How to interprete Scriptures (Bible or Quran)

[Avoice]

"There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead." 1. Cor. 15:41-42

Well, the Scriptures calls Jesus "The Sun":

" As the men watched, Jesus' appearance was transformed so that his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as light." Matt. 17:2

Not all scripture is. The Sun is used in many instances to illustrate goodness, to show greatness or beauty. See my post # 240

Now since the verse is saying resurrection of dead is like, the glory of sun, moon and stars. It is not possible that God the father had ever been dead and resurrected.

Not likely in my view. If God the Father dies all he has created; all that emanates from him ceases to exist. Therefore he was not resurrected.

But Jesus was a new Moses that was Resurrected again. just as John was a new Elijah that was resurrected again, and like the 12 followers of Moses who were resurrected as 12 apostles of Christ.

And in fact scriptures says similar thing about Moses:

"When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD." Exodus 34:29

So, the Moment that Jesus was raised, is symbolized as the Moment His face became bright as the Sun.

? So you are saying that when Jesus ascended to talk with Moses and Elijah he rose?

And that is like the Resurrection of Dead according to Scriptures. So, Like I said before, there are two instances when it is said Christ is raised from the Dead. One is the moment He was raised to Proclaim the Word of God, and the other time is after His Crucifixion.

And you think I don't make sense <sheesh>.

Are we talking the resurrection or stars?

He was raised from the dead once according to Scripture. He was Baptized by a reluctant John to fulfill all righteousness. John thought Jesus should baptize him, for Pete's sake. That says to me Jesus was sinless compared to John who was a very righteous man to hold the office of Prophet.

 

[Ivan-Michael]

I think I have already replied to this in post #220, but probably you didn't see my post. So, I copy it here again:

You are preassuming that Moses and Elijah actually appeared there. In my understanding, this was not a physical appearance of them talking to Jesus.
The way I see scriptures is that, the disciples wrote certain spiritual realities using "Figurative" language.
So, for example, they wanted to say, that, Elijah and Moses had returned in a spiritual sense, as John and Jesus, to renew the Faith. Then they described this with a Figurative Story. So, the Scriptures instead of simply saying, Jesus and John were like Moses and Elijah, it comes up with a "inspiring story", that should be interpreted spiritually.
And I believe it does that intentionally, so people make an effort to use their spiritual eye to understand what the Author of Bible wants to say.

According to Authors of Bible, the Scriptures are veiled, and sealed with seven seals.
This point can be established from Bible alone:

"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing" 2 cori. 4:3

Those who are perishing means, those who are spiritually dead.

The idea is, to look at the Bible with the eye of spirit to see reality of things.

How is it veiled? The answer is, the Bible intentionally speaks in Parables so its hidden meaning is veiled for those who do not have a spiritual eye.


"The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?"

He replied, ....Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." Matthew 13: 10-13


So, what Jesus meant when He said "while seeing they do not see"?

He was saying their spiritual eye was blind.

In many other places in OT and NT it is said the Book is sealed and ordinary and learned men cannot understand it.


The story of Return of Elijah wants to teach that the Pharisees did not recognize Him, because they were after the physical body of Elijah, however Jesus and disciples had recognized that John the Baptist was the Spiritual Return of Elijah. All these stories, point to the fact that the Authors of Hebrew Scriptures, and New Testament, had intentionally wrote Figurative verses to veil. Otherwise, if John the Baptist was to come before Messiah, why should the Hebrew Scriptures say, Elijah comes? It could have made it easy so, The Pharisees could recognize John and not kill Him. Or why should Jesus talked in parables so they could not understand? The idea is, if a person uses spiritual eye, then he may discover these things in scriptures, but if they do not use their spiritual eye, and only sees the apparent meaning, then it is veiled to those who are spiritually dead and perishing (according to Authors of Bible, Not ME!)


Do you think when Jesus said that Father had sent Him, and the Father is in Him, such a Divine Being needs the encouragement or strengthening of Angels?
I just don't know how you reconcile these things. It just doesn't add up for me.

It's natural that 'ordinary' men can not 'See' what's what in the books, these are books of 'Law', not corporate procedural law, but real 'Law'.
If ordinary men could see the meaning of the words used in the scripts as they are related to the 'Law', there would be no confusion in our minds and we would be like Lord God, the Emperor, the 'Superior General' (today).
We are ruled through confusion.
'Order out of chaos' is their motto, for a purpose, our confusion makes it easy for the emperor to incorporate us into their 'order' as the 2x2 animals at the bottom of the 'ark' (ship, planet earth).
Moses = Salvage, he was abandoned on the water and was salvaged, like us when we are 'delivered' in the hospital.
You don't need a 'spritual' eye, it's a fake, a mind virus, these books were commissioned by the Emperor. Learn the words according to the 'Law'.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

? So you are saying that when Jesus ascended to talk with Moses and Elijah he rose?

The Moment that He Recieved the First Revelation of God, saying: "This is my Son, I am pleased with HiM"

This symbolises the Raise of the Sun of Jesus, to shed His light upon People, the Moment His face is said that has shined like the Sun that is Raised in the Morning of Resurrection. When the time had come, for the Dead to Raise from Asleep, and follow the Path of God. Once that Sun Set, and Jesus Left the World, then the Light of Stars appeared in the Night to guide others. Who were the stars?

 

[Avoice]

The Moment that He Recieved the First Revelation of God, saying: "This is my Son, I am pleased with HiM"

This symbolises the Raise of the Sun of Jesus, to shed His light upon People, the Moment His face is said that has shined like the Sun that is Raised in the Morning of Resurrection. When the time had come, for the Dead to Raise from Asleep, and follow the Path of God. Once that Sun Set, and Jesus Left the World, then the Light of Stars appeared in the Night to guide others. Who were the stars?

Interesting though I don't believe Jesus ever, in this life, takes the place of his Father. The stars are likely all anointed Christians as Paul treats them as such in the prior scriptures.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Interesting though I don't believe Jesus ever, in this life, takes the place of his Father.

The Authors of Bible and the early Christians thought of Jesus as a Perfectly Polished Mirror who refelcts the Image of the Sun. Sun being analogy for God.

The stars are likely all anointed Christians as Paul treats them as such in the prior scriptures.

Yes, I think so too.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You don't need a 'spritual' eye, it's a fake, a mind virus, these books were commissioned by the Emperor. Learn the words according to the 'Law'.

Well, we are discussing these from Scriptures, and according to these Authors in order to understand the Scriptures correctly we need to have a spiritual eye.

 

[Avoice]

The Authors of Bible and the early Christians thought of Jesus as a Perfectly Polished Mirror who refelcts the Image of the Sun. Sun being analogy for God.

What reflects the sun in our solar system?

 

[CG Didymus]

I've got another tough one for you Investigate Truth. When Jesus said if you lust it is better to pluck your eye out, what did he mean? Was that literal or symbolic? Almost everybody takes it symbolic, but when God says to stone people for violating his Law, that was real. When in Islam they cut the hand off of thieves, that is real. What is God up to? Even the Baha'i Faith allows for capital punishment. Yet the Bible talks as if when Christ comes back everything will be perfect, all will know God not do evil any longer. What's going on?

 

[arhys]

How do you decide where to interprete a passage literally and where to inteprete it symbolically or Figuratively.
I am looking for a method that can be used to decide "consistantly" if a passage is symbolic or literal.

The Reformers believed that the best method was a systematic topical and/or thematic approach. Calvin, for example, believed that each verse had one specific meaning. He checked any given verse against other verses that had the same theme or topic and deduced a meaning from there.

The best method for a layman is purchasing a good study bible that guides your exegesis.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I've got another tough one for you Investigate Truth. When Jesus said if you lust it is better to pluck your eye out, what did he mean? Was that literal or symbolic? Almost everybody takes it symbolic, but when God says to stone people for violating his Law, that was real. When in Islam they cut the hand off of thieves, that is real. What is God up to? Even the Baha'i Faith allows for capital punishment. Yet the Bible talks as if when Christ comes back everything will be perfect, all will know God not do evil any longer. What's going on?

There are Social Laws in religions that come as "commands". When Jesus said "if you lust it is better to pluck your eye out", He did not command that. He is saying it is better....So, regardless if He meant symbolic or literal, it is not a command. And If you ask me, He meant it literally. It is better, to not have an eye, than do lust, for lust weakens and kills the spirit, and spirit is more important than physical body, for we loose our physical body anyways, but the spirit supposed to live on after our physical death forever.
But regarding stoning the adulterers, cutting hand of thieves, these are commands and literal.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Prophet spoke with Parables, and allegory:

"I spoke to the prophets, gave them many visions and told parables through them." Hosea 12:10

"Son of man, set forth an allegory and tell it to the Israelites as a parable." Ezekiel 17:2

"And utter a parable unto the rebellious house, and say unto them" Ezekiel 24:3​

"The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools." Proverbs 26:7​

 

[Ibraahiym]

Any method, including a coin toss, can be used to decide consistently, and only the most naive fool would believe there to be a method that allows one to consistently decide correctly.

How well do you know the Qur'aan other then what your were told to believe , As the saying goes you can't tell a fool until they open their mouth .

 

[CG Didymus]

Well, if the scriptures are inspired by God, it makes sense there should be a consistant way of interpreting them, otherwise if the Books of God cannot be understood clearly and consistantly, then the god of these Books is confusing His own people, when the matter of fact is, He claimes His Perpose was to guide, but not to confuse. Moreover, if God has created the world containing the Rules of physics which are part of His own knowledge, why should His own Books contain things that are contrary to scientific Rules?

Apparently you have found a consistent way. You make words of a prophet symbolic because you say God gave them the information in dreams and visions. You say that the books are sealed so only the next "manifestation" can decode what was meant. So to be consistent, who are considered by the Baha'i Faith to be an "official" manifestations of God and what was the order of their appearance? Did Buddha clarify what Krishna said? Did he make clear the signs and symbols of Judaism? Did Zoroaster? Jesus' followers wrote about what he said. Did he make clear the signs and symbols of Judaism and then give them signs and symbols that could only be made clear by the next manifestation? Which I presume you'd say is Mohammed. Or, did several things stay unclear until the "end of the age" and the coming of Baha'u'llah? What about other religions like Jainism and the Sikhs? What about within Christianity? When Catholics went to far astray did God send Martin Luther to correctly interpret Scripture for the Christians? But of course, he was only partly correct, because even Protestants have the fool notion that Jesus healed the sick, raised the dead and he himself rose from the dead. Which are all symbolic right?

 

[John Martin]

I have prepared my self seven principles that can help me to interpret the New Testament:
1.Universal validity: my interpretation should have universal validity
2.Unifying: it should not build walls and divide people but break down all the walls and create one God,one creation and one humanity.
3. It must liberating: truth will make you free.
4.It must give possibility for growth-it should open the door for growth
5. It must be reasonable, not impose on the others but explain reasonably
6. Openness to new understanding, never say my interpretation is absolutely right but open to listen any other new understandings.
7. Any new interpretation or understanding should fulfill the first five principles.

 

[Pegg]

I have prepared my self seven principles that can help me to interpret the New Testament:
1.Universal validity: my interpretation should have universal validity
2.Unifying: it should not build walls and divide people but break down all the walls and create one God,one creation and one humanity.
3. It must liberating: truth will make you free.
4.It must give possibility for growth-it should open the door for growth
5. It must be reasonable, not impose on the others but explain reasonably
6. Openness to new understanding, never say my interpretation is absolutely right but open to listen any other new understandings.
7. Any new interpretation or understanding should fulfill the first five principles.

those principles are good, but they will mean different things to different people

What you really need to understand the scriptures is the 'paraclete' or 'helper' as Jesus stated.

 

[John Martin]

(those principles are good, but they will mean different things to different people

What you really need to understand the scriptures is the 'paraclete' or 'helper' as Jesus stated).

.

Yes,certainly the help of the 'pacaclete', the Holy spirit, is necessary.

It does not mean different things to different people: It must have universal validity:
We say the Sun rises in the East. ( of course scientifically the Sun does not rise and set but it is the earth that goes around the Sun). This is universally valid. No body will deny that. it is unifying.
For example Jesus said, the kingdom of God is at hand,repent.
This we can interpret in this way: the kingdom of God is a dynamic word. It means to transform our life into life of God and our actions into actions of God.
As a statement, the first part 'the Kingdom of God is at hand', is a statement of fact,the word 'repent' calls for an action.
The kingdom of God is at hand means: objectively it means that God is everywhere and everyone and everything is in hand. It reveals the universal presence of God. Subjectively it means that ultimately human consciousness with one with God,' the Father and I are one'. When a person realizes this truth this person will say 'the actions that I do are not my own but the Father who dwells in me does his works'
The word 'repent' is an invitation to realize this truth or experience this truth, or aware of this truth etc.
This interpretation is universally valid( at least those who believe in God)
It is unifying, because everyone is already in God.
It is liberating because we can experience the indwelling presence of God.
It gives possibility for growth, from God outside to God inside and even oneness with God.
It seems to be reasonable.
Christ had a profound experience of God and the interpretation we give to his teachings should do justice to him.
We can still keep open if anyone gives a better interpretation.

 

[Pappillion001]

Well, if the scriptures are inspired by God, it makes sense there should be a consistant way of interpreting them, otherwise if the Books of God cannot be understood clearly and consistantly, then the god of these Books is confusing His own people,

:yes:

when the matter of fact is, He claimes His Perpose was to guide, but not to confuse.

:no: Read regarding the tower of Babel. There is a difference between the statements attributed to God and what he says and those from men who tend to make more out of something than is really there.

Moreover, if God has created the world containing the Rules of physics which are part of His own knowledge, why should His own Books contain things that are contrary to scientific Rules?

A) It is all make believe
B) God did not write it
C) Man wrote it without Gods help
D) Man keeps adding to it to make it say something it does not which makes it inconsistent and conflicting.