homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Should we accept that all scripture is to be accepted as truth? (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Should we accept that all scripture is to be accepted as truth?
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Christian faith is also related to this. Faith is faithfullness to God and trust in his faithfullness to us. It has almost nothing to do with believing a set of statements about God conceptually.

I've just been lurking on this thread observing the debate, but I wanted to say very well put, Stowaway.

Louise

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.


Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stowaway

Ship's scavenger
# 139

 - Posted      Profile for Stowaway   Author's homepage   Email Stowaway   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ta, Louise

--------------------
Warning: Mid-life crisis in progress

Posts: 610 | From: Back down North | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
David
Complete Bastard
# 3

 - Posted      Profile for David     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Jim,

When I need to "do a study" of this material, be assured that you will be the first person I contact.

Keep watching for Hell to freeze over.

In the meantime, how about you look at others' criticism of what you have written. Read them, think about them, and try to interact with them.

That is what "debate" is. All you're doing here is uncritically regurgitating some fringe theology based on poor translation, overstated scriptural univocity and an exclusionary soteriology, coupled with unsupported proof-texting and highly dubious typology.

I can't speak for anyone else, but nothing you have to say is in any way educational - but on the other hand, you won't learn from anyone else here. So I'm wondering what it is you're trying to achieve.


Posts: 3815 | From: Redneck Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks Stowaway for this

quote:
Biblically, truth has to do with trustworthiness. The concept entered our language when we say someone is true. i.e. trustworthy, consistent and faithful. We can say that God is true and Jesus is the truth in the sense that they are committed to us and we can trust them

This concept is Truth as revelation god has revealed himself as truth, is this Barth?
God is truth because he has revealed himself as trustworthy.

It's one weakness is that it starts from a faith perspective and this approach to truth is not open to those outside the faith but we do need a concept of truth to engage with the question and this seems to the best on offer. (well I can't think of anything else)

The next stage is to say that we know this God through his word the Bible which was written by Human beings.

God is truth and this is expressed by Jesus the Bible is not God or Jesus and it is fallible. so we can say the Bible contains the Truth ie it reveals God and his Son.

The Bible reveals the Truth
would seem to be something we could all agree on naturally what this means is a mystery Now it is late I must sleep and I am rambling

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp


Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
David.. I did not really expect to learn a great deal from this board,nor am I here to impose what I believe on others.I have a sound bible teacher whose teaching I do trust.
This is just a place for discussion where people freely air their beliefs I suppose,and leave with the same ideas they came with most of the time.
God himself does not force anyone to believe in Christ,nor does he force the believer to grow in knowledge of the bible,we all have freewill.
all the best Jim

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
David
Complete Bastard
# 3

 - Posted      Profile for David     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Powell:
This is just a place for discussion where people freely air their beliefs I suppose,and leave with the same ideas they came with most of the time.

Wrong.


Posts: 3815 | From: Redneck Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Roger Wait
Shipmate
# 56

 - Posted      Profile for Roger Wait   Email Roger Wait   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SteveWal:
Just thought I'd put my tuppenth in...

The problem with reading doctrine straight out of the Bible, especially NT doctrine from the OT, is that if you'd have asked the writer of that bit of Genesis what "salvation by faith" meant, he would have looked blank. Does that mean it wasn't there? I once saw an anti-apartheid version of Othello. Shakepeare wouldn't have known apartheid if it came up and bit his ankle. Does that mean it isn't possible to read Shakespeare like that? The production was very good.

One thing I do wonder about, though, and that is whether we're sometimes guilty of reading a lot more out of a passage than is necessary. Like that 2 Timothy passage: all it's saying is that scripture is profitable. It's not saying that's always right, inerrant, a great fount of unassailable truth; it's saying it is profitable. I think sometimes we read rather more into things than we need to sometimes, probably because it confirms what we already think.


I couldn't put it much better myself, Steve. One of the greatest ways to misread the Bible is to read it all literally and as if it were all fact. But that's imposing on the text the standards of the 21st century. If we will just read it historically and metaphorically, we'll learn a whole lot more.


--------------------
Roger


Posts: 55 | From: Big Red Land USA | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Powell:
This is just a place for discussion where people freely air their beliefs I suppose,and leave with the same ideas they came with most of the time.

I'll second David -- this is simply not the case.

I have learned a lot from shipmates whose ideas are quite different from mine. I've modified my views on some things and realized I was totally off base on others.


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sam
Shipmate
# 423

 - Posted      Profile for Sam   Author's homepage   Email Sam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I am joining this thread very late, having finished A levels yesterday, so now able to dive headlong into the foray.

This debate about "literalism" etc. is very relevant for me currently. My girlfriend of the last year or so is a literalist Christian whilst I am Church of England (currently) and originally about as opposite as is possible. I am now nowhere near literalist, but have had to give the topic a lot of thought.

Literalism can lead to bad theology. The Bible, in literalist hands, has too often been used as a weapon, both defensively, to prove that people’s personal opinions and prejudices are actually God’s, and as an offensive weapon to deny the opinions and experiences of other people who do not share the same interpretation of ‘God’s Word’. Thus within ‘literalist’ movements there is constant splitting and re-splitting of groups as people begin to question each others’ interpretations of ‘The Word’. This acrimony divides families and communities. I am personally aware of people whose families have disowned them because they decided that in conscience they could no longer continue affiliation with one particular literalist group. The central command of Jesus to ‘love one another as I have loved you’ is lost to the great god ‘Truth’ (as though we could, any of us, know all the truth), which, in reality, masks the old human temptation to be seen to be correct. Yuk.

So it all comes down to love above human wisdom.
We are all human and thus infallible.
Literalist churches attack Roman Catholics (and others) for the emphasis on the authority of the church. But surely in a literalist movement the church has equal authority - the fact that scripture can be interpreted in so many different way surely means that the Church will have to provide its own interpretation which can't be infallibe...can it? Just look at 1 Corinthians for a bit of warning about human "wisdom".

Sorry about the essay - I've just got into the habit with all those exams.

SAM
PS. Isn't Christ the "Word" (logos - see John's Prologue)?

--------------------
Do not be overly righteous,
Nor be overly wise.
[Ecclesiastes 7:16]


Posts: 140 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sam
Shipmate
# 423

 - Posted      Profile for Sam   Author's homepage   Email Sam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry...

I meant "We are all human and thus
fallible" not infallible! Freudian slip.
Yes...the whole thing was bit garbled.
Oh well, hope someone gets what I'm on about.

--------------------
Do not be overly righteous,
Nor be overly wise.
[Ecclesiastes 7:16]


Posts: 140 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
by a new and living way which he inaugurated for us through the veil,that is, his flesh.

I agree with Alan. But there's an easy way to tell. I imagine the Greek gender and case system would clearly show whether it is the veil or the living way which is 'his flesh' - if it's like Latin (which it probably is) then the relative pronoun will inflect to agree with the antecedent.

Any Greek scholars out there?

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.


Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stowaway

Ship's scavenger
# 139

 - Posted      Profile for Stowaway   Author's homepage   Email Stowaway   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
God is truth and this is expressed by Jesus the Bible is not God or Jesus and it is fallible. so we can say the Bible contains the Truth ie it reveals God and his Son.

Yes, the purpose of my post was to point out the meanings of "truth" in it's original context so that we can read the verses and understand them correctly. That is not to say that there are no facts in the Bible!

Is the word of God true? Yes, he has always proved himself trustworthy to me.

The apostles make a great deal of stating, not just the theology, but the facts about Jesus. John spoke of what he had touched, handled and seen about Jesus. Paul gives us an early credal statement consisting of the facts of Jesus' life. Some facts are important. But even in the gospels, events are chosen because they communicate truths that the writer wishes to communicate.

In many of Jesus' stories, he does not say that they are parables, but his disciples understand that they are parables. Does it matter whether they are true or not? The question is not asked. Everyone realises that the story has a purpose.

I sometimes think that literalists defend literal truth so that they do not have to understand the point of the passage. As Spurgeon once said:

quote:
Defend the Bible! I would no more think of defending the Bible than I would of defending a caged lion! The thing to do is to let it out!


--------------------
Warning: Mid-life crisis in progress

Posts: 610 | From: Back down North | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
fadethecat
Apprentice
# 446

 - Posted      Profile for fadethecat   Email fadethecat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree that interpreting the Bible literally can lead to a lot of mistakes; however, if one is interpreting it historically, metaphorically, and in all those other fun ways, it's equally open to misinterpretation. Personally I'd prefer the second, but I suspect that's just because it's easier to support my own beliefs that way. I guess my point is that in something as complex as the Bible, people can misinterpret it to suit their own beliefs no matter how they do it, making the method of interpretation nearly irrelevant. Literally or otherwise, people reading the Bible who wish to consider it the absolute truth will read it as supporting their own views.
Posts: 22 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Manx Taffy
Shipmate
# 301

 - Posted      Profile for Manx Taffy   Email Manx Taffy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Powell:
Steve.. Very sadly The Lake of fire for all eternity!
All the best Jim.

(1st posting so unsure about UBB etc!

Sorry to go back to a posting of two pages ago but I think it is fundamental to the debate.

Jim's reply is I think based on a literal interpretation of the bible. Howver if what he says is true and people are literally sent to a lake of everlasting flame if they do not believe in Christ (even if they have not heard of him?) - then myself and many other Christians I am sure would have great dificulty in worshipping such a god and thus end up in the lake!

I believe the bible contains much truth but is not every word is literally true. We should use the bible along with the many other gifts at our disposal to increase our faith and improve our Christian life.

One of these gifts is very much the experience of the Church ie the many Christians who have gone before us and are with us today pondering the same questions.


Posts: 397 | From: Isle of Man | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sam
Shipmate
# 423

 - Posted      Profile for Sam   Author's homepage   Email Sam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well said!

Surely the centre of Christianity is that magic word relationship. It is not something that is finite and contained within the pages of a book, however important that book may be. Our relationship with Christ is still continuing now.

--------------------
Do not be overly righteous,
Nor be overly wise.
[Ecclesiastes 7:16]


Posts: 140 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Steve G
Shipmate
# 65

 - Posted      Profile for Steve G   Email Steve G   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's hard to see a middle way between accepting the bible in its totality (tho not necessarily literally) and being selective in our acceptance of it. If we go down the selective path, what criteria are we using to make our selection? Whatever grid or filter we use is inevitably elevated above scripture in order to interpret it. And the danger is, of course, that our personal preferences become the final criteria so that we are effectively insulated from the bible ever really challenging us.

I'm always struck how central scripture was to Jesus earthly ministry. From his temptation in the wilderness to the road to Emmaus, Jesus was constantly quoting and teaching the Old Testament. How odd that God himself should root his ministry in words that we so often dismiss as purely human, or whatever.


Posts: 168 | From: Exeter | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SteveWal
Shipmate
# 307

 - Posted      Profile for SteveWal   Email SteveWal   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The problem is that we are always selective in our use of it. Fundamentalists are as selective as liberals. And for the same reason: they like to bolster their own position by quoting from the Bible.

And I don't think we should discount the Holy Spirit's ability to constantly challenge us, both through scripture and through what our consciences are saying. It took real guts in the 18th/19th century to say that God is against slavery, and there isn't a strong Biblical case against. I think most Christians would see that as a case of the Holy Spirit revealing something new of God to the world.

Today, that challenge might be coming from the gay christian movement, or the green movement, or from the third world. But it's still there: the Holy Spirit is still blowing through us. And boy, can that wind get hot.

--------------------
If they give you lined paper to write on, write across the lines. (Russian anarchist saying)


Posts: 208 | From: Manchester | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pete
Shipmate
# 88

 - Posted      Profile for Pete   Email Pete   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
All you're doing here is uncritically regurgitating some fringe theology based on poor translation, overstated scriptural univocity and an exclusionary soteriology, coupled with unsupported proof-texting and highly dubious typology.

(ironic) Woo-hoo! That torrent of big difficult words will surely put the farmboy fundy in his place! (/ironic)

Actually what Jim is attempting to articulate in his endearingly bald fashion is not some "fringe theology" but a fairly standard line of evangelical exegesis.

Jim, I think you need to appreciate that a large percentage of people using these boards do NOT come from the type of theological background that you have, and are likely to ask serious questions about the things you write. It really is not very helpful to just assert what you believe without being prepared to answer specific questions. You need to try and engage with real debate, not just repeat what your pastor told you. Maybe you think people here are a bunch of liberal heathen and you are here to show them the truth? I don't know. But try talking to people, not AT them, otherwise all that happens is people get mad and start hacking each other.

--------------------
A dog's not just for Christmas
There's plenty left on Boxing Day


Posts: 187 | From: Shrewsbury/Birmingham | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Laura
General nuisance
# 10

 - Posted      Profile for Laura   Email Laura   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Host hat /on]

quote:
Maybe you think people here are a bunch of liberal heathen and you are here to show them the truth?

Though if this is the case, this board is also not the place for crusading.

--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm


Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Pete,
Thanks for your comments,it would be very difficult if not impossible to explain Bible truth to anyone if they do not accept the the bible as truth in the first place.
I believe that some people choose to reject Christ,and that we should not try to force them to change their minds,but certainly explain the gospel to them if we have a chance.
As for the Christian who rejects the bible as truth,I am convinced that there is nothing I can or should do except encourage them to do serious study,but only if they request it.
Question is what am I doing on here in the first place?
The answer is I have doubts about that, I suppose the truth is I had hoped to encourage someone to accept the bible as truth.
In fact I dont seem to be having much success,and I am concerned that I may harden the attitude of those who prefer their own ideas over what the bible says,and If I tried to explain in detail what I believe that only results in being called extreme.
What to me is simple basics others consider wayout.
I really am not threatened in any way by what people say,but am concerned that that I may make things worse.
Old English saying "You can take a horse to water but you cant make him drink"
All the best Jim.

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To all concerned,
My presence on here has stirred up attacks on my Pastor and his Church by the posting of a web that makes really stupid claims.
I am very dogmatic in what I believe,and will not accept what I consider to be liberal views.
I have become convinced that I have nothing to say that that is of interest to most people on here,and therefore should leave in peace(no hard feelings though)
If anyone who reads this gets to a stage in life when the suffering is to much,please consider that the bible is truth,and has answers for you.
I wish all of you the very best of everything,
Adios Jim Powell.

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
TC
Shipmate
# 70

 - Posted      Profile for TC   Email TC   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Jim,

I've read through most of your posts and have come to the conclusion that your theological stance is very much grounded in the Word of Faith stream of teaching.

Am I correct in this assumption?

I believe I am as my foundational teaching many moons ago was gleaned via the likes of Copeland, Hagan, et al which is why I can see how you arrive at the conclusions you do.

However, since then I have had to completely revise how I view the bible, my faith and ultimately my relationship with God for I realised that I had not thought through any of this for MYSELF! I listenend to tapes, read books and assumed that these men had a handle on the word that was ultimate and right.

I don't hold that view anymore and one of the main reasons why is because they will blatently tell you they are the only ones with such knowledge and insight into the word. It is a very elitist attitude and very dangerous ground they walk on.

You will not convince anyone here of your views Jim - least of all me. But I understand where you are coming from and I'll only say this to you. You 'Pastor' is not the only man with the ability to teach you from the word. If you put yourself in that position and not search this out for yourself you miss out on a much wider richness and experience of God.

I hope I've not offended.

TC ...

--------------------
'Perhaps the dream is dreaming us ... ' Sting, Soul Cages


Posts: 131 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm sorry you don't want to debate what are highly arguable points. But the net is a big place -- I'm sure there are fora where you'll be happy.

We too wish you well.


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
TC,
I have never seen a Pastor on TV that is anyway near what I consider to be accurate most of them are pathetic.I do not follow Copeland or Hagan or Benny Hinn or any of the TV people.
I belong to An Independent Church that seeks only accurate teaching not money,or fame just truth alone,a rare thing these days.
Bye Jim.

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi Jim It would be sad if you left us but all the best you said
quote:
Thanks for your comments,it would be very difficult if not impossible to explain Bible truth to anyone if they do not accept the the bible as truth in the first place.


Do you accept the idea that the Bible reveals the truth of God and his Son Jesus(which is naturally hard to grasp from a non faith perspectice).
If your understanding of truth is something else please explain?

Any way Jim how do you read the bible? this is one way which you or other people might be intrested.
When It comes to reading the bible. here is a simple exegetical tool to aid understanding of any passage. (it is I guess a protestant narrative approach)

First read the passage as if it was the only passage of the bible you have only ever read write down the key claims key events assess what form of literature it is if possible is it a song history ect?

Reread it in the Light of related passages int he same book. What difference does this make?
Re-read it in the Light of related passage for instance if reading from Kings see what chronicles or the prophets say about the same events.
Does this change our understanding and then ask yourselves why?
Grab hold of a book on the said passage and read that.
Look at the passage in the light of the the relevant section either hebrew Bible or NT then in the Light of the whole bible note down the changes in your understanding and see why. Finally look it in the Light of the doctrine of your own particular branch of the church (creeds etc) write down the differences in how you understand the bible.
As we move through the stages we realise how the understanding changes and the bible cahnges us. This is part of hermeneutics

(now that everyone has gone to sleep who read the above )

Jim do you find this method of reading the bible acceptable? If not why not?

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp


Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Chapman
unregistered


 - Posted            Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Heb. 4:12....2 Tim. 3:16-17.....2 Tim. 2:15....1 Cor. 2:16.

I do realize that my posting of these few passages will be ignored for the most part by the majority of you who believe the Bible is a hit & miss sort of book that shouldn't be used for a literal, spiritual guide, & that you have the right to 'pick & choose' from the Word what you believe. For those of you who fit in this category, may I offer some more of Christ's teaching concerning you.....John 7:16-18.

The Bible is the only source of God's teachings & doctrines. Dispute the Word if you want to, after all, you have you free will to do so. But Christ tells it like it is in vs. 18. You may ignore the Bible and dispute it's literal meaning. But you are only seeking your own glory from your fellow man, and Christ states that you are unrighteous, and we know what becomes of the ones who have not the righteousness of Christ......Mat. 25:46.

M.C.


IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thankyou Max chapman you approach to the bible is intresting If you believe Bible is all literal how do you deal with Ecclesiates 9:5 and 1:1. would you agree with the literal meaning of these verses or not?

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp

Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nightlamp,
Having said goodbye,why am I still on here?Well you have been fair and reasonable so I will answer your last question.
Bluntly the believer who rejects the authority of a God given pastor or the bible has no chance of ever living the Christian way of life,and will receive divine discipline all of his life then die and go to heaven never having glorified God.
Rejection of Gods deligated authority of pastor teacher is a handycap that many suffer from,and the arrogant pride in ones own opinion is a disaster that causes so many believers to live such a pathetic life of
fear and confusion.
1Peter5:5 states be under the authority of your pastor,and tells us that God makes war on the arrogent.
Read the bible for yourself?I have met believers who do that ,and they are all in bad shape not even knowing that they are saved for example.
Humility = acceptance of types of authority!
Starts with parents,teachers,laws of the land,traffic lights,commanding officers,courts,husbands;The Bible,Pastors, God the Holy Spirit.
Jails are full of arrogent types.
Hell is full of arrogant types who rejected the convicting ministry of God the Holy Spirit at gospel hearing.
Our Nation declines because arrogant Christians reject the plan of God.
Arrogance accepts no authority.
All the best and bye Jim.

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
uh jim?

quote:
Bluntly the believer who rejects the authority of a God given pastor or the bible has no
chance of ever living the Christian way of life,and will receive divine discipline all of his life
then die and go to heaven never having glorified God.


if they go to heaven anyway, then whats your point?

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!


Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tony
Apprentice
# 318

 - Posted      Profile for Tony   Email Tony   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi, All,

Time to get a few facts out in the open. . .

Jim Powell (and Max Chapman - wondered when he was going to turn up) are members of the Berachah church, run by 'Colonel' R. B. Thieme. This church runs a worldwide tape ministry based on Thieme's own interpretation of the Bible from the original languages. Whilst Thieme's academic record is not in doubt, his teaching and discipling methods are - as anyone who has visited

Questioning R. B. Thieme, Jr.'s Berachah Church

will now understand.

Thieme is the only Christian pastor I know who:

  • Writes all his own teaching material
  • Discourages his followers from reading the Bible on their own
  • Discourages his followers from using any other material
  • Justifies abortion from the Bible
  • Teaches that 'good Bible doctrine' is what God wants for His people
  • ...I could go on

Jim, having moved here from another board and seen what happened to JohnDM, has been very restrained here and has avoided breaking commandments 8 & 9, and therefore 1.

Jim's pastor teaches that anyone who desires good bible teaching will be provided with such by God. If that person is led by God to Thieme then surely, the logic goes, to turn away from that pastor would be to reject God's choice of pastor! Divine discipline must inevitably follow for those who disobey God (I'm serious; 'divine discipline' is a teaching of this church).

This is why Jim cannot contemplate, discuss or accept the shipmates answers where they differ from what he has been taught. Talk about being caught between the Rock and a hard place!

In His Name,

Tony


Posts: 32 | From: England | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Speaking once again in my official capacity as a host of Purgatory:

Jim Powell has only narrowly avoided violating the Ship's Third Commandment -- don't crusade -- up to this point. But this last post is really crossing the line. Jim, if you're not willing to debate because you don't think this is an issue that is arguable, then you are on the wrong board.

Max Chapman, you are already in violation of the Third Commandment. Please go read it. If you don't think that the way people should read the Bible is a debatable issue, that there are points of view other than your own that are valid, then you are on the wrong board.

Please take me seriously, folks. This is a debate board, not a place for lecturing, sermonizing, or crusading. Anyone who insists on doing so will have his/her account terminated.


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you jim for your words I now understand where you coming from
you said
quote:
Bluntly the believer who rejects the authority of a God given pastor or the bible has no chance of ever living the Christian way of life,and will receive divine discipline all of his life then die and go to heaven never having glorified God.
Rejection of Gods deligated authority of pastor teacher is a handycap that many suffer from,and the arrogant pride in ones own opinion is a disaster that causes so many believers to live such a pathetic life of fear and confusion.
1Peter5:5 states be under the authority of your pastor,and tells us that God makes war on the arrogent.

Analytically the approach to scripture is actually very similar to the Roman Catholic Church with the idea that before the Bible is understood it must be viewed in the Light of some set of preconcieved doctrine (I am not being saying something is wrong or right I am simply being analytical). Naturally the doctrine that your church uses is radically different but the hermeneutic is very similar and it appears to be given with greater authority than the Pope. It is that Kind of doctrine that many good reformists died to get rid of.

It is intresting that one of the best teachers I have known (he was stolen by california )His wish was for us to Know the scripture and to love it for ourselves I regret that you are unable to do this I pray that you will learn to love the Bible for what it is so the truth will set you free.

The answer to the quetion that you started with is All Scripture can be accepted as truth in the light of the teaching of my pastor.

I feel sorry for you and I shall pray for you and your branch of the church.


Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Administrator's notes:

ENOUGH! I do not want to see another post on this board giving us the background of other posters, particularly when the relationship is antagonistic. If you have a problem with someone from another board, then take your squabbling back to that board. Quit cluttering up this one with it.

The next time I or any of the hosts sees one of these posts at the very least all mention of whatever church/board/argument is going to be edited out. If I'm feeling particularly peeved I'll just close the thread outright. There is enough to discuss on Ship of Fools without dragging ChurchNetUK internal issues here.

Those of you who are here to convince the rest of us of the errors of our ways -- that's not gonna fly. If you don't want to debate and LEARN from others then find another place on the Internet. The hosts and admins have plenty to do without trying to referee increasingly pointless and frustrating non-debates in which one party refuses to acknowledge the other.

Spread the word, guys. I'm just about at my limit with this.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.


Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Chapman
unregistered


 - Posted            Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nightlamp: In regard to Ecc. 9:5, the reference script in Job 14:21-22 helps to draw a deeper understanding. The picture of the afterlife is very grim. The dead person's soul is mourning, & the dead will be in pain, the dead man's sons come to pay respects to him, but the dead have no knowledge of what is happening on earth.

Hey Tony, what's your deal man? You must have nightmares of me or something, do I really scare you that much, that you feel you have to forewarn others of my existance? Calm down, I'm sure these people have the ability to form their own opinion of me without you injecting your personal, misinformed, prejudices of me into the fray.

Ruth: You may as well just kick me off this deal right now. I have only made 1 post & have somehow broken a rule. After re-reading my post, I still have no idea of what I did wrong , but if my previous post was indeed a 'foul', just go ahead & boot me, because I ain't changin' nor conformin'.

M.C.


IP: Logged
Will
Shipmate
# 356

 - Posted      Profile for Will   Author's homepage   Email Will   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So Max the literalist - you believe in a flat earth? Perhaps a member of the society?
Any allegory in scripture? How about Proverbs? More than just proverbs?
I hate to tell you, dude, but Ecclesistes is a book of poetry - lessons to be learned certainly, but not to be taken literally.

p.s. It is probably not smart to challenge the moderators.

--------------------
Shalom, Will.


Posts: 60 | From: Tx. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Max Chapman:
Ruth: You may as well just kick me off this deal right now. I have only made 1 post & have somehow broken a rule. After re-reading my post, I still have no idea of what I did wrong , but if my previous post was indeed a 'foul', just go ahead & boot me, because I ain't changin' nor conformin'.

It is customary to read the rules and guidelines of a forum before entering the discussion. The links are on the main board -- click on "board home" and you'll find links to the Ship's Ten Commandments and the FAQs.

If you do so, you will find that the Ship's Eighth Commandment, as I said, is Don't Crusade. (Sorry I gave you the wrong number last time, but hey, I was an English major.) The Sixth is Respect the Hosts. The First is Don't Be a Jerk. If you refuse to abide by the rules that govern this forum, you will indeed be booted.

You hereby are given One Last Chance. I don't care that you've only posted twice. The hosts and administrators are all volunteers and this site is privately owned, so I see no reason to put up with this nonsense.


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pikachu
Shipmate
# 170

 - Posted      Profile for Pikachu     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi everyone.
Just some observations/suggestions:
Luke 20:37-38: "But that the dead are raised Moses too made known in the passage about the burning bush, where he calls the Lord 'The God of Abraham, the Bod of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'. He is not hte God of the dead but of the living; for to Him they are all alive." (Jesus speaking)
John 8:56-58: (Jesus speaking)"Your father Abraham was extremely happy in the prospect of seeing My day, and he did see it and rejoiced." Then the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly I assure you, before Abraham was I AM".
And somewhere in Genesis, I don't have the OT in front of me right now: "Let Us make man in Our image..."
My point is just that Jesus is eternal. I will agree with Jim Powell (I have heard this other places too) that the OT persons looked forward to the Messiah, we look back.. and it's my belief that when we leave this world, time will not exist for us. (So there will be no "before" or "after".)
Anyway, that was 2 cents worth, now another 2 cents..
Everyone is going to base their religious beliefs on something they've read/seen/heard/experienced - is that true?
Well, my beliefs are based on my overall belief that the Bible is true. Not what a pastor/televangelist/cult leader/SOF poster says, but what I have read in the Bible. (Not that I don't listen to others, but I compare everything else to the Bible.)Now you may say, well, you're still basing your beliefs on what other humans wrote.. but as I say, all beliefs are based on something seen/heard/experienced, in this world. May I suggest that before anyone out there makes a decision for themselves as to whether or not the Bible is true, and what to believe out of it - read it for yourselves! I mean, read the whole thing straight through. You wouldn't read any other book starting at page 50, then go to page 2, then page 600, would you? That is, if it is worth your time and effort. I can quote you all kinds of verses, translations, etc, etc, - but God forbid that you would accept the scripture as truth just because I say so! (Of course, it occurs to me that, geez, maybe I'm not the only one who has read the Bible..) Anyway, I'll tell you the Bible is all true.. but darn it, don't take my word for it, read it yourself! Or not.
We're all accountable to God, we're not accountable to anyone else. I'm only making a challenge to people here, I'm not angry or anything like that.. I believe that the Holy Spirit within me has convinced me that the Bible is true. Of course, if you think I'm wacko, I'm sure you'll let me know...

--------------------
I know Jesus has a sense of humor, He made my cockatoo.

Posts: 53 | From: Cleveland, Ohio USA | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pikachu
Shipmate
# 170

 - Posted      Profile for Pikachu     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oops. That first paragraph was "the God of Isaac", not, uh, the, uh, "Bod of Isaac".
It's late & the fingers aren't working well!!

--------------------
I know Jesus has a sense of humor, He made my cockatoo.

Posts: 53 | From: Cleveland, Ohio USA | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Pikachu, please give us all a break -- hit "return" (or "enter" or whatever) twice in a row every now and then!

Of course we are all well advised to read the Bible, and it a fine Protestant tradition that we all read it for ourselves. But reading it without the help of bright people who have read it before me seems like making life way more difficult than it needs to be, as well as ignoring the real gifts God offers us in the writings of Biblical scholars. Emphasis on the plural there -- not just one favorite scholar who says what you already think about the Bible.

Also, I don't see the point of reading the Bible straight through (except to be able to say you did) since it's not one book. It's a collection of a wide variety of writings done at different times by different people and then collected even later by still more people. It's an anthology, not a novel.


Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Max chapman said
quote:
You may ignore the Bible and dispute it's literal meaning

I was stating with my references to ecclesiates that you will not take the passage literally because there is no hope of a ressurection or salvation reference in Job just picks that up.

Pikachu said

quote:
Well, my beliefs are based on my overall belief that the Bible is true. Not what a pastor/televangelist/cult leader/SOF poster says, but what I have read in the Bible

How do you understand the word true?

the view that stowaway suggested was basically that the Bible reveals the truth of God and Jesus

Do you agree with this or or do you use some other approach?

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp


Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm trying to remember if I've posted on this thread yet. Never mind, here's my assorted thoughts, for what they're worth

Pikachu has suggested we read the Bible. A few years back I did read it cover-to-cover (although parts of Leviticus were rather hard going ). I would probably recommend taking it a bit slower, there are a couple of study guides out there that go through the Bible, with questions and brief comments, in a couple of years. Much better to study than just read the Bible.

I would say that, yes, the Bible (in it's entirity - which means individual passages are only fully true when taken within the larger context of Scripture) is true. The problem comes when we ask "what is meant by 'true'?"

The Bible is a truthful record of the experiences of God by some of the people of God, expressed in the best way those people could manage (and probably expressed far better than I could manage if I had the same experience). There is always going to be a difficulty relating those experiences to our own, and the form and language of those writings to our own situation.

I cannot except a hyper-literal view of Scripture, nor a full-blown literal innerrancy. Firstly, and most importantly, because Scripture itself makes no such claim; yeah I know "all Scripture is God-breathed", but that passage doesn't say it's correct in every detail. Also, there is such a lack of internal consistancy within Scripture that it is obviously not meant to be a literal historico-scientific account of history nor a systematic theology. If God had wanted us to have such a book, that's what he'd have given us.

I would add that I do accept that Scripture is the supreme authority when it comes to matters of faith and doctrine, interpreted through the witness & tradition of the Church; the teaching of church ministers, the thoughts of theologians and commentators and discussion with "ordinary Christians" (including the insights of people in this forum).

Sorry, it's rather a long post

Alan

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.


Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Chapman
unregistered


 - Posted            Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If the Bible is not a trustworthy book; then how would one explain the hundreds of prophecies that have been fulfilled down through the ages? These fulfilled prophecies in which I refer to aren't just heresy they are indeed historical fact. ie (the prophesy of the messiah, His type of death ect.)

Also, when the book of Revelation was written, there was no way for the entire world to witness an event at the same time it was happening. For years this prophesy has 'stumped' scholars as to the meaning of the 2 prophets being resurrected in front of the whole world, these scholars had no idea of the coming technology to equip the world with tv's & satelites, but God knew it. Will, I guess you would just say this is coincedence huh?

Ecclesiastes may be a book of poetry, but it doesn't make it erroneous. If I were to write a poem about Einstien being a bright person, would the fact that I wrote a poem somehow nullify his brilliant formulas & make him an idiot?

Nightlamp: I guess I'm missing the point you are trying to make with Ecc. I think that Ecc. is literal, & I used Job to help clarify that the lost have no hope after death & the dead (lost) have no knowledge of what is happening (on Earth) after death.

M.C.


IP: Logged
SteveWal
Shipmate
# 307

 - Posted      Profile for SteveWal   Email SteveWal   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think, Martin, you really need a lesson in exactly what constitutes "truth" with regard to poetry.

First of all, poetry is "true" but it does not have to "factual." If I say "my love is a red red rose," I don't mean that my love is a red red rose; I am using a figure of speech known as a metaphor.

Poetry is figurative language; therefore the truth it gives us is figurative. It is neither factual nor erroneous. When TS Eliot said "Let us go then, you and I/ As the evening spreads out against the sky/ Like a patient etherised on a table," he was using an image of one thing (a patient going under the gas) to describe another (the way the evening grows dark.) It is neither a true nor a false image, it is merely an appropriate image.

That's why we object to poems being taken literally. Because they're not meant to be. They use images. As Emily Dickinson would say, it's not a question of not telling the truth, it's a question of telling it slant.

And it's about a different order of truth. Shakespeare's play are far from being factually accurate: but they tell truths about human behaviour and feelings in the most glorious poetry. It doesn't have to be factual to be true.

Which is why I always object when someone says I don't believe that the Bible is true when I say I don't believe that Jonah didn't get swallowed by a whale. Jonah doesn't have to be swallowed by a whale for the book of Jonah to be true.

Not that most fundamentalists seem to get that. So literal-minded, they couldn't spot a metaphor if it came up and bit them on the leg.

--------------------
If they give you lined paper to write on, write across the lines. (Russian anarchist saying)


Posts: 208 | From: Manchester | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Max chapman said
quote:
Nightlamp: I guess I'm missing the point you are trying to make with Ecc. I think that Ecc. is literal, & I used Job to help clarify that the lost have no hope after death & the dead (lost) have no knowledge of what is happening (on Earth) after death.

I see no mention of 'the lost'in the passages you mentioned.

The dead are the dead and in a literal understanding of the passages we see ecc 9:2 all share a common destiny that is death with no hope of anything.


In a non literal approach to the scripture we might say the writer of Ecc had no concept of live after death or ressurection he was also writing this book of wisdom at a depressed part of his life and we understand it in a different way in the light of the Gospel and the NT.

At a guess Max chapman you are understanding the bible in a non-literal way that is fine since we all do so. I am simply pointing out that is what we are all doing so but from different angles.

Jim Powell had great respect of pastors supposing one suggested go read the bible for yourself and read it in the light of different authors would he do so? I say he should but he might not even be reading this
and he might not think Nightlamp is that important but then he does not know who I am

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp


Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Will
Shipmate
# 356

 - Posted      Profile for Will   Author's homepage   Email Will   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by Max Chapman:
If the Bible is not a trustworthy book; then how would one explain the hundreds of prophecies that have been fulfilled down through the ages? These fulfilled prophecies in which I refer to aren't just heresy they are indeed historical fact. ie (the prophesy of the messiah, His type of
death ect.)
I would be interested to see what passages you claim show this.

Also, when the book of Revelation was written, there was no way for the entire world to witness an event at the same time it was happening. For years this prophesy has 'stumped' scholars as to the meaning of the 2 prophets being resurrected in front of the whole world, these scholars had no idea of the coming technology to equip the world with tv's & satelites, but God knew it. Will, I guess you would just say this is coincedence huh?
Well, to me Revelation is just Daniel on acid. How about the Whole World was simply a part of the World they knew? In fact, here is the Greek word for you:
3625 oikoumene {oy-kou-men'-ay}
feminine participle present passive of 3611 (as noun, by implication of 1093); TDNT - 5:157,674; n f
AV - world 14, earth 1; 15
1) the inhabited earth 1a) the portion of the earth inhabited by the Greeks, in distinction from the lands of the barbarians 1b) the Roman empire, all the subjects of the empire 1c) the whole inhabited earth, the world 1d) the inhabitants of the earth, men 2) the universe, the world.

Seems fairly subjective and interpretational to me. When you throw in the word "earth" it gets even more subjective
1093 ge {ghay}
contracted from a root word; TDNT - 1:677,116; n f
AV - earth 188, land 42, ground 18, country 2, world 1, earthly + 1537 + 3588 1; 252
1) arable land 2) the ground, the earth as a standing place 3) the main land as opposed to the sea or water 4) the earth as a whole 4a) the earth as opposed to the heavens 4b) the inhabited earth, the abode of men and animals 5) a country, land enclosed within fixed boundaries, a tract of land, territory, region.

Ecclesiastes may be a book of poetry, but it doesn't make it erroneous. If I were to write a poem about Einstien being a bright person, would the fact that I wrote a poem somehow nullify his brilliant formulas & make him an idiot?

Steve answered this brilliantly

--------------------
Shalom, Will.


Posts: 60 | From: Tx. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jim Powell

BANNED
# 323

 - Posted      Profile for Jim Powell         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi All!,
Yes I know I am leaving,but I do have a few thoughts on my way(Fundies do think even though we may be considered dumb by those of you with superiour intellect)Ha Ha Joke ok?
Liberalism (Websters)a movement in modern protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberity.
Fundamentalism (Websters)a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching.
Now my liberal friends was Jesus Christ a liberal? Matthew4:4 Jesus said man can not live by bread alone,but on every word (EVERY WORD )that procedes from the mouth of God.
He did not say that man is to live on the opinions of our intellectual liberals did he?
I have been told that I should listen to the various opinions on here and learn!
But I am also told that if I express my Fundie beliefs on here that I am treating you as conversion fodder.This is not very consistent is it?
The many attacks on The best of Churchs,and their excellent Pastors seem to get by on here.I dont understand that(but then I am just a dumb Fundie) right?
But the simple statements of basic bible truth are considered a a threat.
Moses,Paul,Peter,David,Daniel,John,James,I think these believers were all fundies dont you?
I bet all of these believers accepted that the word of God is alive and powerful,not something to mull over form an opinion on??
Our lord said in John14:23 If anybody loves me.
, he will keep my word;and my father will love him.......
24.he who does not love me does not keep my words;and the word that you hear is not mine but the Father who sent me.
Its not necessary for me to tell you that the Bible is the infallable word of God is it?As I am well aware that everyone on here is very bright!
Were very smart well educated Pharisees were the liberals of the day?
matthew 23:31 Consquently you bear witness against yourselves,that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.
32 Fill up then the measure of the guilt of your fathers.
Question?Where the prophets fundies or liberals?
33.You serpents, you brood of vipers,how shall you escape the sentence of hell?
Verse 23. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees hypocrites!For you tithe the mint and dill and cummin,and have neglected the weighter provisions of the law:justice and mercy and faithfulness;but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.
Jesus just a typical fundie,not very sweet,not very loving,he just rejected the opinions of the liberal fundies.He really should have exchanged ideas and considered their viewpoint right?
I have enjoyed my time on this board,and writing this post,my mood is one of relaxed humor,some of you have been fair and kind ,I thank you very much for your approach,and please consider that the bible is the truth and that we really do need well prepared Pastors to teach us.
Best wishs to everyone on here including those in authority(I know its not easy)
all the best Jim Powell

--------------------
After being judged for our sins,Our Lord said"It is finished"
(The work of our salvation)

Posts: 78 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Chapman
unregistered


 - Posted            Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Steve;

I am taking it that your post was directed to me.? Some people are so quick to try and 'correct' another person that they forget the name of the person they think they're 'attempting' to correct.

I do agree that the passage in Ecc. is somewhat vague (maybe it is because of the use of poetry?), but this is the very reason that I used Job to clarify the exact meaning of Ecc. from the outset.

If one can't figure out what a certain passage means, there is usually a reference script to help you along. The Bible knits itself together, if one would take the time to humble themselves. This is called Bible study. Heaven forbid you should do such a thing.....2 Tim. 2:15

M.C.


IP: Logged
SteveWal
Shipmate
# 307

 - Posted      Profile for SteveWal   Email SteveWal   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Please try and listen, Jim. When we say we don't necessarily belief in the factual truth of something, it doesn't mean we don't believe in its truth.

Even if the bible were infallible (which I for one can't see the Bible saying about itself) it doesn't make a poem any less a poem, a parable any less a parable. There does not have to be a real Good Samaritan for that parable to be true.

Poems and parables also tend to be open texts, not closed texts. They are not instructions on how to programme a computer. They have, by their very nature, more than one interpretation. You can return to great poetry time after time and get something different each time. That's what you get from the Song of Songs, from Genesis 1, the Song of Deborah, John Chapter 1, the Psalms. The Bible is full of poetry, which is why it's a great work of literature as well as a great work of devotion.

That doesn't mean that all interpretations are right, by the way. You can't make Thou shalt not kill into Thou shalt. But the Bible is a far more open text than you're prepared to deal with, Jim. Which is a shame, becuse you're missing so much beauty.

--------------------
If they give you lined paper to write on, write across the lines. (Russian anarchist saying)


Posts: 208 | From: Manchester | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SteveWal
Shipmate
# 307

 - Posted      Profile for SteveWal   Email SteveWal   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry to get your name wrong. But Job is a poem too, so my point still stands.

This poetry stuff gets everywhere. And 2 Tim 3.15 doesn't say that the bible is literally true. It doesn't even tell you what it means by scripture: it was written 200 years before the canon of scripture was decided upon. It might possibly refer to the Torah, which were the only parts of scripture than universally accepted. Or it could refer to the Septuagint version of the OT, which was fairly widely available in Jewish/early Christian circles. Which included the Apocrypha, by the way (I think: I stand to be corrected). But if the letter is Pauline (it might not be), it won't include the Gospels. And I doubt St Paul thought his own letters were scripture.

As for the Bible being internally consistent, I'd like to see you prove it.

--------------------
If they give you lined paper to write on, write across the lines. (Russian anarchist saying)


Posts: 208 | From: Manchester | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Max Chapman
unregistered


 - Posted            Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nightlamp:

Ecc. 9:5 has made a distinction. Job helps to clarify the distinction. Eventhough the exact words 'lost' do not appear in Ecc. 9:5. Those without Christ are spiritually dead (lost) and when they die in this state, they are in pain & torment & have no knowledge of Earthly things. In order to come to this conclusion, one must have a sound knowledge of scripture to help 'tie-in' the Bible as a whole. After all, the Bible is the mind of Christ, one cannot just pick a script out of the air and make a valid case as to its meaning without having other script to fall back on.

Will; I'm not even gonna bother answering your silly post. If you are such a babe that has no knowledge of the OT prophecies concerning the Messiah, I'm not gonna waste my time with you.

M.C.


IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools