No one can read the bible as the original audience

[Devin P]

I'd recommend along those lines to read the bible in 40 days, it's a good journey and it's more likely to remember the beginning when you get to the end, and more specific to your post ... remember the parts of the law that were spoken of when they're being prophesied.

I mean you could probably read it in 40 days, but I don't think anyone has that amount of time, that and you'd miss way too much. Back when Jesus walked the earth, reading through the torah (the first five books of our bibles) with weekly torah portions took them three years, and that's just the first 5 books.

Just read through it from genesis to revelation at your own pace, praying before hand every time that He makes known to you what you're reading, that He grants you discernment, and attention to things you'd have otherwise missed, and at your own pace just read through it. I'd also suggest on top of this, reading the torah portion each week. The torah, as I mentioned is just the first five books of the bible, but there are portions that in a years time will bring you through the torah, and it's at a pace that will allow you take in much more of the story, remembering it so when you do encounter the gospels and the NT writings, all of it is stuck in your noggin. So, whenever they reference a prophet, or the law, or any event that happened in the OT, you'll know the story like the back of your hand. Not that you don't already, but it's definitely working for me for sure!

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Don't let certain people on the forum see this. Because they will whip out the "Well the KJV is the only accurate bible we can read today!" As if its the actual original written stuff. Today we have translations of versions that have also been translated multiple times. No bible is "Accurate" if we are being technical.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I mean you could probably read it in 40 days, but I don't think anyone has that amount of time, that and you'd miss way too much. Back when Jesus walked the earth, reading through the torah (the first five books of our bibles) with weekly torah portions took them three years, and that's just the first 5 books.

Just read through it from genesis to revelation at your own pace, praying before hand every time that He makes known to you what you're reading, that He grants you discernment, and attention to things you'd have otherwise missed, and at your own pace just read through it. I'd also suggest on top of this, reading the torah portion each week. The torah, as I mentioned is just the first five books of the bible, but there are portions that in a years time will bring you through the torah, and it's at a pace that will allow you take in much more of the story, remembering it so when you do encounter the gospels and the NT writings, all of it is stuck in your noggin. So, whenever they reference a prophet, or the law, or any event that happened in the OT, you'll know the story like the back of your hand. Not that you don't already, but it's definitely working for me for sure!

I Heard a pastor did this, so it challenged me to try it at least once, the first day is the hardest and then the brain gets used to having that much scripture being fed into it on a daily basis. Afterward my brain decided to make it difficult to do that again so I stuffed an MP3 player loaded with the bible in my ear, the flesh didn't like that at all.

The Torah does have a lot of information in it, but it is not the thesis of Christianity, Jesus actually replaced the function of the law on the cross. If you are reading the Torah and see Jesus through it, you're definitely on the right track, that's how the Old Testament is best read.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Don't let certain people on the forum see this. Because they will whip out the "Well the KJV is the only accurate bible we can read today!" As if its the actual original written stuff. Today we have translations of versions that have also been translated multiple times. No bible is "Accurate" if we are being technical.

KJVO debate is over the manuscript medley that is used when translating, for example

Pr 8:12
I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions. (KJV)
or ....
I, wisdom, dwell together with prudence; I possess knowledge and discretion. (NIV)

Which one did God say? this is usually the irritation generated, but quite often it is over passages that remove qualities of Jesus from passages because they were not in the most ancient manuscripts.

 

[Antig]

So say back in the day, someone picked up some papyrus or biblyos as the new thing and started reading it. The original generation may have said, read it regular .. but that is not written in the bible .. here's why:

After the first generation, there was another generation that saw the teachings completely differently. The first generation Christians were eyewitnesses to a crime against God, the second generation and onward needed to rely on what was written and handed down by tradition, the primary focus became about the written text because the age of the (real) apostles was over, the faith that healed the sick and turned the world upside down .. for a time ... became tamed, domesticated, and later became state religions.

But it doesn't stop there .. so later on, you have conflicts between different regions because of what the translations amount to, especially the difference between the latin and the greek on many issues.

It doesn't stop there either, from age to age, there was a different perspective, a different way of doing and seeing things. In effect, the education system of our education system of our educations systems going all the way back has made the information that was apparently so simple (according to scripture) ... not an ordinary affair to interpret properly.

On top of that, we have the greek translated to latin traditions flavouring the translations from the greek into english today, the waters are indeed muddy .. and there are a variety of manuscripts to choose from if you really want to dig that deep.

In that sense . I do not expect anyone today to interpret the bible properly or have a plain reading of the scripture . Reading regular is not a simple thing, because nothing is regular about today compared to back then.

For the action oriented believers, my general work around for this is to examine every possible conclusion, every possible translation, every possible rendition of any scripture, and apply it .. once you have applied all the possible true renditions ... regardless of how you "feel" which is better ... examine which gets better fruit, through the whole bible, through your whole life.

Since the old ways are becoming archaic again ... thought I'd post this for your consideration, pride is sin that blinds us ... and the assumption that we know something that we logically cannot know ... can be a detriment. . . and it may be why there are so many opinions among us .. perhaps in the future we can say ... I tried this interpretation, this interpretation, and that interpretation ... these are the fruit I saw from it ... and this is why I agree with this interpretation may be more edifying for all involved in debates of a religious nature.

Nice post. Well thought out.

 

[Antig]

You've actually touched on what thinking resulted in my tag line.

I find it interesting that, regarding the NT, at some point in time, a bunch of letters to churches and individuals, a history book, a vision and four accounts of the life and times of Jesus became known as "the word of God". After a lot of reading and listening to it in my car, coupled with a lot of prayer and application of the word, a lot of my perspectives have changed drastically. I now finding myself getting concerned with something I call "bible worship".

Thing is, the more I understand the personality of God, through reading the bible and prayer, and applying what you learn, the less committed I am to any one specific teaching, other than the simple grace message. I even switched from ECT to CI a few years ago, and find that if the universalists turn out to be correct, at least in some way, I would not be shocked, though I am not one.

A friend's daughter was going to a university and majoring in something that had to do with the ancient languages used to write the old and new testament and one day I asked her what was the best translation to understand the true meaning. Her response was along the lines of this:

The only way to fully understand the bible is to be fluent in the original language and within the context of the culture at the time. i.e. nobody really knows.

Yes. I agree that there does seem to be a massive amount of Bible worship.

People have to remember that before the Bible was available everything was taught by oral teaching. Where were Sola Scripture people then?

This is why I strongly agree with Holy Tradition. Something that has been brought down through the ages with Apostolic succession.

 

[afishamongmany]

It's more addressing the pride of some who claim to be able to read as the original audience for whatever reason. I'd imagine if John the Apostle was truly kept alive until the return of Jesus with a futurist assumption ... then He'd be the only one.

Sorry Michael but your last sentence above is unintelligible to me. Can you clarify?
Don't you think that one could make a case for a modern reader being able to 'read' the Bible better than the original audience? Simply said, we just know more than they did. Crucially there is all the prophecy that is now fulfilled. But also generally now we have a much wider overview of this world, past, present and future.
Go well
><>

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Sorry Michael but your last sentence above is unintelligible to me. Can you clarify?
Don't you think that one could make a case for a modern reader being able to 'read' the Bible better than the original audience? Simply said, we just know more than they did. Crucially there is all the prophecy that is now fulfilled. But also generally now we have a much wider overview of this world, past, present and future.
Go well
><>

OH you definitely could read the bible better today, for today, no disagreements there. This is more addressing the attitude that we need to rewind our perceptions. However, even the prophets when addressing kings, did not go all the way back to Moses, but referred to contemporary events the audience would have been more familiar with.

 

[Heart2Soul]

The only thing I have to say is that the prophecies of the Bible have been fulfilled throughout history and are still being fulfilled to this day. So whether it is modern day or 1st century, prophecy cannot be changed.

 

[Heart2Soul]

So say back in the day, someone picked up some papyrus or biblyos as the new thing and started reading it. The original generation may have said, read it regular .. but that is not written in the bible .. here's why:

After the first generation, there was another generation that saw the teachings completely differently. The first generation Christians were eyewitnesses to a crime against God, the second generation and onward needed to rely on what was written and handed down by tradition, the primary focus became about the written text because the age of the (real) apostles was over, the faith that healed the sick and turned the world upside down .. for a time ... became tamed, domesticated, and later became state religions.


But it doesn't stop there .. so later on, you have conflicts between different regions because of what the translations amount to, especially the difference between the latin and the greek on many issues.

It doesn't stop there either, from age to age, there was a different perspective, a different way of doing and seeing things. In effect, the education system of our education system of our educations systems going all the way back has made the information that was apparently so simple (according to scripture) ... not an ordinary affair to interpret properly.

On top of that, we have the greek translated to latin traditions flavouring the translations from the greek into english today, the waters are indeed muddy .. and there are a variety of manuscripts to choose from if you really want to dig that deep.

In that sense . I do not expect anyone today to interpret the bible properly or have a plain reading of the scripture . Reading regular is not a simple thing, because nothing is regular about today compared to back then.

For the action oriented believers, my general work around for this is to examine every possible conclusion, every possible translation, every possible rendition of any scripture, and apply it .. once you have applied all the possible true renditions ... regardless of how you "feel" which is better ... examine which gets better fruit, through the whole bible, through your whole life.

Since the old ways are becoming archaic again ... thought I'd post this for your consideration, pride is sin that blinds us ... and the assumption that we know something that we logically cannot know ... can be a detriment. . . and it may be why there are so many opinions among us .. perhaps in the future we can say ... I tried this interpretation, this interpretation, and that interpretation ... these are the fruit I saw from it ... and this is why I agree with this interpretation may be more edifying for all involved in debates of a religious nature.

It wasn't the Bible that became tamed, domesticated, etc....it was the teaching of it by new age doctrines who watered it down so that people wouldn't be offended. Even as recent as this past month the Pope has stated that he wants to change the wording of The Lord's Prayer because he thinks the current translation pushes man to sin...."lead us not" into temptation, supposedly could imply that God can "lead" us to sin. Today we have a church to fit almost everyone's way of how they want to live their life and I am sure an interpretation of the Bible to support it.​

 

[Almost there]

faith comes from hearing; hearing through the word of God.
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth; but you shall meditate therein day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall have good success.
But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Seeing as how the Holy Spirit was what moved holy men to write down Scriptures, it is an important facet of our walk. A devout Christian inevitably finds the written word of God. It has been my impression that a devout Christian is moved to read the written word of God. In some respects, to think otherwise is like saying you didn't ever need the Bible, which as Scripture points out, really is Jesus himself is it not? For it says the Son of Man goes as it is written of him. Had it not been written...would it have happened? No. We live according to God's Word. For we live not by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
You may get spiritual bread in places outside of Scriptures, evem get knocked down in the middle of a road on the way to Damascus; but the mouth of God, the written Word of the Almighty himself...that's power.
Isn't the whole Bible written about Him and his people? Is not the whole of the Bible God's Word?

Isaiah 34:16 Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

The fact is as a devout Christian you would and do read it. You always have, because it is the righteous thing to do. To stray from that is to give in to the temptation that you do not need the very Word that gave you life and can get God anywhere you want. see Judges 17 for the whole of idolatry and doing what is right in your own eyes.... In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. The Word of God keeps you on track.

I completely agree. I'm only saying that a person that has no bible and cannot read can also be a Christian.

And here is an intersting thought:

Technically, the word "scripture", at the time the NT was penned, simply meant the things written down. And it is referring to things written down before the NT was penned.

I read the following in that context: All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

And yes, I read it regularly (it's in a thumb drive on the dashboard of my car and what I'm usually listening to on my 3 hour round trip commute). But the more I read and listen, the more I'm finding I'm taking it less and less literally and more and more spiritually, and in the spirit of my tag line.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

It wasn't the Bible that became tamed, domesticated, etc....it was the teaching of it by new age doctrines who watered it down so that people wouldn't be offended. Even as recent as this past month the Pope has stated that he wants to change the wording of The Lord's Prayer because he thinks the current translation pushes man to sin...."lead us not" into temptation, supposedly could imply that God can "lead" us to sin. Today we have a church to fit almost everyone's way of how they want to live their life and I am sure an interpretation of the Bible to support it.​

The first generation didn't have our bible, so I was obviously talking about something else in that sentence.

 

[Almost there]

Since we cannot know, there is no point in seeking certainty, enjoy the mystery centuries later.

I think there can be certainty, but it is when you get into details of your doctrine that certainty needs to be abandoned.

 

[Doulosiesou]

Don't let certain people on the forum see this. Because they will whip out the "Well the KJV is the only accurate bible we can read today!" As if its the actual original written stuff. Today we have translations of versions that have also been translated multiple times. No bible is "Accurate" if we are being technical.

True that, however the committee that put together the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament has included nearly all variants in footnotes. Their text is the statistically most likely version from a combination of the various letters. Which probably isn't entirely correct either but at least they've listed all known variants.

 

[Ron Gurley]

All should spiritually interpret the scripture as if they were in the original audience

 

[afishamongmany]

OH you definitely could read the bible better today, for today, no disagreements there. This is more addressing the attitude that we need to rewind our perceptions. However, even the prophets when addressing kings, did not go all the way back to Moses, but referred to contemporary events the audience would have been more familiar with.

Ah Michael C - you're tending to be very vague in your responses. What is 'the attitude we need'? and what 'perceptions' do we need to 'rewind'? and why?
The Lord Jesus (I think He qualifies as a prophet) frequently referred back to Moses when teaching and prophesying. He also had no problem about pointing to the 'events' of Noah, Jonah and the men of Nineveh and King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.
The title of the OP is only correct in as far as that we have knowledge of fulfilled prophesy that previously was a mystery. That there is some sort of significant 'gulf' between our modern day reading (understanding) and their other-time reading (understanding) of any specific scripture I do not believe is correct.
Go well
><>
P.S. Michael I'm genuinely curious to know what this means. What is its relevance to the discussion?
"I'd imagine if John the Apostle was truly kept alive until the return of Jesus with a futurist assumption ... then He'd be the only one."

 

[Devin P]

I Heard a pastor did this, so it challenged me to try it at least once, the first day is the hardest and then the brain gets used to having that much scripture being fed into it on a daily basis. Afterward my brain decided to make it difficult to do that again so I stuffed an MP3 player loaded with the bible in my ear, the flesh didn't like that at all.

The Torah does have a lot of information in it, but it is not the thesis of Christianity, Jesus actually replaced the function of the law on the cross. If you are reading the Torah and see Jesus through it, you're definitely on the right track, that's how the Old Testament is best read.

I believe it's the basis of christianity, and that it's saddening that so many people try to do away with it's importance. What do you mean when you said that Jesus replaced the function of the law on the cross? Can you share a few examples and scriptures with me?

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

I completely agree. I'm only saying that a person that has no bible and cannot read can also be a Christian.

And here is an intersting thought:

Technically, the word "scripture", at the time the NT was penned, simply meant the things written down. And it is referring to things written down before the NT was penned.

I read the following in that context: All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

And yes, I read it regularly (it's in a thumb drive on the dashboard of my car and what I'm usually listening to on my 3 hour round trip commute). But the more I read and listen, the more I'm finding I'm taking it less and less literally and more and more spiritually, and in the spirit of my tag line.

You are speculating too much and asking hypothetical questions just to ask hypothetical questions. If there was someone that did not have a bible and couldn't read, there is a large part of his Christian life missing. It is probable that he would be led to learn to read in that scenario, which again, is speculating. But anyhow, glad you got something from it.

 

[MyGivenNameIsKeith]

I believe it's the basis of christianity, and that it's saddening that so many people try to do away with it's importance. What do you mean when you said that Jesus replaced the function of the law on the cross? Can you share a few examples and scriptures with me?

He didn't "replace it". He fulfilled it. Going back to the book of Deuteronomy and the law written there, you can see many times Jesus's own words written in Moses' hand. And That is just one part of the law. Jesus died in a manner which was according to the law, which is why his sacrifice was acceptable and pleasing to the Father. He had gone as the Son of Man, and went according to how it was written of him to go.

Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
Deuteronomy 6:5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Mark 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
Mark 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Law's still there functioning. Just nowadays people aren't into loving their neighbors. They would rather cut them off in traffic, give them the finger, and live selfishly.
The Bible is written in such a way that it can be read as the original audience if looked at in the spiritual fashion in which it is written. One thing I find very easy to do; since I identify as a Christian, when I read the Old Testament, I spiritually read the word "Israel" or "Jew" as Christian in a manner of speaking.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

P.S. Michael I'm genuinely curious to know what this means. What is its relevance to the discussion?
"I'd imagine if John the Apostle was truly kept alive until the return of Jesus with a futurist assumption ... then He'd be the only one."

If Jesus kept John alive, then he'd be the only person who could read the bible as the original audience ... because he would be the original audience.