Divine intervention for proper understanding

[Justin108]

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"

IF the Bible is accepted as the word of GOD, it is accepted as clear.

Any unclearness then resides in the creature. Every statement that coincides perfectly with the character and plans of GOD can be perverted and subverted to mean the opposite of HIS meaning, causing confusion in some...in other words, nothing is sacrosanct to those locked in sin. That the world of GOD is taken to be incomprehensible to those locked in sin is the orthodox position of Christianity.

Christians often claim (or imply) that in order to properly understand the Bible, one needs divine guidance and that the reason atheists find flaws in the Bible is simply because they lack this divine guidance as they do not allow the Holy Spirit to guide them.

But how do Christians know that their disapproval and rejection of the Quran is not for similar reasons? What if you reject the Quran because you do not allow the Spirit of Allah to guide you in the proper understanding of Islam? Why is the rejection of other holy texts due to their content perfectly justified, but the rejection of the Bible due to its content is a flaw in the reader? How can you be sure your rejection of the Quran is not the result of your misunderstanding of the Quran?

[1213]

Who decides what claims about the Bible are 'wrong or false'? By what authority? By whom authorized or empowered?

Such decisions are OPINIONS. What one person claims is wrong or false another person claims is true.

I mean things like if somebody claims Jesus said “1+1=3� and it is not in the Bible, then it is objectively false claim. But if there is matter that is open to interpretation, then the matter is different and it may be so that no decision can be made.

[1213]

And every problem you have with the Quran, a Muslim would be able to "show you why you are wrong"

That remains unproven till we come to that.

You have one quote from one source, and now you believe this is true about the entirety of Islam? What makes you think that the author of this article has any authority over Islam? If I find an article from a Christian on the internet, can I go around accusing all Christians of thinking the same?

My point was only to demonstrate that some say so. You don’t have to believe it.

To demonstrate: the Bible contains contradictions. Do you agree?

I don’t agree that Bible contains contradictions. Interpretations that people make from the Bible may contain contradictions, but those interpretations may be wrong.

Jesus' divinity is arguably the most important part of the New Testament

On what basis? Jesus says in the Bible that there is only one true God that is greater than him.

The Bible says Jesus is the son of God, which is not in line with the Quran

It depends on what the “son of God� means.

But ok, we can agree with that, but then the Quranists have problem with that the Quran says we should believe Jesus.

[Justin108]

[Replying to Justin108]

How would you know what accords to God? Do you look at the Bible to find out what accords to God? Do you look at the Hindu Vedas to find out what accords to God? Which holy text should one look at to find out what the real God is like?

My answer stays the same. I look to various sources, the bible is one of which, for sure

In post 28, you said you would reject anything that does not accord to God. This was in my response to whether or not the Hindu Vedas are true and if their gods exist. Here you tell me that the Bible is indeed a source you would use to identify God.

Now if you read the Bible and you read the Hindu Vedas and they disagreed on one key point, which one would you believe? Which one "accords to God"?

I ask myself, what is it that is most worthy to be called divine? That is deserving of that status?

So it comes down to personal preference?

What attributes? What way of life? What convictions? What relationships with other human beings and things in the world? The bible has helped shape that, again, but it is not authoritative.

It sounds a lot like you're inventing your own god here. You're basically telling me how you would like god to be

[Justin108]

And every problem you have with the Quran, a Muslim would be able to "show you why you are wrong"

That remains unproven till we come to that.

Fine. Are you familiar with Star Wars? To illustrate my point, I will take the role of a believer in the Force. Every problem you have with the Force, I will be able to show you why you are wrong. You up for it?

As long as a religion is open to interpretation, it is impossible to disprove it.

You would say "this part of the Quran is wrong", and the Muslim would respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

I would tell you "this part of the Bible is wrong", and you will respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

As long as a religion is open to interpretation, you cannot disprove it.

My point was only to demonstrate that some say so.

So what?

I don’t agree that Bible contains contradictions. Interpretations that people make from the Bible may contain contradictions, but those interpretations may be wrong.

This is just perfect. Read what I said in the beginning of this post. You just proved my point


You would say "this part of the Quran is wrong", and the Muslim would respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

I would tell you "this part of the Bible is wrong", and you will respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 3 by theophile]



[center]

We have to be already wise to become wise[/center]

In other words, you need a modicum of wisdom to get wisdom. You need to meet certain readiness criteria: i.e. have an open heart, to understand the wisdom of these texts...

Lets accept that idea as true for the sake of the argument. I need to have at least SOME wisdom in order to get the greater wisdom of Christian texts:


____________

Questions:

• 
  1. Why blame me for not being wise to begin with?
  
  2. Is not being wise to begin with a sin?
  
  3. How does a person gain in wisdom?
  
  4. How did you determine that Christian texts are wise at all? What is your criteria for "wisdom"?
  
  5. And of course, since we are talking about wisdom, could you define that, so we know what you are talking about?
  
  

____________


:smileleft

[1213]

Fine. Are you familiar with Star Wars? To illustrate my point, I will take the role of a believer in the Force. Every problem you have with the Force, I will be able to show you why you are wrong. You up for it?

I am familiar with it, but I don’t think it would be useful to debate about it.

As long as a religion is open to interpretation, it is impossible to disprove it.

Maybe so. I don’t think Bible is open to all interpretation. And I personally don’t want to make own interpretations about the Bible. I want to understand it as it is said directly, without own additions.

You would say "this part of the Quran is wrong", and the Muslim would respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

Maybe so, but I don’t think it would be wise from Muslim to tell their god’s word is something else than what is written. After all, it is allegedly directly from god.

I would tell you "this part of the Bible is wrong", and you will respond with "but not if you interpret it this way..."

I think this needs example. But what do you think, if you make interpretation from the Bible and then claim on basis of that “Bible is wrong�, isn’t it just your interpretation, your version of the Bible, that is wrong, not the Bible?

[Justin108]

I want to understand it as it is said directly, without own additions.

Jesus' genealogy in Luke contradicts Jesus' genealogy in Matthew. If you read the Bible "without additions", you would have to conclude that Luke and Matthew contradicts each other

Maybe so, but I don’t think it would be wise from Muslim to tell their god’s word is something else than what is written. After all, it is allegedly directly from god.

Yes, and neither should Christians. So if we look at Luke vs. Matthew and take it for what it said, the conclusion is that the Bible contradicts itself.

I think this needs example. But what do you think, if you make interpretation from the Bible and then claim on basis of that “Bible is wrong�, isn’t it just your interpretation

No. If the Bible makes two contradictory claims, it is not simply "my interpretation" that it's a contradiction. It's a contradiction by definition.

your version of the Bible, that is wrong, not the Bible

So the Bible is never wrong?

[rikuoamero]

I want to understand it as it is said directly, without own additions.

Jesus' genealogy in Luke contradicts Jesus' genealogy in Matthew. If you read the Bible "without additions", you would have to conclude that Luke and Matthew contradicts each other

Maybe so, but I don’t think it would be wise from Muslim to tell their god’s word is something else than what is written. After all, it is allegedly directly from god.

Yes, and neither should Christians. So if we look at Luke vs. Matthew and take it for what it said, the conclusion is that the Bible contradicts itself.

I think this needs example. But what do you think, if you make interpretation from the Bible and then claim on basis of that “Bible is wrong�, isn’t it just your interpretation

No. If the Bible makes two contradictory claims, it is not simply "my interpretation" that it's a contradiction. It's a contradiction by definition.

your version of the Bible, that is wrong, not the Bible

So the Bible is never wrong?

Here's a short book.
Rikuo's father is named Ian.
Rikuo's father is named Michael.
If you say there's a contradiction there, it's just your interpretation. The book itself is not wrong.
Wow. Look at that. I wonder...1213 what is my father's name? His name is one of the two. I've only had the one father who has only had the one name. If you pick one name this means my book is wrong with the other name. Are you going to say it's just someone's interpretation that's wrong, my book isn't wrong or is that a status you reserve for the bible? You do realise that you yourself I interpret the bible?

[theophile]

[Replying to post 33 by Justin108]

In post 28, you said you would reject anything that does not accord to God. This was in my response to whether or not the Hindu Vedas are true and if their gods exist. Here you tell me that the Bible is indeed a source you would use to identify God.

Yes. And although I haven't read the Vedas, I would say that they are likely good sources as well.

Now if you read the Bible and you read the Hindu Vedas and they disagreed on one key point, which one would you believe? Which one "accords to God"?

That depends on which one is more on the side of what is right. Let's look at the biblical God for just a second. Do you think God is never to be challenged? That God doesn't value human beings for our advice, and arguments, in pursuit of what is right?

Consider Abraham. Yes, Abraham showed meekness before God, but he also challenged God. ("What if there are 10 good people in Sodom? Would you spare them?...") Or consider Moses, who argued against God and had God relent against Israel during the golden calf episode. Or consider Jacob who is given the name Israel (and presumably praised) for wresting with God? ...

These give us the true model of God-human relationship, I think. Thus, if I find something in the Vedas that offers a different answer in an otherwise identical situation to what the biblical God gives, I would see that as the very point of religion and our calling as human beings to raise and debate. i.e. to consider the answers, evaluate them, and discern which of them is right (to the best of our abilities).

So again, there is no one answer to your question. And in fact, if I made a biblical argument, I think the biblical God would be thrilled if we came to the table with a different answer that was arguably better. And if it came from the Vedas, God would call the source text divine!

theophile wrote:
I ask myself, what is it that is most worthy to be called divine? That is deserving of that status?

So it comes down to personal preference?

Of course. Isn't that what we all do? If you don't like the biblical God (just assuming here) is that not because that God, as perceived, goes against your personal values and tastes? i.e. what you think should accord with the most high?

Let's be honest here about how we all approach this stuff. Of course it's personal. But the answer does reveal our preferences, and I think that is extremely important and insightful... To go back to my original answer to the OP, it's all about our values. The bible lays out a clear division between valuing our own self-interests, and working towards those, and valuing life more broadly, and working in the service of others without self regard. (Doing that is what is right... i.e in the interests of life more broadly.)

That value and the works that flow from it, or "love" as the bible calls it, is fundamental. That is also my personal value and why I find such resonance with the biblical God. (And can also find great meaning and clarity in, for instance, Jesus' teachings. Again, to the OP, unless we share that deepest commitment and mindset, biblical teachings will sound like nonsense.)

theophile wrote:

What attributes? What way of life? What convictions? What relationships with other human beings and things in the world? The bible has helped shape that, again, but it is not authoritative.

It sounds a lot like you're inventing your own god here. You're basically telling me how you would like god to be

We all do that based on our own experiences and with the help of various sources (religious texts, etc.) Like it or not, that's the way it works.

The question, as I tried to express above, goes down to what preferences or values the 'gods' that we invent reveal. We need to cut to the heart of the matter, below all the trappings of particular religions or texts, and show and debate what really drives us.

We need to argue on the plane of values and which ones are the right ones to provide a basis for our relationships with each other and the world. i.e. which ones will truly create a world of promise, something akin to what the bible declares.

[theophile]

Lets accept that idea as true for the sake of the argument. I need to have at least SOME wisdom in order to get the greater wisdom of Christian texts:

If you want greater biblical precision, fear of God is the beginning of wisdom... That is the entry point and modicum of wisdom that we need.

The interesting question to me is what it means to fear God. I tend to look at the first instance in the bible for clarity. Adam and Eve when God comes calling: "We were afraid because we were naked, so we hid."

In other words, instead of fearing God, or staying out in the open (naked and afraid), Adam and Eve ran and hid. They put their trust in something other than God, a hiding place in this case, and in the process pacified and so nullified their fear of God.

This is important context for me. The movement toward insularity and pursuing ones own interests (instead of trusting others to care and provide) annuls the modicum of wisdom that is the beginning of wisdom. It is the beginning of the fall into sin and the hard consequences that God subsequently declares.

1. Why blame me for not being wise to begin with?

Did I blame you? Look, we are all wise in this way to begin with. As children, we all naturally fear God. Again, see Adam and Eve when they were naked and unashamed. The natural posture of children is to be open. To be trusting. So much so that we have to tell them such things as "don't talk to strangers" or "don't eat from that tree." Not because they will surely die if they do so, but because there are dangers in the world that children do not yet properly fear. Their natural wisdom is a naive sort, and requires safeguards. But we all have it, to begin with.

So why blame you for losing this wisdom that you once had? Well, I could blame you because we all have a head on our shoulders and can see the results of our actions. We can see that the turn toward insularity and setting up barriers between us and God (and the world more broadly) will make the world a poorer, darker place. Especially as everyone else responds in kind and this attitude becomes pervasive.

I could blame you for not seeing that, and for not opening yourself back up to the world. For not giving yourself in service to the world without self-regard. For not trusting in the world despite your fears, and seeing that this is the way toward a better life for all.

But I could blame myself just as much, so don't take that as any kind of personal judgment.

2. Is not being wise to begin with a sin?

I think it is the beginning of sin. Just as fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, the nullification of that fear through the turn toward insularity and seeking one's own protection / interest is the beginning of sin.

3. How does a person gain in wisdom?

By maintaining that open posture. By being open to new ideas. By openly speaking ones mind. By setting ones own interest aside and thinking beyond oneself, and pursuing that which is in the best interest of life of every kind. By not turning away and closing off. By not becoming rigid in ones opinion. By not seeking ones own interests and personal welfare / gain.

4. How did you determine that Christian texts are wise at all? What is your criteria for "wisdom"?

Wisdom is that which will make this world a better place for life of every kind - not just my own life or those I selectively care about. The bible reveals wisdom because it rightly expresses this value and way of life. It rightly proclaims the promise should we all work together in wisdom: a world of peace and richness for all, where life of every kind has a place and can flourish.

5. And of course, since we are talking about wisdom, could you define that, so we know what you are talking about?

To reiterate, wisdom is that which will make this world a better place for life of every kind - not just my own life of those I selectively care about.

The beginning of wisdom is the fear of God, which means adopting an open (bi-directional) posture in the world. Setting aside self interests and putting full trust in God / the world (with all ones fears). Working in the service of every kind of life in the world...

That is wisdom.