How do we read and interpret the Bible.

It is this constant taking of man's 'understanding' over God's words that really gets on my goat. It's all "We know the Bible is wrong in light of new discoveries by men". If we start questioning the foundation of the Word, then we must question everything else written in it. You knock a foundation over, where is the means for the rest of it to stay standing? The fact that God creating the world is mentioned also in the NT by doesn't ring true?

The flood (worldwide) happened. What people have a hard time with is that before the flood, the 'earth' or ground was all in one place and there wer no huge 29029 foot tall mountains at the time. All the plate tectonics and the movement of them occurred during and after the flood. The mountains started pushing up during and after the flood. The reason there are many cultures that believe in a 'localised' flood is that for each and every person on the Earth at then time, it would have been localised (since they all resided on the same bit of earth - there were no separate continents or countries - and were all spread out at the tower of Babel, taking with them all the lore passed down throught the generations). It is because people believe in man's interpretation of history that they cannot understand the true history.

As far as stories being allegorical or metaphorical, which ones are which? Do we have the wisdom to know this answer? Still, I suppose if we are taking man's word over God's Word then we are going to question everything written. Who are we to say which story is real and which is a work of 'fiction'? The only 'story' in the Bible that I believe was written metaphorically was that of the Song of Songs by Solomon. It was meant to be taken that way because it is easy to see how figurative the language is. We really have no reason to doubt the validity of the rest of the Bible just because it seems too 'weird' or 'unbelievable' to be true.

Oh, by the way, the idea of 'Big Bang' beginnings, etc is just conjecture and guessing. It cannot be proven, nor can it be experimented on. As such, it cannot be touted as truth. It all depends on your 'world view'. This then comes down to Philosophy rather than science by saying 'My world view is correct and yours isn't'. It is not science so don't tout it as such.

This is my two cents worth and I hope it helps some people here, though I hold grave doubts on that score.

radlad72 said:

It is this constant taking of man's 'understanding' . . . .

. . . . It is not science so don't tout it as such.

This is my two cents worth and I hope it helps some people here, though I hold grave doubts on that score.

Click to expand...

If nothing else at least you got the doubting part right.

Washington said:

If nothing else at least you got the doubting part right.

Click to expand...

With attitudes like this there is great reason to doubt that people will listen to things that God says rather than man.

radlad72 said:

As far as stories being allegorical or metaphorical, which ones are which? Do we have the wisdom to know this answer? Still, I suppose if we are taking man's word over God's Word then we are going to question everything written. Who are we to say which story is real and which is a work of 'fiction'? The only 'story' in the Bible that I believe was written metaphorically was that of the Song of Songs by Solomon. It was meant to be taken that way because it is easy to see how figurative the language is. We really have no reason to doubt the validity of the rest of the Bible just because it seems too 'weird' or 'unbelievable' to be true.

Click to expand...

So early creation occurred in 24-hour periods before there existed the Earth-Sun system by which we measure the modern day? And you don't see some room for metaphor or prose in there?

In any case, as long as you are transfixed by the heresy that "God's Word" = "what's written in the Old Testament," you might as well just give up trying to reconcile your beliefs with reality.

TeddyKGB said:

So early creation occurred in 24-hour periods before there existed the Earth-Sun system by which we measure the modern day? And you don't see some room for metaphor or prose in there?

In any case, as long as you are transfixed by the heresy that "God's Word" = "what's written in the Old Testament," you might as well just give up trying to reconcile your beliefs with reality.

Click to expand...

It was written quite a bit after the fact by Moses who was given the words by God. I believe God wouold have some understanding about the time frame He was using, don't you? Oh, sorry, I forgot, you don't believe in God at all.

So man's reality (which is as warped as an image in a house of mirrors) is more believable than an infinite being's reality? I think not!

radlad72 said:

It was written quite a bit after the fact by Moses who was given the words by God. I believe God wouold have some understanding about the time frame He was using, don't you? Oh, sorry, I forgot, you don't believe in God at all.

Click to expand...

Regardless, the hypothesis that Moses is the sole author of Genesis has been abandoned for nearly a half-century.

Either way, it's disappointing that you are so wrapped up in absurdist apologetics.

So man's reality (which is as warped as an image in a house of mirrors) is more believable than an infinite being's reality? I think not!

Click to expand...

This entails the truly bizarre position that the Bible somehow interprets itself, in spite of the fact that you read with your own eyes and listen to apologists and preachers with your own ears.

TeddyKGB said:

Regardless, the hypothesis that Moses is the sole author of Genesis has been abandoned for nearly a half-century.

Moot point. All Scripture is God-breathed whether it was fully written by Moses or not.

Either way, it's disappointing that you are so wrapped up in absurdist apologetics.

I am sorry you feel that way. I really wouldn't have thought you, as an athiest, would give a flying fijian whether I was wrapped in Christian apologetics or not.

This entails the truly bizarre position that the Bible somehow interprets itself, in spite of the fact that you read with your own eyes and listen to apologists and preachers with your own ears.

Click to expand...

I would like to believe that I read with the input of the Holy Sprit to help me to understand. I do not blindly follow what preachers say, that would be short-sighted and not very prudent. Of course I listen, it would be rude not to, but this doesn't mean everything they say is taken at face value.

radlad72 said:

I would like to believe that I read with the input of the Holy Sprit to help me to understand. I do not blindly follow what preachers say, that would be short-sighted and not very prudent. Of course I listen, it would be rude not to, but this doesn't mean everything they say is taken at face value.

Click to expand...

Quick question:

If you read something, and then another Christian reads the same thing but comes to a different conclusion, who is correct?

b&wpac4 said:

Quick question:

If you read something, and then another Christian reads the same thing but comes to a different conclusion, who is correct?

Click to expand...

Each would probably believe they were. It is really impossible to tell. I guess maybe that it would be the particular person whose interpretation was most in line with what the rest of Scripture had to say on the topic.

However this is why we have so many denominations in the world, isn't it? Different people interpreting certain passages differently. We'll probably find out one day.

radlad72 said:

Each would probably believe they were. It is really impossible to tell. I guess maybe that it would be the particular person whose interpretation was most in line with what the rest of Scripture had to say on the topic.

However this is why we have so many denominations in the world, isn't it? Different people interpreting certain passages differently. We'll probably find out one day.

Click to expand...

Seems like quite a mess, to be honest.

b&wpac4 said:

Seems like quite a mess, to be honest.

Click to expand...

And honestly, that is what the devil wants. The bigger the mess the better. I see that you are an agnostic. Don't let the 'mess' stop you from wanting to know more. It is through asking, that we discover more.

radlad72 said:

And honestly, that is what the devil wants. The bigger the mess the better. I see that you are an agnostic. Don't let the 'mess' stop you from wanting to know more. It is through asking, that we discover more.

Click to expand...

The fact that there seems to be no consensus on what the Bible is and means is my primary reason for no longer being a Christian.

b&wpac4 said:

The fact that there seems to be no consensus on what the Bible is and means is my primary reason for no longer being a Christian.

Click to expand...

There's consensus if you look in the right place.

But honestly, do you expect, what, 2 billion people to all agree on what Luke means? Ofttimes the Bible will be twisted to fit an agenda.

MaxP said:

There's consensus if you look in the right place.

But honestly, do you expect, what, 2 billion people to all agree on what Luke means? Ofttimes the Bible will be twisted to fit an agenda.

Click to expand...

If it is the word of God that everybody is supposed to be able to get, then yes.

If it is a book written by men with their own agenda and limited foresight into the future, then no.