Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Problem With the Literal Interpretation of Scripture
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 304 (645888)
12-31-2011 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by vimesey
12-31-2011 3:37 AM


Re: A thought
vimesey writes:
whether you acknowledge and agree that your Faith is in a God who, whilst He is loving, gentle and kind, is also one who commits and orders genocide, and orders someone stoned to death for picking up wood on a Sunday ? Is that your Faith ?
Do you believe in God? More specifically the God of the Bible?
This isn't a loaded question; Yes or no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 3:37 AM vimesey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 4:14 AM Chuck77 has replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 107 of 304 (645889)
12-31-2011 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Chuck77
12-31-2011 3:51 AM


Re: A thought
You can characterise it as a loaded question if you wish, but it would help me to understand more fully what is the faith of someone who believes the Bible is inerrant.
I think that is is safe to say that the majority of modern views of morality (of whatever basis) would see it as immoral to stone somebody to death for any crime (much less picking up wood on a Sunday). What I want to know is whether it is ackowledged and agreed by DB that his Faith is in a God who orders that.
If it is, then I can come to a better understanding of Faith in the inerrancy of the Bible. And likewise, if it isn't I will still come to that better understanding.
DB has said that it is not open for a Christian to pick and choose what is true and what is not true in the Bible. I am therefore repeating the request that has been made to DB to confirm his/her belief in one of the more difficult passages.
If the question is loaded, DB put the bullet in the gun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 3:51 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 4:25 AM vimesey has replied
 Message 112 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-31-2011 6:10 PM vimesey has not replied
 Message 124 by foreveryoung, posted 01-03-2012 7:59 PM vimesey has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 304 (645890)
12-31-2011 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by vimesey
12-31-2011 4:14 AM


Re: A thought
If the question is loaded, DB put the bullet in the gun.
No im stating to you that my question wasn't a loaded one. I think you said you're "agnostic at best"?
So I assume that means you don't believe in the God of the Bible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 4:14 AM vimesey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 4:54 AM Chuck77 has replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 109 of 304 (645891)
12-31-2011 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Chuck77
12-31-2011 4:25 AM


Re: A thought
Ah right - my apologies Chuck77.
That is correct - I do not believe in the God of the Bible.
I do not dismiss the idea that there is some form deeper meaning to existence than random chance, but to characterise that as some form of belief or faith on my part would be very wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 4:25 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 6:31 AM vimesey has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 110 of 304 (645892)
12-31-2011 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by vimesey
12-31-2011 4:54 AM


Re: A thought
vimesey writes:
I do not dismiss the idea that there is some form deeper meaning to existence than random chance, but to characterise that as some form of belief or faith on my part would be very wrong.
Gotcha.
So when you said this to DB:
vimesey writes:
whether you acknowledge and agree that your Faith is in a God who, whilst He is loving, gentle and kind, is also one who commits and orders genocide, and orders someone stoned to death for picking up wood on a Sunday ? Is that your Faith ?
Does it have any bearing on whether you believe in the existance of God or not?
If God chose to do some things differently that lined up a little more with your line of thinking, in your mind, would you be more willing to believe He exists?
vimesey writes:
What I want to know is whether it is ackowledged and agreed by DB that his Faith is in a God who orders that.
If it is, then I can come to a better understanding of Faith in the inerrancy of the Bible. And likewise, if it isn't I will still come to that better understanding.
Ok cool. For me personally I serve the God of both the OT and the New, which is the same God. God Almighty. I also believe it's not up to me to decide how God does things or chooses to carry out His Mercy/Justice. How could I question God if He really exists? (and I believe He does). I come to a better understanding from Reading the Bible more so than what people say. The Bible is the filter and it's what connects us (in part) to God. So when other Christians weigh in on their beliefs their (beliefs) are measured against the Bible. That's how we come to an better understanding of Who God is.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 4:54 AM vimesey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by GDR, posted 12-31-2011 11:15 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 111 of 304 (645899)
12-31-2011 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Chuck77
12-31-2011 6:31 AM


Re: A thought
Chuck77 writes:
For me personally I serve the God of both the OT and the New, which is the same God. God Almighty. I also believe it's not up to me to decide how God does things or chooses to carry out His Mercy/Justice. How could I question God if He really exists? (and I believe He does). I come to a better understanding from Reading the Bible more so than what people say. The Bible is the filter and it's what connects us (in part) to God. So when other Christians weigh in on their beliefs their (beliefs) are measured against the Bible. That's how we come to an better understanding of Who God is.
So I would ask you which God do you serve, the one who tells us to slaughter our enemies or the one that tells us to love our enemies. By this post I have to assume that you would say both because it is in the Bible and it is not up to us to question God.
This is wrong on many counts but let's just look at a couple.
Firstly if we have been given, as I believe, the ability to choose between good and evil then it is absolutely imperative that we question God in order to know what is good in order that we can choose that option. In other words our questioning God is the way we discern what is good and what is evil. If God does exist then that is what all people do, whether or not they think of it in those terms.
Secondly, if you believe in a God that both advocates loving your enemy and slaughtering him then you have accepted an extremely ambiguous view of what is good and what is evil. Good and evil are then all situational, and there is no basic underlying morality.
This is from Paul's letter to the Romans Chap 2.
quote:
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
Everyone has the law written on their hearts. We instinctively know that loving our enemy/neighbour is good, whereas hating/slaughtering your neighbour/enemy is not good. By understanding the God is capable of either you are skewing the understanding of good and evil that God wrote on your heart so that you can decide that it is ok to hate your neighbour if you decide the situation warrants it. If we are to follow God perfectly, which obviously none of us do, hating our neighbour wouldn’t be an option. Jesus didn’t give us that option. It all hangs on loving God and neighbour.
Sure Jesus was critical of the Pharisees but that is not the same as not loving them. He condemned their legalism as sin but He Himself said that He had come for sinners and not the righteous. As He said it is the sick that need a hospital, not the healthy.
Ultimately we can understand through this passage and others that what God wants is for people to have hearts that love the message of love or the standard of morality that we see in God embodied in the man Jesus. I agree that that standard is in the OT but along with that is mixed in the many failings of the human condition and by trying to understand it as dictated by God leaves us with a god that is ambiguous allowing us to create a god in whatever image we like.
Happy 2012
Edited by GDR, : typo

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 6:31 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 112 of 304 (645932)
12-31-2011 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by vimesey
12-31-2011 4:14 AM


Re: A thought
What I want to know is whether it is ackowledged and agreed by DB that his Faith is in a God who orders that.
My faith is two-fold and is that way because that is the way God is described in his Word.
First and primarily God is described as infinite in wisdom and knowledge. The scriptures have precedence of morality and hieracrhy of understanding
If I cannot trust or believe the first principle to be true, it does not matter what God asked anyone anywhere else to do, or what words or commands are ascribed to him, because he would be following an unobjective and abstract morality
If however, God is infinite in these qualites, then it follows his thought are not always my thoughts and his ways are not always mine
Here is an example. In the wilderness the devil quoted scripture to Jesus. Jesus acknowledged and did not deny what the devil said, or that it was actually Gods words. he did however show precedence of scripture by stating to him, there is a greater principle satan
While, he will keep you from dashing your foot against the rock, "You shall not put the Lord your God to the test."
One superceeds the other
If the Bible is the Word of God, then you take him at his word for the reasons the Bible indicates. If its not, then who cares.
But one thing is sure there is no middle of the road approach that makes any logical sense. If it does, whos sense is it? You have three billion people to choose from
Yes I believe God ordered those things, because the same God sent his only Son to die. Trust me that which Jesus suffered on the cross was much worse than than those things described in Old Testament
Faith is taking God at his word, not everyone elses
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 4:14 AM vimesey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by GDR, posted 01-01-2012 7:45 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 113 of 304 (646005)
01-01-2012 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Dawn Bertot
12-31-2011 6:10 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
If the Bible is the Word of God, then you take him at his word for the reasons the Bible indicates. If its not, then who cares.
That is my point. Essentially you are saying that if someone could convince you that any part of the Bible is not factually correct then you would toss the whole thing. You’re Christianity is more Bibleianity than it is Christianity. If what Jesus says in the NT contradicts the OT then you just say that God didn’t give us enough information to explain the discrepancy. As you believe in a Bible as dictated by God I would have to ask you why it is that God left out that information that would explain away all ambiguities.
I repeat that there are only three members of the Trinity — The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. The Bible is not part of the God-head. Yes God’s revelation to man is found in the Bible and yes all of the Bible is, profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness ; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.. And yes, God breathes life into the scripture so that in reading the Bible we gain understanding and Godly wisdom. But the Bible is not a science text, it is not a newspaper, it is not an historical account written objectively.
The whole Bible is personally and culturally conditioned by the writers. That is not something to be afraid of but something to celebrate. God has entrusted us to care for His creation and He has given us reason and wisdom to do just that. He has also given us His Holy Spirit and one of the things we have the Spirit for is to discern truth including the truth of what is written in the Bible.
By deifying the Bible you have subverted God’s will by denying His gifts of wisdom and reason. It is the same mistake the Pharisees made. You are going back to the laws of commission and omission as opposed to what undergirds everything, which the law of the heart. What God wants of us is that we have hearts that love unselfishly.
It's in the Bible.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-31-2011 6:10 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-01-2012 10:04 PM GDR has replied
 Message 116 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 7:30 PM GDR has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 114 of 304 (646012)
01-01-2012 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by GDR
01-01-2012 7:45 PM


Re: A thought
I repeat that there are only three members of the Trinity — The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. The Bible is not part of the God-head.
GDR, if the above reality of the trinity is to be accepted as factual, then the Trinity is a part of lies, misconceptions, immorality, inconsistencies, axe griding, scribal errors and embellishments and irrational and illogical approaches.
Because the only way you know of the Trinity is from that unreliable Bible. You cant actually believe the Trinity is real or actual if you believe the Bible is not
Does that make sense to you? I hope it does
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by GDR, posted 01-01-2012 7:45 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by GDR, posted 01-01-2012 10:53 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 115 of 304 (646015)
01-01-2012 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Dawn Bertot
01-01-2012 10:04 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
GDR, if the above reality of the trinity is to be accepted as factual, then the Trinity is a part of lies, misconceptions, immorality, inconsistencies, axe griding, scribal errors and embellishments and irrational and illogical approaches.
How do you figure that Dawn? I just told you in the last post that the Bible is consistent with what is written in 2nd Timothy 3. It doesn't have to be written as 100% factual to contain the truth about God and what He wants of us. We don't have to cut off all reason in order to be Christian, and frankly that is what it takes to read the Bible as dictated by God.
As I said earlier, which either you didn't read or ignored, that we had centuries of Christians that worshipped a ressurected Jesus before the Bible came into existence as we know it today. Sure they we would have some of the writings that became part of the canon but they also had a number of gnostic writings as well. They had to use Godly reason and wisdom to sort out what was of God and what wasn't.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Because the only way you know of the Trinity is from that unreliable Bible. You cant actually believe the Trinity is real or actual if you believe the Bible is not
The Bible is real and it is reliable but not in the way that you understand it. Once again it is to be understood as a meta-narrative involving God and those that He has revealed Himself through.
You say that I can't believe that the concept of the Trinity is true without understanding the Bible the way you do. Well we know that is false because I do believe in the Trinity.
Yes, I can't KNOW that the doctrine of the Trinity is real but I believe that it is. You can't KNOW that The Bible is to be intended to be read literally but you believe that it should be.
Once again, in the end it is faith, and I put my faith in God as expressed through Jesus, whereas you put your faith in an inerrant Bible.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-01-2012 10:04 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 116 of 304 (646072)
01-02-2012 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by GDR
01-01-2012 7:45 PM


Re: A thought
By deifying the Bible you have subverted God’s will by denying His gifts of wisdom and reason. It is the same mistake the Pharisees made. You are going back to the laws of commission and omission as opposed to what undergirds everything, which the law of the heart. What God wants of us is that we have hearts that love unselfishly.
It's in the Bible.
The Word is already deifyed. John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God, the same was in the beginning with God"
These are nice sentiments GDR, but as I have demonstrated to many times to mention now, you have no visible way of distinguishing one truth from another as being from God
If your subjective way works for you then you have justified it in your mind
On the other hand, there is no way to set it out rationally, that makes any logical sense
Example. The only way you know there might be three personalities in the Godhead, is from the Bible. If the Bible cant be trusted in other areas of doctrine and morality, the it follows you have no rational way of knowing or believing that is true either
Its no different that those claiming that everything is just matter in motion claiming some sort of ethics or morality. Its silliness
You may present all the emotional perceptions on how you establish truth, but until you deal with this problem in some rational way, your position is irrational and subjective at best
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by GDR, posted 01-01-2012 7:45 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by GDR, posted 01-02-2012 8:20 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 117 of 304 (646078)
01-02-2012 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 7:30 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
The Word is already deifyed. John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God, the same was in the beginning with God"
This is exactly what I mean. When you try to understand the Bible literally you can make God in any image that you like, by making the Scriptures mean what you want them to mean. To you the Bible is the literal Word of God so it’s simple. You take your quote to mean that the Bible existed from before time. The current canon wasn’t in general acceptance for over 300 years from the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Also, why don’t you at the very least read what the Bible says in context? Here is your quote with some additional verses.
quote:
The Deity of Jesus Christ
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
The Witness John
6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
The Word Made Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15John testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.' " 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses ; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18No one has seen God at any time ; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
Just read what it says. Read verse 14. The Word became flesh. Your quote is saying that Jesus is the Word of God, which is what I have been saying all along. Jesus is the Word of God, and the Bible contains the word of God
Also note in 17 it says that the law was given to Moses but that grace and truth were realized through Jesus. In other words, if we want to know the truth of the laws we have to look to Jesus. We are to interpret the OT through our understanding of the NT.
Dawn Bertot writes:
These are nice sentiments GDR, but as I have demonstrated to many times to mention now, you have no visible way of distinguishing one truth from another as being from God
For the hundredth time I find truth in the OT by understanding the NT. Just look at your quote concerning the Word and you can see just how well your method is working.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 7:30 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:02 PM GDR has replied
 Message 119 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:24 PM GDR has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 118 of 304 (646081)
01-02-2012 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by GDR
01-02-2012 8:20 PM


Re: A thought
For the hundredth time I find truth in the OT by understanding the NT.
For the hundreth time that makes no sense, except to say you like the New Test better than the Old. Iam Joseph, likes the Old better than the New, he believes the Old To be the Word of God and I think he blieves the NT, to not be the Word of God, who is correct?
You even pick and choose out f the NT, so it never stops
Anyone would have the right to decide what they wanted to accept or reject and you would have no way to determine if they were correct or incorrect.
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by GDR, posted 01-02-2012 8:20 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by GDR, posted 01-02-2012 9:53 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 119 of 304 (646083)
01-02-2012 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by GDR
01-02-2012 8:20 PM


Re: A thought
Also note in 17 it says that the law was given to Moses but that grace and truth were realized through Jesus.
Yes but that is not like saying the Law is not totally Gods Word
Paul made it clear that the Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.
Both Christ and Pauld believed the Law was all from God. They did not try to decide what out of it was and was not
So if the law was given to Moses by God, does that mean ALL of the Law or just Some of it?
Also, I did not fairly and completely respond to your post 113. I will do that as soon as I can. I have respond to the other threads as well. Youve asked some good questions in 113
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by GDR, posted 01-02-2012 8:20 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by GDR, posted 01-02-2012 10:17 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 120 of 304 (646087)
01-02-2012 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 9:02 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
For the hundreth time that makes no sense, except to say you like the New Test better than the Old. Iam Joseph, likes the Old better than the New, he believes the Old To be the Word of God and I think he blieves the NT, to not be the Word of God, who is correct?
So I'll answer for the hundredth time. You keep saying that I can't know and I agree. It is faith.
I'm just saying that there is a lot less knowing and a lot more faith if you try and read the Bible as dictated by God, with all of the irregularities, contradictions etc that you have to rationalize in order to read it that way. You are the one that says we can't understand it because we don't have all the information and yet you don't ask the question of why God would dictate a book for us that repeats information and yet leaves out other information.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Anyone would have the right to decide what they wanted to accept or reject and you would have no way to determine if they were correct or incorrect.
The god of the OT supposedly ordered His people to commit genocide which is completely contradictory to the message of God as revealed by Jesus. I have a way of resolving that as I believe that one of the reasons God gave us Jesus in the first place was to bring understanding to the Scriptures. IMHO God abhors genocide.
You have to come up with an answer that justifies genocide then but not now. How do you determine which is correct?
How do you determine whether God approved of the slaughter as carried out by Jehu or not? In one place it said He was and in another it says He wasn't. My understanding of scripture tells me He wasn't. What does your method tell you?
We shall do justice as an eye for an eye. In the OT it says yes - Jesus says no. I would agree that it's no. What does your method of "knowing" tell you?
As you know I could go on.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:02 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 11:23 PM GDR has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024