View Full Version : What Would This Verse Mean to You?
Old Paths
10-03-2007, 10:29 AM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Brett Prince
10-03-2007, 10:36 AM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
It seems to me that the verse is quite clear. Let me interpret it like this:
Rom 16:17
(ALT) Now I call on [or, plead with] you*, brothers [and sisters], to be watching out for [or, to be keeping a close eye on] the [ones] causing divisions [or, discords] and the stumbling-blocks contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.
(ASV) Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them.
(BBE) Now, it is my desire, brothers, that you will take note of those who are causing division and trouble among you, quite against the teaching which was given to you: and keep away from them.
(CEV) My friends, I beg you to watch out for anyone who causes trouble and divides the church by refusing to do what all of you were taught. Stay away from them!
(Darby) But I beseech you, brethren, to consider those who create divisions and occasions of falling, contrary to the doctrine which ye have learnt, and turn away from them.
(ESV) I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.
(GW) Brothers and sisters, I urge you to watch out for those people who create divisions and who make others fall away from the Christian faith by teaching doctrine that is not the same as you have learned. Stay away from them.
(ISV) Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create divisions and sinful enticements in opposition to the teaching you have learned. Stay away from them!
(MKJV) And I exhort you, brothers, to watch those making divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them.
(Murdock) And I beseech you, my Brethren, that ye beware of them who cause divisions and stumblings [among you], aside from the doctrine which ye have learned: and that ye stand aloof from them.
(RV) Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them.
(Webster) Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
(YLT) And I call upon you, brethren, to mark those who the divisions and the stumbling-blocks, contrary to the teaching that ye did learn, are causing, and turn ye away from them;
I can't find anything in any of these versions/translations that would bring one to consider it differently than it is. We need to avoid those that cause division, by their desire to put into the Kingdom things different than the teachings that we have previously received. We are to "turn away," from them, that is to avoid them, stay away from them, or prohibit contact with them.
Old Paths
10-03-2007, 10:39 AM
Thanks, my Friend.
Sometimes the problem becomes "avoiding them" when other friends are involved.
The "avoiding" tends to cause a division among the innocent.
Jack Shephard
10-03-2007, 10:45 AM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
I guess you take it in context. It is always good to avoid people that pull you down or away from what you believe, but the following verse talk about how these people do not follow God anyway.
Are you fishing for an arguement or just asking?
Pastor Keith
10-03-2007, 10:49 AM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
The actual hard part is determining who actually is a trouble maker and who is someone who disagrees with my interpretation of scripture. When flesh is involved the details become fuzzy.
Old Paths
10-03-2007, 10:55 AM
I guess you take it in context. It is always good to avoid people that pull you down or away from what you believe, but the following verse talk about how these people do not follow God anyway.
Are you fishing for an arguement or just asking?
Asking.
My real concern is how a person would appear to innocent bystanders that observe the person "avoiding" one that "cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine"?
Maybe I'm not making sense....
again!
:D
Scott Hutchinson
10-03-2007, 11:24 AM
What Paul saying was don't go back into the ceremonial law in other words be cautious of Judaizers who would pervert the message of grace,and cause you to fall from grace.
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
It means what it says OP.
Trouble is doctrine can mean anything to anybody.....wait.. there is another scripture.
Jdg 21:25... every man did that which was right in his own eyes. :hypercoffee
Doctrine can change if you believe "enlightened progressives":hypercoffee
Carpenter
10-03-2007, 07:10 PM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
It means that old Carpenter is probably going to go hear you preach on Friday night!
:killinme:killinme:killinme
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 07:10 PM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
To mark them and be wary of them...those that are in your congregations that are always doing and saying things to divide the body along doctrinal lines contrary to the doctrine they learned (from the Apostles)....seems pretty clear
Jack Shephard
10-03-2007, 07:17 PM
Asking.
My real concern is how a person would appear to innocent bystanders that observe the person "avoiding" one that "cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine"?
Maybe I'm not making sense....
again!
:D
You are, but I was just checking. I agree with Keith it is tough to find which person is the one making the trouble.
pelathais
10-03-2007, 07:25 PM
The actual hard part is determining who actually is a trouble maker and who is someone who disagrees with my interpretation of scripture. When flesh is involved the details become fuzzy.
That's a good point. After 2,000 years things have only become more complex. Those causing division contrary to the Apostle's teachings may not just be the wolves lurking around the periphery. Those causing the division may be those who are in charge at a particular location. And so in separating from them you may appear to be the one who is causing the division.
The real test comes down to: who is obeying the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles?
Praxeas
10-03-2007, 08:13 PM
That's a good point. After 2,000 years things have only become more complex. Those causing division contrary to the Apostle's teachings may not just be the wolves lurking around the periphery. Those causing the division may be those who are in charge at a particular location. And so in separating from them you may appear to be the one who is causing the division.
The real test comes down to: who is obeying the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles?
You know, when he says what they taught and we think doctrine...it does not necessarily have to be just what we normally call the Apostolic doctrine.
There is a whole NT full of teachings that can be referred too..It could be lack of love. Some saints cause division and ill feelings by talking bad about others, the pastor, his family, brother so and so that plays an instrument.
That kind of stuff is like a cancer when you get other people willing to listen, believe it and then spread it too
Hoovie
10-03-2007, 08:23 PM
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
It means i cannot talk to you again... ever!
J/K!!!
SH
Rom 16:17
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Doctrine is the main concept in that scripture. The fight is over what is doctrine and what is not a heaven or hell issue?
What is your thought on the Scripture?
Old Paths
10-03-2007, 10:23 PM
It means that old Carpenter is probably going to go hear you preach on Friday night!
:killinme:killinme:killinme
COME ON!!
It would be nice to meet you.
I must warn you...
It won't be Elder Groce!
:killinme
crakjak
10-03-2007, 10:25 PM
What Paul saying was don't go back into the ceremonial law in other words be cautious of Judaizers who would pervert the message of grace,and cause you to fall from grace.
Scott, you have the best handle on the meaning, and in proper context. Kudos!
Truth does not change.
It means what it says OP.
Trouble is doctrine can mean anything to anybody.....wait.. there is another scripture.
Jdg 21:25... every man did that which was right in his own eyes. :hypercoffee
Doctrine can change if you believe "enlightened progressives":hypercoffee
Rhoni
10-04-2007, 05:09 AM
The actual hard part is determining who actually is a trouble maker and who is someone who disagrees with my interpretation of scripture. When flesh is involved the details become fuzzy.
Absolutely. I agree.
*I think many Apostolics can agree to disagree without it causing a division, especially about non-essentials such as T.V., and many dress standard issues.
*If a church member disagrees with a doctrinal point the Pastor preaches the right thing to do would be to keep their mouth shut and go to the Pastor in private stating the reason why they are leaving and they do not want to cause church trouble, and if they are a good saint and tithe payer ask for a letter of transfer. Then keep their mouth shut.
*If this thread was about the voting at GC...it is an organization, chosen for democracy, and runs politically and people have the right to vote as they wish and withdraw membership if that is what they wish...but they do not have the right to cause trouble, fan the flame, and spread lies...that is what this scripture is talking about.
Blessings, Rhoni
Raven
10-04-2007, 08:26 AM
What Paul saying was don't go back into the ceremonial law in other words be cautious of Judaizers who would pervert the message of grace,and cause you to fall from grace.
Good answer Brother Scott
Apostle Paul's greatest adversaries came not from the Roman government but from those who sought to mix Judaism and Christianity. The old "Babel Syndrome", of human achievement, is alive and well in all of us and man is always trying to help God out when it comes to religion and man's ultimate salvation.
The ones that Paul said to avoid were the very ones who wanted to bring Chritianity back under the Law and frustrate the Grace of God. There is no sin, known to man, more dangerous than self-righteousness! It is the inability and spiritual ineptitude of some that lead the LORD'S sheep, to resort to "laws", and "musts", and "have to's", because they can't lead people to deeper relationships with God otherwise. Instead of being heart surgeons they have settled on being dermatologists! I, for one, want to be very careful of those I might avoid or exclude from my circle of fellowship. We must be sure that the doctrine we uphold is the one taught by the early church 2000 years ago and not 40 years ago!
Hear what Paul had to say:
1 Cor 8:9
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
Gal 2:4-5
4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Gal 5:1
5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Respectfully
Raven
BobDylan
10-04-2007, 01:18 PM
It means what it says OP.
Trouble is doctrine can mean anything to anybody.....wait.. there is another scripture.
Jdg 21:25... every man did that which was right in his own eyes. :hypercoffee
Doctrine can change if you believe "enlightened progressives":hypercoffee
Would not Parham, Seymore, and others have been considered "enlightened progressives"? What about those at Arroyo Seco? When they received progressive ideas, (i.e. Holy Ghost and tongues, Jesus name baptism, oneness of God) would they not have been "enlightened progressives" during their time? At what point does enlightenment cease for the seeker who is hard after God? If we compare our approach to those progressive men in the early 1900's upon whome the Spirit dwelled, would we seem persuant of deeper and greater experiences with God (like those men), or would we seem more slatwart and backwards, trying to preserve untenable traditionalism in the light of the Spirit of God drawing us into new dimensions in Him?
What is the doctrine? The doctrine was "once delivered" in the inspired writings of scripture. Any doctrine not specifically supported by the proponderance of scripture, is simply man's interpretation and application of bible doctrine and principle. What seems to be the plague among many in apostolic pentecost today, is that they are exalting man's interpretations and application, over and above, or at least equivalent to, the specific testimony of scripture. This is not the ideal approach to bible "doctrine". Interpretations, and more specifically applications of bible principle, can evolve and change over time. That doesn't mean the doctrine itself has changed, it meanst the former applications are no longer relevant (i.e. as preaching against radio ay at one time been relevant, but would be considered completely absurd today...).
The problem is not dividing and offending specific bible doctrine, the problem is clinging to and defending untenable tradition. What does the bible say about holding to and exalting man's tradition above the clear doctrine of scripture? The bible is clear that unity must be strived for and preserved:
1 Cor 1:10
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
KJV
Division over untenable tradition is much more grevious to the Holy Ghost, IMO, than those who have progressive ideas over methodology (NOT BIBLE DOCTRINE). If it can be supported that a division is based on clear BIBLE DOCTRINE, and not human applications, then it may be justified. But the proof of a clear doctrinal deviance is on the burden of the one who wants to divide and avoid the other. They are the ones who must justify their actions. And if they are incorrect, and avoid, and shun, and disassemble themselves from a brother in the gospel over some innucuous application or interpretation, or for the abandoning of a untenable tradition, it may be so that the divider is the one with the grevious mark against them...
BobDylan
10-05-2007, 02:04 AM
Would not Parham, Seymore, and others have been considered "enlightened progressives"? What about those at Arroyo Seco? When they received progressive ideas, (i.e. Holy Ghost and tongues, Jesus name baptism, oneness of God) would they not have been "enlightened progressives" during their time? At what point does enlightenment cease for the seeker who is hard after God? If we compare our approach to those progressive men in the early 1900's upon whome the Spirit dwelled, would we seem persuant of deeper and greater experiences with God (like those men), or would we seem more slatwart and backwards, trying to preserve untenable traditionalism in the light of the Spirit of God drawing us into new dimensions in Him?
What is the doctrine? The doctrine was "once delivered" in the inspired writings of scripture. Any doctrine not specifically supported by the proponderance of scripture, is simply man's interpretation and application of bible doctrine and principle. What seems to be the plague among many in apostolic pentecost today, is that they are exalting man's interpretations and application, over and above, or at least equivalent to, the specific testimony of scripture. This is not the ideal approach to bible "doctrine". Interpretations, and more specifically applications of bible principle, can evolve and change over time. That doesn't mean the doctrine itself has changed, it meanst the former applications are no longer relevant (i.e. as preaching against radio ay at one time been relevant, but would be considered completely absurd today...).
The problem is not dividing and offending specific bible doctrine, the problem is clinging to and defending untenable tradition. What does the bible say about holding to and exalting man's tradition above the clear doctrine of scripture? The bible is clear that unity must be strived for and preserved:
1 Cor 1:10
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
KJV
Division over untenable tradition is much more grevious to the Holy Ghost, IMO, than those who have progressive ideas over methodology (NOT BIBLE DOCTRINE). If it can be supported that a division is based on clear BIBLE DOCTRINE, and not human applications, then it may be justified. But the proof of a clear doctrinal deviance is on the burden of the one who wants to divide and avoid the other. They are the ones who must justify their actions. And if they are incorrect, and avoid, and shun, and disassemble themselves from a brother in the gospel over some innucuous application or interpretation, or for the abandoning of a untenable tradition, it may be so that the divider is the one with the grevious mark against them...
bump
pelathais
10-05-2007, 02:35 AM
bump
Excellent thoughts, B.D. For once, I think we agree without me dissembling over a quibble. :)
They are the ones who must justify their actions. And if they are incorrect, and avoid, and shun, and disassemble themselves from a brother in the gospel over some innucuous application or interpretation, or for the abandoning of a untenable tradition, it may be so that the divider is the one with the grevious mark against them...
Well put.
1 Cor 1:10
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
KJV
Division over untenable tradition is much more grevious to the Holy Ghost, IMO, than those who have progressive ideas over methodology (NOT BIBLE DOCTRINE).
What God has joined together let NO MAN put asunder.
We should be slow to amputate part of the body... some day we my need that hand.
Carpenter
10-05-2007, 10:42 AM
COME ON!!
It would be nice to meet you.
I must warn you...
It won't be Elder Groce!
:killinme
Well, you are going to have to work pretty hard to beat him on the graciousness, kindness and sermon length aspect ratio.
:killinme
BobDylan
10-05-2007, 12:55 PM
Excellent thoughts, B.D. For once, I think we agree without me dissembling over a quibble. :)
Well put.
After having reread my post, I wish I would have used the firefox browser! There are so many typos, fatfingers, and mispellings I feel rather mortified. :) BTW, are yu saying that you usually don't agree with me? Or that you usually defer to dissembling and quibbling with me? haha...
Old Paths
10-05-2007, 05:46 PM
Well, you are going to have to work pretty hard to beat him on the graciousness, kindness and sermon length aspect ratio.
:killinme
LENGTH!!!
You got to be kidding, right?
Hee heeeeeeeeeeeee
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.