Hey guys, this is my first post, but I've been reading here for a while.

Is there ever an instance in scripture where the purpose is only to teach knowledge and not for instruction on what to do? Are there ever stories that are there simply so that we will better know who God is?

Basically, are there instances when it is not appropriate to say, "Given that the Bible says X, we should do Y."

Thanks

__________________
David
SBC
Fort Worth, TX

I'm glad you left lurker status!

I'll take a stab at your question, subject to revision when wiser people begin to chime in. I would say that the Bible teaches a system of divinity, every part of the revelation is connected, and so the duties and the doctrines go together most harmoniously. This interconnectedness would mean that every duty is grounded upon and motivated by at least some of the doctrines, and every doctrine is meant for the whole man, which would include our practice. In brief, no. However, many times the most immediate application of a given doctrine will be things like, "rejoice", "give thanks" and "praise the Lord".

__________________
Ruben
Moderator

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Calvinistas Conversando - Reformed Discussion Board in Spanish.

Spanish Blog -Teologia en Mexico
English Blog -The Howling Wilderness

Welcome to the board, David.

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Daddy
Member of TRBC, Attending CCRPC. My Blog
The Puritan Pub (Team Blog)
Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Maybe I should give some context to why I asked the question. I was thinking that certain sermons I've been listening to jump so soon to applicatoin and try so hard to show what the text is saying we should do, that I feel like the actual meaning of the text is lost.

So I was thinking that not every passage is to be taken as, "What should we do," but some of it is for us to know what happend and to know God better. Maybe I'm off here.

__________________
David
SBC
Fort Worth, TX

Welcome.

The Bible gives us many acts in the history of the judges and kinds without giving us the commentary "that was bad" or "that was good"....thus, much is descriptive and much is also prescriptive. Just because Samsom did something, the Bible did not record his acts as a model to me, but perhapos as a counter-model. Thus, in Samson's story, the Bible tells of Act X when Act Y would have been better.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I meant Kings not kinds. Sorry for the typo

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I agree. And I agree with the sentiments of the question. I've run across several childrens' Sunday school lessons where it seemed the authors were trying to turn what seemed to be a historical incident into a morality tale. The Sunday school text would go beyond the Scriptures to infer the motives of the characters involved. They are assuming motives and intentions where the Scriptures are silent. And this has always made me uncomfortable.

P.S. I thought of the word for it - embellishment. Lot's of embellishing of the Bible in Sunday school material for kids.

__________________
R. Anthony Coletti
Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Jonesborough, TN
[i]et venite et arguite me dicit Dominus[/i]

What comes to my mind is the book of Esther. The theme of Esther is the sovereignty of God. God is in control of all things. Nothing can thwart God's plan. Knowing about God's character can definitely affect one's life, but the purpose of the book of Esther is not to provide instruction on what to do.

__________________
Curt Hayashida
member, Community Bible Church (Non-denominational)
Vallejo, CA

Thanks guys.

Just so you know, the passage that brought all of this up was a sermon on Joshua 2 and 6. The theme of the sermon was that "Faith Produces Radical Obedience." Which is true. Both Rahab and Joshua obeyed God because they first had faith.

But what God me a little upset was that he took chapter 6 and showed it to mean that God was asking Joshua to believe in him, and despite questions, Joshua did believe in him, and because of that, they had victory.

I don't see that in the text. I see God telling him at the get go that HE is victorious and that HE has already given Jericho into their hands. This is a text telling us about God's might and how even his enemies feared him. That we have a triumphant king over all.

He also said that God could choose to use Rahab for radical things because of her faith. Which I thought was backwards: God chose her, gave her faith, and worked out obedience in her.

__________________
David
SBC
Fort Worth, TX

Curt, you read my mind. I thought of Esther immediately when reading that question.

There is also much to learn of the character of God from the life of Christ that is not direction instruction.

__________________
J Baldwin
Keowee Presbyterian Church, PCA
Pickens, SC
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” Luke 10:27

Check Out My Blog: http://reflectjoy.blogspot.com/