Christians: Where do you draw the line?

sojourner said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

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

ChristineES said:

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

Click to expand...

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

peaceful said:

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

Click to expand...

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?

peaceful said:

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

Click to expand...

Which chrsitians are you talking about? what evil are you referring to? too much accusations will not get us anywhere sir.:angel2:

sojourner said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

uss_bigd said:

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

Click to expand...

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:

INALLCAPITALLETTERSWITHNOBREAKSBETWEENWORDSANDWITHNOPUNCTUATIONTHEREFOREHOWCANWE 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.

sojourner said:

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:

INALLCAPITALLETTERSWITHNOBREAKSBETWEENWORDSANDWITHNOPUNCTUATIONTHEREFOREHOWCANWE 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.

Click to expand...

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.:angel2:

uss_bigd said:

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.:angel2:

Click to expand...

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.

sojourner said:

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.

Click to expand...

MR Sojourner, you keep saying i err in interpreting scripture. so you have to provide an alternative interpretation still based on scripture. unfortunately you have not provided a single verse. let us debate in the same "court." it's not going to work if i throw biblical verses and you throw catholic doctrine to it.

ok , let me hear you interpret the word keep to mean not to keep...:slap:

sojourner, it's a lost cause. Save yourself. :cover:

ok , let me hear you interpret the word keep to mean not to keep...

Click to expand...

the word "keep" isn't at issue. it's the object of "keep" that's at issue. I have proven my point. if you can't buy it, that's not my problem.

About baptism-- I personally prefer total body immersion, but I won't judge if some Churches sprinkle or whatever. It is symbolic, anyway.

sojourner said:

the word "keep" isn't at issue. it's the object of "keep" that's at issue. I have proven my point. if you can't buy it, that's not my problem.

Click to expand...

The object of the verb keep in the verse is what is written. meaning "remain or continue on what is written. how can that mean refer to the nicence creed too?:slap:

ChristineES said:

About baptism-- I personally prefer total body immersion, but I won't judge if some Churches sprinkle or whatever. It is symbolic, anyway.

Click to expand...

Hi there! Baptism by immersion is the biblical process exemplified by Jesus at the Jordan river.

how do you find the fact that the threads you started are intensely debated on?

uss_bigd said:

Hi there! Baptism by immersion is the biblical process exemplified by Jesus at the Jordan river.

Click to expand...

That's my idea of baptism too. I think that should be practised, but only as long as it's practical (ie. there's a stream nearby, or there isn't a shortage of water). If you can immerse, I think you should do it that way.

Captain Civic said:

That's my idea of baptism too. I think that should be practised, but only as long as it's practical (ie. there's a stream nearby, or there isn't a shortage of water). If you can immerse, I think you should do it that way.

Click to expand...

Our ministers built a swimming pool that is only weist deep for that purpose.

uss_bigd said:

Hi there! Baptism by immersion is the biblical process exemplified by Jesus at the Jordan river.

how do you find the fact that the threads you started are intensely debated on?

Click to expand...

It surprises me. But also I am flattered.

ChristineES said:

It surprises me. But also I am flattered.

Click to expand...

How do you find the points discussed so far? specially the one about the trinity?
Do you agree that baisng on the bible will draw the line in identifying Chrsitianity?

uss_bigd said:

How do you find the points discussed so far? specially the one about the trinity?
Do you agree that baisng on the bible will draw the line in identifying Chrsitianity?

Click to expand...

There isn't a legitimate denomination that doesn't base its theology and praxis on the Bible. It's not the Bible that's in question here, but the way the Bible is interpreted. And, frankly, the Bible has stood the test of time, not because it's true, but because it allows for multiple interpretations.

uss_bigd said:

The object of the verb keep in the verse is what is written. meaning "remain or continue on what is written. how can that mean refer to the nicence creed too?:slap:

Click to expand...

How can that refer to the gospels, too, wherein we find the method of Jesus' baptism???