Why multiple interpretations?

[Servant of Jesus]

Bless the Moderators; hold them up in prayer:

 

[salida]

First, there are a variety of reasons why the bible is interpreted many ways.

1) The bible is a spiritual book and there are christians walking around without the Holy Spirit in their lifes. Thus, they are going to interpret it to read "how they want it to read among their human nature" instead of the nature of the Holy Spirit. Which is sad because without the Holy Spirit in their lifes, I don't know how they can be christian except in name only.

2) They read a book from the Bible not understanding how the author originally intended it to read. Politically - its like we have the Constitution and some people read it the way they want it to read not the way our Framers intended it to read.

**There is a lot of reading what they want but not reading what they don't like. Picking and choosing what sound good to their ears - what feels good.

Yes, we are saved by grace but there is truly a fundamental understanding of the Bible that must be understood.

 

[Emmy]

Dear Staccato. The Bible is God talking to Man, written by God-inspired men and women. It tells us of our Saviour, Jesus Christus. Jesus left us with 2 Commandments, which contain all 10 commandments which God gave us. 1) Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds. That is straightforward, God is our Creator, and He deserves all Praise and Glory. 2) Love each other as we love ourselves, which St. Paul describes in Ephesians: love and be kind to each other, forgive each other as God, for Christ`s sake has forgiven you." That is what God wants of us. That is the Message to us. Since we are all different, some translators may use different words, BUT the Message is the same. I say this humbly and with love, Staccato. Greetings from Emmy, sister in Christ.

 

[KCDAD]

Dear Staccato. The Bible is God talking to Man, written by God-inspired men and women. It tells us of our Saviour, Jesus Christus. Jesus left us with 2 Commandments, which contain all 10 commandments which God gave us. 1) Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds. That is straightforward, God is our Creator, and He deserves all Praise and Glory. 2) Love each other as we love ourselves, which St. Paul describes in Ephesians: love and be kind to each other, forgive each other as God, for Christ`s sake has forgiven you." That is what God wants of us. That is the Message to us. Since we are all different, some translators may use different words, BUT the Message is the same. I say this humbly and with love, Staccato. Greetings from Emmy, sister in Christ.

Dearest Emmy, I know how good your heart is from your writings...
but God speaks to us not through words but through life itself. Words are man's invention, as is The Bible. The collection of writings included in any particular edition of The Bible, and those that are not included are all man's attempts to describe this experience with the Divine that they wish to share with others. The Bible is a human product attempting to describe a Divine experience. THAT is why there are so many interpretations, because every one reads these words through their own experience.
God is neither a shepherd nor a burning bush, neither a pillar of fire or smoke, neither a Lord nor a King. These are human metaphors trying to bring into our understanding that which is ineffable. I write this under the power of the Spirit of The Living God and with love.

 

[chosenpath]

Actually what happens today is nothing that hasn't happened before is early Judaism or Christianity. The Jewish people time and time again strayed from the Divine providence of God that he sent the Prophets to get them back on track. Finally he sent his son Jesus Christ. There is a great scripture where Jesus explains this.

Matthew 21:33
"Hear another parable: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit. And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, 'This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.' So they took him and cast [him] out of the vineyard and killed [him]. "Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?"

The people were weighed down by various doctrine and traditions. Heck even the Pharisees and Sadducees opposed one another. This is why Jesus stated in Matthew 11:30 - For My yoke [is] easy and My burden is light."

Now during early Christianity the Apostles were faced with the same difficulties. They would start congregations and other false apostles would try to discredit the original teachings of our Majestic King and High Priest Jesus Christ.
2 Coriithians 11:13
For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

They were made aware of the situation and warned the people along with sending disciples to keep them from going astray.
I still wish we had the original Apostles present today to shepherd us so there would be no misinterpetations but time passes by and here we go again.

 

[KCDAD]

Actually what happens today is nothing that hasn't happened before is early Judaism or Christianity. The Jewish people time and time again strayed from the Divine providence of God that he sent the Prophets to get them back on track. Finally he sent his son Jesus Christ. There is a great scripture where Jesus explains this.

This is different from the different interpretations of The Constitution, for example??? Does that mean God wrote The Constitution, too?

Do you really think that if Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Hamilton, Adams et al were alive today they would have written the same document?
Do you really think that if Jesus, the Apostles or the Prophets were alive today they would have written the same documents?

 

[DrBubbaLove]

to the OP;
it is called sin and error as in;
Long lay the world in sin and error pining, 'Til He appear'd and the soul felt its worth.
He appeared and gave us hope, but we still have sin and error. It is a part of being human (at the moment).

 

[KCDAD]

Here is a great example: In church this morning, the sermon was on Matthew 2:13-23, Joseph's faithfulness in following the angel's warning to flee to Egypt (in fulfillment of the prophesy). I immediately thought of how Matthew is "obsessed" with fulfilling prophesy in much of his relating of the events in Jesus' life. Luke on the other hand in 2:21-39 tells a completely different account of the events immediately after Jesus' birth. No trip to Egypt, no warning about the murder of the innocents. He simply relates Joseph's concern to fulfill the law and have Jesus dedicated and circumcised by the 8th day in Jerusalem. Now, obviously, both accounts can not be accurate. You can't be in Jerusalem and in Egypt at the same time and they are certainly not with shouting distance of each other.
Both accounts tell of them settling eventually in Nazareth, according to Matthew to fulfill prophesy and avoid more dangers warned by the angel, and according to Luke because that was their home. (Matthew even comes right out and says that Nazareth was not their home originally, while Luke says it was.)
It is all about telling a story from one's own point of view... and therefor, interpretations by readers are done from their point view.

 

[chosenpath]

Here is a great example: In church this morning, the sermon was on Matthew 2:13-23, Joseph's faithfulness in following the angel's warning to flee to Egypt (in fulfillment of the prophesy). I immediately thought of how Matthew is "obsessed" with fulfilling prophesy in much of his relating of the events in Jesus' life. Luke on the other hand in 2:21-39 tells a completely different account of the events immediately after Jesus' birth. No trip to Egypt, no warning about the murder of the innocents. He simply relates Joseph's concern to fulfill the law and have Jesus dedicated and circumcised by the 8th day in Jerusalem. Now, obviously, both accounts can not be accurate. You can't be in Jerusalem and in Egypt at the same time and they are certainly not with shouting distance of each other.
Both accounts tell of them settling eventually in Nazareth, according to Matthew to fulfill prophesy and avoid more dangers warned by the angel, and according to Luke because that was their home. (Matthew even comes right out and says that Nazareth was not their home originally, while Luke says it was.)
It is all about telling a story from one's own point of view... and therefor, interpretations by readers are done from their point view.

Jesus was not circumcised in Jerusalem. Joseph and Mary did not go to Jerusalem unitl after her purification Luke 2:22 see Leviticus 12:2-8 for the law on purification. Beyond that point The Gospels of Mark and John don't even describe the birth of Jesus. Just because Matthew and Luke give various details which the other may not have included because it was already documented does not warrant the account as inaccurate.

 

[KCDAD]

Jesus was not circumcised in Jerusalem. Joseph and Mary did not go to Jerusalem unitl after her purification Luke 2:22 see Leviticus 12:2-8 for the law on purification. Beyond that point The Gospels of Mark and John don't even describe the birth of Jesus. Just because Matthew and Luke give various details which the other may not have included because it was already documented does not warrant the account as inaccurate.

Luke 2:21
" 21And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. 22And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;"


" 39And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth."


Leviticus12:2 'When a woman gives birth and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean for seven days, as in the days of her menstruation she shall be unclean."

Matthew 2:13 "9After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen in the east went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. 10When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. 11On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh. 12And having been warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route.The Escape to Egypt

13When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him." 14So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son...
21So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: "He will be called a Nazarene."

OK... these story are NOT compatible. In Matthew, they do not go to Jerusalem. They go to a new town because it is not safe for them to go to their home. In Luke they go to Jerusalem immediately after the eight days and RETURN to their home in Nazareth.

Good luck trying to integrate the two stories into one narrative.

 

[chosenpath]

OK... these story are NOT compatible. In Matthew, they do not go to Jerusalem. They go to a new town because it is not safe for them to go to their home. In Luke they go to Jerusalem immediately after the eight days and RETURN to their home in Nazareth.

Good luck trying to integrate the two stories into one narrative.

I would enjoy continuing this discussion but we are going off topic from the OPs question. Start a new thread and I will be happy to reply to this post.

 

[KCDAD]

I would enjoy continuing this discussion but we are going off topic from the OPs question. Start a new thread and I will be happy to reply to this post.

This is exactly on topic. It is why there are multiple interpretations... BECAUSE there are multiple authors with multiple agendas.

 

[chosenpath]

The reason it is going off topic is because it is no longer a dicussion between the OP and myself, but a discussion between me and you.

 

[KCDAD]

The reason it is going off topic is because it is no longer a dicussion between the OP and myself, but a discussion between me and you.

Sorry... I didn't realize this was a private conversation. I thought the OP wanted some informational responses.

 

[Staccato]

As far as I know the FSG's here tend to have it that posters shouldn't really interact with each other on these kinds of boards and should direct their responses to the OP and not each other.

HOWEVER, personally I'm more than happy for you to discuss this question with each other on here. By coming up with slightly different points and refining what it is you think and why it's much more helpful for me personally, as well as others who may read this board, to get a more rounded and thorough understanding of the question I originally posed. This is especially the case as I, as a non-Christian, cannot post in the theology section of this forum where such discussion is more frequent.

And thanks again to everyone for their input

 

[chosenpath]

Thank you Staccato for permission to continue. I was rather eager to share KCDAD.
I was Just respecting the forum rules.

Now back to you issue between Matthew and Luke. When you reason on the scriptures you have to take into account all circumstances. I know for a person who is studying the bible for the first time it can be confusing. I know I dealt with the same questions. Questions are good because they invite you to look more closely and when that happens not only are those questions answered but you start to uncover treasures you never before would have expected.

KCDAD I encouraged you to look at the law of Levitius 12.

Leviticus 12:2-4
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

Which would correspond with Luke 2:22.

Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present [Him] to the Lord

In Luke 2:21 it does not say they were in Jerusalem when Jesus was circumcised.

And when eight days were completed for the circumcision of the Child, His name was called JESUS, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb.

Thirty-three days would be enough time for them to recieve word that Archelaus did not pose a threat as his father Herod. So yes they went to Nazareth and then after purification fufilled the law in Jerusalem.

Matthew covers information that Luke doesn't such as the geneaology of Jesus and the wise men. Luke covers information that Matthew doesn't such as the conception and birth of John the baptist and the announcement of the birth of Jesus by the angels to the shepherds tending their sheep.

 

[KCDAD]

Leviticus 12:2-4[/B]
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

Which would correspond with Luke 2:22.

Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present [Him] to the Lord

In Luke 2:21 it does not say they were in Jerusalem when Jesus was circumcised.

And when eight days were completed for the circumcision of the Child, His name was called JESUS, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb.

Thirty-three days would be enough time for them to recieve word that Archelaus did not pose a threat as his father Herod. So yes they went to Nazareth and then after purification fufilled the law in Jerusalem.

Matthew covers information that Luke doesn't such as the geneaology of Jesus and the wise men. Luke covers information that Matthew doesn't such as the conception and birth of John the baptist and the announcement of the birth of Jesus by the angels to the shepherds tending their sheep.

So I take it you think that Joseph and Mary and Jesus traveled to Egypt, waited out the mass slaughter of every child in Bethlehem under two years of age... Why 2 years? Didn't Herod know when the child was born? Didn't the Wise men tell him? Anyway, Herod kills everyone, and then they wait until Herod dies, and Joseph gets word that it is safe to come back now... all in 33 or 41 days?
And maybe even more unbelievable... for us 21st century people, anyway: That Joseph would travel with a 9 month pregnant wife and then a new born son... for what 2 months? 3 months? 4 months? What was he, rich? According to Matthew he never went home but instead found a new home in Nazareth and in Luke it is at back to their home in Nazareth ... so how long were they "on the road", in the winter, without any food, income or friends?
(The scholarly consensus, based on Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews is that Herod died at the end of March or early April in 4 BC.)

The stories do not correspond and don't make sense taken together...

It is all very well to say that one covers information the other doesn't, and if the stories fit into each other, that might be an explanation... but they don't.
They are completely different stories using the same characters.

 

[chosenpath]

Staccato and KCDAD I do have an answer for the previous post. Before I respond I am fully researching and consulting a proven source to make sure I give you a sufficient answer. I want to make sure I don't leave any loose ends.

 

[chosenpath]

So I take it you think that Joseph and Mary and Jesus traveled to Egypt, waited out the mass slaughter of every child in Bethlehem under two years of age... Why 2 years? Didn't Herod know when the child was born? Didn't the Wise men tell him? Anyway, Herod kills everyone, and then they wait until Herod dies, and Joseph gets word that it is safe to come back now... all in 33 or 41 days?

That is correct.
Herod did not receive a report back from the wise men so he was not certain of the time of birth or age of Jesus Christ, thus, he issued an order for every male child 2 years and younger. Jesus was around 1 years old when Herod the Great died so Joseph and Mary did not return from Eygpt with 33 to 41 days.

Matthew 2:12
Then, being divinely warned in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed for their own country another way.

And maybe even more unbelievable... for us 21st century people, anyway: That Joseph would travel with a 9 month pregnant wife and then a new born son... for what 2 months? 3 months? 4 months? What was he, rich? According to Matthew he never went home but instead found a new home in Nazareth and in Luke it is at back to their home in Nazareth ... so how long were they "on the road", in the winter, without any food, income or friends?

In those days it was not unusual for families to travel long distances even with infants. Look at Abraham moving his family from territory to territory or Jacob moving his whole family to Egypt during the famine, and Moses leading the Exodus into the wilderness for forty years. Many times these people had little to nothing, but God provided.

Mary was from Nazareth

Luke 1:26-27
Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin's name [was] Mary.

Joseph was from Bethlehem

Luke 2:4-5
Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child.

So instead of returning to Bethlehem becuase of the order issued by Herod they settled in Nazareth Mary's hometown.


(The scholarly consensus, based on Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews is that Herod died at the end of March or early April in 4 BC.)

The scholars vary on the death of Herod the Great. Josephus calculated around 4 BCE while others such as Appianos calculated 1-2 BCE. According to the Jewish Aniquity Volume VXII Herod died after the eclipse of the full moon and 3 months before passover. Josephus's calculation was based upon a partial eclipse of the moon that occured before passover. It was discovered that there was a full eclipse of the moon that occured before passover in 1BCE. Jesus was born in 2BCE so he would be approximately one year old when Herod the Great died.

The stories do not correspond and don't make sense taken together...

It is all very well to say that one covers information the other doesn't, and if the stories fit into each other, that might be an explanation... but they don't.
They are completely different stories using the same characters.

Sorry I took so long to respond.

 

[KCDAD]

Sorry I took so long to respond.

No problem.

So when was Jesus born according to your timeline?

How do you think Joseph (from Bethlehem) got hooked up with Mary (from Nazareth)? Do you realize how improbable that is?

Only a man would write a story about hauling a pregnant woman on a donkey (there is no donkey in the story, BTW) or walking the 90 miles from Nazareth to Bethlehem. We are talking about a 4 or 5 day journey, at the very least.
http://www.geocities.com/glory_ark/springbirth.html
I like the suggestion that they were in Jerusalem already for the Passover.

Also, there is no mention in ANY history of Herod's slaughter of the innocents... that certainly would have been noteworthy for both the Jews and the Romans.

Did you think that maybe Matthew was trying to bring up memories of Joseph and Jacob, and the final plague and exodus from Egypt with Moses? He certainly was wrong about his reference to the Isaiah 7:14 prophesy, although that made perfect sense to him, I'm sure. Matthew is constantly trying to find tie ins with Jesus to Jewish history and mythology.