X-mass Worship of $in

[Colours]

Historical criticism puts you on a slippery slope that leads to atheism. The Bible is God's Word, but you make it sound as if it's just another piece of literature. In principle we should take it quite literally, unless specified otherwise in the Bible ITSELF. If Jesus tells us a story AS a parable, we can assume it IS some sort of a metaphor, for instance. The choice of liberal theologians to call this or that story JUST a metaphore, or JUST a hyperbole etc is mostly completely arbitrary, and only serves the weaken the faith of true christians. Ultimatiey it serves the agenda of liberal politics. And who are they to say this or that story is JUST a metaphor anyway? A verse that comes to mind:

Matthew 18:7
7 Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come!

You are assuming that metaphors and hyperbole can't be taken seriously. You are also assuming I see things as 'just metaphors'. Some things are to be read metaphorically, some hyperbolically, some as stories, some literally. Not in order to discount them, but rather to realise their true context and meaning.

If I say to you 'Fathers sometimes make bad decisions that children have to live with', then that is a philosophical statement, quite a literal one. But as Jeremiah put it; 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'. Now, the father didn't LITERALLY eat sour grapes, but it serves as a more vivid explanation of how fathers decisions and shortfalls can affect their sons and daughters.

Therefore, the statement you replied to stands.

 

[zone]

 

[Newluke]

You are assuming that metaphors and hyperbole can't be taken seriously. You are also assuming I see things as 'just metaphors'. Some things are to be read metaphorically, some hyperbolically, some as stories, some literally. Not in order to discount them, but rather to realise their true context and meaning.

If I say to you 'Fathers sometimes make bad decisions that children have to live with', then that is a philosophical statement, quite a literal one. But as Jeremiah put it; 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'. Now, the father didn't LITERALLY eat sour grapes, but it serves as a more vivid explanation of how fathers decisions and shortfalls can affect their sons and daughters.

Therefore, the statement you replied to stands.

I didn't say that, i said we shouldn't view Biblical stories as metaphors etc unless it's clear from the text ITSELF. In the example of Jeremiah that's QUITE clear. But who are YOU to say that Peter used a hyperbole when he addressed Ananias? His statement should be taken quite literally. Liberal theologians use metaphorical reading of the Bible to suit their own purposes, to create doubt in the hearts and minds of good christian folk and to serve the liberal political aganda.

That was my point, again: you should read my posts better. If you fail to understand what I post, how can you then even begin to grasp the true meaning of God's Word? (Acts 8:30b)

 

[sanglina]

Let's see..... people argue at the drop of a hat, & Robot drops a very large hat..... Ok, I get it!

LOL..!! I was going through the comments intensely and then, I came across this and it really crack me up

(Sorry for the little interruption, carry on guys )

 

[Colours]

I didn't say that, i said we shouldn't view Biblical stories as metaphors etc unless it's clear from the text ITSELF. In the example of Jeremiah that's QUITE clear. But who are YOU to say that Peter used a hyperbole when he addressed Ananias? His statement should be taken quite literally. Liberal theologians (is this another group? Jew or Gentile) use metaphorical reading of the Bible to suit their own purposes (how do you know?), to create doubt in the hearts and minds of good christian folk and to serve the liberal political aganda.

That was my point, again: you should read my posts better. If you fail to understand what I post, how can you then even begin to grasp the true meaning of God's Word? (Acts 8:30b)

Perhaps my inability to read your posts as you intended is because I do not know your heart? The same way you do not know mine, or that of 'liberal theologans'.

'For I know where I have been and where I am going, you do not know where I have been and where I am going. You judge purely in a human way'.

 

[Colours]

I didn't say that, i said we shouldn't view Biblical stories as metaphors etc unless it's clear from the text ITSELF. In the example of Jeremiah that's QUITE clear. But who are YOU to say that Peter used a hyperbole when he addressed Ananias? His statement should be taken quite literally. Liberal theologians use metaphorical reading of the Bible to suit their own purposes, to create doubt in the hearts and minds of good christian folk and to serve the liberal political aganda.

That was my point, again: you should read my posts better. If you fail to understand what I post, how can you then even begin to grasp the true meaning of God's Word? (Acts 8:30b)

Also, who are you to say that it is literal? To make commands on how one reads the bible?

For if I can not interpret it in my perhaps 'metaphorical way' in some instances, then surely by your own standards it is hardly fair nor right for you to be allowed to interpret it in the literal way that you do?

And it is therefore not right for you to tell me to read it a certain way, nor for I to tell you to read it in a certain way.

So this argument, is pointless.

 

[Newluke]

Perhaps my inability to read your posts as you intended is because I do not know your heart? The same way you do not know mine, or that of 'liberal theologans'.

'For I know where I have been and where I am going, you do not know where I have been and where I am going. You judge purely in a human way'.

You speak in riddles. What does your 'heart' or mine have to do with it? Should we hang out for a while before you can read my posts and you mine? That doesn't seem that practical to me, because then i would have to do the same with EVERYBODY who's posting. Just read what i wrote, and base your opinion about my posts on that, it should be enough. I know my grammar and my spelling aren't perfect, but they can't be THAT bad...
And I've read enough on liberal theolgians to know their intentions. Paul is talking about their influence in our day and age too...

1 Timothy 4:3-4

3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

 

[Colours]

You speak in riddles. What does your 'heart' or mine have to do with it? Should we hang out for a while before you can read my posts and you mine? That doesn't seem that practical to me, because then i would have to do the same with EVERYBODY who's posting. Just read what i wrote, and base your opinion about my posts on that, it should be enough. I know my grammar and my spelling aren't perfect, but they can't be THAT bad...
And I've read enough on liberal theolgians to know their intentions. Paul is talking about their influence in our day and age too...

1 Timothy 4:3-4

3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Perhaps we should. I believe there is a lot more to a person than what someone posts on an internet forum.

The heart is all that matters.

I can speak any amount of words and they bear nothing to what I really think. My heart could desire all the peace, love and joy that is part of the holy spirit yet I may become tongue tied.

I could be deaf, mute and have no hands, then how would I worship? ..

 

[Newluke]

Also, who are you to say that it is literal? To make commands on how one reads the bible?

For if I can not interpret it in my perhaps 'metaphorical way' in some instances, then surely by your own standards it is hardly fair nor right for you to be allowed to interpret it in the literal way that you do?

And it is therefore not right for you to tell me to read it a certain way, nor for I to tell you to read it in a certain way.

So this argument, is pointless.

Since I'm pretty tired now I'm just going to paste something here i copied. You don't have to respond to it.

We must take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

One reason we should take the Bible literally is because the Lord Jesus Christ took it literally. Whenever the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He believed in its literal interpretation. As an example, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, He answered by quoting the Old Testament. If God’s commands in Deuteronomy 8:3, 6:13, and 6:16 were not literal, Jesus would not have used them and they would have been powerless to stop Satan’s mouth, which they certainly did.

The disciples also took the commands of Christ (which are part of the Bible) literally. Jesus commanded the disciples to go and make more disciples in Matthew 28:19-20. In Acts 2 and following, we find that the disciples took Jesus' command literally and went throughout the known world of that time preaching the gospel of Christ and telling them to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). Just as the disciples took Jesus’ words literally, so must we. How else can we be sure of our salvation if we do not believe Him when He says He came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10), pay the penalty for our sin (Matthew 26:28), and provide eternal life (John 6:54)?

Although we take the Bible literally, there are still figures of speech within its pages. An example of a figure of speech would be that if someone said "it is raining cats and dogs outside," you would know that they did not really mean that cats and dogs were falling from the sky. They would mean it is raining really hard. There are figures of speech in the Bible which are not to be taken literally, but those are obvious. (See Psalm 17:8 for example.)

Finally, when we make ourselves the final arbiters of which parts of the Bible are to be interpreted literally, we elevate ourselves above God. Who is to say, then, that one person’s interpretation of a biblical event or truth is any more or less valid than another’s? The confusion and distortions that would inevitably result from such a system would essentially render the Scriptures null and void. The Bible is God’s Word to us and He meant it to be believed—literally and completely.

 

[Colours]

Since I'm pretty tired now I'm just going to paste something here i copied. You don't have to respond to it.

We must take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

One reason we should take the Bible literally is because the Lord Jesus Christ took it literally. Whenever the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He believed in its literal interpretation. As an example, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, He answered by quoting the Old Testament. If God’s commands in Deuteronomy 8:3, 6:13, and 6:16 were not literal, Jesus would not have used them and they would have been powerless to stop Satan’s mouth, which they certainly did.

The disciples also took the commands of Christ (which are part of the Bible) literally. Jesus commanded the disciples to go and make more disciples in Matthew 28:19-20. In Acts 2 and following, we find that the disciples took Jesus' command literally and went throughout the known world of that time preaching the gospel of Christ and telling them to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). Just as the disciples took Jesus’ words literally, so must we. How else can we be sure of our salvation if we do not believe Him when He says He came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10), pay the penalty for our sin (Matthew 26:28), and provide eternal life (John 6:54)?

Although we take the Bible literally, there are still figures of speech within its pages. An example of a figure of speech would be that if someone said "it is raining cats and dogs outside," you would know that they did not really mean that cats and dogs were falling from the sky. They would mean it is raining really hard. There are figures of speech in the Bible which are not to be taken literally, but those are obvious. (See Psalm 17:8 for example.)

Finally, when we make ourselves the final arbiters of which parts of the Bible are to be interpreted literally, we elevate ourselves above God. Who is to say, then, that one person’s interpretation of a biblical event or truth is any more or less valid than another’s? The confusion and distortions that would inevitably result from such a system would essentially render the Scriptures null and void. The Bible is God’s Word to us and He meant it to be believed—literally and completely.

Again, this whole thing is a man's interpretation, and then his own way of thinking on how the bible should be read.

 

[Newluke]

Perhaps we should. I believe there is a lot more to a person than what someone posts on an internet forum.

The heart is all that matters.

I can speak any amount of words and they bear nothing to what I really think. My heart could desire all the peace, love and joy that is part of the holy spirit yet I may become tongue tied.

I could be deaf, mute and have no hands, then how would I worship? ..

We will see...

Maybe you're just more of a poet than me, and as you may know poetry and logical reasoning don't mix too well.

 

[Newluke]

Again, this whole thing is a man's interpretation, and then his own way of thinking on how the bible should be read.

No sir, God speaks to us through His WORD.

Clearly, you yourself are a victim of liberal theology. Too bad. Btw, i'm done here.

 

[RoBoT-7x153-]

Let's see..... people argue at the drop of a hat, & Robot drops a very large hat..... Ok, I get it!

Just as your picture states, our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. I've simply posted what GOD's WORD says about these heathen customs, more need to read HIS WORD and not care what this rebellious world has to say about anything. HIS WORD says that this is an abomination, the Scripture has been posted at the start, just read HIS WORD. There's absolutely nothing else that matters, Matthew 24: 35; Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.