well. we have seen a guy here attempt to use the bible to say something the bible doesnt say...
but as you say, Jim Jones used the bible to kill thousand people.
Person A says the Bible says X. Person B says the Bible says Y. Person A says person B says the Bible says something that it doesn't. Person B says that about person A.
Who's right?
I say they are both right, in a sense. The very flexibility and ambiguity of scriptures that allow one to reconcile literally any "apparent" contradiction also allow one to reconcile a scripture with literally any teaching. This is not an abstract hypothetical -- it has happened in real life, as we have seen over and over again. It is the reason there are so many sects of Christianity. It is the reason that even Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Christians are not united in their doctrines.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Person A says the Bible says X. Person B says the Bible says Y. Person A says person B says the Bible says something that it doesn't. Person B says that about person A.
Who's right?
I say they are both right, in a sense. The very flexibility and ambiguity of scriptures that allow one to reconcile literally any "apparent" contradiction also allow one to reconcile a scripture with literally any teaching. This is not an abstract hypothetical -- it has happened in real life, as we have seen over and over again. It is the reason there are so many sects of Christianity. It is the reason that even Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Christians are not united in their doctrines.
Can you give an example of this? I would say there are three possibilities.
1. Person A and Person B are arguing over something that is genuinely not spelled out explicitly. Many issues in the subject of bible prophecy come to mind. Thus, in certain areas, there must be room for 'disagreement' since, in those areas, we are operating in a more speculative and interpretive arena.
2. One of them is correct, and the other is incorrect. A person may believe they are 'teaching what the Bible teaches' but in many cases they are not. Example: Those who teach emphatically that 'baptism does not save us' are teaching emphatically the opposite of the plain, explicit statement of Scripture.
3. Both persons are wrong. Both of them are suffering from number 2 above, and in addition have posited different and contrary opinions. An example is the argumentation common between Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox concerning the 'supreme' Patriarchate, or concerning icons vs statues, etc. Another example is among Oneness Pentecostals who argue about wine or grape juice in communion (both are usually in error because they are arguing about how to properly observe a pseudo-catholic mystery rite, instead of simply eating the Lord's Supper as brethren in honour of Jesus and in expectation of his return).
As far as 'reconciling contradictions', I don't know of any unreconcilable contradictions (which means they aren't actually contradictions). Also, many people do not seem to understand the concept of paradox.
And furthermore, people seem not understand that Scripture itself testifies to the fact that much of it is written in such a way that those whose hearts are not right with God will misunderstand and be led astray, to their own destruction. Sort of like God's 'security code' that keeps the insincere from getting in the treasure chest. (I'm sure you folks who don't believe in God will have all sorts of fun with that last one.)
Can you give an example of this? I would say there are three possibilities.
1. Person A and Person B are arguing over something that is genuinely not spelled out explicitly. Many issues in the subject of bible prophecy come to mind.
Salvation would be another one.
Quote:
Thus, in certain areas, there must be room for 'disagreement' since, in those areas, we are operating in a more speculative and interpretive arena.
I can't think of an area that isn't.
Quote:
2. One of them is correct, and the other is incorrect. A person may believe they are 'teaching what the Bible teaches' but in many cases they are not. Example: Those who teach emphatically that 'baptism does not save us' are teaching emphatically the opposite of the plain, explicit statement of Scripture.
In your opinion, yeah. Do you actually think those who have a different view don't also think the Bible supports their view? Read my post again. It's a good one.
Quote:
3. Both persons are wrong. Both of them are suffering from number 2 above, and in addition have posited different and contrary opinions. An example is the argumentation common between Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox concerning the 'supreme' Patriarchate, or concerning icons vs statues, etc. Another example is among Oneness Pentecostals who argue about wine or grape juice in communion (both are usually in error because they are arguing about how to properly observe a pseudo-catholic mystery rite, instead of simply eating the Lord's Supper as brethren in honour of Jesus and in expectation of his return).
As far as 'reconciling contradictions', I don't know of any unreconcilable contradictions (which means they aren't actually contradictions).
Of course! See my post.
Quote:
Also, many people do not seem to understand the concept of paradox.
And furthermore, people seem not understand that Scripture itself testifies to the fact that much of it is written in such a way that those whose hearts are not right with God will misunderstand and be led astray, to their own destruction. Sort of like God's 'security code' that keeps the insincere from getting in the treasure chest. (I'm sure you folks who don't believe in God will have all sorts of fun with that last one.)
Us folks who don't believe everything people say or have written about God, you mean? Yep. Lots of fun.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
In your opinion, yeah. Do you actually think those who have a different view don't also think the Bible supports their view? Read my post again. It's a good one.
So, someone who teaches 'baptism doesn't save us' has a VALID REASON for thinking they are 'in agreement with Scripture', when Scripture says the following:
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
The bible PLAINLY and EXPLICITY says baptism saves us. The hypothetical person claims 'baptism does not save us'.
That is a clear and undeniable contradiction. One must be wrong. Either the person is right, and the bible is wrong, or the bible is right, and the person is wrong. (Or they are both wrong, in which case the argument is moot.)
Of course they will THINK and BELIEVE and SAY they are 'in the book', but that doesn't make it so. Surely you know these things?
"And furthermore, people seem not understand that Scripture itself testifies to the fact that much of it is written in such a way that those whose hearts are not right with God will misunderstand and be led astray, to their own destruction. Sort of like God's 'security code' that keeps the insincere from getting in the treasure chest..."
Excellent point. God even tells us, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments." Ps 111:10
So, someone who teaches 'baptism doesn't save us' has a VALID REASON for thinking they are 'in agreement with Scripture', when Scripture says the following:
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
The bible PLAINLY and EXPLICITY says baptism saves us. The hypothetical person claims 'baptism does not save us'.
That is a clear and undeniable contradiction. One must be wrong. Either the person is right, and the bible is wrong, or the bible is right, and the person is wrong. (Or they are both wrong, in which case the argument is moot.)
Of course they will THINK and BELIEVE and SAY they are 'in the book', but that doesn't make it so. Surely you know these things?
Hey, don't argue with me. Argue with them.
Is "If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it" plain and explicit?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I've never heard that, but the good news is: the ideas held by one UPCI preacher don't represent the views of every UPCI preacher.
I've mostly heard the argument that beards associate you with the hippie culture...or whatnot. Lame argument, but subjectively reasonable coming from a certain age group.
There were hippies in the bible? Seriously though, I have heard cause it makes you look like a biker. LOL. I have hells angels members in my family. Used to party with them. Some of them were long hair long bearded bikers. Others looked like CEOs. No biblical verse/verses against beards.
Linear Mode
