FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-01-2004, 12:34 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default Re: Re: Re: Literal/Allegorical interpretation of the Bible

Quote:
Originally posted by blindwatchmaker
Yeah right.

It's obvious isn't it.

That's why half of what was considered literal two hundred years ago is now considered metaphor, and why there's still very little agreement amongst the twenty thousand flavours of christianity about which is which.

Surely you can do better?..
And a huge part of why there are so many conflicting views is because 1) everyone has an opinion and world view, and will fit their beliefs to what they like or don't like ( example: don't like the concept of Hell - remove it - wahla- you now have a new denomination) and 2) many denominations stem from Catholicism, which has always taught that only the Pope and Magesterium can interpret scripture correctly ( and yes this is truth - its in the Catechism, and a Catholic friend just told me that most Catholics have no clue what the Bible really says). If you have the head of the largest denomination on Earth telling you that you can't correctly interpret scripture, then people are bound to come up with their own views of what they like over what the magesterium says. Thats where Lutheran and Calvinism came from - rebellion against the Catholic Church.

Although, I probably can't do much better since it seems like all you care about doing is rejecting every explanation I come up with. If nothing I say is good enough for you, why bother?
Magus55 is offline  
Old 01-01-2004, 12:37 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Toto
I recall this question - what in the Bible is to be taken literally, what metaphorically - asked of a Greek Orthodox organization. Their answer was that their tradition told them, and since they read the New Testament in the language in which it was written (snubs to American televangelists evident there) and claim direct descent from the original disciples of Christ, that must be it.

The problem for Protestants who have rejected most of Christian tradition in favor of sola scriptura is that they have no tradition to save them from textual difficulties, since they have rejected that tradition as corrupt and/or paganized. But they won't take the next step and reject the scripture for the same reason.
Actually, Christians will tell you that the Holy Spirit guides them in understanding what is to be taken literal or metaphoric on topic of the context/writing style. Since most people can't read ancient Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, we need another guide. Hence why without the Holy Spirit, the Bible says unbelievers will not understand it.
Magus55 is offline  
Old 01-01-2004, 12:43 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
Hence why without the Holy Spirit, the Bible says unbelievers will not understand it.
Ah, so that is why there is an absence of disagreement among believers as to what the Bible means!
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 01-01-2004, 12:50 PM   #14
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
Actually, Christians will tell you that the Holy Spirit guides them in understanding what is to be taken literal or metaphoric on topic of the context/writing style. . . .
And you know that the Holy Spirit and not Satan guided you to the correct conclusion because . . . ?

Does this imply that it must have been Satan guiding other believers to a different conclusion?
Toto is offline  
Old 01-01-2004, 03:59 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Roanoke, VA.
Posts: 2,198
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55
If the rest of the Bible, including Jesus' own words conflict with the idea of predestination, then we are likely interpretating Romans 9:14 wrong.
No, we are likely looking at a contradiction. Please explain how Romans 9:14 is ambiguous. I have read it over and over, and it appears very straightforward to me. This goes right back to the OP: how do we know this passage needs to be interpreted instead of taking it literally (in which case it clearly preaches predestination), and who holds the authoritative position to make the interpretation?

And don't feed me the "read the whole Bible" line. I have read the Bible cover to cover more than once. I also took separate courses on the Old and New Testaments at a Southern Baptist college, taught Sunday school at a fundamental church, and read my Bible constantly for several years. I know what the Bible says...
Postcard73 is offline  
Old 01-01-2004, 04:35 PM   #16
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 227
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Magus55

Although, I probably can't do much better since it seems like all you care about doing is rejecting every explanation I come up with. If nothing I say is good enough for you, why bother?
Trust me my friend; When you come up with an explanation that the majority of freethinking, sane people in the world wouldn't laugh at, it wont be rejected.

It certainly isn't the case that nothing you say is good enough for me.
I welcome your input. You are obviously bright enough, and it always fascinates me to see bright people being convinced by weak arguments.

You must find that too.
blindwatchmaker is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:43 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.