Quote: jonathan_206 said: The Bible is a book with writing, just like any other book.
fireworks:
Trying to justify that the Bible's objective meaning is easily interpreted and evident by asserting that it is just like any other book is misleading and not true.
No, it's not misleading at all. And when we compare it to other ancient historical artifacts we find it is more reliable and has more evidence then them all by leaps and bounds. 24,000+ pieces of manuscript and so much secondary and tertiary evidence. It would take weeks to talk about it all surely. Scripture is not ambiguous and although there are some parts that are hard to interpret for some, once someone is aquianted with scripture it's not true at all. It's probably much more difficult to try to understand shakespear.
Quote: Fact is, the Bible is not just like any other book. The Bible's unique history belies the notion of it being like any other book, where one author sits down and writes an organized, thoughtful conveyance of intended meaning.
It's what the Bible talks about, the words and message it has that makes it so different. And your last sentence I think is really a vague attack because of your overall dislike for the bibles content and message.
Quote: jonathan_206:
It's not as if it's awash in fundamentally ambiguous language like alchemy or something. The bible is able to be determined and it's doctrines are not ambiguous.
fireworks:
What is contained within The Bible is within a wide range of interpretation, not to mention numerous translations over thousands of years. If the doctrines within it are not ambigious, it, quite likely, has less to do with original expression, and moreso with how individuals have expressed what was once written.
It's true that many people have interpereted the bible differently from one another. And this supports what I have already admitted, that bias is the culprit. But this by itself does not make my belief subjective.It is either right or wrong, just like everybody elses. But in reality the bible does not have a wide range of interpretation, and the bibles we have to day for the most part are not extremely different in my opinion at all. And the important thing is that there is a consensus in the manuscripts, and there is that for sure.
Quote: Of course, what is in question is the ideas accessible right now, as the question as to what was once intended, or whether or not the writings are "the word of g*d", are entirely unanswerable questions.
that's your opinion that they are entirely unanswerable questions.I believe that is false.
ThQuote: e point to be made, clearly, is that, within the present form of the writings, there is still a wide range of potential interpretation - there is no clear, objective meaning that is being conveyed, especially when we are referring to an overall, concise, all-inclusive "doctrine".
There is no way I know of that I can convince you that there is a clear objective meaning if you have read scripture and come to this conclusion. But there are many people who disagree with you, including myself, and why don't you click on my sig and see how ambiguous that is. Not abiguous at all.
Quote: jonathan_206
But it is true that it deals with matters of faith and belief, and for this reason it is important to recognize how great an effect personal bias plays. But personal bias is inescapable, thus it is most reasonable to reocognise your own bias. The bibles doctrine is not undefendable, it is not undebatable, and for those that know it, it can be explained in concepts able to be grasped by anyone. The reason people have so many different interpretations, is because of their personal bias.Reason dictates that the bible does not support so many interpretations.
Whether God wrote the bible or not, it's theme is very singular and coherent and the bible's interpetation rests upon the single interpretation that was intended to be conveyed through the words by the Author.
fireworks:
This is all very true, and I don't deny that there isn't valuable meaning and expression within the Bible. I am simply casting doubt onto to the idea that there is a singular, clearly accessible, overall theme, or outlined path. I find specific meanings and specific intention spread throughout, which each individual considers and interprets how they will relate the meaning together to form their path. I do not see one path contained or expressed within it.

That's remarkable to me, because I think for anyone who has studied scripture intently and learned about the story of the bible, it is that It is singular in God's purpose of salvation of humanity from sin and death, pointing forward to Jesus Christ. Everything in the bible is directly or indirectly related with God's plan of salvation for humanity.
Quote: jonathan_206
A real Christian is one who really obeys Christ and obeys the doctrine of Christ. Thats it. To understand who a real Christian is, read the bible and find out. But take heed to Jesus' warning : be careful how you hear.
fireworks:
This is another point that I am clearly critical of. There is no "real" Christian. The identity of being a Christian is one that each individual applies to themselves or others for their own reasons, associating with that identity their own meaning. It means something different to everyone, and there clearly cannot be an objective meaning. The idea of how one obeys Christ and a conception of a doctrine is different for everyone.
No, it's not different for everyone. It's all about discernment and having an open heart. The ink on the paper, the message is written in coherent language for people to understand. It is objective. If people have a different opinion about that material, that does not make it subjective. It is weighed against the evidence. That's how real science works. We can read and understand and come to a common understanding about a lot of other materials, even more difficult to understand.
Quote: There is only you, and the ideas that you choose to live in relation to, your path. There is no "real Christian"; there is no "Christian". These are merely abstract terms that could never define the totality and culmination of one's own existance, and applying them to our own nature serves no beneficial end.
A real Christian is one who obeys Christ. That is the definition that scripture gives itself.
Quote: jonathan_206:
How is this confusing? Voting necessitates pushing your beliefs, your morality, your personal convictions on others, for better or for worse. This is not an abstract conception. Voting necessitates judging others. When you vote, you actively push your beliefs on others, including what you think they should be arrested for, and condemned. You might just as well sit in a judges seat, and interpret the law, and judge others.
fireworks:
People make decisions, whether or not they choose to cast a vote. Voting is no different than any other action one takes that affects the course of one's life. The fact that individuals make decisions cannot be denied. Everyone makes judgement - the simple fact that you personally make assertions regarding whether or not an individual is a "real Christian" demonstrates this very clearly.
voting is A LOT different than merely stating an opinion. That is not judging. When you vote, you are actively judging others through the tax system, police system, justice department, laws etc. I do not, I must not go around judging others in this way, this is judging others, really judging others, and I'm sad that you cannot make the distinction.
Quote: jonathan_206Z:
Not only this, but the bible in obvious language, tells us Christians to mind our own business, and not be involved in worldly matters. What greater worldly matter then democracy?
fireworks:
Define worldly matters. Everything we engage in as human beings is a "worldly matter". 
That's not true, and that's not reasonable. If you disagree, I don't know how to convince you except to say that you've entirely missed the entire context that passage is in.
|