StreetBrother
| Posted On: 03/31/08 01:11:51 PM |
Age 73, NC |
I have been a street Evangelist for 32 years.
I agree with your article about binding,and
loosing. Only when we search the scriptures
in faith can we Understand what is teached.
My Ministry based on the following scripture,
1cor-CH15 verse 3and4
this is the truth of Jesus Christ
thisthe Whole gospel
according to Paul.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 11/08/07 05:59:32 PM |
Age 44, TX |
Minor nit: you write:
"...those who repent and believe the gospel are forgiven and are added to the church."
You can wrangle and proof-text and read between the lines all day, but what Peter, the "binder "and "looser" actually said was, "Repent and be immersed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins" (Acts 2:38), and Luke affirmed that "[t]hose who accepted his message were immersed, and about three thousand were added to their number that day," (v. 41) and that "the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved" (v. 48).
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that Peter claims a dunking saves a person; this same Peter says as much in 1 Peter 3:21 (where he says that "baptism saves you -- but not the removal of dirt from the body...").
What I am saying is that the modern practice of downplaying immersion in the process of salvation is just as unBiblical as "binding Satan".
As I understand it, immersion is the point of salvation, the "signing on the dotted line", so to speak, making salvation "official".
It's faith that saves us, but at the point of immersion, at least "technically"; if God wants to make exceptions to the rule (found in every single instance of conversion in the book of Acts), that's his business, but I don't see that we have the authority to "loose" this practice the way modern Christians have tended to do.
Other than that, I found the article very educational and enlightening. Thanks!
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/28/07 10:47:08 PM |
Age 41, MN |
Excellent article. And excellent response from the first two feedbacks. Although I have a seminary degree and have heard lots of teachings in childhood through adulthood, some of this is new to me. But it really makes sense what you are saying. I will thinkand pray about. I had not gotten much teaching on this, so this was very helpful. Thank you very much!
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/28/07 06:51:53 AM |
Age 46, MO |
Bob:
I enjoyed reading your article because to me it was a flash back to the 70's. I was in the USAF when I came to know and accept Christ and there were a lot of "power players" at our little Christian Coffee House. Thanks for the insight, the memories, and the education.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/28/07 01:04:16 AM |
Age 43, TX |
Thanks so much. I have a friend who has been searching for this Scripture meaning- really seeking the Lord's meaning, and I think this article has some wonderful truth to test by precept and in light of Scripture.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/27/07 03:25:38 PM |
Age 54, SC |
Excellent article,with good, Biblical exegesis and documentation. Much needed in the Body of Christ today since many churches, charismatic or not, teach this practice under the guise of "healing prayer", "deliverance" as well as the teachings made popular by Hayford's church, Cleansing Streams. It provides good apologetics against some very false teaching, allowing the reader to reach their own conclusions based on what the Bible has to say. Thank-you for this practical,well-though out presentation.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/27/07 02:28:46 PM |
Age 54, OK |
The binding and loosing heresy is to be expected in a professing church dominated by biblical illiteracy. Too often Christians are an offense, not for the gospel, but for distorting the truth with heresies, irrational ideas and obnoxious behavior. If we can bind the spirits why not bind them all and be done with it? And how do they get free again? Is it some kind of spiritual freeze tag? Error must be graciously but soundly refuted from the pulpits of believing churches.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/27/07 02:19:38 PM |
Age 45, MN |
With all due respect to Pastor DeWay, this article contains many historical and logical errors in understanding the principles of binding and loosing. Pastor DeWay is correct in stating that the terms are commonly used in rabbinic writings, and should be understood within this historical context. A.T. Robertson's comments are correct. The problem is that the author departs from this stated understanding and applies a different meaning to these common terms.
To properly understand the function of binding and loosing, one only has to examine the historical usage amongst the sages; Hillel and Shamai, as A.T. Robertson notes, are two very good examples.
The terms "to bind" and "to loose" are best understood with reference to a practice of determining the application of a Scriptural commandment for a particular situation. The sages "bound" an application of the Law when they determined that a commandment was applicable to a particular situation, and they "loosed" it when they determined that a commandment (while eternally valid) was not applicable under certain specific circumstances. We should note too, that some applications by Jesus applied to the written Law, while others applied to the Oral Law.
Within the milieu of Second Temple Judaism (within which Jesus and the Apostles practiced), debates over the applicability of the Law to specific situations were common; they appear in famous arguments between the first-century schools of Hillel and Shammai (as noted, which predate Jesus' ministry). Many of these arguments would become a defining part of the discussions that would ultimately be codified in the Mishnah.
It is important to understand that for the sages (as well as for Jesus) loosing the Law never meant abolishing the Law or countering its authority, even for gentiles (Mat. 28:19-20). The Law was never wrong when it was rightly interpreted (1 Tim. 1:8, Rom. 7:12). The issue, rather, was discerning the Law's intent and sphere of application.
This is to saybinding and loosing applies to HOW a commandment is to be observed, NOT WHETHER it is to be observed. This does not (as stated) apply to binding Satan, people, or the Word of God, but to halacha (the manner in which a commandment is walked out). No one, not even Jesus can dispense with the Law (that would render Him Lawless, and disqualify Him from being the Messiah), especially according to ones ethnicity, but a good lawyer (Jesus, as one who ruled justly according to the Law) is helpful for us to understand what is and what is not permitted according to the eternal Word of God (other wise known as the Law of Moses, Psa. 119:89). An antinomian understanding would contradict Jesus' words in Matthew chapter 5 when He clarifies that the Law will not pass away until heaven and earth pass away, which is not likely to happen as the prophets state that the earth will endure forever (Psa. 78:69, Ecc 1:4); thus implying that the Word of God (His Law) will also endure forever.
To understand Acts chapter 15 within the pervue of the Jerusalem Council dispensing with the Law of Moses (God's Word) for gentiles, is anachronistic with verse 21 where the gentiles are to attend synagogue to hear the words of Moses read every Sabbath. "For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." (NASB)
If we say that only the four commandments bound upon the gentiles (vs. 29) applies to believers today, then we should be very concerned, because blasphemy and murder are conspicuously omitted, so is loving God and loving one's neighbor, the two weightiest commandments (Mark 12:29-31). This understanding is to completely ignore the context to fit a theology that holds God's eternal Law is disdain, rendering God's word void in the lives of many believers. To improperly apply new meaning to the practice of binding and loosing, at the same time ignoring the contextual impetus of the Biblical text is historically and logically fallacious.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/27/07 09:01:36 AM |
Age 35, MI |
Thank you for the proper reading and translating of scripture regarding "binding and loosing". Most Charismatic congregations use this text incorrectly. They strike superstitous fear into the hearts of their believers. If they looked a little harder we are to put on the Armor of God and stand against the evil one and his ways. And, the Bible says that not even the Archangel deals directly with Satan, because only God can do that.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Re: Binding And Loosing part 1
| Posted On: 04/26/07 10:01:24 PM |
Age 45, NC |
I am glad you wrote this article. Thank you for clearing up the meaning of these words binding and loosing. I had been in WOF movement for a few years, but came to realize that speaking words to bind satan was really an attmept at practicing enchantments/witchcraft. As I studied scriptures, I found I had to repent of that behavior. If the angels would not even get into a shouting match with Satan, who was I to try to rebuke him? Anyway, thank you so much for clarifying the meaning behind the original intention and language of the terms binding and loosing. THere is something to be said for a seminary education. Sadly, many in the WOF churches look down upon it as if doctrine is boring and man-made. They pridefully say they rely totally on the Holy Spirit, yet He does not glorify Himself, but the One of Whom He testifies. It is very hard to pray with people who pray this way. Lord, may their eyes be open!
Click here to reply to this post
|
Read More Feedback
|
|
|
