Should Psalms be used to support doctrine?

[atpollard]

I get nervous any time someone suggests an important TRUTH that is based exclusively on a singe verse (or worse, part of a verse) and cannot be confirmed by both the surrounding context and other parts of scripture. I prefer at least 3 “witnesses” for anything important and if God said it 3 times in 3 different locations … then it is probably safe to assume that God meant it.

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

atpollard makes a good point in saying: I get nervous any time someone suggests an important TRUTH that is based exclusively on a singe verse (or worse, part of a verse)...

I suspect it would be helpful for many of us were atpollard able to remember a number of these single verse (and part verse) “truths” that he has come across in the past.

It would help us to attune our minds to not be easily tricked by that technique. The technique is simple to use, and probably sways people more than they realise.

Thanks is offered in advance.

===================================================================================

 

[Fritz Kobus]

I get nervous any time someone suggests an important TRUTH that is based exclusively on a singe verse (or worse, part of a verse) and cannot be confirmed by both the surrounding context and other parts of scripture. I prefer at least 3 “witnesses” for anything important and if God said it 3 times in 3 different locations … then it is probably safe to assume that God meant it.

There are volumes upon volumes of books written about a supposed 1000-year physical kingdom of Christ on earth some time between now and the end of the world that are based on a single verse.

 

[atpollard]

There are volumes upon volumes of books written about a supposed 1000-year physical kingdom of Christ on earth some time between now and the end of the world that are based on a single verse.

And for that EXACT reason I tread very lightly when discussing my “opinion” on eschatology as if it were “fact”.
(although technically, it is mentioned 6 times in the first 7 verses of Revelation 20, so that is more than a single verse).

 

[Fritz Kobus]

And for that EXACT reason I tread very lightly when discussing my “opinion” on eschatology as if it were “fact”.
(although technically, it is mentioned 6 times in the first 7 verses of Revelation 20, so that is more than a single verse).

Yep, I should have cracked my bible and verified the verse(s) first. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

So “a supposed 1000-year physical kingdom of Christ on earth” was close in some ways, but not quite an example of the type of which we were seeking,

I have a dyslexic memory (incredible disability to handle lists – I almost had to repeat second class (“year 2” these days) because I could not recite the alphabet). I doubt that I am Robinson Crusoe in that regard. So I never expect people to be able to pull lists out of the air, as it were.

However, I am still hopeful that atpollard (and/or others) can remember instances that could be instructive for us.

===================================================================================

 

[Spindle4]

How do you reconcile Psalm 137:9?

More to the point, how do you reconcile "lucky charms" with the Christian faith?

But to answer the ubiquitous Psalm 137:9 question, see notes below and compare the activity prophesied in Isaiah:

Some Scriptures do imprecate, particularly the prophecies of judgment and Psalms of the captivity

im·pre·cate​

(ĭm′prĭ-kāt′)

tr.v. im·pre·cat·ed, im·pre·cat·ing, im·pre·cates
To invoke evil upon; curse.

---

[Latin imprecāri, imprecāt- : in-, towards; see in-2 + precārī, to pray, ask; see prek- in Indo-European roots.]

---

im′pre·ca′tor n.
im′pre·ca·to′ry (-kə-tôr′ē) adj.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

The prophesy of Babylon's judgment is in view here:

Isa 13:1 The burden against Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.

Compare Psa 137:8-9 O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed, Happy the one who repays you as you have served us! (9) Happy the one who takes and dashes Your little ones against the rock!

with Isa 13:15-17 Everyone who is found will be thrust through, And everyone who is captured will fall by the sword. (16) Their children also will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished. (17) "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, Who will not regard silver; And as for gold, they will not delight in it.

While the Imprecatory Psalms advocate taking revenge against enemies and wrongdoers, and come across as requests for God to be vindictive and vengeful, these emotive expressions serve as reminders of human reactions to adverse circumstances rather than as examples of unjust and immoral dealings by God.

Imprecatory Psalms - Wikipedia

This link contains references to imprecations elsewhere in the Bible as well.

 

[atpollard]

===================================================================================

atpollard makes a good point in saying: I get nervous any time someone suggests an important TRUTH that is based exclusively on a singe verse (or worse, part of a verse)...

I suspect it would be helpful for many of us were atpollard able to remember a number of these single verse (and part verse) “truths” that he has come across in the past.

It would help us to attune our minds to not be easily tricked by that technique. The technique is simple to use, and probably sways people more than they realise.

Thanks is offered in advance.

===================================================================================

Not certain that it is a singular verse, but is a singular example of twisting meaning by plucking part of a verse from context and mutilating it with bad “exegesis”.

[1 Peter 2:24 KJV] 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

From that I have heard (more than one) “preacher” strip out only “by whose stripes ye were healed.” From this they immediately apply it to physical healing of any illness. Then they call our attention to the verb tense “were healed” as past tense … already done. Thus, they boldly proclaim that God has already healed every illness and infirmity of every Christian. Armed with this “revelation”, they follow with the exhortation that only your lack of faith can keep you from the complete physical health that the blood of Christ has already purchased for you. Now just throw away those diabetes and blood pressure pills and simply believe God for your healing. After all, the WORD OF GOD says … “by His stripes you WERE HEALED” … so you are already healed!

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

Of course the one important thing that I could have missed (but I don’t think I have), is a definitive explanation from the seminarians and other experts among us, regarding the spiritual future of the little ones that would be (and had been) dashed against the stones. Based on Holy Scripture of course.

Some “Christian” religious groups would tell us that because they died before accepting the evils of their culture(s), their souls would go to the “righteous” half of Hades, and thereafter to Heaven. Whereas had they been killed at a later age (as some would be and had been (including siblings) after accepting the evils of their culture(s)), their souls would go to the “unrighteous” half of Hades, and thereafter to Hell.

Learned comment (i.e. thoroughly grounded in Holy Scripture) is invited.

===================================================================================

 

[Castle Church]

Yes, but they need to be read in light of the rest of the Gospel. That said, in their proper context, the Psalms contain the entirety of the Gospel. I think Martin Luther said it best:
“The Psalter should be precious to us if only because it most clearly promises the death and resurrection of Christ, and describes his kingdom, and the nature and standing of all Christian people. It could well be entitled a “Little Bible” since everything contained in the entire Bible is beautifully and briefly comprehended, and compacted into…a Manual. It seems to me as if the Holy Ghost had been please to take on himself the trouble of putting together a short Bible…touching the whole of Christianity…in order that they who are unable to read the whole Bible may nevertheless find almost the whole sum comprehended in one little book…the Psalter is the very paragon of books.

 

[tango]

Not certain that it is a singular verse, but is a singular example of twisting meaning by plucking part of a verse from context and mutilating it with bad “exegesis”.

[1 Peter 2:24 KJV] 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

From that I have heard (more than one) “preacher” strip out only “by whose stripes ye were healed.” From this they immediately apply it to physical healing of any illness. Then they call our attention to the verb tense “were healed” as past tense … already done. Thus, they boldly proclaim that God has already healed every illness and infirmity of every Christian. Armed with this “revelation”, they follow with the exhortation that only your lack of faith can keep you from the complete physical health that the blood of Christ has already purchased for you. Now just throw away those diabetes and blood pressure pills and simply believe God for your healing. After all, the WORD OF GOD says … “by His stripes you WERE HEALED” … so you are already healed!

For good measure they can throw Ps 103:3 into the mix. Never mind the context of who wrote it, the situation surrounding it etc, it clearly says what it says so let's stand on it. Then we get to wonder why it didn't work.

(Edited to add quote, as there were posts I didn't see between the quoted post and my reply)

 

[Spindle4]

===================================================================================

Of course the one important thing that I could have missed (but I don’t think I have), is a definitive explanation from the seminarians and other experts among us, regarding the spiritual future of the little ones that would be (and had been) dashed against the stones. Based on Holy Scripture of course.

Some “Christian” religious groups would tell us that because they died before accepting the evils of their culture(s), their souls would go to the “righteous” half of Hades, and thereafter to Heaven. Whereas had they been killed at a later age (as some would be and had been (including siblings) after accepting the evils of their culture(s)), their souls would go to the “unrighteous” half of Hades, and thereafter to Hell.

Learned comment (i.e. thoroughly grounded in Holy Scripture) is invited.

===================================================================================

God knows those who are His own but good discussion is to be found at this link:

GotQuestions: Is The Age Of Accountability Biblical​

 

[Fritz Kobus]

God knows those who are His own but good discussion is to be found at this link:

GotQuestions: Is The Age Of Accountability Biblical​

Except that article takes a psalm for doctrine that my have been meant with some hyperbole:
Psalm 51:5, David wrote, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

The other thing that article did not address is the age of 20 in the Old Testament. Here are a couple verses ( I believe there are more):

Numbers 32:11 “Surely none of the men who came up from Egypt, from twenty years old and above, shall see the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because they have not wholly followed Me.”

Deuteronomy 1:39 “Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.”

These suggest an Old Testament age of accountability. What it says about the New Testament I don't know, but the general principal might still be there.

 

[Spindle4]

These suggest an Old Testament age of accountability. What it says about the New Testament I don't know, but the general principal might still be there.

Yes, big positive doctrinal emphasis on this NT verse in my experience:

Mat 19:14 But Jesus said, "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

 

[FredVB]

Except that article takes a psalm for doctrine that my have been meant with some hyperbole:
Psalm 51:5, David wrote, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

If there is doctrine shown in Psalms I think there is requirement of another passage for enough witness to the doctrine.

The other thing that article did not address is the age of 20 in the Old Testament. Here are a couple verses ( I believe there are more):

Numbers 32:11 “Surely none of the men who came up from Egypt, from twenty years old and above, shall see the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because they have not wholly followed Me.”

Deuteronomy 1:39 “Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.”

These suggest an Old Testament age of accountability. What it says about the New Testament I don't know, but the general principal might still be there.

I would not think of concluding twenty years is the age of accountability from that so much as concluding God is gracious and knows who to leave as a remnant.

Yes, big positive doctrinal emphasis on this NT verse in my experience:

Mat 19:14 But Jesus said, "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

I see how children who show interest in Jesus can be presented with what they will understand of him. The gospel is inclusive, so it would be good to do. But maybe we might not be right to understand accountability as something coming at a certain age, maybe there are increments of increasing accountability. These are just thoughts, and I have no further passages for it.