Reformed? Just curious...

[Okami]

I don't know that I agree with this. I guess my main question is, why is a certain denominational belief near and dear to someone's heart? Is it because it's how they were raised, or is it because it's actually scriptural? I know that a lot of people say that there is no right way to interpret Scripture, but I think that there is. Or at the very least, some ways are more valid than others. For instance, some denominations base certain beliefs on verses taken out of their original context. Is it right for them to take that belief and call it an essential of the faith when it's really only Scripture twisted around to say what they want it to say? I don't think that it is.

I think that, when looking at Scripture, it's possible to come to a common belief about many aspects of our faith, and even though there still may be some differences of opinion, there might be a lot less if you rule out all of the traditions and practices that people base on Scriptures that they simply aren't reading properly.

I guess my main point is this: regardless of denomination, race, or personal preference, we're all worshipping the same God, and as the body of Christ, we should be more unified. I would have less of a problem with denominations if all they were was people of different personal preferences coming together to worship Jesus in the way they prefer, but instead, it typically tends to turn into a bunch of people fighting over things that are non-essential to our faith, and it's not how the Church should be treating one another.

Anyways, I have class, so I'll have to cut this short here, but I may come back and expound later. XD

One of my professors says that the best way to interpret the Bible is by reading the Bible in its original context to the original readers...having a Biblical prospective of the Bible. Or something to that degree.

[Ingemar]

Reformed? Just curious...

No. I am Orthodox.

For more information, see the Creed of Nicea and Constantinople (minus the Filioque, a Catholic innovation).

[Whitefang]

While searching for a passage, I ran across 1 Corinthians 1:10-17. Even back then divisions in the church were an issue to deal with.

I think this is the most important part here:

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

What it means is that anyone who professes to teach the gospel must do so from God, not from doctrine. This is important for anyone (all of us!) who teaches the Word to others.

One of my professors says that the best way to interpret the Bible is by reading the Bible in its original context to the original readers...having a Biblical prospective of the Bible. Or something to that degree.

That's very true, but the Bible is (or should be) applicable to all cultures and eras, so it is important to understand the history of the Bible, but the other half of the battle is figuring out how to apply that meaning to our lives today.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I think a lot of popular systematic structures are built off of poor biblical interpretations.

[Radical Dreamer]

Agreed. The same could be said of any belief in Christianity though. Remember, there are religions that believe Jesus existed, but that he was not the son of God. In fact, Thomas Jefferson accused Christians of putting words in Jesus' mouth that he claims were never spoken. So to a person like him, Christ's divinity is not scriptural. To him, we only believe it because of how we were raised, and it's not actually scriptural.

But obviously, we think Christ's divinity is all over the Bible and it'd be silly to say He never claimed to be divine. Again, these are the types of things that create denominations.

Yes, he would believe that, but as Christians, don't we believe he's wrong? Not just of a different opinion, but absolutely wrong based on Scripture? Just because someone holds an opinion based on preconceived notions doesn't mean they're right about it, and it doesn't mean another party has to agree with them. So in that sense, Scripture certainly can indicate that some denominations are wrong-headed in their approach, and therefore have an incorrect interpretation of the Bible. That's what I'm getting at. XD

I hate to sound like Ryan...but...it can't be helped. There is definitely a right way to interpret scripture. But how will we know it's the right way? Everyone feels their interpretation is correct. There can be only one correct interpretation, but we can't ever know what it is. If the Bible is truly God's word, only God knows what He meant by the words, and to try and claim we definitively know is, I think, kinda arrogant. We can say "Well God PROBABLY meant this" but that's just our subjective interpretation.

While I agree that some verses may be more difficult to interpret (and may require more personal study) than others, I don't think that deciphering what God means when He says "x" is meant to be all that difficult. I don't believe God made His word cryptic and difficult to understand, like He's up in heaven saying "ohoho, I am so crafty! They will never figure this out!" XD I think that He wants us to understand His word, that we might better follow Him. XD I guess what I'm saying is that while not everyone agrees on something, it doesn't mean that everyone is right about that particular thing. And there has to be a right answer at some point, whether you or I have that answer or not. XD

I agree that taking verses out of context is wrong, but again, it's subjective to say what exactly "taking out of context" is. I believe there are a few verses that are taken out of context...not out of the context of the Bible, but out of the context of the original language, out of the context of the society and culture of the time. But to most people, the verse is very clear as to what it says, whereas I say "Y'know, I don't think that's really true because of the original Greek and the way it's written in reference to the time period." I feel that's "out of context" but a lot of people don't.

And here, I would say that you're right in saying "this verse is being taken out of context because of the original language and culture in which it was written," and I think that's a much smarter way of approaching God's word than the opposite. XD That is to say, I think that the people who don't think they should study God's word for cultural context and original language are incorrect in their thinking, and I don't feel like I'm arrogant for thinking that way. XD After all, disagreeing with someone is really just a nice way of saying "I'm right and you're wrong," and I don't think arrogance really comes into it unless you have an arrogant attitude. This is especially true if you have the studies and evidence to back up your claims. I don't believe that God's word was meant to be so fluid as to change or be twisted with each person's opinion, and I definitely think that searching for the right interpretation is something we should strive to do if we're searching for truth.

So again, this is why it's nice to think "We should all be unified!" but when you get down to it, is a Protestant going to accept that Catholics think you have to defer to the Pope on matters of moral authority and have to go to confession? Is a Baptist going to accept that a gay person can be a bishop at an Episcopalian church? Is a Lutheran going to accept a Pentecostal's belief that you have to speak in tongues to be saved? Is any mainstream Christian denomination going to accept a Mormon's belief that Joseph Smith was a prophet?

These may seem "non-essential" to you but to every denomination, their beliefs are essential and necessary and of vital importance. And since we're not ever going to 100% agree on what the Bible says, this is why there will always be denominations and we will never be completely unified. Because each of us thinks the others are making God mad or losing salvation by not following their interpretation.

Again, this is why studying the scriptures is so important, but even so, I think that as the Church, people who are called to follow Jesus, we should be able to put aside our differences, regardless of how deep they run, and help both one another and those that Jesus told us to help. These are the times where you see the Kingdom of God on Earth -- the times where Christ's Church is doing His will.

[Shao Feng-Li]

I was just thinking, I know some of our nondenominational folks here wouldn't want to attend my church, it being strictly Psalm singing for example. It's more than a preference, but we feel a moral duty. Unfortunately, we have to separate from churches if we feel morally obligated to and even if you're ultimately wrong, you can't sin against our own conscience. We are where we are because we think it's correct and the other isn't. Maybe we wouldn't attend each other's worship services, but we're no less brothers and sisters in Christ (except for maybe the Westboro Baptists...). Until Heaven, we can never really be 100% unified.

Then again, Paul seems to suggest in some of his epistles that not all things are essential (holidays, food regulations, etc.)

Well, it was revealed to Peter that the food laws were done away with in Acts... But Paul said also to uphold it a bit for the sake of the weaker brethren. I dunno.

I think that He wants us to understand His word, that we might better follow Him.

QFT. Somethings are harder to understand than others. And like, if all you ever read was the OT, you wouldn't understand that sacrifices and food laws were fulfilled in the NT. Or you need to know that the events in Revelation aren't all that literal while those in Luke are. And that Jesus isn't actually livestock. I mean, hopefully no one reads "Thou shalt not commit adultery" and thinks "oh darn, I can't have relations with my wife." Just thinking that the fundamentals are pretty darn straight forward XD

[Radical Dreamer]

And like, if all you ever read was the OT, you wouldn't understand that sacrifices and food laws were fulfilled in the NT. Or you need to know that the events in Revelation aren't all that literal while those in Luke are.

Agreed. XD This is why I'm such a big fan of reading the Bible in its full context. Books and passages written as poetry, history, letters, prophecy, or parable all ought to be read and understood as such. I think people would come to find that God's word makes a lot more sense when read within its full context like that. XD

[ShiroiHikari]

I remember back when theology threads got locked on the spot...

[Nate]

I was just thinking, I know some of our nondenominational folks here wouldn't want to attend my church, it being strictly Psalm singing for example. It's more than a preference, but we feel a moral duty. Unfortunately, we have to separate from churches if we feel morally obligated to and even if you're ultimately wrong, you can't sin against our own conscience. We are where we are because we think it's correct and the other isn't.

This is a good example of the thing I was talking about in my last post. Whereas someone like Corrie might see this as non-essential, to Shao's church, this belief is very essential. This is again why Shao is absolutely correct. We'll never be unified until we get to Heaven. While we can join together to do good and help others, we can't always get along when it comes to our worship of God, because everyone has different beliefs that are very near and dear to their hearts.

Yes, he would believe that, but as Christians, don't we believe he's wrong? Not just of a different opinion, but absolutely wrong based on Scripture?

Yes! Just like how Protestants believe Catholics are absolutely wrong based on scripture, and Catholics believe Protestants are absolutely wrong based on scripture! That was the point of my post. You can't use the Bible to definitively prove someone wrong because they'll just say "No, you're interpreting it wrong" and then you'll go "No, YOU'RE interpreting it wrong" and then they'll go "NO U" and so on and so on.

This is what I'm saying. You can't say certain denominations are flat-out wrong because they have different interpretations!

Just because someone holds an opinion based on preconceived notions doesn't mean they're right about it, and it doesn't mean another party has to agree with them.

Yes, and Jefferson would have said your opinion about Christ's divinity was based on preconceived notions. This is my point! You think they have preconceived notions, they think you have preconceived notions. Most people tend to believe the things that they were raised believing, not because it's necessarily right, but because it's how they were raised. There are exceptions (I'm one of them) but it tends to be the norm.

I definitely think that searching for the right interpretation is something we should strive to do if we're searching for truth.

I agree that we should strive to search for the right interpretation, however, the point is that we will not necessarily know that it is. We can say "I believe this is the right interpretation" but just because we believe it is doesn't make it so. We're human, we're fallible, and we're prone to make decisions based on our personal opinions, upbringing, and desires which can cloud our judgment.

We can think we're right, but the problem is the other people think they're right and you're wrong, too. That's why you can't say "Oh well this is CLEARLY wrong based on the Bible" because guess what? They think they're clearly RIGHT based on the Bible. You can say "Well they're NOT and they should realize that and join in unity with us!" and they'll say the exact same thing about you.

This is why we can't ever completely be unified until Heaven.

[Cognitive Gear]

I remember back when theology threads got locked on the spot...

Yeah. Honestly I like it better this way, though. This has been an interesting conversation, and it's been way more civil than I remember them being in the past.

[Shao Feng-Li]

Heh, it really wasn't supposed to be about theology XD But I'm glad everyone's being nice, thought I'm left feeling lonely, lol

[Radical Dreamer]

XD It's a civil discussion about theology, which actually are allowed on CAA. And you guys are doing a sweet job of keeping things civil so far, so props for that! XD

[Cognitive Gear]

One thing that I do not understand about all of this is how it seems that so many of us have problems putting these differences aside to do the things that we all agree that we have been told to do. Are these differences really so important that we can't show love?

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Yeah. Honestly I like it better this way, though. This has been an interesting conversation, and it's been way more civil than I remember them being in the past.

Agreed! I think it's rather conducive to our growth. Both interpersonally and for our faith.

I'll have a real response later, if permitting. XD My earlier response was rather flippant.

[Peanut]

XD It's a civil discussion about theology, which actually are allowed on CAA. And you guys are doing a sweet job of keeping things civil so far, so props for that! XD

Huh? When I read this and the rule I'm a little confused about this whole situation. Maybe I'm just reading the rule wrong but it seems to me that its directing all theological discussions to TheologyWeb.com. In fact, I think the link to TheologyWeb.com isn't under the words "Theological Debates" which has negative connotations to it but is instead under "Theological Discussions" which this thread seems to fall under. I also remember similar threads being locked in the past. Could I possibly get some clarification about this?

[Fish and Chips]

I'll have a real response later

Oh, I am going to hold you to this.

[Radical Dreamer]

Huh? When I read this and the rule I'm a little confused about this whole situation. Maybe I'm just reading the rule wrong but it seems to me that its directing all theological discussions to TheologyWeb.com. In fact, I think the link to TheologyWeb.com isn't under the words "Theological Debates" which has negative connotations to it but is instead under "Theological Discussions" which this thread seems to fall under. I also remember similar threads being locked in the past. Could I possibly get some clarification about this?

We've been a bit more lenient with them as of late, as long as people keep things very civil and don't get too riled up. You may notice that some threads have warnings or "keep up the civil discussion" posts in them, which is a result of that. We still don't encourage everyone to go out and start a theology thread, but we don't immediately shut down threads that start one way and turn into something theological as they continue. Hope it clarifies! XD

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Oh, I am going to hold you to this.

I'm sure that you'll also enjoy picking at it and telling me why I'm wrong! XD

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

TheologyWeb makes my brain hurt.
All Christian denominations share the same core Christian beliefs but there are just many finer details that are different. There's no need to argue, when we agree on the basics. Go team!

[Syreth]

Evidence and reason can only get us so far when it comes to interpreting Scripture, and ultimately, what we place our faith in. You will never get a watertight argument for any system of belief that nobody can argue against because people interpret the evidence differently, and the law of diminishing probability makes 100% certainty on these things pretty much impossible. There is no "right way to believe" that nobody can argue against based solely on evidence and reason. It's all based on faith -- or belief in this doctrine or that doctrine simply because we choose to believe.

Reason and evidence can have a role as a good negative test, I think. For instance, if we had a faith that was in no way supported by any archaeological finds, or if the Bible's teaching about the ancestry of certain people groups was in contradiction to what we can observe today through DNA analysis, then reason and evidence might lead us to put our faith in something else.

All told, what makes the difference is the Holy Spirit. We believe we are right because the Holy Spirit is working in our hearts to put our faith in the Gospel. We also believe the Spirit works in our hearts as we put our faith in this doctrine or that doctrine, or to interpret the Bible in this way or that way.

It's why disagreements of this nature can be so profoundly difficult -- but it's also what I think our basis for faith in Christ is in the first place. Reason and evidence might not be able to take us all the way there, but they can bring clarity into how God might be leading us into a more excellent way (See 1 Corinthians 12:31, NKJV).

[Okami]

That's very true, but the Bible is (or should be) applicable to all cultures and eras, so it is important to understand the history of the Bible, but the other half of the battle is figuring out how to apply that meaning to our lives today.

Right. Even so, we must have it known by its original context before trying to apply it to our lives. When I first became a Christian, I self-taught myself things from the Bible]I[/I] could get out of it, sufficiently screwed me over. Now as a theology major at a Bible college, my entire faith system is being deconstructed and disassembled and the very heart of my faith is being stabbed to death and plucked out so I can relearn Biblical truth instead of all the times I have read my own thoughts into the text. [SIZE="1"](Not to get too theologically deep here, but just as an example, everything I ever believed about what happens after death has been torn to shreds. But the new view I see on the subject makes a whole heck of a lot more sense when the Bible is speaking as compared to what I made the Bible say)[/SIZE]

The process of getting to a point of reading the text in a truthful, contextual manner and have it become applicable can be excruciatingly painful. I learned the hard way that the Bible is not a go-on-your-own text, but much rather a communal book to be discussed back and forth.

[Htom Sirveaux]

Oh, I am going to hold you to this.

I'm sure that you'll also enjoy picking at it and telling me why I'm wrong! XD

You know, the two of you are so much alike. . . .

[Mr. SmartyPants]

We're like a married couple.

[ShiroiHikari]

Ryan and Andrew? Ahahahahahahahahahahahah *gasp* ahahahahahaha.

[Peanut]

We're like a married couple.

If you only knew how funny this is to me.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Okami. I'm with you there too. My faith has been shattered in such a beautiful and transforming way. At this point, I'm pretty removed from any sort of orthodox traditional belief system. Learning philosophy as well as critical theory has really done a huge impact on altering my own faith.

Especially with what you mention about life after death, and what Jesus meant when he preached about the Kingdom of God. It's fascinating stuff. I imagine I'm on the same boat with you there.

[Ingemar]

The process of getting to a point of reading the text in a truthful, contextual manner and have it become applicable can be excruciatingly painful. I learned the hard way that the Bible is not a go-on-your-own text, but much rather a communal book to be discussed back and forth.

2 Peter 1:20

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Okami. I'm with you there too. My faith has been shattered in such a beautiful and transforming way. At this point, I'm pretty removed from any sort of orthodox traditional belief system. Learning philosophy as well as critical theory has really done a huge impact on altering my own faith.

Especially with what you mention about life after death, and what Jesus meant when he preached about the Kingdom of God. It's fascinating stuff. I imagine I'm on the same boat with you there.

A big ditto here... I've stayed out of the conversation thus far for fear of the typical Theological discussions (And because, to be frank, Theology net killed me for debating the subject). What did it for me was less philosophy and more a study of history. Human issues don't change all that much as we progress as a culture. Viewing a passage in the socio-historical context it was written in vastly changes much of what we traditionally consider in the text.

[Nate]

Yeah I was on T-Web for a few days and those people don't mess around. They're like all masters and doctorates in religious studies and stuff and I felt like an idiot compared to them because I was like "Um...I read a book once or something?"

[Fish and Chips]

You know, the two of you are so much alike. . . .

I'm glad we've finally established Htom is Tsundere for me.

It makes reading his posts a lot less baffling.