Can you be a Christian and reject certain parts of the Bible?

[Albion]

A lot of people insist upon reading the Bible in a strictly literal way. Fortunately, most churches and theologians know to treat poetic and hypothetical--and even satirical--passages differently from the ones that are not written in that style.

 

[Aldebaran]

A lot of people insist upon reading the Bible in a strictly literal way. Fortunately, most churches and theologians know to treat poetic and hypothetical--and even satirical--passages differently from the ones that are not written in that style.

There are passages in Psalms that people use, and then someone will say, "No, that's just a song that was written." But then again, there are passages in Psalms (quite a few of them!) that foretell the coming of Jesus and what things He would do when He was here. So sometimes a song isn't just a song. Which psalms predict the coming of Jesus Christ?

 

[Albion]

There are passages in Psalms that people use, and then someone will say, "No, that's just a song that was written."

That would be going too far, I agree.

Jesus himself used a lot of double entendres, metaphors, and teasing language with people who confronted him; and there is broad agreement that when he, for example, said he was a vine or a door, that he didn't mean it literally.

 

[Aldebaran]

That would be going too far, but it doesn't mean that everything in the Scriptures is meant to be taken strictly literally. Jesus himself used a lot of double entendres, metaphors, and teasing language with people who confronted him.

I understand what you mean. But some people will take entire sections of the bible, such as the Creation or the Flood and say that the entire story is an allegory, even though those events were referenced as fact in the NT.

 

[Albion]

I understand what you mean. But some people will take entire sections of the bible, such as the Creation or the Flood and say that the entire story is an allegory, even though those events were referenced as fact in the NT.

I know. What we have to do IMHO is strive to understand that the Bible is all these things and not uniformly literal or, at the other extreme, figurative. Another thing to note is that simply discarding whole sections or even lesser ones is not a defensible approach to the matter. The poetic or symbolic language DOES have a meaning that we must understand.

 

[kishankt]

Can you be a Christian and only believe some parts of the Bible? For example, can you reject a global Noah's Flood, a six-day creation, a literal exodus, etc.? Could you reject other parts as well, like Christ walking on water? Discuss.

Everyone rejects parts of the Bible. Since the Bible is self contradictory, it's impossible to accept the entire thing, at least literally.

Absolutely. Christianity is NOT a religion. Name itself misleading.. better call JC followers. Bible is part history and mostly metaphors which are profoundly true! Many stories including Genesis are allegories .. meaning not literal or factual but one has to find what it means to us.
The core of Bible is LOVE and every thing you read read through the lens of Love.If it does not work just move on and one day it flashes in your mind. be Blessed.

 

[LadyCrosstalk]

Can you be a Christian and only believe some parts of the Bible? For example, can you reject a global Noah's Flood, a six-day creation, a literal exodus, etc.? Could you reject other parts as well, like Christ walking on water? Discuss.

No. If you reject any part of His word, you make Him into a liar and why would we listen to anything further He had to say? We might not understand His word entirely but His word is true. "May God be true and every man a liar."

 

[Thedictator]

I think that you can be a Christian and reject parts of the Bible. I feel God looks at the heart. I don't believe in hell but I still consider myself a Christian.

Matthew 7:21-23

 

[FrankDux]

You can certainly reject another person's interpretation, but if the Bible is to be consistent in it's claims, and " Every tongue confesses, every knee bows " , then the claim that " Jesus " is " The Word " means that eventually, there will be no rejection of the bible either

I personally think that the people who think they have the Bible " all figured out " are in for some rude awakenings, it's arrogant to think they would know " the Word " better than " the Word " ( Himself )

And since scripture also says " the Tabernacle will dwell among men " ( mankind ) one would think he would also come teaching some amazing things about the Bible that will put the naysayers to bed once and for all

Because if any mere human could do that, they would be Jesus and it would have already been done

 

[Armoured]

No. If you reject any part of His word, you make Him into a liar and why would we listen to anything further He had to say? We might not understand His word entirely but His word is true. "May God be true and every man a liar."

Why are you so syre that everything in the Bible is "His word"?

 

[Thedictator]

Why are you so syre that everything in the Bible is "His word"?

Because God said it was so.

 

[Armoured]

Because God said it was so.

When?

 

[LisaMC-D]

I often feel it is not really Scripture that we question, it is what people do with their interpretation of Scripture or in the name of God that we question. I believe a lot of what we read is to let us know historically what happened in BC and AD times. I cite slavery as an example. I believe Father wanted us to see that slavery was wrong, but be aware it was being practiced. He gave encouragement and insight into it knowing it would fall away. It was many people who misused the Scriptures to justify owning slaves in this country's past. I believe it is evil in hearts that cause slavery throughout the world.

 

[Brian Sellers]

The Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God. However, there are errors in man's understanding and interpretation of the Bible. The Bible isn't a single book, but a collection of books written by different men, in different languages over thousands of years inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Bible did not fall out of the sky.
The Early Church used the Old Testament, namely the Septuagint which was a Greek translation of the Old Testament. Christ did not leave behind a book, He did leave behind His Church to which He explicitly delegated authority. Additionally, the Apostles did not leave a defined set of new scriptures; instead, the New Testament developed over time.

Writings attributed to the apostles circulated among the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating in collected forms by the end of the 1st century AD. Justin Martyr, in the early 2nd century, mentions the "memoirs of the Apostles," which Christians (Greek: Χριστιανός) called "gospels," and which were considered to be authoritatively equal to the Old Testament.
While there was a good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the major writings were accepted by almost all Christians by the middle of the 3rd century; however, it would not be uncommon to hear a reading from the Gospel of Mary, or The First Epistle of Clement at one church while another church may not consider the Book of Revelation to be Sacred Scripture. Obviously this did not contribute to a unity of mind and spirit. When Constantine declared Christianity a protected religion with the Edict of Milan, Church membership swelled but this exacerbated the problem of not having an official canon. In 367 Bishop Athanasius addressed the issue in his most famous work, his Festal Letter which lists the complete New Testament canon (27 books) for the first time. In 393 the Synod of Hippo took up the issue and through prayerfull discussion and debate guided by the Holy Spirit, the Council of Bishops made their recommendations and the Council of Carthage in 397 officially canonized the New Testament and by the authority granted to it by Jesus Christ in union with the Holy Spirit declared it to be the inspired, infallible word of God.

The vast majority of Christians agree that the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God. Where we disagree is on it's interpretation and understanding which is why we have over 30,000 denominations claiming to have the truth. A more relevant and more important question is this:
Who has final authority regarding the interpretation and teaching of Sacred Scripture? For what purpose did God give us Sacred Scripture? To lead us to Jesus who will take us to the Father. If Jesus gave authority to His Church and sent the Holy Spirit to help His Church discern what was Sacred and what wasn't, then it stands to reason He sent the Holy Spirit to guide His Church in teaching Sacred Scripture. In fact Jesus says in John 14:15-27 that He would do just that.
Peace

 

[Brian Sellers]

The Word of God is not a book, The words of God are written in a book, But the Word is not the book.
"Without that written book you would be lost. Why? because that only way you know about God, Jesus, Sin, or salvation is through the Bible.

Spot on in your first statement, then a total miss in your second statement.

There was no canonized Bible for the first three centuries of the Church, even if there had been, there was no printing press. It took years to copy by a book by hand which would then have to be read and reviewed to ensure its accuracy. There was no paper. They used papyrus or vellum, both very expensive. The cost of reproducing a book in the first century would cost more than your house; moreover, vast majority of people couldn't read. Christ founded a Church, not a book, on the apostles and gave them and us the great commission. The Apostles did not walk around with a copy of the KJV under their arm. Most of them never wrote a single sentence and most of their followers never read a single word, but they built Jesus's Church. Being literate is not a prerequisite for salvation, faith is.

 

[Achilles6129]

You are correct. I DO NOT worship or serve the image of a dark, jealous and ferocious dragon (2Samuel 22:7-12), a self proclaimed beast (Hosea 13:4-8, 1Peter 5:8) and a confessed taunting spiritual predator from hell (Deuteronomy 32:22-25) who has a well documented obsession with the aroma of incinerating flesh.

But again, if you have accepted Jesus Christ as your savior and choose to obey HIS merciful and just commands rather than the evil commands of Satan in the O.T. (which Christ fully abolished for obvious reasons), I don't think you have anything to worry about. Spiritual blindness is not a sin. (John 9:39-41)

Peace and love to you brother in Christ!

I haven't read this whole thread, so I don't know whether or not you've addressed this before, but exactly what do you think the Old Testament is, if you reject it as the word of God? And what do you make of the connections between the New Testament and the Old?

 

[marineimaging]

I do know what you mean. That you reject parts of the Bible, just like I said. Faith's great. But let's no pretend that "having faith" means "believing every bit of the Bible", because, apart from anything else, the Bible is a self contradictory and imperfect book written by humans.

Now, sorry if that "pushes your buttons", it's not meant to. It's just a basic acknowledgement of fact.

Please don't put words in my mouth and I don't think you are sorry if it pushes my button. I think you enjoy believing you have one-upped someone. I do not believe the Bible contradicts itself nor does it err in anyway. I am absolutely certain that any error is in men's interpretation of the Living Word. I am absolutely certain the Bible is God's Living Word and by living, I mean that to those who derive spiritual direction from it also understand that gist of a chapter and verse will change in subtle ways just as if we are conversing with God. As the Bible also states, those who have no spiritual discernment nor desire to seek God's direction. So, to support my statement with scripture;

1 Corinthians 2:14-16King James Version (KJV)
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

I haven't seen anything in your responses that says you desire to know God. What I see is that you desire to usurp God by finding what you think is a chink in the armor if those who belief. I can only laugh sadly at your attempt. Sadly because you need spiritual help.

 

[JGHorton]

Many Christians do not fully understand some parts of the Bible. Others disagree with the interpretations of various parts of the Bible. That, however, is not the same as accepting / rejecting the Bible as God's absolute truth standard and authority.

The huge problem with disbelieving any part of Scripture, is that it undermines one's ability to confidently believe any other part. How can one confidently trust Jesus Christ as one's Savior and Lord based on Scripture, yet, reject the Biblical account of God's creation?

Accepting everything in Scripture as literal is not the basis of Salvation and eternal life. But, stepping back from the truth and authority of God's inspired Scripture is a slippery slope (For more details, see ucanknowthetruth.com).

 

[Achilles6129]

Achilles, you stated: "Can you be a Christian and only believe some parts of the Bible"? FYI: The Protestant Bible/KJV Martin Luther removed 7 Books away from the Bible, which are: Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, as well as parts of Esther and Parts of Daniel, AND nearly took the Book of James from the Bible.

Achilles, AND you are worried: "Can you be a Christian and only believe some parts of the Bible". lol lol lol

Achilles, the question you should be asking is: Can you be a Protestant Christian if your Protestants Bible is missing 7 Books and parts of Esther, parts of Daniel are Missing.

Truth is you can be a protestant Christians, you have the Bible of Martin Luther/King James. However, you can NOT be a Catholic Christians who have the intact Bible of the Apostles/Jesus Christ, to this present day Thanks to the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

Achilles, To sum it all up you have to BELIEVE all that the Bible tells you, to be a Christian, and frankly the Protestant bible is missing a lot.

You do realize that Protestant Old Testament follows the Jewish Old Testament, correct? That's the justification right there. The Catholic OT adds books that the Jews don't consider Scripture.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

YHVH BREATHED HIS WORD. YHVH CLAIMS TO GUARD HIS WORD.
Y'SHUA and the Jews and the Apostles(all Jews) and the disciples with Y'SHUA (all or mostly Jews)
all went to synagogue every 7th day SABBATH and listened to TORAH READING and TEACHING as
Y'SHUA TOLD those following HIM to do.

Men were used by GOD (YHVH), but YHVH is the ONE WHO guarded and protected and arranged HIS WORD as HE PLEASED all along. (not men) (not men opposed to HIM). History is replete with being re-written concerning this and many other things , by the so-called 'victors'
but YHVH is the ONE GUARDING and PRESERVING HIS WORD,
and
YHVH is the ONE WHO gives understanding of HIS WORD.
IT is entirely good and perfect and life-giving, as is Y'SHUA MESSIAH SAVIOR KING COMFORTER HEALER TEACHER.