Telling it like it is?

[Sonic247]

One thing that’s good about the Bible is that it gives an accurate picture of the way people are, like in this case:
“(Lamentations 2:14-16) Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee: and they have not discovered thine iniquity, to turn away thy captivity; but have seen for thee false burdens and causes of banishment. All that pass by clap [their] hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jerusalem, [saying, Is] this the city that [men] call The perfection of beauty, The joy of the whole earth? All thine enemies have opened their mouth against thee: they hiss and gnash the teeth: they say, We have swallowed [her] up: certainly this [is] the day that we looked for; we have found, we have seen [it].”
Even many fundamental-type scholars say that people should not preach on sin, but the results are clearly predicted, let’s say that this principle is applied to the Church like it was to Jerusalem. Instead of saying “is this the city that men call the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth.” they say, “is this the people that are called the children of God?” When they see that Christians are just as sinful because nobody makes a big deal about sin. And you can notice today in Christianity, who blasphemes God because of our compromise? The very people that the compromise was made for. Or for another issue, when we say that we believe in evolution to make evolutionists happy and compromise the word God has given us who curses us: evolutionists, if one part of the Bible cannot be taken literally then who knows what other lies it could have. Who would want to join a religion that compromises what it believes in order to please fallible man? Especially after fallible man makes a new discovery and finds out the Bible was right after all, but we didn’t have faith. And when we do give a false view of God like the prophets Jeremiah spoke of people will respond the same way they did in his day:
“they hiss and gnash the teeth: they say, We have swallowed [her] up: certainly this [is] the day that we looked for; we have found, we have seen [it].”

Why do people think it's ok to compromise?:no:

 

[adilrockstar]

One thing that’s good about the Bible is that it gives an accurate picture of the way people are, like in this case:
“(Lamentations 2:14-16) Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee: and they have not discovered thine iniquity, to turn away thy captivity; but have seen for thee false burdens and causes of banishment. All that pass by clap [their] hands at thee; they hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jerusalem, [saying, Is] this the city that [men] call The perfection of beauty, The joy of the whole earth? All thine enemies have opened their mouth against thee: they hiss and gnash the teeth: they say, We have swallowed [her] up: certainly this [is] the day that we looked for; we have found, we have seen [it].”
Even many fundamental-type scholars say that people should not preach on sin, but the results are clearly predicted, let’s say that this principle is applied to the Church like it was to Jerusalem. Instead of saying “is this the city that men call the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth.” they say, “is this the people that are called the children of God?” When they see that Christians are just as sinful because nobody makes a big deal about sin. And you can notice today in Christianity, who blasphemes God because of our compromise? The very people that the compromise was made for. Or for another issue, when we say that we believe in evolution to make evolutionists happy and compromise the word God has given us who curses us: evolutionists, if one part of the Bible cannot be taken literally then who knows what other lies it could have. Who would want to join a religion that compromises what it believes in order to please fallible man? Especially after fallible man makes a new discovery and finds out the Bible was right after all, but we didn’t have faith. And when we do give a false view of God like the prophets Jeremiah spoke of people will respond the same way they did in his day:
“they hiss and gnash the teeth: they say, We have swallowed [her] up: certainly this [is] the day that we looked for; we have found, we have seen [it].”

Why do people think it's ok to compromise?:no:

I agree, We should not ADD or TAKE AWAY

 

[Katzpur]

I agree, We should not ADD or TAKE AWAY

I've been going back and forth between the OP and this post and have been unsuccessful in trying to figure out what in the world your statement has to do with Sonic's post. Would you mind explaining?

 

[Sonic247]

Well that is what I mean, people will take away from the word of God by not telling about what they feel is unpopular.Jeramiah says that the prophets in Jerusalem didn't point out the peoples iniquity to turn away their captivity. And today many people may think Jesus is all fine and good, but they don't need him because they are good people. But the Bible says we are not naturally good and that can't be taken away from the word of God; even if it's unpopular people need to know they are sinful or there is no reason to be saved. Saved from what?

 

[~Ty~]

Why do people think it's ok to compromise?

Because they have eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (that has been transplanted from the garden, to their own soul), and they see themselves as gods.

 

[*Paul*]

I am all for telling it like it is, but it doesn't mean we have to be rude either that only isolates people and puts a cloud in front of the message. I love and read the old preachers. John Bunyan, Charles Spurgeon, John Owen, F.B Meyer, H.A Ironside and so on they are from a different era when it was more imprortant to please God and present the truth than to tickle mens ears and tell them what they want ot hear.

The preaching of the Law is too much neglected now and the fruit of it is evident to those who know something of God's Holiness, Justice and Character and who know just how wretched and vile and putrid the natural man is.

This is why it is so important to support the few faithful uncompromising preachers and teachers we have today and to stand boldly ourselves for the plain and simple truth of Gods Word.

 

[Sonic247]

That's a good point, no one wants to be sinful, but it's better to be sinful and know it then to be sinful and think you are good. The Bible says the law is a mirror that lets us see ourselves for how we really are. It can also be compared to a thermometer, which doesn't cure you but at least lets you know you are sick. The law doesn't make people righteous but it at least lets people know that they aren't righteous and they need a saviour.

 

[FatMan]

Why do people think it's ok to compromise?:no:

It's OK to compromise because very few things in life are black and white, despite most people's best efforts to make them that way.

Even interpretation of the Bible is open to wiggle room, a "fact" that many fundamentalists fail to observe. Thus, an uncompromising faction, who in all possibility could be wrong is trying to bend the way many others think.

Of course that is going to lead to trouble and disagreement.......unless compromise is reached.

 

[Sonic247]

Although people may have diffrent interpretations of the Bible that doesn't mean that more than one of them is right. I think the opposite of what you said is happening: many things are black and white in life but people try to make them more grey.

 

[FatMan]

Although people may have diffrent interpretations of the Bible that doesn't mean that more than one of them is right. I think the opposite of what you said is happening: many things are black and white in life but people try to make them more grey.

Ahh...but there's the rub. If people make multiple interpretations of the Bible - since nearly everything that is in the bible is up for interpretation, what are the chances that a person making 10 interpretations is going to go 10 for 10??

I know that percentage is very small, yet ask a person who thinks they are knowledgeable about the bible and most will say that they indeed can go 10 for 10.

Unless we are dealing with a mathematical or scientific question, very little is black and white. And interpretation of the Bible is way down the list, because not only are many people incorrect, they are arrogantly incorrect.

 

[Sonic247]

Ok what would be an example of something from the Bible with multiple interprations that could both be right? I think if the verse is looked at in context and compared to other scriptures that it really isn't all that hard to interpret right.

 

[Booko]

Although people may have diffrent interpretations of the Bible that doesn't mean that more than one of them is right.

Very true, but as for creativity, I've found it unwise to sell God short either.

While there are things that do seem quite clearcut and not subject to much interpretation, it's also true that when it comes to Creative Writing God is far superior to mere human poets, who manage to bury multiple meanings in their merely human work.

There is a saying common in some quarters: "For every verse there are 70 meanings, only one of which is commonly known among the people."

But your main point, I think, was that we have reached the point where the religious are afraid of saying anything that might be challenging to anyone, and that point I think is a good one and worth examining.

I can't think of any religion that doesn't present some sort of challenge to the believer.

And seriously, I don't know any school teacher worth their salt that doesn't present some sort of challenge to the student. If mere humans do this, why should we expect God to do any less?

The problem we have as individuals is not so much to speak the truth, but to find a way, as Paul admonishes us, to "speak the truth in love." That's a toughie!

 

[FatMan]

Ok what would be an example of something from the Bible with multiple interprations that could both be right? I think if the verse is looked at in context and compared to other scriptures that it really isn't all that hard to interpret right.

I didn't say how many interpretations could be right. Assuming only one interpretation is correct and somebody is examining 10 different verses, what do you think the liklihood that somebody will correctly interpret each verse? I'd say it would be very low. Statistically it would be well worse than 1%.

 

[Sonic247]

Well that would be pretty bad then since most chapters in the Bible have more than 10 verses. I someone can’t read that far without misinterpreting the Bible then their isn’t much point reading it at all. Anyway it’s not always not knowing what God says, but as far as preachers go it is often knowing but not telling anyone.

 

[FatMan]

Well that would be pretty bad then since most chapters in the Bible have more than 10 verses. I someone can’t read that far without misinterpreting the Bible then their isn’t much point reading it at all. Anyway it’s not always not knowing what God says, but as far as preachers go it is often knowing but not telling anyone.

But isn't your question regarding why it is OK to compromise?

Compromise is a must because very few people can state a position definitively, either through their own intellectual hurdles or because their position is unable to be defended without argument.

It doesn't matter if the issue is regarding what god said or if it regarding which TV show is the best - it is all up for interpretation. Now if you want to debate the atomic weight of Hydrogen - we have a set understanding of what that is. Who's better looking - Ginger or Mary Ann - not so much agreement there.

And since the Bible is open for interpretation (a fact borne out by the creation of so many different Christian groups), then it appears that the need to compromise has been around since early times.

If you feel that you fully understand the Bible and have the true answer to all that you've read, you're either a complete genius, or an utter fool. Since you are probably neither, we will have to compromise that you're someplace in the middle. And in a case like that, I think you'd prefer it that way.

 

[sojourner]

We're not at all sure "how it is." How can we possibly "tell it like it is?" The Bible gives us some clues, but not all the answers. As Paul says, "Now we see only in part." We can tell what our perspective of it is; we can give our take on it, but that doesn't mean that's "how it is."

 

[may]

That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,​

You alone are the Most High over all the earth.psalm 83;18
(Isaiah 42:8) "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images.

 

[Sonic247]

I'm not talking about comprimises made on things the Bible is unclear on. There is some examples of things that are comprimised: Preaching on sin or hell (not pleasant but true), accepting homosexuality as a life style, woman being able to be the pastor of a church, leaders in the church getting drunk, can someone that has been divorced be a pastor? how old is the earth? is abortion wrong? a pastor should not be covetous. Stuff like that is comprimised in churches all over this country.

 

[Booko]

I'm not talking about comprimises made on things the Bible is unclear on.

can someone that has been divorced be a pastor?

It's not a compromise to understand the historical situation that caused Paul to make such a remark? (Have you ever been to an Orthodox synagogue? It helps in understanding the remark.)

how old is the earth?

So if the Bible isn't a science text, we're compromising?

a pastor should not be covetous.

Yeah, and no one else either. Works for me.

Stuff like that is comprimised in churches all over this country.

Well, I came from an early experience with Christianity that focused so much on the sin and hellfire and brimstone that it was difficult to grasp the "for God so loved the world" part.

The flip side of this is forgetting that there are actually behaviours that are destructive to ourselves and others, either physically or spiritually, and we could use some encouragement and guideance to stay away from those things, and not pretend they aren't dangerous.

How about doing a novel thing and finding a balanced approach instead?