Christians: Where do you draw the line? (Jesus, Creator, Moses)

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by sojourner

What about those who accept the gospel through faith and baptism by pouring or sprinkling?

Since I don't know if zeezrom is going to answer, I'll just say that it's not the LDS position that these people are not to be considered Christian. They're just not LDS, that's all.

[ChristineES]

If someone is truly saved then you will know- Jesus did say that you would know people by their fruits.

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by ChristineES

If someone is truly saved then you will know- Jesus did say that you would know people by their fruits.

Best to have fruit born of Love and Mercy. No other fruit need apply.

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by peaceful

the bible as we know it today is not the real teachings.

Your statement implies that you know the real teachings. what were the real teachings then? which teachings was replaced? when? how? if you can't tell me, are people suppose to beleive you on a matter of faith?

Originally Posted by peaceful

It has been rewritten by christians to cover up their evil.

Which chrsitians are you talking about? what evil are you referring to? too much accusations will not get us anywhere sir.

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by sojourner

But what meaning does that have to you? That's an interpretation. What about people who hate their own bodies? What do we do about that? Any time we apply the teaching, we engage in interpretation.

No, but it sure helps! That's why the pure of heart have always turned to teachers and theologians for help in understanding.

I am not interpreting the bible. I am reading it.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

I am not interpreting the bible. I am reading it.

Reading is interpretation. When your eye sees a written symbol, your brain interprets that as a letter of the alphabet, and cogent to the process of reading. Further, your brain interprets what that symbol means, in context with the symbols around it. After your brain does this, your cognitive mind extrapolates some kind of meaning from what the brain has determined are words, sentences, and paragraphs. These words, sentences and paragraphs are meant to convey ideas. What are those ideas?

For example, if we read the sentence, "Let's eat, Grandma." We may interpret that as "someone telling Grandma that it's time to eat." If we read the same words, "Let's eat Grandma." We may interpret that completely differently.

In our society, we interpret that one way, because of our social mores. In a cannibalistic society, we might interpret that another way.

In order to "read the Bible," we have to determine many things, such as cultural implications, context, social issues, even puncutation. The Greek texts were written thus:

INALLCAPITALLETTERSWITHNOBREAKSBETWEENWORDSANDWITH NOPUNCTUATIONTHEREFOREHOWCANWE BESURETHATWEREREADINGCORRECTLYWHATWASWRITTEN

Imagine that sentence in letters completely foreign to our first language.

Even your statement, above, is an interpretation. "I'm just reading" is a form of interpretation.

Sorry. You're interpreting. So is everyone else. Including me.

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by sojourner

Reading is interpretation. When your eye sees a written symbol, your brain interprets that as a letter of the alphabet, and cogent to the process of reading. Further, your brain interprets what that symbol means, in context with the symbols around it. After your brain does this, your cognitive mind extrapolates some kind of meaning from what the brain has determined are words, sentences, and paragraphs. These words, sentences and paragraphs are meant to convey ideas. What are those ideas?

For example, if we read the sentence, "Let's eat, Grandma." We may interpret that as "someone telling Grandma that it's time to eat." If we read the same words, "Let's eat Grandma." We may interpret that completely differently.

In our society, we interpret that one way, because of our social mores. In a cannibalistic society, we might interpret that another way.

In order to "read the Bible," we have to determine many things, such as cultural implications, context, social issues, even puncutation. The Greek texts were written thus:

INALLCAPITALLETTERSWITHNOBREAKSBETWEENWORDSANDWITH NOPUNCTUATIONTHEREFOREHOWCANWE BESURETHATWEREREADINGCORRECTLYWHATWASWRITTEN

Imagine that sentence in letters completely foreign to our first language.

Even your statement, above, is an interpretation. "I'm just reading" is a form of interpretation.

Sorry. You're interpreting. So is everyone else. Including me.

Have you noticed that while i remain biblical and reinforce my arguments with verses, all you have done so far is challenge what i am saying BUT YOU HAVE YET TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION.

IF YOU FEEL THAT THE BIBLICAL FACTS I "INTERPRETTED" IS INCORRECT PROViDE ME WITH AN ALTERNATIVE.

now, Mr Sojourner. when Paul said 'keep to which that is written" are you able to interpret it to mean that we should refer to other writtings aside from the gospel?

The word keep means to remain, continue on, and the like. is that subject to interpreation? isn't a fact that it should mean the same to everyone who knows the english language?

Alternatives Mr. Sojourner, you are attacking 'how" i say things and not "what" i am saying.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

Have you noticed that while i remain biblical and reinforce my arguments with verses, all you have done so far is challenge what i am saying BUT YOU HAVE YET TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION.

IF YOU FEEL THAT THE BIBLICAL FACTS I "INTERPRETTED" IS INCORRECT PROViDE ME WITH AN ALTERNATIVE.

now, Mr Sojourner. when Paul said 'keep to which that is written" are you able to interpret it to mean that we should refer to other writtings aside from the gospel?

The word keep means to remain, continue on, and the like. is that subject to interpreation? isn't a fact that it should mean the same to everyone who knows the english language?

Alternatives Mr. Sojourner, you are attacking 'how" i say things and not "what" i am saying.

have you noticed that I have been providing you with alternative interpretations? Thing is, you simply turn them aside with the dismissal, "that's not Biblical." Try using some real exegesis, instead of proof-texting (which only gets you 5 minutes in the Biblical-scholarship penalty-box) for a change.

Please see Post #111 in "do different practices?" thread for an answer to the word "keep" problem. Yes. Everything -- repeat, everything is subject to interpretation.

Actually, I take issue with what you say.