Christians Only: How should we view the Scriptures?

[SilverOrb]

Thanks Robert.Evans.

I see some voting but not a lot of replying. Come on kids let's expand on our votes a little.

I like it for the moral values like don't kill and such. I see the bible itself as being written by humans and because of that. I can't believe it 100% as I know the human memory is bad if it is the word of God and someone has written it down. It has been changed so many times over the years also.

 

[TheInfiniteLight]

Question is in the thread title.

I've gone through some phases of trying to take the Scriptures more liberally, only to find myself in a subjective quagmire where my own feelings trump what is actually in the text.

Fed up with the subjective and somewhat meaningless (to me) method of interpreting Scripture, I resorted to using Tradition to also inform my views of Scripture.

To cut a long story short, I concluded Tradition was not awfully reliable, seeing as the source of much tradition, the church fathers, were not infallible bastions of truth themselves, and I became wary of the "Chinese whispers" effect of passing teachings down through the generations, where additions and embellishments could have been made.

My own view these days is now sola scriptura; Scripture alone. I'm basically back where I started, not sure if that's a good or bad thing. It's solved my subjective quagmire problems at least. I concluded it is better to just submit to God's word rather than try and fit Him into my little box of what I feel is right and wrong. And when I say sola scriptura, that doesn't mean the Bible is the only source of truth, but it is the only infallible source of truth. Other sources, like Tradition, can indeed be useful but I see the Scriptures as the only real reliable source.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what my fellow Christians' views are on this, and how we should approach and interpret the Scriptures, and how we should view them in relation to God's revelation and the truth.

You get out of scripture of who you are in relationship to God. As you continue your studies, use others opinions and test that relationship to see if it fits in who you are in relationship to God. It is a life-long, ongoing process. I view theological philosophy as an un-carved block. It is my intent to make that block into myself with my relationship with God.

 

[12jtartar]

Question is in the thread title.

I've gone through some phases of trying to take the Scriptures more liberally, only to find myself in a subjective quagmire where my own feelings trump what is actually in the text.

Fed up with the subjective and somewhat meaningless (to me) method of interpreting Scripture, I resorted to using Tradition to also inform my views of Scripture.

To cut a long story short, I concluded Tradition was not awfully reliable, seeing as the source of much tradition, the church fathers, were not infallible bastions of truth themselves, and I became wary of the "Chinese whispers" effect of passing teachings down through the generations, where additions and embellishments could have been made.

My own view these days is now sola scriptura; Scripture alone. I'm basically back where I started, not sure if that's a good or bad thing. It's solved my subjective quagmire problems at least. I concluded it is better to just submit to God's word rather than try and fit Him into my little box of what I feel is right and wrong. And when I say sola scriptura, that doesn't mean the Bible is the only source of truth, but it is the only infallible source of truth. Other sources, like Tradition, can indeed be useful but I see the Scriptures as the only real reliable source.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what my fellow Christians' views are on this, and how we should approach and interpret the Scriptures, and how we should view them in relation to God's revelation and the truth.

Sultan Of Swing,
I believe that you have become a man of Wisdom.
There have been a few errors that have crept into Bible translations. These errors are small, and have nothing to do with the Message to mankind, from God, usually errors in men's names and in numbers.
Any error can easily be found by a comparison of Bibles. I use about 40 different Bibles, and sometimes by doing that I get a better idea of exactly what the message is telling me.
Another point to remember is; God Himself has given us the promise that He would protect His word, forever, Ps 12:6,7. When Jesus was on earth, he said: Your word is truth!! John 17:17. Jesus and the Cheistians of the first century used the Septuigent translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Peter said that God's word would last forever, here including the Gospel, 1Pet 1:25.
Other assurances that God's word is true is 2Tim 3:16,17, 2Pet 1-20,21, 1Thes 2:13.
Many Bible scholars have researched the ancient manuscripts for many years. They say that there is no longer any reason to believe that we do not have the accurate message from God to mankind.

 

[rusra02]

I think you are in good company in accepting the Holy Scriptures as God's word. Jesus Christ accepted the Hebrew Scriptures as God's word, and frequently quoted from them. (John 17:17) So did his apostles. (2 Peter 1:20,21)

 

[12jtartar]

Question is in the thread title.

I've gone through some phases of trying to take the Scriptures more liberally, only to find myself in a subjective quagmire where my own feelings trump what is actually in the text.

Fed up with the subjective and somewhat meaningless (to me) method of interpreting Scripture, I resorted to using Tradition to also inform my views of Scripture.

To cut a long story short, I concluded Tradition was not awfully reliable, seeing as the source of much tradition, the church fathers, were not infallible bastions of truth themselves, and I became wary of the "Chinese whispers" effect of passing teachings down through the generations, where additions and embellishments could have been made.

My own view these days is now sola scriptura; Scripture alone. I'm basically back where I started, not sure if that's a good or bad thing. It's solved my subjective quagmire problems at least. I concluded it is better to just submit to God's word rather than try and fit Him into my little box of what I feel is right and wrong. And when I say sola scriptura, that doesn't mean the Bible is the only source of truth, but it is the only infallible source of truth. Other sources, like Tradition, can indeed be useful but I see the Scriptures as the only real reliable source.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what my fellow Christians' views are on this, and how we should approach and interpret the Scriptures, and how we should view them in relation to God's revelation and the truth.

Sultan Of Swing,
Please allow me to start my answer by pointing out a few things.
There is two kinds of Theology; natural Theology, and Revealed Theology. Natural Theology or religion, is what we learn from nature, The great creations of God. Then there is Revealed Theology or Religion.
The reason that God had His word written down is because word of mouth is not reliable, especially over great periods of time. God had The Holy Bible written so that we have His word, which is the only source of truth, especially when it
comes to Bible Doctrine. Because word of mouth is not reliable, God gave us a promise that He Himself would guard His word from every generation. That means that God has promised that He would not allow His word to become corrupted, or adulterated, Ps 12:6,7, John 17:17, 1Pet 1:25. The word of God was inerrant when first written, and understood completely by the writer's contemporaries. Now here is the question: Has God's word been completely unadulterated???
The answer is no!!! This is because it has been found that it is impossible fo any human being to copy, much less translate a whole Bible without making a mistake. When many people translate the Bible over many years, there would certainly be some mistakes in their translations. Think though, the translators would not all make the same mistakes, so any errors could be easily found and corrected, by a comparison of the many translations. This is what has been done by Bible scholars, over the years, so that the many Bibles that we have today, are accurate, and especially when it comes to the actual message from God to mankind.
God purposes to judge mankind, and God is just and fair in every way, He cannot allow His word to become adulterated. If the Bible was not accurate, God would be unjust Himself, if He judged mankind by an inaccurate Bible, Job 34:10-12, Deut 32:4, Rom 3:5,6.
Bible scholars say that the last reason to believe that the Bible is inaccurate has been done away with, that we can have full trust in God's word.

 

[roger1440]

Christian scripture should be viewed through a first century Jewish lens. The books of the New Testament were written by Jews, for Jews using Jewish theology as a foundation. As this new sect moved from the time and place of its origin, it became more and more unlike Judaism. Within a hundred years it was no longer a Jewish movement, but a Gentile movement. It had become something it was never intended to be.

 

[Rapha]

Can not vote unless there is a 'None of the above' option.

Try the idea that Satan and Yahweh are one of the same entity and the entire Bible was rigged by the fallen seraphs (lizards) to keep the human population of this planet under their control.

Events written in the Book of Revelation are happening today (via scalar weaponry) because for Satan to maintain total control over the masses he has to crush any form of uprising by imposing fear.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

My view:

1) The Scriptures are inspired because they inspire. If Scriptures cease to speak to our existential being, they are no longer Scripture.

2) I take an incarnational approach to Scripture: they are fully human and fully divine. As such, they reflect every aspect of human frailty but enrich us with the Word of God.

 

[sojourner]

My view:

1) The Scriptures are inspired because they inspire. If Scriptures cease to speak to our existential being, they are no longer Scripture.

2) I take an incarnational approach to Scripture: they are fully human and fully divine. As such, they reflect every aspect of human frailty but enrich us with the Word of God.

Aaaaand... thus endeth the thread.

 

[TheInfiniteLight]

Question is in the thread title.

I've gone through some phases of trying to take the Scriptures more liberally, only to find myself in a subjective quagmire where my own feelings trump what is actually in the text.

Fed up with the subjective and somewhat meaningless (to me) method of interpreting Scripture, I resorted to using Tradition to also inform my views of Scripture.

To cut a long story short, I concluded Tradition was not awfully reliable, seeing as the source of much tradition, the church fathers, were not infallible bastions of truth themselves, and I became wary of the "Chinese whispers" effect of passing teachings down through the generations, where additions and embellishments could have been made.

My own view these days is now sola scriptura; Scripture alone. I'm basically back where I started, not sure if that's a good or bad thing. It's solved my subjective quagmire problems at least. I concluded it is better to just submit to God's word rather than try and fit Him into my little box of what I feel is right and wrong. And when I say sola scriptura, that doesn't mean the Bible is the only source of truth, but it is the only infallible source of truth. Other sources, like Tradition, can indeed be useful but I see the Scriptures as the only real reliable source.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what my fellow Christians' views are on this, and how we should approach and interpret the Scriptures, and how we should view them in relation to God's revelation and the truth.

Maybe your problem is that you do not see the foundation of our faith as our faith. Perhaps, you are upset because of the end of the bible, its message and the state of the world.

You should perhaps think of it as an ongoing work. That has not ended today. It surpasses your own life. If you want to know the end then stand today in the beginning. Then you will know the end. That means seek all righteousness and goodness; and you will have sought the Victory of God.

Don't go with sola scripture. Even God has made things pass away, that were and never were, within scripture. Do you sacrifice animals today? The path of righteousness is a quest put forth by God. Even what the disciples say will pass away. Jesus says, only his own words will never pass away. Jesus shines a light upon you that you must gather for yourself. That light is the light of truth. A quest for truth does not end in the pages of any book.

 

[*Paul*]

Question is in the thread title.

I've gone through some phases of trying to take the Scriptures more liberally, only to find myself in a subjective quagmire where my own feelings trump what is actually in the text.

Fed up with the subjective and somewhat meaningless (to me) method of interpreting Scripture, I resorted to using Tradition to also inform my views of Scripture.

To cut a long story short, I concluded Tradition was not awfully reliable, seeing as the source of much tradition, the church fathers, were not infallible bastions of truth themselves, and I became wary of the "Chinese whispers" effect of passing teachings down through the generations, where additions and embellishments could have been made.

My own view these days is now sola scriptura; Scripture alone. I'm basically back where I started, not sure if that's a good or bad thing. It's solved my subjective quagmire problems at least. I concluded it is better to just submit to God's word rather than try and fit Him into my little box of what I feel is right and wrong. And when I say sola scriptura, that doesn't mean the Bible is the only source of truth, but it is the only infallible source of truth. Other sources, like Tradition, can indeed be useful but I see the Scriptures as the only real reliable source.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what my fellow Christians' views are on this, and how we should approach and interpret the Scriptures, and how we should view them in relation to God's revelation and the truth.

I'm glad you've come to take the highest view of scripture, it is indeed the Word of the Living God, believing this has never done me wrong. Hold on to the Truth.

 

[Johnlove]

Jesus told me personally that the Christian Bible is God’s written Word. Any teaching that contradicts the written Word of God is not of God.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Jesus told me personally that the Christian Bible is God’s written Word. Any teaching that contradicts the written Word of God is not of God.

We can access the personal Word of God ( Scripture ) the writings from God which says ALL Scripture is inspired by God and why ALL of it is beneficial - 2 Timothy 3:16-17

 

[Johnlove]

We can access the personal Word of God ( Scripture ) the writings from God which says ALL Scripture is inspired by God and why ALL of it is beneficial - 2 Timothy 3:16-17

Yes the written Word of God can be used to help people accept Jesus Christ as one’s Lord and God. But only God/Holy Spirit can bring one to know God.

(1 Corinthians 2:10-16) “These are the very things that God has revealed to us through the Spirit, for the Spirit reaches the depts. Of everything, even the depths of God. After all, the depths of a man can only be known by his own spirit, not by any other man, and in the same way the depths of God can only be known by the Spirit of God.---------“

(1 Corinthians 2:10-16) “These are the very things that God has revealed to us through the Spirit, for the Spirit reaches the depts. Of everything, even the depths of God. After all, the depths of a man can only be known by his own spirit, not by any other man, and in the same way the depths of God can only be known by the Spirit of God.---------“

(1 John 2: 27) “But you have not lost the anointing that he gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you; the anointing he gave teaches you everything: you are anointed with truth, not with a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in him.”

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Gospel writer John wrote at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 that Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.

God had No beginning, No start and will have No end - Psalms 90:2 - so God can Not die.
On the other hand, the created heavenly Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.
Also, John believed that No person can see God and live. People saw Jesus and lived - 1 John 4:12; John 1:18; Exodus 33:20

 

[Johnlove]

Gospel writer John wrote at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 that Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.

God had No beginning, No start and will have No end - Psalms 90:2 - so God can Not die.
On the other hand, the created heavenly Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.
Also, John believed that No person can see God and live. People saw Jesus and lived - 1 John 4:12; John 1:18; Exodus 33:20

Jesus is God, and I know this because he personally told me he is God, and the Bible tells us he is God.

(1John 1: 1) “In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.”

Without one having a personally relationship with Jesus Christ our Lord and God one can never come to know God. People will continue to commit sin, and be of the devil and not of God.

(1 John 3:7-8) “My children, do not let anyone lead you astray to live a holy life is to be holy just as he is holy; to lead a sinful life is to belong to the devil, since the devil was a sinner from the beginning.”

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Jesus is God, and I know this because he personally told me he is God, and the Bible tells us he is God.
(1John 1: 1) “In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.”
Without one having a personally relationship with Jesus Christ our Lord and God one can never come to know God. People will continue to commit sin, and be of the devil and not of God.
(1 John 3:7-8) “My children, do not let anyone lead you astray to live a holy life is to be holy just as he is holy; to lead a sinful life is to belong to the devil, since the devil was a sinner from the beginning.”

Yes, the devil was a sinner since the beginning of his going bad. Whereas the message ( Bible ) that we heard for the beginning of our hearing it - 1 John 3:11 - is the message of love.
Gospel writer John wrote 1st John. According to John - at 1 John 4:12 A - NO man can see God and live ( remain alive ) People saw Jesus and lived.
What did John say at John 1:18?
What does Exodus 33:20 say ?

Please keep in mind Jesus, nor the apostles, had the KJV Bible. Originally the Bible was written mostly in Hebrew and Greek and Not in English.
KJV took the liberty to insert a letter 'a' at Acts 28:6 B, and took the liberty to omit the letter 'a' at John 1:1 even though the same Greek grammar rule applies in both verses.

Please also keep in mind both God and Lord are titles and Not personal names.
KJV has two (2) LORD/Lord's mentioned at Psalms 110:1
The LORD in all upper-case letters is where the Tetragrammaton appears.
The Lord in some lower-case letters stands for the Lord Jesus and the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) never applies to Jesus.
Does God need more than one throne? How many thrones are mentioned and for who at Revelation 3:21?

 

[Johnlove]

Yes, the devil was a sinner since the beginning of his going bad. Whereas the message ( Bible ) that we heard for the beginning of our hearing it - 1 John 3:11 - is the message of love.
Gospel writer John wrote 1st John. According to John - at 1 John 4:12 A - NO man can see God and live ( remain alive ) People saw Jesus and lived.
What did John say at John 1:18?
What does Exodus 33:20 say ?

Please keep in mind Jesus, nor the apostles, had the KJV Bible. Originally the Bible was written mostly in Hebrew and Greek and Not in English.
KJV took the liberty to insert a letter 'a' at Acts 28:6 B, and took the liberty to omit the letter 'a' at John 1:1 even though the same Greek grammar rule applies in both verses.

Please also keep in mind both God and Lord are titles and Not personal names.
KJV has two (2) LORD/Lord's mentioned at Psalms 110:1
The LORD in all upper-case letters is where the Tetragrammaton appears.
The Lord in some lower-case letters stands for the Lord Jesus and the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) never applies to Jesus.
Does God need more than one throne? How many thrones are mentioned and for who at Revelation 3:21?

You just go one using your human logic which is making you believe what you do. Humans can’t ever understand God.

You are in so much error, and I am not here to even try to educate you.


I have seen Jesus, and he has personally been teaching me for the last forty years. Because of this I know that the only way one can come to know God is to give his or her life to Jesus. Then one will always walk in God’s will.


People read what they want to read into the written Word of God, and if they still commit sin then it is Satan who is teaching them.

 

[12jtartar]

Johnlove,
I see that uravip2me was quoting the Bible and applying the scriptures, exactly where is the human logic there???
How did you see Jesus, since he is a spirit, 1Peter 3:18, and flesh cannot see spirits???
Do you claim to be a follower of Jesus, and you say that you are not here to educate a lost person, Matthew 28:19,20, 2Timothy 4: