Why the interpretations?

[Chuck_G]

If the bible were compendious Christianity would be a more compelling belief even in the face of nature having better explanatory power.

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

[1213]

If the bible were compendious Christianity would be a more compelling belief even in the face of nature having better explanatory power.

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

Unfortunately I don’t know exact reason. But possible reason is, it is good that way. It wouldn’t make any meaningful difference if otherwise. The goal doesn’t seem to be belief, but understanding. Belief is not helpful, if person doesn’t have right understanding. And Bible can be understood also now, if person really wants to understand.

[ttruscott]

If the bible were compendious Christianity would be a more compelling belief even in the face of nature having better explanatory power.

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

ahhh, commas...

The non-compendious-ness of the Bible is to force HIS sinful elect to seek HIS Holy Spirit and not lean on their own understanding of what the book means. It is to lead the elect to having a relationship with HIM, not a church or Book.

[Divine Insight]

And Bible can be understood also now, if person really wants to understand.

I beg to differ with this claim. There appears to be overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

1. This Abrahamic Religion has fallen into at least three major divisive sects:

Judaism
Islam
Christianity

And these three are radically different understandings of this "Bible" (call it the Bible, the Torah, the Qur'an). Call it whatever you will, it's all clearly based on the same fundamental God myths.

2. Even within these three major divisions this religion continues to fracture into even more extreme divisiveness.

For the sake of brevity I won't even bother mentioning the myriad of divisive sects of Judaism and Islam. Let's just look at the single off-shoot of Christianity.

Christianity is clearly majorly divided between Catholicism and Protestantism (there are even other sects that refuse to be associated with either of these)

The Protestantisms are probably the most divisive sects (or denominations) of any religion every known to mankind. They comprise a very wide range of diverse beliefs, and clearly extremely different "understandings" of the Bible. They all disagree with Catholicism, otherwise they would be Catholics.

So where is there any hint of any understanding at all? Even the most devout believers of these divisive Abrahamic sects can't agree with each others understanding of the Bible.

3. Finally, if a genuinely clear understanding of the Bible could be had by anyone, shouldn't that person be able to explain it to others in a clear, convincing, and compelling manner without any ambiguity or self-contradictions.

Where do these people exist?

I've never seen anyone who could give an unambiguous meaningful explanation of the Bible that wasn't itself filled with extreme self-contradictions. Save for possibly some explanations that are so far removed from the Biblical narrative that they simply aren't compelling in terms of being a fair representation of the original scriptures.

For example, I could offer an alternative story line partly plagiarized from the Biblical scriptures but in no way compatible with it in any literal sense. But what good is that? That wouldn't be the Biblical story. So even if my story made sense it would hardly help or support the Bible.

~~~~

So your claim that the Bible is "understandable" by someone if they truly want to understand it is highly questionable and hardly supportable by any sort of real world evidence.

When people who make these claims offer their version of the Bible, the usual result is that the people they offer it to point out serious errors in the "explanations". And do not find them to be the least bit compelling.

So to just claim that the Bible can be understood by anyone who's willing to understand it doesn't hold water.

A far more likely truth is that some people can clearly convince themselves that it makes sense to them, even though when they offer their interpretations to others, the other people point out the flaws in the offered explanations.

This is called "denial".

A refusal to own up to the inconsistencies of the explanations being offered.

I have never heard a consistent and compelling story of the Bible yet from anyone. And as I've pointed out above, even the most devout believers clearly aren't even convincing each other of their own interpretations.

So what actually exists in the real world is overwhelming evidence that no one truly understands the Bible at all. Not even those who claim to be the most devout believers.

[Chuck_G]

ahhh, commas...

English was not my favorite subject in high school. I spent much of those classes with my head on the desk sleeping. In hindsight that was a mistake.

The non-compendious-ness of the Bible is to force HIS sinful elect to seek HIS Holy Spirit and not lean on their own understanding of what the book means.

What other than "their own understanding" does one have to decide what something means?

It is to lead the elect to having a relationship with HIM, not a church or Book.

It seems to me that intentional obfuscation of a "message" would be the worst way to let the elect "hear the good news".

[catnip]

If the bible were compendious Christianity would be a more compelling belief even in the face of nature having better explanatory power.

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

Note that all evidence that I can see proves that the scriptures were written by ordinary people who had some experience of extraordinary things. It is God breathed (inspired) by God and is useful---and that is the best that is said about it in an obscure book of dubious authorship in the New Testament, 2 Timothy. In short, I don't think God wrote the book.

I think more people can readily see that natural world (reality) clearly than the supernatural reality. I was just thinking about the word supernatural because people here critisize it, but it is natural, but just super (of superior size).

And no, I don't think we do a very good job of even comprehending nature. It has taken science a very long time and the work is ongoing. A lot of what we once thought about it, such as there were once only four elements named, prove we haven't got a good natural grasp of what we perceive around us. It takes careful study--whole lifetimes in the early years--to come up with viable explanations for singular theories.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Note that all evidence that I can see proves that the scriptures were written by ordinary people who had some experience of extraordinary things. It is God breathed (inspired) by God and is useful---and that is the best that is said about it in an obscure book of dubious authorship in the New Testament, 2 Timothy. In short, I don't think God wrote the book.

I think more people can readily see that natural world (reality) clearly than the supernatural reality. I was just thinking about the word supernatural because people here critisize it, but it is natural, but just super (of superior size).

And no, I don't think we do a very good job of even comprehending nature. It has taken science a very long time and the work is ongoing. A lot of what we once thought about it, such as there were once only four elements named, prove we haven't got a good natural grasp of what we perceive around us. It takes careful study--whole lifetimes in the early years--to come up with viable explanations for singular theories.

Keep in mind that the Bible was written by ordinary ancient people for whom the experience of a great earthquake, or a massive storm with high winds, heavy rain and much thunder and lightning, was an awe inspiring experience of apparently extraordinary things. Things they had no means to explain. Things which they could only suppose were the result of an all powerful intelligence. These things occur without any intelligence involved however. They are the results of quantum mechanics at work, and we have no reason, or at least no evidence of any kind, to suppose that quantum mechanics is itself a form of intelligence.

For a species of great ape we have done a rather remarkable job of comprehending how nature works. It's just that relatively few people make the effort to avail themselves of that information. Let's face it, it much easier for most people to conclude that "God did it," and leave it at that. Science is quite difficult and complicated. And so there is a great divide between those who have learned to comprehend nature well enough to be able to design working computers and smart phones, and those who have learned enough about computers and smart phones to click on the right icon, or push the correct sequence of buttons.

[JehovahsWitness]

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

Everything, possibly short of a telephone directory, is open for debate. An omnipotent God may well have good reason for inspiring a book that requires His own intervensioin to be accurately understood as He wants.

In this regard the book of Matthew in the bible contains the following observation attributed to Jesus Christ; when asked why he (Jesus) didn't speak in plain straightforward terms but rather in illustrations (the interpretation of which would be open to debate) his reply is recorded below:

"Why is it you speak to them by the use of illustrations? 11 In reply he said: To YOU it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, but to those people it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 This is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations, because, looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, neither do they get the sense of it"

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[McCulloch]

Why would he leave his "word" open for debate?

An omnipotent God may well have good reason for inspiring a book that requires His own intervention to be accurately understood as He wants.

A God may well have a good reason for direct intervention to make himself understood. But such a god would not require to have a book written. And if the supposed God communicated directly, there would have to be an effective way to discern true revelation from false prophesy.

In this regard the book of Matthew in the bible contains the following observation attributed to Jesus Christ; when asked why he (Jesus) didn't speak in plain straightforward terms but rather in illustrations (the interpretation of which would be open to debate) his reply is recorded below:

“Why is it you speak to them by the use of illustrations?�
In reply he said: “To YOU it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, but to those people it is not granted. For whoever has, more will be given him and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations, because, looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, neither do they get the sense of it�

Let me get this straight. God is withholding the sacred secrets of the kingdom of heaven from certain people but allows others to get it. Why would God want that? Are we talking about the same God that Paul speaks of to Timothy?

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

[JehovahsWitness]

In this regard the book of Matthew in the bible contains the following observation attributed to Jesus Christ; when asked why he (Jesus) didn't speak in plain straightforward terms but rather in illustrations (the interpretation of which would be open to debate) his reply is recorded below:

“Why is it you speak to them by the use of illustrations?�
In reply he said: “To YOU it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, but to those people it is not granted. For whoever has, more will be given him and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations, because, looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, neither do they get the sense of it�

Let me get this straight. God is withholding the sacred secrets of the kingdom of heaven from certain people but allows others to get it.

I just quoted Jesus words, what do YOU understand them to mean?

JW