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

[Unfettered]

No, it was not. When I responded to your post it copied the whole post. You can still read it. There is no support for your post within it.

In a debate if you cannot support a claim and refuse to after someone points it out that is the same as you admitting that you were wrong.

You misunderstand. I endorse the statement of the OP because I do receive the things of the Spirit of God; they are not foolishness to me; I know them because I spiritually discern them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This is sound.

It's not sound. There's noshred of truth to it. It's nothing more than another tool of Christian arrogance that allows them to easily dismiss all criticism without considering it.
It's absolutely no different, and just as equally absurd and preposterous, when a Christian ignores what apostates say just to say they go apostate because they just want to sin.

 

[jimb]

Thanks for clearing that up.

But since believers disagree with each other, is that because the Spirit tells them different things, just for mischief?

Or does the Spirit have a speech impediment, or speak only in koine Greek, or is inclined to mumble, so it's hard to understand?

How does that work?

Why don't you understand the quote? "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:14

Here is the same verse and the two following from a modern translation:

"Those who are unspiritual do not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to them, and they are unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny.

“For who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”
But we have the mind of Christ." 1 Corinthians 2:14-16

Judging by their posts, many people on this forum have clearly demonstrated the truth of these verses. They don't understand the truths of Scripture because they are spiritually discerned. Because Christians have "the mind of Christ", we are able to understand them.

"Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The Bible is not a scientific textbook. It is a book that teaches people spiritual truths, not scientific facts. There would be no point in turning to scientific texts for spiritual answers, correct?

Spiritual truth is very debatable. Especially considering Christianity has suck a shaky theology that it gets basically nearly everything abouf Judaism wrong and retroactively reads Messianic prophecy into passages that aren't about the Messiah.

 

[Unfettered]

It's the notion of the Spirit you mentioned. I'm asking how it works, such that it results in so much disagreement between its believers.

OK, so you're asking. Disagreement results from human imperfection, not from failure on God's part.

 

[Unfettered]

It's not sound.

You and I disagree. Impasse.

 

[jimb]

You are pompous man, aren't you?
No one knows God, not even Jesus.
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only." Mat 24:36

By the way, it's the third time I'm asking for your reply to my question if you support God's commands in the OT, that people must kill disobedient children and those working on Saturdays, also if you agree that slaves can be bought and used as property (inherited by owner's children).
Lack of response from you clearly means that the Bible is not 100% correct as you claim. Just to remind you though that the omniscient God can not change.

Again: I know God and God knows me. You can accept that or reject it; that is of no concern to me.

And of course, Jesus knows His own Father.

Secondly, my lack of response is solely due to the fact that I won't answer your questions. Why should I entertain your absurdity?

 

[jimb]

You're arrogant ("I know the truth"), defiant ("I am really not interested in your opinion"), indifferent to the way you are perceived ("If some disagree with the above or consider what I say to be disrespectful, that is of no concern to me"), and appear to be at war with the other participants in this thread. You probably consider yours a religion of love.

I'm still waiting for your apology to the "fools" you've gratuitously offended with your scripture, but that won't happen, will it, because you have "God" in your corner. You KNOW you're right and don't care what others think. You don't see the atheistic humanists here posting like that, and there's reason for that.

You are entirely correct: there will be no apology from me. If people are offended by Scripture, that is their problem, not mine.

BTW I was an atheist once. I thought that I was smarter than other people because I knew the truth, but God clearly showed me that I was wrong. Now I know God and am known by God. That is sufficient for me.

Galatians 4:8-9, "Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to beings that by nature are not gods. Now, however, that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental principles? How can you want to be enslaved to them again?"

It is extremely hard for people who don't know God to understand those of us who do.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You and I disagree. Impasse.

It's called a debate thread. This idea you must have the holy ghost us nothing more than a means to silence criticism without actually hearing or considering it. It's a facet of the holier than thou mentality,
Like it or not the Bible isn't a difficult read. Inconsistencies, contradiction, typos, editorializing and poor translationsn are the main concern when it comes to reading and comprehending it. This just isn't like Heidegger, Spinoza or Hegel where they are widely regarded as difficult reads and will require other sources (especially dictionaries and encyclopedias, with other philosophers and secondary texts also helping). The Bible can be easily read, especially if it's annotated like a good version of Divine Comedy (another book that itself isn't hard but many of the references are obscure).

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

You misunderstand. I endorse the statement of the OP because I do receive the things of the Spirit of God; they are not foolishness to me; I know them because I spiritually discern them.

Other Christians who follow a different church doctrine and scriptural interpretation than you do believe they can also "spiritually discern" the Bible. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought that these Christians were wrong and misled in their beliefs, but you believe that you are correct in yours.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You misunderstand. I endorse the statement of the OP because I do receive the things of the Spirit of God; they are not foolishness to me; I know them because I spiritually discern them.

How would you demonstrate that to be a fact? A strong belief does not make it factual.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it is a misunderstood claim (by you).

Really? Then where did he provide any support?

 

[Unfettered]

It's called a debate thread.

I understand that. My response conveyed that I was not interested in the kind of debate that would flow from the post to which I was responding.

This idea you must have the holy ghost us nothing more than a means to silence criticism without actually hearing or considering it. It's a facet of the holier than thou mentality,

Now that is a response that can be discussed intelligently. It's not a simple "No it's not," which is largely just an invitation to argue.

To the discussion point, your response dismisses or ignores without substance the possibility that what Paul said is true: That spiritual communication IS required to to understand the things of God. If that is true, how is it that to agree with or confirm that assertion, or to make the same assertion oneself is to silence opposition without consideration, or to express the idea that one is holier than anyone who disagrees? My experience has constituted a confirmation of what Paul asserted, and leads me to an affirmation of his statement. If you want to discuss that, we sure can. But I neither confirm or affirm to silence anyone or place myself above anyone. On the other hand, the blanket dismissal of my, and Paul's, experiential statements does feel like subordination and silencing.

Seems that the accusation here follows the action, rather than points to it?

Like it or not the Bible isn't a difficult read.

Each person will find it challenging to a different degree, but Paul wasn't talking about how easy or hard it is to read the Bible.

 

[Unfettered]

Other Christians who follow a different church doctrine and scriptural interpretation than you do believe they can also "spiritually discern" the Bible. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought that these Christians were wrong and misled in their beliefs, but you believe that you are correct in yours.

I know that is the case, yes.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It's not sound. There's noshred of truth to it. It's nothing more than another tool of Christian arrogance that allows them to easily dismiss all criticism without considering it.
It's absolutely no different, and just as equally absurd and preposterous, when a Christian ignores what apostates say just to say they go apostate because they just want to sin.

Some Christians enjoy boasting that they have spiritual discernment to properly understand the Bible, whereas we (and other non-Christians) do not, but what they seem to forget or ignore is the fact that we (and many other non-Christians) were once Christians and are well-versed in it. We read it, studied it, and prayed for spiritual guidance when we were Christians. We didn't forget what we had learned when we renounced our Christian faith. We retained that knowledge and are now able to use it to challenge the credibility of the Bible. During the years I was a Christian, I thought that reading and studying the Bible on a daily basis would deepen my faith in God and Jesus, but all I did was eventually study my way out of believing in God, Jesus, and the Bible.

I read and studied the Bible on a daily basis throughout the thirty years I was a Christian. I extensively studied it and Christian theology while training to be a street preacher and evangelism team leader. In fact, I was a very effective street preacher and evangelism team leader for several years. I also studied the Bible and Christian theology in depth while assisting my nephew in his extended theological studies to become an ordained minister. He was studying to earn a Master of Theological Studies (MTS) degree. He eventually studied his way out of believing in the Bible and in God just as I did. A few weeks after I renounced my faith, he told me that he had made the decision to renounce his after extensively studying the Bible and Christian theology with me.

 

[Unfettered]

How would you demonstrate that to be a fact?

I don't have to demonstrate it in any way in order for it to be a fact.

A strong belief does not make it factual.

I agree; I did not assert a strong belief; to answer as if I did creates a strawman fallacy.

 

[jimb]

Id agree that it might be a story with "spiritual teaching".
Or it might just be a story that never had any biblical
meaning but somehow got in there. Or or.

Our OP has not weighed in. Lots of others, most,
I would venture, who claim god-help think god told
them it was a world wide flood, real as rain.

Lots on this forum are dead set on just that.
All guided of god to that understanding.

How would you explain this?

The whole Bible is spiritual teaching. Some people "get it", some don't. It's generally quite clear who's who.

 

[jimb]

Some Christians enjoy boasting that they have spiritual discernment to properly understand the Bible, whereas we (and other non-Christians) do not, but what they seem to forget or ignore is the fact that we (and many other non-Christians) were once Christians and are well-versed in it. We read it, studied it, and prayed for spiritual guidance when we were Christians. We didn't forget what we had learned when we renounced our Christian faith. We retained that knowledge and are now able to use it to challenge the credibility of the Bible. During the years I was a Christian, I thought that reading and studying the Bible on a daily basis would deepen my faith in God and Jesus, but all I did was eventually study my way out of believing in God, Jesus, and the Bible.

I read and studied the Bible on a daily basis throughout the thirty years I was a Christian. I extensively studied it and Christian theology while training to be a street preacher and evangelism team leader. In fact, I was a very effective street preacher and evangelism team leader for several years. I also studied the Bible and Christian theology in depth while assisting my nephew in his extended theological studies to become an ordained minister. He was studying to earn a Master of Theological Studies (MTS) degree. He eventually studied his way out of believing in the Bible and in God just as I did. A few weeks after I renounced my faith, he told me that he had made the decision to renounce his after extensively studying the Bible and Christian theology with me.

Not to change the subject, but... what made you renounce your faith?

 

[Tomef]

OK, so you're asking. Disagreement results from human imperfection, not from failure on God's part.

How can people be mistaken if they are guided by the spirit of god? That would mean the guide is mistaken.

 

[Unfettered]

How can people be mistaken if they are guided by the spirit of god?

They can't be (confining the reach of that assertion to the specific guidance received).

That would mean the guide is mistaken.

That is ruled out as per above.