• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does 'Bible-based' mean anything?

The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?
 

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
I always took 'Bible-based' to be a pejorative term for 'true Christian' as opposed to 'Catholic', which many Protestants do not believe read or use the Bible. So to me, 'Bible-based' is code for 'Protestant'.

I think your cynicism could be somewhat justified.
 
Last edited:

exchemist

Veteran Member
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?

Taken at face value, it is pretty meaningless, since all Christianity and Judaeism is obviously founded on the bible.

However @Rival makes a good observation. In practice it seems to be a term used only by sola scriptura Protestants of various flavours, often to claim their beliefs superior to those of other Christians according to the degree to which they are said (by these same people) to adhere or otherwise to Luther's principle.

As for your idea of picking a set of verses, constructing a world view and then force fitting the rest of the bible to it, that could be taken as a kind of caricature of what the whole of Christianity does, in that it takes the reported teaching of Christ and the Apostles in the New Testament and interprets the Old Testament in that light. Is that what you meant? Or, if you were thinking of something more specific, can you give an example?
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?


Haha, I think it’s pretty common.

Unless you deeply dedicate yourself to studying Scripture (preferably in spiritual context and frame of mind), that’s what you’ve got.

Most people do not have the time to study the Bible personally; they are busy living (in worldliness) and rely on spiritual leaders who do so on their behalf.

Of course they interpret both life and Scripture through the bits of their faith that they grasp.


Humbly
Hermit
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?
I guess it's ok. But couldn't it mean "Not Koran based" or "humanistic thinking based" et al?
 

VoidCat

Pronouns: he/him/they/them
I always took 'Bible-based' to be a pejorative term for 'true Christian' as opposed to 'Catholic', which many Protestants do not believe read or use the Bible. So to me, 'Bible-based' is code for 'Protestant'.

I think your cynicism could be somewhat justified.
Ugh im reminded of the prejudice I was taught growing up that Catholics aren't true christians and how I acted as a person in the past towards anyone who disagreed with anything I believed. Can I go back and shoot old me? They were such a bigot towards too many groups...

Anyway to the OP...yes your cynicism is justified. Very justified. For a large number of reasons
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:
I'm going to try and approach this from a different direction than I normally would.

As a child I thought the love of my family was supernatural or particularly Christian. Our strong love was evidence of a special relationship with God. We were approved of and were given truth, and our love was the proof. I was a church kid, which was a somewhat insular life. I grew to believe my life was privileged by God, so much so that as I grew older I began to question how I could have such privilege from God. The idea of being privileged did not make sense.

I lived in a suburb in which we didn't know most neighbors. I wasn't allowed to wander about and make friends, because my parents feared I might be kidnapped or run over by a car. (Kidnapping and crime had recently become heavily reported in the news. If a child disappeared in Hawaii it was like it had happened locally.) Many kids in the neighborhood were not like me and were allowed to roam about on bicycles, but not me. I also didn't live near to any relatives and only saw them once a year. My neighborhood in a suburb was to me nothing more than asphalt.

Church fulfilled my need for neighbors and family. At church everyone hugged, greeted one another like long lost friends. They dressed well, and they were respectful. We held doors for one another and smiled and greeted and said goodbye. It was a wonderful neighborhood full of food and friends and noise. And we did things for people: for drug addicts and prisoners and people without food. As a child I could talk to anyone, anyone at all in church and wander about like I owned it. Old men told me stories. Thousands of people recognized me. I knew all the secret rooms, every secret, every sound. I knew how to get into the attic, and I knew how to sneak into the ceiling though I never did so. I knew all the kitchens, all the restrooms, all the hallways. I saw them as they changed and the people, too.
*****

Many people live in small towns, in farming communities; or they may attend the same church all of their lives which can function for them as an isolated community. There are many small communities, and I think this has a lot to do with how people perceive insular bible-based christiandom. I have reason to think so, although I am generalizing from my experience.

So it is easy for a person who grows up in a small community to think of it as special and of their family love as supernatural. If they also believe that their community has a leg up on scripture, has more truth, then as a result they may associate their level of truth as privileged, something they must be grateful to God for.

That is a strong bible-based community.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
When I hear/read "Bible-based" it seems to be attempting a few things. One is that it implies there is only one proper meaning and interpretation to any given text, and that this is an absolute and uncompromising interpretation. This seems to suggest the believer is infallible or beyond reproach when they are making their case.

Second it also suggests the Bible has some sort of authority that everyone has to recognize, including atheists.

To my mind both of these are a sort of bluff that Christians will assert in debate or in claims. It seems to try to remove the believer from the equation and instead put the burden on the Bible, and the power /influence it has attained over millennia. Obviously the Bible needs to be seen as perfect and essentially God itself. These are a priori assumptions and can be disputed since "Bible-based" tends not to be "reality-based".
 
Post #3: Your caricature analysis is fairly close, I think. The only area I would make a distinction in is where Christians make no claim that the Bible is the be-all and end-all of their faith, which is in fact most of Christendom.

Examples of where the world-view is the real driving force include predestination, attitudes towards alcohol and the role of human effort in Christian salvation. I am quite happy to describe the Bible as containing writings from people who did not have the same views as other writers. For example, one part would favour a more Calvinist reading while the other might give support to an Arminian viewpoint.

Asking what 'the Bible says' on a topic is, for me, a little like asking what the local library says.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
I always took 'Bible-based' to be a pejorative term for 'true Christian' as opposed to 'Catholic', which many Protestants do not believe read or use the Bible. So to me, 'Bible-based' is code for 'Protestant'.

I think your cynicism could be somewhat justified.

Your explanation is how I understood the term during the years I was an evangelical Christian. It was normally used to distinguish Catholics from Protestants, and it was meant to be pejorative. I was once taught that Catholics aren't real Christians because they worship Mary as an idol, they bow down to statues, they pray to the saints, and they don't believe in the five solas: Sola scriptura (scripture alone), Sola fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solo Christo (Christ alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (to the glory of God alone). I'm ashamed to say that I once believed that Catholics aren't true Christians and they are going to hell. I'm also ashamed to admit that I tried to witness to Catholics in an effort to save their souls. I imagine my "witnessing" was offensive to these Catholics.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
Ugh im reminded of the prejudice I was taught growing up that Catholics aren't true christians and how I acted as a person in the past towards anyone who disagreed with anything I believed. Can I go back and shoot old me? They were such a bigot towards too many groups...

Anyway to the OP...yes your cynicism is justified. Very justified. For a large number of reasons

I feel the same way about how I used to act when I was a young Christian, RayofLight. I was intolerant of anyone who didn't share my personal biblical beliefs of God and the Bible. I once believed that evangelicals were the only true Christians, and I didn't like Christians who weren't evangelical. I also believed that Democrats couldn't be Christian because the Republican Party was the only political party of true Christians. I'm ashamed that I believed these things, but that's how I was taught. I certainly know better now.
 

VoidCat

Pronouns: he/him/they/them
I feel the same way about how I used to act when I was a young Christian, RayofLight. I was intolerant of anyone who didn't share my personal biblical beliefs of God and the Bible. I once believed that evangelicals were the only true Christians, and I didn't like Christians who weren't evangelical. I also believed that Democrats couldn't be Christian because the Republican Party was the only political party of true Christians. I'm ashamed that I believed these things, but that's how I was taught. I certainly know better now.
Old me would've had a fit they met me now then try to fight me and I'd probably would've been able to kick their ***
I am such a different person now.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
Old me would've had a fit they met me now then try to fight me and I'd probably would've been able to kick their ***
I am such a different person now.

I hear you, my friend. I'm a different person now, too. The old me would be totally shocked to learn that the new me has forsaken her faith, became an agnostic, and has been researching Spiritualism as her new religion. The old me would have a heart attack.
 

DNB

Christian
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?
Depends on the person using it. But, to me, it's usually a flag that someone or some group is anything but Bible based. The term implies that all doctrines, dogma, ordinances and liturgy, are, to the exegete's best ability, derived solely from the Bible, and that the Bible is authoritative. Whereas Catholicism, for example, includes tradition into their theology.
My initial point is that, if you have to declare your fidelity and acumen in the Bible, it's typically a sign that others are not making the same declaration about you (self-praise, is no praise).
So, yes, your cynicism has merit as far as something being suspicious about such an admission. But, to me, it's a valid term, but allow others to recognize your adherence and discipline towards studying the Bible, and do not feel compelled to impose that boast upon others, it will, as it should, elicit a dubious reaction.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
As any human is just a human only first.

No thesis.
No stories.
No books. First.

Humans taught earth is my one God O only.

Basic natural science.

Topic chosen by a human said my god in science is earth. The planet.

No thesis about your owned self.

Position one the thinker. A human only.

So humans give group gatherings a named title. Always had. Still in life all are just humans first.

Science is science. The topic science human chosen is just science.

A book was shut. Human legal systems civilization implemented.

Shut book means no more lying name terms. Word use by humans only. No man is God proven. Don't give names to earth products.

Law a new branch in society oath Swore to legally tell only truth.

Jesus stance a human. A human held hand up the other hand extended forward.

Oath symbolism.

Legal branch had to be introduced to deal with a caused human problem by occult science brain irradiation.

Behaviours changed.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The cynical interpretation of the term 'Bible-based' would be this:

I have a set of Bible verses which I use as a starting point. I have created a world-view out of these. I use this world-view as a back story to all the other parts of the Bible in order to show that the whole Bible teaches this world-view.

How justifiable is the cynicism here?
Every Christian sect claims to be bible based, but they all disagree so strongly that they have to be in schism with each other.
 
Top