- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by josephwAre both the Douay-Rheims and the KJV the Bible that speaks for itself?
You have it wrong. God's Word isn't interpreted by man. When it is disagreements arise.
Private, or personal interpretation means the one doing the interpreting will project his own meaning into the text. The text speaks for itself. One can study the text, learn from the text and be influenced by the text, but one cannot apply meaning to the text. The scripture speaks for itself.
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by josephwI don't have it wrong at all, josephw. God's Word is interpreted by man. That's why there is diversity of interpretation and understanding within Christendom and that's why disagreements arise.
You have it wrong. God's Word isn't interpreted by man. When it is disagreements arise.
Originally posted by josephwYou say the scripture speaks for itself, So where did the scripture say:
You have it wrong. God's Word isn't interpreted by man. When it is disagreements arise.
Private, or personal interpretation means the one doing the interpreting will project his own meaning into the text. The text speaks for itself. One can study the text, learn from the text and be influenced by the text, but one cannot apply meaning to the text. The scripture speaks for itself.
"JESUS WAS BORN WITHOUT SIN"?
Apparently nowhere, because nobody who claims that is true can produce supporting passages.
So it is YOUR interpretation or YOUR PRIVATE interpretation which has projected your own meaning to other texts, leading to your false doctrine.
Clearly you are not allowing the text to speak for itself. You are applyinn YOUR meaning to the text and not allowing the scripture to speak for itself.
Originally posted by josephwAnd yet Christians for 2,000 years have been doing exactly that ~ interpreting the Bible and projecting meaning onto the text (a.k.a. interpreting it). In so far as "the text speaks for itself", different Christians have heard and understood the Bible to say different things.
Private, or personal interpretation means the one doing the interpreting will project his own meaning into the text. The text speaks for itself.
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by KellyJayHow is that not the same thing? The text quoted is clearly relevant to the proposition that 'Sin is passed down through the father,'
You are not talking about the same thing. Closer would be found in Hebrews 7:
6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.
7 And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.
8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed t ...[text shortened]... r priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
'Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.'
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
06 Apr 17
1 edit
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
How is that not the same thing? The text quoted is clearly relevant to the proposition that 'Sin is passed down through the father,'
'Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.'
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
How is that not the same thing? The text quoted is clearly relevant to the proposition that 'Sin is passed down through the father,'
'Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.'
How is that not the same thing? The text quoted is clearly relevant to the proposition that 'Sin is passed down through the father,'
'Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.'
Are you using this passage to argue that Paul was wrong to speak of death passing to all men from Adam's sin ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
06 Apr 17
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFWhy are you asking me this question ?
Why are you addressing this question to Ghost of a Duke?
You don't want Ghost to speak up for himself ?
Some kind of control freak you are ?
I bet you project your own control freak attitude towards your Creator as well.
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by sonshipWhat does Ghost of a Duke have to do with you likening DeepThought to a Holocaust denier?
Why are you asking me this question ?
You don't want Ghost to speak up for himself ?
Some kind of control freak you are ?
I bet you project your own control freak attitude towards your Creator as well.
06 Apr 17
Originally posted by JS357Not to deflect from your point, but the translation issue is another topic. Having said that, to answer the question, some translations are obviously better than others. The fact is we have at our fingertips all the most reliable manuscript evidence necessary to identify what God's Word is.
Are both the Douay-Rheims and the KJV the Bible that speaks for itself?
And much much more. The problem with skeptics is they only understand God, with a lower case g, as a fabrication of the imagination of man, and naysay to the one and only true God of which the Bible amply describes.
They can't even bring themselves to acknowledge that fact much less have an objective discussion about it.