30 Oct 07
tuned in lst night and they were on about back to basics with the bible, genraly doing the all the rest have god wrong and this is what he ment. They even kept refering to the right reverand so and so did this and said that which proves there point??. No names etc just referances even giong in one sentence from peter quote to old testerment did not have time to look them up!! to see if they were quoting correctly or not. very annoying even for a christian.
30 Oct 07
Originally posted by stokerWas that on Premier?
tuned in lst night and they were on about back to basics with the bible, genraly doing the all the rest have god wrong and this is what he ment. They even kept refering to the right reverand so and so did this and said that which proves there point??. No names etc just referances even giong in one sentence from peter quote to old testerment did not have time ...[text shortened]... look them up!! to see if they were quoting correctly or not. very annoying even for a christian.
30 Oct 07
Originally posted by stokerit it was 88.5 then they were probably quoting correctly
tuned in lst night and they were on about back to basics with the bible, genraly doing the all the rest have god wrong and this is what he ment. They even kept refering to the right reverand so and so did this and said that which proves there point??. No names etc just referances even giong in one sentence from peter quote to old testerment did not have time ...[text shortened]... look them up!! to see if they were quoting correctly or not. very annoying even for a christian.
30 Oct 07
Originally posted by stokerGenerally, I find most of what is on Christian radio to be anemic.
tuned in lst night and they were on about back to basics with the bible, genraly doing the all the rest have god wrong and this is what he ment. They even kept refering to the right reverand so and so did this and said that which proves there point??. No names etc just referances even giong in one sentence from peter quote to old testerment did not have time ...[text shortened]... look them up!! to see if they were quoting correctly or not. very annoying even for a christian.
That isn't to say there's nothing to learn, it's just that the so-called teachers try in vain to produce in the hearers the ability to walk the christian walk with information designed for the Jews thousands of years ago.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
But, if you want to know what it means to be a christian, and learn how to walk the christian walk, then you need to focus on that body of doctrine designed for the christian today. Namely, the Pauline epistles.
31 Oct 07
Originally posted by josephwYou mean - if you want to be a Paulian. So what must the people 2000 years from now focus on? Which books were written for them?
But, if you want to know what it means to be a christian, and learn how to walk the christian walk, then you need to focus on that body of doctrine designed for the christian today. Namely, the Pauline epistles.
31 Oct 07
Originally posted by stokerwe have a God Channel (TV) here in the UK, and every time I look at it there is some crew who are constantly banging on about how you have to donate money for you and your family to be saved (the implication if not explictly stated) ; and your names will appear on a Wall (of Mercy or something); and there is only room for another few hundred etc etc.
tuned in lst night and they were on about back to basics with the bible, genraly doing the all the rest have god wrong and this is what he ment. They even kept refering to the right reverand so and so did this and said that which proves there point??. No names etc just referances even giong in one sentence from peter quote to old testerment did not have time ...[text shortened]... look them up!! to see if they were quoting correctly or not. very annoying even for a christian.
It is not what I would have thought of as anything to do with God.
31 Oct 07
Originally posted by stokerNot sure if you were sincere or not, but he (or she) meant the writings of the Apostle Paul...
whos pauline??, is she some new doctrine!! know of a sister from poland who died in 1937 of TB sister of mercy, name unshure of its spelling
...And to that thought, I'm sorry but I don't worship Paul, I worship Jesus the Christ. We must take the Bible as a whole and quit cutting it up into pieces so that we can choose how we worship God as if it were a buffet. Picking and choosing which parts of scripture we will believe will lead to very big problems as evidenced by the sheer number of denominations we have today.
01 Nov 07
Originally posted by SourJaxAnd how many of those denominations claim to be doing just that (taking the Bible as a whole)?
We must take the Bible as a whole and quit cutting it up into pieces so that we can choose how we worship God as if it were a buffet. Picking and choosing which parts of scripture we will believe will lead to very big problems as evidenced by the sheer number of denominations we have today.
The denominations have as much to do with interpretation as they do with selection and quite a lot to do with tradition.
The main reason you cant take the Bible as a whole is that it keeps contradicting itself.
01 Nov 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadSorry missed the w in my last post, i do not have my reading glasses with me and having troble. Ido not think the bible does as you say. but each generation reads it to there thinking, But the taking of a bit from here and there does give someone of there own view the missguided interpritation. (hope the spelling is ok)
And how many of those denominations claim to be doing just that (taking the Bible as a whole)?
The denominations have as much to do with interpretation as they do with selection and quite a lot to do with tradition.
The main reason you cant take the Bible as a whole is that it keeps contradicting itself.
01 Nov 07
Originally posted by stokerBut then the Bible itself is essentially meaningless on its own because the correct interpretation is essential to actually know what it means.
Ido not think the bible does as you say. but each generation reads it to there thinking, But the taking of a bit from here and there does give someone of there own view the missguided interpritation. (hope the spelling is ok)
There are many well known contradictions in the Bible which by any normal reading are undeniably contradictions. However, the use of secret decoder rings normally clears that problem up.
But if it is the interpreted version that is without contradiction then one can hardly meaningfully talk about the uninterpreted version that is on paper.
So what do you think we should do, since you have made it clear that the problem is peoples interpretation? Should we all follow your interpretation? Or do you believe (as you imply) that there is a special perfect interpretation based on taking the Bible as a whole?