Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 20062 | ||
Charis I would humbly disagree with some of you points. I do not agree that denominations were started by people that believed they had or developed or discovered a universal way to interpret the Bible but rather they had discovered "spiritual truths" that made their continued fellowship with the body they presently affiliated with impossible and thus were forced for form a new body of believers. The discovery of the "spiritual truths" in many cases were derived by Bible interpretation, experience, or visions and etc. In most cases the understanding of the Bible was then made to fit the new found “truth”. For nearly 1500 years and with the exception of a few infractions the church did in fact handle the Bible the same way. It wasn’t until the reformation and the age of enlightenment that man started to put the various spins on the Bible. Men at this point began to intellectualize the Bible and developed plausible and explainable reasonings for various texts, many times rendering them ineffective or at least reduced in importance. Nothing was accepted by face value but everything was explored for hidden meanings, contradictory meanings, and in some cases humanist explanations. I will add that much of this was caused by the previous 1500 years of treatment of the Bible and how the bible was controlled and manipulated for the gain of man. That said and with an additional caveat, that being, I believe there is no desire for consensus within the church today, let me say I believe the Bible was written to be taken one way. The fact that it is read many ways tells me factors such as, biases, prejudices, previous teachings, intellectualism, humanism, and Satan have been allowed to get into the way. I further believe basic Christianity can be realized strictly from the Bible without the need for outside material to clarify or explain any tenet of faith. The fact that so many outside references are used in attempt to clarify biblical truths tell me the truths are questionable or at least have some base in human reasoning. I have heard many people speak that we should allow the Holy Spirit to lead us. But isn’t that exactly what men have claimed to have done all through history and the result has been the thousand of denominations each calling themselves right. I know the power of the Holy Spirit (which in many cases is overran by the will of man) and I know the power of the Bible (which in many cases has been rendered powerless by the reading of man). I firmly believe we need to take the Bible literally unless by doing so we run into a un-resolvable contradictions, or the passage tells or implies it is figurative. I further think when any form of human intellectualism becomes involved whether to analyze the language structure or to explain a difficult passage we open the door for all the failings of man to fall in and taint the truth of the word. I personally believe the various denominations and different interpretations of the Bible are an affront to Christ. Jesus prayed for unity in church in John 17:20-21 and I think it is time man puts away his pride, humbles himself and seeks the unity the Christ prayed into the church. EdB |
||||||
2 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 20068 | ||
Dear Ed, friend and brother, this post is certainly no attempt on my part to drive a wedge between you and Charis, both of whom are, I surely do believe, honorable and dedicated servants of the King. Both of you have made some good talking points and your unity of spirit overrides your minor points of view. I simply wish to make a couple of casual observations that, it is hoped, will provide some small catalyst for more thought on the matter of biblical study and interpretation..... Let me begin with an analogy taken from my long experience as a Christian, a Bible reader, a church-goer -- and a radio listener and TV viewer. When I was very young, my father listened every evening on the radio to H.V.Kaltenborn or Gabriel Heater, two popular newsmen of the time. They gave the world and national news and, this is the point, they gave it in half an hour, once a day. That was it. Today we are deluged by two major 24-hour TV news networks, not to mention the overwhelming number of radio news-talk shows that go round the clock, 24/7. It's an information overload. No one can absorb this much informational input and keep his head straight.... When the President of the United States makes a speech, we are told in advance what he is going to say; we are told afterward what he said and what he meant by what he said and what he meant by what he didn't say. But even this is not enough. We are told by everyone from the White House butler to Madonna what they thought about what the President said. The result of this process is that we become so confused and rattled, we don't remember three words of what the President actually said..... Now for the Bible aspect to complete my analogy. When I was a young lad, my parents read and studied the Bible, the text. They didn't jump around among a dozen versions or consult this or that Study Bible, and for good reason. There was only one of the former and none of the latter at their disposal. When a locution in the text was unclear, they didn't question the accuracy of the text but simply dug in deeper for themselves, reading a difficult passage over and over, comparing one gospel account with another, cross-referencing passages, all in an effort better to understand what the Bible had to say. They committed large portions of Scripture to memory. They studied the Bible with other believers. And, unless my memory is playing evil tricks on me, my recollecion is that there was far more harmony then among the members of the church community than there is now.... One of the pitfalls to which Christians, I among them, have fallen prey in our approach to Bible reading and study is that we are looking for the quick fix. When we come accross a passage we don't immediately understand, we hasten to open our Study Bibles or go to the Internet to get ourselves a quick, easy answer. I am not in any sense opposed to the use of Bible study aids; in fact, I'm on record on this forum as having advocated the use of Study Bibles, Bible dictionaries, and other such helps to enhance our understanding of the Bible. But let me make clear that no extra-biblical sources do, or ever can, relieve us of the absolute necessity of reading and studying the text itself...... What I have said about the news-media overload can be said about Bible materials as well. Not in all history have we had anything approaching the number of different versions of the Bible that are now available in English. Never before have we seen such a plethora of study Bibles, and they keep coming in tidal waves, flooding an already glutted market. I happen to know a few people who will read the commentary footnotes of a variety of study Bibles before they will even read the full text itself. And I find myself comparing this approach with the one that a well-known Bible scholar and commentator is said to have used: "I never make a comment nor write a single word about a book of the Bible," he said, "until I have read that book at least 50 times."...... It may be a naive view in this age of sophisticated ignorance, but it seems to me that a truly dedicated and thorough study of the Bible, with open hearts and minds, just might effect more unity among believers than all the ecumenical conferences they could attend in a lifetime. --Hank | ||||||
3 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 20098 | ||
Hank I think you are more or less saying what I used so many words to say. I think one of the biggest dangers we have in the church today is this overload of data and the constant search for the quick answer. I also believe the condition of our seminaries add to the problem. Most are bulwarks of liberal theology or held in such contempt as to be avoided therefore they do little to be the bastions of the truth they once were. Hence doctrinal purity in any form is slowly being tainted with a humanistic quick fix. thanks for you comments Brother! EdB |
||||||