Why do we argue over the meaning of scriptures in the Bible among ourselves?
- Thread starter wintersrain
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:1-4)
As to what the gospel does for us...that is a longer discussion.
I have not written any formal work yet. But someday I would like to write a commentary of the Bible. I will have my AA from a secular college in June, but I plan to transfer to a Christian university this fall to get (at least) a MA and pursue a professorship and pastoral ministry later. I'd like to teach systematic and/or Biblical theology at a seminary.
As to what the gospel does for us...that is a longer discussion.
I have not written any formal work yet. But someday I would like to write a commentary of the Bible. I will have my AA from a secular college in June, but I plan to transfer to a Christian university this fall to get (at least) a MA and pursue a professorship and pastoral ministry later. I'd like to teach systematic and/or Biblical theology at a seminary.
That was well written.
In honesty I think a walk-through of the book of Revelation showing a link to the interpretation within the bible of each such word or phrase would be helpful. You worded that well and presented your conclusion "We can objectively understand this passage as something like:" in a way that allows the reader to agree with you on the agreeable while also being allowed to internally adjust what they find disagreeable...because of the underlined portions. That's well-received and impressive.
If you can maintain that style of writing, I'm thinking you will do quite well. And I'd be interested to read the analysis of Revelation...though I am a bit skeptical of the market-perceived value of the same analysis on the rest of the bible.
Love in Jesus, and thanks for writting the quoted post,
Kelby
In honesty I think a walk-through of the book of Revelation showing a link to the interpretation within the bible of each such word or phrase would be helpful. You worded that well and presented your conclusion "We can objectively understand this passage as something like:" in a way that allows the reader to agree with you on the agreeable while also being allowed to internally adjust what they find disagreeable...because of the underlined portions. That's well-received and impressive.
If you can maintain that style of writing, I'm thinking you will do quite well. And I'd be interested to read the analysis of Revelation...though I am a bit skeptical of the market-perceived value of the same analysis on the rest of the bible.
Love in Jesus, and thanks for writting the quoted post,
Kelby
-
1
- Show all
Thank you for the kind words.
As for the rest of the Bible, I would just call this deductive reasoning.
For example, Jesus gave a group of kingdom parables (Matt 13, Mk 4, Lk 8) after the Pharisees rebuked Him as "Beelzebul".
Jesus said something interesting in Mark's account:
He proceeds to explain the components:
seed = the word
birds = Satan
soil = the heart
etc.
The key to understanding all the parables is understanding this first parable (and what each component corresponds to).
This is one example of how figurative language outside of the Revelation still is interpreted the same way...by explicit and unambiguous association.
In my study of figurative language, I have noticed that trees often refer to nations (Judg 9, Matt 13, 24, Ezk 15, 21, 31, Lk 13, 21, Dan 4, Rev 22, Rom 11 ). Also, some of the symbols often occur in close proximity to each other while maintaining their symbolic meaning (e.g. birds and trees - Dan 4, Ezk 31, Matt 13).
Other common symbols are horns, bones, arrows, serpents, hands, beasts, etc.
It's all very fascinating...especially when you factor in numerology into it all.
As for the rest of the Bible, I would just call this deductive reasoning.
For example, Jesus gave a group of kingdom parables (Matt 13, Mk 4, Lk 8) after the Pharisees rebuked Him as "Beelzebul".
Jesus said something interesting in Mark's account:
“And He said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables?” (Mark 4:13)
He proceeds to explain the components:
seed = the word
birds = Satan
soil = the heart
etc.
The key to understanding all the parables is understanding this first parable (and what each component corresponds to).
“Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,
but to them it has not been granted.” (Matthew 13:11)
but to them it has not been granted.” (Matthew 13:11)
This is one example of how figurative language outside of the Revelation still is interpreted the same way...by explicit and unambiguous association.
In my study of figurative language, I have noticed that trees often refer to nations (Judg 9, Matt 13, 24, Ezk 15, 21, 31, Lk 13, 21, Dan 4, Rev 22, Rom 11 ). Also, some of the symbols often occur in close proximity to each other while maintaining their symbolic meaning (e.g. birds and trees - Dan 4, Ezk 31, Matt 13).
Other common symbols are horns, bones, arrows, serpents, hands, beasts, etc.
It's all very fascinating...especially when you factor in numerology into it all.
I brought up discussion in my concordance, and there is much scripture has to say about Paul reasoning with groups about scripture.
When some were becoming hardened and disobedient, Paul left and asked his disciples to leave the area.
Paul would reason but he would not argue.
I have noticed that the Christians on this site who believe in following Christ as Christ lives within us never argue, they discuss. They never belittle other posters. Christ said to "follow me". Those who take that seriously are peace makers, they are not contentious.
1 Timothy 1:6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion,
When some were becoming hardened and disobedient, Paul left and asked his disciples to leave the area.
Paul would reason but he would not argue.
I have noticed that the Christians on this site who believe in following Christ as Christ lives within us never argue, they discuss. They never belittle other posters. Christ said to "follow me". Those who take that seriously are peace makers, they are not contentious.
1 Timothy 1:6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion,
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I appreciate your ambitions. I once longed to be a teacher (of some sort) in a modern-day church, though I do not any longer. The two primary reasons for such is that I'm not interested in the fact that an incredibly high percentage of people do not agree, at all, on the meaning of Scripture. Quite frankly, I wouldn't be able to offer my "sermon" in full concentration as I looked across the "flock" of "my" church, realizing that nearly all don't agree with me. And then there is the senseless fighting and bickering, such as what we see, here.
Second, the more I can to learn about the Bible, the more I recognize that what I believed kept changing. What's the point in being a teacher or preaching if I keep realizing how wrong I have been? Or, it is reasonable to think that "finally I have arrived! I've finally gotten the Bible figured out!" Another example of this is: Nearly 30 years ago I wrote a personal book on how to be happy. Needless to say, I was utterly miserable, wishing that I were not alive for, at that point in my life, about fifteen years of my living. It is a collection of writings at about 260 pages. I'm both glad and thankful that I wrote that material, but I no longer agree with the entire set of contents today. This lends to the idea of the futility of being a teacher. Why be a teacher if one day I will come to realize that the things I wrote were in error? And, how horrific it is to realize that what I once taught people was wrong. Having felt the Raw, Almighty Power of God to the degree that I nearly died, the thought of teaching things that are wrong is enough to cause me to take heed to the teaching that many of us should not be teachers. If we aren't extremely afraid of being wrong in our teachings, then I'm not certain that being a preacher or teacher is a wise thing to do.
Before you continue in your writings, I would focus on getting the Gospel figured out. I would get that concept nailed down before anything else. We don't want to be like the rest of the World. Doesn't it seem reasonable that we would have that particular writing first and foremost? After all, the Gospel is the essence of our Faith. The Gospel is the "Story of God," but is that really the Gospel or is that just another way of merely describing the Gospel? The Gospel is never offered in the form of a mere description, rather, the True Gospel is to be offered by explanation. There is a gulf of a difference between describing the Gospel, and explaining the Gospel.
When a person claims that, "The Gospel is the Good News of Jesus Christ!" - That is folly. The "Good News" is not the Gospel, but instead, the "Good News" is a mere title to a chapter of a potential of a book. The contents of the chapter are an explanation of the description; the title of the chapter. No one can knock on a door and say, "The Good News of Jesus Christ" and save a soul through that message. There must be an explanation, the same explanation that Phillip gave to the Eunuch; the same explanation that Paul and his companions gave to the Jailer and his family. But what is the entire package? What did they actually teach? Or, was Phillip only in the carriage for a mere ten seconds . . . or, did he enter the chariot because the explanation took a while to diseminate?
Check this out and be amazed: Once I became honest with myself and proclaimed that I really didn't know what the Gospel was (beyond the standard quips that I was blurting out for several decades), I wanted to understand why. I also realized that because of the Internet, I could write to virtually every pastor in America, if not the English-speaking world, and ask every church to explain the Gospel to me. In my introduction, I stated that I wasn't requiring that they spend the time to type it out, but if they would like, they could simply send a copy of a pre-written sermon that outlined the Gospel, or send a pre-written, personal explanation of the Gospel that they had previously written. The results? Not one had a sermon or a pre-written explanation of the Gospel that they were able o send to me. To make sure, I asked them point-blank if they had either a sermon or pre-written paper that they could send to me . . . not one of them did. Holy Cow! It's no wonder that "we" don't understand the Gospel, for were not being taught.
In these communications, not one of them mentioned Abraham and why he is our Father of Faith. Not one of them mentioned the Spiritual Circumcision of Jesus. Spiritual Circumcision was instituted in the life of Abraham . . . how can this be ignored? I would not suggest that the Gospel [is] Spiritual Circumcision, for this would be another chapter title, but instead, I would say that the Gospel [revolves] around Spiritual Circumcision. Any True form of the Gospel must include the teaching of the Circumcision of Christ and what it means. Any True and whole Gospel must include the explanation of the Purpose of Christ, the Work of Christ, and the Effect of Christ. Again, those three points are mere chapter titles, but it is the explanation of them wherein we will come to understand the Gospel.
And so, as it became most evident, no one is knocking on my door to explain the Gospel because we do not understand it. We THINK we do, but in our foggy minds, we must conclude that we really do not. There is a reason for why I can walk into virtually any church and I will [not] hear people talking about the core and center of our Faith . . . the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Instead, I will hear people lighting and talking about worldly things. Anyone who has the Gospel Truly embedded within their hearts cannot contain themselves; nothing is more important. Yet, we do not hear this Love of the Gospel when we enter into churches. The last church I attended happened to be "Baptist." The pastor, for the seven months that I attended, didn't even reference the Holy Name of Jesus from the pulpit a single time. We did learn, however, about gun safety, his favorite burger joint, and how to make papyrus paper multiple times.
Here is what I would recommend that you do: Create an Excel spreadsheet and begin keeping track of every Bible passage that address the question . . . "What is the Gospel of Jesus?" Get yourself a timeline, chronological reading of the entire Bible, and begin with Genesis chapters 1 through 3 as day one. Learn the story of the Bible, for the Gospel is discovered in the "Story of God." Paul talks about the Mysterious Plan in Ephesians chapters 2 and 3. Before each reading, consider his words that pertain to this Mysterious Plan, and consider Colossians 2:9-15 before each reading. As said, after you have consider these three sets of passages, begin your daily reading of the entire Bible in a timeline, chronological order. If you do this, you will hold a primary advantage over nearly all people that you speak with regarding the Holy Word of God.
In your youth, you are wise and I admire you. Do not be like the pastors that I have written to that were unprepared to share the Gospel in a realistic form. We should be prepared to offer the Gospel before we offer anything else. The ability to share the Gospel is of first importance. It must be clear in our minds. Lastly, I would add this: If someone asks me to explain the Gospel (and no one ever does, especially in a church), the first response should be, "How much time do we have?" The reason for this is that we can give it in a matter of minutes, or we could spend an entire year reading of the Gospel in a timeline, chronological order. The Gospel is simple, yet it is complex.
I believe in you.
Second, the more I can to learn about the Bible, the more I recognize that what I believed kept changing. What's the point in being a teacher or preaching if I keep realizing how wrong I have been? Or, it is reasonable to think that "finally I have arrived! I've finally gotten the Bible figured out!" Another example of this is: Nearly 30 years ago I wrote a personal book on how to be happy. Needless to say, I was utterly miserable, wishing that I were not alive for, at that point in my life, about fifteen years of my living. It is a collection of writings at about 260 pages. I'm both glad and thankful that I wrote that material, but I no longer agree with the entire set of contents today. This lends to the idea of the futility of being a teacher. Why be a teacher if one day I will come to realize that the things I wrote were in error? And, how horrific it is to realize that what I once taught people was wrong. Having felt the Raw, Almighty Power of God to the degree that I nearly died, the thought of teaching things that are wrong is enough to cause me to take heed to the teaching that many of us should not be teachers. If we aren't extremely afraid of being wrong in our teachings, then I'm not certain that being a preacher or teacher is a wise thing to do.
Before you continue in your writings, I would focus on getting the Gospel figured out. I would get that concept nailed down before anything else. We don't want to be like the rest of the World. Doesn't it seem reasonable that we would have that particular writing first and foremost? After all, the Gospel is the essence of our Faith. The Gospel is the "Story of God," but is that really the Gospel or is that just another way of merely describing the Gospel? The Gospel is never offered in the form of a mere description, rather, the True Gospel is to be offered by explanation. There is a gulf of a difference between describing the Gospel, and explaining the Gospel.
When a person claims that, "The Gospel is the Good News of Jesus Christ!" - That is folly. The "Good News" is not the Gospel, but instead, the "Good News" is a mere title to a chapter of a potential of a book. The contents of the chapter are an explanation of the description; the title of the chapter. No one can knock on a door and say, "The Good News of Jesus Christ" and save a soul through that message. There must be an explanation, the same explanation that Phillip gave to the Eunuch; the same explanation that Paul and his companions gave to the Jailer and his family. But what is the entire package? What did they actually teach? Or, was Phillip only in the carriage for a mere ten seconds . . . or, did he enter the chariot because the explanation took a while to diseminate?
Check this out and be amazed: Once I became honest with myself and proclaimed that I really didn't know what the Gospel was (beyond the standard quips that I was blurting out for several decades), I wanted to understand why. I also realized that because of the Internet, I could write to virtually every pastor in America, if not the English-speaking world, and ask every church to explain the Gospel to me. In my introduction, I stated that I wasn't requiring that they spend the time to type it out, but if they would like, they could simply send a copy of a pre-written sermon that outlined the Gospel, or send a pre-written, personal explanation of the Gospel that they had previously written. The results? Not one had a sermon or a pre-written explanation of the Gospel that they were able o send to me. To make sure, I asked them point-blank if they had either a sermon or pre-written paper that they could send to me . . . not one of them did. Holy Cow! It's no wonder that "we" don't understand the Gospel, for were not being taught.
In these communications, not one of them mentioned Abraham and why he is our Father of Faith. Not one of them mentioned the Spiritual Circumcision of Jesus. Spiritual Circumcision was instituted in the life of Abraham . . . how can this be ignored? I would not suggest that the Gospel [is] Spiritual Circumcision, for this would be another chapter title, but instead, I would say that the Gospel [revolves] around Spiritual Circumcision. Any True form of the Gospel must include the teaching of the Circumcision of Christ and what it means. Any True and whole Gospel must include the explanation of the Purpose of Christ, the Work of Christ, and the Effect of Christ. Again, those three points are mere chapter titles, but it is the explanation of them wherein we will come to understand the Gospel.
And so, as it became most evident, no one is knocking on my door to explain the Gospel because we do not understand it. We THINK we do, but in our foggy minds, we must conclude that we really do not. There is a reason for why I can walk into virtually any church and I will [not] hear people talking about the core and center of our Faith . . . the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Instead, I will hear people lighting and talking about worldly things. Anyone who has the Gospel Truly embedded within their hearts cannot contain themselves; nothing is more important. Yet, we do not hear this Love of the Gospel when we enter into churches. The last church I attended happened to be "Baptist." The pastor, for the seven months that I attended, didn't even reference the Holy Name of Jesus from the pulpit a single time. We did learn, however, about gun safety, his favorite burger joint, and how to make papyrus paper multiple times.
Here is what I would recommend that you do: Create an Excel spreadsheet and begin keeping track of every Bible passage that address the question . . . "What is the Gospel of Jesus?" Get yourself a timeline, chronological reading of the entire Bible, and begin with Genesis chapters 1 through 3 as day one. Learn the story of the Bible, for the Gospel is discovered in the "Story of God." Paul talks about the Mysterious Plan in Ephesians chapters 2 and 3. Before each reading, consider his words that pertain to this Mysterious Plan, and consider Colossians 2:9-15 before each reading. As said, after you have consider these three sets of passages, begin your daily reading of the entire Bible in a timeline, chronological order. If you do this, you will hold a primary advantage over nearly all people that you speak with regarding the Holy Word of God.
In your youth, you are wise and I admire you. Do not be like the pastors that I have written to that were unprepared to share the Gospel in a realistic form. We should be prepared to offer the Gospel before we offer anything else. The ability to share the Gospel is of first importance. It must be clear in our minds. Lastly, I would add this: If someone asks me to explain the Gospel (and no one ever does, especially in a church), the first response should be, "How much time do we have?" The reason for this is that we can give it in a matter of minutes, or we could spend an entire year reading of the Gospel in a timeline, chronological order. The Gospel is simple, yet it is complex.
I believe in you.
-
1
- Show all
if you say you disagree with someone, You see it this way (and explain how you see it). Its a disagreement
When you called them stupid, unlearned, Not able to read or comprehend or other sarcastic comment, You are mudslinging
And by the way, When someone calls another out for mudslinging, It does not mean they are offended or weak. they are just calling them out for being rude..
If we mudslinging and can not humble admit when we are called out (I believe we all can do it in the heat of an argument) then we are the one with the issue, not the other.
When you called them stupid, unlearned, Not able to read or comprehend or other sarcastic comment, You are mudslinging
And by the way, When someone calls another out for mudslinging, It does not mean they are offended or weak. they are just calling them out for being rude..
If we mudslinging and can not humble admit when we are called out (I believe we all can do it in the heat of an argument) then we are the one with the issue, not the other.
-
1
- Show all
When you understand that Christians make mistakes , then maybe your anti Christian behaviour will cease. It's clear your listening to lies that's Christian should always be Christian, kind hearted and set a good example and be loving like Jesus and if there not, then there bad people all together,. guess what we can be tough in clamping anti Christian behaviour, but not all of the time, so get of your high horse and quit being anti Christian, and painting Christians to be mean hearted because they have shown anger,
how about your comments that insight anger, ? Don't put the lord your God to the test, and quit listening to lies and temptation to find fault with Christians attitude.
how about your comments that insight anger, ? Don't put the lord your God to the test, and quit listening to lies and temptation to find fault with Christians attitude.
This now your second anti Christian post I am reporting @wintersrain
I think it comes down to tact. Some people don’t have good reading comprehension and that’s apparent on a medium where the sole form of communication is reading. There are good ways to tell people this and bad ways.
I think it’s best to just not give unsolicited advice even when it’s constructive and intentions are good. I think the sensibilities of people are very easily offended on this message board. In my culture, people aren’t easily offended. So what I see is there is not an objective right or wrong here.
I think it’s best to just not give unsolicited advice even when it’s constructive and intentions are good. I think the sensibilities of people are very easily offended on this message board. In my culture, people aren’t easily offended. So what I see is there is not an objective right or wrong here.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I won't dispute what you say because I am not informed regarding it. But I would like to make a side-note here:
Who or what is right or wrong is in most cases not important because most of the things we are contentious about are not salvation issues. To be wrong is not sinful nor should our discussions regarding them become arguments. In regard to the father and the son. All who believe on the son have eternal life. Jesus says if we love God most and others as we love ourselves, we have met all of the commandments. I enjoy bible study and I love discussing it. But who's right or wrong in regard to worldly matters is of little concern for we that believe (all of us). Throughout the first 5 centuries of
christianity, Christians didn't even have the Bible. Thank God they had and we have the Holy Spirit who writes His word on our hearts. Thank you for listening.
Who or what is right or wrong is in most cases not important because most of the things we are contentious about are not salvation issues. To be wrong is not sinful nor should our discussions regarding them become arguments. In regard to the father and the son. All who believe on the son have eternal life. Jesus says if we love God most and others as we love ourselves, we have met all of the commandments. I enjoy bible study and I love discussing it. But who's right or wrong in regard to worldly matters is of little concern for we that believe (all of us). Throughout the first 5 centuries of
christianity, Christians didn't even have the Bible. Thank God they had and we have the Holy Spirit who writes His word on our hearts. Thank you for listening.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
