Not really. I am saying "I wonder why He makes it ambiguous". The reason why I wonder this is because for me it would make more sense to not do so. Then, whilst wondering about this, I can't really find any good reasons (IMO) to do it this way.
This will support my response a bit further down, please keep in mind the limit of your imagination compared to His.
Well, is that the reasonable response? First I would prefer to understand the reasons behind the ambiguity. Without this, the ambiguity affects its credibility (IMO). Politicians and spin doctors are notorious for this tactic. They make statements that are unclear and open to interpretation. This ambiguity allows them to avoid giving detailed and clear responses to questions.
When it comes to something as critical as the word of god, it worries me that scholars should have to debate its meanings and that there can be multiple interpretations of texts.
So yes, I suppose you are right. I am complaining. It doesn't make sense to me. I am worried about its credibility.
I see it as natural selection, leveraging freedom of choice to enable someone to confess that they are not being honest. Ambiguity gives people the opportunity to be deceptive, claiming that their interpretation is valid even when it is plainly obvious that it is wrong. Therefore, when you see this happening, you can remember that Jesus said nobody can gather a fig from a thistle, because each [plant] brings forth fruit of it's own kind.
Why is this step even necessary? He has made a decision that adds to the doubt over the credibility of the Bible. Is that really pride getting in the way? To me it seems more like a bit of scepticism which is a useful tool to have as it protects us in our daily lives from con artists (no I am not insinuating anything, just explaining that it is a good characteristic and not a bad one). The quality you seem to be asking for is open-mindedness. Pride only comes in to it when I refuse to accept I am wrong.
This trait (you call it pride, I call it scepticism), is a positive trait. Why should this process fall down because of a positive trait that we use on a daily basis. Without it "humbleness" and open-mindedness lead to gullibility.
Pride and skepticism are different things though, you and I are describing different things. If you are saying that what I am calling pride is skepticism then to determine which of us is correct, we must consider whether you know that you are wrong. As you have rightly said, if you refuse to accept you are wrong, then it is pride. But if you don't know that you are wrong, yet someone else claims in serious belief that you are, then you are being skeptical. In addition to being skeptical, you need to either be humble and seek to understand why this person believes you are wrong, or proud and dismiss their view before you understand it.
* Because so far I have been lead to believe that the only words from God that are available to everyone are found in the Bible and scriptures. Some claim to have heard him personally, but for most of us, the only message we have from God is what is written in the bible. Since this is the word of God, are Christians not expected to live their lives based on the teachings in the Bible? So we should be living our lives and making decisions based on these writings.
If you agree with a concept that is central to Christianity (God existed in the beginning and created everything), then you will know that the bible did not exist at the time that Moses met Him in the desert. Moses was raised in Egyptian society, studying their religion, the study that did not pertain to God. God approached him in the desert. If God is able to be known without the bible being present, do you think that the bible is necessary to know God?
* The texts are written in old English, the originals in a different language, they use a lot of symbolism, refer to customs that are no longer part of our lives, can be ambiguous or superficially contradictory (eye for an eye - thou shalt not kill for example). The very fact that there are theology courses in colleges and universities, and that almost everyone needs help and guidance in understanding what is written, indicates to me that the texts are complicated. The Bible is not a simple read.
Maybe you should read a more modern translation. Here, take a look at this:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1&version=TLB This is The Living Bible translation, which is a paraphrased translation. As I understand how it came about, the original translator translated a few books of the New Testament, then did some more, then eventually the whole lot was translated to this manner of speech and published. I found this translation in a second hand shop and bought at the sticker price (0c). I have loved reading this bible, because it is such straight forward, plain language. If you read a bit of it online, I am sure you will agree. If you need a paper copy, you can PM me and I will post one to you. I have collected a couple of spare copies for the purpose to gift.
Next, symbolism as I have explained gives a way out to those who don't wish to obey. Customs that don't apply to us - well I don't actually know why you have a problem with that. I think it is reasonable to expect that. Ambiguous, again, gives a way out for those who don't want to obey, and serves as proof of this decision. As for being superficially contradictory, it seems that when this happens, someone has taken a statement and made it mean something different from what the author of the statement intended it to mean. I have always found without fault (since accepting that the bible contains truth), that if I am able to understand what the author was meaning to say, then it does make sense, it seems right, and it doesn't seem to contradict statements by other authors. A further note about this, since I am saying you need to accept you are wrong on this point, you no need to decide whether you will be humble or proud and therefore approach this concern of yours with an open mind. You can still be skeptical instead of gullible as you do this, but you need to decide how important the truth is to you.
Keep in mind as I say this, that these are not necessarilly the whole and only answers to your questions, but they are what I consider good reasons. It is an example I mentioned where the limit of our imagination is a good reason for us to be humble and to seek to understand God's reasons rather than just complaining about something we don't understand.
As for theology courses, well I don't know since I have not actually been subjected to one. Help and guidance - again I think that God should be the one we look to for that. In my experience, He has always provided me enough understanding to cope with each day. Sometimes it is very interesting and reassuring, that just a day or few prior I had received an understanding that was relevant to someone else's problem. I just trust Him to provide. I think that is what Jesus meant when He described "do not be anxious about tomorrow, because your Father in heaven provides everything for those sparrows over there, and you are so much more valuable to Him than a sparrow".
Sure, you can encounter complicated topics, and you will encounter that with any philosophical pursuit. But the texts are easy to read (except those which are purposefully encrypted such as prophecy). I suppose an interesting way to view it, is that you can only extract enough meaning from it as you are capable of at any time, and that depends on what you already believe/understand/know at any time. So although it is a finite collection of words, the journey of learning and understanding is never ending. For his reason, since there is so much to know, someone who is new will not understand some of the knowledge that more experienced students have. This is what St Paul described as "milk" and "meat" as he described the way he was teaching a particular church (describing his teaching as spiritual food).
What do you mean by "I have assumed there is a point to it"?
I still think that your idea that we need to make decisions based on texts has not been proven. So until it is, I think we should suspend this point and come back to it once we agree that you have established a valid premise. (I sense I am about to learn from you!).
That's pretty much my response. Although its not just the metaphor. Its also the strange use of language where everything ends in "-eth". Ultimately it doesn't speak to me, and dare I say it doesn't speak to most people on the planet today. Is that not a problem?
Yes, it is a problem. Is there a reason you are reading a bible that is written in a foreign language? (KJV is old english, it is foreign to me too). There is lots of other translations in modern language. Eg, the New King James version is written in modern English. Regarding the metaphor, you would benefit from opening your mind. Perhaps you can take it slow. One by one, look at those quotes I gave you and understand exactly what they are getting at (if you desire that knowledge).
If he still exists, I would dearly like him to reword it, in a manner that the people of today can all understand in an easy way. It sounds too important to have the presentation be the cause for the message not getting across.
He communicates by spirit. If you ask Him, He will give you understanding, no words necessary. The bible is only information.
If so, I'm starting to feel aggrieved he made me this way
You are actually a product of your environment. Your environment does not obey Him. Therefore, you cannot blame Him for the way you are. But you can blame Him for making such an attractive world. I don't think that is a bad thing, TBH.
Regarding the following, I will just pick the bits I want to respond to and if I have missed something important to you, just mention it. I am aware this is a convoluted conversation now, hard to manage, lots of work. I would like to trim it to be more brief.
I am unable to determine if its fact or not. It does seem quite likely to me though that men at the time were crucified for those very reasons, so the story could be true - although one of many similar ones.
Given the events that followed (ie, the proliferation of Christian religion), how can you explain that other than fact?
The primary issue is whether the book itself is collection of stories, with advice on how to live life, or whether it is a set of instructions from God. Whether I "believe" certain statements are true in the Bible is difficult to say. The content of the book is largely irrelevant to me if they appear to be nothing more than traditional stories on life, passed down through the ages. There will be parts of the advice I agree with, others not, but that can be said of almost any book. The crucial bit is, who is the author? How can I trust the content of a self help book of this magnitude without knowing the author?
The book, as you put it, actually is written by many different authors. It is going to be good for you to consider each book in the bible independently, as they were originally. Then, in that context, you will see that some books are more reliable than others. For example, we know the author of the book of Revelation, and we know that he personally knew Jesus. Therefore, we can expect when reading that book, a fairly accurate representation of the nature of Jesus. On the other hand, Genesis appears to have been written by several different authors, and contains information that we don't know the origin of. Therefore, we just don't know if the information in that book is factual or fictional. Besides all that though, the truth exists. And what I have told you here is true. So we can still observe the truth by considering the point of what is in texts such as the bible.
That said, from the top of my head the bits I have difficulty with include, amongst others:
- That Jesus rose from the dead.
- Jesus walked on water.
- Mary was a Virgin.
- Angels appearing.
Pretty much all the super natural stuff I suppose.
Can you please describe why these are difficult for you?
It means that I came to that conclusion based on what people have posted on the forum. The Bible seems to be the only source of information. I have accepted that there does not seem to be any alternatives, I have not yet accepted that it is a reliable source.
Consider the way that Moses, Abraham and Noah (for example) came to know God before the bible. Notice too that The Word of God is not the bible, it is the source of the light of men. Therefore, God will speak to you outside of the bible (if you care to listen to Him). (John 1:4).
I've been told this on a few threads now, but how exactly does one "go to Jesus"? Dumb it down as much as possible. For the literal minded folk.
I suppose my degree of want is not high enough yet.
I don't know whether you have noticed that you answered your own question. You need to find out what is stopping you from just opening the door to Him. It is most likely some sinful desire. For me it was and often is
Matthew 5:28. It seems quite a common sensitivity.
