Official Bible Interpretation Thread

I believe that people have the right to their own morality and their own standard of living. I don't ascribe myself, my morals or my thoughts to any religion.

As for the use of cannabis, I've read very convincing material that suggests that cannabis was used often in certain practices during biblical times and before that by people such as Moses and Jesus. However I personally was not there so I can't say either way. I do not currently use cannabis, I just try to advocate suspected truth. That being said, no truth can ever be fully known. But suspected truth should never be ignored.

Do I agree? Do I agree that cannabis can relieve pain such as a headache? Yes. Would I take it before a valium? Yes. Do I suspect it was and still is used for religious purposes? Yes, apparently so.

 

Church of the Universe requres followers to use it every day in some aspect of life.

 

Again you imply false things about me to demean me, I have never said you were ignorant, just mislead.

As for Love, I was not trying to negotiate anything of the sort with you.

 

I didn't "make up" a belief for Jesus, I merely stated, I believe what Jesus said on the matter.

The Bible is the testimony of others and I read many books that were not recommended to me.

 

So you say but too bad it doesn't agree with what the Bible actually says.

 

Yes, sickness is one thing but demon possession is another. One does not rule out the other.

It is interesting that you seem to believe that the Bible is an insult to common sense and that God would not know what caused sickness and whether there are demons or not.

Thanks for that clarification.

Interesting, how can "archaic metaphors for our states of being" be without a "biological sexual dimorphism"?

Again you show your respect for the Bible by saying "in large part they represent primitive and archaic superstitions".

And that "reality of being", that you point to, is that there are no spirit beings and thus the reality of spirit beings like God and Jesus are also called into question, in your "reality of being".

 

There is hypocrisy almost everywhere, so what does Jesus loving, all the little children of the world, have to do with it ?

 

So you're so afraid of causing fear in someone that you let them get hit by the train? That's just not common sense. Fear or not you try to get them off the tracks, that would be the loving thing to do.

It is that "cruel and vengeful" God that sent Jesus in the first place so why would he want Jesus' teachings to be discarded?

As for "I don't think Jesus' message is come unto me or you will all be schmucked." Wasn't part of Jesus' message about the last days of Jerusalem, as well the last days of this system of things? What happened to Jerusalem? Was what Jesus said just metaphors and symbolism or was Jerusalem actually destroyed in 70 CE?

 

I have never attempted to demean you, or say false things about you.

This comment is about my caring not yours. I do not care what you think of me,
Love is not predicated on performance. I would love you, no matter your acts.

 

Actually, we can both read what is written. It is your belief that you defend, not the intention of Jesus that you defend.

I said we do not read a book unless we are in some way attracted to read it.

 

Why do you bother to make comments like this? Why waste the time? If you have a different interpretation give it and give your supporting verse. What do you think it means?

 

No but common sense does.

The belief in invisible spirit forces as the cause of disease was once common, that is no longer so.

Animus animates animal, not the other way around.

Yes in deed, I show my sane consideration of the material.

No, the reality of being I point to is that we are spirit reaching toward spirit in all things.

 

In large part, I did not see people loving all the children of the world, there were many children left out because they are called evil, or in some other way did not measure up.

 

I am not afraid of causing fear, there is no fear in love. There is no train coming. Will the world end, we all know it will.

Why do you worry about the log in your brothers eye, first remove the log from our own eye then we can see to remove the speck in our brothers eye.

I don't understand this question.

I think Jesus talked about these things happening so that when we saw these sorts of things we would not be swayed by circumstances to loose confidence that things are in order, not to frighten into subservience.

 

We are in God's image in that we can imitate God's qualities. As for feeling pain that is the way we are designed and it is for our benefit that we do so. There are some who do not feel ordinary pain and it has been a curse to them not a blessing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_insensitivity_to_pain

I never said people can't talk in dreams, it's just that usually it is incoherent and almost never poetic.

Yes put it was God who put him into the sleep that caused the dream. Thus if God had not put him to sleep there would be no dream, so God is responsible for the dream of a problem. So according to you and the dope it seems God is the problem or at least responsible for it.

Did you really find this necessary?

Unfair in what way? You and the dope are the ones defending this "dream of separation", which blames God for our problems, I merely pointed out that it defames God, which is what the father of the lie has been doing all along.

 

So the part of the Bible that says the Adam fell asleep is true but the part right before that about God putting Adam to sleep is untrue? Talk about just picking and choosing what you want to believe. And the part where the Bible says Adam dreamt, where was that again?

And again where does the Bible say we are taught dreams as reality?

Really? That would put the trouble starting before the creation of Eve and yet, as you are so fond of saying, God called both man and woman good after he created them so does that mean that God thought this "dream of separation" was a good thing? Sounds like you are defaming God again.

Oh you were so loving not to come right out and say it but that is what this whole "dream of separation" is implying.

Perhaps a way of misunderstanding but understanding, no.

As I have pointed out this whole "dream of separation" ends up blaming God, thus you dishonor him.

 

Actually this is not the way I was taught about this issue.
The second creation event is mans take on his own dilemma and represents a point of departure in the bible as a whole. God never did anything to man. Man never did do anything to god. Man says god is on his side or disapproves of him but this is not so.

Excuse me. I am not defending anything. I am positing an interpretation and that interpretation is not as you describe. The dream of separation is the errant idea that we are separate from god and good. God is certainly not responsible for it but god immediately held out the remedy the moment that idea arose.

 

Seems you have contradicted yourself.

 

Once again, you merely dodge the discussion when you can no longer support your side.

 

No you didn't but as usual when you have no answer, you just say you have already answered.