Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation

[Shadow Wolf]

I think it depends on ones motivation and context.

I didnt say Joe stole the money.

Interpret that statement.

Of course. But the Bible still isn't that hard to read. The problems come from dated language, typos, pesky scribes and translation errors. That doesn't itself make it a difficult read, just something you'd want to read with annotation or other means of assistance to clarify obscured language and point out, f9r example, where we have strong reason to believe some parts of Paul's Epistles weren't him but someone else who added to it later on. But the Bible itself only has about a fifth grade reading level.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The problems come from dated language, typos, pesky scribes and translation errors.

I would add vague, ambiguous, and contradictory language to your list of problems with biblical text.

But I agree that it isn't too difficult to look at scripture and say what it means where it's not unclear and to say that it means nothing specific where it is.

 

[Ignatius A]

Of course. But the Bible still isn't that hard to read. The problems come from dated language, typos, pesky scribes and translation errors. That doesn't itself make it a difficult read, just something you'd want to read with annotation or other means of assistance to clarify obscured language and point out, f9r example, where we have strong reason to believe some parts of Paul's Epistles weren't him but someone else who added to it later on. But the Bible itself only has about a fifth grade reading level.

Well Jesus says in Scripture "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned."

People have argued that baptism isn't necessary for salvation even though Jesus uttered those words. As you read that would you conclude baptism is not necessary to be saved?

 

[2ndpillar]

Well Jesus says in Scripture "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned."

People have argued that baptism isn't necessary for salvation even though Jesus uttered those words. As you read that would you conclude baptism is not necessary to be saved?

You are quoting from Mark 16-20. Who is Mark? Believe what? Saved from what? What about the signs this Mark said would accompany this, such as "cast out demons", speak in tongues, pick up serpents, drink deadly poisons, heal the sick? And then there is the rest of the story.

Mark 16:16“He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. 17“These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; 18they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

 

[Ignatius A]

You are quoting from Mark 16-20. Who is Mark? Believe what? Saved from what? What about the signs this Mark said would accompany this, such as "cast out demons", speak in tongues, pick up serpents, drink deadly poisons, heal the sick? And then there is the rest of the story.

Mark 16:16“He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. 17“These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; 18they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

Now try answering the question, based on what Jesus said is baptism necessary for salvation? "Yes" or "No".

 

[jimb]

Well Jesus says in Scripture "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned."

People have argued that baptism isn't necessary for salvation even though Jesus uttered those words. As you read that would you conclude baptism is not necessary to be saved?

If you're going to rely on the long ending of Mark, don't forget to include these verses...

"And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” Mark 16:17-18

It is a serious mistake to quote the long ending of Mark, which has very little support of being authentic, to prove doctrine.

Additionally, if whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, then John's baptism was all that was necessary to be saved and Christ's sacrificial death was unnecessary

 

[jimb]

Of course. But the Bible still isn't that hard to read. The problems come from dated language, typos, pesky scribes and translation errors. That doesn't itself make it a difficult read, just something you'd want to read with annotation or other means of assistance to clarify obscured language and point out, f9r example, where we have strong reason to believe some parts of Paul's Epistles weren't him but someone else who added to it later on. But the Bible itself only has about a fifth grade reading level.

You are making some contradictory statements. Do you really think that fifth graders can understand the Bible when so many adults have trouble? The answer is obvious!

Incidentally, the great majority of Bibles are way too advanced for many people, never mind fifth graders. And you contradict your own statement when your write "just something you'd want to read with annotation or other means of assistance to clarify obscured language".

 

[2ndpillar]

Now try answering the question, based on what Jesus said is baptism necessary for salvation? "Yes" or "No".

"Jesus" never said what you quoted him as saying. That was said by some guy named "Mark". Do you drink poison also and play with venomous snakes? Some so called "Christians" do, but I doubt that you follow that trend on your own volition. What Yeshua actually said, was that Simon Peter was "Satan" and a "stumbling block to me". It is reported on the grape vine, that Mark was associated with Peter. What does that make Peter's followers? Are they all following "Satan", and his associates, and heirs, such as the pope, in which the pope is a follower of Caesar and Constantine, the beast with two horns like a lamb", since Constantine and Caesar both held the status of Pontifex Maximus, the keeper of the gods and the Calendar, in which all changed the times (Daniel 7:25), which would put them in the "Christian" perceived role of the "antichrist".

 

[Trailblazer]

"Jesus" never said what you quoted him as saying. That was said by some guy named "Mark".

Correct.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are making some contradictory statements. Do you really think that fifth graders can understand the Bible when so many adults have trouble? The answer is obvious!

Incidentally, the great majority of Bibles are way too advanced for many people, never mind fifth graders. And you contradict your own statement when your write "just something you'd want to read with annotation or other means of assistance to clarify obscured language".

I didn't contradict myself. Needing something like a dictionary doesn't necessarily up the difficulty.

What Reading Level Is The Bible? - Christian Website

The Bible is one of the most influential books in human history, with billions of copies sold over thousands of years. But with its ancient language and

www.christianwebsite.com

Reading Level by Translation

King James Version The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, published in 1611, has a reading level between 7th and 8th grade.

New International Version​

The New International Version (NIV), published in 1978 and revised in 2011, has a reading level around the 7th grade.

New Living Translation With a reading level of 6th grade,

Try Moby Dick if you want something on the hard side.

 

[jimb]

I didn't contradict myself. Needing something like a dictionary doesn't necessarily up the difficulty.

What Reading Level Is The Bible? - Christian Website

The Bible is one of the most influential books in human history, with billions of copies sold over thousands of years. But with its ancient language and

www.christianwebsite.com

Try Moby Dick if you want something on the hard side.

If you need a dictionary to understand something you're reading it obviously is difficult for you.

Comparing the Bible and Moby Dick is absurd.

Since this conversation is getting nowhere and all you want to do is argue, I won't discuss it with you any further.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you need a dictionary to understand something you're reading it obviously is difficult for you.

Divine Comedy isn't really that hard of a read. But if refers to many people who lived during the Renaissance era, especially Italian statesmen. Needing side notes to know who those parole were amd what they did didn't make it a hard read.

 

[McBell]

Comparing the Bible and Moby Dick is absurd.

I completely agree.
The Bible is nowhere near as difficult a read as Moby Dick.

Now if you want a near impossible book to read, try Gone With The Wind.

I mean, how was the author able to stay awake long enough to write it?

 

[Audie]

I would add vague, ambiguous, and contradictory language to your list of problems with biblical text.

But I agree that it isn't too difficult to look at scripture and say what it means where it's not unclear and to say that it means nothing specific where it is.

What about parts that just are not true

 

[Audie]

If you need a dictionary to understand something you're reading it obviously is difficult for you.

Comparing the Bible and Moby Dick is absurd.

Since this conversation is getting nowhere and all you want to do is argue, I won't discuss it with you any further.

Looks like fleeing the interview.

And frantically dodging any but your own
chosen perspective.

 

[Sargonski]

If you need a dictionary to understand something you're reading it obviously is difficult for you.

Comparing the Bible and Moby Dick is absurd.

Since this conversation is getting nowhere and all you want to do is argue, I won't discuss it with you any further.

I completely agree.
The Bible is nowhere near as difficult a read as Moby Dick.

Now if you want a near impossible book to read, try Gone With The Wind.

I mean, how was the author able to stay awake long enough to write it?

Well hold on here .. one can not get through the Bible without a dictionary .. of the intra-linear kind --and claim to have understood what is being said. Don't let this difficulty discourage you from reading the Bible Lads .. and just because using such resources will aid understanding of the material .. does not mean it is too difficult friends. LIfe puts up enough barriers in our path without creating ones for ourselves

but .. all that aside .. what is the point of a dictionary or other aid if understanding the Bible is impossible unless God makes a personal visit for Tea .. and tells you the secret meeting. They had some folks speaking in tongues the other day whan Arizona passed the abortion ban .. . Thats God helping us interpret the Law .. make it better ..

 

[Sargonski]

What about parts that just are not true

Never mind .. what about the parts that are true !

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

What about parts that just are not true

That's there, too, but to call them untrue, they have to be clear. I was addressing reasons why scripture might be unclear - vague and ambiguous language and containing contradictory statements.

what about the parts that are true !

What about them? They're useless, since they need to be confirmed empirically to be elevated from claim to truth, in which case what did we need the scripture for? Archeology has confirmed that there was a historical David. Only then did we know that he wasn't mythical like Adam and Noah. But we can't confirm that he was a shepherd or a psalmist or that he killed a giant Phillistine with a slingshot without evidence, and then, once again, what part does scripture play in acquiring that knowledge?

 

[jimb]

Divine Comedy isn't really that hard of a read. But if refers to many people who lived during the Renaissance era, especially Italian statesmen. Needing side notes to know who those parole were amd what they did didn't make it a hard read.

Say what? Can you be any more off-topic?

 

[jimb]

Looks like fleeing the interview.

And frantically dodging any but your own
chosen perspective.

"... fleeing the interview"? You mean I won't be hired?

"... frantically dodging any but your own chosen perspective" Most of us believe what we believe. Isn't that the case with you?