Proof that all interpretation is "personal"...

[Cepha]

Proof that all interpretation is "personal" unless you're Catholic:

Here, Jesus states how only "men" can get to The Father (God) through Him.

Now, if you're a Bible "literalist", then you must accept the scripture as it is written and recognize (according to your strict accordance to going word by word) that Jesus said that only men can go through Him to get to The Father...

John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Some might say "common sense dictates that He also meant women". If that's the case, where does that common sense originate if "not" in The Bible?

It comes from the person applying that common sense making it a personal interpretation.

So, what the person who reads this has to believe is:
A) Jesus is the only way to God for men only (since women are not mentioned there).

B) Jesus included women when he said "man" (even though He didn't actually use the word woman).

[emily445455]

Gal 3

26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

I don't think Christ was overly concerned with being politically correct...I don't blame Him, if He was, the Bible would be a lot bigger and probably more confusing.

[Cepha]

Apr 15, 2009 10:05:23 GMT -5 emily445455 said:

Gal 3

26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

I don't think Christ was overly concerned with being politically correct...I don't blame Him, if He was, the Bible would be a lot bigger and probably more confusing.

I know that and you know that, but what about those who insist that there is no personal interpretating The Bible?

That it has to be taken "as" written with no room for suggesting what Jesus could've meant (when not actually written)?

See what my point is?

That all scripture is personally interpretated.

[emily445455]

Actually, I believe the Scripture should not be personally interpretated. The Bible will answer itself...like in your example....upon a little (or a lot of) investigation.

[watchman]

Actually as scripture itself says there is no (or at least should not be) any personal interpretation. What we should all do is (as emily alluded to) allow scripture to interpret itself.

[cradlecathlic27]

You cant deny that i could read the same scripture as any of you and come up with my own interpretation different than any of yours. That is why some churches preach that this verse means this and other church down the road says it means something else. That is a HUGE problem.

[emily445455]

Apr 15, 2009 15:01:37 GMT -5 cradlecathlic27 said:

You cant deny that i could read the same scripture as any of you and come up with my own interpretation different than any of yours. That is why some churches preach that this verse means this and other church down the road says it means something else. That is a HUGE problem.

Just because many people do this doesn't mean it is right of them to do so. The Bible says one thing, it means one thing...people who privately interpret the Bible instead of comparing Scriptures are doing the wrong thing.

[teresahrc]

Actually as scripture itself says there is no (or at least should not be) any personal interpretation. What we should all do is (as emily alluded to) allow scripture to interpret itself

(watchman)

Just because many people do this doesn't mean it is right of them to do so. The Bible says one thing, it means one thing...people who privately interpret the Bible instead of comparing Scriptures are doing the wrong thing.

(emily)

But when you cut and paste certain verses together, that is your own interpretation that those certain verses relate to each other!

for example,

Cepha quoted
John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

and then Emily quoted

Gal 3

26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

But I could just as easily have quoted this passage:

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. (1 Timothy)

So you see, you are still interjecting your own opinion when you choose which verses to compare and contrast.
That is why scripture must be interpreted by the "church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." (1 Tim. 3) and not by our own interpretation--whatever the method.

teresa

[emily445455]

Gal 3:26-29 has to do with Salvation, 1 Tim ?:11-15 is about how a woman should act within the home in relation to her husband....not Salvation.

The Bible explains itself.

[emily445455]

Once we start privatly interpreting Scripture...where does it stop? In reality...it doesn't. People make up all sorts of things to fit what they want the Bible to say and claim it is "their interpretation".

[teresahrc]

Once we start privatly interpreting Scripture...where does it stop? In reality...it doesn't. People make up all sorts of things to fit what they want the Bible to say and claim it is "their interpretation".

I agree.

That's one of the main reasons I became Catholic.

[teresahrc]

According to the "Status of Global Mission, 2008" of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (its main campus is located in South Hamilton, MA), the number of Christian denominations is about 39,000.

[emily445455]

Sad.

[Cepha]

Apr 15, 2009 10:43:54 GMT -5 emily445455 said:

Actually, I believe the Scripture should not be personally interpretated. The Bible will answer itself...like in your example....upon a little (or a lot of) investigation.

So, you mean that the particular scripture requires "investigation"?

If that's the case, then it's not interpreting itself.

It has to be confirmed by something else.

Right?

[Cepha]

Apr 15, 2009 16:21:07 GMT -5 emily445455 said:

Apr 15, 2009 15:01:37 GMT -5 cradlecathlic27 said:

You cant deny that i could read the same scripture as any of you and come up with my own interpretation different than any of yours. That is why some churches preach that this verse means this and other church down the road says it means something else. That is a HUGE problem.

Just because many people do this doesn't mean it is right of them to do so. The Bible says one thing, it means one thing...people who privately interpret the Bible instead of comparing Scriptures are doing the wrong thing.

So, you mean that The Bible means that Jesus said that only men can get to The Father and not women?

[Cepha]

Apr 16, 2009 13:24:42 GMT -5 @teresahrc said:

Actually as scripture itself says there is no (or at least should not be) any personal interpretation. What we should all do is (as emily alluded to) allow scripture to interpret itself

(watchman)

Just because many people do this doesn't mean it is right of them to do so. The Bible says one thing, it means one thing...people who privately interpret the Bible instead of comparing Scriptures are doing the wrong thing.

(emily)

But when you cut and paste certain verses together, that is your own interpretation that those certain verses relate to each other!

for example,

Cepha quoted
John 14:6
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

and then Emily quoted

Gal 3

26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

But I could just as easily have quoted this passage:

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. (1 Timothy)

So you see, you are still interjecting your own opinion when you choose which verses to compare and contrast.
That is why scripture must be interpreted by the "church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." (1 Tim. 3) and not by our own interpretation--whatever the method.

teresa

According to their beliefs T, if the Jesus only mentions that men can get to The Father but not women, what does that say without having to go elsewhere?

That only women have access to The Father.
Because that is what Jesus literally said in The Bible.

To believe anything else is combine other scriptures to form their belief that women too are allowed access to The Father (even though The Bible nor Jesus never said that).

This is creating a belief that doesn't exist by combining different scriptures instead of just accepting the Word of God "as written".

That is, "if" one is a Bible literalist.

[emily445455]

Apr 16, 2009 14:53:51 GMT -5 Cepha said:

So, you mean that the particular scripture requires "investigation"?

If that's the case, then it's not interpreting itself.

It has to be confirmed by something else.

Right?

I meant investigation within other Scriptures, sorry for being unclear.

[emily445455]

Apr 16, 2009 14:55:08 GMT -5 Cepha said:

So, you mean that The Bible means that Jesus said that only men can get to The Father and not women?

According to Gal 3 about men and women in Christ, that would be an untrue statement.

[Cepha]

Apr 16, 2009 14:08:09 GMT -5 emily445455 said:

Once we start privatly interpreting Scripture...where does it stop? In reality...it doesn't. People make up all sorts of things to fit what they want the Bible to say and claim it is "their interpretation".

I agree with you wholeheartedly.
That's why God established The Church to guide us (as she is guided by The Holy Spirit...Book of Acts).

See, when we have an institution guided by The Holy Spirit guiding us, then there is no way that we can personally interpret The Bible.

If scripture was enough, then Jesus wouldn't have needed The Apostles to spread the Gospels. All you'd have to do is to leave Bibles around and everybody would be saved because they would all read the same things and all believe in it the same exact way.

But then, that would be God forcing His will upon us and God doesn't do that. He allows us to come to Him of our own accord.

Do you agree?

Or disagree?

[Cepha]

Apr 16, 2009 15:01:14 GMT -5 emily445455 said:

Apr 16, 2009 14:53:51 GMT -5 Cepha said:

So, you mean that the particular scripture requires "investigation"?

If that's the case, then it's not interpreting itself.

It has to be confirmed by something else.

Right?

I meant investigation within other Scriptures, sorry for being unclear.

In other words, there's no guarantee that one scripture is enough to convey a meaning/teaching to you?

That some require support from other scriptures?