One thing you'll see me and many others do is the good old bible bash with scriptures flying around. I cannot move away from the idea however, that when we cannot agree on the interpretation of scripture how can we possibly claim our understanding is superior to anothers? Yet upon such topics hangs the supposed destination of one's soul.
(New Testament | 2 Peter 1:20)
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
Does this back me up or more fully condemn me??
The current thread RE being saved by baptism is a typical point. If any one of us is absolutely right then there may be serious consequences for those who disagree. What is the measuring stick by which to judge or is there indeed none and we all have to choose our brand of faith, close our eyes and hope its right or at the very least that the door to heaven is wide enough to accept that faith along with a load of others? Does it in effect matter what we believe? Where do we draw the box around our beliefs and say no more - outside here and you ain't getting in?
(New Testament | Matthew 7:13 - 14)
13 ¶ Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Oh cr*p! Let's just hope it's not what it could mean...:(
When we quote from the bible to prove a point do we have any right?
by Qcmbr 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Qcmbr
-
AllTimeJeff
While I respect believers of the bible or other ancient holy books, what you just brought up is why "truth" is so elusive and why any group claiming a monopoly on it must be viewed with caution....
Whatever our beliefs on various spiritual matters, we have to admit first of all of where they originate. If they come from the bible, then we start by saying that these anceint scrolls in ancient tounges are not what they were when first written, and there is no way to verify the truthfullness of their claims... You can believe the claims, no problem, that is everyone's right. But all we have left are these old, translated scrolls. What bearing should that have on belief? I think it should at least be acknowledged by believers, because it affects me.... How do you overcome that arguement?
There is one other thing, people love to argue, and they love their opinions... Intellectual honesty is something that is missing in many debates, and often debates involving the bible cannot be intellectually honest because it is so open to a wide variety of interpretations....
Edited for bad formatting... Sorry...
-
Doug Mason
God does not save a person based on the correctness of their theology, wisdom or eschatology. This is as it should be, since every one of us holds to erroneous understandings.
What matters is to accept that which God offers as a free gift. The offer needs to be continually accepted (see: "Life in the Son" by Shank). This gift of salvation cannot be earned as a wage, since the price has already been paid. This is too simple for many people and they resort to using Scripture as a hammer.
The books and letters that comprise the Scriptures were written to an immediate audience, using their contemporary speech, idioms and so on. They were not written to someone living in the 16th century, 21st century or the 26th century. They are records, not books of systematic theology.
Doug -
AllTimeJeff
Hi Doug. I can see you are a person of faith, and that is cool. for my own reasons, I am not at the moment, I consider myself agnostic. Because this thread addresses basically how so many people use the bible to prove their own p.o.v. I think it legitimate to point out that their cannot be multiple truths.....
Also, I would be remiss to point out that your belief and all Christians in Jesus ransom comes from ancient scrolls, the same scrolls that you said
The books and letters that comprise the Scriptures were written to an immediate audience, using their contemporary speech, idioms and so on. They were not written to someone living in the 16th century, 21st century or the 26th century. They are records, not books of systematic theology.
I don't doubt that Jesus existed, I do doubt the supernatural aura that surrounds him as described in these letters. I am sure you have heard this before, and I have no desire to argue per se on this. But at the same time, I have to say that I respect less the arguement that says "Jesus died for our sins, we need to accept his sacrifice, but don't worry too much about looking for theology in the very books and letters that promote the ransom of Christ, because they are old and not meant for our modern times." How does one follow the other? It doesn't....
-
PEC
No!!!
Philip
-
Madame Quixote
Yes!!!!! It's a free country! You can quote from anything or anyone; just be sure to give credit to the source, er, what source, when you're talking about the bible - it's from so many sources . . . YESS you have every right.
-
Doug Mason
Jeff
Thank you for your comments, which are perceptive and well made.
You have decided you are agnostic, and I respect you for making a decision. And we must live in accord with our personal convictions, else we are hypocrites. Those in religious authority, such as the GB of the WTS, do not permit their followers to express their personal convictions, but I salute you for doing that. Our beliefs will differ, but we can still remain friends.
As I said, neither doctrine nor belief, nor any word from Scripture can save; only God can. He is the Judge, not any man.
Regarding Scripture, we must recognize that the writers were addressing their contemporaries. As you point out, this includes the writings I rely on to say that salvation is a gift (letter to the Romans, in particular).
These are old documents from a different time and cultures. So to understand their message and purpose, one must climb into the times and minds of the writers and their intended readers. We must smell the sawdust, hear the babble of many voices in the marketplace. How did they think? How did they express themselves?
Thus you can see that I believe “higher criticism” is a vitally important exegetical tool. It is far more important than trying to “score points” or to “prove” a doctrine.
Using higher criticism as an analytical tool helps to show me what Paul meant when he spoke of “wages” and “gift” regarding God’s offer to people – whether they belong to a formal group or not – Jew, Christian, Agnostic, Muslim or Calathumpian. God is the Judge, and he will do right, else he is not God.
Have you read “The Bible Unearthed” by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman (ISBN 0-684-86913-6, paperback)?
The WTS treats Scripture as some mystic document containing types and parallels that apparently point forward to their own history, such as in the 1930s. What a travesty!
Doug -
LittleToe
In the absence of actually having died, got the big picture and the full skinny on absolute truth, and come back, I think that all we can do is give it our best shot. Meanwhile, trying not to be too dogmatic is probably a good position to hold
I guess it also depends somewhat on whether we are attempting to bolster our reliance on a mere framework of belief, rather than just enjoy a robust discussion from which we can all benefit. If we are so insistant that folks adopt our point of view then we run the risk of dipping into proselytising, even if that was never our intention.
-
RAF
Since faith is a personal matter whatever is said can just inspire us or not (but again since you get too much into details it’s getting confusing because we put too much of our understanding into it) and here is a demonstration from the verse you chosed :
they could have different meanings
(New Testament | Matthew 7:13 - 14)
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that lead eth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.The JW – and most religious once (seen as a very precise path to get salvation – which is not totally false to me) but because this message is also talking about false prophetsyou can also see it as : what is really important (= not that much – Charity, forgiveness Able to shut down your Ego when needed - but most might not understand it). False prophets don’t really lead to that and a lot do take there Path.
Two actually differente meanings ... one will lead to follow false prophets (for salvation = bad) ... the other one will lead to understand what is important ...
-
RAF
To be more explicite :
the path to me is that simple (= not that much – Charity, forgiveness Able to shut down your Ego when needed) you don't really need more than that (it's not a wide range of laws - but it leads to a wide range of solutions)