sky4it

But most people in our country believe we have the best constitution in the world, so does that mean it has an infallible standard of interpretation? Of course not. Same thing. So, there is one standard for reading works of anyone else and another standard for reading the Word of God? Don't you think that's a little predisposed towards bias? People are people, there minds work the same wether reading any type of material. I just said that the best way to read it is by following the instructions inside the book itself, some people do not do this.

Actually with that comment I was shooting a little higher and meant we here in America get along fairly well and wasnt intending to go down the historical slippery slope. But since you did:

1)The Bible as you know has not changed since the middle ages, but neither was the bible available to people to read in the middle ages.

2) The Christian Crusades were wrong. I am not an apologist for kings monarachs or crusaders who engaged in war. Yet, you also have to remember some Christians were attacked too and only defending themselves. Going down this road is a slippery slope. Weren't Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot all men who despised people of faith? Same thing. They sure did not allow any "people of faith" access to bibles so they certainly had a problem with the God's stuff. We are not going to do the Nazi thing now too are we? That gets real lame. BTW, I have read Wiekert, and I am sure he is anathema around here, but I liked his work and thought as a historian he did a good job. (No, I am not a Discovery Institute guy) Wiekert is one of the only Discovery guys I have read.

3) Some of the people that you condemn, they weren't killing athiests, but people who believed the bible different than they did. ie(John Calvin) HEY I agree, that shouldn't go on, but its not about bible believing doing people, but governments & people who do things they shouldn't in the name of God. It's not even about Biblical interpretation, but about selfish men who use any vice to conquer and plunder.

Joan of Bark

1) There is a different standard for the Bible, because it is supposed to be the Word of God, and therefore not the work of imperfect human beings. An omnipotent, omniscient God should have written a book that could not possibly be misinterpreted.

2) The Bible was available in the middle ages, but most people were illiterate.

3) According to Jesus, you are NOT allowed to defend yourself: "If anyone strikes your right cheek, turn to him the other one also".

Not sure where you're going with the rest of your argument, but to sum up my feelings based on my first post:

The Bible has been, and continues to be, interpreted differently by Christians of different stripes. There is NO commonly agreed-to interpretation, in America or anywhere else, as to when it is permissible to kill another human being. Americans cannot agree on the use of nuclear arms, or the death penalty. Put an Amish and a baptist in the same room, and they will both use the Bible to justify their beliefs. The Bible is vague, ambiguous, and contradictory.

sky4it

People are not perfected. In addition, Luke 13:32 "go ye tell that fox, Behold I cast out devils and I do cures to day and tommorow, and the third day I shall be perfected." You make the call. Plus, you have to follow the instructions that is in the bible on how to read it.

The bible was NOT available in production until the printing press. Furthermore
Roman Catholics regarded interpretation only through a priest. (Which is why a monk named Luther had access to a bible) If you don't believe me go ask an old timer who was born and raised in Roman Catholicism, heck my brother in law could tell you that.

So what happens if you turn your other cheek and get that one struck, or if you walk an extra mile and someone compells you to walk a 100 miles and be there slave? Want my vantage point? Back to the law. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is what happens. See, there is some harmony between Jesus and the Old Testament stuff. BTW, I turn the other cheek a few times too, but after that they keep striking, well then I just love that Old T stuff.

There is TONS OF HARMONY. Babtists are babtists, Assemblies are Assemblies and Catholics are Catholics, and Amish are Amish. BTW, this is Biblical too. The bible clearly indicates there are "differences of administrations" I Corthinthians 12:5, but the same Lord. You see they all have one common denominator, his name is Jesus Christ.

The degree of difference is way less than you indicate. But you would have to bring the Amish into the equation. I mean leave the Amish alone, they dont need you wiping them like a piece of toilet paper. I like Amish people, even tho I am not one.

regards :wave:

Joan of Bark

Okay, so what are the instructions?


Exactly. In the RCC, you need to read the Bible with the help of a priest, yet according to protestants, you don't need one. So who is correct?

And, okay, the Bible was not available in the local bookshop. But it was in church, and any literate person could access one if they wanted to.

So you pick and choose passages according to your convenience?


So why don't Christians agree on whether it is permissible to drop a hydrogen bomb on millions of people? Or on capital punishment? Every side claims to be using the Bible to support their view.

HUH???? Where do I insult the Amish??? I merely pointed out that they have a very different view of Christianity and the Bible than other Christians ... thereby proving my point that the good book is contradictory.

Anyway, since I will be travelling and won't have access to the internet for a few days, I will let you have the last word on this thread.

-Jay-

Addendum to the question: and how do we know that Pastor X's interpretation of those instructions is correct and Crazy Bob's (who stands in the intersection shouting Gospel verses to cars stopped at the traffic lights) isn't? For instructions of any sort to be useful, they need to be objective.

In point of fact, while the RCC was really big on the priest-as-intermediary model in the past, that's pretty much gone by the wayside today (even though it's still part of the official Catechism, IIRC). It may be different outside of the U.S., but I haven't personally seen that being an issue in at least the last 20 years or so. YMMV. (Interestingly, I know Protestants of various affiliations who would not dream of interpretting the Bible on their own, and instead rely on their Pastors/Elders. Some of those Elders I know for a fact gained the sum and substance of their knowledge of Chrstianity from reading Rob Bell's Velvet Elvis.)

(I'm resisting the urge to wade in to the "picking and choosing passages" part of the discussion...)

regards,

NinJay
(afdave: 2=/=14)

sky4it

NINJAY; John of Bark was to have the last word so I wont comment on his spin, because he said thats what I wanted. HINT( I proved him wrong)

Just from talking to you Ninjay, I think your a smart enough feller to weed out the Crazy Bob's and Looney Joes. But you are going to have to put up with someone you dont like somewhere, just like in everyday life the same people that you run into that are troublesome. Your a smart guy, stay away from people who dont agree with you, its simple stuff.

It must be a heavy load, to bear, to carry, arggg , oh so hard, to READ and do what it says. There is such a burden arrgg because some people have interpeted it differently oh myyyy now you never have to do it?

You guys suprise me for some people who are bright, it aint that difficult.

spin

Oh, dear, not again. This time you should note it is Joan of Bark. It's an allusion to Joan of Arc, if you've heard of her. She's old.

Gosh, are you playing for brownie points or something. We do biblical criticism and history here.

How does this stuff answer the question that was asked of you?

And what does this have to do with what you are ostensibly commenting on?

It would be useful if you could make your comments clear enough for people to see the connections you are trying to make. This last comment of yours has the appearance of a drunken ramble.


spin

-Jay-

And what, exactly did you prove Joan of Bark wrong on? She asked what the instructions you mentioned were, whether you pick and choose passages for your convenience, and why Christians disagree on what would appear to be some very fundmental and obvious issues. I'm not sure what you claim to have proven - you've made some general assertions and thrown in a couple of scripture references here and there, but you really didn't prove anything.

In point of fact, staying away from people who don't agree with you is something that I consider to be a huge problem. Surrounding yourself with people who only think the way you do pretty well guarantees trouble - at a personal level you (general "you", not specific "you") lock yourself into a worldview that doesn't (or maybe can't) respond to changing information. At a societal level you have holy wars. So, no. I won't stay away from people who don't agree with me - in fact, I try to seek them out so I can understand and learn from their perspectives. Your suggestion is absurd.


Talk Like a Pirate Day was weeks ago.

Stay on point here. The question was why Christians (in general) don't agree on the proper interpretation of supposed scriptural instructions (to use your word). Joan of Bark split that into a couple of questions, but that's the main intent. (That these instructions be identified prior to answering the question of interpretation is implied.) How I personally interpret them, how Joan of Bark personally interprets them, how you personally interpret them, or how Crazy Bob personally interprets them are specific details that are irrelevant to the original question.

Once again:

1) What, specifically, are the instructions to which you refer?
2) Why don't Christians agree on how these instructions are to be followed?

regards,

NinJay

sky4it

I did not comment on Joan O Bark's comments because Joan said she would give me the last word, and I figured to give it to Joan.

I was not talking to you Spin I was talking to Ninjay so I am not going to respond to your comments. I did notice the sarcasm, again. I was simply trying to say that reading and comprehesion is not that difficult, and trying to "spin" it a little because you make it sound so hard. Good bye.

NinJay, I was simply responding to Joan's last comment that said she wanted to give me the last word and I refused to do it. It's not a big deal man, lighten up.

That's exactly what I wanted to hear from you. So you enjoy learning from others who have a differing perspective? Great! You just made my point about the Bible and since you said it, you certainly can't disagree if people have differing perspectives on the Bible, because as you said, You can learn from it. seems that the same perspective you put on other differing views does not hold up for the bible with you does it? that is called hypocrasy. You know Ninjay, you cant ever retreat on that one either. Maybe I will put that one on a billboard so that athiests cant say, they cant deal with different perspectives. hint hint differing perspectives = different interpetation. since you must, there is a bible concept called the "present truth" meaning different people are at different stages in life. some are in 1st grade some in high school and some are graduates.


1) On question 1 I already went over all that stuff, if not on this thread on other ones, I see no need to repeat it. I listed 4 or 5 scriptures that help. In addition there is another one that says No prophecy of scripture is of any mans private interpetation, : its in Peter look it up. It means be careful how you interpet the scriptures and one person doesn't have a lock for himself on the stuff.

2) On question 2, Ninjay, I have already told you and others, there is more harmony than there is battles amongst those of faith. In addition, see my comments above on this same post, You allow for differing perspectives with other people, but you seem adverse to allow those of faith the same differing degree for learning from each other. BTW, thats biblical too. bible says we are many members and all have not the same gifts and callings, so learning from each other is a "good thing"

Later Ninjay Regards

spin

Well you have in your crablike way.

Actually comprehension can be hard (as many christians who come here demonstrate). You just need to cope with the fact better.

:wave:


spin