What is in the Bible. Do you know?

[Tart]

All too often people just assume they know god, and what Christianity is all about. Before i dived into the scripture i assumed I knew what people thought about God. I assumed I knew what was in the Bible. "Just be a good person, and the rest is legend". In fact, i was so confident in this thought that I knew everything i need to know, and would suggest to people I have read the Bible... That i know everything it's about.

It was the Bible that blew those misconceptions out of the water, and blew my mind.... I consider myself lucky I spent 6 months in solitary confinement, because I actually had the time to read the Bible....

But lets face it, the Bible is HUGE, and many parts are REALLY hard to get through. People give up, people dont read it, and lot of people dont think they even need to read it to understand God... In fact, im skeptical on some people in this forum, that claim they do study the Bible, and have read it, but really havent...


For these reasons I have narrowed down scripture to 3 books (totaling about 75 pages)... If you havent read the scripture, if its very long and you never read anyways, if you dont even think of reading it... Dont be quick to throw it away...

Here is the challenge for all those people... Pick 1 Gospel (Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John), the Book of Acts, and the Romans Epistle... Read those 3 books and you will have a decent knowledge of Christianity... It is 75 pages...

This topic was sparked by trying to talk to my neighbors, which was suggested to have a Bible study... Read those 3 books, and come back and comment on what your thoughts are on each book...

A topic for debate... What is the inspiration of the authors? What is an explanation for these books? What do you think about each book? (Please be as detailed as possible, like by using quotes, or verses, trying to understand why he author wrote what he did, what was the inspiration, etc...)

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 27 by PinSeeker]

To me, the criteria need to be defined before I can even begin to answer. 'Criteria' doesn't even seem relevant here, honestly; it seems to me what we should be talking about is the method(s) used to arrive at a conclusion.

That is precisely what you should be doing. Explain the criteria or the method to show how you can justify your conclusion as being the correct one while others are therefore incorrect.

AH!!! Method! Criteria and method are two different things, brunumb. Maybe you agree; maybe you're coming around after all. Yes, the method of arriving at the understanding is the relevant thing, here. Certainly there are criteria that enter in in the course of the method -- like which conclusions are proven correct based on the explanations revealed through the course of the research. This is true education.

You have explained neither.

Ah, but I have. I was very clear on my method. See above.

There is no reason to conclude that you are any more correct than anyone else. You might as well just spin a wheel and go with the what comes up.

How can you say that without any thought or insight into what my understanding is and the research and reason I have employed in arriving at it? I mean, you can't, really. You can think you can, and try to convince yourself of it and even be successful in doing so. But alas, you can't. Again, I don't expect it of you, or anyone else on this forum, actually.

[ElCodeMonkey]

And that's exactly what I expected from you. The irony is, what you're basically saying is, "I don't want to try to understand, because well, without even without having tried to understand it or even thinking about it, much less having actual conversations with others who have different viewpoints on it, I'm right about it being stupid and making no sense, and therefore I'm not going to waste my time." If you want to do that to yourself, I mean, in my opinion, that's too bad, but it's fine with me, man. You're your own man.

Again, I don't expect it of you, or anyone else on this forum, actually.

Moderator Warning

You are still addressing the people rather than the topics. This is in violation of the forum's rules. Stick to topics.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 30 by PinSeeker]

Yeah -- again, the point is, the asking for "criteria" doesn't even make any sense with regard to understanding Revelation... or comprehending anything.

Of course it makes sense. You made the following statement:
"It's very, very misunderstood, even by so many Christians. Which is a shame, but should not be so; it's really not hard to understand at all."
For you to say that you must have some way of determining the correct understanding and dismiss all others. You do that by taking each expressed understanding and apply a set of criteria that need to be met before that understanding can be accepted as correct or rejected as incorrect. Just accepting what someone else has said because it agrees with your understanding is not valid.

Well this is for sure not what my decision is based on. About anything. This makes it sound like the understanding I have is different than anybody else's, which is ridiculous. It's not "my" understanding, as if no one else else has ever had it.

"Your" understanding means the understanding that "you" have of something, not that you own it exclusively. Give us an example of precisely what your decision was based on when you reached the conclusion that the understanding you reached was in fact correct and that those who had a different understanding were incorrect.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 31 by PinSeeker]

Yes, the method of arriving at the understanding is the relevant thing, here. Certainly there are criteria that enter in in the course of the method...

Having admitted that there are criteria that need to be applied, could you now please specify those criteria as per the original question.

-- like which conclusions are proven correct based on the explanations revealed through the course of the research.

That statement says nothing about the criteria applied. It actually says nothing meaningful at all. How can conclusions be proven correct based on revealed explanations that also lead others to reach different conclusions? You have yet to establish how one distinguishes between correct and incorrect explanations and conclusions. As it stands, your decision still just boils down to personal choice and nothing more.

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 30 by PinSeeker]

Yeah -- again, the point is, the asking for "criteria" doesn't even make any sense with regard to understanding Revelation... or comprehending anything.

Of course it makes sense. You made the following statement:
"It's very, very misunderstood, even by so many Christians. Which is a shame, but should not be so; it's really not hard to understand at all."
For you to say that you must have some way of determining the correct understanding and dismiss all others.

Sure I do. It's in the method of gaining and arriving at the correct understanding. It's called comparative analysis, involves research, and comes under the general heading of education. This makes at least three times I've said this. Yes, there's "criteria" for everything, comparative analysis, research, and education included. If you want criteria for that, I think you can probably figure that out for yourself.

Now. If you want to discuss specifics regarding different understandings of Revelation how parts of it are misunderstood and how they should be, then I'm all for that. But something tells me you don't. You just want to argue about "criteria," but hey, maybe I'm wrong about that. If you do, then let me know. If you don't then we're done here.

[PinSeeker]

-- like which conclusions are proven correct based on the explanations revealed through the course of the research.

That statement says nothing about the criteria applied.

Correct; it was not meant to.

As it stands, your decision still just boils down to personal choice and nothing more.

Well, sure, it boils down to personal choice, but personal choice should come only after comparative analysis and careful consideration of differing opinions and the facts on which those differing viewpoints are based. Research. Gathering information from a wide variety of sources. Comparative analysis. Critical thinking. Education is wonderful thing. It helps us make good choices.

Like I say, if you want to discuss Revelation and actually do some real comparative analysis of the different understandings of Revelation so that then you, too, can make a personal choice regarding the correct understanding of it, let me know. Otherwise, good day, brunum. Grace and peace to you.

[Tcg]

Like I say, if you want to discuss Revelation and actually do some real comparative analysis of the different understandings of Revelation so that then you, too, can make a personal choice regarding the correct understanding of it, let me know.

Until a proper criterion is established, discussing "different understandings of Revelation", or anything else for that matter, would simply be an exercise in one displaying their own personal choice in the understandings they prefer.


This endeavor wouldn't bring us any closer to understanding what, if anything, Revelation was intended to convey. It'd simply be a display of individual preferences and opinions.


When facts are preferred, individual preferences and opinions provide nothing of value.



Tcg

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 30 by PinSeeker]

Yeah -- again, the point is, the asking for "criteria" doesn't even make any sense with regard to understanding Revelation... or comprehending anything.

Of course it makes sense. You made the following statement:
"It's very, very misunderstood, even by so many Christians. Which is a shame, but should not be so; it's really not hard to understand at all."
For you to say that you must have some way of determining the correct understanding and dismiss all others.

Sure I do. It's in the method of gaining and arriving at the correct understanding. It's called comparative analysis, involves research, and comes under the general heading of education. This makes at least three times I've said this. Yes, there's "criteria" for everything, comparative analysis, research, and education included. If you want criteria for that, I think you can probably figure that out for yourself.

Now. If you want to discuss specifics regarding different understandings of Revelation how parts of it are misunderstood and how they should be, then I'm all for that. But something tells me you don't. You just want to argue about "criteria," but hey, maybe I'm wrong about that. If you do, then let me know. If you don't then we're done here.

In other words you are completely unable to demonstrate how your conclusions must be correct while others doing the same things as you have reached incorrect conclusions. Got it.

[PinSeeker]

Until a proper criterion is established, discussing "different understandings of Revelation", or anything else for that matter, would simply be an exercise in one displaying their own personal choice in the understandings they prefer.

Nah. It's not even necessary to believe the Word of God to assess which understanding of Revelation is more correct than another.

This endeavor wouldn't bring us any closer to understanding what, if anything, Revelation was intended to convey. It'd simply be a display of individual preferences and opinions.

Classic avoidance.

When facts are preferred, individual preferences and opinions provide nothing of value.

Again, nah. All personal opinions are valuable, even if they're wrong. It's the same with just about any subject you want to discuss, politics, science, history... the list goes on and on. Revelation -- and even Christianity as a whole -- is no different. At the end of the day, everyone makes a personal decision about everything, hopefully after carefully considering, critically analyzing, and sorting through opinions of folks with differing viewpoints present as factual. In this way we draw conclusions regarding whatever the content is and yes, make a personal decision regarding what is true.

[PinSeeker]

In other words you are completely unable to demonstrate how your conclusions must be correct while others doing the same things as you have reached incorrect conclusions. Got it.

Uh, no, brunumb, you have apparently "gotten" the precise opposite from what I was saying... which is purposeful; only the naive would think otherwise. I have offered several times to demonstrate, but so far you -- and now Tcg, and maybe others -- have failed to take me up on it. Like I said, classic avoidance.