Thursday, March 22, 2012

The Gospel of Peace: Making It Real - Lesson 20 - “Gentle Restoration ” - Galatians 6.1-5

Lesson 20 - “Gentle Restoration ” - Galatians 6.1-5
ID: Inductive Questions (Asking the text questions like who, what, where, when, why, & how?”) 
CR: Cross References (Comparing Scripture to Scripture, understanding the vague by the clear.) 
WS: Word Study (Understanding definition, theological meaning, and usages in other passages.)
The WORD: What does the Bible say?
 Context:   Galatians 5:13-26 (esp. 14-15, 26) provides important context for 6:1-5.  Read it slowly and think about how it relates to today’s passage.  Also, note what follows this passage in 6:6-10.
1.      WS:  (1) Overcome (nkjv) or captured (esv) is a translation of (prolambanō).  The New Living Translation says “overcome” in a sin and the NET Bible says “discovered” in a sin.  Which one captures the sense here?  Check some word study resources and commentaries for help. 
2.      WS/ CR:  (1) What does it mean to restore (katartizō) a brother?  (Notice the English words used to translate this Greek word in Matthew 4:21, 1 Thessalonians 3:10, and Hebrews 13.21)
3.      ID:  (1) With what kind of spirit should you respond to a brother that is struggling with a sin? What warning does Paul give?
4.      CR: (2) What is the “law of Christ”? According to verse 2, how do we fulfill the law of Christ? What are some practical ways to do this in the context of restoring a brother?
5.      ID: (3) What are some attitudes that might prevent us from helping a brother who is struggling with sin? (see Gal 5:26)
6.      ID:  (5) What is the difference between carrying each other's burdens (v2) and carrying your own load (v5).  Why are we told to do both?
The WALK: What should I do?
1.      How do you distinguish between constructive confrontation and being a busybody?
2.      “You who are spiritual” can have reference to our general spiritual maturity and / or to our current disposition.  What are some things we should check in our hearts before gently confronting a brother?
3.      Do you think questions like “What was going on there?” or “Help me understand what it happening?” would be helpful for understanding a situation before talking with someone or just open the door for excuses?  (James 1:9)  Why?
4.      How do we decide when we should or should not just overlook a fault? (Pages 53-57 of The Peacemaker: Handling Conflict without Fighting Back offer some helpful thoughts to discuss.)

Going further:3rd G: Gently Restore” on the blog Reflections on the Journey of Living out Matthew 5:9 offers more thoughts on restoring a brother.

Page 2 -----------------------------------------

Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics with commentary by Norman L. Geisler

Article XIX

WE AFFIRM  that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it.
WE DENY  that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself, such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism.
The question of preunderstanding is a crucial one in contemporary hermeneutics. The careful wording of the Affirmation does not discuss the issue of whether one should approach Scripture with a particular preunderstanding, but simply which kinds of preunderstanding one has are legitimate. This question is answered by affirming that only those preunderstandings which are compatible with the teaching of Scripture are legitimate. In fact, the statement goes further and demands that all preunderstanding be subject to "correction" by the teaching of Scripture.
The point of this article is to avoid interpreting Scripture through an alien grid or filter which obscures or negates its true message. For it acknowledges that one's preunderstanding will affect his understanding of a text. Hence to avoid misinterpreting Scripture one must be careful to examine his own presuppositions in the light of Scripture.

Article XX

WE AFFIRM  that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history, or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extra-biblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations.
WE DENY  that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it.  What is in view here is not so much the nature of truth (which is treated in Article VI), but the consistency and coherence of truth.
This is directed at those views which consider truth paradoxical or contradictory. This article declares that a proper hermeneutics avoids contradictions, since God never affirms as true two propositions, one of which is logically the opposite of the other.
Further, this Affirmation recognizes that not all truth is in the Bible (though all that is affirmed in the Bible is true). God has revealed Himself in nature and history as well as in Scripture. However, since God is the ultimate Author of all truth, there can be no contradiction between truths of Scripture and the true teachings of science and history.
Although only the Bible is the normative and infallible rule for doctrine and practice, nevertheless what one learns from sources outside Scripture can occasion a reexamination and reinterpretation of Scripture. For example, some have taught the world to be square because the Bible refers to "the four corners of the earth" (Isa. 11:12). But scientific knowledge of the spherical nature of the globe leads to a correction of this faulty interpretation. Other clarifications of our understanding of the biblical text are possible through the study of the social sciences.
However, whatever prompting and clarifying of Scripture that extrabiblical studies may provide, the final authority for what the Bible teaches rests in the text of Scripture itself and not in anything outside it (except in God Himself). The Denial makes clear this priority of the teaching of God's scriptural revelation over anything outside it.

Article XXI

WE AFFIRM  the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of biblical teaching with the facts of nature.
WE DENY  that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture.
This article continues the discussion of the previous article by noting the harmony of God's general revelation (outside Scripture) and His special revelation in Scripture. It is acknowledged by all that certain interpretations of Scripture and some opinions of scientists will contradict each other. However, it is insisted here that the truth of Scripture and the facts of science never contradict each other.
"Genuine" science will always be in accord with Scripture. Science, however, based on naturalistic presuppositions will inevitably come in conflict with the supernatural truths of Scripture.
Far from denying a healthy interchange between scientific theory and biblical interpretation, the framers of this statement welcome such. Indeed, it is acknowledged (in article XX) that the exegete can learn from the scientist. What is denied is that we should accept scientific views that contradict Scripture or that they should be given an authority above Scripture.

No comments:

Post a Comment