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

[Shadow Wolf]

Some Christians enjoy boasting that they have spiritual discernment to properly understand the Bible, whereas we (and other non-Christians) do not, but what they seem to forget or ignore is the fact that we (and many other non-Christians) were once Christians and are well-versed in it. We read it, studied it, and prayed for spiritual guidance when we were Christians. We didn't forget what we had learned when we renounced our Christian faith. We retained that knowledge and are now able to use it to challenge the credibility of the Bible. During the years I was a Christian, I thought that reading and studying the Bible on a daily basis would deepen my faith in God and Jesus, but all I did was eventually study my way out of believing in God, Jesus, and the Bible.

I read and studied the Bible on a daily basis throughout the thirty years I was a Christian. I extensively studied it and Christian theology while training to be a street preacher and evangelism team leader. In fact, I was a very effective street preacher and evangelism team leader for several years. I also studied the Bible and Christian theology in depth while assisting my nephew in his extended theological studies to become an ordained minister. He was studying to earn a Master of Theological Studies (MTS) degree. He eventually studied his way out of believing in the Bible and in God just as I did. A few weeks after I renounced my faith, he told me that he had made the decision to renounce his after extensively studying the Bible and Christian theology with me.

My own path was strongly moved by the Circuit Riders and the stories of fervor and zeal and moving masses to the Lord. That's what I wanted to do. But my relationship with Jehovah and his son was very one sided and uneven. Amd the Bible didn't provide the comfort, solace and guidance like I had believed it would. I saw violence, slavery, genocide and cruelty. People say look to Job for inspiration, but he had a great life amd his struggle was in having that taken away. My mom took out of public school after 5th grade because she was scared I was going to shoot it up and my home life wasn't much better (I was diagnosed with a stomach ulcer in the second grade from being so stressed). So Job wasn't good.
I also began learning how much of the OT was borrowed from neighboring peoples of the Hebrews and stories already a part of well established lore.
As for reading the Bible, the irony of it all is that secular readings of it and secular history are what lend the best evidence that there probably was an actual person there who inspired the Jesus character in the Bible, evem better evidence than for the existence of Muhammed (who may have even been two people (which would, of course, not be the first time history remembers multiple people as one)). Secular studies of Biblical languages have also rendered very usable results.
Amd of course there are also studies indicating particularly Evangelicals don't know the Bible as well as atheists and agnostics.
But most daming is how lots of them haven't read any or much of the Bible while those who have (and espouse this holy ghist required nonsense) tend to promote the idea of a plain, simple reading of the Bible.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The Bible is not a scientific textbook.

It unsuccessfully attempts to do what science does very successfully. It attempts to describe the origin and history of the world known to the ancients using supernaturalism, which means that there is both physical law and magic. Not surprisingly, it's almost all incorrect. Science is naturalistic and empirical, which accounts for its stellar success in explaining and predicting the ways of nature.

It is a book that teaches people spiritual truths

There is no such thing as spiritual truth. That's an abuse of the word truth. Truth refers to knowledge and correct ideas. What you have are unsupported and unfalsifiable guesses.

The Bibile teaches that there are gods and devis and angels and demons and magic and an afterlife. It teaches that homosexuality and atheism are moral failings. It teaches that faith is superior to reason and calls faith evidence. None of that deserves to be called truth.

If people are offended by Scripture, that is their problem, not mine.

The offense included your willingness to wheel it out and subject unbelievers to it. And I am not surprised that you won't apologize. It is, after all, "spiritual truth," right? That justifies using it to insult others. You saw what response that got.

I was an atheist once. I thought that I was smarter than other people because I knew the truth

But know you know that you REALLY know the truth, right? You've already said so. NOW, you actually ARE smarter than an atheist, who is a fool and cannot understand "spiritual truth," right? You've also said that.

It is extremely hard for people who don't know God to understand those of us who do.

You flatter yourself. Often. You assume that you are misunderstood, because if others actually understood what you but not they can see, they would fall down prostrate and begin begging for forgiveness from your god for being human. Since they continue to reject your beliefs, they must not understand them, you think. Like I said, that's self-flattery and quite off-putting.

You're not difficult to understand. You have some need that that belief fulfills for you. You were incomplete with nothing but reason and conscience to guide you, so you added a religion to fill the void. How hard is that to understand?

Understand this: others don't have that need, and a god belief and a religion like yours would just be baggage and an encumbrance imposing irrational beliefs and values on them.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

My own path was strongly moved by the Circuit Riders and the stories of fervor and zeal and moving masses to the Lord. That's what I wanted to do. But my relationship with Jehovah and his son was very one sided and uneven. Amd the Bible didn't provide the comfort, solace and guidance like I had believed it would. I saw violence, slavery, genocide and cruelty. People say look to Job for inspiration, but he had a great life amd his struggle was in having that taken away. My mom took out of public school after 5th grade because she was scared I was going to shoot it up and my home life wasn't much better (I was diagnosed with a stomach ulcer in the second grade from being so stressed). So Job wasn't good.
I also began learning how much of the OT was borrowed from neighboring peoples of the Hebrews and stories already a part of well established lore.
As for reading the Bible, the irony of it all is that secular readings of it and secular history are what lend the best evidence that there probably was an actual person there who inspired the Jesus character in the Bible, evem better evidence than for the existence of Muhammed (who may have even been two people (which would, of course, not be the first time history remembers multiple people as one)). Secular studies of Biblical languages have also rendered very usable results.
Amd of course there are also studies indicating particularly Evangelicals don't know the Bible as well as atheists and agnostics.
But most daming is how lots of them haven't read any or much of the Bible while those who have (and espouse this holy ghist required nonsense) tend to promote the idea of a plain, simple reading of the Bible.

Thank you for sharing your story with me, Shadow Wolf. It's inspiring to me to hear these stories. I've heard quite a few from other former Christians I have met either online or in person, including in my emotional support group. The vast majority of the stories are of abuse (physical, psychological, sexual, and spiritual) by their Christian parent(s) or other Christians in positions of authority over them. It's comforting to talk to others who understand our situation.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To the discussion point, your response dismisses or ignores without substance the possibility that what Paul said is true:

Paul also hated women, people enjoying life, amd said it's best for people to be celibate like him. He also contradicts Jesus, such as when Jesus said he is not the lord of the dead but of the living (Luke 20:38) yet Paul says Jesus is lord of bith the living and the dead (Romans 14:9l.
Why would Jehovah, amd especially Christ, have intended you must be filled with the Spirit to understand the Bible? That defeats the point of having a message to send out to every nation (Matthew 28:19) and disciples who are fishermen of men (Matthew 4:19).

But I neither confirm or affirm to silence anyone or place myself above anyone. On the other hand, the blanket dismissal of my, and Paul's, experiential statements does feel like subordination and silencing.

Insisting one must have the holy ghost to understand the Bible is doing just that. Myself, since I left the Church I've began to see the forest amd not just the trees and I'd argue my understanding has actually gotten better.
All Jesus really said was to love god, love eachother and do mind your own business because you're guilty too.

 

[Tomef]

They can't be (confining the reach of that assertion to the specific guidance received).

That is ruled out as per above.

There does seem to be a contradiction involved. People claiming, and presumably believing, to be guided by the spirit have conflicting ideas and beliefs about the same things. How do you determine who is mistaken? What criteria or process do you use? You mention human failing, but if people claiming to be guided by the same spirit disagree with each other, at what point does this failure come into it? When receiving guidance, when interpreting it (and how does that work), or when putting it into action, and how do you determine any of that?

 

[Ajax]

Again: I know God and God knows me. You can accept that or reject it; that is of no concern to me.

And of course, Jesus knows His own Father.

Secondly, my lack of response is solely due to the fact that I won't answer your questions. Why should I entertain your absurdity?

I didn't think you would dare to reply, anyway.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't have to demonstrate it in any way in order for it to be a fact.

That is true. But the I do not have to demonstrate my belief that you are full of prunes for that to be a fact either. This is a debating forum where one is obligated to support one's beliefs.

I agree; I did not assert a strong belief; to answer as if I did creates a strawman fallacy.

No, that is not a strawman fallacy. That is a reasonable conclusion based upon your posts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They can't be (confining the reach of that assertion to the specific guidance received).

That is ruled out as per above.

You appear to be contradicting Romans 1 20 with this claim. If people that are not believers cannot understand the Bible then they do have an excuse when it comes to rejecting the claims that a God exists:


For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

 

[Sargonski]

Again: I know God and God knows me. You can accept that or reject it; that is of no concern to me.

And of course, Jesus knows His own Father.

Has nothing to do with acceptance or rejection of your God.. what was asked is which God you are referring to... What is the name of the God that you are claiming to know .. and the God who knows you ?

Surely the chief God on earth knows you .. is this the God you are referring to ?

 

[Trailblazer]

I know God and God knows me. End of story.

Yes, you know God, but 'how' you know God cannot be explained to others who do not know God.

Yes, God knows you, and God knows you better than you know yourself because God is all-knowing.

“Consider, moreover, how frequently doth man become forgetful of his own self, whilst God remaineth, through His all-encompassing knowledge, aware of His creature, and continueth to shed upon him the manifest radiance of His glory. It is evident, therefore, that, in such circumstances, He is closer to him than his own self. He will, indeed, so remain for ever, for, whereas the one true God knoweth all things, perceiveth all things, and comprehendeth all things, mortal man is prone to err, and is ignorant of the mysteries that lie enfolded within him….”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 186

 

[Unfettered]

Paul also hated women, people enjoying life, amd said it's best for people to be celibate like him. He also contradicts Jesus, such as when Jesus said he is not the lord of the dead but of the living (Luke 20:38) yet Paul says Jesus is lord of bith the living and the dead (Romans 14:9l.
Why would Jehovah, amd especially Christ, have intended you must be filled with the Spirit to understand the Bible? That defeats the point of having a message to send out to every nation (Matthew 28:19) and disciples who are fishermen of men (Matthew 4:19).

I understand what you're saying. I have no illusions that every word Paul said, or even every doctrine he shared, is true. My posts proceed from my personal experience with the specific doctrine posted the OP, which in this case was taught by Paul. It could have been taught by Isaiah or Moses or by someone else, recorded in some compendium or book of scripture other than the Bible. None of those factors would make a difference to the question of its truthfulness.

Insisting one must have the holy ghost to understand the Bible is doing just that.

Again, I can't account for your understanding. If that's what you know, and it differs from what I know, I'm not sure what you expect from me here.

Myself, since I left the Church I've began to see the forest amd not just the trees and I'd argue my understanding has actually gotten better.
All Jesus really said was to love god, love eachother and do mind your own business because you're guilty too.

I understand what you're saying, regardless of whether or not I can agree with your interpretations, summaries or conclusions.

 

[Unfettered]

There does seem to be a contradiction involved. People claiming, and presumably believing, to be guided by the spirit have conflicting ideas and beliefs about the same things. How do you determine who is mistaken? What criteria or process do you use? You mention human failing, but if people claiming to be guided by the same spirit disagree with each other, at what point does this failure come into it? When receiving guidance, when interpreting it (and how does that work), or when putting it into action, and how do you determine any of that?

Are you asking all this generally, or are you asking me personally? Are you asking rhetorically? Do you believe that there actually is a way that these apparently conflicting ideas can be reconciled?

Not sure what channel of discussion you're wanting to go down.

 

[jimb]

Has nothing to do with acceptance or rejection of your God.. what was asked is which God you are referring to... What is the name of the God that you are claiming to know .. and the God who knows you ?

Surely the chief God on earth knows you .. is this the God you are referring to ?

I have no idea to whom you're referring when you say "the chief God on earth". I know the God of the Bible, God in heaven, and He knows me.

 

[Ajax]

If you really want to know what the Spirit of God is, there is a simple solution: read the Bible!

Most atheists and agnostics abandoned Christianity because they read the Bible, so do not promote this please.

He healed me when I was in the hospital,

Why did you go to hospital? Don't you have enough faith?

"Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven.” James 5:14-15

"Anything is possible for someone who has faith" Mark 9:23

You said that the Bible is 100% true, that's why I ask you....

 

[jimb]

Most atheists and agnostics abandoned Christianity because they read the Bible, so do not promote this please.

Why did you go to hospital? Don't you have enough faith?

"Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven.” James 5:14-15

"Anything is possible for someone who has faith" Mark 9:23

You said the the Bible is 100% true, that's why I ask you....

It is absurd to think that people abandoned Christianity because they read the Bible. They lost their faith in God by reading???

I went to the hospital because of a severe asthma attack. AT THE TIME I WAS A CONFIRMED ATHEIST! A pastor prayed for me and I was a) instantly healed and b) my entire body was filled with extreme love (that is the only way I can describe it.)

The quotes from the Bible closely describe what happened to me, except I wasn't anointed with oil.

 

[Trailblazer]

Unlike yourself, I have faith.

I also have faith, but it is evidence-based faith. No just God would expect people to believe if there was no evidence.

Faith is what God wants us to have and that is why there is no proof that God exists.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

Believing in God requires faith since no man has ever seen God. Then we go looking for the evidence. I believe that God will reward those who earnestly seek Him by helping them find the evidence they need to believe.

God could prove that He exists if God wanted to do so, but If God proved He exists then we would no longer need faith, because we would know 'for a fact' that God exists. So, it makes logical sense to me why there is no proof that God exists, because God wants us to believe on faith and the evidence that God provides.

Evidence is not proof unless it is verifiable evidence, but there is no way to verify that God exists, so there is no verifiable evidence, which is the kind of evidence that atheists want.

The only way we could have verifiable evidence (proof) that God exists is if God verified His existence in some manner.
If God wanted verify that He exists He could easily do so, but instead all God offers is evidence. The Bible is evidence, but there is also other evidence.

 

[Ajax]

It is absurd to think that people abandoned Christianity because they read the Bible. They lost their faith in God by reading???

Yes, by reading all the falsehoods and contradictions, as well as the crimes performed by God in OT.
Take for example the Exodus where God punished the Egyptians with various diseases for not letting the Jews free, but at the same time hardened Pharaoh's heart not to let them go...
The best way to covert people to Christianity is for all denominations to denounce the Old Testament, which is simply ridiculous.

 

[Unfettered]

That is true. But the I do not have to demonstrate my belief that you are full of prunes for that to be a fact either. This is a debating forum where one is obligated to support one's beliefs.

Who asserted a belief? I spoke a particular, experiential knowledge. Here was my statement:

"I endorse the statement of the OP because I do receive the things of the Spirit of God; they are not foolishness to me; I know them because I spiritually discern them."

I didn't say I "believe" I receive...
I said I "do" receive...

And I do. It's a fact. And I'm happy to support my statement. What kind of support do you want?

If also witnessed a lightning strike last year. That's also a fact. What could I possible present as support for that fact?

I'm not saying that you have to believe me in either case. I'm just straining to understand the basis upon which someone with no knowledge of what I have experienced can rationally dispute either fact.

No, that is not a strawman fallacy. That is a reasonable conclusion based upon your posts.

No, it is most definitely a strawman fallacy; you're talking belief; I'm talking knowledge. But if you yet would press the point, take it; I see no need to discuss it further.

 

[Trailblazer]

I went to the hospital because of a severe asthma attack. AT THE TIME I WAS A CONFIRMED ATHEIST! A pastor prayed for me and I was a) instantly healed and b) my entire body was filled with extreme love (that is the only way I can describe it.)

Miracles do happen, but they don't happen to everyone. Many people die despite their sincere prayers.

 

[Unfettered]

You appear to be contradicting Romans 1 20 with this claim. If people that are not believers cannot understand the Bible

Not sure where you're coming from; I didn't claim that. I have seconded what Paul taught on the foundation of my own experience, but neither he nor I have submitted the idea you just posted.