Total Posts:98|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

ShouldChristiansTakeTheEntireBibleLiterally?

Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :)
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:40:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :)

I don't think too many Christians are Biblical literalists. My three daughters are Christians, the eldest an Anglican Priest, but they certainly aren't Biblical literalists, thank goodness..
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:43:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 11:40:14 AM, JJ50 wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :)

I don't think too many Christians are Biblical literalists. My three daughters are Christians, the eldest an Anglican Priest, but they certainly aren't Biblical literalists, thank goodness..
Neither am I.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:14:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?

The way in which this question is posed is tricky to respond to. As far as I know, this is the method I usually use to determine the meaning of Biblical passages. https://carm.org...

I think sometimes people are too concerned about the specifics about what the Bible teaches. The point of the Bible was not that we would follow God's instructions exactly down to the t each and every time. In fact, it teaches (and I think most secularists would agree) it is impossible for anybody to follow anything perfectly. The point of the Bible is to show that we are no longer bound by all of these laws, but we are forgiven through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:15:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Biblical scholars -- I mean serious scholars, not theologians -- point out that the Old Testament in particular is not a history, is not full of exemplary characters, is not a book of children's stories, and is not to be read as a list of theological dos and don'ts for life.

They point out that it's a collection of cultural artefacts whose authorship and redaction spanned many centuries, and occurred in a very different cultural context to the modern day.

In other words (and they don't say this part), you'd have to be nuts to treat it as a manual for modern life.

And regarding the New Testament, there are questions about the authorities of authorship, of redaction and the originality of the stories told. So it's unwise to treat every memoir as literal history.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:39:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:14:45 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?

The way in which this question is posed is tricky to respond to. As far as I know, this is the method I usually use to determine the meaning of Biblical passages. https://carm.org...

From your link:

"We need, as best as can be had, the guidance of the Holy Spirit in interpreting God"s Word. "

In other words, pure guesswork or whatever one wants to believe. That's called cherry picking.

I think sometimes people are too concerned about the specifics about what the Bible teaches. The point of the Bible was not that we would follow God's instructions exactly down to the t each and every time. In fact, it teaches (and I think most secularists would agree) it is impossible for anybody to follow anything perfectly. The point of the Bible is to show that we are no longer bound by all of these laws, but we are forgiven through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ.

Then, the Bible is completely useless if it has no point other than that.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
12_13
Posts: 1,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 1:46:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I think Bible should be understood as the writers wanted it to be understood. In my opinion it explains itself and there is not reason to make own interpretations or give own modern meanings.
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:45:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:39:29 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 1:14:45 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?

The way in which this question is posed is tricky to respond to. As far as I know, this is the method I usually use to determine the meaning of Biblical passages. https://carm.org...

From your link:

"We need, as best as can be had, the guidance of the Holy Spirit in interpreting God"s Word. "

In other words, pure guesswork or whatever one wants to believe. That's called cherry picking.
No, I don't think that at all, it's certainly not guesswork. People think that whenever Christians are too proud to admit that they don't know something, they use the excuse that the Holy Spirit will guide them. I find it's the opposite. Of course nobody will be able to perfectly interpret the Bible, but the purpose of calling on the guidance of the Holy Spirit is to ask God to help us use logic and reason so that he can clearly show us what he is trying to say. It is asking God to help us be fully able to use our brains in a capacity to logically decipher the message that the Bible has for us. I mean, like I said, people make too much of a big deal about interpreting the Bible correctly. Sure there are the radicals who try to twist any theological doctrine to fit their own desires for what the text should say. Take the Salem Witch Trials for example. Those were wrong and resulted because of a gross interpretation of Scripture to fit the desires of the people who were reading it. Personally, I think any logical and reasoning person should be able to read the Bible and understand that it never teaches that we should burn people at the stake because we've got a "hunch" that they're evil. And any logical person should find it easy to understand what the Bible is trying to tell us by looking mainly at the Author's purpose for writing. I think that is the key. The author's purpose really is the main way to discover what a passage teaches. By looking at what the author was originally trying to convey and who he was trying to convey it to will easily reveal the point he was trying to get across and how it relates to whoever decides to pick up the Bible and read it today. It's really not as hard as some people make it out to be, I think.

I think sometimes people are too concerned about the specifics about what the Bible teaches. The point of the Bible was not that we would follow God's instructions exactly down to the t each and every time. In fact, it teaches (and I think most secularists would agree) it is impossible for anybody to follow anything perfectly. The point of the Bible is to show that we are no longer bound by all of these laws, but we are forgiven through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ. You also asked why the Bible doesn't have "notes" or something similar to show us how to interpret it. Like I've already said, some Biblical passages are poetry. And I don't believe that I've ever heard of a poet who included "notes" on how to interpret his poetry. Isn't that what makes it poetry?

Then, the Bible is completely useless if it has no point other than that.

How is the Bible completely useless? It tries to show us how we are in error and how to understand human nature so that we can move in a positive moral direction both individually and as a collective.

"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"
Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.
for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong
for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.
for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.
While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 2:57:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 1:46:43 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I think Bible should be understood as the writers wanted it to be understood. In my opinion it explains itself and there is not reason to make own interpretations or give own modern meanings.

I agree we need to understand it the way the writers wanted it to be understood. But if they are to be believed, we have to find a way to connect them to the things that we face today, I mean these are divine revelations from God, and obviously if he exists, he did not only create the ancient people, but the modern ones too and intended a message for modern readers because of the Bible's divine inspiration. Think about it, the underlying problems we face today are no different from what people faced in Biblical times: War, Disease, Hate, Unloving, etc. The only difference really is in the forms that these problems come: today we face the possibility of nuclear warfare, things of that nature, we have politicians manipulating the people to achieve their own desires (not unlike the infamous Pharisees of Jesus' time), we have racism, shootings, discrimination, pollution, etc. Just because something specific wasn't addressed in the Bible particularly for people of our time, does not mean that the underlying, basic themes have no meaning for us today. Example: "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:3-4) [Italics added for emphasis]. Clearly the phrase "all men" doesn't just refer to those who have lived in the time that Jesus was alive. It really means ALL men.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 3:06:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 2:45:04 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:

In other words, pure guesswork or whatever one wants to believe. That's called cherry picking.

No, I don't think that at all, it's certainly not guesswork. People think that whenever Christians are too proud to admit that they don't know something, they use the excuse that the Holy Spirit will guide them. I find it's the opposite. Of course nobody will be able to perfectly interpret the Bible, but the purpose of calling on the guidance of the Holy Spirit is to ask God to help us use logic and reason so that he can clearly show us what he is trying to say. It is asking God to help us be fully able to use our brains in a capacity to logically decipher the message that the Bible has for us.

Yes, that's why there are some 45,000 registered denominations of Christianity and probably a whole lot more individuals with their various interpretations, each and every one of them claiming God, the Holy Spirit or whatever you want to call it, guiding them "to logically decipher the message that the Bible has for us".

I mean, like I said, people make too much of a big deal about interpreting the Bible correctly.

Considering the influence it has over societies, I would think it should be interpreted correctly, otherwise people are just living false interpretations.

Sure there are the radicals who try to twist any theological doctrine to fit their own desires for what the text should say. Take the Salem Witch Trials for example. Those were wrong and resulted because of a gross interpretation of Scripture to fit the desires of the people who were reading it. Personally, I think any logical and reasoning person should be able to read the Bible and understand that it never teaches that we should burn people at the stake because we've got a "hunch" that they're evil. And any logical person should find it easy to understand what the Bible is trying to tell us by looking mainly at the Author's purpose for writing. I think that is the key. The author's purpose really is the main way to discover what a passage teaches. By looking at what the author was originally trying to convey and who he was trying to convey it to will easily reveal the point he was trying to get across and how it relates to whoever decides to pick up the Bible and read it today. It's really not as hard as some people make it out to be, I think.

But, that's the point entirely, the authors never relay their purpose so we are forced to take their words at face value. There are no crypt notes showing what we should believe or shouldn't believe. I suspect the authors had every intention of thinking everything should be believed as true. Why wouldn't they?

I think sometimes people are too concerned about the specifics about what the Bible teaches. The point of the Bible was not that we would follow God's instructions exactly down to the t each and every time. In fact, it teaches (and I think most secularists would agree) it is impossible for anybody to follow anything perfectly. The point of the Bible is to show that we are no longer bound by all of these laws, but we are forgiven through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ. You also asked why the Bible doesn't have "notes" or something similar to show us how to interpret it. Like I've already said, some Biblical passages are poetry. And I don't believe that I've ever heard of a poet who included "notes" on how to interpret his poetry. Isn't that what makes it poetry?

Then, the Bible is completely useless if it has no point other than that.

How is the Bible completely useless? It tries to show us how we are in error and how to understand human nature so that we can move in a positive moral direction both individually and as a collective.

It should be obvious to anyone the bible is totally wrong about human nature and does not move us in any positive moral directions, simply because it does not teach morals, it only shows God commanding us to do this and not do that without a shred of explanation.


"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"

Notice what I bolded/underlined? Doesn't that claim the entire bible must be true and must be believed in all cases.

Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

No, it isn't. I'm not a sinner and don't need to be saved.

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Sorry, but the bible does not explain why those things are wrong. Not only that, but the vast majority of people would never consider murder, rape, etc. no matter if the bible existed or not.

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.
for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

I don't need the Bible to tell me what I can reason and rationalize myself. In fact, the stories in the Bible are without many of the morals and ethics we have today, hence it is now outdated information.

While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 3:36:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In other words, pure guesswork or whatever one wants to believe. That's called cherry picking.


Yes, that's why there are some 45,000 registered denominations of Christianity and probably a whole lot more individuals with their various interpretations, each and every one of them claiming God, the Holy Spirit or whatever you want to call it, guiding them "to logically decipher the message that the Bible has for us".
I never said anybody has it completely right. Denominations split because of many reasons, sometimes over the meaning of one single word or phrase in the Bible. Does that mean only one of those denominations will be saved, if any? Of course not, you must realize, the overarching theme of the Bible (acceptance of Jesus' divine gift) is why the Bible was put together in the first place. As long as you realize what is important and what really leads to salvation, the other teachings don't hold as much weight. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to correctly decipher them, it means that one must really focus and tune in on the important parts of the Bible.

I mean, like I said, people make too much of a big deal about interpreting the Bible correctly.

Considering the influence it has over societies, I would think it should be interpreted correctly, otherwise people are just living false interpretations.
Like I said, you should try to interpret them correctly, but one must always focus on the direct point of the writing, after that, certain aspects are more or less negligible when it comes to what is important.

Sure there are the radicals who try to twist any theological doctrine to fit their own desires for what the text should say. Take the Salem Witch Trials for example. Those were wrong and resulted because of a gross interpretation of Scripture to fit the desires of the people who were reading it. Personally, I think any logical and reasoning person should be able to read the Bible and understand that it never teaches that we should burn people at the stake because we've got a "hunch" that they're evil. And any logical person should find it easy to understand what the Bible is trying to tell us by looking mainly at the Author's purpose for writing. I think that is the key. The author's purpose really is the main way to discover what a passage teaches. By looking at what the author was originally trying to convey and who he was trying to convey it to will easily reveal the point he was trying to get across and how it relates to whoever decides to pick up the Bible and read it today. It's really not as hard as some people make it out to be, I think.

But, that's the point entirely, the authors never relay their purpose so we are forced to take their words at face value. There are no crypt notes showing what we should believe or shouldn't believe. I suspect the authors had every intention of thinking everything should be believed as true. Why wouldn't they?
Because they weren't writing directly to us, they were writing to the people of their time, and that makes scripture take on a whole new meaning. Also I never said it shouldn't be believed as TRUE, I said it shouldn't be taken literally, for example, the poetry and such. There is nothing "forcing us" to take their words literally, that is the point of poetry and such. That is why authors choose one word over the other, and things like that. Why do you think reading classes focus so much attention on deciphering author's purpose, even if the author doesn't clearly state it? We can certainly still determine the author's basic meaning, even without a specific guide to what he/she really meant.


How is the Bible completely useless? It tries to show us how we are in error and how to understand human nature so that we can move in a positive moral direction both individually and as a collective.

It should be obvious to anyone the bible is totally wrong about human nature and does not move us in any positive moral directions, simply because it does not teach morals, it only shows God commanding us to do this and not do that without a shred of explanation.
First of all, what explanation does it need? He is God and that is all there is to it, even if he wasn't loving or caring, he would still be God and he would still be greater than us, so why does he owe us any explanation? Even so, I do think he gives us an explanation. If you look at any Biblical command, it is given out of love for us. Example: the commandment not to murder, it's purpose is to conserve human life and conserve love between humans. The command against adultery, to ensure that love between a married couple is real love and not based on what you can get out of the other person. All of God's commandments are given out of the desire for love between each other so that we can all benefit.


"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"

Notice what I bolded/underlined? Doesn't that claim the entire bible must be true and must be believed in all cases.
Yes, it must be true and believed. That is a far cry from every word being interpreted literally.

Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

No, it isn't. I'm not a sinner and don't need to be saved.
That comment is irrelevant, considering we are arguing under the hypothetical that God exists. The title of the forum is "Should Christians Take the Entire Bible Literally?" That point is a completely valid opinion, but is irrelevant because we are arguing from a religious standpoint.

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Sorry, but the bible does not explain why those things are wrong. Not only that, but the vast majority of people would never consider murder, rape, etc. no matter if the bible existed or not.
I explained above the reasoning for these things being wrong. And I completely agree, I never said that, but you know there are the very few who would consider it, and that's who the passage is directed to.

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.
for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

I don't need the Bible to tell me what I can reason and rationalize myself. In fact, the stories in the Bible are without many of the morals and ethics we have today, hence it is now outdated information.
Hold on, I ran out of characters, I'll address this in a minute.

While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 3:45:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"

Notice what I bolded/underlined? Doesn't that claim the entire bible must be true and must be believed in all cases.

Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

No, it isn't. I'm not a sinner and don't need to be saved.

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Sorry, but the bible does not explain why those things are wrong. Not only that, but the vast majority of people would never consider murder, rape, etc. no matter if the bible existed or not.

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.
for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

I don't need the Bible to tell me what I can reason and rationalize myself. In fact, the stories in the Bible are without many of the morals and ethics we have today, hence it is now outdated information.
Well, assuming God exists, I don't see any way that you could reason and rationalize the way to be saved without the Bible telling you. And that's something else that proves my point, your claim about Biblical stories not having morals or ethics. That's exactly what some of them are--stories. Stories of people who fell from grace because they sinned and what to do to avoid the pitfalls that even some of the righteous men have fallen to. Stories to show us the consequences of living a life full of sin, and to show us that even God's chosen people were not perfect and we are all prone to sin. They are not to be taken as principles we should live by, in fact, the exact opposite is shown. And there again, stories showing the consequences of sin. That is another reason God commands us certain things. Because certain things that we do will have bad consequences, both for ourselves and for others , and even if God didn't exist, these things would still have negative consequences. And that is why God commands us not to do those things, because he doesn't want us to have to face those consequences.

While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 5:53:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 3:45:10 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"

Notice what I bolded/underlined? Doesn't that claim the entire bible must be true and must be believed in all cases.

Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

No, it isn't. I'm not a sinner and don't need to be saved.

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Sorry, but the bible does not explain why those things are wrong. Not only that, but the vast majority of people would never consider murder, rape, etc. no matter if the bible existed or not.

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.
for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

I don't need the Bible to tell me what I can reason and rationalize myself. In fact, the stories in the Bible are without many of the morals and ethics we have today, hence it is now outdated information.
Well, assuming God exists..

There's where we have a major problem. I have no more reason to assume God exists than I do fairies, pixies, unicorns, Allah or Zeus. There is nothing showing their existence in any way other than a single book written by men centuries ago.

I don't see any way that you could reason and rationalize the way to be saved without the Bible telling you.

Why can't God just tell me himself? If God created us, why don't we all have that instilled in us? Why do we need some Bronze Age book written by men to tell us that? Why do I need to be saved? What have I personally done to warrant that?

And that's something else that proves my point, your claim about Biblical stories not having morals or ethics. That's exactly what some of them are--stories. Stories of people who fell from grace because they sinned and what to do to avoid the pitfalls that even some of the righteous men have fallen to. Stories to show us the consequences of living a life full of sin, and to show us that even God's chosen people were not perfect and we are all prone to sin.

I've read those stories, they are horrible. They show a cruel, psychotic God who metes out his wrath on people. He is not a loving God by any stretch of the imagination. Pure evil. Since I don't sin and could never be perfect, I have no interest in following such a God.

They are not to be taken as principles we should live by, in fact, the exact opposite is shown. And there again, stories showing the consequences of sin . That is another reason God commands us certain things. Because certain things that we do will have bad consequences, both for ourselves and for others , and even if God didn't exist, these things would still have negative consequences. And that is why God commands us not to do those things, because he doesn't want us to have to face those consequences.

Those things you refer are irrelevant to me as I do not sin nor have any inkling to do so. Not only that, I'm not a robot or slave who needs to be commanded, I'm a human being with a brain for learning things, hence if I'm to understand something, I need an explanation, not a commandment. I would suspect God would know this and act accordingly, I mean, if He created us, He would know this.


While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 6:41:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 5:53:26 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 3:45:10 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"

Notice what I bolded/underlined? Doesn't that claim the entire bible must be true and must be believed in all cases.

Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

No, it isn't. I'm not a sinner and don't need to be saved.
Well, assuming God exists..

There's where we have a major problem. I have no more reason to assume God exists than I do fairies, pixies, unicorns, Allah or Zeus. There is nothing showing their existence in any way other than a single book written by men centuries ago.
That's a perfectly valid opinion, sadly, it is irrelevant to the topic of this forum post.

I don't see any way that you could reason and rationalize the way to be saved without the Bible telling you.

Why can't God just tell me himself? If God created us, why don't we all have that instilled in us? Why do we need some Bronze Age book written by men to tell us that? Why do I need to be saved? What have I personally done to warrant that?
Those first three questions are completely valid, and I shall here answer them here. First of all, God did. When he created Adam and Eve, of course they knew that He existed. But they still sinned. Cain and Abel knew God existed, but Cain still killed his brother. It is because of human nature that we sin. And even if God did come down from the Heavens today and proclaimed that it was really him, many still wouldn't believe him. Jesus performed amazing miracles right in front of people's eyes and yet they still did not believe him! Take the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus for example: "There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." [Italics added for emphasis] Really, we do have it instilled in us, God just allows us the free will to choose whether or not to believe in Him. That is why Salvation is a gift and not a right. As for your other two questions, God is a just and perfect God, therefore, he cannot coexist with impurities (sin). Anything that is against the commandments that God has given us is a sin, because it is morally wrong, and therefore God cannot coexist with us unless we have paid for our sins. The only way to pay for sin is death, that is the just punishment for doing wrong. That is why Jesus died for us, being perfect, his death was able to atone for all sins everywhere. So to answer your question, everyone has sinned. It is a 100% guarantee that each and every one of us has at least slightly deviated from God's law at some point in our lives, requiring the need for a death of atonement, in our case, Jesus, because his death covers all sins.

And that's something else that proves my point, your claim about Biblical stories not having morals or ethics. That's exactly what some of them are--stories. Stories of people who fell from grace because they sinned and what to do to avoid the pitfalls that even some of the righteous men have fallen to. Stories to show us the consequences of living a life full of sin, and to show us that even God's chosen people were not perfect and we are all prone to sin.

I've read those stories, they are horrible. They show a cruel, psychotic God who metes out his wrath on people. He is not a loving God by any stretch of the imagination. Pure evil. Since I don't sin and could never be perfect, I have no interest in following such a God.
I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to the stories of men who have gone against God's will, not the supposed "hateful" or "genocidal" acts of God. That, sadly, is also a topic for another forum, but I will gladly discuss them with you there, due to the unfortunate lack of characters allowed in a single forum post.

They are not to be taken as principles we should live by, in fact, the exact opposite is shown. And there again, stories showing the consequences of sin . That is another reason God commands us certain things. Because certain things that we do will have bad consequences, both for ourselves and for others , and even if God didn't exist, these things would still have negative consequences. And that is why God commands us not to do those things, because he doesn't want us to have to face those consequences.

Those things you refer are irrelevant to me as I do not sin nor have any inkling to do so. Not only that, I'm not a robot or slave who needs to be commanded, I'm a human being with a brain for learning things, hence if I'm to understand something, I need an explanation, not a commandment. I would suspect God would know this and act accordingly, I mean, if He created us, He would know this.
As I have said, sin is just the act of doing something that is morally wrong or impermissible. It is not honoring the commands of God, it is merely imperfection, as all humans have. And God certainly gives us explanations for his commandments, as I have said. They are out of love for humankind and the desire for us to love each other and not have to face unfavorable consequences. And also, like you have said, most people consider murder inherently wrong, even if it would (hypothetically) benefit others. There doesn't seem to be a reason or explanation for that, yet I assume (and hope) that you subscribe to the idea that murder is wrong.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 8:42:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 6:41:12 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:

Those first three questions are completely valid, and I shall here answer them here. First of all, God did. When he created Adam and Eve, of course they knew that He existed. But they still sinned. Cain and Abel knew God existed, but Cain still killed his brother. It is because of human nature that we sin.

That is where the Bible is dead wrong, it is not our nature to sin, quite the contrary. If it were our nature to sin, then the entire world would be in utter chaos and we would have killed each other long ago. Our nature is one of compassion and altruism, which we observe every day with the vast majority of people. No one needs saving.

And even if God did come down from the Heavens today and proclaimed that it was really him, many still wouldn't believe him.

That is nonsense, we would all see him and know it, there would be no question whatsoever that is was God.

Jesus performed amazing miracles right in front of people's eyes and yet they still did not believe him!

Actually, there are stories written by men about Jesus, which most likely are highly exaggerated or just not true, especially the part about miracles.

Take the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus for example: "There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." [Italics added for emphasis]

Sorry, but that's probably just another made up story.

Really, we do have it instilled in us, God just allows us the free will to choose whether or not to believe in Him.

That's not a choice because choices are not meant to have severe consequences, they then become threats.

That is why Salvation is a gift and not a right.

So, God threatens us to believe in him or not and then offers a gift of salvation?

As for your other two questions, God is a just and perfect God, therefore, he cannot coexist with impurities (sin).

Yet, he metes out the most vicious and cruel punishments. Is that what you consider perfect? I certainly don't.

Anything that is against the commandments that God has given us is a sin, because it is morally wrong, and therefore God cannot coexist with us unless we have paid for our sins.

That's why I don't follow God, I'm not into commandments and threats, I prefer explanations and choices.

The only way to pay for sin is death, that is the just punishment for doing wrong.

That is not just at all, that is pure evil.

That is why Jesus died for us, being perfect, his death was able to atone for all sins everywhere.

I didn't ask nor want Jesus to die for me, so his death was irrelevant. Besides, he didn't choose to die, he was arrested and convicted by the Romans, he had no choice.

So to answer your question, everyone has sinned.

Not me.

It is a 100% guarantee that each and every one of us has at least slightly deviated from God's law at some point in our lives, requiring the need for a death of atonement, in our case, Jesus, because his death covers all sins.

I have not deviated from any God's laws because there are no laws from God, there are only laws from men. It was men who wrote the Bible, not God.

And that's something else that proves my point, your claim about Biblical stories not having morals or ethics. That's exactly what some of them are--stories. Stories of people who fell from grace because they sinned and what to do to avoid the pitfalls that even some of the righteous men have fallen to. Stories to show us the consequences of living a life full of sin, and to show us that even God's chosen people were not perfect and we are all prone to sin.

I've read those stories, they are horrible. They show a cruel, psychotic God who metes out his wrath on people. He is not a loving God by any stretch of the imagination. Pure evil. Since I don't sin and could never be perfect, I have no interest in following such a God.
I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to the stories of men who have gone against God's will, not the supposed "hateful" or "genocidal" acts of God. That, sadly, is also a topic for another forum, but I will gladly discuss them with you there, due to the unfortunate lack of characters allowed in a single forum post.

They are not to be taken as principles we should live by, in fact, the exact opposite is shown. And there again, stories showing the consequences of sin . That is another reason God commands us certain things. Because certain things that we do will have bad consequences, both for ourselves and for others , and even if God didn't exist, these things would still have negative consequences. And that is why God commands us not to do those things, because he doesn't want us to have to face those consequences.

Those things you refer are irrelevant to me as I do not sin nor have any inkling to do so. Not only that, I'm not a robot or slave who needs to be commanded, I'm a human being with a brain for learning things, hence if I'm to understand something, I need an explanation, not a commandment. I would suspect God would know this and act accordingly, I mean, if He created us, He would know this.
As I have said, sin is just the act of doing something that is morally wrong or impermissible. It is not honoring the commands of God, it is merely imperfection, as all humans have. And God certainly gives us explanations for his commandments, as I have said. They are out of love for humankind and the desire for us to love each other and not have to face unfavorable consequences. And also, like you have said, most people consider murder inherently wrong, even if it would (hypothetically) benefit others. There doesn't seem to be a reason or explanation for that, yet I assume (and hope) that you subscribe to the idea that murder is wrong.

Of course, but I don't need God to tell me that or tell me not to murder. I can reason that our for myself.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 9:24:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :)

No book that contains talking animals and plants should be taken literally. Not one word of it ought to be taken literally.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 10:13:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 2:45:04 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:

How is the Bible completely useless? It tries to show us how we are in error and how to understand human nature so that we can move in a positive moral direction both individually and as a collective.

"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"
Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

Is knowing the way to be set free from any addiction a good reason for rehab information to exist? Would it need to exist if people were not so stupid to become addicted to things in the first place?
An addict knows how to be saved from his addiction without any book or rehab group telling him how to be saved. The way to do it is to not partake of whatever causes the addiction. It is as simple as that.
Knowing how to be saved from anything and then still continuing to to it does not save anyone. A theory of how to do something is useless if it is not put into action.
It is like an alcoholic knowing how to be free from alcoholism yet still continuing to drink while they believe by faith that they are free and sober.
If an alcoholic continues to drink alcohol while claiming to be free from it and claiming to be sober, they are kidding themselves.
If a sinner continues to sin while claiming they have been set free from sin, they are also kidding themselves the same as the alcoholic does.
Those who are truly free from sin, ( transgression of the laws) do not sin, ( do not transgress laws) the same as those who are free from alcohol addiction do not drink alcohol.

It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

What in your opinion is the meaning of sin?

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Do you think people do not know that rape and murder is wrong and need to be informed of the fact or do the negative affects of their own actions teach them certain actions end up giving them undesirable results?

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.

Then why do so many Christians continue to sin? Why are more than half of the people in jails Christians?
http://i.imgur.com...

for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

How does a belief in a mythical character show anyone how to love each other?

How does the bible or Christianity set a good example of moral standards when more than half of the criminals in jails are Christians?

While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)

It seems you are the one who needs help.
Supernatural immortal beings cannot die, therefore any stories about the death and resurrection of some supernatural immortal person are fictional.
mindbender
Posts: 155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:01:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :) : :

The biblical prophecies are mostly written in metaphor so those who try interpret it should understand this. If they don't, they will get all kinds of different interpretations which is well known among the various Christian denominations.
mindbender
Posts: 155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:01:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :) : :

The biblical prophecies are mostly written in metaphor so those who try interpret it should understand this. If they don't, they will get all kinds of different interpretations which is well known among the various Christian denominations.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2015 11:19:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?

You and Atheist like you are not here to debate honestly.

You ask, "How can you tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?".

Well good amazing Genius of a question!!

The answer has not changed in the last 4000 years of literary study. That NO MATTER what written passage you are talking about, an HONEST investigator will consider context, syntax, audience, and time period to evaluate what is to be taken literally and what is not.

If I say, "It is raining cats and dogs! My shoes are wet." OH MY GOSH how can YOU tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?!

You and atheist like you, do you fools think asking such a question repeatedly some how infers you to be intelligent? It doesn't. You look like a dullard pompous fool to me.

You want to be honest and intellectual? then apply the same standard of discerning meaning of Shakespearean passages as one should apply to understanding biblical passages.

"Wherefore art thou Romeo?" do you know what that means? NOT if you don't take into account context, syntax, audience, time period.

It means "Why are you Romeo?", further evident by her next line, Deny thy father and refuse thy name.

You know what this line of questioning is... it is atheist ignorance, it is atheist like you who apply a double standard to the bible, to religious testimony. A standard you don't even attempt to apply to the other concepts you accept as truthful.

This question of "How can you tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?" has been answered before, will continue to be answered in the future. The same examples that can be pulled from practically any period piece of writing. AND the answer is the same standard applied to Shakespeare, the Vedas, the Egyptian Manuscripts, the Greek Epics, ECT...

To understand the meaning of a sentence, one has to consider the context, syntax, audience, time period.

The Literal view of the bible, like by Young Earth Creationist, is a modern interpretation long removed from the original texts. The only other group that adheres to a strict literal interpretation of the bible are Atheist!

Why don't you attack the bible on what it says in accordance with acceptable literary study methods?

I'll be honest, there would still be some contradictions and difficult passages to explain.

but instead of getting to meat and real issues, trolls like you prefer to dance around the same worn bone.
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 5:54:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:13:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 5/18/2015 2:45:04 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:

How is the Bible completely useless? It tries to show us how we are in error and how to understand human nature so that we can move in a positive moral direction both individually and as a collective.

"And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

key phrase: "...the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation"
Isn't knowing the way to be saved from our sins a good reason for the Bible to exist?

Is knowing the way to be set free from any addiction a good reason for rehab information to exist? Would it need to exist if people were not so stupid to become addicted to things in the first place?
An addict knows how to be saved from his addiction without any book or rehab group telling him how to be saved. The way to do it is to not partake of whatever causes the addiction. It is as simple as that.
Knowing how to be saved from anything and then still continuing to to it does not save anyone. A theory of how to do something is useless if it is not put into action.
It is like an alcoholic knowing how to be free from alcoholism yet still continuing to drink while they believe by faith that they are free and sober.
If an alcoholic continues to drink alcohol while claiming to be free from it and claiming to be sober, they are kidding themselves.
If a sinner continues to sin while claiming they have been set free from sin, they are also kidding themselves the same as the alcoholic does.
Those who are truly free from sin, ( transgression of the laws) do not sin, ( do not transgress laws) the same as those who are free from alcohol addiction do not drink alcohol.
Yes, and that is why the Bible says that to be truly saved you must no longer sin after you have accepted forgiveness. "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin."
Yes of course anyone who wishes to be saved must stop sinning. But a just God demands proper punishment for the sins that have already been committed, which is death, in our case, the death of Jesus Christ. The Bible never says you can continue doing wrong after asking for forgiveness. (However, even most Christians can't get this through their heads).


It is also: Profitable for doctrine- ex: the meaning of sin, how it affects us, the gift of salvation, etc.

What in your opinion is the meaning of sin?
Well, in that specific instance, I was referring mostly to how it affects us, which would be like I said, the punishment for committing sin. Sorry I should proofread. And like you said, it's any transgression from the law.

for reproof- ex: informing someone of their sin and the negative affects on them and their relationship with God, i.e. murder, rape, etc. and why it is wrong

Do you think people do not know that rape and murder is wrong and need to be informed of the fact or do the negative affects of their own actions teach them certain actions end up giving them undesirable results?
Well, there are the very few who don't know. And remember, back in Biblical times, writers were talking to an audience where these things were a common occurrence and needed to be addressed.

for correction- ex: what they should do instead of sinning i.e. love one another, honor thy father and mother, etc.

Then why do so many Christians continue to sin? Why are more than half of the people in jails Christians?
http://i.imgur.com...
The simple answer, people are hypocrites. It's sad, but it's true.


for instruction in righteousness- ex: showing us what our natural response should be to the grace of Jesus and his salvation, showing us how we should love each other and show them the way also to salvation, showing us how we can grow in our relationship with God and with others, etc. I could go on.

How does a belief in a mythical character show anyone how to love each other?

How does the bible or Christianity set a good example of moral standards when more than half of the criminals in jails are Christians?
Like I said, people are hypocrites, it breaks my heart. Christians doing things that are so blatantly wrong demonstrates a lack of knowledge about what the Bible teaches, or else lying about actually being a Christian, and that is unfortunate.

While I'm on the subject, this is a good time to mention that these are also great ways to help with the interpretation of scripture! Looking to see how Biblical passages convey those 4 overarching themes of the Bible as well as how they relate to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ--the point of the Bible as a whole.

I hope this helped :)

It seems you are the one who needs help.
Supernatural immortal beings cannot die, therefore any stories about the death and resurrection of some supernatural immortal person are fictional.
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 6:29:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 8:42:21 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 6:41:12 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:

It is because of human nature that we sin.

That is where the Bible is dead wrong, it is not our nature to sin, quite the contrary. If it were our nature to sin, then the entire world would be in utter chaos and we would have killed each other long ago. Our nature is one of compassion and altruism, which we observe every day with the vast majority of people. No one needs saving.
Even small transgressions (Ex: Lying, Cheating, Stealing) still count as sins, so even though the world isn't in flames, we still aren't perfect. And that's the point, no matter how good we are, we aren't perfect, so we can't reside with a perfect God.

And even if God did come down from the Heavens today and proclaimed that it was really him, many still wouldn't believe him.

That is nonsense, we would all see him and know it, there would be no question whatsoever that is was God.

Jesus performed amazing miracles right in front of people's eyes and yet they still did not believe him!

Actually, there are stories written by men about Jesus, which most likely are highly exaggerated or just not true, especially the part about miracles.

Sorry, but that's probably just another made up story.

Really, we do have it instilled in us, God just allows us the free will to choose whether or not to believe in Him.

That's not a choice because choices are not meant to have severe consequences, they then become threats.
I don't understand your meaning. People make wrong choices every single day that have severe consequences.

That is why Salvation is a gift and not a right.

So, God threatens us to believe in him or not and then offers a gift of salvation?
He's not THREATENING us to believe, he gives us a choice.

As for your other two questions, God is a just and perfect God, therefore, he cannot coexist with impurities (sin).

Yet, he metes out the most vicious and cruel punishments. Is that what you consider perfect? I certainly don't.
Perfect doesn't mean he lets things slide. If a parent lets his kids do whatever they want without just punishment, he is seen as a bad parent. One of God's perfect qualities is that he justly deals punishment to the people who deserve it.

Anything that is against the commandments that God has given us is a sin, because it is morally wrong, and therefore God cannot coexist with us unless we have paid for our sins.

That's why I don't follow God, I'm not into commandments and threats, I prefer explanations and choices.
They aren't threats. He commands us to do things for our own benefit, and he allows us the choice to decide if we want to do what's right or what's wrong. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

The only way to pay for sin is death, that is the just punishment for doing wrong.

That is not just at all, that is pure evil.
How is it evil to punish what is wrong?

That is why Jesus died for us, being perfect, his death was able to atone for all sins everywhere.

I didn't ask nor want Jesus to die for me, so his death was irrelevant. Besides, he didn't choose to die, he was arrested and convicted by the Romans, he had no choice.
Well, if Jesus was truly God, at any time he could've shown the Romans who he really was and he wouldn't have been crucified. He never had to come down to Earth as a human to die on the Cross, but he chose to. And if you don't want to accept Jesus' death, that's perfectly fine, he's not going to make you. It's completely choice.

So to answer your question, everyone has sinned.

Not me.
You are so proud that you won't admit you've done even one thing wrong? Never lied once? Never cheated on anything? Made a promise you couldn't follow through on?

It is a 100% guarantee that each and every one of us has at least slightly deviated from God's law at some point in our lives, requiring the need for a death of atonement, in our case, Jesus, because his death covers all sins.

I have not deviated from any God's laws because there are no laws from God, there are only laws from men. It was men who wrote the Bible, not God.

And that's something else that proves my point, your claim about Biblical stories not having morals or ethics. That's exactly what some of them are--stories. Stories of people who fell from grace because they sinned and what to do to avoid the pitfalls that even some of the righteous men have fallen to. Stories to show us the consequences of living a life full of sin, and to show us that even God's chosen people were not perfect and we are all prone to sin.

I've read those stories, they are horrible. They show a cruel, psychotic God who metes out his wrath on people. He is not a loving God by any stretch of the imagination. Pure evil. Since I don't sin and could never be perfect, I have no interest in following such a God.

They are not to be taken as principles we should live by, in fact, the exact opposite is shown. And there again, stories showing the consequences of sin . That is another reason God commands us certain things. Because certain things that we do will have bad consequences, both for ourselves and for others , and even if God didn't exist, these things would still have negative consequences. And that is why God commands us not to do those things, because he doesn't want us to have to face those consequences.

As I have said, sin is just the act of doing something that is morally wrong or impermissible. It is not honoring the commands of God, it is merely imperfection, as all humans have. And God certainly gives us explanations for his commandments, as I have said. They are out of love for humankind and the desire for us to love each other and not have to face unfavorable consequences. And also, like you have said, most people consider murder inherently wrong, even if it would (hypothetically) benefit others. There doesn't seem to be a reason or explanation for that, yet I assume (and hope) that you subscribe to the idea that murder is wrong.

Of course, but I don't need God to tell me that or tell me not to murder. I can reason that our for myself.
Like I said, there are some few people who aren't aware that it is wrong, and there are other, less severe sins (still considered sins) that people aren't aware that they're wrong.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 7:17:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Definitions:
Literal- "taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory."
Entire- "with no part left out; whole."

I'm looking for a range of different opinions from all sorts of people. I look forward to learning something new or getting a new perspective. Thanks :)

Adam, Eve, talking snake, garden of eden, tree's that fruit give knowledge, Eve being formed from Adams rib..........
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 9:04:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Christians should first read the entire bible before they decide if they can take it literally.

"Of over 2 billion Christians in the world, less than 30% will ever read through the entire bible. The fact is over 82% of Christian Americans only read their bibles on Sundays while in church."
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 10:09:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/18/2015 11:19:25 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:57:34 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 12:54:31 PM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 11:56:49 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:11:53 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
Sorry about the title, I ran out of characters haha. I just want to argue and get opinions about whether or not Christians should interpret the entire Bible in a strictly literal sense.

Aren't they supposed to do that? Isn't the Bible the word of God as far as they're concerned? Or, do they cherry pick what they want to believe, thus being hypocrites?
That's a common misconception. It's not cherry-picking if you take the Bible the way it was meant to be taken. The Bible is literature like any other kind of literature and must be analyzed like any other piece of literature. There are books of poetry in the Bible. "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My GOD, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold" (Ps. 18:2). Do you expect us to believe that God is LITERALLY a rock? Poetry needs to be interpreted to try to comprehend the meaning of the author. Not every word of the Bible was MEANT to be taken literally, therefore you CAN'T take it literally.

Okay, who decided what is to be taken literally and what is not? On what authority were those decisions made? Why doesn't the Bible have notes showing what we are supposed to believe and what not to believe?

You and Atheist like you are not here to debate honestly.

Projecting yourself again, Mhykiel, the one who constantly, dishonestly posts nonsense?

You ask, "How can you tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?".

Well good amazing Genius of a question!!

Thank you. Considering you believers can't seem to agree on anything in the bible, it's an obvious relevant question.

The answer has not changed in the last 4000 years of literary study. That NO MATTER what written passage you are talking about, an HONEST investigator will consider context, syntax, audience, and time period to evaluate what is to be taken literally and what is not.

Is that why there are some 45,000 different denominations of Christianity, because none of you are "honest investigators"?

If I say, "It is raining cats and dogs! My shoes are wet." OH MY GOSH how can YOU tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?!

Of course, but those are not words that have been considered the inerrant word of God, hence your analogy is irrelevant.

You and atheist like you, do you fools think asking such a question repeatedly some how infers you to be intelligent? It doesn't. You look like a dullard pompous fool to me.

And yet, you failed so far to explain anything and accomplished looking the dullard pompous fool you refer. Well done.

You want to be honest and intellectual? then apply the same standard of discerning meaning of Shakespearean passages as one should apply to understanding biblical passages.

"Wherefore art thou Romeo?" do you know what that means? NOT if you don't take into account context, syntax, audience, time period.

It means "Why are you Romeo?", further evident by her next line, Deny thy father and refuse thy name.

You know what this line of questioning is... it is atheist ignorance, it is atheist like you who apply a double standard to the bible, to religious testimony. A standard you don't even attempt to apply to the other concepts you accept as truthful.

This question of "How can you tell what is to be taken literally and what is not?" has been answered before, will continue to be answered in the future. The same examples that can be pulled from practically any period piece of writing. AND the answer is the same standard applied to Shakespeare, the Vedas, the Egyptian Manuscripts, the Greek Epics, ECT...

To understand the meaning of a sentence, one has to consider the context, syntax, audience, time period.

Again, that's why we currently have over 45,000 registered denominations of Christianity and probably millions more individuals with their own interpretations of the Bible.

So far, you are looking like a pompous fool.

The Literal view of the bible, like by Young Earth Creationist, is a modern interpretation long removed from the original texts.

Long removed? By whom? Who has the authority to remove the word of God from the Bible?

The only other group that adheres to a strict literal interpretation of the bible are Atheist!

Yes, that is because we honestly read the words there and don't decide to cherry pick what is and what isn't true, like you do.

Why don't you attack the bible on what it says in accordance with acceptable literary study methods?

Why don't you read the bible?

I'll be honest, there would still be some contradictions and difficult passages to explain.

No, you won't be honest.

but instead of getting to meat and real issues, trolls like you prefer to dance around the same worn bone.

So, you have failed miserably at answering the question and only used your post to toss out insults, as usual, and look the pompous fool.

You have been dismissed, troll.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 4:02:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/19/2015 5:54:42 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:13:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Is knowing the way to be set free from any addiction a good reason for rehab information to exist? Would it need to exist if people were not so stupid to become addicted to things in the first place?
An addict knows how to be saved from his addiction without any book or rehab group telling him how to be saved. The way to do it is to not partake of whatever causes the addiction. It is as simple as that.
Knowing how to be saved from anything and then still continuing to to it does not save anyone. A theory of how to do something is useless if it is not put into action.
It is like an alcoholic knowing how to be free from alcoholism yet still continuing to drink while they believe by faith that they are free and sober.
If an alcoholic continues to drink alcohol while claiming to be free from it and claiming to be sober, they are kidding themselves.
If a sinner continues to sin while claiming they have been set free from sin, they are also kidding themselves the same as the alcoholic does.
Those who are truly free from sin, ( transgression of the laws) do not sin, ( do not transgress laws) the same as those who are free from alcohol addiction do not drink alcohol.
Yes, and that is why the Bible says that to be truly saved you must no longer sin after you have accepted forgiveness. "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin."
Yes of course anyone who wishes to be saved must stop sinning. But a just God demands proper punishment for the sins that have already been committed, which is death, in our case, the death of Jesus Christ. The Bible never says you can continue doing wrong after asking for forgiveness. (However, even most Christians can't get this through their heads).

To punish an innocent person for the crimes of many guilty ones is sheer stupidity.
It does not cause the guilty ones to stop doing wrong.
It is also totally against what the OT teaches...
Jer 31:30 Instead, everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes"their own teeth will be set on edge.
Ezek 18:20 The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.

The story of Jesus on the cross is symbolic of putting evil/ sin to death. The sin is not supposed to be worshiped. It is supposed to be crucified.
The character ( Jesus) in the story represented sin on the cross. 2 Cor 5:21 ... he hath made him to be sin for us......
The people who worship the character on the cross are basically worshiping a personification of sin as they continue to sin and claim they have been saved from it.
As long as they idolize sin (Jesus) they are not saved from their idolatry.
They are idolatrous hypocrites who believe a mythical character has saved them from hell, not from sin, since they continue to sin. They worship a mythical character who cannot hear them or speak back to them. Their father is the devil ( the liar and deceiver) . Their own belief has deceived them and led them astray.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2015 4:18:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/19/2015 5:54:42 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
At 5/18/2015 10:13:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:

What in your opinion is the meaning of sin?
Well, in that specific instance, I was referring mostly to how it affects us, which would be like I said, the punishment for committing sin. Sorry I should proofread. And like you said, it's any transgression from the law.

Was the OT the law to the people of the time?
Does the OT not say "everyone will die for their own sin; " Jer 31:30
and
The children will not share the guilt of the parents and vice versa but the one who sins pays for the crime? ( Ezek 18:20 )

If that was the law then the NT concept of one man dying to pay for the sins of the world is against the OT law. Therefore God is committing a crime sinning against his own law. That means God deserves be crucified according to his own law.
None of us inherit the sins of Adam IF the above scriptures in Ezekiel and Jeremiah are true.
Every man reaps the consequences of his own actions. That law also applies to God himself. The character, mythical or not, is not exempt from his own laws. If you think he is that makes him a hypocrite who says do as I say and not as I do.
However, that is no surprise since the hypocritical character created hypocrites in his own image.
It is quite comical if you can see the irony in that.