Of interest to anyone? I just read a statement* re: JESUS "being the perfect interpretation (my emphasis) of the Bible"; the author uses Mathew 5:17-20 to discuss how the Old Covenant law was simply "an incomplete revelation of God's heart", and how the Pharisees' unhealthy interpretations of Scripture were WRONG. Jesus, on the other hand, came to fulfill/complete the OT Covenant, AND to "show the very heart of God, and how He wants his People to live in His Kingdom". Thus JESUS "confronts the very unhealthy teachings and interpretations of the law in His day by the religious elite" and is the chief interpreter of Scripture, "because the law points to HIM" and His teaching (interpreting) ministry.
This was new for me! I had heard a respected ex-twi leader declare "Ah, the Holy Spirit is the Interpreter of Scripture!" But never Jesus. But now that I think about it, since the Comforter is come to lead us into all truth, and since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit, it makes perfect sense!!!!!! This expands the Red Thread concept beautifully, I think! And confronts vp's doctrinal, practical, and horribly Pharisaical teachings on several different levels!!
*from Spark by EJ Martone (my Assembly of God pastor)
Well... other than the "I'm right and they're wrong" aspect of your post I figure there could be some reasonable insight to looking at Jesus as fulfillment of OT law.
I totally reject the paradigm of black/white, wrong/right interpretations of scripture. WE (humans/humanity) IMO are far too limited to be able to clearly define (most) interpretations of scripture as such.
Stay curious and be willing to consider new ways to look at them. Just sayin'.
Of interest to anyone? I just read a statement* re: JESUS "being the perfect interpretation (my emphasis) of the Bible"; the author uses Mathew 5:17-20 to discuss how the Old Covenant law was simply "an incomplete revelation of God's heart", and how the Pharisees' unhealthy interpretations of Scripture were WRONG. Jesus, on the other hand, came to fulfill/complete the OT Covenant, AND to "show the very heart of God, and how He wants his People to live in His Kingdom". Thus JESUS "confronts the very unhealthy teachings and interpretations of the law in His day by the religious elite" and is the chief interpreter of Scripture, "because the law points to HIM" and His teaching (interpreting) ministry.
This was new for me! I had heard a respected ex-twi leader declare "Ah, the Holy Spirit is the Interpreter of Scripture!" But never Jesus. But now that I think about it, since the Comforter is come to lead us into all truth, and since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit, it makes perfect sense!!!!!! This expands the Red Thread concept beautifully, I think! And confronts vp's doctrinal, practical, and horribly Pharisaical teachings on several different levels!!
*from Spark by EJ Martone (my Assembly of God pastor)
If Jesus is the perfect interpretation of the bible, how does this explain the multitude of different interpretations people have of bible scriptures? Does one still not have to interpret Jesus' interpretation?
For example, Jesus says: Matt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Yet, Paul writes: Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast.
What is Jesus' perfect interpretation of "one saved, always saved"?
Or, apparently, EJ Martone, Assembly of God pastor as mentioned above.
VPW - no scripture is of any private interpretation (iow - the bible interprets itself)
EJM - Jesus is the perfect interpretation of the bible
Fact - There are more than 45,000 Christian denominations globally and more than 200 in the U.S., according to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
Fact - There are more than 45,000 Christian denominations globally and more than 200 in the U.S., according to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
I'm not going to fact check the number in your claim, but I acknowledge your overall point.
I listened to a discussion between Steven Pinker (cognitive scientist) and an interviewer with the Free Press. The interview is NOT politics.
Though the clip is about 44 minutes long, I got the main takeaway very early on in the interview. Essentially, for thousands of years, facts eluded most people.
Therefore, people evolved to learn from and believe STORIES. Stories that made the most sense to the people hearing them at the time.
For those thousands of years, one of the main objectives of humans (who lived and traveled in TRIBES) revolved around survival.
Facts did not always provide protection for the tribes.
Today we have databases and research that rapidly contribute to the amount of truthful and factual knowledge. However, people STILL are inclined to learn from and believe their favored stories that contribute to their tribe's wellbeing. Religion is one of those areas of knowledge that is evolving rapidly. Victor Wierwille, even if he had been an honest seeker of the truth of God's Word, did not seem to contribute to any database or factual knowledge that humanity in general has been able to benefit from.
I'm not going to fact check the number in your claim, but I acknowledge your overall point.
Therefore, people evolved to learn from and believe STORIES. Stories that made the most sense to the people hearing them at the time.
For those thousands of years, one of the main objectives of humans (who lived and traveled in TRIBES) revolved around survival.
Facts did not always provide protection for the tribes.
"Fact" was not the best word to have used in my post when mentioning how many Christian denominations are in the world. It's what came up first on a simple google search - admittedly, not the most in-depth way to research something.
Concerning your mention of stories above, the first gospel was written over 30 years after the life and death of Jesus. (“The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel)
Also, “The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels
One has to take it on faith when believing the gospels (which contains Jesus' perfect interpretation of the law and the prophets according to the opening post) were inspired by God and not simply stories (imo) passed on by men for most likely self-serving political and/or religious reasons.
Remaining on topic of this thread, I think any interpretation of the Bible is that of the person teaching it. Calling it "Jesus' perfect interpretation" is a fallacy.
"Fact" was not the best word to have used in my post when mentioning how many Christian denominations are in the world. It's what came up first on a simple google search - admittedly, not the most in-depth way to research something.
Concerning your mention of stories above, the first gospel was written over 30 years after the life and death of Jesus. (“The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel)
Also, “The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels
One has to take it on faith when believing the gospels (which contains Jesus' perfect interpretation of the law and the prophets according to the opening post) were inspired by God and not simply stories (imo) passed on by men for most likely self-serving political and/or religious reasons.
Remaining on topic of this thread, I think any interpretation of the Bible is that of the person teaching it. Calling it "Jesus' perfect interpretation" is a fallacy.
I have no problem with you using the word "fact" in your post/comment.
Further, I now believe "inspired by God" has a much broader meaning than what Victor Wierwille taught us. I believe something (one says or writes) CAN be "inspired" by God even though it's not necessarily directly given by God (whomever (or whatever form) she or he may actually be) verbatim. But that's an entirely different discussion.
Nevertheless, I take no issue with your post/comment and appreciate the thought you put into it.
Of interest to anyone? I just read a statement* re: JESUS "being the perfect interpretation (my emphasis) of the Bible"; the author uses Mathew 5:17-20 to discuss how the Old Covenant law was simply "an incomplete revelation of God's heart", and how the Pharisees' unhealthy interpretations of Scripture were WRONG. Jesus, on the other hand, came to fulfill/complete the OT Covenant, AND to "show the very heart of God, and how He wants his People to live in His Kingdom". Thus JESUS "confronts the very unhealthy teachings and interpretations of the law in His day by the religious elite" and is the chief interpreter of Scripture, "because the law points to HIM" and His teaching (interpreting) ministry.
This was new for me! I had heard a respected ex-twi leader declare "Ah, the Holy Spirit is the Interpreter of Scripture!" But never Jesus. But now that I think about it, since the Comforter is come to lead us into all truth, and since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit, it makes perfect sense!!!!!! This expands the Red Thread concept beautifully, I think! And confronts vp's doctrinal, practical, and horribly Pharisaical teachings on several different levels!!
*from Spark by EJ Martone (my Assembly of God pastor)
Annio, I appreciate your excitement over such an idea as what you shared in your post. You wrote that Jesus makes known the perfect interpretation of the Bible by leading and guiding Christians in perfect harmony with the Holy Spirit? That means there is only one acceptable interpretation. What happens when two Christians have a different understanding of a particular verse or passage in the Bible? How does one decide which Christian's interpretation is the perfect one from Jesus? How does Jesus make this known to them?
I have no problem with you using the word "fact" in your post/comment.
Further, I now believe "inspired by God" has a much broader meaning than what Victor Wierwille taught us. I believe something (one says or writes) CAN be "inspired" by God even though it's not necessarily directly given by God (whomever (or whatever form) she or he may actually be) verbatim. But that's an entirely different discussion.
Nevertheless, I take no issue with your post/comment and appreciate the thought you put into it.
Hi Rocky,
Inspiration is the product of one's mind when personally interacting withsomething or someone. It would be based on how that person first interpreted what they saw, read or heard. Any parts of the bible that were inspired by God (as opposed to being directly given by God) would have been the writer’s interpretation of and their resulting thoughts and feelings about an event they credited to God. I think this is a good possibility.
However, 2 Tim 3:16, 2 Peter 1:20,21 and Gal 1:12 respectively say scripture is God-breathed, is of no private interpretation and is not of men but is the revelation from Jesus Christ.
Additionally, according to the opening post, there is only one perfect interpreter of God’s word and that is Jesus.I’m waiting to hear how this one interpretation has been made known to everyone over the thousands of years to ensure their likemindedness. Obviously, I think this is an impossibility.
You need to look at the whole Bible to understand what Jesus knew. And then you have to figure out his understanding of it, which will include some cultural taboos at various times throughout the OT and during his lifetime.
Did Jesus "interpret" in relation only to Jewish culture? After all, he didn't visit Gentiles in their homes and we have no indication that he ate other than kosher meats. He was in many ways a strict Jew.
And yet he saw much bigger things. He understood and foresaw "all nations" coming into God's love. And he certainly cut through cultural barriers of his time, by speaking with and (gasp) even touching women, to heal and to help.
You need to look at the whole Bible to understand what Jesus knew. And then you have to figure out his understanding of it, which will include some cultural taboos at various times throughout the OT and during his lifetime.
Did Jesus "interpret" in relation only to Jewish culture? After all, he didn't visit Gentiles in their homes and we have no indication that he ate other than kosher meats. He was in many ways a strict Jew.
And yet he saw much bigger things. He understood and foresaw "all nations" coming into God's love. And he certainly cut through cultural barriers of his time, by speaking with and (gasp) even touching women, to heal and to help.
I don't see a significant difference between the words perspective and interpretation. I have bought the book on Kindle to read Yancey's interpretation of the Old Testament.
If Annio reads your post and my reply, I'm hoping she will share more about what she thinks is Jesus' "perfect" interpretation of the Bible as quoted by EJ Martone, her Assembly of God pastor, as well as the "perfect" harmony Jesus makes available. Such perfection would be vital to know when one is searching for truth amongst all the other interpretations out there that are messing up people's heads.
Which is why I wonder how anyone who lived through years of believing vpw's teachings that the Bible was the inherent and inerrant word of God would think that another pastor would hold the keys to teaching there is such an idea of Jesus' perfect interpretation of the Bible being known to anyone.
The opening post of this thread began with "of interest to anyone?" Even though I believe the bible was written by men based on their man-made beliefs in God, I am interested in how she knows what she believes now falls under the description of being perfect.
The opening post of this thread began with "of interest to anyone?" Even though I believe the bible was written by men based on their man-made beliefs in God, I am interested in how she knows what she believes now falls under the description of being perfect.
I hope you don't get too disappointed if she never responds to your inquiry. I figure many (most?) people never consider the question at all.
I only do because I embrace (rather than shy away from) uncomfortable questions, with curiosity.
"..since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit.."
This is a conventional, even essential, Christian maxim, right? Even the pseudo-Christian charlatan, victor paul wierwille, "taught" Jesus is sitting, alive and well, at the right hand of the Father, right? Albeit, far, FAR away in a distant, inaccessible realm, hence his AND his Father's absence.
If he is alive, he didn't die. Not REALLY. And if he didn't die, he wasn't sacrificed. What kind of payment is this if Jesus is still alive? It seems more like he just took a long weekend off.
Genuine question: How does this work, theologically?
"..since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit.."
This is a conventional, even essential, Christian maxim, right? Even the pseudo-Christian charlatan, victor paul wierwille, "taught" Jesus is sitting, alive and well, at the right hand of the Father, right? Albeit, far, FAR away in a distant, inaccessible realm, hence his AND his Father's absence.
If he is alive, he didn't die. Not REALLY. And if he didn't die, he wasn't sacrificed. What kind of payment is this if Jesus is still alive? It seems more like he just took a long weekend off.
Genuine question: How does this work, theologically?
Is it so difficult to believe that the life that Jesus first had was laid down at Calgary, and the life that he was raised with is something brand new and different than anything that ever existed before?
If so, then you have plainly never really understood nor believed Acts 13:33
Is it so difficult to believe that the life that Jesus first had was laid down at Calgary, and the life that he was raised with is something brand new and different than anything that ever existed before?
If so, then you have plainly never really understood nor believed Acts 13:33
And Acts 13:34-37. He was raised from the dead, incorruptible, glorified, holy with a life more than abundant. Whatever the life, if Jesus was raised, is he dead?
Which is the more valuable life? Which life is more desirable? The one subject to decay or the one that will never decay?
What was sacrificed if Jesus is living gloriously and more than abundantly?
Well... other than the "I'm right and they're wrong" aspect of your post I figure there could be some reasonable insight to looking at Jesus as fulfillment of OT law.
I totally reject the paradigm of black/white, wrong/right interpretations of scripture. WE (humans/humanity) IMO are far too limited to be able to clearly define (most) interpretations of scripture as such.
Stay curious and be willing to consider new ways to look at them. Just sayin'.
On 8/29/2024 at 7:06 PM, Rocky said:
I hope you don't get too disappointed if she never responds to your inquiry. I figure many (most?) people never consider the question at all.
I only do because I embrace (rather than shy away from) uncomfortable questions, with curiosity.
One of the attractions and perceived strength of being a bible-believing Christian is the idea of finding "truth." Doing so is building your house upon a rock and being rooted and grounded so you are no longer being tossed to and from with every wind of doctrine. Doubting, as Peter found out when his walk on the water with Jesus began to go south, is never a good idea.
Fortunately for Dorothy and her 3 companions, it was the powerful sniff-and-hearing dog Toto who had the sense(s) to discover and reveal the lie about the great and powerful Oz
Another obstacle in being blinded by the gospel “truth” is believing the following lies about yourself: your heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; you are all as an unclean thing, and all your righteousnesses are as filthy rags; you’re carnal, sold under sin and you’re wretched, just to name a few.
However, the fictional Dorothy learned a real human lesson which was to believe in oneself.
believing the following lies about yourself: your heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; you are all as an unclean thing, and all your righteousnesses are as filthy rags; you’re carnal, sold under sin and you’re wretched
Gaslighting.
Also, a convenient cop out for abusive charlatans like victor paul wierwille: "I can't help but to lie, cheat, steal and rape. It is my nature."
Doubting, as Peter found out when his walk on the water with Jesus began to go south, is never a good idea.
Except when it is.
One of my favorite pericopes on doubt and belief is John 20: 19-29.
Whoever wrote GJohn was writing against the Thomasine community. The author composes this scene intending to make a sound argument for believing without evidence: "Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” But, by my lights, the author of GJohn misses his mark and unintentionally proves the antithesis.
Because Thomas doubted, because he investigated, he was the only disciple to touch the incorporeal resurrected body, the only disciple to whom Jesus vouchsafed this knowledge. Thomas saw. What he saw he surely could not unsee. The other disciples merely believed.
A powerful, unintended lesson on how doubt and inquiry can lead to astonishing spiritual insight.
"..since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit.."
This is a conventional, even essential, Christian maxim, right? Even the pseudo-Christian charlatan, victor paul wierwille, "taught" Jesus is sitting, alive and well, at the right hand of the Father, right? Albeit, far, FAR away in a distant, inaccessible realm, hence his AND his Father's absence.
If he is alive, he didn't die. Not REALLY. And if he didn't die, he wasn't sacrificed. What kind of payment is this if Jesus is still alive? It seems more like he just took a long weekend off.
Genuine question: How does this work, theologically?
It doesn't work because it's based on myths, superstition and man-made concepts which explain why there are so many holes in the biblical story.
Since God made death the penalty for sin according to the myth of Genesis 3, blood sacrifices of animals became necessary as a reminder to mankind of this judgment and as an atonement for their sins.
(Weren't blood sacrifices already being offered to ancient "pagan" gods in order to obtain favor from them before the time Genesis was even written? If so, this idea was simply adopted by men who created their Hebrew god Yahweh. The NT writers then extended this concept to include the human sacrifice of Jesus.)
The biological evidence concerning why human bodies eventually die heavily outweighs the superstitious/ignorant belief held back then that death was because of some mythical sin. It's hard to consider that the emperor Yahweh is wearing no clothes.
One of my favorite pericopes on doubt and belief is John 20: 19-29.
Whoever wrote GJohn was writing against the Thomasine community. The author composes this scene intending to make a sound argument for believing without evidence: "Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” But, by my lights, the author of GJohn misses his mark and unintentionally proves the antithesis.
Because Thomas doubted, because he investigated, he was the only disciple to touch the incorporeal resurrected body, the only disciple to whom Jesus vouchsafed this knowledge. Thomas saw. What he saw he surely could not unsee. The other disciples merely believed.
A powerful, unintended lesson on how doubt and inquiry can lead to astonishing spiritual insight.
Thanks for the new vocab "pericopes!"
I love your last sentence. Other posters have written similar ideas to this. A hunger to gain spiritual insight as it relates to one's spirit defined as "the nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character" is a wonderful thing. A belief in a god is not required.
In fact, after relying so long on mythical beliefs for your identity, such a hunger is necessary in order to avoid nihilism after deconstructing.
Recommended Posts
Rocky
Well... other than the "I'm right and they're wrong" aspect of your post I figure there could be some reasonable insight to looking at Jesus as fulfillment of OT law.
I totally reject the paradigm of black/white, wrong/right interpretations of scripture. WE (humans/humanity) IMO are far too limited to be able to clearly define (most) interpretations of scripture as such.
Stay curious and be willing to consider new ways to look at them. Just sayin'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
If Jesus is the perfect interpretation of the bible, how does this explain the multitude of different interpretations people have of bible scriptures? Does one still not have to interpret Jesus' interpretation?
For example, Jesus says: Matt 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Yet, Paul writes: Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast.
What is Jesus' perfect interpretation of "one saved, always saved"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
When in doubt, write:
The Teacher
Box 679
New Knockwurst, Ohio
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Or, apparently, EJ Martone, Assembly of God pastor as mentioned above.
VPW - no scripture is of any private interpretation (iow - the bible interprets itself)
EJM - Jesus is the perfect interpretation of the bible
Fact - There are more than 45,000 Christian denominations globally and more than 200 in the U.S., according to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
Which one has Jesus' "perfect" interpretation?
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I'm not going to fact check the number in your claim, but I acknowledge your overall point.
I listened to a discussion between Steven Pinker (cognitive scientist) and an interviewer with the Free Press. The interview is NOT politics.
Though the clip is about 44 minutes long, I got the main takeaway very early on in the interview. Essentially, for thousands of years, facts eluded most people.
Therefore, people evolved to learn from and believe STORIES. Stories that made the most sense to the people hearing them at the time.
For those thousands of years, one of the main objectives of humans (who lived and traveled in TRIBES) revolved around survival.
Facts did not always provide protection for the tribes.
Today we have databases and research that rapidly contribute to the amount of truthful and factual knowledge. However, people STILL are inclined to learn from and believe their favored stories that contribute to their tribe's wellbeing. Religion is one of those areas of knowledge that is evolving rapidly. Victor Wierwille, even if he had been an honest seeker of the truth of God's Word, did not seem to contribute to any database or factual knowledge that humanity in general has been able to benefit from.
If you'd like to check it out, here it is.
Edited by RockyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
"Fact" was not the best word to have used in my post when mentioning how many Christian denominations are in the world. It's what came up first on a simple google search - admittedly, not the most in-depth way to research something.
Concerning your mention of stories above, the first gospel was written over 30 years after the life and death of Jesus. (“The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel)
Also, “The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels
One has to take it on faith when believing the gospels (which contains Jesus' perfect interpretation of the law and the prophets according to the opening post) were inspired by God and not simply stories (imo) passed on by men for most likely self-serving political and/or religious reasons.
Remaining on topic of this thread, I think any interpretation of the Bible is that of the person teaching it. Calling it "Jesus' perfect interpretation" is a fallacy.
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I have no problem with you using the word "fact" in your post/comment.
Further, I now believe "inspired by God" has a much broader meaning than what Victor Wierwille taught us. I believe something (one says or writes) CAN be "inspired" by God even though it's not necessarily directly given by God (whomever (or whatever form) she or he may actually be) verbatim. But that's an entirely different discussion.
Nevertheless, I take no issue with your post/comment and appreciate the thought you put into it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Annio, I appreciate your excitement over such an idea as what you shared in your post. You wrote that Jesus makes known the perfect interpretation of the Bible by leading and guiding Christians in perfect harmony with the Holy Spirit? That means there is only one acceptable interpretation. What happens when two Christians have a different understanding of a particular verse or passage in the Bible? How does one decide which Christian's interpretation is the perfect one from Jesus? How does Jesus make this known to them?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Hi Rocky,
Inspiration is the product of one's mind when personally interacting with something or someone. It would be based on how that person first interpreted what they saw, read or heard. Any parts of the bible that were inspired by God (as opposed to being directly given by God) would have been the writer’s interpretation of and their resulting thoughts and feelings about an event they credited to God. I think this is a good possibility.
However, 2 Tim 3:16, 2 Peter 1:20,21 and Gal 1:12 respectively say scripture is God-breathed, is of no private interpretation and is not of men but is the revelation from Jesus Christ.
Additionally, according to the opening post, there is only one perfect interpreter of God’s word and that is Jesus. I’m waiting to hear how this one interpretation has been made known to everyone over the thousands of years to ensure their likemindedness. Obviously, I think this is an impossibility.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Interpretation, whatever.
You need to look at the whole Bible to understand what Jesus knew. And then you have to figure out his understanding of it, which will include some cultural taboos at various times throughout the OT and during his lifetime.
Did Jesus "interpret" in relation only to Jewish culture? After all, he didn't visit Gentiles in their homes and we have no indication that he ate other than kosher meats. He was in many ways a strict Jew.
And yet he saw much bigger things. He understood and foresaw "all nations" coming into God's love. And he certainly cut through cultural barriers of his time, by speaking with and (gasp) even touching women, to heal and to help.
I would recommend the book The Bible Jesus Read, by Philip Yancey - you can pick it up at various bookshops including online secondhand places. The Bible Jesus Read | Philip Yancey | 9780310231868 | Awesome Books. It's very readable and will give you a new perspective.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
I don't see a significant difference between the words perspective and interpretation. I have bought the book on Kindle to read Yancey's interpretation of the Old Testament.
If Annio reads your post and my reply, I'm hoping she will share more about what she thinks is Jesus' "perfect" interpretation of the Bible as quoted by EJ Martone, her Assembly of God pastor, as well as the "perfect" harmony Jesus makes available. Such perfection would be vital to know when one is searching for truth amongst all the other interpretations out there that are messing up people's heads.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Nothing is perfect when everything is flawed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Which is why I wonder how anyone who lived through years of believing vpw's teachings that the Bible was the inherent and inerrant word of God would think that another pastor would hold the keys to teaching there is such an idea of Jesus' perfect interpretation of the Bible being known to anyone.
The opening post of this thread began with "of interest to anyone?" Even though I believe the bible was written by men based on their man-made beliefs in God, I am interested in how she knows what she believes now falls under the description of being perfect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I hope you don't get too disappointed if she never responds to your inquiry. I figure many (most?) people never consider the question at all.
I only do because I embrace (rather than shy away from) uncomfortable questions, with curiosity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
"..since Jesus is still alive and well, and leading and guiding us in perfect harmony w/ the Holy Spirit.."
This is a conventional, even essential, Christian maxim, right? Even the pseudo-Christian charlatan, victor paul wierwille, "taught" Jesus is sitting, alive and well, at the right hand of the Father, right? Albeit, far, FAR away in a distant, inaccessible realm, hence his AND his Father's absence.
If he is alive, he didn't die. Not REALLY. And if he didn't die, he wasn't sacrificed. What kind of payment is this if Jesus is still alive? It seems more like he just took a long weekend off.
Genuine question: How does this work, theologically?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Labor Day?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Is it so difficult to believe that the life that Jesus first had was laid down at Calgary, and the life that he was raised with is something brand new and different than anything that ever existed before?
If so, then you have plainly never really understood nor believed Acts 13:33
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
And Acts 13:34-37. He was raised from the dead, incorruptible, glorified, holy with a life more than abundant. Whatever the life, if Jesus was raised, is he dead?
Which is the more valuable life? Which life is more desirable? The one subject to decay or the one that will never decay?
What was sacrificed if Jesus is living gloriously and more than abundantly?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
One of the attractions and perceived strength of being a bible-believing Christian is the idea of finding "truth." Doing so is building your house upon a rock and being rooted and grounded so you are no longer being tossed to and from with every wind of doctrine. Doubting, as Peter found out when his walk on the water with Jesus began to go south, is never a good idea.
Fortunately for Dorothy and her 3 companions, it was the powerful sniff-and-hearing dog Toto who had the sense(s) to discover and reveal the lie about the great and powerful Oz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Another obstacle in being blinded by the gospel “truth” is believing the following lies about yourself: your heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; you are all as an unclean thing, and all your righteousnesses are as filthy rags; you’re carnal, sold under sin and you’re wretched, just to name a few.
However, the fictional Dorothy learned a real human lesson which was to believe in oneself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Gaslighting.
Also, a convenient cop out for abusive charlatans like victor paul wierwille: "I can't help but to lie, cheat, steal and rape. It is my nature."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Except when it is.
One of my favorite pericopes on doubt and belief is John 20: 19-29.
Whoever wrote GJohn was writing against the Thomasine community. The author composes this scene intending to make a sound argument for believing without evidence: "Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” But, by my lights, the author of GJohn misses his mark and unintentionally proves the antithesis.
Because Thomas doubted, because he investigated, he was the only disciple to touch the incorporeal resurrected body, the only disciple to whom Jesus vouchsafed this knowledge. Thomas saw. What he saw he surely could not unsee. The other disciples merely believed.
A powerful, unintended lesson on how doubt and inquiry can lead to astonishing spiritual insight.
Edited by Nathan_JrGloves
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
It doesn't work because it's based on myths, superstition and man-made concepts which explain why there are so many holes in the biblical story.
Since God made death the penalty for sin according to the myth of Genesis 3, blood sacrifices of animals became necessary as a reminder to mankind of this judgment and as an atonement for their sins.
(Weren't blood sacrifices already being offered to ancient "pagan" gods in order to obtain favor from them before the time Genesis was even written? If so, this idea was simply adopted by men who created their Hebrew god Yahweh. The NT writers then extended this concept to include the human sacrifice of Jesus.)
The biological evidence concerning why human bodies eventually die heavily outweighs the superstitious/ignorant belief held back then that death was because of some mythical sin. It's hard to consider that the emperor Yahweh is wearing no clothes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Thanks for the new vocab "pericopes!"
I love your last sentence. Other posters have written similar ideas to this. A hunger to gain spiritual insight as it relates to one's spirit defined as "the nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character" is a wonderful thing. A belief in a god is not required.
In fact, after relying so long on mythical beliefs for your identity, such a hunger is necessary in order to avoid nihilism after deconstructing.
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.