bible interpretation

[mikeuk]

What part of off topic, irrelevant and inflammatory do you not get?

This is about differing Protestant bible interpretations and why they exist: a serious problem contradicting each other in every aspect of doctrine from salvation to baptism, predestination, Eucharist to even the trinity eg Pentecostals! So focus on your own back yard.

It is not the Jeff " one track mind - the only post he can seemingly think of, repeated everywhere ad nauseam" thread
And since the scripture calls to love one another and for meekness in discussion, you are not acting out the Christian vocation either!

muslims are welcome here, if they don't promote their religion.

catholics are welcome here, if they don't promote their religion.

the rules are simple: don't promote your religion here, only the groups recognized as christian, even if they have
errors of doctrine, may promote christianity.

since catholicism has never been christian, and is recognized by all believers as heresy, and by the rules as heresy ,

that it the vital difference. no one in christ jesus wants to chop someone's head off, just keep the heresy out of here - it is demonically deceptive and comes only to kill, to steal and to destroy -- even destroying wantonly without any conscience the souls of it's own members !!!

if the heresy stays out of here, perhaps then good conversations may be had without the promotion of the heresies which again are by definition rcc teachings, doctrines and practices...

Scripture is THE AUTHORITY, stick with scripture, test everything by scripture, as scripture says. \
Yahweh's Decree.

 

[prove-all]

• [h=3]1 Thessalonians 5:21 (KJV)[/h]Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

 

[mikeuk]

• 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (KJV)
  
  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Which is fine as far as it goes, but proving has seemed to be the problem, since it has failed to prevent fundamental disagreement on almost every area of doctrine.

 

[michael56]

What part of off topic, irrelevant and inflammatory do you not get?

This is about differing Protestant bible interpretations and why they exist: a serious problem contradicting each other in every aspect of doctrine from salvation to baptism, predestination, Eucharist to even the trinity eg Pentecostals! So focus on your own back yard.

It is not the Jeff " one track mind - the only post he can seemingly think of, repeated everywhere ad nauseam" thread
And since the scripture calls to love one another and for meekness in discussion, you are not acting out the Christian vocation either!

Why does a subject ''bible interpretation'' solely have to be about differences of views in protestant churches. Why should differences between the bible and the interpretation the RCC church has put on scripture not also be discussed? Are you sure you do not only seek to find fault with other denominations, while being reluctant to defend your own?

 

[prove-all]

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ

Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years

I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.​

​

 

[RickyZ]

If we receive the holy spirit then why do many people interprete Bible in many different ways and as a result many ideas pop up and with the ideas many church are formed and by forming churches the believes are branched and resulted in pulling people here and there? Why?

One day Jesus is walking down the street and a group of people bring a blind man to Him seeking healing. Jesus spits on the ground, makes a little mud, puts some in the blind man’s eyes, and tells his friends to take him down to the river and wash it out. They and the crowd do just that, and when the man washes he is healed and can see. So off this group goes, preaching that one must receive ‘spit in the eye and wash at the river’.

Another day, Jesus comes across another blind man seeking healing. Jesus tells the man to go to the temple and pay his alms. The man and the crowd around him do so, and he is healed and can see. So off this group goes, preaching that one must ‘give their alms’.

On still another occasion, a blind man is brought to Jesus wanting to be healed. Jesus asks the man if he believes He can do it, the man says yes, and he is healed. So off this group goes, preaching one must have ‘faith and belief’.

So now we have these three groups going at each other, insisting you can only be healed by ‘spit and washing’, or only by ‘alms and giving’, or only by ‘faith and belief’ - each ‘denomination’ insisting that it is exclusive of all the others. But in debating about the how, they totally lose sight that there are many ways Jesus restores us, and that they are not exclusive of each other.

None of us has the whole picture... but we all have a piece of the jigsaw puzzle. So while we're trying to force-feed our piece of the puzzle into the big picture, we should pay attention to the picture formed by the puzzle pieces around us. Because even with as much as we think we know, today is not the day to stop learning.

 

[oldhermit]

Again... this is where you are at error. 2Tim.3:16-17 doesn't say Scripture is sufficient as a sole rule of faith, no matter how much you want it too. As I stated in post 73, page 4 of this thread. It only claims Scripture is "profitable" (Greek: ophelimos) that is, "Helpful". Once again, many things can be profitable for moving one toward a goal, without being sufficient in getting one to the goal. Please read it again and notice that the passage nowhere even hints that Scripture is "sufficient"—which is, of course, exactly what you think/want the passage to mean.
Now when quoting 2Tim.3:16-17, I just can't understand how you (and others) don't see that in these passages that Paul is laying down a guideline for Timothy to make use of "Scripture and tradition" in his ministry as a bishop.

Paul says, "But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (Greek: theopneustos = "God-breathed"), and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Tim. 3:14–17).

And again there is vs. 14, and 2Tim.1:13-14; passages you all seem to be convenietly ignoring!!! In verse 14, Timothy is initially exhorted to hold to the oral teachings—the traditions—that he received from the apostle Paul. This echoes Paul’s reminder of the value of oral tradition in 1:13–14, "Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us" (RSV), and ". . . what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2:2). Here Paul refers exclusively to oral teaching and reminds Timothy to follow that as the "pattern" for his own teaching (1:13). Only after this is Scripture mentioned as "profitable" for Timothy’s ministry.

So, as I said before, the belief that "Sola Scriptura" ( bible alone) is sufficient as a sole rule of faith is not only untrue.... but un-biblical! Again, if you disagree, prove me wrong with a verse that states otherwise! Minus 2Tim.3:16-17 due to the fact I have showed it does not.


Pax Christi

"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed." ----Luke 1:48.

Apparently you did not understand this the first time so I will post it again.
"All Scripture is:
1. God-breathed
2. Useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
3. So that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
i.e. nothing else is needed to insure the desired results.

We are commanded to neither take anything from it or add anything to it. This is something the RCC has never learned.

 

[DiscipleDave]

DiscipleDave said :

Interpretations belong to God, NOT to men. Who is man to say this means that, or that means this? Woe to man, for interpretations belong to God, NOT to men.

We have hundreds of different denomination, why? Because men interpreted the Bible.
We have many versions of the Bible, why? Because men interpreted the Bible.
Why is there so much confusion? Because men interpreted the Bible
Who is the author of confusion? satan is.
Woe to this last days generation, which have altogether taken it upon themselves to interpret the Word of God, then teach others that it means as they themselves have interpreted it to mean. They will not escape the wrath of God during the hour of temptation.

There is ONLY ONE TRUTH. That Truth is the narrow and difficult path that only a very FEW will find. Those who interpret the Word of God, do not know the Truth, if they did, they would not interpret the Word of God.

Walk that narrow path DiscipleDave, won't be long now brother.

Many who are on the wide and easy path, claim they are on the narrow and difficult path, You can tell what path you are on though. is it easy being a Christian and not difficult at all, then that should reveal to you what path you are actually on.
Those who are actually on the narrow and difficult path, can try all they want to tell people what that path is, but those who believe they are on that narrow and difficult path already, WILL NOT LOOK for it, and therefore will not listen to them who are actually on that path, saying come over here, this is the path. Those who THINK they are on the right path, will not look for another, therefore remain on the path they are on, it will not be until the end, that they will realize they were NOT on the narrow and difficult path, but were all along on the wide and easy path, then they will remember, or Jesus will make them remember all those who were actually on the narrow and difficult path trying to tell them they were on the wrong path.
The greatest thing ever, is finding that narrow and difficult path. The worse thing ever is trying to tell other where that path is, and nobody chooses to listen, because they THINK they are already on the narrow and difficult path, all the while the path they are on, is NOT difficult at all. Believe in Jesus (Easy), continue to live in sin (Easy), repent without ceasing everyday (Easy), don't have to live by the Bible / Do what it says (Easy), go to Heaven (Easy). = Easy gate.

^i^ Responding to Post #56

 

[elf3]

And who was it that compiled the bible ??? I know!!! I know!!! The bible as a whole was compiled in the late 4th century and then it was compiled by a Catholic saint (St.Jerome) at the request of a Catholic pope (St.Damasus I).

Pax Christi

"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed." ----Luke 1:48.

Ok the RCC (Roman Catholic Corruption) is getting quite deep. God wrote it and God had man choose which writings were to be chosen. To say that man chose the writings by himself puts man above God. Do you know what divine Providence is? Or do you along with the couple other RCC people on this forum believe man is above God?

 

[VioletReigns]

"Bible Discussion" Forum?

 

[mikeuk]

Ok the RCC (Roman Catholic Corruption) is getting quite deep. God wrote it and God had man choose which writings were to be chosen. To say that man chose the writings by himself puts man above God. Do you know what divine Providence is? Or do you along with the couple other RCC people on this forum believe man is above God?

Deliberately or not you are missing the obvious conclusion, you yourself have stated here.

That for the canon to be infallible, the ( catholic) council that determined it ,acting under the see of Rome, were acting by inspiration of the Holy Spirit when they took the decisions , so that the decisions they took then were by Gods hand. Otherwise the New Testament could not be infallible.

The origin of the New Testament is A fundamental problem for those who believe the church had apostasized.

 

[Saved2004]

If we receive the holy spirit then why do many people interpret Bible in many different ways and as a result many ideas pop up and with the ideas many church are formed and by forming churches the believes are branched and resulted in pulling people here and there? Why?

[SUP]21 [/SUP]“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. [SUP]22 [/SUP]Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ [SUP]23 [/SUP]Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Matthew 7: 21-23

I think the key to your answer is in what Jesus said above...I never knew you!
We all should know to be a true "Born Again" Christian means that Christ is in you.
If Christ is not in you, he doesn't know you and ultimately rejects you!!!!

 

[mikeuk]

[SUP]21 [/SUP]“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. [SUP]22 [/SUP]Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ [SUP]23 [/SUP]Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Matthew 7: 21-23

I think the key to your answer is in what Jesus said above...I never knew you!
We all should know to be a true "Born Again" Christian means that Christ is in you.
If Christ is not in you, he doesn't know you and ultimately rejects you!!!!

All true, but fails to answer the subject of the thread - if scripture by itself is enough , why so many contradictory interpretations in almost every aspect of doctrine?

 

[fordman]

Apparently you did not understand this the first time so I will post it again.

I understood you perfectly, but I feel you are avoiding my question.

Show me one verse in "all" of the Bible that states that Scripture alone is sufficient as a sole rule of faith

Pax Christi

"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed." ----Luke 1:48.

 

[oldhermit]

I understood you perfectly, but I feel you are avoiding my question.

Show me one verse in "all" of the Bible that states that Scripture alone is sufficient as a sole rule of faith

Pax Christi

"From henceforth, all generations shall call me Blessed." ----Luke 1:48.

I did, twice, but you do not believe what those verses tell you. Showing you anything else would be a waste of time.

 

[4enlightment]

All true, but fails to answer the subject of the thread - if scripture by itself is enough , why so many contradictory interpretations in almost every aspect of doctrine?

Luke 21:15 For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict.

Matthew 3:16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.

Numbers 11:25 Then the Lord came down in the cloud and spoke with him, and he took some of the power of the Spirit that was on him and put it on the seventy elders. When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied—but did not do so again.

Deuteronomy 34:9 Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him. So the Israelites listened to him and did what the Lord had commanded Moses.

Judges 6:34 Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Gideon, and he blew a trumpet, summoning the Abiezrites to follow him.

Judges 14:6 The Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon him so that he tore the lion apart with his bare hands as he might have torn a young goat. But he told neither his father nor his mother what he had done.

1 Samuel 10:6 The Spirit of the Lord will come powerfully upon you, and you will prophesy with them; and you will be changed into a different person.

1 Samuel 16:13 So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon David. Samuel then went to Ramah.

John 14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Psalm 51:11 Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.

In order for someone to preach, they must have the spirit of God in them.

 

[mikeuk]

I did, twice, but you do not believe what those verses tell you. Showing you anything else would be a waste of time.

You did not answer his. Question even once.

You said this.

Apparently you did not understand this the first time so I will post it again.
"All Scripture is:
1. God-breathed
2. Useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
3. So that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
i.e. nothing else is needed to insure the desired results.


We are commanded to neither take anything from it or add anything to it. This is something the RCC has never learned.

Nowhere do ANY of the verses you relate , say the totality of truth is in scripture, which it would have to say EXPLICITLY in order for that - the highest truth - to be included, and therefore logically consistent. Indeed scripture contradicts that saying that the pillar of truth is the church not the bible - which is inevitable considering New Testament scripture was not available to early Christians in anything like the canon of.27 books accepted several centuries on, on which you base theclaim all truth is included! so from the aforesaid sola scriptura is biblically, logically and historically false.

But disregarding any of that, scripture is clearly not enough by itself because of all the Protestant divisions on what it means.

If it were enough by itself, learned men discerning the spirit would come to the same conclusion and they do not. The arguments on most of this are all Protestant affairs take OSAS or can lose it, and rapture or none, both the proponents and adversaries are all Protestant divisions.

So leave RCC out of this, and answer:why so many Protestant divisions if scripture is enough by itself? a question that never gets answered because all slip back into anti RCC posting , just as you did, rather than answer the questions in their own back yard.

It is not a trick question, but a fundamental problem with Protestantism, that was one part of why I went back to studying ultimately joining RCC from Protestant and evangelical roots.

 

[columbo]

The reason there are so many interpretations of Scripture are many. For some its false teachers perverting the Scriptures. Others its the sin in their life that makes them change the Scriptures in hopes of avoiding conviction and for some its a lack of spiritual maturity and they simply don't understand in full and so they do they best they can until corrected if their pride will allow for it.

The Bible is the divine revelation of God to man. It contains all we need to know to be saved and to live. The bible alone can't save you, that takes the Holy Spirit but even the unbeliever can be prepared to receive the Holy Spirit from reading the bible.

 

[oldhermit]

You did not answer his. Question even once.

You said this.



Nowhere do ANY of the verses you relate , say the totality of truth is in scripture, which it would have to say EXPLICITLY in order for that - the highest truth - to be included, and therefore logically consistent. Indeed scripture contradicts that saying that the pillar of truth is the church not the bible - which is inevitable considering New Testament scripture was not available to early Christians in anything like the canon of.27 books accepted several centuries on, on which you base theclaim all truth is included! so from the aforesaid sola scriptura is biblically, logically and historically false.

But disregarding any of that, scripture is clearly not enough by itself because of all the Protestant divisions on what it means.

If it were enough by itself, learned men discerning the spirit would come to the same conclusion and they do not. The arguments on most of this are all Protestant affairs take OSAS or can lose it, and rapture or none, both the proponents and adversaries are all Protestant divisions.

So leave RCC out of this, and answer:why so many Protestant divisions if scripture is enough by itself? a question that never gets answered because all slip back into anti RCC posting , just as you did, rather than answer the questions in their own back yard.

It is not a trick question, but a fundamental problem with Protestantism, that was one part of why I went back to studying ultimately joining RCC from Protestant and evangelical roots.

It is clear you have no regard for the authority of scripture so consider our conversation at an end.

 

[mikeuk]

It is clear you have no regard for the authority of scripture so consider our conversation at an end.

I certainly do. I also understand the history, that the NT did not pop out of the sky and early Christians passed the word by tradition of word of mouth and letter, Paul says so, obviously true as a matter of history.

I also ask the question as to why people disagree on it, and never get an answer other than the thing we all agree - the verses you and others quote " all scripture is valuable, inspired" - but that is a far cry from saying all truth is contained in it , which it does not claim for itself, indeed not just the " pillar of truth" denies, but also the last verse of john says " many books could be written" of Jesus's other works and teachings.

But what are we talking about here? Interpretation consistent with a holistic view of scripture,not new doctrine.

Take Those early fathers closest to the disciples only one generation on believed in the real presence, so tradition tells us that real presence is the true interpretation, and few doubted that till after the reformation, when everyone got to decide their own version of interpretation. Why? Because post reformation they lost the historicall roots of early Christianity, indeed glossed over the early history of scripture.