how does a christian understand the bible?

[Crown College ofthe Bible]

i understand the claim but do you know how the new testament came to be?
did you ever question it's validity?

The Bible says in II Peter 1:21

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

It was the Holy Ghost who spoke through man. This is called verbal-plenary inspiration. Verbal-plenary means "God breathed."
When we open the Bible, we open the mind of God.

Psalm 119:89 says,
For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. The Word of God was settled in heaven before it was settled on earth. It was already pre-determined meaning it has always been.

 

[waitasec]

Well, my observation has been this - that the vast majority of "bible colleges" are so vehemently anti Catholic that there's no way they could teach the history of the development of the canon without that rancor bleeding through - so my bet is that you didn't get any sort of balanced view of the process.

I think it's amazing that most Protestant churches can't be objective and give the RCC credit where credit is due. Of course, the RCC, like any other huge organization, has it's faults, but if you listen to most Protestant organizations, their history "starts" in the 1500s - as if 1500 years of doctrine, church history, and spiritual growth just didn't happen - like they sprang from the earth like mushrooms overnight.

No offense, but I think I'd rather spend four years in Afghanistan than four years at a bible college! :run:

non taken.
it was essentially a roman emperor (who's religious beliefs were questionable) that became the catalyst for christianity because it was now an accepted religion in the empire. i see no difference between that and joseph smith and the mormons. (no offense to anyone)
while it's very probable that i was taught an unbalanced view there is more to it than that. the ideal's within the bible are also a bit skewed. and how the OT is sort of the foundation but not really. jesus and pauls teaching seem to collide and the teachings of paul are mostly observed because of the idea that faith is what saves you, not deeds... which goes against what jesus taught. the idea of hell was also introduced in the NT. and then there is this notion that this all powerful god somehow needs my faith for my own good.
i can't ignore the fact that the temple was destroyed (which was around the time gospel of mark was written) and certain jews needed to reconcile why god would allow that to happen. thusly, the birth of the christian oral tradition.
in short, there's too many flaws and inconsistencies from what i gather and i can't be honest with myself if i take it at face value. i've looked back and turned to stone. certain things you cannot unlearn.

 

[waitasec]

The Bible says in II Peter 1:21

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

It was the Holy Ghost who spoke through man. This is called verbal-plenary inspiration. Verbal-plenary means "God breathed."
When we open the Bible, we open the mind of God.

Psalm 119:89 says,
For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. The Word of God was settled in heaven before it was settled on earth. It was already pre-determined meaning it has always been.

thank you for that. but i can't help but notice the inconsistencies in the bible.
and if this were the mind of god then why is it ambiguous and not straightforward? god is still a mystery in the bible.
there is no way i can be honest with myself and ignore the irreconcilable differences. that is why you have faith and i don't.
and when i say faith i mean, believing in things that are unprovable or improbable.

 

[waitasec]

It's such an erroneous statement to say that any book is not capable of being faithfully copied!

Read Jane Austin and then go aroun blabbering like an idiot that the ending has been changed since it was first published.

i'm not sure what your point is.
can you elaborate?

the gospel of mark was changed or altered.

 

[Ben Masada]

lets talk

You ask how does a Christian understand the Bible. My answer is by doing what Isaiah wrote in 2:2,3. "And many people shall go and say, Come you, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the House of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths; for out of Zion, shall go forth the Law, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem."

Here, "Zion and Jerusalem" are taken as synonyms for the Jewish People. That's the way how Christians can understand the Bible: By addressing their quest to the Jewish People. Then, Ezekiel is clear to state that by means of Israel, the Almighty reveals His glory in the sight of the nations. (Ezek. 20:41)

At the end, anyways, non-Jewish nations will reach for the garment of the Jews and beg to let them join us, because they have finally acknowledge that God is with us. (Zech. 8:23)

 

[Muffled]

something your probably not aware of is that on the old scrolls that had biblical writings on the ends of the scrolls often deteriorated or wore off leaving many of the fables incomplete. redactors often filled them in as they wanted to. [forged] simular tyo the ending of mark

The books of the Bible were passed around separately for years before being gathered into the Bible. It is no less possible that mark could have been divided and then put back together. I am not a scholar, so I don't know if there is any evidence for this but the end of Mark appears to be reasonable in style and context. Suggesting that someone invented an ending sounds a lot like specualtion to me and I don't see any evidence of it.

 

[Muffled]

You ask how does a Christian understand the Bible. My answer is by doing what Isaiah wrote in 2:2,3. "And many people shall go and say, Come you, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the House of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths; for out of Zion, shall go forth the Law, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem."

Here, "Zion and Jerusalem" are taken as synonyms for the Jewish People. That's the way how Christians can understand the Bible: By addressing their quest to the Jewish People. Then, Ezekiel is clear to state that by means of Israel, the Almighty reveals His glory in the sight of the nations. (Ezek. 20:41)

At the end, anyways, non-Jewish nations will reach for the garment of the Jews and beg to let them join us, because they have finally acknowledge that God is with us. (Zech. 8:23)

It appears Jesus didn't think much of Jewish understanding because he did a lot of "you say...but I say" in Mat 5.

 

[Muffled]

Yes Jesus is the good news, you are right. The good news is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. His death and resurrection. Revelation 19 says, And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Jesus is the Word of God.

No doubt that is good news however the gospel of jesus is the gospel of the Kingdom of God. What you are most likely referring to is the gospel of Paul.

 

[waitasec]

the end of Mark appears to be reasonable in style and context. Suggesting that someone invented an ending sounds a lot like specualtion to me and I don't see any evidence of it.

actually the gospel of mark is a very dark gospel.
the addition to the last chapter has a very different tone to the rest of the writings.

Scholars are divided on the question of whether the "Longer Ending" was created deliberately to finish the Gospel of Mark (as contended by James Kelhoffer) or if it began its existence as a freestanding text which was used to "patch" the otherwise abruptly ending text of Mark. Its failure to smoothly pick up the narrative from the scene at the end of 16:8 is a point in favor of the latter option.

Mark 16 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sandy whitelinger]

lets talk

How does a Christian understand the Bible? Usually very poorly.

 

[Archer]

How does a Christian understand the Bible? Usually very poorly.

Wow good answer:yes: Frubs on that.

 

[DavyCrocket2003]

Well, this is a great thread. I hope we can have a discussion without getting interrupted by trolls. I am a Christian. I consider the Bible an extremely valuable book. I have learned and continue to learn a ton from it. Right now, my hero is Nehemiah. He is such an awesome guy. In my view, the Bible is replete with inspiration and truth. Yeah, I know that it is not infallible. It was written by men and compiled many years (centuries?) after Christ lived. Not to mention it has been transcribed and translated countless times. Of course it's going to have errors. Of course there will be things taken out and things added to it. Does that mean that what is left has no value? I don't think so.

In my opinion, the problem with the Bible, is that people often seem to forget that it is a book. People have this tendency to elevate it to a level of authority that just seems illogical to me. It's as if the Bible is all that God ever revealed, all that he ever will reveal, and that it contains within it all that is now or will ever be necessary to know about God. If that is true, how come there is such a broad range of interpretation? Why are there so many denominations of Christians with such widely varying beliefs? Did God plan it this way? Did he want us to be confused and lost? I suppose some would argue that if everyone studied the Bible really hard and very carefully, we would all come to the same conclusions as to God's nature, and the points of his doctrine. Hmm.... I don't think so. We have 2000 years of evidence to the contrary.

I think it is unhealthy to forget where the Bible came from. The Bible is not an original source. It is a secondary source. Where did the Bible come from? What did Christians do before there was a Bible? What has been God's pattern all throughout history of revealing things to his children? Why would he suddenly stop talking to them, just because there is a Bible? Is it because they are so self assured, so confident that the Bible contains all the things God ever wants to say, that they stop listening to God the source of this truth and light?

Here is an apt description of our times:

3For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord’s; and the others shall say: I, I am the Lord’s; and thus shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the Lord—

4And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

5And they deny the power of God, the Holy One of Israel; and they say unto the people: Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold there is no God today, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men;

6Behold, hearken ye unto my precept; if they shall say there is a miracle wrought by the hand of the Lord, believe it not; for this day he is not a God of miracles; he hath done his work.

This day he is not a God of miracles; he hath done his work. Not so. He is the same yesterday today and forever. God is still a God of miracles. And he is just as accesible as he has ever been. The Bible is a good starting place, but it is not the end all of religion. God is.

7¶Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

8For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

 

[javajo]

Here is what I believe:

Jesus said he would die and rise again according to the (Old Testament) scriptures:

Jesus Predicts His Death a Third Time

31 Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled.32 He will be delivered over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him and spit on him;33 they will flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.” 34 The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. (Luke 18)

The four Gospels record that he was crucified, died and rose again. The Epistles all confirm this over and over again as well:

3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (1 Cor. 15)

So there it is, very simple, not hard to understand. Its as plain as day. No mystery. Even a child can see, unless they are trying very hard not to.

 

[waitasec]

Here is what I believe:

Jesus said he would die and rise again according to the (Old Testament) scriptures:

Jesus Predicts His Death a Third Time

31 Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled.32 He will be delivered over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him and spit on him;33 they will flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.” 34 The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. (Luke 18)

The four Gospels record that he was crucified, died and rose again. The Epistles all confirm this over and over again as well:

3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (1 Cor. 15)

So there it is, very simple, not hard to understand. Its as plain as day. No mystery. Even a child can see, unless they are trying very hard not to.

so your understanding of the bible is that we are not capable of living forever without jesus. am i correct in that assessment?
and that is the entire point of being alive; to live forever.
not to become a better person. not to help those in need.
it's all about your eternal life. is that right?

 

[javajo]

so your understanding of the bible is that we are not capable of living forever without jesus. am i correct in that assessment?
and that is the entire point of being alive; to live forever.
not to become a better person. not to help those in need.
it's all about your eternal life. is that right?

I think you missed the point of my post entirely. The point is Jesus said he must die and rise again according to scripture, the four gospels recorded the event, and the epistles also say the same thing, its simple. This is of great importance, for God HAD to deal with sin and he loves us so much he provided the way for FREE, absolutely for FREE. This is the Gospel, or Good News! Now, as far as becoming a better person and helping the needy, that comes in fine for anyone, but not for salvation, for it is free. For Ephesians 2:8 and other verses say we are freely saved by grace through faith UNTO good works. So, the important thing, is first to deal with the issue of our sin, when we have accepted the free gift, then growth and good works follow. Being a better person and helping the needy or doing good works are a result of a person maturing not only in life, but in the grace of God. And its deeper than self-improvement and self help books and such, for it comes from knowing we have been bought with a price yet freely saved. Knowing such love begets love. I think people for lack of understanding God's unconditional love and provision for our salvation or for pride and loving this present world and all it offers purposely blind themselves to the very straightforward presentation of the Gospel in the New Testament. That's my belief.

 

[waitasec]

I think you missed the point of my post entirely. The point is Jesus said he must die and rise again according to scripture, the four gospels recorded the event, and the epistles also say the same thing, its simple. This is of great importance, for God HAD to deal with sin and he loves us so much he provided the way for FREE, absolutely for FREE. This is the Gospel, or Good News! Now, as far as becoming a better person and helping the needy, that comes in fine for anyone, but not for salvation, for it is free. For Ephesians 2:8 and other verses say we are freely saved by grace through faith UNTO good works. So, the important thing, is first to deal with the issue of our sin, when we have accepted the free gift, then growth and good works follow. Being a better person and helping the needy or doing good works are a result of a person maturing not only in life, but in the grace of God.

you being saved has no bearing on your morality, for there is no moral act you can do that i cannot.

And its deeper than self-improvement and self help books and such, for it comes from knowing we have been bought with a price yet freely saved. Knowing such love begets love. I think people for lack of understanding God's unconditional love and provision for our salvation or for pride and loving this present world and all it offers purposely blind themselves to the very straightforward presentation of the Gospel in the New Testament. That's my belief.

you believe gods love is unconditional...can you provide me scripture that supports this claim?
or are you saying because salvation is a free gift that would support this assumption..?

but, if god is love and keeps no record of wrong then what's the point in being saved? would it not be based on the condition of belief? john 3:16.
which contradicts your unconditional love premise.

 

[DavyCrocket2003]

I think what he is saying is that, salvation is a gift, but we have to take steps to allow that gift to have effect in our lives. We must allow Christ's grace to permeate our lives and allow it to change us for the better. The result of this process in an increased capacity for good. Our works will become different as a result of our changed nature. That we are not saved by our good works, but that our good works are a result of being saved.

 

[waitasec]

I think what he is saying is that, salvation is a gift, but we have to take steps to allow that gift to have effect in our lives.

thank you for your input, i appreciate that, i really do
and i don't want to be misunderstood when i say,
any self respecting, dignified person takes steps to better themselves and faith in god doesn't open the door for that to happen.

We must allow Christ's grace to permeate our lives and allow it to change us for the better. The result of this process in an increased capacity for good.

with all due respect,
what moral act can a believer do that a non believer can't?

Our works will become different as a result of our changed nature. That we are not saved by our good works, but that our good works are a result of being saved.

there are very nice good natured decent atheists out there too.
every single one of us has the capacity to do good or evil. most of us do good; with or without faith in god.

i think faith in god is an idea bound for failure;
if it is our motivation to be accountable to god then our motivation has been tainted by selfish reasons. however if we were to be accountable to each other for the sake of fairness, then our responsibilities towards our individual freedoms would not be so convoluted. ‘love thy neighbor’ and ‘treat others as you would yourself’ are principles that come from our accountability towards one another. but since it is set on the impression of gaining favor then it will ultimately fail, simply for the selfish incentive.

 

[Crown College ofthe Bible]

thank you for that. but i can't help but notice the inconsistencies in the bible.
and if this were the mind of god then why is it ambiguous and not straightforward? god is still a mystery in the bible.
there is no way i can be honest with myself and ignore the irreconcilable differences. that is why you have faith and i don't.
and when i say faith i mean, believing in things that are unprovable or improbable.

What do you mean by inconsistencies? The Bible is straightfoward. Where are the inconsistencies? The God I worship created everything and He is the God of the Bible

 

[Kathryn]

i think faith in god is an idea bound for failure;
if it is our motivation to be accountable to god then our motivation has been tainted by selfish reasons. however if we were to be accountable to each other for the sake of fairness, then our responsibilities towards our individual freedoms would not be so convoluted.

‘love thy neighbor’ and ‘treat others as you would yourself’ are principles that come from our accountability towards one another. but since it is set on the impression of gaining favor then it will ultimately fail, simply for the selfish incentive.

We're accountable not only to God, but to our communities, our neighbors, and ourselves.

And everyone's walk of faith or lack thereof, is intensely personal. Everyone has different reasons. It seems that you are projecting your own ideas of your own former motives (within Chrsitianity) onto other people.

Those were your motives, your hangups - that doesn't mean that most Christians have the same issues and misunderstandings.