Interpretation

[Prizebeatz1]

There's only one meaning for each proposition, otherwise everything means everything. There may be other places (passages) where another proposition is made or said to be true, but only one meaning in each one.

It might help to recall Dr. U. Middelmann's paragraph on 'the circumference of reality' here:

"By rejecting limits of modernity (subjectivism, narcissism) my perception stands in a system of coordinates (including the Bible, the vast experience of many people over many periods of time, a vast number of sources, etc)... All of these are controls on each other, so that together they provide me with a view of reality that is more accurate than any one of them or than my perception of any one of them alone."
--PRO-EXISTENCE, 1974. U. Middelmann was one of F. Schaeffer's sons in law.

Let's try to apply this as in the case where Jesus gives the keys to Peter. Does that mean Peter and ONLY Peter has the power to loose on earth, or can we assume the keys can be passed down? Why or why not?

 

[patrick jane]

Let's try to apply this as in the case where Jesus gives the keys to Peter. Does that mean Peter and ONLY Peter has the power to loose on earth, or can we assume the keys can be passed down? Why or why not?

There are no keys

 

[patrick jane]

How many different ways could one interpret the scriptures? Does interpretation from God or from man? Why does this make a difference? Is the literal translation the only one with merit? Why or why not? Who holds the power to declare which interpretation is most appropriate? Can one interpretation be more correct or more accurate than another? What evidence or support is available to suggest that an entity has the authority to determine which interpretation is valid and/or more valid than another? Who is interpreting the evidence or support that is being used to come up with the original interpretation? Does one interpretation have all the correct answers and if it doesn't, does that invalidate any of the viewpoints that do make sense? Does any one interpretation make perfect sense? What should we do if someone proposes an alternative interpretation that we know through discernment makes much more sense to us? Is it okay to continue believing one interpretation if we know there is a more accurate one available? What would prevent us from accepting a more true interpretation of the scriptures were it to be presented to us?

Do you know how to make paragraphs yet ? I won't read drivel that isn't spaced properly.

 

[Prizebeatz1]

Do you know how to make paragraphs yet ? I won't read drivel that isn't spaced properly.

My bad. I'll try to break up my sentences a little better going forward. I don't think they were literally any keys but I was taught Peter passed down the power to bind and loose. Am I incorrect on this?

 

[CherubRam]

I'm just wondering if there is more than one way to interpret the Bible then why wouldn't there be more than one possible meaning?

It is true that some prophecies have more than one application. But as for correct doctrine, that is narrowly defined. The Catholic Papacy does not have the authority to alter scriptures, they do not hold any keys. Yahwah was the Rock being spoken of. The disciples were instructed by Yahshua that Yahwah was the Rock they were to build upon, for a sure foundation.

 

[Prizebeatz1]

It is true that some prophecies have more than one application. But as for correct doctrine, that is narrowly defined. The Catholic Papacy does not have the authority to alter scriptures, they do not hold any keys. Yahwah was the Rock being spoken of. The disciples were instructed by Yahshua that Yahwah was the Rock they were to build upon, for a sure foundation.

Right. How about Matthew 18:9: "And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away..." Can we pick and choose what we take literally and what we don't? Who determines this and what if our own interpretation does not agree? Are we going to be considered a non-believer and treated with scorn as a sinner if we don't repent and change our minds?

 

[OCTOBER23]

CHRYS said,

so why does he have a church in rome with his name on it?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that Chrys is NOT Feeling well or maybe he is just Tired of

trying to Defend a Dying Pagan Religion.

In 1798 the Pope was captured by the French General and Imprisoned for a time.

That is when the little horn received its Deadly Wound.

But it was prophesied to come back stronger, which it did.

It is now prophesied to combine with the Moslems for awhile

until they get Angry with it and apostate and Destroy that church in Rome.

 

[Lon]

How many different ways could one interpret the scriptures? Does interpretation from God or from man?

I had a Scripture Interpretation One-on-One that discusses a few of these questions. I'm not sure if it answers all of them, but I think it hits on a number of them.

 

[CherubRam]

Right. How about Matthew 18:9: "And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away..." Can we pick and choose what we take literally and what we don't? Who determines this and what if our own interpretation does not agree? Are we going to be considered a non-believer and treated with scorn as a sinner if we don't repent and change our minds?

Mark 4:34
He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything. Matthew 18:9 is a parable that means you should cut sin off from your life to enter heaven.

 

[CherubRam]

I had a Scripture Interpretation One-on-One that discusses a few of these questions. I'm not sure if it answers all of them, but I think it hits on a number of them.

Lots of good things are said, but it is to wordy. Perhaps you could reduce it to a numbered list. If you do, I would like to see it.

 

[Zeke]

Luke 17:20-21, a good foundation to build on with spiritual stones concerning that inner witness/voice that gives liberty the letter can never do 2Cor 3:6, it always demands one bows the knee to some system born from the traditions of men where equality is a meaningless word under their creeds and moral dogma, who are clearly holding hands with world in its quest of governing minds into that prison.

 

[Prizebeatz1]

Mark 4:34
He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything. Matthew 18:9 is a parable that means you should cut sin off from your life to enter heaven.

In general, it seems that he spoke to the masses mostly in parables but that was not always the case when he spoke to individuals or smaller groups. I don't think most people would consider it a parable when he said "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many..." (Mark 14:24). Or was it?

 

[6days]

there are many tests for what is true

the test of time
the test of numbers
the test of authority
the test of reason

start testing

Are you arguing with what Grosnick said? He said there can only be one truth.

 

[6days]

How many different ways could one interpret the scriptures?

Two ways.... the right way...or the wrong way.
No..

There are essentially 2 ways. Exegetical or eisegetical.
I think the way to interpret scripture to use scripture to help interpret scripture.

 

[6days]

Luke 17:20-21, a good foundation to build on with spiritual stones concerning that inner witness/voice that gives liberty the letter can never do 2Cor 3:6, it always demands one bows the knee to some system born from the traditions of men where equality is a meaningless word under their creeds and moral dogma, who are clearly holding hands with world in its quest of governing minds into that prison.

If we take Christ's example, He often quoted scripture as His source of absolute truth.

 

[CherubRam]

In general, it seems that he spoke to the masses mostly in parables but that was not always the case when he spoke to individuals or smaller groups. I don't think most people would consider it a parable when he said "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many..." (Mark 14:24). Or was it?

Parables do have literal applications.

 

[Zeke]

If we take Christ's example, He often quoted scripture as His source of absolute truth.

Which was aimed at the unseen kingdom John 4:24 (not of this world) told in allegorical style Galatians 4:24 about Galatians 1:12. 1Cor 3:16, John 1:14, Galatians 3:1, in not among, John 1:9.

 

[6days]

Which was aimed at the unseen kingdom John 4:24 (not of this world) told in allegorical style Galatians 4:24 about Galatians 1:12. 1Cor 3:16, John 1:14, Galatians 3:1, in not among, John 1:9.

Sorry but I don't get your point. How does that relate to Christ often using scripture as a source of absolute truth?

 

[Prizebeatz1]

Parables do have literal applications.

Yes they do. I'm not disputing that. I'm talking about interpretation.

 

[chrysostom]

Yes they do. I'm not disputing that. I'm talking about interpretation.

we need to talk about interpretation
many here do not even like to use that word
so
the first step
is
to acknowledge that it is something we have to deal with

thank you for dealing with it