Official Bible Interpretation Thread

That's the thing about religion...and most certainly Christianity - there are many, many that may call themselves Christian yet differ totally in their interpretation of the word. There are also those that call themselves Christian that live lifes that have nothing to do with God.
I feel myself to be a devout believer and pray often/carry on internal conversations w/ Him when the spirit moves, so to say. Yet, there would be some that would judge me and question my Christianity because I do not attend church.

 

Perhaps I am wrong, and would love for someone to correct me; but, I would bet God isn't all that interested in us going over and over semantics...

 

I'm sure many would love to 'correct' you.

Many think that because they know what words are printed in some bibles they also know about God and what He thinks.

Christ has made it simple for us. Be peaceful, charitable, merciful and forgiving.

And continue with your conversation.

I can't imagine anything else is as important as these things. Else He would have taught otherwise. He seemed unimpressed with the activity of religious lawyers.

 

worlds, I really find you quite amusing. )
I remember Jesus tripping up a group of lawyers regarding the question of what is the greatest commandent. lol Which He came up with a couple of whole new ones to put first. Regarding this subject, in general, to my best understanding, Jesus wasn't all that impressed at those standing on the corner(s) ripping their clothes and shouting scripture. He wanted us to feel/know within the word of the law - not just (or only) the written letter.
I know I personally need to find that quiet place within when I need to get there,in my heart, with the Lord. Yet, throughout the day I will sometimes find myself with a running commentary to Him about "stuff".
A lot of yelling is not going to help me personally; but, I know those that feel different. And those ppl I know personally are talking about the "yelling" just going on in the church - although literally nobody there regards it as "yelling" (tho' that is indeedy what it is). They are just letting the Spirit take them, or something. I certainly do not mean to imply that they, as a group, do not "feel the spirit"..."for where 2 or more are gathered in my name, there will I be". or something like that.
Tho' I do not actively participate in a church such as I have described, I have in the past (as well as know someone now attending church at the Pentocoastal, I think they call it). Many protestants do not want to confront/face the issue of speaking in tongues. However, if there is an interpreter there, the speaking in tongues is fine and accepted...tho' there are those that supposedly do this - speak in tongues in their private prayer life. According to the bible, all of this is fine and correct.

 

For what it's worth, the Bible does say:
And let us consider one another to incite to love and fine works, not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as some have the custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as YOU behold the day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:24-25)

 

Speaking in tongues is a peculiar phenomenon to me. As it appears to happen only in certain demoninations and in those tends to happen with some regularity, particularly when there are audiences to witness it, I have a tendency to be skeptical about the causation. Not saying it definately isn't the manifestation of the Holy Spirit - just saying that there may be other reasons for it (hysteria, auto hypnosis, self hypnosis, fakery - to name a few)

 

At the original "speaking in tongues", the "tongues" seem to have foreign languages, seeing as the foreigners were able to say I hear them speaking in my own language.

So it would seem that the purpose of "speaking in tongues" was to witness to foreigners about the glory of God, rather than some abstract proof that they had Holy Spirit, as it is today.

As it was, there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, reverent men, from every nation of those under heaven. So, when this sound occurred, the multitude came together and were bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Indeed, they were astonished and began to wonder and say: “See here, all these who are speaking are Gal·i·le′ans, are they not? And yet how is it we are hearing, each one of us, his own language in which we were born? Par′thi·ans and Medes and E′lam·ites, and the inhabitants of Mes·o·po·ta′mi·a, and Ju·de′a and Cap·pa·do′ci·a, Pon′tus and the [district of] Asia, and Phryg′i·a and Pam·phyl′i·a, Egypt and the parts of Lib′y·a, which is toward Cy·re′ne, and sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cre′tans and Arabians, we hear them speaking in our tongues about the magnificent things of God.” (Acts 2:5-11)

 

So the 'believers' that speak in tongues today don't actually know what speaking in tongues is. Delicious. Nice of their 'reverends' to set them straight on it.

 

Personally I would say that they don't but I'm sure that those that speak in tongues today would disagree with me.

 

Pretty much yes, but then again--most Catholics (according to a US poll) do not know what the Church's teaching on the Eucharist is.


BTW- Anyone else getting the phantom 92nd page in this thread?

 

Yep, I'm getting the phantom 92nd page.

 

I wonder if getting to the 92nd page has fixed it?

 

Props!

 

Thank you, OWB, for basically reminding me of where the "speaking in tongues" originated...I knew that; but, had forgotten it. Also, believe it or not, I actually found the scripture I was speaking of regarding the importance of having an interpreter there:
1 Corinthians 14: 27 & 28. 28 even says "But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." Of course, for the whole context, one should read from 1 Cor. 14: 21 - 28 for what I was speaking of earlier.

Following this, I am going to bring up a most unpopular subject (especially with us women), which is 1Cor. 14: 34 (and on through) to the end. It is telling that women should "keep silent in the churches..." () Verse 38 even says (after we are supposed to go home and ask a man whatever we pitiful women don't understand - lol) "if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." What in the world?!?

I need someone to explain this to me in a way that helps me understand. Surely it can't mean what I've interpreted it to mean. I've been taught that a woman can be a Sunday-school teacher, which the best one I ever had was a woman. (and she is now over our county's prayer ministry) That isn't keeping silent! But then, probably the verse was referring to speaking before the church...so what about all the women being ordained now - in all different denominations!?
Thanks in advance for helping me understand.

 

Well, let's face it. Paul had no shortage of opinions and he really thought he knew it all.

 

I will respond with the Church's teaching on your larger post, but I want to breifly touch upon this one here.

Ordination cannot be confired upon women. People can try to ordain women, but they in reality do nothing. They do just that, try.

Women's ordination isn't just a "teaching on which the Church is backwards", but a theological impossibility.

 

St Paul probably didn't write the antiwomen stuff found within his letters. That doesn't change their inspiration, but it is just an interesting historical note.

 

And a convenient one.

 

Why do you say that.

 

How so?

I am looking at the historicity of St Paul. By most other things attributed to him, he seemed to think everyone, for whatever issues were going n, than none were the lesser before God.

This unkown person probably added this because of something else going on in a local church, but it is, again, none-the-less inspired.