|
Post by logic on Aug 6, 2008 15:55:20 GMT -5
Any one who holds God's character in high esteem would understand the verse this way:
1Peter 2:8 And, A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them who stumble at the word to which also they were appointed, being disobedient:
Romans 3:2b because unto them were committed the oracles of God. Means that they were appointed to the these.
Romans 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertains the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Means that they were appointed to these.
They were disobedient to the word, the oracles of God, and the covenants, and the giving of the law.
Anyone who would think that this verse is saying that God apoints people to disobedience, thinks that God appoints people to disappoint Him.
Could anyone disagre, and say that I misinterpret the verse?
|
|
|
Post by pete777 on Aug 7, 2008 4:56:18 GMT -5
Logic,
I agree with you! They are appointed to stumble because they have closed hearts! They will not be taught or listen to others, they are their own guide in religious matters. The WORD is not their standard, even though they may read it, they have their own WISDOM applied to it, so it would seem! They are disobedient because they have no faith! Faith is what the stumbling block is! The faith should be in Christ, not their own wisdom. Therefore, the stumbling block is faith in CHRIST. They know that MORAL LAW is the standard of eternal life, but they do not realize that only by faith in Christ can the standard be met! Faith unlocks power to render obedience to MORAL LAW! The gospel is composed of two things Christ and the Law and the binging ingredient of FATIH that brings them together.
Matthew
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Aug 7, 2008 8:32:24 GMT -5
Logic,
I do not think the passages from Romans shed any light on this text in 1 Peter. As I understand it the text in 1 Peter can grammatically be understood in one of three ways.
1. The unbelief was appointed by God.
2. The unbelief and stumbling were appointed by God.
3. The stumbling was appointed by God.
Basically your theology will determine which you choose. The non-Calvinist usually will say option 3 is the best option. This would mean that those who disobey the word are appointed to stumble.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 7, 2008 9:52:06 GMT -5
"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold I lay [appointed - tithemi] in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious, and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded… And, a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them who stumble at the word to which also they were appointed [lay - tithemi], being disobedient" 1Peter 2:6, 8
It seems to clearly say that the Word was appointed [tithemi]. It doesn't say that they were appointed to disobedience or appointed to stumbling, as the Calvinists would interpret. It says that the Word was appointed unto them.
God laid down the word before the people (appointed) and they stumbled at it and were disobedient to it (choice). The Word which was appointed was God’s doing, the stumbling at the Word was man’s doing.
"As it is written, behold I lay [appointed - tithemi] in Zion a stumblingstone, and the rock of offense: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." Rom. 9:33
"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold I lay [appointed - tithemi] in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious, and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded." 1 Pet. 2:6
It is the Word that God appointed or laid, which people stumbled at. Jesus is the stumblingstone which God has appointed or laid in Zion. “But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto Greeks foolishness." 1 Cor. 1:23. God has appointed or laid the Word, which is a stumblingstone, a rock of offense. Men stumble at the Word which God has appointed. The Word is appointed by God, but their stumbling is their own choice.
"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold I lay [appointed - tithemi] in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious, and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded... And, a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them who stumble at the word to which also they were appointed [lay - tithemi], being disobedient" 1Peter 2:6, 8. The context of 1 Pet. 2:8 is 1 Pet. 2:6. It is clearly talking about people stumbling at the preaching of Jesus. And it is this rock, the Word, which God has appointed or laid down.
"Jesus saith unto them, did ye never read in the Scriptures, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes... And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Mat 21:42, 44
|
|
|
Post by pete777 on Aug 7, 2008 10:46:16 GMT -5
Brethern,
I want to make mention that Jesse followed the rules of Biblical interpretation in comparing text with text. If everybody did that we would all drink the same spiritual drink and have all things in common, in relation to Bible doctrine! Praise God! Keep going Jesse! There is only one faith and the way to get to it is by rightly dividing the Word of truth!
Matthew
|
|
|
Post by logic on Aug 7, 2008 11:32:41 GMT -5
Brethern, I want to make mention that Jesse followed the rules of Biblical interpretation in comparing text with text. If everybody did that we would all drink the same spiritual drink and have all things in common, in relation to Bible doctrine! Praise God! Keep going Jesse! There is only one faith and the way to get to it is by rightly dividing the Word of truth! Matthew Jesse only clarified that which I put forth. He is much more eloquent than I am. Thank you Jesse, I knew you would agree with me.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Aug 7, 2008 11:39:35 GMT -5
Basically your theology will determine which you choose. To be more precise, commone sence, truth & reality will determine which you choose. The charachter of God must be Just and right. To ordain anybody to stumble means that God appoints people to disappoint Him. They were created not to worship Him, but to sin against him. This means that when they sin, they are actualy doing Gods will. That menas their sin is not realy sin, but obediance. That means the "non-elect" are righteous for obeying God by sinning, however God still condemns them. Go figure?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Aug 7, 2008 22:55:28 GMT -5
Basically your theology will determine which you choose. To be more precise, commone sence, truth & reality will determine which you choose. The charachter of God must be Just and right. To ordain anybody to stumble means that God appoints people to disappoint Him. They were created not to worship Him, but to sin against him. This means that when they sin, they are actualy doing Gods will. That menas their sin is not realy sin, but obediance. That means the "non-elect" are righteous for obeying God by sinning, however God still condemns them. Go figure? Logic, I'm not sure if you're understanding what I'm saying here or not. The third view above is not that God appoints certain people to stumble but rather that God has appointed that those who disobey the word will stumble. That's what I mean when I say that some view the text as saying God appoints the stumbling. Steve
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Aug 7, 2008 23:51:00 GMT -5
Also...
From my research on this text today I haven't come across any scholar (Arminian, non-Calvinist, or Calvinist) who even mention the possibility of the text saying what logic or Jesse are saying. I did not come across even 1 person who even mentions the possibility that "to which they also were appointed" is a reference to the word being appointed. As I mentioned earlier I don't think that is a grammatical possibility. Now there's some confusion here because it appears that logic is saying that the people in this text were appointed to the word (see logic's 1st post here) while Jesse is saying that the word was appointed to the people (see Jesse's 1st post here). Notice the KJV says "to which also they were appointed." It does not say "to whom also they were appointed." That which is appointed in the text is not the word. The 3 choices grammatically are:
1. Some people are appointed to disobey.
2. Some people are appointed to disobey and stumble.
3. Those who disobey (by their own choice) are appointed to stumble.
Everything I've read from various commentaries and scholars across the theological spectrum give these as the possibilites.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 8, 2008 13:25:29 GMT -5
Steve,
Scholars are nice to consider, but they are not the ultimate authority. We need to be our own students of the word. We cannot just rely on what other people say. Often, scholars seem to get it wrong. Not only in the field of theology, but in other areas as well such as science, history, etc. So we have to be willing to disagree with Scholars when it is necessary because of the Word, the Holy Spirit, and our conscience. Remember, it was the scholars (Scribes, Pharisees) who rejected the Messiah. And they studied more than many of our modern scholars! My point is that we are to be followers of the Bible, and not followers of scholars who talk about the Bible. Even the genuine and sincere can get it wrong. Besides, even the "scholars" cannot agree on this passage anyways. So I don't mind disagreeing with the scholars who can't agree themselves.
But Steve, do you see a connection or a correlation between verse 6 and verse 8? Doesn't context clearly explain this passage? And isn't heresy built when we isolate passages and remove them from their context? Look at the context:
"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold I lay [tithemi] in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious, and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded." 1 Pet. 2:6
"And, a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them who stumble at the word to which also they were appointed [tithemi], being disobedient" 1Pet. 2:8
Verse 6 says God appointed a cornerstone in Zion. Verse 8 says people stumbled at the Word which was appointed to them.
(Saying that they were appointed to the word is saying the same thing as saying that the word was appointed to them. My wife is married to me, and I am married to my wife. They were appointed to the word, and the word was appointed to them. It is the same thing. You could say Washington was appointed to the Presidency, or you could say that the Presidency was appointed to Washington. You are saying the same thing in a different way.)
The word which they are stumbling over is "the rock of offense" the "stone of stumbling" (vs. 8) which is the same thing as the "chief corner stone" (vs. 6). So men stumble at the Word which was appointed unto them. Jesus Christ is a stumblingblock, a rock of offense, when He is preached among people.
“But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto Greeks foolishness." 1 Cor. 1:23.
"As it is written, behold I lay [tithemi] in Zion a stumblingstone, and the rock of offense: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." Rom. 9:33
It amazes me that ANY "scholar" could possible misunderstand or misinterpret this. God appointed a chief cornerstone in Zion and people stumbled over the word which was appointed unto them, being offended at the word that they were appointed to. It is very simple really.
And for someone to use this passage to say that God has eternally decreed that people should disobey Him is nothing short of blasphemy and heresy. I often wonder if such theologians are really unregenerate in their minds, because they certainly don't know God or understand His heart and ways. Those are my honest thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Aug 8, 2008 14:13:18 GMT -5
To be more precise, commone sence, truth & reality will determine which you choose. The charachter of God must be Just and right. To ordain anybody to stumble means that God appoints people to disappoint Him. They were created not to worship Him, but to sin against him. This means that when they sin, they are actualy doing Gods will. That menas their sin is not realy sin, but obediance. That means the "non-elect" are righteous for obeying God by sinning, however God still condemns them. Go figure? Logic, I'm not sure if you're understanding what I'm saying here or not. The third view above is not that God appoints certain people to stumble but rather that God has appointed that those who disobey the word will stumble. That's what I mean when I say that some view the text as saying God appoints the stumbling. Steve Okay, I see what you mean. However, isn't that like saying God appoints the effects from the causes? That would be stating the obvious, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Aug 8, 2008 22:01:58 GMT -5
Jesse,
I agree that scholars are not the ultimate authority. I appeal to them here because of what I understand them saying about the Greek grammar of this passage. I'm not sure if the option you've listed is a possibility in the Greek. I'm only a little way into learning the rules for Greek verbs so I can't confirm or deny this myself at this time. I have a class in the morning so I'll ask and see what I can find out. Also, the fact that every Christian scholar I've been able to reference on this text, weather Calvinist or not, speaks of the options I've listed above makes me skeptical that they are all missing something. That does not mean that they are right, but it does cause me to question what you're saying.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Aug 9, 2008 13:10:10 GMT -5
I talked with my Pastor today about this text and we broke it down in the Greek together. The text is saying that these people (the unbelieving, stumbling, disobedient ones in this passage)have been appointed by God. The question is: What were they appointed to? The view given by logic and Jesse is that they were appointed to the word. The problem is grammatically you cannot take "the word" out of the phrase "they stumble at the word" and make it that to which they were appointed. This is made clear in the Greek which is reflected in every major translation of this text. KJV "... even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed." NKJV "... They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed." NASB "... for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed." NIV "... They trip and fall because they do not obey the message. That is also what God planned for them." ESV "... They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do." NRSV "... They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do." Young's Literal Translation "... who are stumbling at the word, being unbelieving, -- to which also they were set;" You'll notice that none of the major translations translate this text as listed by logic did below "... even to them who stumble at the word to which also they were appointed, being disobedient:" The reason they do not translate this text as "... the word to which also they were appointed..." is because that's not what it says in the Greek. The options I've listed above are the grammatical options available in this text. The translation and interpretation put forth here by logic and Jesse is not a legitimate option. Steve
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Aug 9, 2008 14:18:24 GMT -5
Steve is right. The relative clause "to which they were appointed" is not describing the word. Let me give some technical info on it. The phrase "ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν" is a relative clause. ὃ is a relative pronoun. In Greek, the relative pronoun has case, number, and gender. The number and gender match the word it is referring to and the case reveals it's function in the sentence. We do this some in English too. You would replace the name Josh with he and not she because Josh is a masculine name. It's a similar concept. The relative pronoun in that phrase is singular and neuter. So, this means it can only be referring to a noun that is singular and neuter. The Greek word for "word" in that verse is not singular and neuter but singular masculine. The Greek words stumbling and offense in this passage are both singular neuter. It could be referring to either one of them. As you guys know, you can always replace a pronoun with it's antecedent. Here is that verse without the relative pronoun.. or at least how I would translate it. And a stone of stumbling and rock of offense which they stumble at the word being disobedient into the stumbling even as they were set. As far as I'm educated in Greek grammar (which isn't really extensive) this is just what the the grammar of this verse plainly says. If you disagree, you will have to start discussing Greek grammar and explain why the relative pronoun that is singular and neuter has a singular masculine antecedent. The question, as Steve pointed out, isn't what the text is grammatically saying but how we interpret it. What translation are you two quoting from?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 9, 2008 15:12:21 GMT -5
So you are saying that God appointed a stumbling stone (vs. 6), and then appointed people to stumble over it (vs. 8)? A stumbling stone is"an obstacle in the way which if one strikes his foot against he stumbles or falls".
I guess the "people" God appointed to stumble over Christ were not individual people, but were a type of people - the proud and so called wise. It takes brokenness and humility to believe on Christ. So anyone who is not willing to be broken in humility is destined to stumble over this rock of offense. And it is their own choice to be proud and arrogant, or their choice to become as a little child. So the fault still lies with them and not with God.
"Verily I say unto you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." Mk. 10:15
“But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto Greeks foolishness." 1 Cor. 1:23.
"Jesus saith unto them, did ye never read in the Scriptures, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes... And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Mat 21:42, 44
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Aug 9, 2008 16:03:11 GMT -5
I interpret the passage to mean that those who are unbelieving God appoints to stumble. If you are an unbeliever God will see that you stumble. Not that God appoints who is unbelieving but God appoints what happens when you don't believe.
These verses come to mind.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Rom 11:12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? Rom 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: Rom 11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. Rom 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
|
|