A matter of context

[Stubbly_Dooright]

You know Paranoid Android, I could respond, and feel that I could from a particular point of view. I was raised in a secular household. My mom is Prespertarian and is still in that belief. There have been times that her belief has helped me in the past. My father was raised congregational, and feel that if I didn't follow my own beliefs which are based in a lot of New Age beliefs, I would be followering my father's. I also have a B.A. in English. On top of that, I grew up not going to Church or reading the bible. So, I wonder if this is also a particular viewpoint I could use to how I can answer yours, I thought I could answer.

One thought is, I think you should take over as teacher!

It does seem that my opinion is that your opinion seems sound.

Another thought is that it could be left open to interpretation. Now who is qualified to interpretate it right? The bible teacher or you or anyone else? A lot of my courses in college dealt with studying literature from bygone ages. Meaning that the English language has gone through many changes. I felt that my English professors had the background and degrees to interpretate the languages of the literture as close as they can. I also felt, as my studying and years would go by, I could in a sense. I may have some interpretations of what the authors and the literature were saying, but I don't I was close to it in many circumstances.

It must be remembered in this post of mine, this is from a secular point of view, and thought that mine might make a particular contribution to this thread.

(This is also a point, that I haven't read other's postsyet, so I use my own viewpoint for this too.)

I do not know though, PA, that you attend your own bible studies or not, so I wonder if you need to take into account various other teacher's teachings into context too.

I also know, that I might be off, because I don't have that background. I am wondering if, if that would help in my contripution for this thread as well.

I remember David Koresh and the Davidians at Waco. I remember seeing tv shots of him preaching and interpretating the bible to his cult. I also remember various churches and congregations thoughout America stating that the Davidians do not follow what they believe is what they themselves believe in and teach.

SO, I don't know who is right, and we have texts that are from another time and lanquage. Could be, when you read the bible, does one have to feel that the higher power helps them interpretate the bible right for them? DOes it do the same thing for the bible study teacher?

I'm sure those who have a more organised religious background in this thread will give you a better context to this matter. I'm wondering though if a secular vision, like mine, would help in coming to a conclusion in your thoughts too.

I hope I did help, though.

Edited July 29, 2007 by Stubbly_Dooright

[Beckys_Mom]

The problem with christianity is...........it has split so many times into so many different faiths..that each faith will read something and take from it what they want...this is why there are so so many disagreements and arguements amongst christians as a whole

I wouldnt be surprized if another protestant group built another church of their own and gave it a name...........

Look at the Presbyterians they couldnt agree with eachother for crying out loud...now here in N.Ireland Paisley developed his own church and re-named it - The FREE Presbyterian church...that do not get along with the other Presbyterians lol

Wont be too long before another protestant lives up to their name and protests their faith as a - IE baptist...and re-name the new baptists something like --> The free baptists LOL

and all of this all because of who understands WHAT in the bible...........

too much agro for my liking...best to stay clear of it lol

[WalkingWithFire]

The problem with christianity is...........it has split so many times into so many different faiths..that each faith will read something and take from it what they want...this is why there are so so many disagreements and arguements amongst christians as a whole

I wouldnt be surprized if another protestant group built another church of their own and gave it a name...........

Look at the Presbyterians they couldnt agree with eachother for crying out loud...now here in N.Ireland Paisley developed his own church and re-named it - The FREE Presbyterian church...that do not get along with the other Presbyterians lol

Wont be too long before another protestant lives up to their name and protests their faith as a - IE baptist...and re-name the new baptists something like --> The free baptists LOL

and all of this all because of who understands WHAT in the bible...........

too much agro for my liking...best to stay clear of it lol

The Bible only teaches one church. You can't judge the Bible by what people choose to do with it. You have to look at it within the context in which it was written.

[Beckys_Mom]

The Bible only teaches one church. You can't judge the Bible by what people choose to do with it. You have to look at it within the context in which it was written.

This dont make sense...cuz I wasnt judging the bible...i as talking about the many different faiths within christianity that dont agree with eachother

[momentarylapseofreason]

Context has no meaning unless you have the "autographs" of the various books of the Bible. You need to read the book "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman, one of the foremost textual critics of today. He points out that there are over 10,000 variations among the ancient texts, many of no consequence but many many that have actual bearing on doctrine and dogma of the Christian religion! What Christians read today has been altered so many times that the original message is so obscured as to be unlike anything taught today.

All of you who are truly interested in bible study might want to read his book.

Here is a little more info on Ehrman.

Bart D. Ehrman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bart D. Ehrman is a New Testament scholar and an expert on early Christianity. He received his Ph.D and M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary where he studied under Bruce Metzger. He currently serves as the chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He was the President of the Southeast Region of the Society of Biblical Literature, and worked closely as an editor on a number of the Society's publications. Currently, he co-edits the series New Testament Tools and Studies.

Much of Ehrman's writing has concentrated on various aspects of Walter Bauer's thesis that Christianity was always diversified or at odds with itself. Ehrman is often considered a pioneer in connecting the history of the early church to textual variants within biblical manuscripts and in coining such terms as "Proto-orthodox Christianity." In his writings, Ehrman has turned around textual criticism. From the time of the Church Fathers, it was the heretics (Marcion, for example) that were charged with tampering with the biblical manuscripts. Ehrman theorizes that it was more often the Orthodox that "corrupted" the manuscripts, altering the text to promote particular viewpoints. He has authored or contributed to nineteen books.

Ehrman has two children, a daughter, Kelly, and a son, Derek. He is married to Sarah Beckwith (Ph.D., King's College London), Marcello Lotti Professor of English at Duke University.

Ehrman became an Evangelical Christian as a teen. He attended Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton College (B.A., 1978). His desire to know the original words of the Bible led him to textual criticism, which in turn undermined his faith in the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Ehrman now considers himself an agnostic. He appeared on The Colbert Report, as well as The Daily Show, in 2006 to promote his book Misquoting Jesus and was jokingly called an "atheist without balls" (alluding to his agnosticism) on national television by Stephen Colbert.[1]

In March of 2006, Ehrman and evangelical theologian William Lane Craig engaged in a debate entitled "Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?" on the campus of the College of the Holy Cross, with Ehrman arguing the opposing position. Following the event, Ehrman's publisher, along with Craig, expressed interest in publishing the transcript in book form. However, Ehrman declined.[2][3][4] In June of 2006, a transcript of the debate was made available on the college's website.[5]

LINK:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Edited July 29, 2007 by momentarylapseofreason