WW, the problem with the me vs God paradigm is the assumption that everything in the Bible is God-breathed and therefore perfect. I don't see it that way. I think some scripture that we have in the canon today probably shouldn't be there.
Lest you think that's a heretical idea, I remind the forum that Martin Luther thought so too. He referred to book of James as 'an epistle of straw' and, according to what I've heard, didn't think Revelation should be in there either.
But then, I may be a prime example of an ex-Wayfer with too little knowledge. :-)
Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Proverbs 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
So which is it?
This is not a contradiction, it's a choice. If you do what verse 4 says, then your choice (priority) is to protect yourself, because it says "lest thou". If you do what verse 5 says, then your choice (priority) is to try to help the person, because it says "lest he". To "answer a fool according to his folly" is what we today call "humoring someone".
Jesus beautifully answered fools according to their folly in Luke 15. The fools are the scribes and Pharisees who murmured and their folly is that they thought they themselves were "just men who need no repentance". Jesus served them a full meal, beginning with 2 appetizers, parables about people who were rejoicing, and then the main course, a parable ending just short of the response of a foolish elder son who was resentful when he should have been rejoicing. Jesus tried to lead those scribes and Pharisees out of their error by "answering fools according to their folly. He did this in other places as well.
In Mark 12 Jesus answered NOT fools according to their folly. Beginning in verse 13 the Pharisees and some Herodians tried to tag team him about giving to Caesar or not. This time he answered their question with a question. We were taught to do that in TWI. THAT'S when you do that. When you answer a question with a question, then you are definitely "answering NOT a fool according to his folly".
I agree with Chockfull that debate is a good thing. However, if it's God's word, it needs no human checks and balances. God's always right and He's all love. Not so the US government.
You guys all bring up good points. I am not trying to present "the last word" on anything. I'm mostly just trying to expand my thinking beyond the extreme fundamentalist viewpoint I learned in TWI. Why? Because I found in application that viewpoint to be elitist, egotistical, and harmful. So I think that is a flaw in approaching understanding scripture as well.
WW - that's a good point regarding antanaclasis - I'm going to have to think on that one for a while. That Proverb DOES call out some extremeties in language at least in the English such that figures of speech are naturally a good consideration. Is antanaclasis two different meanings of a word in the same sentence? Like the "hang" examples? I'll have to dig out my Bullingers and see what he says there. Does Bullinger identify a "contradictory statement" as a unique figure of speech? That would be kind of a breaking up against rather than the word meaning the whole thought. Maybe antanaclasis covers it, or maybe another in that family.
That's also a good consideration to look at the logical common sense understanding outside of that, and to investigate the different translations. To me the common sense understanding would probably be something like supplying an ellipsis at the beginning of each sentence like (Depending on the context, ...).
johniam - your examples of how Jesus handled fools in different contexts is great too. Sometimes he answered them, other times he didn't. It is interesting to look at his example in light of the Proverb - was it always either to keep the fools ego in check or to differentiate himself from them? I thought some of the silence in answering accusations were the fulfillment of prophecy - "like a lamb to the slaughter" and all that.
I guess this topic is somewhat controversial too - it seems that "contradictions in the Bible" is a subject where people could feel that the whole thing falls apart if they are there. So I guess that the positive side of the Fundamentalist view is that there is an absolute truth and there is something to hang onto that is solid and unchanging. But I tell you I will no longer tolerate in myself the TWI viewpoint of walking around with the nose in the air around other Christians thinking "they're just not in the household". That attitude is a disease. That is the start to where all these little TWI Napoleans justify their atrocities "so that the ministry be not blamed". And I think the extremist Fundamentalist view is at the root there.
So while this thread is waxing a touch doctrinal, I guess we can also classify it under the proper view of scriptures outside of the influence of TWI as well.
It's possible- and was just done- to take the 2 verses, not bother using REASONABLE
measures to try to understand them- and just turn around, announce they are contradictory,
and use that as justification for downgrading the Bible as a guide for guidance,
wisdom, etc.
It's possible, and lots of people do things like that every day.
However, it's not intellectually honest, and it lacks integrity.
Why does it seem impossible for people who believe in an inerrant Bible to accept the fact that others see contradictions in the Scripture without resorting to character assassination? First Geisha (different thread, same outcome) now WordWolf.
Just to rebut the assumption that any apparent contradiction can be worked out if you just ask someone else..I've been looking at the various levels of grace vs works for oh, about eight years now. Asking, praying, all that. No one has yet been able to clarify this issue to my satisfaction. Even bought several books by Vince Finnegan, whom I was told has grappled with some of the same issues in the Scripture, only to find that he doesn't reveal his thought process in his writing.
I get a bit peeved when people assume that I'm lazy, intellectually dishonest and "lack integrity" just because I have given up on believing that the dozens of apparent contradictions in the Bible really aren't contradictions.
By the way, despite the fact that I no longer think of the Scripture as divinely perfect, I still use it for guidance and inspiration. Accepting its limitations didn't automatically lead me to throwing away all my Bibles and considering it a useless pile of paper.
There are some people though, for whom all of life is polarized. They can't see grades of gray, only black and white. My lovely wife is such an individual. Doesn't make her a bad person. It just makes it very hard for us to discuss things that require moderation or nuanced understanding.
Sometimes, a bitter disagreement boils down to a simple different in perspectives.
Apollonius of Tyana, a 1st century CE philosopher, is recorded as having said about Aesop:
... like those who dine well off the plainest dishes, he made use of humble incidents to teach great truths, and after serving up a story he adds to it the advice to do a thing or not to do it. Then, too, he was really more attached to truth than the poets are; for the latter do violence to their own stories in order to make them probable; but he by announcing a story which everyone knows not to be true, told the truth by the very fact that he did not claim to be relating real events. (Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Book V:14)
There is wisdom in the story of the tortoise and the hare. And, yet, any reasonable person surely realizes that such an actual race never occurred.
If the bible has contradictions in it then there is things that is wrong or not from God then
we need to take out some verses like all scripture is not God breathed in 1 Tim. It seems to me to be a domino effect occurs.
It is either true or false......
To me it seems like trying to put God in our box and since we don't understand it.... well it must be a contradiction.
If the bible had contradictions is not an indication of what is true or false in the book.... To me I can't trust it. It might as well be a book with Good says as I am the judge that determines what is of value.... Do good to your neighbor as you want to do good.... sounds like a good one to me.
In the 4th sura of the Quran it says Jesus was taken back off the cross and someone took his place to look like it (debate in muslim world that is was judas). I don't believe the Quran because I don't think it is 100% true as there belief states that about what happened to Jesus. There may be true statements but that statement seems not to with historical records inside and outside the bible. I just can't trust the Quran.
If there were to be something to me that would be a contradiction or something that is just totally false. I am not talking about passages like the one in John 7-8 the adulterous woman that do not show up until centuries later.... There is debate about it but most all agree it is something Jesus did. But it dose not change doctrine or contradicts anything else in scripture. It just kinda goes along with it. There are a few more debated scriptures other than people who don't like certain books of the bible but that is on another rant.
If it did have contradictions in it then it would be just like any other book..... We just choose what we feel is right.
I think Grace and works go hand and hand....
I think this also goes into what is salvation?
I think works is just the natural byproduct of salvation.....
As James says faith without works is dead.....
Can you really say you are saved by a spiritual grace if there is no fruit that comes out of it.
Not saying you become instantly perfect once you are saved.
I think that is exactly what Paul is saying in Romans 7 about the war that is now inside of him taking over....
I think this kinda goes into who is Jesus and what are you really believing.
If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and you truly believe it.... They your actions will follow suit.
If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is your best friend surfer dude well you actions will follow suit.
Is Jesus truly Lord. Then your actions upon your belief that saves you would follow suit. If you don't have works well then you are not really believing, following or what every else you want to call it.
Thats just how I see it.
Anyway fascinating topic and I love everyones input. Thanks for challenging my little brain cells :)
Why does it seem impossible for people who believe in an inerrant Bible to accept the fact that others see contradictions in the Scripture without resorting to character assassination? First Geisha (different thread, same outcome) now WordWolf.
Just to rebut the assumption that any apparent contradiction can be worked out if you just ask someone else..I've been looking at the various levels of grace vs works for oh, about eight years now. Asking, praying, all that. No one has yet been able to clarify this issue to my satisfaction. Even bought several books by Vince Finnegan, whom I was told has grappled with some of the same issues in the Scripture, only to find that he doesn't reveal his thought process in his writing.
I get a bit peeved when people assume that I'm lazy, intellectually dishonest and "lack integrity" just because I have given up on believing that the dozens of apparent contradictions in the Bible really aren't contradictions.
By the way, despite the fact that I no longer think of the Scripture as divinely perfect, I still use it for guidance and inspiration. Accepting its limitations didn't automatically lead me to throwing away all my Bibles and considering it a useless pile of paper.
There are some people though, for whom all of life is polarized. They can't see grades of gray, only black and white. My lovely wife is such an individual. Doesn't make her a bad person. It just makes it very hard for us to discuss things that require moderation or nuanced understanding.
Sometimes, a bitter disagreement boils down to a simple different in perspectives.
I wasn't singling you out in the "other" thread and I highly doubt WW was in this thread.....it is just a different perspective Jerry. I can readily accept that you see contradiction in scripture. I just don't accept what you see as a blanket confirmation that scripture contradicts itself in an unresolvable manner. Should I?
For me.....most things you would consider a contradiction....speak to me......including Jesus' interaction with the rich young ruler. I have a totally different read on that personal and very human conversation that the Lord had with this man....and when I contrast that with His interaction with Zacchaeus, while bearing in mind that Jesus said......"with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." I don't see a contradiction. What I see is Jesus illustrating exactly what He said.
To me it is an amazing passage. This rich young ruler was sure he had already done the first thing Jesus said .....but, when Jesus said...okay then sell all your stuff and give it away to the poor..... the reality was something else. I see the rich young ruler trying to come to God on his own terms. Jesus challenges that in all of us in my opinion. Jesus' interaction with Zacchaeus was something totally different......Zacchaeus was looking to see Jesus and not looking to gain something.....and the Lord sought him out. With the exception of the thief on the cross....this is the last individual interaction Jesus had and I think it illustrates what Jesus meant when He said" with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." For me it also illustrates the different manners in which people approach God.
It can also be read as insight into the meaning of faith and for me it is not problematic but faith building......so when I say it isn't a contradiction....I am not speaking to personally offend you....I am adding my perspective. Is that okay with you? Can I believe the scriptures and let them speak to me and then add my voice even if it contradicts your perspective? Without it being a personal affront?
I don't doubt in the least that you have wrestled with the concept of grace vs works .....coming from TWI it makes perfect sense. I struggled with them as well. For me...I landed somewhere else.....I found my answer at the cross of Christ. That is where it converged for me and where I finally began learning about faith. I know you certainly don't want to hear it from me.......I don't think my insight would satisfy whatever it is you need to get out of the passages that challenge you....but I promise you my perspective is not a slam against your struggle or study.
Sounds like a rationalization to me. If this were a secular work we are discussing, it would be clearly obvious that those two passages contradict each other. The only way to resolve that is to give it an esoteric twist and dismiss the obvious logic. I think that's what we used to call "private interpretation". Ironic, no? Use private interpretation to disparage private interpretation.
If the bible has contradictions in it then there is things that is wrong or not from God then
we need to take out some verses like all scripture is not God breathed in 1 Tim. It seems to me to be a domino effect occurs.
It is either true or false......
This is a classic example of the polar mindset I described above. In your mind, if there is one thing in the ENTIRE Bible that is not "God-breathed", then the entire book is worthless. To quote VP, "It's either all God's word or none of it."
SAYS WHO? This is a blatantly illogical statement with no basis in fact. The reason people make these kinds of statements, imho, is because they're incapable of dealing with the task of using your God-given mind, intelligence, and spiritual intuition to sort out what's true from what isn't.
Fundamentalism is the easy way out. You guys just aren't spiritually mature enough to deal with anything less than 100% certainty. Your faith is WEAK.
Now I'm being an elitist. Take that! HA! :-)
I would love to read and respond to Geisha's post now, but My wifey's gotta go to bed, so I guess I'll have to pick this up tomorrow.
God Bless!
PS. I gave Geisha's post a quick read while Deb was playing with the Shih-Tzu. Very gracious of you Geisha, and much appreciated. Oh, NOW she's gotta go to bed. Lights out for me. :-)
Sounds like a rationalization to me. If this were a secular work we are discussing, it would be clearly obvious that those two passages contradict each other. The only way to resolve that is to give it an esoteric twist and dismiss the obvious logic. I think that's what we used to call "private interpretation". Ironic, no? Use private interpretation to disparage private interpretation.
It might if you were reading it with only a literal perspective......but....Jesus spoke in parables....Jesus used illustrations from everyday life......Jesus walked along pointing and teaching and Jesus rarely spoke in an obvious manner......even His disciples had to ask Him repeatedly to explain Himself.....when He did speak plainly they noted it. "Ah, now you are speaking plainly and not using figurative speech!"
They were amazed by His words and they way He spoke...."No one ever spoke the way this man does,"...they were confused by His words.....they were terrified by what He spoke.....and I believe that if you read it so literally without the nuance, the whole, and at least some kind of perspective into the heart of the subject ...yeah, you are going to be confused.
What? You never took an English Lit class? There is layer upon layer in scripture.......and Jesus was interacting with people....with individuals.....do you speak to your grandchild the same way you do to your work colleagues? No? I don't think we should expect Jesus to either. Look at the striking difference between John chapter 3 and 4......Nicodemus and the woman at the well.....the tenderness in which Jesus dealt with the women who was a hardcore sinner....and the seemingly brash style with Nicodemus a Pharisee.....there is more there than meets the eye. There is so much depth in those encounters, but it is found in the illustration of His interaction.
Why did He chide some of His followers for their lack of faith and deal so sweetly with Thomas? He was dealing with individuals and He knew them. He knew what was in peoples hearts.
I don't think scripture is all that obvious and I know in TWI we were taught to look at it that way......plain as the nose on my face......but, maybe that wasn't the right way to approach it.
Why does it seem impossible for people who believe in an inerrant Bible to accept the fact that others see contradictions in the Scripture without resorting to character assassination? First Geisha (different thread, same outcome) now WordWolf.
Because perception is SUBJECTIVE, and someone touchy on a subject can see an insult in it
even when that insult isn't even there. US television writers have to tread a thin tightrope
to produce scripts that won't result in SOMEONE starting a letter-writing campaign for the
same reason.
I left the entire discussion about inerrancy ALONE except for a specific instance where
ONE poster posted ONE thing and said it was a contradiction and proof of contradictions.
I rebutted that and pointed out I thought it didn't take a lot of work to see how that
specific instance fit together. I don't like it when people jump to conclusions that
fast- I find it sloppy, and altogether too common nowadays.
(Just a reminder: I don't spend all my time on the GSC. Out in the big wide world are
lots of people with sloppy logic who tick me off all the time.)
That one poster thanked me for posting what I did, and said they'd follow up on their
own. "The end", I thought, but a few OTHER posters seem to have seen themselves in
what I said when I was specifically addressing ONE poster, and thinking of a bunch of
people who've never heard of twi. I was even ASKED about that, I clarified my point,
and STILL got someone interpreting my points as addressing them in a general way
when I was addressing someone else in a SPECIFIC way.
Just to rebut the assumption that any apparent contradiction can be worked out if you just ask someone else..
There's an assumption there that there was an assumption that ANY apparent contradiction can be worked
out if you just asked someone else. Someone brought one up, I worked it out as if asked. If I'd been
asked about it earlier, I would have posted it sooner. When I see an apparent contradiction, I look at
it from all the angles I can find, and if that doesn't present a logical answer, I call in others for
insight. Often they have access to resources or commentaries or whatever that I don't, or have pondered
this very issue before, and can fill in all or part of an answer. I find that's a good strategy to follow.
"In multitude of counsellors is safety." I don't know how that became universalized as a Thou Shalt
rather than a "rule of thumb." Seems the contents of my posts are being read through a perception
filter that's polarizing them.
I've been looking at the various levels of grace vs works for oh, about eight years now. Asking, praying, all that. No one has yet been able to clarify this issue to my satisfaction. Even bought several books by Vince Finnegan, whom I was told has grappled with some of the same issues in the Scripture, only to find that he doesn't reveal his thought process in his writing.
Sorry to hear that. I hate it when I can't find an answer and end up with a persistent question
that lasts years. It feels like unfinished business or a discordant note.
I get a bit peeved when people assume that I'm lazy, intellectually dishonest and "lack integrity" just because I have given up on believing that the dozens of apparent contradictions in the Bible really aren't contradictions.
I suppose that could be annoying.
Then again, if you find that lots of people are assuming that-
and most of that is as substantial as me not even thinking about you and you deciding I was trying
to "character assasinate" you, then there's a simple solution-
stop thinking everything's about you.
I used to ascribe a much greater importance to my existence in other people's discussions.
Once I adjusted my perceptions closer to reality, I found it remarkable freeing.
(Of course, it was a slight ego blow that I really wasn't in ANY discussions when I thought
I was in a LOT of them, but in the long run, I much prefer it this way.)
By the way, despite the fact that I no longer think of the Scripture as divinely perfect, I still use it for guidance and inspiration. Accepting its limitations didn't automatically lead me to throwing away all my Bibles and considering it a useless pile of paper.
There are some people though, for whom all of life is polarized. They can't see grades of gray, only black and white. My lovely wife is such an individual. Doesn't make her a bad person. It just makes it very hard for us to discuss things that require moderation or nuanced understanding.
Sometimes, a bitter disagreement boils down to a simple different in perspectives.
Just maybe, you're missing a nuance or two here, yourself.
But I agree that a difference in perspectives could avoid bitterness in a disagreement here.
I was quite surprised to discover I've apparently been in a heated argument for over a day.
This is the first I've heard of it.
Next time, I'd like to know sooner. Otherwise, I might miss the entire thing.
I wasn't singling you out in the "other" thread and I highly doubt WW was in this thread.....it is just a different perspective Jerry. I can readily accept that you see contradiction in scripture. I just don't accept what you see as a blanket confirmation that scripture contradicts itself in an unresolvable manner. Should I?
For me.....most things you would consider a contradiction....speak to me......including Jesus' interaction with the rich young ruler. I have a totally different read on that personal and very human conversation that the Lord had with this man....and when I contrast that with His interaction with Zacchaeus, while bearing in mind that Jesus said......"with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." I don't see a contradiction. What I see is Jesus illustrating exactly what He said.
To me it is an amazing passage. This rich young ruler was sure he had already done the first thing Jesus said .....but, when Jesus said...okay then sell all your stuff and give it away to the poor..... the reality was something else. I see the rich young ruler trying to come to God on his own terms. Jesus challenges that in all of us in my opinion. Jesus' interaction with Zacchaeus was something totally different......Zacchaeus was looking to see Jesus and not looking to gain something.....and the Lord sought him out. With the exception of the thief on the cross....this is the last individual interaction Jesus had and I think it illustrates what Jesus meant when He said" with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." For me it also illustrates the different manners in which people approach God.
It can also be read as insight into the meaning of faith and for me it is not problematic but faith building......so when I say it isn't a contradiction....I am not speaking to personally offend you....I am adding my perspective. Is that okay with you? Can I believe the scriptures and let them speak to me and then add my voice even if it contradicts your perspective? Without it being a personal affront?
I don't doubt in the least that you have wrestled with the concept of grace vs works .....coming from TWI it makes perfect sense. I struggled with them as well. For me...I landed somewhere else.....I found my answer at the cross of Christ. That is where it converged for me and where I finally began learning about faith. I know you certainly don't want to hear it from me.......I don't think my insight would satisfy whatever it is you need to get out of the passages that challenge you....but I promise you my perspective is not a slam against your struggle or study.
This.
I don't think I can add anything to this post, so I won't try.
All scripture is "God-breathed" (Theopneustos). Paul said so. What do we really know about Paul, aside from what he, himself, declared about himself?
There's stuff written about him in Acts, for starters. He didn't write Acts as you know. Peter also makes reference to him in his writings and besides this, there is information in profane writings.
I can readily accept that you see contradiction in scripture. I just don't accept what you see as a blanket confirmation that scripture contradicts itself in an unresolvable manner. Should I?
I actually find Jbarrax's viewpoint refreshing. It is a change of pace from the stoic Fundamentalist view that to me came from TWI. Some of the issue in my mind here centers on the "sacred cow" of scripture contradiction. To some it's the cause of denigrating scripture and devalueing it. However, I don't find it such. One example - I as a parent can tell my children one thing one day, and then on another day say something totally different. Now this is not a state I strive for as a rule as children need consistency and direction much as God's children. However, the challenges in a child's life and a day's event can sometimes dictate saying different things at times that the child should focus on. Does this mean my advice as a parent is valueless? I don't think so - I put a lot of effort into it to be right and help children turn out better than their parents.
So if I can have that attitude, what about myself as a child of God? Can I accept that sometimes God will instruct me to answer fools, and other times not answer fools? I can. I believe that my personal relationship with Him, including common sense, scriptural study, the gifts/manifestations area, and wise counsel can all contribute together to help me go in the right direction, including wisdom in certain situations.
So in that I can accept those verses in Proverbs as somewhat contradictory, and search for additional answers to help me find the right application for what I'm dealing with now. I don't have to resort to the old viewpoints of "well if the Bible has one contradiction it would fall to pieces" which is a viewpoint I believe was instilled by a false Fundamentalist teacher. I think needing to resort to interpretation trickery of different types to explain away apparent contradictions is not completely intellectually honest, although I do acknowledge that God has enough foresight to call attention to contradictions to give us tools to help our limited minds through it.
For me.....most things you would consider a contradiction....speak to me......including Jesus' interaction with the rich young ruler. I have a totally different read on that personal and very human conversation that the Lord had with this man....and when I contrast that with His interaction with Zacchaeus, while bearing in mind that Jesus said......"with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." I don't see a contradiction. What I see is Jesus illustrating exactly what He said.
To me it is an amazing passage. This rich young ruler was sure he had already done the first thing Jesus said .....but, when Jesus said...okay then sell all your stuff and give it away to the poor..... the reality was something else. I see the rich young ruler trying to come to God on his own terms. Jesus challenges that in all of us in my opinion. Jesus' interaction with Zacchaeus was something totally different......Zacchaeus was looking to see Jesus and not looking to gain something.....and the Lord sought him out. With the exception of the thief on the cross....this is the last individual interaction Jesus had and I think it illustrates what Jesus meant when He said" with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." For me it also illustrates the different manners in which people approach God.
Funny enough - these things speak to me as well. The different manners people approach God and the truth of what each needs to do in their lives can be complicated. To me the contradictory advice given to Zaccheus and the rich young ruler illustrate this. But I guess I can use the word "contradiction" without it triggering all the things it does for some others. With the rich young ruler - dude's got a lot of material baggage he's going to need to deal with to make it work. Zaccheus - just a humble soul. No such hinderances.
I don't doubt in the least that you have wrestled with the concept of grace vs works .....coming from TWI it makes perfect sense.
IMO the grace / works package and putting it together in daily life is something EVERY Christian struggles with and it's an ongoing thing. At least it is for me. It's resolved in Christ for sure, but there's plenty of people that rest on that victory and never live for Him again.
I left the entire discussion about inerrancy ALONE except for a specific instance where
ONE poster posted ONE thing and said it was a contradiction and proof of contradictions.
I rebutted that and pointed out I thought it didn't take a lot of work to see how that
specific instance fit together. I don't like it when people jump to conclusions that
fast- I find it sloppy, and altogether too common nowadays.
(Just a reminder: I don't spend all my time on the GSC. Out in the big wide world are
lots of people with sloppy logic who tick me off all the time.)
I really appreciate the rebuttal and discussion. If I go on my heart feelings and ignore investigative work then it is I that am being lazy. I need some more effort, some more work to complete that picture. I do agree that without that effort conclusions are sloppy, intellectually dishonest, and also too common nowadays.
Sounds like a rationalization to me. If this were a secular work we are discussing, it would be clearly obvious that those two passages contradict each other. The only way to resolve that is to give it an esoteric twist and dismiss the obvious logic. I think that's what we used to call "private interpretation". Ironic, no? Use private interpretation to disparage private interpretation.
Yes you have a point. I don't want to rationalize to understand Scripture. But I don't want to ignore the tools either, like translations, definitions, and figures of speech.
I think a portion of intellectual honesty is to treat scripture with the same scrutiny as other books. We were taught in TWI to worship scripture in a sense. Without applying the brain cells that can easily become a cargo cult science rather than a genuine piece to stimulate the heart and intellect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science
They were amazed by His words and they way He spoke...."No one ever spoke the way this man does,"...they were confused by His words.....they were terrified by what He spoke.....and I believe that if you read it so literally without the nuance, the whole, and at least some kind of perspective into the heart of the subject ...yeah, you are going to be confused.
SNIP
I don't think scripture is all that obvious and I know in TWI we were taught to look at it that way......plain as the nose on my face......but, maybe that wasn't the right way to approach it.
Just a thought .
There's that esoteric twist. I never said you should read it without an understanding of the nuances or that you should ignore the symbolism of the parables. If the Bible is all that it's touted to be, it should be able to withstand the same sort of scrutiny as a secular work. It should be readable by Christian and Non-Christian alike. A Hindu or Buddhist should be able to read Proverbs and come away with no less enlightenment than a Christian. To think otherwise, borders on elitism.
There's that esoteric twist. I never said you should read it without an understanding of the nuances or that you should ignore the symbolism of the parables. If the Bible is all that it's touted to be, it should be able to withstand the same sort of scrutiny as a secular work. It should be readable by Christian and Non-Christian alike. A Hindu or Buddhist should be able to read Proverbs and come away with no less enlightenment than a Christian. To think otherwise, borders on elitism.
That is a pretty arbitrary standard to apply ...... how so?
I took a French lit class.....not everyone speaks or reads French......unless explained or translated for non-franchophones not everyone is going to understand French lit .....is that elitist? Last time I sat in an English Lit class not everyone was able to pick up Jane Austen and recognize her critique on life as a woman in 19th century England without being taught how to read it.
Many, if not most Muslims believe that the Koran is an exact word for word representation of God(much like we believed about the bible in TWI).....many do not consider translations to be the Koran and believe it must be read in Arabic.....is your same non Arabic speaking Buddhist or Hindu able to pick up the Koran and come away enlightened? I certainly hope you apply your standard equally and stand ready to accuse Muslims of bordering on elitism.
The bible deals with spiritual matters......it deals with faith....it coalesces around the person of Jesus Christ. How is it even logical to not read it in light of its spiritual nature, faith, and the person of Jesus Christ. Wouldn't you discern something that is spiritual in a spiritual manner? They also deal with the human condition, with sin, with good and evil.....and the very nature of God. If someone doesn't read them in light of their nature as thee disclosure of God and His interaction with mankind and still demands to understand .....I think that crosses the border of elitism. Note that I didn't say you had to believe them.....
You do realize that the bible is about the most scrutinized book we have and millions still understand and believe it. We are not all brain dead or unthinking are we? Actually, you can trot on down to your local Walmart and buy one for around 10 dollars. Still standing under scrutiny. Somehow it has managed to bury its pall bearers..... yet you speak like no one has ever answered the questions you pose. They have been asked and answered time and again......it is up to the individual to decide what they believe about the answers....if they satisfy. It is up to the individual to decide what they believe about Jesus Christ....and oddly enough....the scriptures even address this. They make us responsible for what we believe.
Your standard is problematic for me because within the very scriptures you want to understand is the disclosure that you must come in a particular manner and in light of faith in a particular person to understand. Ignore those internal instructions and replace them with an arbitrary standard and expect results.... no, demand results......or cry elitism?
There's that esoteric twist. I never said you should read it without an understanding of the nuances or that you should ignore the symbolism of the parables. If the Bible is all that it's touted to be, it should be able to withstand the same sort of scrutiny as a secular work. It should be readable by Christian and Non-Christian alike. A Hindu or Buddhist should be able to read Proverbs and come away with no less enlightenment than a Christian. To think otherwise, borders on elitism.
I disagree.
Not even addressing matters of the supernatural and doctrine, I would disagree.
When I read Hamlet, I come away with a deeper understanding than the high school and college
students that read it each semester. (More than I did at both levels, and I understood it
a lot at both levels.) That's interest, study, and familiarity. However, they get the basic
story-they understand who does what and basically why.
Anyone can read "the Wheel of Time" and get an entertaining read of a story they understand.
Then there's people who "sleuth" the series, digging for all the nuances the author included
for those who look VERY closely. Those people get a lot more out of each volume.
When the Harry Potter series was coming out, I took time off sleuthing the Wheel of Time
to sleuth HP. It was a LOT easier than sleuthing WoT, but a lot of the same principles
applied. Lots and lots of people read the books, and many just got what was on the surface.
Some sleuthed deeper, and many of those guessed wrongly because they didn't have enough experience
with sleuthing books. I did, so most of my guesses were correct (and I was correct as to which
ones were wrong that others proposed.)
Anyone with a coherent Bible version that's fairly accurate can get a basic understanding of
salvation in Jesus Christ and so on. The basics are of primary importance, and those come through.
Those who approach it with a degree of historical knowledge, cultural knowledge, Koine Greek or
other language knowledge, those people will be able to get more out of it. Those with a lot of
that knowledge will see deeper yet. (That's why ex-twi'ers generally can only see but so
deeply- we all had a limit on our education, and few went far beyond that. And I don't count
myself among them.)
So, I expect almost anyone can read the Bible and get a basic understanding.
However, the deeper matters will need more dedication than the average person will devote.
That goes for ANY group of adherents with ANY book they consider "holy". They will put in the
time, they will be more dedicated, so they will get more out of it.
So, you need to either be a Christian or apply advanced academic techniques, or both, to extract wisdom from Proverbs? (That's the book I used in my example.)
Not even addressing matters of the supernatural and doctrine, I would disagree.
When I read Hamlet, I come away with a deeper understanding than the high school and college
students that read it each semester. (More than I did at both levels, and I understood it
a lot at both levels.) That's interest, study, and familiarity. However, they get the basic
story-they understand who does what and basically why.
Anyone can read "the Wheel of Time" and get an entertaining read of a story they understand.
Then there's people who "sleuth" the series, digging for all the nuances the author included
for those who look VERY closely. Those people get a lot more out of each volume.
When the Harry Potter series was coming out, I took time off sleuthing the Wheel of Time
to sleuth HP. It was a LOT easier than sleuthing WoT, but a lot of the same principles
applied. Lots and lots of people read the books, and many just got what was on the surface.
Some sleuthed deeper, and many of those guessed wrongly because they didn't have enough experience
with sleuthing books. I did, so most of my guesses were correct (and I was correct as to which
ones were wrong that others proposed.)
Anyone with a coherent Bible version that's fairly accurate can get a basic understanding of
salvation in Jesus Christ and so on. The basics are of primary importance, and those come through.
Those who approach it with a degree of historical knowledge, cultural knowledge, Koine Greek or
other language knowledge, those people will be able to get more out of it. Those with a lot of
that knowledge will see deeper yet. (That's why ex-twi'ers generally can only see but so
deeply- we all had a limit on our education, and few went far beyond that. And I don't count
myself among them.)
So, I expect almost anyone can read the Bible and get a basic understanding.
However, the deeper matters will need more dedication than the average person will devote.
That goes for ANY group of adherents with ANY book they consider "holy". They will put in the
time, they will be more dedicated, so they will get more out of it.
So, you need to either be a Christian or apply advanced academic techniques, or both, to extract wisdom from Proverbs? (That's the book I used in my example.)
Sorry, I just don't see that to be the case.
I don't see that to be the case, either.
I didn't use any "academic techniques" with the Wheel of Time or Harry Potter.
(I didn't go to any school offering a degree in either, but I've heard
there's a school somewhere with at least a class on HP.)
Again, it depends on how deep you want to go.
The most elementary SWIMMERS can all hang out in the shallows,
to go deeper into the water, you need to swim better than that.
With any book, you can get some level of understanding by reading it
no matter who you are, so long as you have something approaching
an average level of reading comprehension.
With any book, the more skills you have (the deeper your background),
the more levels you'll understand the book at.
Again, that's ANY book. With moderate skills, you'll see deeper and
more profoundly than the D+ English student who read through it.
With more dedication, you'll bring a broader range to the table,
or a greater wealth of specialized knowledge, and you'll understand
more. And if you really put in several years of work, you'll find
things that the average person would think you made up. (Regarding
Hamlet, I've found at least one teacher I had was INDIFFERENT and
didn't seem to get a certain point Shakespeare made. So, attitude
affects dedication, which affects how far you go or how hard you
apply yourself.
To very specifically address your point,
ANYONE can read Proverbs and should be able to see it's got a lot
of wisdom in it, and understand SOME of that wisdom, enough for their
preferences. Not everyone could do a read-through of, say,
Ecclesiastes and find it equally wise. Due to its handling of
DEEPER issues, it can seem like nonsense to an indifferent reader,
who might completely miss the points made all over the book.
I got accused of polarizing the posts of others a few posts back.
I think I'm getting that type of RESPONSE to my posts, however,
and I'm not actually trying to make things either/or.
I agree with the premise that Christians should be able to get more understanding out of the Bible than non-Christians. This is by virtue of God being able to give a spirit-filled Christian insight into a passage that a Muslim or Hindu won't necessarily be able to receive.
It's that process of being able to receive revelation when we read that makes the all or none preposition so primitive; carnal even.
If there are problems in the text, a spirit filled Christian can acknowledge that and still be able to glean marvelous truths from other Scriptures. As a spirit-filled Christian, I can acknowledge the conflict between grace and works but still rejoice in the gift of holy spirit, God's grace and mercy, resolve to "work heartily as to the Lord and not unto men" and remind myself that "charity suffereth long and is kind".
Would I like to have a rock solid confidence that there's only truth in the Bible about salvation? As my dear departed Grandma would say, Sho nuff! But not having that doesn't mean I can't still value and enjoy and benefit from the truths I do understand.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
9
32
13
Popular Days
Oct 28
15
Nov 7
14
Nov 1
13
Oct 27
13
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 12 posts
johniam 9 posts
waysider 32 posts
Naten00 13 posts
Popular Days
Oct 28 2011
15 posts
Nov 7 2011
14 posts
Nov 1 2011
13 posts
Oct 27 2011
13 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
And therein lies the crux of the issue. In The Way, we were told we were being given the necessary tools to do independent research (cough), yet if one were to venture outside the prescribed doctrine
WordWolf
I prefer to say that "the Theory of Evolution" HAS NOT MADE ITS CASE. If it is true and correct, I have not been presented with sufficient evidence to support the major points that are claimed. Adhe
waysider
As would I, as well.....ALL is much too far-reaching a word to use. My point was simply this: We often hear the argument being presented that this country was based on Christian principles. That is n
Jbarrax
WW, the problem with the me vs God paradigm is the assumption that everything in the Bible is God-breathed and therefore perfect. I don't see it that way. I think some scripture that we have in the canon today probably shouldn't be there.
Lest you think that's a heretical idea, I remind the forum that Martin Luther thought so too. He referred to book of James as 'an epistle of straw' and, according to what I've heard, didn't think Revelation should be in there either.
But then, I may be a prime example of an ex-Wayfer with too little knowledge. :-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
My point was that I think some people have made the easy decision,
and just give up when they run into something they don't understand,
as soon as they can't make heads nor tails out of it.
(I've usually called in someone else to try to help me figure out what
was puzzling me.)
We just saw an example of that. Someone posted a pair of verses. I think
a careful reading would make it clear, even without any special knowledge
of Greek names or figures of speech. Heck, a look at other Bible versions
could help work it out. A few seconds typing at Bible Gateway and I have
the verses in 2 other versions, which seem to see the verses as I do.
NASB
4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
Or you will also be like him.
5 Answer a fool as his folly deserves,
That he not be wise in his own eyes.
CEV
4 Don't make a fool of yourself by answering a fool.
5 But if you answer any fools, show how foolish they are, so they won't feel smart.
It's possible- and was just done- to take the 2 verses, not bother using REASONABLE
measures to try to understand them- and just turn around, announce they are contradictory,
and use that as justification for downgrading the Bible as a guide for guidance,
wisdom, etc.
It's possible, and lots of people do things like that every day.
However, it's not intellectually honest, and it lacks integrity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Why must pointing out a contradiction necessarily be equated with "justification for downgrading the Bible as a guide for guidance,
wisdom, etc."? Consider this: Aesop's Fables have contradictions but, that doesn't negate the wisdom they convey.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote:
Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Proverbs 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
So which is it?
This is not a contradiction, it's a choice. If you do what verse 4 says, then your choice (priority) is to protect yourself, because it says "lest thou". If you do what verse 5 says, then your choice (priority) is to try to help the person, because it says "lest he". To "answer a fool according to his folly" is what we today call "humoring someone".
Jesus beautifully answered fools according to their folly in Luke 15. The fools are the scribes and Pharisees who murmured and their folly is that they thought they themselves were "just men who need no repentance". Jesus served them a full meal, beginning with 2 appetizers, parables about people who were rejoicing, and then the main course, a parable ending just short of the response of a foolish elder son who was resentful when he should have been rejoicing. Jesus tried to lead those scribes and Pharisees out of their error by "answering fools according to their folly. He did this in other places as well.
In Mark 12 Jesus answered NOT fools according to their folly. Beginning in verse 13 the Pharisees and some Herodians tried to tag team him about giving to Caesar or not. This time he answered their question with a question. We were taught to do that in TWI. THAT'S when you do that. When you answer a question with a question, then you are definitely "answering NOT a fool according to his folly".
I agree with Chockfull that debate is a good thing. However, if it's God's word, it needs no human checks and balances. God's always right and He's all love. Not so the US government.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
You guys all bring up good points. I am not trying to present "the last word" on anything. I'm mostly just trying to expand my thinking beyond the extreme fundamentalist viewpoint I learned in TWI. Why? Because I found in application that viewpoint to be elitist, egotistical, and harmful. So I think that is a flaw in approaching understanding scripture as well.
WW - that's a good point regarding antanaclasis - I'm going to have to think on that one for a while. That Proverb DOES call out some extremeties in language at least in the English such that figures of speech are naturally a good consideration. Is antanaclasis two different meanings of a word in the same sentence? Like the "hang" examples? I'll have to dig out my Bullingers and see what he says there. Does Bullinger identify a "contradictory statement" as a unique figure of speech? That would be kind of a breaking up against rather than the word meaning the whole thought. Maybe antanaclasis covers it, or maybe another in that family.
That's also a good consideration to look at the logical common sense understanding outside of that, and to investigate the different translations. To me the common sense understanding would probably be something like supplying an ellipsis at the beginning of each sentence like (Depending on the context, ...).
johniam - your examples of how Jesus handled fools in different contexts is great too. Sometimes he answered them, other times he didn't. It is interesting to look at his example in light of the Proverb - was it always either to keep the fools ego in check or to differentiate himself from them? I thought some of the silence in answering accusations were the fulfillment of prophecy - "like a lamb to the slaughter" and all that.
I guess this topic is somewhat controversial too - it seems that "contradictions in the Bible" is a subject where people could feel that the whole thing falls apart if they are there. So I guess that the positive side of the Fundamentalist view is that there is an absolute truth and there is something to hang onto that is solid and unchanging. But I tell you I will no longer tolerate in myself the TWI viewpoint of walking around with the nose in the air around other Christians thinking "they're just not in the household". That attitude is a disease. That is the start to where all these little TWI Napoleans justify their atrocities "so that the ministry be not blamed". And I think the extremist Fundamentalist view is at the root there.
So while this thread is waxing a touch doctrinal, I guess we can also classify it under the proper view of scriptures outside of the influence of TWI as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
Why does it seem impossible for people who believe in an inerrant Bible to accept the fact that others see contradictions in the Scripture without resorting to character assassination? First Geisha (different thread, same outcome) now WordWolf.
Just to rebut the assumption that any apparent contradiction can be worked out if you just ask someone else..I've been looking at the various levels of grace vs works for oh, about eight years now. Asking, praying, all that. No one has yet been able to clarify this issue to my satisfaction. Even bought several books by Vince Finnegan, whom I was told has grappled with some of the same issues in the Scripture, only to find that he doesn't reveal his thought process in his writing.
I get a bit peeved when people assume that I'm lazy, intellectually dishonest and "lack integrity" just because I have given up on believing that the dozens of apparent contradictions in the Bible really aren't contradictions.
By the way, despite the fact that I no longer think of the Scripture as divinely perfect, I still use it for guidance and inspiration. Accepting its limitations didn't automatically lead me to throwing away all my Bibles and considering it a useless pile of paper.
There are some people though, for whom all of life is polarized. They can't see grades of gray, only black and white. My lovely wife is such an individual. Doesn't make her a bad person. It just makes it very hard for us to discuss things that require moderation or nuanced understanding.
Sometimes, a bitter disagreement boils down to a simple different in perspectives.
Edited by JbarraxLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Apollonius of Tyana, a 1st century CE philosopher, is recorded as having said about Aesop:
... like those who dine well off the plainest dishes, he made use of humble incidents to teach great truths, and after serving up a story he adds to it the advice to do a thing or not to do it. Then, too, he was really more attached to truth than the poets are; for the latter do violence to their own stories in order to make them probable; but he by announcing a story which everyone knows not to be true, told the truth by the very fact that he did not claim to be relating real events. (Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Book V:14)
There is wisdom in the story of the tortoise and the hare. And, yet, any reasonable person surely realizes that such an actual race never occurred.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Naten00
If the bible has contradictions in it then there is things that is wrong or not from God then
we need to take out some verses like all scripture is not God breathed in 1 Tim. It seems to me to be a domino effect occurs.
It is either true or false......
To me it seems like trying to put God in our box and since we don't understand it.... well it must be a contradiction.
If the bible had contradictions is not an indication of what is true or false in the book.... To me I can't trust it. It might as well be a book with Good says as I am the judge that determines what is of value.... Do good to your neighbor as you want to do good.... sounds like a good one to me.
In the 4th sura of the Quran it says Jesus was taken back off the cross and someone took his place to look like it (debate in muslim world that is was judas). I don't believe the Quran because I don't think it is 100% true as there belief states that about what happened to Jesus. There may be true statements but that statement seems not to with historical records inside and outside the bible. I just can't trust the Quran.
If there were to be something to me that would be a contradiction or something that is just totally false. I am not talking about passages like the one in John 7-8 the adulterous woman that do not show up until centuries later.... There is debate about it but most all agree it is something Jesus did. But it dose not change doctrine or contradicts anything else in scripture. It just kinda goes along with it. There are a few more debated scriptures other than people who don't like certain books of the bible but that is on another rant.
If it did have contradictions in it then it would be just like any other book..... We just choose what we feel is right.
I think Grace and works go hand and hand....
I think this also goes into what is salvation?
I think works is just the natural byproduct of salvation.....
As James says faith without works is dead.....
Can you really say you are saved by a spiritual grace if there is no fruit that comes out of it.
Not saying you become instantly perfect once you are saved.
I think that is exactly what Paul is saying in Romans 7 about the war that is now inside of him taking over....
I think this kinda goes into who is Jesus and what are you really believing.
If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and you truly believe it.... They your actions will follow suit.
If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is your best friend surfer dude well you actions will follow suit.
Is Jesus truly Lord. Then your actions upon your belief that saves you would follow suit. If you don't have works well then you are not really believing, following or what every else you want to call it.
Thats just how I see it.
Anyway fascinating topic and I love everyones input. Thanks for challenging my little brain cells :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
All scripture is "God-breathed" (Theopneustos). Paul said so. What do we really know about Paul, aside from what he, himself, declared about himself?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I wasn't singling you out in the "other" thread and I highly doubt WW was in this thread.....it is just a different perspective Jerry. I can readily accept that you see contradiction in scripture. I just don't accept what you see as a blanket confirmation that scripture contradicts itself in an unresolvable manner. Should I?
For me.....most things you would consider a contradiction....speak to me......including Jesus' interaction with the rich young ruler. I have a totally different read on that personal and very human conversation that the Lord had with this man....and when I contrast that with His interaction with Zacchaeus, while bearing in mind that Jesus said......"with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." I don't see a contradiction. What I see is Jesus illustrating exactly what He said.
To me it is an amazing passage. This rich young ruler was sure he had already done the first thing Jesus said .....but, when Jesus said...okay then sell all your stuff and give it away to the poor..... the reality was something else. I see the rich young ruler trying to come to God on his own terms. Jesus challenges that in all of us in my opinion. Jesus' interaction with Zacchaeus was something totally different......Zacchaeus was looking to see Jesus and not looking to gain something.....and the Lord sought him out. With the exception of the thief on the cross....this is the last individual interaction Jesus had and I think it illustrates what Jesus meant when He said" with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible." For me it also illustrates the different manners in which people approach God.
It can also be read as insight into the meaning of faith and for me it is not problematic but faith building......so when I say it isn't a contradiction....I am not speaking to personally offend you....I am adding my perspective. Is that okay with you? Can I believe the scriptures and let them speak to me and then add my voice even if it contradicts your perspective? Without it being a personal affront?
I don't doubt in the least that you have wrestled with the concept of grace vs works .....coming from TWI it makes perfect sense. I struggled with them as well. For me...I landed somewhere else.....I found my answer at the cross of Christ. That is where it converged for me and where I finally began learning about faith. I know you certainly don't want to hear it from me.......I don't think my insight would satisfy whatever it is you need to get out of the passages that challenge you....but I promise you my perspective is not a slam against your struggle or study.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Sounds like a rationalization to me. If this were a secular work we are discussing, it would be clearly obvious that those two passages contradict each other. The only way to resolve that is to give it an esoteric twist and dismiss the obvious logic. I think that's what we used to call "private interpretation". Ironic, no? Use private interpretation to disparage private interpretation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
This is a classic example of the polar mindset I described above. In your mind, if there is one thing in the ENTIRE Bible that is not "God-breathed", then the entire book is worthless. To quote VP, "It's either all God's word or none of it."
SAYS WHO? This is a blatantly illogical statement with no basis in fact. The reason people make these kinds of statements, imho, is because they're incapable of dealing with the task of using your God-given mind, intelligence, and spiritual intuition to sort out what's true from what isn't.
Fundamentalism is the easy way out. You guys just aren't spiritually mature enough to deal with anything less than 100% certainty. Your faith is WEAK.
Now I'm being an elitist. Take that! HA! :-)
I would love to read and respond to Geisha's post now, but My wifey's gotta go to bed, so I guess I'll have to pick this up tomorrow.
God Bless!
PS. I gave Geisha's post a quick read while Deb was playing with the Shih-Tzu. Very gracious of you Geisha, and much appreciated. Oh, NOW she's gotta go to bed. Lights out for me. :-)
Edited by JbarraxLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
It might if you were reading it with only a literal perspective......but....Jesus spoke in parables....Jesus used illustrations from everyday life......Jesus walked along pointing and teaching and Jesus rarely spoke in an obvious manner......even His disciples had to ask Him repeatedly to explain Himself.....when He did speak plainly they noted it. "Ah, now you are speaking plainly and not using figurative speech!"
They were amazed by His words and they way He spoke...."No one ever spoke the way this man does,"...they were confused by His words.....they were terrified by what He spoke.....and I believe that if you read it so literally without the nuance, the whole, and at least some kind of perspective into the heart of the subject ...yeah, you are going to be confused.
What? You never took an English Lit class? There is layer upon layer in scripture.......and Jesus was interacting with people....with individuals.....do you speak to your grandchild the same way you do to your work colleagues? No? I don't think we should expect Jesus to either. Look at the striking difference between John chapter 3 and 4......Nicodemus and the woman at the well.....the tenderness in which Jesus dealt with the women who was a hardcore sinner....and the seemingly brash style with Nicodemus a Pharisee.....there is more there than meets the eye. There is so much depth in those encounters, but it is found in the illustration of His interaction.
Why did He chide some of His followers for their lack of faith and deal so sweetly with Thomas? He was dealing with individuals and He knew them. He knew what was in peoples hearts.
I don't think scripture is all that obvious and I know in TWI we were taught to look at it that way......plain as the nose on my face......but, maybe that wasn't the right way to approach it.
Just a thought .
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I give up, why must it?
I was pointing out that a SPECIFIC example, to me, looked nothing like what it
was being described as, and THAT type of thinking bothered me.
Just as when someone says "here's a contradiction" then uses that as their excuse to
downgrade the Bible's utility. THAT's what I objected to, and I still do.
For the most part, I've been leaving you guys alone about the inerrancy thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Because perception is SUBJECTIVE, and someone touchy on a subject can see an insult in it
even when that insult isn't even there. US television writers have to tread a thin tightrope
to produce scripts that won't result in SOMEONE starting a letter-writing campaign for the
same reason.
I left the entire discussion about inerrancy ALONE except for a specific instance where
ONE poster posted ONE thing and said it was a contradiction and proof of contradictions.
I rebutted that and pointed out I thought it didn't take a lot of work to see how that
specific instance fit together. I don't like it when people jump to conclusions that
fast- I find it sloppy, and altogether too common nowadays.
(Just a reminder: I don't spend all my time on the GSC. Out in the big wide world are
lots of people with sloppy logic who tick me off all the time.)
That one poster thanked me for posting what I did, and said they'd follow up on their
own. "The end", I thought, but a few OTHER posters seem to have seen themselves in
what I said when I was specifically addressing ONE poster, and thinking of a bunch of
people who've never heard of twi. I was even ASKED about that, I clarified my point,
and STILL got someone interpreting my points as addressing them in a general way
when I was addressing someone else in a SPECIFIC way.
There's an assumption there that there was an assumption that ANY apparent contradiction can be worked
out if you just asked someone else. Someone brought one up, I worked it out as if asked. If I'd been
asked about it earlier, I would have posted it sooner. When I see an apparent contradiction, I look at
it from all the angles I can find, and if that doesn't present a logical answer, I call in others for
insight. Often they have access to resources or commentaries or whatever that I don't, or have pondered
this very issue before, and can fill in all or part of an answer. I find that's a good strategy to follow.
"In multitude of counsellors is safety." I don't know how that became universalized as a Thou Shalt
rather than a "rule of thumb." Seems the contents of my posts are being read through a perception
filter that's polarizing them.
Sorry to hear that. I hate it when I can't find an answer and end up with a persistent question
that lasts years. It feels like unfinished business or a discordant note.
I suppose that could be annoying.
Then again, if you find that lots of people are assuming that-
and most of that is as substantial as me not even thinking about you and you deciding I was trying
to "character assasinate" you, then there's a simple solution-
stop thinking everything's about you.
I used to ascribe a much greater importance to my existence in other people's discussions.
Once I adjusted my perceptions closer to reality, I found it remarkable freeing.
(Of course, it was a slight ego blow that I really wasn't in ANY discussions when I thought
I was in a LOT of them, but in the long run, I much prefer it this way.)
Just maybe, you're missing a nuance or two here, yourself.
But I agree that a difference in perspectives could avoid bitterness in a disagreement here.
I was quite surprised to discover I've apparently been in a heated argument for over a day.
This is the first I've heard of it.
Next time, I'd like to know sooner. Otherwise, I might miss the entire thing.
This.
I don't think I can add anything to this post, so I won't try.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
There's stuff written about him in Acts, for starters. He didn't write Acts as you know. Peter also makes reference to him in his writings and besides this, there is information in profane writings.
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I actually find Jbarrax's viewpoint refreshing. It is a change of pace from the stoic Fundamentalist view that to me came from TWI. Some of the issue in my mind here centers on the "sacred cow" of scripture contradiction. To some it's the cause of denigrating scripture and devalueing it. However, I don't find it such. One example - I as a parent can tell my children one thing one day, and then on another day say something totally different. Now this is not a state I strive for as a rule as children need consistency and direction much as God's children. However, the challenges in a child's life and a day's event can sometimes dictate saying different things at times that the child should focus on. Does this mean my advice as a parent is valueless? I don't think so - I put a lot of effort into it to be right and help children turn out better than their parents.
So if I can have that attitude, what about myself as a child of God? Can I accept that sometimes God will instruct me to answer fools, and other times not answer fools? I can. I believe that my personal relationship with Him, including common sense, scriptural study, the gifts/manifestations area, and wise counsel can all contribute together to help me go in the right direction, including wisdom in certain situations.
So in that I can accept those verses in Proverbs as somewhat contradictory, and search for additional answers to help me find the right application for what I'm dealing with now. I don't have to resort to the old viewpoints of "well if the Bible has one contradiction it would fall to pieces" which is a viewpoint I believe was instilled by a false Fundamentalist teacher. I think needing to resort to interpretation trickery of different types to explain away apparent contradictions is not completely intellectually honest, although I do acknowledge that God has enough foresight to call attention to contradictions to give us tools to help our limited minds through it.
Funny enough - these things speak to me as well. The different manners people approach God and the truth of what each needs to do in their lives can be complicated. To me the contradictory advice given to Zaccheus and the rich young ruler illustrate this. But I guess I can use the word "contradiction" without it triggering all the things it does for some others. With the rich young ruler - dude's got a lot of material baggage he's going to need to deal with to make it work. Zaccheus - just a humble soul. No such hinderances.
IMO the grace / works package and putting it together in daily life is something EVERY Christian struggles with and it's an ongoing thing. At least it is for me. It's resolved in Christ for sure, but there's plenty of people that rest on that victory and never live for Him again.
I really appreciate the rebuttal and discussion. If I go on my heart feelings and ignore investigative work then it is I that am being lazy. I need some more effort, some more work to complete that picture. I do agree that without that effort conclusions are sloppy, intellectually dishonest, and also too common nowadays.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Yes you have a point. I don't want to rationalize to understand Scripture. But I don't want to ignore the tools either, like translations, definitions, and figures of speech.
I think a portion of intellectual honesty is to treat scripture with the same scrutiny as other books. We were taught in TWI to worship scripture in a sense. Without applying the brain cells that can easily become a cargo cult science rather than a genuine piece to stimulate the heart and intellect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
There's that esoteric twist. I never said you should read it without an understanding of the nuances or that you should ignore the symbolism of the parables. If the Bible is all that it's touted to be, it should be able to withstand the same sort of scrutiny as a secular work. It should be readable by Christian and Non-Christian alike. A Hindu or Buddhist should be able to read Proverbs and come away with no less enlightenment than a Christian. To think otherwise, borders on elitism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
That is a pretty arbitrary standard to apply ...... how so?
I took a French lit class.....not everyone speaks or reads French......unless explained or translated for non-franchophones not everyone is going to understand French lit .....is that elitist? Last time I sat in an English Lit class not everyone was able to pick up Jane Austen and recognize her critique on life as a woman in 19th century England without being taught how to read it.
Many, if not most Muslims believe that the Koran is an exact word for word representation of God(much like we believed about the bible in TWI).....many do not consider translations to be the Koran and believe it must be read in Arabic.....is your same non Arabic speaking Buddhist or Hindu able to pick up the Koran and come away enlightened? I certainly hope you apply your standard equally and stand ready to accuse Muslims of bordering on elitism.
The bible deals with spiritual matters......it deals with faith....it coalesces around the person of Jesus Christ. How is it even logical to not read it in light of its spiritual nature, faith, and the person of Jesus Christ. Wouldn't you discern something that is spiritual in a spiritual manner? They also deal with the human condition, with sin, with good and evil.....and the very nature of God. If someone doesn't read them in light of their nature as thee disclosure of God and His interaction with mankind and still demands to understand .....I think that crosses the border of elitism. Note that I didn't say you had to believe them.....
You do realize that the bible is about the most scrutinized book we have and millions still understand and believe it. We are not all brain dead or unthinking are we? Actually, you can trot on down to your local Walmart and buy one for around 10 dollars. Still standing under scrutiny. Somehow it has managed to bury its pall bearers..... yet you speak like no one has ever answered the questions you pose. They have been asked and answered time and again......it is up to the individual to decide what they believe about the answers....if they satisfy. It is up to the individual to decide what they believe about Jesus Christ....and oddly enough....the scriptures even address this. They make us responsible for what we believe.
Your standard is problematic for me because within the very scriptures you want to understand is the disclosure that you must come in a particular manner and in light of faith in a particular person to understand. Ignore those internal instructions and replace them with an arbitrary standard and expect results.... no, demand results......or cry elitism?
I guess that's one way to go....
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I disagree.
Not even addressing matters of the supernatural and doctrine, I would disagree.
When I read Hamlet, I come away with a deeper understanding than the high school and college
students that read it each semester. (More than I did at both levels, and I understood it
a lot at both levels.) That's interest, study, and familiarity. However, they get the basic
story-they understand who does what and basically why.
Anyone can read "the Wheel of Time" and get an entertaining read of a story they understand.
Then there's people who "sleuth" the series, digging for all the nuances the author included
for those who look VERY closely. Those people get a lot more out of each volume.
When the Harry Potter series was coming out, I took time off sleuthing the Wheel of Time
to sleuth HP. It was a LOT easier than sleuthing WoT, but a lot of the same principles
applied. Lots and lots of people read the books, and many just got what was on the surface.
Some sleuthed deeper, and many of those guessed wrongly because they didn't have enough experience
with sleuthing books. I did, so most of my guesses were correct (and I was correct as to which
ones were wrong that others proposed.)
Anyone with a coherent Bible version that's fairly accurate can get a basic understanding of
salvation in Jesus Christ and so on. The basics are of primary importance, and those come through.
Those who approach it with a degree of historical knowledge, cultural knowledge, Koine Greek or
other language knowledge, those people will be able to get more out of it. Those with a lot of
that knowledge will see deeper yet. (That's why ex-twi'ers generally can only see but so
deeply- we all had a limit on our education, and few went far beyond that. And I don't count
myself among them.)
So, I expect almost anyone can read the Bible and get a basic understanding.
However, the deeper matters will need more dedication than the average person will devote.
That goes for ANY group of adherents with ANY book they consider "holy". They will put in the
time, they will be more dedicated, so they will get more out of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
So, you need to either be a Christian or apply advanced academic techniques, or both, to extract wisdom from Proverbs? (That's the book I used in my example.)
Sorry, I just don't see that to be the case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I don't see that to be the case, either.
I didn't use any "academic techniques" with the Wheel of Time or Harry Potter.
(I didn't go to any school offering a degree in either, but I've heard
there's a school somewhere with at least a class on HP.)
Again, it depends on how deep you want to go.
The most elementary SWIMMERS can all hang out in the shallows,
to go deeper into the water, you need to swim better than that.
With any book, you can get some level of understanding by reading it
no matter who you are, so long as you have something approaching
an average level of reading comprehension.
With any book, the more skills you have (the deeper your background),
the more levels you'll understand the book at.
Again, that's ANY book. With moderate skills, you'll see deeper and
more profoundly than the D+ English student who read through it.
With more dedication, you'll bring a broader range to the table,
or a greater wealth of specialized knowledge, and you'll understand
more. And if you really put in several years of work, you'll find
things that the average person would think you made up. (Regarding
Hamlet, I've found at least one teacher I had was INDIFFERENT and
didn't seem to get a certain point Shakespeare made. So, attitude
affects dedication, which affects how far you go or how hard you
apply yourself.
To very specifically address your point,
ANYONE can read Proverbs and should be able to see it's got a lot
of wisdom in it, and understand SOME of that wisdom, enough for their
preferences. Not everyone could do a read-through of, say,
Ecclesiastes and find it equally wise. Due to its handling of
DEEPER issues, it can seem like nonsense to an indifferent reader,
who might completely miss the points made all over the book.
I got accused of polarizing the posts of others a few posts back.
I think I'm getting that type of RESPONSE to my posts, however,
and I'm not actually trying to make things either/or.
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
I agree with the premise that Christians should be able to get more understanding out of the Bible than non-Christians. This is by virtue of God being able to give a spirit-filled Christian insight into a passage that a Muslim or Hindu won't necessarily be able to receive.
It's that process of being able to receive revelation when we read that makes the all or none preposition so primitive; carnal even.
If there are problems in the text, a spirit filled Christian can acknowledge that and still be able to glean marvelous truths from other Scriptures. As a spirit-filled Christian, I can acknowledge the conflict between grace and works but still rejoice in the gift of holy spirit, God's grace and mercy, resolve to "work heartily as to the Lord and not unto men" and remind myself that "charity suffereth long and is kind".
Would I like to have a rock solid confidence that there's only truth in the Bible about salvation? As my dear departed Grandma would say, Sho nuff! But not having that doesn't mean I can't still value and enjoy and benefit from the truths I do understand.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.