What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #1

Post by Justin108 »

JehovahsWitness wrote: those that interpret the bible correctly will never find any of its statements contradict proven scientific fact.
What is the "correct" way to interpret the Bible? Is there an objective "correct" way to interpret the Bible? If so, what methods should one employ to interpret the Bible "correctly"?

Let's use Genesis 1 as an example. What is the correct interpretation of Genesis 1 and what method did you employ to conclude your interpretation?

Specifically...

1. Is Genesis 1 literal or metaphorical? (what method did you use to reach this conclusion?)

2. If it is metaphorical, what is it a metaphor for? (what method did you use to reach this conclusion?)

3. What is your explanation for the Genesis 1 claim that God created plants before he created the sun? (and again, what method did you use to reach this conclusion?)

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #161

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Benoni wrote:
Justin108 wrote:
Benoni wrote: [Replying to post 22 by rikuoamero]

1 Corinthians 2:
14But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.
Suppose the Quran had a verse like that. How would you respond?
I really do not care what the Quran has to say.
Why, please?
Anybody, please
Regards

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #162

Post by paarsurrey1 »

2timothy316 wrote:
rikuoamero wrote:
Which is following the footsteps of Jesus as closely as possible. What exactly does this mean? I presume you don't chase out moneylenders/merchants from churches,
Um yes exactly what I mean. You will find no merchants or banks in a Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm not responsible for what happens in other people's religions or churches. Just like Jesus didn't go into the temples of the Roman gods and try to straighten them out. Yet I am responsible for what happens in my congregation. It doesn't have to be whips to accomplish this either.
suggest that adulterous women be struck first by sinless people or get yourself nailed to a piece of wood.
I am guessing you are referring to John 8:7 about the woman. Are you aware that John 8:1-11 is widely accepted as not from John? This is why it is important to study the Bible. Otherwise one can quote something that is not from actually in Jesus' footsteps.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and ... n_adultery

However, if we were still under the Mosaic Law then yes I'd follow it just as Jesus did. Yet Jesus ended that law so Christians are not under law to enforce Justice. That has been given to the world's governments. (Romans 13:1)

I would indeed allow myself to be nailed to a piece of wood and yes even die for following Jesus' footsteps. There is no greater thing I could give for my God than giving my life to save my follow man. This doesn't mean killing in war as other have perverted this sacrifice. As Jesus killed no one in war while on Earth.
Obviously there are things that Jesus reportedly did that you yourself think or feel no inclination to do, so why say the above? It would be a different matter if you had said you try to emulate Jesus generally, but no. You said "as closely as possible", which obviously isn't true.
You are putting words in people's mouths. What do you know of me? Nothing! Just because you couldn't endure doesn't mean no one else can. :roll:

All true Christians I know of strive to follow Jesus footsteps as closely as possible. Yet since we are imperfect and this world is not setup to help follow Jesus' footsteps, no one can do it perfectly.
Doing this has never failed to produce a happy and secure life.

Except for when it has. You have made the claim that emulating Jesus never fails to produce a happy and secure life. I only have to provide ONE example where that isn't the case and the above claim falls apart.
My example is myself. As a child, I tried to emulate Jesus. As a result, my life was not happy and not secure.
As a child? How about as an adult? Matt. 24:13 - “He who endures to the end will be saved.� Just because you stopped enduing doesn't mean following Jesus' footsteps doesn't lead to a better life. The ones I have seen, including myself, have endured trials and came on the other side better than when the trial began. I even have a video about one example of endurance. https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/VODInt ... 07_1_VIDEO

Job is another example. It's not the life of following Jesus that makes things difficult. It is those that oppose that life choice that make life difficult.

Like many others perhaps a life style was forced on you as a child. How are you even sure without enduring, that the life style given to you was the correct one? Or was it the right one but you wanted to follow your own course? Either way, you stopped enduring and without endurance to follow Jesus footsteps there is no path to happiness or even life either. There is only one way. “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." - John 14:6

Satan and wicked people rule for now. They are the cause for any suffering. However, these times will come to an end. "And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.� - Rev 21:4

Until that time, "We are hard-pressed in every way, but not cramped beyond movement; we are perplexed, but not absolutely with no way out; we are persecuted, but not abandoned; we are knocked down, but not destroyed." - 2 Cor 4:8, 9.

“God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear, but along with the temptation he will also make the way out in order for you to be able to endure it.� - 1 Corinthians 10:13

If you have stopped enduring then I have nothing else for you.
Illustration: A person buys an all-you-can-eat buffet meal. He pays and then goes and sits down at a table with his receipt. He has the receipt showing that he can eat as much as he wants but will simply holding on to that receipt feed him? No. He needs to get up and actually go get his food.

"Ask and ye shall receive".
Once received then what? James tells us...

“Become doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves with false reasoning.�—JAMES 1:22.
Just like Jesus didn't go into the temples of the Roman gods and try to straighten them out.

Was it a JW Kingdom Hall where Jesus went, as per NT Bible, to straighten the things? It was not even a Christian temple. Was it, please?
Regards

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #163

Post by paarsurrey1 »

RightReason wrote: [Replying to Justin108]
Do you have any scriptural support that Christ established the Catholic Church specifically?
Sure. Christ established His Church, “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I build my church�. Peter was the first Pope and there has been an unbroken chain of Apostolic succession ever since. Jesus said, “Whoever hears you, hears me, . . . “ “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven�. Jesus said He will remain with His Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Catholic Church meets the four marks of Christ’s Church (which are all mentioned in Scripture) and only the Catholic Church can trace its origin back to the Apostle Peter. All other Christian religions were founded at some other period in history. In fact, many not even until the 1900’s. If we believe Christ’s words that He would remain with His Church and that His Church shall be guided in all truth, then it would be impossible to believe His Church would be hidden or not visible for a period of time – only say to be discovered by someone like George Fox, or Charles Taze Russel, or John Wesley, or John Calvin, or Billy Graham, etc.
Let's suppose for argument sake that the Catholic Church is the "true" Church. Does that mean they cannot make mistakes in interpretation?
It means she cannot make mistakes when speaking ex cathedra. The Church is made up of fallible human beings and therefore those within the Church certainly can make mistakes and screw up – yes, even priests, but Christ promised she would not err in her teachings on matters of faith and morals.
Did the Catholic Church not once teach about the existence of Limbo? And did they not change their mind about it since?
Limbo was never an official teaching of the Church and it actually has not been renounced either. The Church has fully admitted that many theologians tempted to provide a reasonable answer to the question about what happens to babies that die and were never baptized. Some theologians came up with the term limbo to describe the place they said these babies might end up until Christ returns. This answer demonstrates the necessity of Christ’s command that we all be baptized, while realizing it is not the baby’s fault if he/she was not. Clearly, heaven is for those Baptized into Christ’s Church. Babies who die before this was able to occur might have to wait in a holding pattern. It actually makes sense and it is still permissible for Catholics to believe this possibility. Of course, the Church admits this is simply something we do not know and have not been told. It could be that God takes this children straight to heaven giving them a Baptism of intent. Who knows? The limbo term is something that simply was suggested as a theory and took off and came to be widely known and accepted. The Church qualified however that it is not official Church teaching.
Church
Did Jesus ever speak the word Church from his mouth, please?
It was not in use in Judea in Jesus' time. Was it, please?
Anybody, please.
Regards

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #164

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 29 by 2timothy316]
You are putting words in people's mouths. What do you know of me? Nothing! Just because you couldn't endure doesn't mean no one else can.
Going back through the posts written, you did indeed say you tried to follow Jesus 'as closely as possible'. You even repeat in the sentence after this. So want to explain again how this is me putting words in people's mouths?
All true Christians I know of strive to follow Jesus footsteps as closely as possible. Yet since we are imperfect and this world is not setup to help follow Jesus' footsteps, no one can do it perfectly.
So what is stopping you from being nailed to a piece of wood? What is stopping you from conjuring up fishes and loaves? What is stopping you from entering churches, not necessarily those belonging to Jehovah's Witnesses, and throwing out merchants of any stripe?
As a child? How about as an adult? Matt. 24:13 - “He who endures to the end will be saved.�
Moving the goalposts. You made a claim about emulating Jesus leads to happiness and security. You previously had not talked about this 'saved' business (whatever exactly that is).
The ones I have seen, including myself, have endured trials and came on the other side better than when the trial began.
Please do not intimate that I have not endured trials. I had to endure much, and trying to follow Jesus actually made things worse, instead of better.
Like many others perhaps a life style was forced on you as a child.
Like what?
How are you even sure without enduring, that the life style given to you was the correct one?
I did endure. What I used to endure helped in my situation where trying to emulate Jesus would not have.
Either way, you stopped enduring and without endurance
To quote a certain someone

What do you know of me? Nothing!
There is only one way.
How do you know that? Have you examined the lives of each and every human? How do you know that this "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" line (which can mean anything and everything, it doesn't actually detail any specific actions one is to take) actually is the ONLY way to get through life's challenges?
It may help some people, it may have helped you...but everyone? The ONLY way?
Satan and wicked people rule for now.
Why look for a 'Satan' when the wicked people are there plain to see? I don't need to invent supernatural demons to explain away a lust for power in (some) humans.
They are the cause for any suffering.
So if a kindly old grandma slips on the ice one winter's morning and cracks her skull open on the pavement...the devil did that? Wicked people in power are responsible for that?
However, these times will come to an end.
People have been promising that suffering will come to an end for as long as there have been people who have suffered. It might have escaped your attention...but suffering people still exist. When the umpteenth person claims that their holy book says that any day now the rapture will come and that this time, THIS person has got it right...I kind of stopped paying attention to it.
If you have stopped enduring then I have nothing else for you.
Who ever said I had stopped enduring? Might it be that because I said I no longer applied the methods you prefer, you took that to mean I had given up?
Once received then what? James tells us...

“Become doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves with false reasoning.�—JAMES 1:22.
Again...presuming I did nothing. If you had met my childhood self, describing me as perhaps being more devout than anyone on this site would have been a fair assessment.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

paarsurrey1
Sage
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm

Post #165

Post by paarsurrey1 »

Justin108 wrote:
ttruscott wrote: From my Christian pov the only correct way to interpret the Bible is to find out from GOD what HE meant when HE had it written that way...
So the only way to interpret the Bible is to assume from the get-go that it's the word of God?

Back to the dilemma I pointed out in post 51. In order for Jack to believe in the Holy Spirit, he must first believe the Bible. In order to believe the Bible, he must first believe in the Holy Spirit. How is Jack ever expected to believe if the Holy Spirit only comes after belief yet is also necessary for belief?

Maybe this same logic applies to Islam? That must be why you're not a Muslim. You forgot to read the Quran with the a priori assumption that it's the word of God.
Maybe this same logic applies to Quran?
That is not the case with Islam. Please don't generalize it to Quran.
Regards

liamconnor
Prodigy
Posts: 3170
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 pm

Post #166

Post by liamconnor »

[Replying to post 165 by paarsurrey1]
That is not the case with Islam. Please don't generalize it to Quran.
I challenge this. Everything I know about Islam (from Muslims as well as lectures) testifies that the Koran is the Word of Allah, not to be questioned, but to be obeyed. Now in Christianity we have people who don't believe everything written in the Bible. Luke and Matthew have Jesus born of a virgin: There are some Christians who doubt this; they have no trouble accepting that Matthew and Luke, being human biographers, were either including bits from the 'populace' or were inventing their own stories to support their motif 'Jesus, Son of God'. Yet still, these skeptical Christians believe that Jesus was crucified and risen.

Now, are there examples of Muslims who disbelieve portions of the Koran? For instance, are there Muslims who doubt that Mohammed actually received the Koran, but still, there is one God, Allah?

liamconnor
Prodigy
Posts: 3170
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 pm

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #167

Post by liamconnor »

[Replying to post 164 by rikuoamero]
Quote:
All true Christians I know of strive to follow Jesus footsteps as closely as possible. Yet since we are imperfect and this world is not setup to help follow Jesus' footsteps, no one can do it perfectly.
So what is stopping you from being nailed to a piece of wood? What is stopping you from conjuring up fishes and loaves? What is stopping you from entering churches, not necessarily those belonging to Jehovah's Witnesses, and throwing out merchants of any stripe?
This is a ridiculous attack. I have not read Timothy's comments which provoked it, and so maybe you are just reacting to nonsense, but I advise you return to more intellectually respectable assaults. 'What is stopping you from getting crucified?' Obviously, history. 'What is stopping you from multiplying fish and loaves?' Obviously, you don't have the power. Nor is there any unambiguous promise of Jesus that all Christians could. 'What is stopping you from throwing out merchants from churches'? Are you serious?

liamconnor
Prodigy
Posts: 3170
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 pm

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #168

Post by liamconnor »

paarsurrey1 wrote:
RightReason wrote: [Replying to Justin108]
Do you have any scriptural support that Christ established the Catholic Church specifically?
Sure. Christ established His Church, “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I build my church�. Peter was the first Pope and there has been an unbroken chain of Apostolic succession ever since. Jesus said, “Whoever hears you, hears me, . . . “ “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven�. Jesus said He will remain with His Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Catholic Church meets the four marks of Christ’s Church (which are all mentioned in Scripture) and only the Catholic Church can trace its origin back to the Apostle Peter. All other Christian religions were founded at some other period in history. In fact, many not even until the 1900’s. If we believe Christ’s words that He would remain with His Church and that His Church shall be guided in all truth, then it would be impossible to believe His Church would be hidden or not visible for a period of time – only say to be discovered by someone like George Fox, or Charles Taze Russel, or John Wesley, or John Calvin, or Billy Graham, etc.
Let's suppose for argument sake that the Catholic Church is the "true" Church. Does that mean they cannot make mistakes in interpretation?
It means she cannot make mistakes when speaking ex cathedra. The Church is made up of fallible human beings and therefore those within the Church certainly can make mistakes and screw up – yes, even priests, but Christ promised she would not err in her teachings on matters of faith and morals.
Did the Catholic Church not once teach about the existence of Limbo? And did they not change their mind about it since?
Limbo was never an official teaching of the Church and it actually has not been renounced either. The Church has fully admitted that many theologians tempted to provide a reasonable answer to the question about what happens to babies that die and were never baptized. Some theologians came up with the term limbo to describe the place they said these babies might end up until Christ returns. This answer demonstrates the necessity of Christ’s command that we all be baptized, while realizing it is not the baby’s fault if he/she was not. Clearly, heaven is for those Baptized into Christ’s Church. Babies who die before this was able to occur might have to wait in a holding pattern. It actually makes sense and it is still permissible for Catholics to believe this possibility. Of course, the Church admits this is simply something we do not know and have not been told. It could be that God takes this children straight to heaven giving them a Baptism of intent. Who knows? The limbo term is something that simply was suggested as a theory and took off and came to be widely known and accepted. The Church qualified however that it is not official Church teaching.
Church
Did Jesus ever speak the word Church from his mouth, please?
It was not in use in Judea in Jesus' time. Was it, please?
Anybody, please.
Regards

You have asked this before and it has been answered. Asking it again and again does not reflect well.

Of course Jesus never spoke the word 'Church'. The word 'Church' is English. Jesus didn't speak English.

The Greek word of the bible is pronounced eklesia.

Did Jesus every say 'eklesia'? Probably not. He probably rarely spoke Greek, as he lived in Palestine, in which the predominate language was Aramaic.

Did Jesus ever say an Aramaic word that could be translated into Greek as 'eklesia'? Not unlikely, as this word shows up in the LXX, where it refers to the 'people of God'. Jesus obviously could have talked about 'the people of God'.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #169

Post by JehovahsWitness »

paarsurrey1 wrote: Was it a JW Kingdom Hall where Jesus went, as per NT Bible, to straighten the things? It was not even a Christian temple
Yes, Jesus went to a Kingdom hall.

HALL

Where people meet is not what makes something sacred, the people (church) is what does that. Jesus met with his disciples to discuss scripture, they discussed in the street, in fields, in private home. Jesus true followers do the same. Whether it is a hall
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?

Post #170

Post by JehovahsWitness »

paarsurrey1 wrote:
Just like Jesus didn't go into the temples of the Roman gods and try to straighten them out.

Was it a JW Kingdom Hall where Jesus went, as per NT Bible, to straighten the things?
Jesus did not go to pagan temples of false worship to teach people that they were wrong in what they were doing or try and "straighten them out". If there were mosques in Jesus' days he probaby would 'nt have gone there either.

Jesus visited people in their homes and spoke to people in public streets, in fields and whereever people could be found to help them spiritually ("straighten the things"). Jehovah's Witnesses do just as Jesus and approach people to speak about the truth in the street, at their homes and whereever people can be found.

KINGDOM HALLS are dedicated places of true worship where Christians meet for prayer and fellowship. They are the equivalent of the Synagogues of Jesus' day.



JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply