Can a fine leather-bound gilt-edged study bible become a negative influence?

[Xeno.of.athens]

You mean as opposed to letting an organization do all my thinking for me? When you're familiar with what and how Jesus and Paul taught, it's not all that hard.

Had I meant what you wrote I would have written it, so, obviously that is not what I meant.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Never entirely trust the KJV alone for your theology.

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
[2Ti 2:15]

The Douay-Rheims says: Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Had I meant what you wrote I would have written it, so, obviously that is not what I meant.

That's what it sounded like to me, care to set me straight on what you meant?

 

[bling]

Yes, but sometimes the facts don't leave it open to interpretation.
If Paul, for example, was writing to answer a certain problem that a church had, or correct a certain heresy or tell them how to act in a particular situation, that is the background of a particular Scripture - and we do not have the right, or authority, to interpret it to mean something else. There are false teachers who have said, "never mind the commentators/orthodox preaching, I have been inspired to interpret this passage in this way."

Interpretation is not the same as application. Even if a Scripture means X, and was written only to certain people, the Holy Spirit can still apply it to our lives in a certain way.

You should always consider the context, context, context, context and context first.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Douay-Rheims says: Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Yes, it's quite good.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's what it sounded like to me, care to set me straight on what you meant?

No. It was clear enough.

 

[Ceallaigh]

No. It was clear enough.

That's what I thought. But you said you meant something else. But you won't elaborate.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's what I thought. But you said you meant something else. But you won't elaborate.

I am not responsible for how you misconstrue what I write.

---

There are lots of false; prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers out there. It is up to us to find the truth.

Of course, that's called discernment. You will know them by their fruits; Matthew 7:15-20. But that doesn't mean we should put every teacher into that category.

Sounds like hard work, @bling and @Ceallaigh

That is clear enough. And it does not mean what you wrote before.

You mean as opposed to letting an organization do all my thinking for me? When you're familiar with what and how Jesus and Paul taught, it's not all that hard.

So, as I said; "I am not responsible for how you interpret what I write."

 

[Strong in Him]

Never entirely trust the KJV alone for your theology.

I don't; I don't even read it.

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
[2Ti 2:15]

A person needs to study and be taught how to correctly handle the word of truth. The various cults all claim that they, alone, have the truth -their teachings don't align with Scripture.
Study/studying is not a bad thing - as a Jewish boy, Jesus would have studied for his bar Mitzvah. Paul was a Pharisee, so had studied the Scriptures. In fact, he knew about other cultures/beliefs too and was able to quote poets and scholars, as seen in Acts 17:28.
Your priests will have studied - and I would hope that all wise clergy encourage Christians to read, and learn, God's word for themselves. Anyone who doesn't is encouraging dependency on themselves/their church rather than helping believers to grow in the faith.

 

[Strong in Him]

Had I meant what you wrote I would have written it, so, obviously that is not what I meant.

The statement "it sounds like hard work", carries the implication that you don't want to do it (study) or think it necessary.
If you don't want to study - because you believe it is hard work - what is the alternative? Remain ignorant? Or accept the fruit of someone else's study and believe what you they tell you, rather than find out for yourself?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

A person needs to study and be taught how to correctly handle the word of truth. The various cults all claim that they, alone, have the truth -their teachings don't align with Scripture.

It may be a mistake to treat "word of truth" as if it were the same as "scripture".

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The statement "it sounds like hard work", carries the implication that you don't want to do it (study) or think it necessary.

That is an incorrect conclusion and an incorrect interpretation.

Please see post #28

 

[Strong in Him]

That is an incorrect conclusion and an incorrect interpretation.

So why, in a discussion about commentaries/discernment did you write "sounds like hard work?"

 

[Strong in Him]

It may be a mistake to treat "word of truth" as if it were the same as "scripture".

Jesus said "your word is truth", John 17:17. Paul said that the sword of the Spirit is the word of God, Ephesians 6:17.
Scripture contains God's words, and revelations, about himself, his will, his plan etc; the OT prophets proclaimed "this is what the Lord says." Jesus is THE Word. The Scriptures, which Christ quoted and affirmed, are the written record of the God's words and are, themselves, inspired by God.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

So why, in a discussion about commentaries/discernment did you write "sounds like hard work?"

Look at post #28.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Jesus said "your word is truth", John 17:17. Paul said that the sword of the Spirit is the word of God, Ephesians 6:17.

Neither of those passages says "the scriptures are <insert superlative here>".

 

[Strong in Him]

Look at post #28.

I did.
You've evaded the question by stating:

I am not responsible for how you misconstrue what I write.

And:

That is clear enough. And it does not mean what you wrote before.

So tell us plainly.
You start a thread on study Bibles - or one in particular. The comment is made it is best just to read the Bible than to rely on what commentators say. You replied saying it is a huge burden to interpret the Bible alone, and asked how the forummer chose the canonical books.
There followed a short discussion on discernment, false teachers, prophets etc, and you replied to these folks saying, "it sounds like hard work."

As you apparently didn't mean either "it sounds like hard work - I just trust what the Catholic church teaches", or "it sounds like hard work - I don't think it is necessary", what DID you mean by that comment?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Look at post #28.

Usually when someone is so unwilling to explain what they meant, it was something they shouldn't have said.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Neither of those passages says "the scriptures are <insert superlative here>".

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved by him, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly explaining the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15 NRSV Catholic Edition.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You replied saying it is a huge burden to interpret the Bible alone, and asked how the forummer chose the canonical books.

I did not reply saying that. That is your spin, not mine.