Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What I mean is I opened in faith, and it seeed to be the exact page I would have looked for, but I was not versed in scripture at all. So it was "random" but right. Can that mean "god blessed" or something?The conversation probably had to do with the fact that in the West we use unleavened bread for the Sacrament, but in the East they use leavened.
I don't know what you mean by "How do I interpret that?" I'm not sure what it is you want interpreting--that you opened up a Bible to a place talking about bread with yeast and bread without yeast? That's all that "leaven" is--yeast.
-CryptoLutheran
The Holy Spirit intended to convey one particular message in each passage. There is no two right ways to interpret any one passage. There can be duel prophecies but both together are the interpretation.I'm not sure that this is the most helpful or even most orthodox position. What do you mean that there's only one true interpretation of the Bible?
I do not see an interpretation as being relative. You can be right or wrong in your interpretation but not both.The best position, it seems to me, is to say that we've got the text of the Bible and we've got applications of that text. When we're asking for the "meaning" of a particular text, we're asking how that text is to be applied. Because a text can be applied in many different ways to many different circumstances, one text can have many different "meanings". The more we apply the text the more deeply we discover the meaning of the text.
In light of this it's hard to see how the Bible only has "one true interpretation".
Could you give me an example of what you mean?Now this is not to say that every application is valid. If one follows the rules of hermeneutics then the applications that they make are probably valid. If one breaks these rules then their applications are probably invalid.
But because meaning is application and every text has many applications, there is no "one true meaning" to any given text.
The indwelling Holy Spirit is that all-knowing third party.And every Christian thinks that he or she is a True Christian, and there's no objective, all-knowing third party to help us out, so we're back to square one.
Yes, I'm aware that Christians believe this. I obviously can only speak in terms of my own beliefs, which do not include the existence of a third party.The indwelling Holy Spirit is that all-knowing third party.
You have to start with the right motive for knowing if you want the Holy Spirit to help you.
What I mean is I opened in faith, and it seeed to be the exact page I would have looked for, but I was not versed in scripture at all. So it was "random" but right. Can that mean "god blessed" or something?
What I mean is I opened in faith, and it seeed to be the exact page I would have looked for, but I was not versed in scripture at all. So it was "random" but right. Can that mean "god blessed" or something?
My thought is, that if you aren't intentionally looking for an exact verse that you are trying to remember, then you are doing bible roulette to some extent. This would cover situations such as the reading of the bible in a sequential manner, or having bible verses given to you in church. You aren't controlling what information you come across at what time, you are just receiving it as it comes.What I mean is I opened in faith, and it seeed to be the exact page I would have looked for, but I was not versed in scripture at all. So it was "random" but right. Can that mean "god blessed" or something?
It seems like the liberal and reformed Jews have a more rationalistic view of scripture, which is maybe inspired, but like science, progressive and always open to change.
On the other hand the "reformed" Christians, or some at least, view the bible as inerrant and infallible etc.
I know that there are some churches like the unitarians which are willing to "move on" from scripture, or are open to new sources of insight.
But mainstream protestantism - is that as a rule inerrantistic?
It seems like the liberal and reformed Jews have a more rationalistic view of scripture, which is maybe inspired, but like science, progressive and always open to change.
On the other hand the "reformed" Christians, or some at least, view the bible as inerrant and infallible etc.
I know that there are some churches like the unitarians which are willing to "move on" from scripture, or are open to new sources of insight.
But mainstream protestantism - is that as a rule inerrantistic?
I mean more philosophic and logical, or more pragmatic in that they are open to evolution of belief over time.Why is the perspective of the Jews and liberal Christians you describe here "more rationalistic"?
Well "irrationalism" is a philosophy, and fideism (putting faith uppermost) is a type of this. It seems like when you put the bible first as if it were an axiom, one who does so is being fideistic.The implication here is that Reformed believers have an irrational view of the Bible. Can you show that this is so?
Loving their neighbour?Yes, and how do they do so and remain followers of Christ, exactly?
Thanks again. What I mean is the more orthodox as opposed to theologically liberal churches.What is "mainstream protestantism"? I'm not really sure any more...
Selah.
Why is the perspective of the Jews and liberal Christians you describe here "more rationalistic"?I mean more philosophic and logical, or more pragmatic in that they are open to evolution of belief over time.
The implication here is that Reformed believers have an irrational view of the Bible. Can you show that this is so?Well "irrationalism" is a philosophy, and fideism (putting faith uppermost) is a type of this. It seems like when you put the bible first as if it were an axiom, one who does so is being fideistic.
Yes, and how do they do so and remain followers of Christ, exactly?Loving their neighbour?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?