In addition, to the Studies within the books of the Bible, which are reached with the links in the table above, There is an incomplete Study called Relational Prepositions. It has prepositions (in, of, by, through, etc) which are used with one of the major names of the Son of God. These combinations tells us about our personal relationship with Him.
1 Thessalonians 5:21 says Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
As I point out in my paper called Prove this is a two-step command and we can't do the second step without first doing the first step. That which is good
is what comes from God, according to the Bible. We have lost, and are losing many things that God gave us because we are not doing what God means by Prove all things
. The religious man says that he proved his doctrines but if that were true then we would not have lost all of the things that God gave to us which we no longer have. People question the authority of the Bible and of the church and of the preacher, Drugs, divorce and many other evidences of sinful lifestyle s are rampant in God's church, which show that we have lost God's protection. I could go on but the evidence shows that we can not hold fast that which is good (from God)
because we have not done what God means by Prove all things
.
The Bible tells us how to Prove all things
. There are three different spiritual gifts that deal with the word of God: knowledge, wisdom and understanding. Each uses a different method to Prove all things
. One of the main sources of current error is trying to use the method for one spiritual gift to prove the results of another spiritual gift. The spiritual gift of understanding is what is used for interpreting the Bible while the spiritual gift of wisdom is used for applying Bible principals to the circumstances of life. 1Corinthians 12 equates different spiritual gifts to different parts of the body. Trying to use the gift of wisdom to understand the Bible is like trying to see a sound, yet that is what many people try to do.
Many of the rules for interpretation, which come from the Bible, can be found in documents on the Hermeneutics page. One of those rules is that we must cover every (100%) permutation of a Bible word, found in the Bible, if we are to Prove a doctrine (based upon that word) using the Bible. To study less than 100% of God's statements is to claim that God wasted His efforts to provide what we choose to ignore. It is claiming that our opinion of what is required for proper understanding is greater than God's Word because we are saying that some of what God included is not really necessary.
I have been told by my retired pastor (Doctor of Divinity, 34 years as pastor in one church, etc.) that Schofield and others wrote rules for Hermeneutics, and then failed to follow their own rules. This study follows the rules of interpretation found in documents on the Hermeneutics page. This study shows that these rules work because they produce consistent results with NO conflicts. (The Bible is the uncorruptible
[Romans 1:23; 1Peter 1:23] picture of God Who has no conflicts within Himself.) There are things in the Bible that we can not fully understand but we can understand enough to know that there are NO conflicts within the Bible itself. For over 25 years I have been proving to people that their ' conflicts ' and ' difficult verses ' are actually the result of using wrong rules of Hermeneutics .
I believe God keeps His promise to be a rewarder of them that diligently seek him
( Hebrews 11:6 ). In this study I sought what God revealed about Himself in His Word through the major names for the Son of God found in the New Testament. I made sure that I followed the rules of Hermeneutics that God revealed to me through His Word. When this study was first put on the web, it was also put into a Word document with about 1300 pages. Since that time several other Studies have been added to this site. It provided the in-context, sentence based interpretation of over 3,000 verses which are cross-referenced to over 26,000 verses. (Please look at the Site Map for all that is on this site.)
I started out to study every use of Lord
, Jesus
, Christ
and their combinations found in the New Testament. While studying them, I found that I also had to cover King
, Saviour
, Son (of God, of man, etc)
and Lamb
because they were so much involved in the proper interpretation of the other names. I know of no other study which can make this claim even though that is what the Bible says is required to Prove true Bible doctrine. Several people, including nationally known preachers, have claimed that they know of some study that matches it but when I asked them to show it or identify it, they were not able to do so. They might as well have claimed that they own 'the cow that jumped over the moon '. God said Prove all things
and James 4:17 says Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin
. We can not hold fast that which is good
so long as we follow religious opinion which can not be backed up from the Bible.
I have backed my mouth, and continue to do so, with what is found on this site. Every verse that is interpreted on this site follows the same rules for interpretation. I have found not reason to make excuses for rejecting the literal interpretation of the Bible. I have found NO conflicts. I have not had to go to the 'Greek' or anything else.
Any who wish to dispute my claims for these rules of Hermeneutics only needs to find one place in this study where these rules don't work. If you believe that you find such an occurrence, Please send an email specifying exactly where (and why) you believe the error can be found. Within the notes for the Epistles, I explain my analysis. Where the sentence is complex or involves more than one verse, I outline the sentence structure according to the punctuation. There are several hundred outlines available to anyone who cares to use them. When the context is important for understanding, I explain the context. For example, there is a high-level interpretation of every sentence in Romans because every sentence in Romans is built upon all prior and must support what follows it. When I wrote the notes for the Gospels, I could not explain the analysis in a clear fashion. The Gospels are many small stories and often the same story appears in more than one Gospel but each Gospel provides a different perspective. Therefore, each story had to be analyzed within the perspective of the given Gospel, then the similarities and differences had to be compared and resolved before a proper interpretation could be rendered. Producing a clear explanation was beyond my writing ability at the time that I wrote the analysis used in the Lord Jesus Christ Study. (God willing, when I get back to the Gospels to do the sentence-by-sentence analysis, I can clarify these issues.) Therefore, at this time, unless a doctrinal issue is involved and explained, the notes for Gospel verses have only my conclusions and cross-reference verses without all of the supporting explanation. However, in most cases, the cross-reference verses are more than what is available from any other single source. Therefore, they still remain a good research tool.