Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation

[sojourner]

There are many different groups with different interpretations who consider other groups heretics. And the splits between the Western Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church and the split that happened during the reformation and the results of that split certainly caused division. Catholics and Protestants fought each other quite a bit because of bible interpretation. Not to mention the cults that appeared afterwards led by Cult leaders.

I can’t help how those facets are seen by others. There are differing viewpoints, yet all believe in God, all follow Jesus, and all hold the hope of salvation, yes?

 

[sojourner]

The correct method can only be known if we know what the original author meant to get express. And we cannot know so it is all confusion

A proper exegesis will get us close, though.

 

[3rdAngel]

Oh, waaah!
See your latest response about biblical eyewitnesses to Jesus. There are none. None. Zero. But you claim that there are. Yet you cannot provide any proof of that claim. You constantly confuse belief with fact, and then pass that belief off as fact. It doesn’t work that way.

I see you have either not read what has been posted or your simply not being honest. I would simply point everyone to posts # 342 linked and post # 348 linked that proves your not telling the truth, but I know you will not respond to these posts because virtually all academic scholarship agrees to what I have posted in these posts is true and is verified by linked sources that are not my opinion. So here we simply have your opinion againt virtually all academic scholarship that disagrees with you and the historical records inside and outside of the bible. Does this not concern you? It should, but you can believe as you wish. Time will tell who is right and who is wrong, but it seems time is running out for the many if the scriptures are true IMO.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Why?

Because only one can be true.

Of course. Again: what’s inherently wrong with a multifaceted view of the Faith? God is much, much larger than any one interpretation. Remember: we’re about unity here, not uniformity.

Yet these different viewpoints demand uniformity which is why they call each other heretics. A multifaceted view of faith is not necessarily wrong, but if it makes contradictory truth claims then only one can be true. So it isn't that any are wrong, it is a matter of what is true and what is false and how this affects salvation according to each belief.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I can’t help how those facets are seen by others. There are differing viewpoints, yet all believe in God, all follow Jesus, and all hold the hope of salvation, yes?

Thing is that those views don't believe that just believing in God and Jesus is enough for attaining salvation. Unitarians and JW's (even muslims) believe in God and Jesus, yet Trinitarians say that they are all wrong and will not attain salvation because their belief about the relationship between God and Christ is wrong. The others believe that Trinitarians are pagans and will not attain salvation. Only one of those interpretations are right and the consequences of those who believe the wrong belief will not attain salvation.

 

[Samael_Khan]

A proper exegesis will get us close, though.

Closer. It narrows down possibilities. But then with the OP's statement, nobody can know objectively what the correct exegesis is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your response...

Well that is not true my friend. I have only provided you with historical fact of eyewitness accounts of JESUS from 1. The NON BELIEVING JEWS; the 2. THE NON BELIEVING ROMANS and the 3. CHRISTIANS who were present during the life of JESUS and all three Historical sources both from within Christianity and outside of Christianity say that there were eyewitness accounts of JESUS and that JESUS existed and this is cerified by the History, Historians and verified by nearly all academic scolarship. There is no historical records without eyewitnesses. You have been provided three Historical records from different sources of eyewitness accounts of JESUS inside and outside of the biblical records from all people present in the life of JESUS that nearly all academic scholarship agrees verifies the existence of JESUS. You on the other hand are simply in denial posting your opinion does this not concern you? It should. I believe time will tell who is wrong and who is right. I believe also according to the scriptures, you better hope I am wrong as if I am correct but I believe deep down inside you know I am correct.

Ok great, good answer. So do I. Now why do you believe JESUS existed? How do you know?

No, you didn't. You love to abuse dictionaries. Though sometimes you seem to have trouble understanding them. Look up the definition of "eyewitness testimony".

None of your sources were examples of that.

Try again.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, you didn't. You love to abuse dictionaries. Though sometimes you seem to have trouble understanding them. Look up the definition of "eyewitness testimony".

None of your sources were examples of that.

Try again.

Sorry did you say something? Are you going to answer the questions asked of you or are you going to simply do more hand waiving

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry did you say something? Are you going to answer the questions asked of you or are you going to simply do more hand waiving

If you are a Christian you should not break the Ninth Commandment.

 

[3rdAngel]

If you are a Christian you should not break the Ninth Commandment.

I am not breaking the ninth commandment and posts # 342 linked and post # 348 linked proves your not telling the truth. Athough it does not seem to worry you. It should though. Time will tell.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not breaking the ninth commandment and posts # 342 linked and post # 348 linked proves your not telling the truth. Athough it does not seem to worry you it seems. It should though. Time will tell.

Sorry but you are. You keep making false claims about me. That is breaking the Ninth Commandment. Now you might not realize that you are doing that. That only means that you are not lying. But it is still a major sin in your religion to break the Ninth whether you are actively lying or not. But then, far too many Christians do not understand their own book of myths.

All that your links prove is that you do not understand the concept of "eyewitness testimony".

 

[3rdAngel]

Sorry but you are. You keep making false claims about me. That is breaking the Ninth Commandment. Now you might not realize that you are doing that. That only means that you are not lying. But it is still a major sin in your religion to break the Ninth whether you are actively lying or not. But then, far too many Christians do not understand their own book of myths.
All that your links prove is that you do not understand the concept of "eyewitness testimony".

I am sorry did you say something? Are you going to answer the questions asked of you now or are you going to simply do more hand waiving

 

[Subduction Zone]

Technically "eyewitness testimony" is a legal term. But we can use the same standards for what we see in the Bible:

"Eyewitness testimony is the account a bystander or victim gives in the courtroom, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation."

Eyewitness testimony - Wikipedia

None of the examples that you gave fit that definition. Let's see if there are any others:

"Eyewitness testimony is a legal term. It refers to an account given by people of an event they have witnessed. "

https://www.simplypsychology.org/eyewitness-testimony.html
Nope, still nothing for you.

Okay one more:

"Eyewitness testimony is a situational account of a witness of what is typically a crime or an accident. It is a legal term that essentially describes when a witness or victim is recounting their firsthand experience to another person or to a court."

Eyewitness Testimony definition | Psychology Glossary | alleydog.com

That is strike three and you are out. By the way, one must be careful with the work of Josehpus. Some of his "quotes" have been determined to be doctored. But none of them deal with eyewitness testimony. If you read his actual works he talks about what Christians belief. He does not refer to any witnesses at all.

You failed in your claim.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am sorry did you say something? Are you going to answer the questions asked of you now or are you going to simply do more hand waiving

Trolling is against the rules here. As is abuse of the rating system. Hand waving is your sin. You quote articles that you do not understand and try to claim you made a point. You need to do better than that.

 

[3rdAngel]

Trolling is against the rules here. As is abuse of the rating system. Hand waving is your sin. You quote articles that you do not understand and try to claim you made a point. You need to do better than that.

Then do not do it. Are you going to answer the questions asked of you or are you going to simply do more hand waiving?

 

[sojourner]

I see you have either not read what has been posted or your simply not being honest. I would simply point everyone to posts # 342 linked and post # 348 linked that proves your not telling the truth, but I know you will not respond to these posts because virtually all academic scholarship agrees to what I have posted in these posts is true and is verified by linked sources that are not my opinion. So here we simply have your opinion againt virtually all academic scholarship that disagrees with you and the historical records inside and outside of the bible. Does this not concern you? It should, but you can believe as you wish. Time will tell who is right and who is wrong, but it seems time is running out for the many if the scriptures are true IMO.

This doesn’t address my point. I maintained that there were no eyewitnesses to Jesus. Josephus isn’t an eyewitness. Neither are the other “outside” sources. I’m not denying Jesus’ existence; just your fanciful assertion of the “fact” that there are biblical ”eyewitnesses” of Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

Then do not do it. Are you going to answer the questions asked of you or are you going to simply do more hand waiving?

“Waiving?” No one’s dismissing a hand here.

 

[sojourner]

Because only one can be true

Uh, no.

Yet these different viewpoints demand uniformity which is why they call each other heretics. A multifaceted view of faith is not necessarily wrong, but if it makes contradictory truth claims then only one can be true

Not necessarily. My denomination sees other viewpoints and doesn’t use that term. And truth is in the perspective of the observer. Truth and fact are two different things.

So it isn't that any are wrong, it is a matter of what is true and what is false and how this affects salvation according to each belief

I don’t think it does affect salvation. Unless one is not true to one’s faith.

 

[sojourner]

Closer. It narrows down possibilities. But then with the OP's statement, nobody can know objectively what the correct exegesis is.

We don’t need to know a “correct” exegesis — just a reasonable one.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then do not do it. Are you going to answer the questions asked of you or are you going to simply do more hand waiving?

I answered your question. You probably missed the answer. I am the only one left that has not put you on ignore. Do you want to put just be an old man shouting at others to "Get off my lawn!" and have everyone just ignore the nonsense you post? You should be using this as a learning experience.