If the Bible is so cut and dry why do no two Christians agree on doctrine?

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,370
10,611
Georgia
✟912,970.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The Bible seems not so "cut and dried" as some would have us believe.

Let me make totally clear that I can find nothing in the Bible that causes meany doubt whatsoever! But, here is what I wrote in my book, "It Seems To Me":

Another reason I felt directed to write this book is to reveal the purposeful obfuscations in the Word! The reason for these purposeful mis-directions/confusions in the New Testament, are the same reason today, as was the reason for Jesus' speaking in Parables, during His earthly ministry. Had Jesus spoken the truth, in clarity from the very start of His earthly ministry, He would not have lived even the three years that He needed, to accomplish all that He, God and Holy Spirit decided that He/They needed to accomplish prior to His crucifixion!


Today, those two reasons become one; to give man a chance to deny Him! God gives man plenty of rope to hang Himself. He does not want robots for a family, He wants faith-filled lovers of Him/Them, and man is just dying to deny Him; so determined are men to become gods unto themselves!


The Trinity decided, before the foundations of the earth, that Jesus would fulfill all the Messi-anic prophesies of The Old Testament, before going to the cross, and He needed three years to accomplish all of the dozens of Old Testament Prophesies that God, through the Prophets, had promised the jews that their Messiah would do.

But in that text you are sticking to generalities. (And of course I myself would agree that there are indeed differences between denominations) - I am wondering which ones you cited as examples. Or is it that "Robot" phrase and possibly a reference to predestination.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,370
10,611
Georgia
✟912,970.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
This is a very somber question. We all need to explore this phenomenon carefully because our salvation depends on it. I cannot list nor know all of the reasons but some may encompass a chronology of learning. We learn from generation to generation; and, the substance of what we learn is usually acceptable because our parents, educators, others held in high esteem are deemed to be trustworthy. We, also, have the innate tendency-because of sin-to accept or reject what fits our beliefs that conform to our personalities and lifestyles.

Considering my lack of a more through explanation, I refer you to a few direct warnings-from the Bible-considering this doom that will effect most of the masses. Reference: Matthew 7:15, 21-23; Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9, 10; 2 Timothy 4:3-5; 2 Peter 2:1-3,7.

And of course the fact that the NT writers repeatedly point out the doctrinal heresy arising from within the NT church - as a warning to those living today that the same principle exists.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,370
10,611
Georgia
✟912,970.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
We believe the Scriptures for Christ's sake, we do not believe Christ for Scripture's sake. Christ is Lord.

-CryptoLutheran


We only know of the history of Christ through scripture. "Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" Romans 10.

Going with "scripture" we go directly back to the text written and read 2000 years ago - bypassing many centuries of man-made-error-in-traditions and doctrines of men Mark 7:6-13 as Christ points out.
 
Upvote 0

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,449
1,228
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟90,207.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Bible seems not so "cut and dried" as some would have us believe.

Let me make totally clear that I can find nothing in the Bible that causes meany doubt whatsoever! But, here is what I wrote in my book, "It Seems To Me":

Another reason I felt directed to write this book is to reveal the purposeful obfuscations in the Word! The reason for these purposeful mis-directions/confusions in the New Testament, are the same reason today, as was the reason for Jesus' speaking in Parables, during His earthly ministry. Had Jesus spoken the truth, in clarity from the very start of His earthly ministry, He would not have lived even the three years that He needed, to accomplish all that He, God and Holy Spirit decided that He/They needed to accomplish prior to His crucifixion!


Today, those two reasons become one; to give man a chance to deny Him! God gives man plenty of rope to hang Himself. He does not want robots for a family, He wants faith-filled lovers of Him/Them, and man is just dying to deny Him; so determined are men to become gods unto themselves!


The Trinity decided, before the foundations of the earth, that Jesus would fulfill all the Messi-anic prophesies of The Old Testament, before going to the cross, and He needed three years to accomplish all of the dozens of Old Testament Prophesies that God, through the Prophets, had promised the jews that their Messiah would do.
With all due respect I read your assumption that Jesus could not have lived more than three years to complete His ministry would seem to imply that God had no control. Not over men or the world or the cross. I find that hard to believe from any position or direction. God is not subject to men's timing and His grace, through Jesus our Messiah, was not affected by any man, any where. He was not taken to the cross, He went to the cross. No single man convicted Him, He was convicted by ALL men. His Word is not convoluted then or now. That men have a problem is that men have a problem with anything to do with goodness. The problem occurred in Eden and it was there that our ability to understand our God faltered. And will do so until Jesus return.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,449
1,228
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟90,207.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
This is a very somber question. We all need to explore this phenomenon carefully because our salvation depends on it. I cannot list nor know all of the reasons but some may encompass a chronology of learning. We learn from generation to generation; and, the substance of what we learn is usually acceptable because our parents, educators, others held in high esteem are deemed to be trustworthy. We, also, have the innate tendency-because of sin-to accept or reject what fits our beliefs that conform to our personalities and lifestyles.

Considering my lack of a more through explanation, I refer you to a few direct warnings-from the Bible-considering this doom that will effect most of the masses. Reference: Matthew 7:15, 21-23; Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9, 10; 2 Timothy 4:3-5; 2 Peter 2:1-3,7.
If our salvation rests on it, then how is it possible that an ignorant, uneducated sheep herder sitting on the side of a hill be saved? What Jesus did was sufficient. What I do is out of love, not any duty. I don't see how our imperfect lives can be made perfect by our own behaviors. Otherwise Jesus would not need to have been unjustly beaten, spat upon, carried his cross and then crucified on that same cross for our sins. We could have simply achieved our salvation by our own works and left Jesus alone. Do more good than bad and that would have been enough. Yet, God said it wasn't good enough. Nor was living a moral life. Or the Word would not have said we have all fallen short of the Glory of God. ALL of us.
 
Upvote 0

Paul G West Sr

Active Member
Jan 29, 2019
51
23
85
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
✟17,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
With all due respect I read your assumption that Jesus could not have lived more than three years to complete His ministry would seem to imply that God had no control. Not over men or the world or the cross. I find that hard to believe from any position or direction. God is not subject to men's timing and His grace, through Jesus our Messiah, was not affected by any man, any where. He was not taken to the cross, He went to the cross. No single man convicted Him, He was convicted by ALL men. His Word is not convoluted then or now. That men have a problem is that men have a problem with anything to do with goodness. The problem occurred in Eden and it was there that our ability to understand our God faltered. And will do so until Jesus return.

I appreciate what you have said, but God lets men be men, most of the time, and the Pharisees and Sadducees would have killed Jesus the first week, if they had know all that He would say and do in those three years. You may remember, that Jesus disappeared (slipped through the crowd) a few times. They would have killed Him then, if God had wanted, but His mission was not yet accomplished. Certainly God could have changed His plan and prevented the Crucifixion. He could have accomplished what He wanted to accomplish in one day! He could have found another way and not sent Jesus down here at all. How-ever, He/They/The Trinity did it as they planned from before time began.

Both statements are true, in my estimation. It's just that God knew how much time He needed for Jesus to get the job done. I believe that because that is actually the time that He used. In other words, why did God plan for three years in the first place? Because He knew! There are no surprises with God. I think I am writing truth that you will agree with.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Pharisees and Sadducees would have killed Jesus the first week, if they had know all that He would say and do in those three years.

I won't defend the Sadducees but I do believe that the Pharisees have been greatly maligned. Over the centuries and going right back to the New Testament itself, the Pharisees have been viewed very negatively. In my opinion most of this negativity is quite undeserved.

At the time of Jesus the Pharisees were the most liberal and progressive aspect of Judaism. They were in several 'schools' or ‘bets’ --- the most progressive was Bet Hillel, which was in a minority position at the time of Jesus. The dominant group was the more conservative Bet Shammai. Towards the end of the first century following the destruction of the temple, Bet Hillel moved into the dominant role. Modern rabbinical Judaism traces its roots to the Pharisee movement.

Being a rabbi, Jesus was also a Pharisee and it seems most likely that Jesus was of Bet Hillel. To suggest that the scribes and Pharisees were in bed with the high priest and his little group is to betray a lack of understanding of Judaism at that time. The high priest, a Sadducee, was the most hated man in Judaism for the simple reason that he was regarded as a Roman 'quisling' --- he was after all personally appointed by the procurator himself and answered to him. The high priest did chair the Sanhedrin but did not control it. It was, in fact, controlled by the Pharisees who opposed the high priest at nearly every turn.

The Pharisees themselves became a major movement within Judaism in the centuries just prior to Jesus. They regarded their role as an effort to make the Law a possession of all the people not just the priesthood and the ruling elite. To this end they established synagogues in the cities, towns and villages. That is to say, they invented the 'community church' and most Christian churches today follow the same order of service established by the Pharisees --- several scripture readings interspersed with prayer and hymns and of course a sermon usually based on one of the readings. They also established schools attached to the synagogues to encourage literacy even amongst the common people. At the time of Jesus they as a group were certainly were not the hypocrites that the gospels portray them as. It is also very probably true that there were individual Pharisees who were over-zealous hypocrites.

In addition, they were able to successfully introduce legal measures to mitigate the harsher aspects of Torah law. This had the effect of virtually eliminating legal executions by stoning for offences like blasphemy, adultery, rebellious youths and the like. In those few executions that did take place, they ensured that the victim was rendered dead or unconscious by the first stone.

Scripture portrays a degree of hostility between the Pharisees and Jesus and his followers. It is doubtful that this was the actual case at the time of Jesus. I suspect that the majority of Pharisees would have been both curious about and friendly toward Jesus. In Acts 5:33-42 Luke portrays Peter and the apostles arrested and taken for trial before the Sanhedrin. Note that earlier in this same chapter it was the Sadducees not the Pharisees who were demanding that the apostles be imprisoned. It was Rabbi Gamaliel, a Pharisee, who successfully defended them before the Sanhedrin. Rabbi Gamaliel was a student of Rabbi Hillel mentioned earlier. Scripture even notes that Saul/Paul studied under Gamaliel.

About forty years following the execution of Jesus, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple and with it they also destroyed the high priesthood. In the years following, the leadership of Judaism did devolve upon the Pharisees and we see rabbinic Judaism becoming dominant. Like all peoples threatened with cultural extinction, Judaism turned inward --- they circled the wagons and became very suspicious of any threat both internal and external. This is a fundamentalist knee jerk reaction --- we see something similar going on in the Islamic world today and also in the Christian right in certain parts of the USA.

This was the climate in which the gospels were written. By this time it was becoming increasingly apparent that the early Christian church was losing the battle for the heart and soul of Judaism to the Pharisee rabbis and there was a good deal of bitterness on the part of both parties. This explains the animosity toward the Pharisees. Let us then temper our attitudes and ‘Pharisee rhetoric’ because we now realize, for the most part, that they have been portrayed quite unfairly in the gospels.
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,369
7,745
Canada
✟722,927.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Whether it's eternal security or some other basic truth of scripture how come no two Christians will agree with the Bible? I mean there are Christians out there that dont even believe that belief is good enough for salvation when the Bible clearly says "believe in Christ and you will be saved" in multiple spots. I mean its extremely difficult to get the truth out of scripture because everyone will interpret a particular verse differently. Why isn't there just one huge believe all belief that one can pick and say "Okay I believe that. Yay! I am saved now!"? Why all the divisions in the church and among Christians? What is the truth about scripture?
Well I think the pages are cut and are dry unless thrown into the lake then they're cut and damp.

I think the post reformation experience of the faith seems to indicate that the scriptures are not enough to bring the whole faith together. Maturity of the whole body is also required.
 
Upvote 0

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,449
1,228
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟90,207.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I appreciate what you have said, but God lets men be men, most of the time, and the Pharisees and Sadducees would have killed Jesus the first week, if they had know all that He would say and do in those three years. You may remember, that Jesus disappeared (slipped through the crowd) a few times. They would have killed Him then, if God had wanted, but His mission was not yet accomplished. Certainly God could have changed His plan and prevented the Crucifixion. He could have accomplished what He wanted to accomplish in one day! He could have found another way and not sent Jesus down here at all. How-ever, He/They/The Trinity did it as they planned from before time began.

Both statements are true, in my estimation. It's just that God knew how much time He needed for Jesus to get the job done. I believe that because that is actually the time that He used. In other words, why did God plan for three years in the first place? Because He knew! There are no surprises with God. I think I am writing truth that you will agree with.
Do you know Jesus as God?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,449
1,228
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟90,207.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I want you to sit down and imagine a society far different from ours. How different? Perhaps more different than most of us can even imagine.

It is a society without mass media. There is no radio, no television, no telephones, no cell phones, no telegraph, not even a printing press. Even if the printing press existed, it would be of little worth since the great majority of people were illiterate. Only the rulers, court officials, military officers, the rich, the merchants and the priests but very very few of the common people could read or write. Most news or information had to be transmitted orally person to person.

To send a message over a distance a scribe might be employed to write it and another to read it upon arrival. It would have had to be carried by a person on foot, or horseback, or camelback or by ship at sea. All of these were by no means certain. A message from Jerusalem to Rome might take weeks even months to arrive if at all.

What about the people themselves? As mentioned earlier, most were illiterate. This is not surprising for a society in which most lived a hand to mouth existence. Mere survival was of utmost importance. Few people traveled any more than a few dozen kilometers from their native town. Few people were ever exposed to thoughts from anyone more distant than that.

Is it possible to even translate these conditions into the present day? Imagine, if you will, trying to describe an event that happened in the 1960's, say, the assassination of President Kennedy. There are no videotapes to view, no audio tapes, and not even any photographs. There might be written accounts but 95% of the population are illiterate. The story is passed down orally from person to person. Even in a society where oral transmission is valued and respected, the chance of getting the story straight is almost nil. This is the situation the author of the Gospel of Mark (whoever he was) was in. Remember we are only looking at 40 years. Add another 20 to 30 years and we have the situation of the author of the Gospel of John (whoever he was).

Can we trust these accounts? As literal history? No! As an embellished, allegorical, midrashic accounts? Yes! But we must always remind ourselves that they are embellished, allegorical and midrashic and deal with them as such. To grant these accounts more credence than that is to ignore the entire context of the times in which they were written.

Am I trashing scripture? By no means! I am respecting scripture by being realistic about it. Our Judeo-Christian scriptures were a very human endeavor in a certain context of history. When we lose sight of that context, then we also lose sight of the meaning and value of those scriptures. At this point, I have not even yet addressed the many other contexts of scripture ---- historical, scientific, economic, military, religious, literary and more! All of these contexts affect the interpretation of scripture. We ignore them at our peril.
And all of that might be true... IF and I can't make this IF big enough, God who is our omniscient, omnipotent, perfect God were not directly involved in developing His Word for us. The failure is not of God to breathe the words for men to write, but rather, the failure to come together is because of men's self righteousness. Of men's pride. Of men's failures and weaknesses. That is why we cannot come together over the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
FWIW, I don't think that is true in most cases. Whether it is todays churchgoers or the famous reformers of history, most sincerely disagreed with the views or beliefs of whatever other church body they felt it necessary to contend against. It seemed a moral imperative, in fact, to take a stand given the circumstances. We all have been taught that unity is a virtue, but so is finding and adhering to the truth.
 
Upvote 0

marineimaging

Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
Jul 14, 2014
1,449
1,228
Ward, Colorado
Visit site
✟90,207.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
FWIW, I don't think that is true in most cases. Whether it is todays churchgoers or the famous reformers of history, most sincerely disagreed with the views or beliefs of whatever other church body they felt it necessary to contend against. It seemed a moral imperative, in fact, to take a stand given the circumstances. We all have been taught that unity is a virtue, but so is finding and adhering to the truth.
It's men against men when things fall apart. Men for God have no problems.
 
Upvote 0

1213

Disciple of Jesus
Jul 14, 2011
3,661
1,117
Visit site
✟146,199.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
...everyone will interpret a particular verse differently. ...

I think that is the problem. People should avoid making interpretations, just read directly and honestly what is said and remain in that, without adding own meanings. After all, it is said:

Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, "If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:31-32

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
John 12:49

If you don’t like what you hear, don’t try to change its meaning, just admit the truth and you will be free. :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
I would point out that the very act of reading, is, in and of itself, an act of interpretation.

That is true but it is well to be aware that the Bible itself is an interpretation.
 
Upvote 0

Paul G West Sr

Active Member
Jan 29, 2019
51
23
85
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
✟17,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I won't defend the Sadducees but I do believe that the Pharisees have been greatly maligned. Over the centuries and going right back to the New Testament itself, the Pharisees have been viewed very negatively. In my opinion most of this negativity is quite undeserved.

At the time of Jesus the Pharisees were the most liberal and progressive aspect of Judaism. They were in several 'schools' or ‘bets’ --- the most progressive was Bet Hillel, which was in a minority position at the time of Jesus. The dominant group was the more conservative Bet Shammai. Towards the end of the first century following the destruction of the temple, Bet Hillel moved into the dominant role. Modern rabbinical Judaism traces its roots to the Pharisee movement.

Being a rabbi, Jesus was also a Pharisee and it seems most likely that Jesus was of Bet Hillel. To suggest that the scribes and Pharisees were in bed with the high priest and his little group is to betray a lack of understanding of Judaism at that time. The high priest, a Sadducee, was the most hated man in Judaism for the simple reason that he was regarded as a Roman 'quisling' --- he was after all personally appointed by the procurator himself and answered to him. The high priest did chair the Sanhedrin but did not control it. It was, in fact, controlled by the Pharisees who opposed the high priest at nearly every turn.

The Pharisees themselves became a major movement within Judaism in the centuries just prior to Jesus. They regarded their role as an effort to make the Law a possession of all the people not just the priesthood and the ruling elite. To this end they established synagogues in the cities, towns and villages. That is to say, they invented the 'community church' and most Christian churches today follow the same order of service established by the Pharisees --- several scripture readings interspersed with prayer and hymns and of course a sermon usually based on one of the readings. They also established schools attached to the synagogues to encourage literacy even amongst the common people. At the time of Jesus they as a group were certainly were not the hypocrites that the gospels portray them as. It is also very probably true that there were individual Pharisees who were over-zealous hypocrites.

In addition, they were able to successfully introduce legal measures to mitigate the harsher aspects of Torah law. This had the effect of virtually eliminating legal executions by stoning for offences like blasphemy, adultery, rebellious youths and the like. In those few executions that did take place, they ensured that the victim was rendered dead or unconscious by the first stone.

Scripture portrays a degree of hostility between the Pharisees and Jesus and his followers. It is doubtful that this was the actual case at the time of Jesus. I suspect that the majority of Pharisees would have been both curious about and friendly toward Jesus. In Acts 5:33-42 Luke portrays Peter and the apostles arrested and taken for trial before the Sanhedrin. Note that earlier in this same chapter it was the Sadducees not the Pharisees who were demanding that the apostles be imprisoned. It was Rabbi Gamaliel, a Pharisee, who successfully defended them before the Sanhedrin. Rabbi Gamaliel was a student of Rabbi Hillel mentioned earlier. Scripture even notes that Saul/Paul studied under Gamaliel.

About forty years following the execution of Jesus, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple and with it they also destroyed the high priesthood. In the years following, the leadership of Judaism did devolve upon the Pharisees and we see rabbinic Judaism becoming dominant. Like all peoples threatened with cultural extinction, Judaism turned inward --- they circled the wagons and became very suspicious of any threat both internal and external. This is a fundamentalist knee jerk reaction --- we see something similar going on in the Islamic world today and also in the Christian right in certain parts of the USA.

This was the climate in which the gospels were written. By this time it was becoming increasingly apparent that the early Christian church was losing the battle for the heart and soul of Judaism to the Pharisee rabbis and there was a good deal of bitterness on the part of both parties. This explains the animosity toward the Pharisees. Let us then temper our attitudes and ‘Pharisee rhetoric’ because we now realize, for the most part, that they have been portrayed quite unfairly in the gospels.
 
Upvote 0

Paul G West Sr

Active Member
Jan 29, 2019
51
23
85
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
✟17,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But in that text you are sticking to generalities. (And of course I myself would agree that there are indeed differences between denominations) - I am wondering which ones you cited as examples. Or is it that "Robot" phrase and possibly a reference to predestination.
Which phrase are you referring to?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums