Originally posted by chaney3You've yet to make a reasonable case that the article contradicts itself.
My powers of discernment:
You have provided an article that contradicts itself, and doesn't make sense.
The author cherry picks and merely views the Bible as "useful". How quaint.
5 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
That being said: I do not believe that scripture is holy. I don't believe that it is perfect. I do not believe that it is free from errors. I believe, in the words of the founder of my particular sect of Christianity, John Wesley, that scripture is "Sufficient."
The bible is sufficient.
If we search the Bible but we are not willing to come to Jesus Christ, it will not be sufficient for us to receive the divine Person, the divine life of God in Jesus. This Jesus told the experts in the Hebrew Scriptures. And it applies to readers and "experts" of the New Testament Scriptures as well.
" You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that testify concerning Me. Yet you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life." (John 5:39)
The Bible itself is not sufficient for receiving a communion with God if you read not willing to open your heart to its center - the Lord Jesus Christ.
In this case, searching Scripture yet closing your heart towards the living Lord and Savior, the Bible will not be sufficient for a reader. In fact such searching may result in them becoming more and more blinded and hardened towards the God of Scripture.
For this reason it is well advised to always accompany your searching of the Scriptures with a humble prayer that you are willing to simultaneously come to the Lord Jesus too.
"Lord Jesus, I come now to the Holy Bible. But Lord I come with a desire to touch You, to receive You, to open my life to You that You may dispense divine life into my life.
Lord Jesus save me from searching the Bible with a closed heart hunting for reasons to live on apart from You in my natural mind. "
Something like this is a good prayer to have while opening the Bible to search it.
7 edits
In the article it said:
According to scripture, even GOD HIMSELF points out that "You can't take this stuff literally."
Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
-Matt. 13:13
Verse 13 is a reply to the question asked by the disciples about why Jesus was speaking to the opposing Jews in parables (verse 10).
"And the disciples came and said to Him, Why do You speak in parables to them? And He answered and said to them, Because to you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of the heavens, but to them it has not been given."
First of all we should take seriously the distinction between "you" and "them".
"[Y]ou " means the believing disciples, the lovers of Jesus, and those willing to hear and follow Him.
"[T]hem" means the opposing unbelieving hearers of Jesus's teaching.
God has granted the lovers of Jesus to know the things of the kingdom of the heavens. The opposing ones are mystified and all His words are a closed mystery that they cannot understand.
The meaning of Christ is "Don't any of you take this stuff liturally." It is more " God has given some of you a heart to perceive and understand these words, But others are only hardened, made more rebellious and closed minded by these teachings."
Jesus follows by saying the open who have a little understanding will be granted even more understanding by God. While the rebellious will lose even whatever slight understanding they might have.
"For whoever has, it shall be given to him, and he will abound; but whoever does not have, even that which he has shall be taken away from him.
For this reason I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." (v.12,13)
Jesus goes on to confirm His disciplinary method by quoting what the prophet Isaiah had warned:
" And in them the prophesy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
In hearing you shall hear and by no means understand, and seeing you shall see and by no means perceive. For the heart of this people has become fat, and with their ears they have heard heavily, and their eyes they have closed, lest they perceive with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart,
and they turn around, and I will heal them." (vs.14-15)
The "them" of the opposing hearers is not the example we should follow if we want God.
The example to follow is to believe in Christ as Son of God and all He taught.
"But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men have desired to perceive the things that you see, and have not perceived them, and to hear the things that you hear, and have not heard them.
You therfore hear the parable of the one who sowed." (vs. 16-18)
Originally posted by sonshipThe Bible itself is not sufficient for receiving a communion with God if you read not willing to open your heart to its center - the Lord Jesus Christ.That being said: I do not believe that scripture is holy. I don't believe that it is perfect. I do not believe that it is free from errors. I believe, in the words of the founder of my particular sect of Christianity, John Wesley, that scripture is "Sufficient."
The bible is sufficient.
If we search the Bible but we are not willing to ...[text shortened]... " [/quote]
Something like this is a good prayer to have while opening the Bible to search it.
In this case, searching Scripture yet closing your heart towards the living Lord and Savior, the Bible will not be sufficient for a reader. In fact such searching may result in them becoming more and more blinded and hardened towards the God of Scripture.
Is this what you believe is the point Jesus is making in John 5:39?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOn page 2 of this thread I listed what the article says about the Bible. Yet, the author wants one to follow the teachings of Jesus, in the books you provided, from the very same Bible. If he disagrees with the 'validity' of the Bible, that's one thing, but it appears that his opinions of the Bible do NOT apply to those particular books.
The books of Matthew, Luke, John and Mark. Focus on the words of Jesus rather than the story of what He did.
A good place to start is Matthew 5-7.
There lies the contradiction. He cannot have it both ways.
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYes.
[b]The Bible itself is not sufficient for receiving a communion with God if you read not willing to open your heart to its center - the Lord Jesus Christ.
In this case, searching Scripture yet closing your heart towards the living Lord and Savior, the Bible will not be sufficient for a reader. In fact such searching may result in them becoming more and ...[text shortened]... the God of Scripture.
Is this what you believe is the point Jesus is making in John 5:39?[/b]
And I would add that this principle was applicable before Jesus Christ was born.
Coming to the Scripture even on the old covenant had to be accompanied by bringing the heart to God.
In Christ's earthly ministry it was the same, for He was God incarnate.
In Christ's heavenly ministry, His ministry today from heaven, it is also the same.
I wrote a thread about mixing praying with reading the Bible and mixing reading the Bible with praying with its words. This is mixing the word with faith (Hebrews 4:2) . I highly recommend this - reading and praying with, by, and through the words to God.
This is a good way to assure that when you come to the Scripture you simultaneously come to God too.
Of course there is a time for analytical study also. Balance treatment - a study time and a prayreading time, is good.
Christian Growth - Prayreading the Word part 1
Christian Growth - Prayreading the Word part 2
3 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneSo then what I previously described really does indicate your approach to the New Testament. Minus the performed signs, deeds, circumstances and practical historical description of various situations, the words of Jesus "while He walked on earth" is code for "Eliminate all miracles and manifestations of divinity of Christ."
The books of Matthew, Luke, John and Mark. Focus on the words of Jesus rather than the story of what He did.
A good place to start is Matthew 5-7.
I described what I thought you meant. You seemed to insist my reading comprehension was awry. But it seems to turn out as I thought anyway.
I had said:
Does the phrase "while Jesus walked on earth" mean not the ultimate divine words and miraculous deeds ?
ie
1.) Jesus said to love one another in John 13. That was a saying of Jesus while He "walked on earth."
But when Jesus said "Rise, pick up your bed and walk" that is not a saying of Jesus "while He wallked on earth."
...
In other words "while He walked on earth" means minus all miracles of Jesus in the New Testament or minus words and deeds pertaining to His authority as Divine.
We should focus on the words of Christ for sure. But eliminating the context of the situations in which He spoke them is applying a anti-miraculous filter of unbelief.
Didn't He speak many words about unbelief as well?
Why not focus on situations and words more equally?
5 edits
Originally posted by chaney3You really need to reread the OP. It's clear you don't understand what the author is saying.
On page 2 of this thread I listed what the article says about the Bible. Yet, the author wants one to follow the teachings of Jesus, in the books you provided, from the very same Bible. If he disagrees with the 'validity' of the Bible, that's one thing, but it appears that his opinions of the Bible do NOT apply to those particular books.
There lies the contradiction. He cannot have it both ways.
Focus on the following:
The bible repeatedly implies in the old and new testaments that it is a metaphorical and esoteric work, and then the voice of God outright says so in the new testament.
As far as scripture's go, the bible suffices. It's pretty okay. It has some pretty major problems if you take it literally, because it describes a code of laws designed to hold a society together in absolutely barbaric conditions,.. As far as the rest of the stuff in the book, it's got some problems here in there with internal errors and inconsistencies, where it disagrees with itself, especially about women, but overall, it suffices...
The bible is a very difficult book to understand and to use because it is not internally consistent, it does not claim to be perfect, and it is mistranslated. So we Methodists have a Method (that's how we got our name) for understanding the world:
1. Scripture
2. Tradition
3. Reason
4. Experience
A literal reading of the bible is logically inconsistent, both because God says "I teach in metaphor," and because the strongest claim that scripture makes about itself is that it is A) God Breathed, and B) Useful.
3 edits
Originally posted by sonshipIf you read the words of Jesus in context, then you'd know that Jesus often says something in the abstract and then follows with clarification.
Yes.
And I would add that this principle was applicable before Jesus Christ was born.
Coming to the Scripture even on the old covenant had to be accompanied by bringing the heart to God.
In Christ's earthly ministry it was the same, for He was God incarnate.
In Christ's heavenly ministry, His ministry today from heaven, it is also the sa ...[text shortened]... owth - Prayreading the Word part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcq3lIjWXUI[/b]
If you had done this with John 5:39, you might understand what He was saying.
John 5
24“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
38“You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.
39“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; 40and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
Keep in mind the fact that when Jesus is speaking of "the scriptures", He is speaking of the OT. Jesus is saying that in order to have eternal life they need "His word abiding" in them. That the OT (Moses) testifies about Jesus bringing "His word".
John 5
46“For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.
47“But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”
In short, in order to have eternal life, they need to hear His word, believe His word and have His word abide in them.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You really need to reread the OP. It's clear you don't understand what the author is saying.
Focus on the following:The bible repeatedly implies in the old and new testaments that it is a metaphorical and esoteric work, and then the voice of God outright says so in the new testament.
As far as scripture's go, the bible suffices. It's pretty ...[text shortened]... claim that scripture makes about itself is that it is A) God Breathed, and B) Useful.
The bible repeatedly implies in the old and new testaments that it is a metaphorical and esoteric work, and then the voice of God outright says so in the new testament.
Metaphorical and esoteric work repeatedly being claimed ?
Let's test this ambiguous notion on your very favorite passage:
" And the slave does not abide in the house forever; the son does abide forever. If therefore the Son sets you free, you shall be free indeed." (John 8:35,36)
Why are you fond of this passage if you think the entire bible is metaphoric and esoteric so as to be not taken seriously? How does your rule not apply to your favorite passage but applies to the rest of the passages you don't care for?
As far as scripture's go, the bible suffices. It's pretty okay. It has some pretty major problems if you take it literally, because it describes a code of laws designed to hold a society together in absolutely barbaric conditions,..
We can return to this after some consideration. But I would add that the Law of Moses was also given to a people who witnessed God's incredible miraculous liberation power in the Exodus.
When we see that some of the regulations were very strict we should remember that because of the eyewitness events in which they saw God act, they had little excuse to disbelieve.
I too read and think some penalties pronounced appear overly harsh. Then I remember that these people and their near ancestors had seen God judged the mighty empire of Egypt, open the Red Sea, sustain them for 40 years in the wilderness, tumble the walls of Jericho.
The strongness of the laws should be considered against the backround that the Exodus account was true.
When this writer says that the Bible is pretty ok to suffice, he is only thinking of man to man comparisons. "Compared to this other guy I can be not as bad, in fact pretty OK in morality."
But he is not thinking of justification before God. And he is not thinking of being justified according to God's (not man's) standard of righteousness.
As far as the rest of the stuff in the book, it's got some problems here in there with internal errors and inconsistencies, where it disagrees with itself, especially about women, but overall, it suffices...
Since you are just pasting in someone else's thoughts you pretty much pass on any responsibility to prove this to another party. You can always say that it really was not YOUR argument to defend.
So I will not attempt to engage you here on this secondhand argument borrowed from someone not present here on the Forum.
The same goes with the rest of the paragraph.
That is the advantage of cut and paste. You can always claim it really was not your thinking if it is debunked.
Originally posted by sonshipDid you intentionally respond to a post directed at c3 and ignore the post directed at you?The bible repeatedly implies in the old and new testaments that it is a metaphorical and esoteric work, and then the voice of God outright says so in the new testament.
Metaphorical and esoteric work repeatedly being claimed ?
Let's test this ambiguous notion on your very favorite passage:
[quote] [b] " And the slave does not abid ...[text shortened]... antage of cut and paste. You can always claim it really was not your thinking if it is debunked.