No applications from Scripture?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

God can be found when He is sought, but not simply because of Jeremiah 29:13. It's given elsewhere in the Holy Scriptures as a universal truism. If Jeremiah 29:13 was the only place it was written, then it would not be a universal truism for all people for all time.

Conversely, there are verses which indicate God hides Himself behind thick darkness, and cannot be found (e.g. Isaiah 45:15, 1 Kings 8:12, Psalm 97:2). What if we took those verses and taught them the same way, that is, universally true? We'd convince people there's no hope of ever finding God, and we know that's not true. We realize then that such verses have to be understood in light of their context. The same is true then, of Jeremiah 29:13.

So, in other words, verses must be understood not only in their immediate contexts, but also in the context of the entire Bible. Correct?

Which means that applications of Scripture to current situations can and must be made, BUT they must be made in light of the entirety of Scripture, and thus not "taken out of context". Amen?

So, when it comes to Acts 2:38, there is nothing contextually speaking to indicate that it cannot be applied outside of 1st century Jerusalem, Day of Pentecost. It is the universal response to the Gospel.

Actually, the immediate context of the verse is those people, in that time. Just like in the Jeremiah passages. But we have additional Scripture which indicates the passage has additional application to people outside that immediate historical context. Again, just like the Jeremiah passages.

Again, that sounds nice and neat, but that's not the right application of that story, because the context doesn't allow for such an interpretation.

But that kind of thing is done all the time, by believers of every type, from every group. I am against it, and so, I try my absolute best to not be a hypocrite and allow for it in my own understanding or explanations. It unnecessarily obfuscates the meaning of any given text, and makes it hard if not impossible to correctly exegete and teach the Scriptures. It's a hindrance to the Gospel and the expansion of the Kingdom of God.

The example is not an application of the text, but a twisting of the text and a denial of the plain statements of the text, so of course that "application" will be in error.

I understand what you are attempting to prevent (misapplication of Scripture) but I honestly think your statement(s) to the effect that a passage has one historical application only (unless there is some sort of "universal principle" in it) was too broad. And speaking of finding a universal principle in a passage, exactly how does that work? As far as I can see, we can look at a passage to see what it reveals about God's character, and we can examine the rest of Scripture to see if we see that character trait repeated, and can then conclude that the original passage reveals a universal principle.

Can you state your understanding of this subject as a "hermeneutical rule" that Bible students can follow?