Interpretation affecting what's important?

[Sinai]

Must one either believe all of the Bible or none of it?

No--of course not.

Some may have read all of it, studied it, and fully believe all of it. Some may believe all of it in principle or in theory--but since they have not read and studied all of it, they might not necessarily know for sure. Some of the folks who "believe all of the Bible" may believe different parts in different ways. Note how many denominations that accept the Bible as being their source of authority may still disagree on key issues.

But just because many (perhaps most) Christians may fully believe the Bible to be the fully true and reliable word of God does not mean that it is not possible for persons to believe parts of the Bible without necessarily believing all of it.

 

[Ron21647]

Several times there has been a call for a theistic evolution web site. I'm not sure there is one. I didn't even realize there were others with this belief until I joined these forums less than a month ago. However, I have had this belief for most of my life.

I would say if you want to learn the science involved, to go to the Talk Origins web site. They have a lot of articles on the site, they have references to the scientific papers the articles are summarized from, and even a huge list of YEC sites. If you run out of things to read there, start going to sites run by major universities. a lot of them post science articles.

To answer the original post, I do think the interpretation of Genesis matters. I think many parts of the Bible are symbolic, including the creation, fall, and flood portions. that does not mean I do not think they are important, I just do not think they happened in a literal way as a child would read it.

I cannot believe that God would want a literal interpretation of something that flies in the face of science, which is being used to explain His creation.


Ron

 

[Bushido216]

Not to argue, but I personally agree with the quote regarding all or nothing, with the following elaborations:

I believe the Bible to be inerrant, but we must rely on the guidance of the Holy Spirit to understand it properly. We can all get differing interpretations or meanings out of what we read in Scripture, the truth of which depends on how in touch we are with the Holy Spirit's guidance. Taking an absolutist stand (which I believe is what you're referring to Bushido216), either direction, based on our own understanding, leaving no room for the fact that our interpretations can be wrong, demonstrates a lack of the humility Christ expects of us.

On that note, I'd like to remind everyone here (BOTH SIDES) that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. Mud-slinging, belittling, name-calling, etc. is not beneficial to the cause of Christ, and in my opinion disrespects Him wholly. If we're going to disagree in the course of discussions here, let's do it respectfully, okay?

Naturally the whole Bible must be believed. However, that the gentleman to whom I was referring was doing was making his interpretation the only teneble one. That is what is dangerous and unnecessary.

 

[brinley45cal]

Man why is everyone being so mean?The point i was getting at is,if you dont agree with everything the bible says then how do you know that any of its true?
Mybe some just pick and choose just so they can do what they want without feeling convicted.Something to think about.

 

[pressingon]

I cannot believe that God would want a literal interpretation of something that flies in the face of science, which is being used to explain His creation.

Ron

I'm not trying to start a debate here, but I think what you've stated is a fairly accurate description (from my perspective, hearing what's been stated in these forums many times) of the general stance Theistic Evolutionists have regarding God and the Bible.

To contrast your position by stating the general Creationist position similarly, I cannot believe that God would have us accept an interpretation explaining His Creation presented by science that flies in the face of a straightforward reading of the Bible.

That being said.... Yes, some Creationists blindly dismiss any scientific evidence contrary to their position carte blanche... and some, with the best of intentions, develop things to support their position which are quite misleading (we all have a black sheep or two, don't we?). However, there are some of us that, after digging into the science itself, examining assumptions, experimental methods, evidence, etc., honestly believe that there are alternate explanations that are consistent with a straightforward reading of the Bible. Does that mean we have all the answers? Certainly not... but then again, neither does science. Our search for answers to the how of God's Creation will no doubt continue for a long time... there are many blanks that are yet to be filled. One day, perhaps we'll know with all certainty all of the details. I'm not counting on that until I get to heaven and can ask, though.

Until then, I, as I'm sure you do as well, simply continue my faith journey, seeking God's wisdom to grow closer to Him each day through my relationship with Him, my knowledge of His Word, and in my understanding of the creation which declares His majesty.

 

[Asar'el]

I'm not trying to start a debate here, but I think what you've stated is a fairly accurate description (from my perspective, hearing what's been stated in these forums many times) of the general stance Theistic Evolutionists have regarding God and the Bible.

To contrast your position by stating the general Creationist position similarly, I cannot believe that God would have us accept an interpretation explaining His Creation presented by science that flies in the face of a straightforward reading of the Bible.

That being said.... Yes, some Creationists blindly dismiss any scientific evidence contrary to their position carte blanche... and some, with the best of intentions, develop things to support their position which are quite misleading (we all have a black sheep or two, don't we?). However, there are some of us that, after digging into the science itself, examining assumptions, experimental methods, evidence, etc., honestly believe that there are alternate explanations that are consistent with a straightforward reading of the Bible. Does that mean we have all the answers? Certainly not... but then again, neither does science. Our search for answers to the how of God's Creation will no doubt continue for a long time... there are many blanks that are yet to be filled. One day, perhaps we'll know with all certainty all of the details. I'm not counting on that until I get to heaven and can ask, though.

Until then, I, as I'm sure you do as well, simply continue my faith journey, seeking God's wisdom to grow closer to Him each day through my relationship with Him, my knowledge of His Word, and in my understanding of the creation which declares His majesty.

Amen! Well said!

In answer to the original post I would add this: It does matter how one views the entire Scripture; Genesis as much as Psalms as much as Matthew as much as Romans as much as Revelation. I find those willing to place anything as more authoritative than Scripture end up relying on the flesh in the search for truth, and fit the Word to their own desires, rather than letting the Word speak to them.

Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Creation, Adam, Eve, Sin, Fall, Promise, Enoch, Noah, Flood - so many foundational concepts originate in Genesis... and their culmination with Jesus Christ and His death and resurrection. And it really has to do with hearing God's words ... and listening to them, instead of the imagination of our heart.

This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.

 

[Chi_Cygni]

In answer to the original post I would add this: It does matter how one views the entire Scripture; Genesis as much as Psalms as much as Matthew as much as Romans as much as Revelation. I find those willing to place anything as more authoritative than Scripture end up relying on the flesh in the search for truth, and fit the Word to their own desires, rather than letting the Word speak to them.

So all Scripture is equally valid to you?

Tell me what about Scripture that was arbitrarily rejected? What about the way Revelation was included? (a mistake IMO)

What about the Apocrypal books? Are they inerrant? Gospel of Thomas?

Last time I checked the books entered the Canon by councils of men and whether some made it or not was the equivalent of a coin toss.

 

[Bushido216]

Amen! Well said!

In answer to the original post I would add this: It does matter how one views the entire Scripture; Genesis as much as Psalms as much as Matthew as much as Romans as much as Revelation. I find those willing to place anything as more authoritative than Scripture end up relying on the flesh in the search for truth, and fit the Word to their own desires, rather than letting the Word speak to them.

I hope you understand the fallacy of this arguement. This is one of those thing that just sends me into a raging tizzy.

What you're setting yourself up to do (if you were that sort of person, which you may or may not) is to claim that any interpretation other than yours is driven by earthly desires. That's equivalent to saying that anyone who doesn't want to fight the Iraq war is unpatriotic. The two aren't connected in anyway.

 

[L'Anatra]

Amen! Well said!

In answer to the original post I would add this: It does matter how one views the entire Scripture; Genesis as much as Psalms as much as Matthew as much as Romans as much as Revelation. I find those willing to place anything as more authoritative than Scripture end up relying on the flesh in the search for truth, and fit the Word to their own desires, rather than letting the Word speak to them.

Honestly, your placement of your interpretation of scripture above all else seems a little delusional to me. It really isn't your place to judge how others interpret the Bible. And to say that you don't fit the Word to your own desires is, if you don't mind my being blunt, a lie, plain and simple. I'm certainly not saying that's how it should work, but you're human just like the rest of us. Your lack of humility is unbecoming.

And I'll say it again... scripture was not intended to be a treatise on science. Otherwise, nothing would have changed in the last 2,000 years. I won't even bring up medical doctors.

 

[L'Anatra]

Man why is everyone being so mean?The point i was getting at is,if you dont agree with everything the bible says then how do you know that any of its true?
Mybe some just pick and choose just so they can do what they want without feeling convicted.Something to think about.

Well... I wouldn't say that anyone is really being mean, but rather that they're trying to make a point. Some people, like me, have a habit of speaking rather caustically or sarcastically. These things are detectable in a direct conversation, but are rather difficult to notice in a primarily text-only forum such as this.

Just because the Bible contains factual errors hardly means it's theological truths are any less important. Believing otherwise is theologically dangerous. God created the Heavens and the Earth... if you say, for example, that He created them with the appearance of age, you are saying that He is deceitful.

I understand your last point, in a sense, but if you need a book to tell you how to be a good person there's a problem.

 

[brinley45cal]

Well... I wouldn't say that anyone is really being mean, but rather that they're trying to make a point. Some people, like me, have a habit of speaking rather caustically or sarcastically. These things are detectable in a direct conversation, but are rather difficult to notice in a primarily text-only forum such as this.

Just because the Bible contains factual errors hardly means it's theological truths are any less important. Believing otherwise is theologically dangerous. God created the Heavens and the Earth... if you say, for example, that He created them with the appearance of age, you are saying that He is deceitful.

I understand your last point, in a sense, but if you need a book to tell you how to be a good person there's a problem.

Hello there!
I guess i can see where your comming from,but im not sure either one can be proven.I guess it might be one of those things we wont know till we get to heaven.

 

[L'Anatra]

Hello there!
I guess i can see where your comming from,but im not sure either one can be proven.I guess it might be one of those things we wont know till we get to heaven.

Hi!

Yeah... absolute proof is not something you're gonna find in science. So it's entirely up to you. I feel that if you're interested you can try and find answers, if you're not it's really not that important.

 

[brinley45cal]

Hi!

Yeah... absolute proof is not something you're gonna find in science. So it's entirely up to you. I feel that if you're interested you can try and find answers, if you're not it's really not that important.

Howdy
I totaly agree.I might not know all the answers,but thats not going to stop me from searching to find them.