Does the Bible want you to take it non-literally?

[Winter wind]

Quote:
"Likewise, no one pours new wine into old wineskins. Otherwise, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the skins are ruined. Rather, new wine is poured into fresh wineskins."
Mark 2:22
Quote:
"In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away."
Hebrew 8:13

As for the New testament
God acts through man. Jesus was not happy with those who followed the letter of the Bible before he changed it. He did not politely say "I know that was then, but this is now". He called them hypocrites.
Quote:
Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered
A translation (i don't put words in mouth, just clean up the old english): You idiot, lawyers! You have the key to knowledge. You're smart. I know, because God gave you that key. And yet you don't use your head! You don't use the key. You just stick to stopping others from using the key (brains).

Not objectionable. (i think...)

He expected that humans would have tended to the wine and not just cling to the wineskin.
He expects that from us. And how is this possible? How can humans be allowed to change anything?
Because God lives inside us.
God gave us the Bible in the (maybe vain) hope that we would use our brains when reading it. That we would be able to change wineskins by ourselves.
Quote:
our sufficiency is from God, who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2 Corinthians 3:5-6:
not the letter but the Spirit.

We don't "pick and choose" at all. We find the spirit.

The third time I've tried this.

[jazz fork Gun]

[Winter, get a new edition that isn't the King James =P That was actually an edition sanctioned by him because it sounded better and more poetic.]

How has Christianity managed to stay such a huge religion all these years? Because it's been flexible. 1700s? FIRE AND BRIMSTONE! 2007? Personal relationship with God.

In a novel a "static" character is one whose personality never changes, for instance Les Mis's Javert. Usually this character's inflexibility is his downfall, whereas a flexible character can adapt to changing situations and thrive.

"In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." Hebrew 8:13

The Bible is full of contradictions like that. That quote that says what's obsolete is as good as gone.

Living by the Book is just going through the motions: you get too wrapped up in the blah blah blah and then you're not paying attention to the religion. Do you think God would prefer you go to church every Sunday but pay no attention and never eat pig meat or that you maybe eat pork every night but really believe that Jesus died for you?

It's almost impossible to interpret it straight.

[Keith Hamburger]

I have commented elsewhere about how it is impossible to take every passage of the bible litereally. In one passage they state that homosexuality is an abomination. Very close nearby is stated that unruly children should be stoned to death. Very near to that, an adultress should likewise be stoned and witch should not be allowed to live.

Even the most literal fundamentalists do not kill their children. I have not heard of any serious suggestions of killing Wiccans or magicians. Divorcees are not stoned in the town square, and I have never heard a fundamentalist suggest that this lack is wrong.

Everyone who believes in the Bible must select and interpret. If they claim to not do so they are liars, which itself is a violation of the Commandments, and punishable by death.

If someone selects and interprets the Bible (which all believers absolutely must do) but denies others their own right to do the same, they are hypocrites. If a believer wishes to outlaw homosexuality, force others to follow their interpretation through the use of government violence, but does not kill their children when they step out of line, then they don't truly believe that of which they speak.

Interestingly, by the definitions I give above, most all Christians are hypocrites. They insist on interpretations of some parts, but deny others their own right to make their own interpretations of some parts.

Keith

[jazz fork Gun]

I agree! Are we to define "love" as murder? Are we to define "neighbour" as other Christians? How else can we both kill gays and love our neighbours at the same time and still call ourselves Christian?

[Jack]

The entire premise of this thread is weird. The Bible is just a book, it can't "want" you to do anything. It's up to the individual and his/her religious beliefs as to how they interpret the Bible and what they accept and reject from it. Don't put the onus on the book.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Isherwood The entire premise of this thread is weird. The Bible is just a book, it can't "want" you to do anything. It's up to the individual and his/her religious beliefs as to how they interpret the Bible and what they accept and reject from it. Don't put the onus on the book.

It, effectively, does want people to do things. The entire book is full of passages telling people what they should do. No, the book can't literally "want" anything, but I never suggested it was a personification.

[Zero Fries]

Again, how can one decide on what to accept and what to deny? What makes stoning children less believeable than heaven?

If you reject certain parts, why do some Christians get offended when I reject all of them?

[shawmutt]

I follow the Jefferson Bible, does that count?

The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth: Extracted Textually from the Gospels Greek, Latin, French, and English

[Foxfyre]

Quote by: Zero Fries Again, how can one decide on what to accept and what to deny? What makes stoning children less believeable than heaven? If you reject certain parts, why do some Christians get offended when I reject all of them?

It is done through dedicated, comprehensive Bible scholarship generally spanning years of study. This allows us to separate the history from the allegory, the eye witness accounts from the symbolism, the poetry from the prophecy, the wisdom literature from the Law, etc. We can learn to begin to see the world of the ancients through their eyes that allows us a better handle on what the ancients saw, experienced, thought, understood, and believed when they wrote it down.

The Bible isn't something that can 'expect' anything. It is a collection of widely diverse, often fragmented, sometimes duplicated pieces of manuscripts spanning more than 2000 years that have been somewhat awkwardly and/or inefficiently edited together and compiled into what we now consider to be the Holy Bible. We certainly don't have all the manuscripts that would have been included had we had them, and we are lacking a lot of detail that would have made translations and interpretations much easier.

And yet the Bible has survived millienia of attempts to extinguish it and remains the world's No. 1 best seller today. It has helped change many lives and has provided insight, inspiration, and encouragement to billions.

Rather remarkable don't you think?

Having said that, yes, the Bible can be taken pretty much literally as we have it. The trick is to know what it is literally stating.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Isherwood The entire premise of this thread is weird. The Bible is just a book, it can't "want" you to do anything. It's up to the individual and his/her religious beliefs as to how they interpret the Bible and what they accept and reject from it. Don't put the onus on the book.

It becomes whatever someone wants it to be. And if the laws of that nation use the book then it also becomes the common law for the people. Just like a book, it is whatever you make if it.... and it can push people to do things.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: HelioPrime It becomes whatever someone wants it to be. And if the laws of that nation use the book then it also becomes the common law for the people. Just like a book, it is whatever you make if it.... and it can push people to do things.

When a book reads "you shall stone all children" and someone says "this isn't to be followed", Are they doing what the book wants or what they want?

[Jack]

And yet the Bible has survived millienia of attempts to extinguish it and remains the world's No. 1 best seller today. It has helped change many lives and has provided insight, inspiration, and encouragement to billions. Rather remarkable don't you think?

No, I don't. Popularity is not a measure of validity. And the self-abasement and mental self-abuse required to be a Christian leave me feeling less than charitable toward that particular religion, not that the validity of any religion has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Winter wind]

No, I don't. Popularity is not a measure of validity. And the self-abasement and mental self-abuse required to be a Christian leave me feeling less than charitable toward that particular religion, not that the validity of any religion has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.

My religion has been singled out! We're so special...no but really...

self abasement and mental self-abuse? Buddhism and the sensory world is no more a form of "mental self-abuse" and "self abasement" then Christianity. Don't get me started on Judaism and Islam. Hinduism had the Caste system. so I don't see how Christianity is oh so special.

When a book reads "you shall stone all children" and someone says "this isn't to be followed", Are they doing what the book wants or what they want?

My post covers. The one I've posted three times and no one has refuted each time.

[freefallife]

Quote by: Winter wind My post covers. The one I've posted three times and no one has refuted each time.

Your post was refuted each time you brought it up with Matthew, remember??

Matthew 5
18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Unless you mean to assert that the "new covenant" Jesus made completely eradicated the 10 commandments. Is that what your point is here??

[LOGAN]

The answer to that question also answers many "uninformed" and "misrepresented" idea's concerning the scriptures of the Holy Bible. First one must rightly divide the word (2Tim2:15). The law of the OT that contained the punishments which required stoning were indeed hung on the cross of the Christ as were all the laws of the OT (Col2:13-14). No one can take out of context, a single verse, and comprehend its intended message. As I said before, there are no passes of scripture that make contradiction to the truth of one another found in the entire Holy Bible. If they are "interpreted" as such, they are not being "comprehended" and one is not rightly dividing the world of truth, and "......they are not showing themselves to be a workman that needth not to be ashamed." (2Tim2:15) Logan

[Winter wind]

Unless you mean to assert that the "new covenant" Jesus made completely eradicated the 10 commandments. Is that what your point is here??

The contradictions in the Bible only serve to prove my point more. The Bible does not make logical sense, it is nigh impossible to follow it to the letter. Looking for the spirit rather then the letter of the Bible is the only option left. I didn't mean to ignore the refute you made, I just found it didn't address a lot of my post.

This isn't meant to sound offensive, but I know it's going to anyway. Why do you double your "?"
Emphasis?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer When a book reads "you shall stone all children" and someone says "this isn't to be followed", Are they doing what the book wants or what they want?

Lacking someone to tell us stoning is bad many of us probably would still use stoning as a form of punishment. So you'd be doing what it told you.

If you didn't then your giving in to peer pressure or taught reason. You only need to look at the middle east where stoning isn't looked down on, and isn't viewed as a backward punishment.

Just like libertarians use a document to define what they think should be the exacting lines for american government, many people will use the bible as exacting words on life. While this isn't in any way good or desired by most people its their choice. They are compelled to do what a book tells them.

[freefallife]

Quote by: Winter wind The contradictions in the Bible only serve to prove my point more. The Bible does not make logical sense, it is nigh impossible to follow it to the letter. Looking for the spirit rather then the letter of the Bible is the only option left. I didn't mean to ignore the refute you made, I just found it didn't address a lot of my post.

Why not answer the question? Are the 10 commandments still applicable or did Jesus completely eradicate the old testament?

This isn't meant to sound offensive, but I know it's going to anyway. Why do you double your "?" Emphasis?

A habit I suppose. I play and annotate lot of chess so you might see some ??, !?, !! kind of marks. The emphasis might be that I personally think you're position is dubious. (a dubious move in chess is annotated with ?? ie; 1. f3 e5 2. g4?? Qh4 mate)

[LOGAN]

There is no contradiction, the new covenant of the New Testament did in fact, do away with the "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS", as the information is given in clear and easily understood language.

When God gave the law through Moses, the Ten Commandments were only part of that law. If you read Exodus, Chapter 21-24, you see that penalties were prescribed for violations of that law. For, idolatry, murder, adultery, profaning the Sabbath---the penalty was death. For theft, false testimony and other offenses, the pentalty depended upon the result of the offense. But, with every one of the commandments, the teaching concerning those penalties could not be isolated from the commands. If the commands of Exodus 20 applied to us today, then the penalties of Exodus 21,22, and 23 would also apply.

The Old Testament was done away in Christ, superceded by the New Testament (that of Jesus). The old laws was only designed by God, to last "till the seed should come" and that seed was Christ (Galatians 3:16,19). The Old Testament was removed so that the New Testament could become effective (Roman 7:1-7, 2nd Cor3:1-18, Eph 2:12-16, Heb 7:12, 8:8-13, 9:12-17, 10:9,10, etc). And it is clearly stated by the inspired writings of the apostle Paul, regarding the law of Moses, that Christ has, "Blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us; and He hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross" (Colossians 2:14).

Though some contend that the "Then Commandments" were not taken away, notice what the scripts actually have to say concerning worship on the Sabbath(Saturday) and other "special" days, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon, or a SABBATH day; which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ's" (Colossians 2:16,17). All these were part of the law that was nailed to the cross, and that includes the law of the Sabbath day. You will also find one to the ten commandments listed in Romans 7:1-7 as part of the law that was removed. And in 2nd Cor3, the entire chapter deals with the law "WRITTEN AND ENGRAVEN ON STONES" being done away. That could hardly refer to any other than the Ten Commandments because they were the "only" ones written and engraven on stones.

We live under the New Testament, which was established on and by the death of Christ (Heb9:15-17). Under this law, there are not "holy days" (Colossians 2:16,17, Galatians 4:9-11). The first day of the week (Sunday), did not replace the Sabbath, nor is it the Christian Sabbath. Under the gospel of Christ, the first day of the week was never called a day of rest, nor was it called a holy day. We are told that the disciples of Jesus came together "on the first day of the week to break bread" to observe the Lord's Supper in remembrance of His death and suffering until He comes again. (Acts 20:7, 1st Cor.11:23-28, 16:1,2). Deuteronomy 5:1-21 tells us that the Law of Moses, including the Ten Commandments, were never given to any Gentile but only to the Jews that were brought out of Egyptian bondage and their offspring. But it seems the ones making all the fuss over keeping the Ten Commandments in our day and times are the Gentiles who were never under any of the Laws of Moses, including the Ten Commandments. Actually all that was done away with were the laws that were "specific" to the Jewish Nation, Israel and their penalties, customs and traditions, unless introduced under the NT by those that were commissioned to lead the whole world into "ALL" truth....the apostles.

Does this mean that we are to ignore all the ten commandments of the old testaments? No, of course not, all but one of these commandments were re-introduced under the law of Grace (New Testament) with the exception of the Sabbath worship. The penalties, for the breaching of these laws are not the same as was under the Old Testament, as the penalties were not reintroduced.

No other Gods....Matt.4:10, Acts 17:22-30

Idolatry forbidden.....1 Cor. 10:14, 1 John 5:21

Do not take God's name in vain....1 Tim. 6:1. Col.3:17

Keep the Sabbath....found no where in New Testament teachings

Honor your mother and father....Matt.15:4-9, Eph.6:1-3

Do not murder....Matt.5:21-22, Rev.21:8

Do not commit adultery.....Gal 5:19:1, 1 Cor. 6:9-20

Do not steal.....1 Cor 6:10, Eph. 4:28

Do not bear false witness....Matthew 5:22, Col. 3:9

Do not covet......Ephesians 5:3, Colossians 3:5

[Winter wind]

Why not answer the question? Are the 10 commandments still applicable or did Jesus completely eradicate the old testament?

Well I can only give my interpretation, not a universal opinion.
The ten commandments are a basic set of laws.

"No other God before me" does not exclude other religions in my opinion because other religions worship God, just a different form. Hindus believe in a formless single God with other Gods just being forms of the main God. That is closest to what I believe. The commandment was rather to make sure that religion came first and other matters came second.

The no idol commandment is very applicable in todays world. Christians have a tendency to worship the Bible rather then God, or worship their paster. The spirit of Christianity takes full precedence, the Bible is a guide, but it shouldn't be made into an idol. It was his way of saying don't lose yourself in the narrow view, always look at the big picture.

The wrongful use of name is a little confusing to me, but it could be God making sure you don't be little His importance.

Remember the Sabbath just means don't put religion on the back burner. It is very easy to do that, but will be detrimental to your spiritual development. Always set some time to think about your religion.

Honor thy Mother and Father is more Honor those more experienced then yourselves. They were here longer and are generally smarter (though not always) Respect them and listen to them. (doesn't mean worship them).

The rest are rules to stop infringements on the natural rights. (take a look at Locke if no one knows what I'm talking about.)