Why do Christians disagree?

[OzSpen]

Do you think that a non believer like me could do some bible study and hermeneutics and gain a better understanding of the Bible without becoming a beliver ?

Athee,

I use the same principles for reading and understanding the Bible as I do for my local newspaper, a book of history, or my kids' poetry. There are fundamental principles of hermeneutics that many of us use (often automatically) that are used to interpret any document. This is sometimes called the historical-grammatical method and you most certainly can use these principles of interpretation for reading the Bible. They include:

1. Discover what the meaning of a statement (command or question) was for the original author and his/her hearers - whether 1st or 21st century. This means:
2. Discovering the original meaning of a word or statement that involves obtaining the historical meaning of words (for the Bible Hebrew or Greek lexicons are the source of such words - like Oxford or Merriam-Webster dictionaries for English readers). If you can't read the original languages, compare a number of Bible translations and you'll soon gain the etymology of words. I'd use the ESV, NIV, NLT, NASB, NKJV and NRSV translations for comparison. You'll need to note the changes in meaning from the first to 21st centuries.
3. Note the cultural nuances of the first century. For example, what was the significance of head coverings according to 1 Cor 11:2ff? Best of luck with that one.
4. Context, context, context. What was the meaning of the verse in the context, based on surrounding verses. One of the sad states of affairs with the numbering of verses in the Bible is that it is too easy to pluck out one verse to make it mean something and ignore the surrounding context.

There are other principles of hermeneutics for reading any document, but that should get us started.

Do you believe that when you are hearing God speaking in your heart that what he is teaching you is true only for you or are His truths objective and true for everyone if they would only listen?

Hearing God speaking in your heart may be a gift of the Spirit for expression when the church gathers (e.g. 1 Cor 12-14; note 1 Cor 14:26) but according to 1 Cor 14:29, prophets must 'weigh' what other prophets say. The gifts are expressed in the church gathering for the church's benefit. Read especially 1 Cor 14 for principles to follow.

Often God's prompting in the heart is for a personal benefit - that's my experience.

The safest hermeneutics in hearing the voice of God is to learn principles of biblical interpretation and apply them to Scripture. That seems to be the primary way God speaks. You as a non-believer can do that.

I warn you! God could get you!

Blessings,
Oz

 

[paul becke]

Hi all,

I am an atheist, married to a wonderful Christian woman. In hopes of coming to belive what she believes I have started attending a bible study group with some cool guys from our church.

One question that keeps coming up in our discussions is this notion of the indwelling of the spirit as it pertains to interpreting the Bible.
I have often heard that when a believer reads the bible the truth of it will be revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. If that is the case why do so many Christians disagree about interpreting scripture?
The most common response in our group was that people supress/make errors even though the holy Spirit is teaching them the truth . If this were the case wouldn't we expect broad agreement on any particular issue as the supression and error would be idiosyncratic to any particular believer but the consensus would remain (same principle as poll the audience in Who Wants to be a Millionaire , all the people who know the right answer pick the same one, everyone who doesn't spreads their votes out over the possible choices leaving the truth clearly indicated.
In our group this ended with the guys just saying they don't really have a good answer for this problem, which while intellectually honest is not super helpful
Looking forward to your thoughts on this.

Note: This is not supposed to be a debate thread so as you respond I will try to simply ask questions to clarify rather than offer rebuttals. As such if you can think of a counter argument to your own position please include it and also include why you don't find that counter argument compelling

Thanks for your time and intellectual effort.

Peace

 

[paul becke]

Hi Athée,

It is a primordial truth, the primordial truth, that when we read Scripture, it is God talking to us directly and personally

Like any book, much of what we get out of it depends on what we are able to bring to it, when we read it. Think of the incredible range of tastes in leisure reading matter there is. This, however, once we understand the first point, can be magnified many times in terms of understanding a text of the Bible, in front of us, because our interior spiritual life governs what we are able to understand of its meanings and imports.

Also, since you sound well-disposed to believe in Christ, given sufficient evidence, it sounds as if it will end well for you, but be aware that God always leaves a certain 'wriggle-room' for us. Heck, THEISM HAS NOW BEEN PROVED BY PRE-EMINENT THEORETICAL PHYSICISTS AND METAPHYSICIANS BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT TO BE THE BASIS OF OUR PHYSICAL UNIVERSE.... our very perception of it. However, that doesn't prevent leading atheist 'scientists' rejecting that evidence - just as Einstein was initially labelled, an imbecile by an eminent physicist of his day - since it annihilates their favoured world-view. Of course, conjecture of evolution was never scientific and just keeps getting more and more wildly improbable : actually, impossible ! Just found this a moment go :

New discovery makes Darwinists’ case even harder to make

And here is Richard Lewontin's infamous, yet amazingly honest take on science and truth :

A Divine foot in the door - Christian Voice UK

In the final analysis we believe what we want to believe, since the most fundamental truths are too abstruse and/or emotionally-charged to fully understand with our unaided analytical, worldly intelligence. Yes, wishful thinking ! But why should the truth be cold, hard, ugly, not to be wished for, not to be hoped for, undesirable ? Just so that we can lead promiscuous sexual lives with less troubled consciences ? I don't think so. Though for many, that appears to usually be the main reason, in the opinion of Aldous Huxley, judging from his own earlier life and the attitude of his friends.

Since the soul consists of the memory, will and understanding, this means that we shall be judged on what we choose to believe, what we find most morally beautiful - in short, on the disposition of our HEART. Otherwise, should we get to heaven on the basis of our worldly intelligence, our intellect, we could easily find ourselves being greeted at the pearly gates by Dr Mengele or some other such monster.

I recommend you read Aldous Huxley's fascinating essay on comparative religion, called The Perennial Philosophy (a Fontana publication, I believe). In it, he states that our docility to the Holy Spirit, is a function of the degree to which we have modified our consciouness by an ascetical mindset/life-style, whether such asceticism by physical, spiritual or both. Though, it is, of course, God's grace alone that can dispose our hearts to accept whatever spiritual truths we lay ourselves open to receive.

Huxley, himself, became a Vedantist, though he quoted copiously from Christian sources. He seemed to have been deterred from joining the Catholic church (my church), by the scandalous accretions of 'the traditions of men', so notable prior to Vatican II.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hi all,

I am an atheist, married to a wonderful Christian woman. In hopes of coming to belive what she believes I have started attending a bible study group with some cool guys from our church.

One question that keeps coming up in our discussions is this notion of the indwelling of the spirit as it pertains to interpreting the Bible.
I have often heard that when a believer reads the bible the truth of it will be revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. If that is the case why do so many Christians disagree about interpreting scripture?
The most common response in our group was that people supress/make errors even though the holy Spirit is teaching them the truth . If this were the case wouldn't we expect broad agreement on any particular issue as the supression and error would be idiosyncratic to any particular believer but the consensus would remain (same principle as poll the audience in Who Wants to be a Millionaire , all the people who know the right answer pick the same one, everyone who doesn't spreads their votes out over the possible choices leaving the truth clearly indicated.
In our group this ended with the guys just saying they don't really have a good answer for this problem, which while intellectually honest is not super helpful
Looking forward to your thoughts on this.

Note: This is not supposed to be a debate thread so as you respond I will try to simply ask questions to clarify rather than offer rebuttals. As such if you can think of a counter argument to your own position please include it and also include why you don't find that counter argument compelling

Thanks for your time and intellectual effort.

Peace

Jesus said narrow is the way that leads to life and few be there that find it. Those who have life are of the FEW. So not everyone who thinks they are saved and have correct knowledge are really in fact saved and led by the Spirit. The test is to see who is truly living like Jesus (or close to it). Again, this is not the many but the FEW. Most people whether they are an unbeliever or claiming to be a believer prefer their sin over GOD. Sin is what gets in the way. So not everyone who claims to be of the Spirit are truly being led by the Spirit. Jesus said we will know false prophets by their fruit. Fruits are deeds.

Anyways, the short answer to why Christians disagree is because of sin.
Sin is always the problem in people not having Godly knowledge, or in getting diseases, or for all the pain, suffering, and death in this world. But with Jesus Christ, a person can be set from sin and overcome it with the LORD's help.


....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Anyways, I would highly encourage you to accept Jesus Christ as your Savior.

To Accept Jesus Christ so as to be Saved (Born Again), check out this tract here:



This Was Your Life.


...

 

[Fred Manalo]

Shalom, Peace be with you.
Your question is what everyone should be asking. Really, how can there be so much difference or disagreement in what Christians hold as truth if they are guided by one Spirit?
You may also see that what Christians today believe and teach are not the same as the teaching of Christ.

One big example is the absence of the signs Jesus said will be seen in those who believe:

“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭16:16-18‬ ‭NIV‬‬

These signs were seen only in the first generation of Spirit-filled Christians. None of these signs were seen after that generation. Jesus said only those who are born again or baptized with the Spirit will enter the kingdom of heaven. He also declared in which generation (Matthew 24 and Luke 21) he will return to take them to the kingdom of heaven. The sign given about the Prophet or the Messiah is that everything he declares will happen.

“You may say to yourselves, 'How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?'If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭18:21-22‬ ‭NIV‬‬

So the possible answer to your question may be that Jesus already returned when he said he will and took all true believers to heaven.

Which means we got our Christianity from those who were left behind, and the reason for all the confusion and disunity in those who say they believe or are born again today is that no one is truly baptized with the Spirit after that first generation of Christians was gone.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Raggedyman]

Its simple
Because the bible is not perfect, people are not perfect we christians have issues.
Its ok, it would be boring if we were all the same.
Jesus, The Father are perfect, the rest is by faith

Youtube some Bruxy Cavey sermons, he is great at teaching new christians simple christianity

 

[ViaCrucis]

Hi all,

I am an atheist, married to a wonderful Christian woman. In hopes of coming to belive what she believes I have started attending a bible study group with some cool guys from our church.

One question that keeps coming up in our discussions is this notion of the indwelling of the spirit as it pertains to interpreting the Bible.
I have often heard that when a believer reads the bible the truth of it will be revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. If that is the case why do so many Christians disagree about interpreting scripture?

In my honest opinion, it's because the idea that the Holy Spirit, in some way, beams the right understanding of Scripture into our brains is simply wrong. But this is an idea that is popular in certain churches which advocate Biblicism, or "Bible-onlyism". It's largely, I think, intended as a fail-safe, because if one has asserted, in effect, that we are only to use the Bible and that ultimately it is up to us to understand and interpret the Bible correctly, then it should follow that God will get us from point A to point B, so He does this through the Holy Spirit.

I think the monkey wrench in that idea is precisely your question here: if we were guaranteed to understand Scripture correctly because the Holy Spirit dwells in us, then why do we disagree on just about everything? Why, if you bring ten Christians into a room to study the Bible you'll get at least ten different answers?

The most common response in our group was that people supress/make errors even though the holy Spirit is teaching them the truth .

I'd say that's another fail-safe. And it can be particularly pernicious when it is coupled with a "we're right, they're wrong, trust us, we have the Holy Spirit" kind of mindset.

If this were the case wouldn't we expect broad agreement on any particular issue as the supression and error would be idiosyncratic to any particular believer but the consensus would remain (same principle as poll the audience in Who Wants to be a Millionaire , all the people who know the right answer pick the same one, everyone who doesn't spreads their votes out over the possible choices leaving the truth clearly indicated.
In our group this ended with the guys just saying they don't really have a good answer for this problem, which while intellectually honest is not super helpful
Looking forward to your thoughts on this.

Note: This is not supposed to be a debate thread so as you respond I will try to simply ask questions to clarify rather than offer rebuttals. As such if you can think of a counter argument to your own position please include it and also include why you don't find that counter argument compelling

Thanks for your time and intellectual effort.

Peace

This is one of several reasons why I do not subscribe to Biblicism. Now, I am a Lutheran, and we Lutherans basically are the ones who coined the idea of Sola Scriptura; but what "Scripture alone" meant five hundred years ago and what it means today are nearly as different as night and day. Sola Scriptura, as understood by the Protestant Reformers, was a rule or principle by which to state that Scripture should be the final say on matters of teaching and practice in the Church, what we call the "Norma Normans" (Latin, meaning, "the norm that norms"), whereas--for example--the Creeds of the Church and the Lutheran Confessions are called "Norma Normata", "the normed norm". In this traditional view, Scripture is the baseline against which our ideas are ultimately measured, and this of course also means that even our interpretations of Scripture are never that baseline. This means that not only is it that the Pope in Rome doesn't dictate the infallible meaning of Scripture, but it means that we ourselves don't get to act as our own little pope; and that's one of the principle flaws of the modern biblicist methodology--each pastor, or even each Christian acts as his or her own infallible pope. On the contrary, Scripture is instead to be read from within the historic teaching and tradition of the Church--it is a communal, corporate act, throughout history to read and receive Scripture for our larger benefit as the Christian Church. And so we listen to what the ancient fathers said, we confess the Creeds which have been handed down to us, and we engage with Scripture, not chiefly as private individuals but as integrated members of the community of faith, gathered around Christ who is present in Word and Sacrament.

The Holy Spirit isn't going to magically beam the truth of Scripture into our brains, because that isn't how He works, and because the Bible isn't magic. But we can, acting together in our common confession and reception of the ancient and catholic faith of the Church, gather around the written word of Scripture to hear it, confess it, and receive it. Will we get things wrong? Most likely, we're not infallible. But as people of faith we trust that Christ's word, "Not even the gates of Hades shall stand against [the Church]" will remain true even in spite of our failure.

If one, however, rejects the historic teaching and tradition of the Christian Church, and believes that one must, in essence, reinvent the wheel; well then I really don't know that there is much left other than to claim a particular divine infallibility for themselves--which is, really, what lay behind the idea that the Holy Spirit will just beam truth into our brains (and those who disagree are suppressing the Holy Spirit, don't have the Holy Spirit, etc).

-CryptoLutheran