in a direct manner. The Holy Spirit, Jesus said,

Share this post


Link to post

Long. Pretty well written. But it has one fatal flaw. You took your eye off the ball and isolated John from its bigger context.

John 14

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

When was this fullfilled?

Acts 2

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

14

Share this post


Link to post

Zakuska,

Yes, of course the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is for all believers in Jesus Christ. Yes, the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost, and everyone who believed in Jesus as Lord and Christ received the gift of the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. But the specific work of the Holy Spirit of which John 14:26 speaks is not the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but the work of teaching the apostles and bringing to their remembrance what Jesus had said to them. You cannot negate the considerable evidence from the immediate context of the statements in John by running to this passage in Acts.

Long. Pretty well written. But it has one fatal flaw. You took your eye off the ball and isolated John from its bigger context.

John 14

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

When was this fullfilled?

Acts 2

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

14

Share this post


Link to post

Zakuska,

Yes, of course the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is for all believers in Jesus Christ. Yes, the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost, and everyone who believed in Jesus as Lord and Christ received the gift of the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. But the specific work of the Holy Spirit of which John 14:26 speaks is not the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but the work of teaching the apostles and bringing to their remembrance what Jesus had said to them. You cannot negate the considerable evidence from the immediate context of the statements in John by running to this passage in Acts.

Paul would disagree... He seem to link Knowledge and learning to the Holy Ghost for ALL workers in Christ...

2 Cor 6

1 We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

2 (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:

4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,

5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;

6 By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,

7 By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,

8 By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true;

9 As unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed;

10 As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.

Share this post


Link to post
Such considerations point to the conclusion that the ultimate ground of the quest for cognitive certainty is the need for security in the results of action. Men readily persuade themselves that they are devoted to intellectual certainty for its own sake. Actually they want it because of its bearing on safeguarding what they desire and esteem. The need for protection and prosperity in action created the need for warranting the validity of intellectual beliefs.

John Dewey, The Quest for Certainty

It is still all subject to interpretation

Share this post


Link to post

Zakuska,

One passage at a time. This thread is about John 14-16. I said repeatedly that if you can find a doctrine of the Holy Spirit teaching all believers individually, or whatever, somewhere else in the Bible, that is fine. But it isn't in John 14-16. Can we agree on that?

Paul would disagree... He seem to link Knowledge and learning to the Holy Ghost for ALL workers in Christ...

2 Cor 6

1 We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

2 (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

3 Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed:

4 But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,

5 In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings;

6 By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,

7 By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,

8 By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true;

9 As unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed;

10 As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.

Share this post


Link to post

mfbukowski,

Somehow, I don't think Dewey (or Whitehead) are at all allies for LDS epistemology. Nor do I think this has anything to do with the exegesis of the texts in John 14-16.

I sure will be interested to see if anyone cares to engage that issue.

Share this post


Link to post

mfbukowski,

Somehow, I don't think Dewey (or Whitehead) are at all allies for LDS epistemology. Nor do I think this has anything to do with the exegesis of the texts in John 14-16.

I sure will be interested to see if anyone cares to engage that issue.

They most certainly are allies; but you are putting the cart before the horse.

William James wrote extensively on spiritual experience.

Whether or not (most) Mormons know that is not important at the moment, they will.

The gang at the trailer park are aware of it, so you better get caught up if you want to try and peddle an anti-mormon philosophy, because it won't work for long.

Once most figure it you, your stuff will be toast.

Edit: "figure it out"

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another intresting verse:

Prov 14

33 Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding: but that which is in the midst of fools is made known.

Paul tells us "Wisdom" is Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 1:24) Is this not saying that Jesus is in our heart like in the NT?

Who would not trust their heart with Christ in it?

Share this post


Link to post

Note: The title of this thread was supposed to be "Holy Spirit's teaching in John 14-16," not "14:16."

In this brief study, I want to dispel a common misunderstanding of the teaching of Jesus about the Holy Spirit in the Gospel of John. It is extremely common for people to understand certain statements in John to mean that the Holy Spirit teaches each individual whom he indwells in a direct manner. The Holy Spirit, Jesus said,

Share this post


Link to post

<SNIP>

Share this post


Link to post

<SNIP>

Also notice what Jesus said here,

John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Paul wasn't among your "apostles" of John 14-16 and yet what did Paul teach about the Spirit revealing truth?

1 Cor 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man

Share this post


Link to post

mfbukowski,

The article you cited pointed out some conceptual parallels and points of contact between William James and Mormonism, but did not defend the idea that Mormon epistemology is or should be a form of pragmatism. But hey, if you want to say that LDS epistemology is pragmatic, be my guest.

And again, this is a diversion from the issue at hand, namely the exegesis of John 14-16.

Share this post


Link to post

Darth,

You wrote:

Without conceding that your interpretation is correct, which I don't, if:

1. God only shares the Holy Ghost with 12 Jewish men who lived hundreds of years before I was born;

2. God doesn't think I am or anyone else is important enough to get the Holy Ghost, too;

3. I'm just supposed to read this compilation of various translations of the remnants of various books purported to be written by these individuals, but I have no way to determine whether any of this is true;

4. I'm just supposed to take their word for it;

5. Hundreds of years later, various different religious groups are going to come along and they all say that they're the ones who understand this the right way, even though they had absolutely nothing to do with writing it or compiling it, and by their own teaching do not have the Holy Ghost the ancient apostles did;

Why would I want to believe in a god who works like that, anyway?

You completely missed the point. I did not say that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in all believers. I said that the specific teaching activity of the Spirit described in John 14-16 referred to his special revelatory work through the apostles.

The issue is, or at least should be, what the text says, not what we would like it to say.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, Vance. You're just being silly. Must I really refute your silly objections?

1. Sola scriptura does not mean we cannot use words that are not found specifically in the text under discussion. Since I have already explained this to you, it is obvious that you simply don't care what sola scriptura really means. You would rather attack your own straw-man version of it.

2. I certainly never suggested that none of what Jesus says in John 14-16 refers or applies to us. This is another straw man.

3. One passage at a time, please.

Wow, YOU really have to stretch this a long long ways to get it to where YOU want it to be.

First, I will say that again you have thrown "sola scriptura" under the Anti-Mormon agenda driven bus.

No where in John 14-16 do I find the term "apostle"!!!

I do find "disciple". Of course if you are not a disciple of Jesus then I guess you can neglect the words of Jesus found in John 14-16.

Nice bait and switch there Rob.

So is it your position that NONE of the teachings of Jesus found in John 14-16 are applicable to us? If not why did John even bother to record them?

Also notice what Jesus said here,

John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Paul wasn't among your "apostles" of John 14-16 and yet what did Paul teach about the Spirit revealing truth?

1 Cor 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man

Share this post


Link to post

In this brief study......

Brief it was not, but despite the disguise I got to this right at the end...

Christ

Share this post


Link to post

Darth,

You wrote:

You completely missed the point. I did not say that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in all believers. I said that the specific teaching activity of the Spirit described in John 14-16 referred to his special revelatory work through the apostles.

The issue is, or at least should be, what the text says, not what we would like it to say.

No, the issue is, even if "the text" says that:

1. the text of the Koran says a lot of things,

2. the text of the Bhagivad Gita says a lot of things,

3. the text of the Iliad says a lot of things,

4. the text of the Urantia Book says a lot of things,

5. the text of Nietzche's The Antichrist says a lot of things,

And you have chosen to believe the Bible when you have no more proof that it is "true" than #'s 1-5. And you don't know--because neither you nor anyone else has any proof at all--that what is written in any of the numerous versions of the Bible that exist today are what John originally wrote. Or if John even existed. So you have yet to establish that anyone should believe in the Bible to begin with, instead of #'s 1-5, or the Tao Te Ching, or Native American myths, or voodoo, or nothing at all.

And the ultimate issue is, still, if God operates the way you say he does, why would I want to believe in that god, anyway?

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, Vance. You're just being silly.

Well if you can't refute the message, you can always attack the messenger.

Must I really refute your silly objections?

Nah, not really, I would never insist that you do the impossible. Instead, why don't you just attack the messenger?

1. Sola scriptura does not mean we cannot use words that are not found specifically in the text under discussion. Since I have already explained this to you, it is obvious that you simply don't care what sola scriptura really means. You would rather attack your own straw-man version of it.

The term "apostle" is NEVER used in John 14-16. So you abused what the text ACTUALLY says/means and in so doing, you also abuse the doctrine of "sola scriptura" and render it obsolete. In so doing you have thrown it under the anti-Mormon agenda driven bus.

John does use the term "disciple" in John 14-16.

DISCIPLE, n. [L., to learn.]

1. A learner; a scholar; one who receives or professes to receive instruction from another; as the disciples of Plato.

2. A follower; an adherent to the doctrines of another. Hence the constant attendants of Christ were called his disciples; and hence all Christians are called his disciples, as they profess to learn and receive his doctrines and precepts.

DISCIPLE, v.t.

1. To teach; to train, or bring up.

2. To make disciples of; to convert to doctrines or principles.

This authority he employed in sending missionaries to disciple all nations.

3. To punish; to discipline. [Not in use.]

Now, if you want to so separate yourself from the disciples of Christ and the applicability if John 14-16 to you, then you are free to do so. But, I am not willing to go there.

2. I certainly never suggested that none of what Jesus says in John 14-16 refers or applies to us. This is another straw man.

Well then, you need to explain how and why some of these verses DO apply to you, and how and why some of these verses DO NOT apply to you.

And to think that John wrote those verses several years after the other Gospels were written, and after most of the other "apostles" were dead. Yet he felt the need to include the information that, according to you, was only applicable to those dead "apostles". What a strange waste of effort.

And so, I look forward to the contorted and tortuous explanation.

3. One passage at a time, please.

You were unable to keep to Deut 32:8-9 when SPECIFICALLY asked to do so, and now you are complaining because we have brought up other verses that clearly and plainly refute your position?

Oh please.

Share this post


Link to post

Smith,

You wrote:

So all that to sell us a spin that there is no need for modern day prophets, revelation and the Book of Mormon. I'm not sure but maybe you are even suggesting that the Old Testament is no longer needed.

This I reject out of hand. It is a big leap to go from speaking specifically to the apostles at one time to stretch that to all we need is a book that didn't even exist when he spoke to them. I cant believe you are even trying to sell us this drivel

If you can't refute what someone says, refute something else. Apparently, that is the approach you have chosen.

You must know full well that I am not suggesting that we don't need the Old Testament. I am also not suggesting that all we need is the Bible. We need the Bible, the indwelling Holy Spirit, the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ, the fellowship of other believers, mature believers discipling new believers, etc., etc.

I'm still waiting for someone to try to refute my exegesis.

Share this post


Link to post

Darth,

You wrote:

No, the issue is, even if "the text" says that:

1. the text of the Koran says a lot of things,

2. the text of the Bhagivad Gita says a lot of things,

3. the text of the Iliad says a lot of things,

4. the text of the Urantia Book says a lot of things,

5. the text of Nietzche's The Antichrist says a lot of things,

And you have chosen to believe the Bible when you have no more proof that it is "true" than #'s 1-5.

This is another attempt to change the subject. It has NOTHING to do with what John 14-16 say about the teaching work of the Holy Spirit.

You wrote:

And you don't know--because neither you nor anyone else has any proof at all--that what is written in any of the numerous versions of the Bible that exist today are what John originally wrote. Or if John even existed.

I think I can go out on a limb and assume what Mormons and evangelical Christians agree is true. We both agree that John existed. We both agree that John wrote the words discussed in my post. If you DON'T agree that John wrote them, of course, please let us know. If you don't think he wrote them, then you would have to agree that Mormons should not quote them to support their position. So this is a diversionary tactic if I ever saw one.

You wrote:

So you have yet to establish that anyone should believe in the Bible to begin with, instead of #'s 1-5, or the Tao Te Ching, or Native American myths, or voodoo, or nothing at all.

Again, Mormons quote John 14:26 and 16:13 to support their beliefs. I am simply addressing the question of whether these verses do in fact support the claim that the Holy Spirit teaches each individual believer doctrinal truth directly.

You wrote:

And the ultimate issue is, still, if God operates the way you say he does, why would I want to believe in that god, anyway?

Believe in whatever sort of a god you like. But I'm not interested in believing in a god of my own choosing, but in the God who actually exists. I expect that will work out much better in the end than believing in a god because I find it palatable to me.

Share this post


Link to post

I think I can go out on a limb and assume what Mormons and evangelical Christians agree is true. We both agree that John existed. We both agree that John wrote the words discussed in my post. If you DON'T agree that John wrote them, of course, please let us know. If you don't think he wrote them, then you would have to agree that Mormons should not quote them to support their position. So this is a diversionary tactic if I ever saw one.

They may both be wrong, and I am open to that possibility. I have never seen anything from evangelical Christians that was not circular reasoning, because even if you are right about what the Bible means and Mormons are wrong, that doesn't prove that (1) the Bible is true, (2) this particular part of the Bible is true, (3) your version of Christianity is true.

Let's say I concede the point and Mormons are wrong. Why should I now believe in what you have to say over, let's say, the Urantia Book? Or stories about Greek gods and titans?

Or, to be more succinct: how do you know that the Bible is "true" based on anything but faith?

Share this post


Link to post

Note: The title of this thread was supposed to be "Holy Spirit's teaching in John 14-16," not "14:16."

<snip>

The first thing that is wrong with your post is that it is way too long! :P Secondly, you overlook the fact that what Jesus said to his disciples on that occasion was intended for all of his disciples, not just those who were with Him at that time:

John 17
:

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for
them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us:
that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

Sharing their "unity" necessitated that they should share all the other blessings that He had promised them, including the promises relating to the Holy Ghost. Thirdly, your insistence that the discussion should be confined exclusively to the passages in the Gospel of John is disingenuous, knowing as an evangelical theologian the importance all Bible plays in interpreting any portion of it. Thus attempting to exclude passages such as these:

1 John 2
:

20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

----

27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

from the discussion seems a bit dishonest. And lastly, Mormonism relies not just on the Bible as a source of its theology, but on additional scriptures pertaining to the new dispensation, which you are free to disbelieve, but we cannot deny. They confirm the doctrine stated above. Here are some quotes:

1 Nephi 10
:

19 For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round.

Moroni 10
:

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

D&C 50
:

23 And that which doth not edify is not of God, and is darkness.

24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

D&C 88
:

67 And if your eye be single to my glory, your whole bodies shall be filled with light, and there shall be no darkness in you; and that body which is filled with light comprehendeth all things.

D&C 93
:

26 The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth;

27 And no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments.

28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things.

Share this post


Link to post

You're aware, of course that this

http://www.irr.org/bible-reliable.html

doesn't prove that the Bible is true any more than an authentic, reliable copy of the Koran proves that the Koran is true.

When people ask about the accuracy of the Bible, there are two different issues they might have in mind:
  • Is the Bible really from God?
  • Has the Bible been accurately preserved over the centuries?

This article focuses on the second question, trying to figure out how the Bible has been passed down from the original form to the texts used for modern translations.

Right. Because you don't have an answer for the first question that is anything beyond faith--just like Mormons have faith in Mormonism, Hindus have faith in Hinduism, Catholics have faith in Catholicism, and tribespeople have faith in witchdoctors.

The Bible doesn't belong to you. You didn't write it. You didn't compile it. Do you understand this?

Or maybe I could explain it this way:

I have decided to restart the Roman Empire. I'm going to start quoting the writings of Julius Caesar, Marcus Aurelius, Pliny the Younger, Virgil, etc. and speak on these works as if I was involved in writing them. And once in a while I'll throw around a Latin maxim. I may even start wearing a purple robe and a laurel wreath so everyone knows I'm the emperor and a conqueror. And I'm going to imitate whatever I think Caesar, Virgil, and other Roman writers and philosophers meant. And I will tell everyone that this is THE Roman Empire, the exact same Roman Empire that existed hundreds of years ago, and everyone must respect me and believe what I say because I am the emperor of Rome.

Please explain to me how this would be any less legitimate than you taking a collection of books written in the ancient Middle East by another race and another culture, that someone else arbitrarily compiled into what they decided were the scriptures, then imitating what you think those writings mean and claiming that you are the same church that Jesus of Nazareth started. As soon as you establish how evangelical Christianity has any more legitimacy than my statement about restarting the Roman Empire, then you will have a valid basis to judge Mormonism by your standards.

Go ahead. Witness to us.

Share this post


Link to post

Vance,

You wrote:

The term "apostle" is NEVER used in John 14-16. So you abused what the text ACTUALLY says/means and in so doing, you also abuse the doctrine of "sola scriptura" and render it obsolete. In so doing you have thrown it under the anti-Mormon agenda driven bus.

If you say something loudly enough and often enough, does it become any less fallacious?

John's one and only use of the word apostolos is in a general statement that does not limit its application to the group we know as apostles: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent [apostolos] greater than he that sent him" (John 13:16). I notice that you said "in John 14-16," ignoring this occurrence in John 13. It is clear that John simply did not use the term apostolos in the technical sense of a revelatory spokesperson of Jesus Christ. He wasn't alone--the author of Hebrews also never used apostolos with this meaning (his one use refers to Jesus, Heb. 3:1). That doesn't mean that these writers don't refer to the group of people that the NT elsewhere calls the apostles.

You wrote:

John does use the term "disciple" in John 14-16.

DISCIPLE, n. [L., to learn.]

1. A learner; a scholar; one who receives or professes to receive instruction from another; as the disciples of Plato.

2. A follower; an adherent to the doctrines of another. Hence the constant attendants of Christ were called his disciples; and hence all Christians are called his disciples, as they profess to learn and receive his doctrines and precepts.

DISCIPLE, v.t.

1. To teach; to train, or bring up.

2. To make disciples of; to convert to doctrines or principles.

This authority he employed in sending missionaries to disciple all nations.

3. To punish; to discipline. [Not in use.]

Now, if you want to so separate yourself from the disciples of Christ and the applicability if John 14-16 to you, then you are free to do so. But, I am not willing to go there.

I am not denying being one of Christ's disciples if I deny that some of the things that John says about some of Jesus' disciples refer to me. When Jesus washed the feet of the disciples, he did not wash my feet (John 13:5). When the disciples looked at one another wondering to whom Jesus was referring, I was not one of those disciples (John 13:22). I was also not one of those disciples who asked, "What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?" (John 16:17). I was also not one of those disciples who said, "Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb" (John 16:29). On the other hand, I certainly consider myself one of Jesus' disciples, and so I certainly take seriously my responsibility to love other disciples of Jesus (John 13:35). I also seek to "bear fruit" in my relationship to Jesus as one of his disciples (John 15:8 ). So, some of what John says about disciples applies directly to me, and some of it does not.

You wrote:

Well then, you need to explain how and why some of these verses DO apply to you, and how and why some of these verses DO NOT apply to you.

Three principles to keep in mind:

1. context

2. context

3. context

Actually, I don't think I need to explain this any further. I happen to suspect you're smart enough to understand that you can't be one of the "disciples" in John 13:22 and yet you could potentially at least be one of the "disciples" in John 13:35. I think you have the brainpower to understand that John 16:12 cannot be addressed to you, because you were not with Jesus when he was speaking and therefore could not have been one of those that Jesus said could not bear to hear everything he wanted to say at that time.

You wrote:

And to think that John wrote those verses several years after the other Gospels were written, and after most of the other "apostles" were dead. Yet he felt the need to include the information that, according to you, was only applicable to those dead "apostles". What a strange waste of effort.

I specifically addressed this objection toward the end of my opening post.

You wrote:

And so, I look forward to the contorted and tortuous explanation.

Actually, you are the one who will either give no explanation at all, or give a contorted explanation to get around the obvious fact, for example, that John 16:12 clearly limits the individuals included in "you" in John 16:13.

You wrote:

You were unable to keep to Deut 32:8-9 when SPECIFICALLY asked to do so, and now you are complaining because we have brought up other verses that clearly and plainly refute your position?

I've been waiting for this, and specifically expected it from you. Nice of you to fall into the trap.

First, I did, in fact, address Dan's exegetical argument in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. I didn't convince him, but I did address his exegetical evidence.

Second, Dan's stricture would not allow even for putting Deuteronomy 32:8-9 in the context of the rest of Deuteronomy, or even in the rest of chapter 32! I am certainly not imposing such a restriction on you. Bring up anything you like within the Gospel of John, anywhere in the book.

Third, at the time you were fully supportive of Dan's argument; as I recall, you pictured yourself happily munching popcorn at the show. Thus, even if I were limiting the scope of relevant evidence as much as Dan did, which I am not, you ought to approve.

Fourth, I presented three distinct texts in John (not just one, as Dan did in Deuteronomy) and showed how they all supported the same conclusion. So far, neither you nor any of the other several Mormons who have responded have tried to address the exegetical evidence for any of those three texts.

Fifth, Dan admits that his understanding of Deuteronomy 32:8-9 conflicts with the theology of the rest of Deuteronomy, and even with the theology of the rest of chapter 32. Thus, his argument admittedly was pitting this one short text against everything else in Deuteronomy, not to mention the rest of the Bible. This is not at all comparable to the argument I am presenting.

Sixth, the other verses that Mormons keep bringing up do not refute my argument at all, since my argument was not intended to prove that the Bible nowhere teaches the doctrine of the Holy Spirit teaching each believer individually, but only to prove that this doctrine does not appear in the Gospel of John. I didn't even claim that these passages in John disagree with or contradict your view about the Holy Spirit. I only claimed that they don't happen to teach it. My conclusion allows you to try to find it elsewhere. If you want to address my argument, however, you will have to address my exegetical evidence.

Your objection is overruled.

Share this post


Link to post

Rob, it is rather evident that Christ was talking to other disciples and not just the twelve apostles in John 14-16. There are certain elements that could only apply to them to bring them in remembrance of the things that he (Jesus) had taught them. That could only apply to those who had actually been taught by Jesus. However that does not preclude the Holy Ghost from witnessing the truth to others as He did on many occasions in the New Testament.

Paul was not an apostle at the time, yet after he was called by Jesus, he did not see an apostle to be taught until something like eight years later. And since Paul's epistles make up the bulk of the New Testament, where did he get his instructions?

I Corinthians 2:

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...