Is the Bible Open to Just Any Interpretation?

by Mythbuster 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Mythbuster

  *** w88 12/15 p. 5 Is the Bible Open to Just Any Interpretation? ***
  What would a housewife think of a recipe book that was open to just any interpretation? Or of what benefit would it be to spend money for a dictionary that allowed its reader to interpret the meaning of words just any way he chose?Is that the kind of guidebook we would expect God to give his creatures? Indeed, in such a case, would it even be proper to speak of it as a guidebook?

  April 15, 2010 Watchtower

  Although we cannot measure the exact length of "this generation," we do well to keep in mind several things about the word "generation": It usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period; it is not excessively long; and it has an end.
• 

  Lady Lee

  There will always be disagreements about that words mean, what the writer meant, ho wit was interpreted etc.

  Good grief just look here for example. How often do people start agruing because someone posted something and others took it to mean something else? At least here we have the person who will hopefully clear up any misunderstandings.

  With something like the Bible that has been translated and interpreted so that we have many different versions of the Bible, we don't have the authors around to clear up the misunderstandings.

  The written word is a rather ineffective means of communication because so much of how we interpret what a person means is missing from the communication. They didn't even have smilies!
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Pretty much just about anything you want it to mean. But if you want followers to your particular meanings you need the right formula. That will keep them in your clutches.
• 

  leec

  No indeed. Only the "FDS" are the only ones allowed to interpret it ... dontcha know?
• 

  villabolo

  In certain scriptures, yes, they would be open to interpretation. But most of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures are too forthright to be open to interpretation. Often time, when there is a difference in interpretations, other than nebulous scriptures, it is because one or both (or more sides) do not want to accept the obvious.

  An example would be Matthew 1:25, which says that Joseph had no intercourse with Mary until Jesus was born. Catholics do not want to accept the implications of this, namely that Joseph did eventually have sex with Mary. The reason for this is that they developed a non-Biblical tradition of Mary's perpetual virginity, as opposed to the Biblical tradition of her virginity during Jesus' conception and birth. and they do not want to align their teachings with the Bible.

  So a rational interpretation of what the author is trying to get across is obvious but some people just don't want to get it. I believe this is the same with most of the Bible.

  villabolo
• 

  Farkel

  : Is the Bible Open to Just Any Interpretation?

  Sure it is.

  Then again, I feel the same way about the book "Alice in Wonderland," even though Alice in Wonderland is the more believable of the two.

  Farkel
• 

  wobble

  Some interpretations are just plain silly, i.e those of the WBT$

  Love,

  Wobble
• 

  Terry

  There are two worlds.

  There is the real one and there is the imaginary one.

  If you are driving a car in the real world you can't deal with a red light or a stop sign in an interpretive manner without risking your life (or a ticket.)

  But, in an imaginary scenario you could probably cause the redlight to turn purple and let that "mean" you should levitate above the street.

  The Bible isn't reality for the real world. It was compiled and redacted, revised and overlaid by each and every scribe, translator or copyist.

  You prove this easily.

  An imaginary interpretation cannot be proved wrong. It can be "explained" to fit. One size fits all.

  The real world has real consequences. The imaginary world is deuces wild and anything goes.

  The Bible is a non-reality without consequences (except imaginary ones.)

  You can PRAY and God will "listen" and you can explain why nothing happens any way you wish. Or, you can attribute anything that goes well (or wrong) as reward or punishment willy nilly.

  Around the 300 B.C.E. a Greek mathematician named Euclid compiled a book consisting of elements, proofs, theorems and demonstrations of Geometry. Over 2000 years have passed and it is still valid and demonstrably true WITHOUT RESORTING TO PERSONAL INTERPRETATIONS.

  Although many of the results in Elements originated with earlier mathematicians, one of Euclid's accomplishments was to present them in a single, logically coherent framework, making it easy to use and easy to reference, including a system of rigorous mathematical proofs that remains the basis of mathematics 23 centuries later.

  Why is this true of Euclid and not true of the Bible?

  Euclid deals with reality.

  The Bible deals with imaginary subjective constructs.

  If the Bible dealt with reality it would not budge because of interpretation. It would defy corruption because dissonance with the real world would indicate error.

  There is no Provenance for Bible writings from autograph originals to copies and copies of copies down through the ages.

  What we have is an artifact and a relic and not a transmission of divine thought.

  Naturally it has been besmirched, altered, reworded, revised, interpreted and reshaped by each and every hand that ever touched it!

  The Bible is not anything at all except what certain people insist it MUST BE (mostly because it proves their own views right and proves you wrong.)
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  The Bible is indeed open to just any interpretation. No matter what any group or person has said that the Bible means, something contradicts what they have claimed and has to be explained away. Plus, there is not 100% agreement about what books or texts belong to the Bible.

  Then add to that, arguments on what terms mean and how they should be applied. Even here where the vast majority agree that WTS is not the truth, we cannot get agreement on whether WTS is a cult or how to apply that term.
• 

  cyberjesus

  No, Jehovah meant EVERYTHING he wrote on the 66 books. no need to interpret anything. He is what he is. Thats why I dont respect him anymore. Unless he wrote something different on the originals and the devil has the originals and gave us his copies, (I think the bible we have sounds more like it was written by the devil) in such case I am giving him another chance to re-write the originals (after all even joseph smith re-did his writtings when his originals got lost)

  :-)