Could God have designed the Bible to only have one interpretation?

And that point being?

As I pointed out, there are things authored by man that have only one interpretation, so why can't God deliver to us a message with only one correct interpretation?

You didn't explain why you believe it can't be done you just said it couldn't, which is not of much help to the discussion.

 

So you are suggesting that it is every man for himself, if you don't get the message right or if you did not get the message at all, then you're just out like a chicken neck.

Some how that seems a bit unchristian.

 

How will you determine that? It does not appear terminable. Can you point to god and say, there he is?

It can be definitely determined that there has not been one interpretation but many, that evidence is definitely in. So while god may have done that, he didn't.
And if he did, and there is only one meaning, I think that is what you mean, as opposed to interpretation, then who is to tell us what that meaning is?

 

OWB:

That one interpretation would be Gods alone, FTSOA : D

Again, FTSOA, because it would only be his own interpretation. FTSOA, he could, but why?

FTSOA?! LOL

I hope this post is explanation enough. If it isn't, I'll keep trying to interpret what I mean to you, but I can't promise results! : D

 

Somewhere in the Bible it says that every man comes to a realization of God based on his experience with nature. (It is against the rules to quote the Bible in this forum, so I won't.) It is what he does with that knowledge that determines whether he will spend eternity in heaven or hell. Some men accept God as their master, and others choose to rebel against Him. So yes, absolutely, it is every man for himself. The choice each man makes determines his or her destiny. There is nothing I can do about it.

You cannot lead someone to understand the Bible. You cannot lead someone to accept Christ as their Savior. Only the Holy Spirit can do those things. Occassionally the Holy Spirit uses peoples as tools to open their eyes, but anything we do under our own power will be burnt as hay stubble in the fires of judgment.

 

Why?

Because he loves mankind like a father and wants what is best for his children.

Repeating what you just said is not an explanation.

 

It's not against the rules to cite a Scripture for what you are saying.

As for everyone being on their own, why did Jesus tell us to go and make disciples? (Matthew 28:19-20)

 

I don't think God designed the bible for you to accept it. I don't the bible was designed from the appropriate fear that those people who accepted will get us now for a mean conlusion. The book is there: it's a good life style and accept or not the proof is for the bearing that no matter what you do it is also atheistic to understand that we as a whole world won't let go of it's ideals.


________________________________________

Does the book of Love have words for it? The bible does.

 

The words in the bible are not the truth, the words are only pointing to the truth. There is a real experience that these words are trying to describe. The words are not for interpretation, not for this or that. They ring with a certain truth, and if your able to ring with that truth too then it is good. If not, then no need to rationalize.

 

Actually it's once a week with wine, although grape juice is an available option.

I think the overall message of the Bible is very clear and easy to understand. Other parts can change as we relate to them throughout our lives. You might look at the story of the prodigal son for instance through the lense of the lost son, the jealous brother or the father depending on your life experience.

 

This is a quote from the rules posted by Skip on 4/20/2007.

Please feel free to interpret that in some other way than the plain sense of it, I don't dare. I have been banned once, and am trying to pay attention to the rules and not offend anyone. Very difficult to do, all things considered. Especially considering my God-given personality.

I think in the example you are using, Jesus was talking to the people who would be apostles, not to you and me.

There is no doubt that we will have fruit in our lives if we are Christians (Jesus withered the fig tree as an example of this) but that fruit is due to the work of the Holy Spirit in our lifes, not to our ability to interpret the Bible correctly for others, or our ability to argue about that interpretation. Anything we do on our own ability will be burnt as hay stubble in the fires of judgment.

 

The intent of the Bible Quote Rule was to prevent things like a long string of bible quotes and the conclusion

"Therefore I am right". This type of post flooded the forum a while back and there was some backlash including the Sanctuary. There is generally no problem citing Scripture, or even the judicial use of quotations, but when flooding a post with quotations was your only argument, it is against the rules.

 

Sorry. I know there are Protestants who do use wine, and that most do participate in some symbolism ceremony every week, however there is a growing population of communities who disavow wine, and place bigger and bigger gaps between Eucharistic style services.

 

LOL Who elses? If there is only one interpretation it must be gods for him to have written it, FTSOA. The interpretation of his children would be lost in individuation, FTSOA. : D

Humperdink:

Sometimes I think the self really is anathema to the religious! It's mean of me I know, but the air we breathe is free! Isn't it? lol

 

The plain sense of it is "NO BIBLE QUOTES". That means don't quote. Citing a Scripture, doesn't mean quote it but tell where it comes from such as John 3:16 and the rules say nothing about citing Scriptures.

 

God doesn't need to write the Bible just for himself, it was written for mankind and so he must not have thought that it would be lost in individuation.

 

You are correct Jesus was talking to the apostles at that time but what he said applies to us today or else, why would he also say that this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth and then the end will come, when he knew that the apostles would be long and unable to preach the good news at that time. (Matthew 24:14) That Good news is still being preached today and his disciples are still preaching that good news today even though they are not apostles.

 

OWB:

We're making progress!? FTSOA I'm not talking about the bible, but its (FTSOA) 'singular' interpretation. FTSOA, you could say that its sole meaning could be shared between gods chosen, but my point is that the very act of interpretation results in it becoming gods alone if god is to remain its author, FTSOA. LOL

 

Yes, now you are making progress. It seems you've actually gotten to the point of the thread.

Some, like you, hold that nothing can have but one correct interpretation, that there must be different interpretations for every individual because of individual perceptions.

The point I am making is:
Seeing as there are things created by man that have only one correct "interpretation" regardless of individual perceptions, such as jigsaw puzzles and crossword puzzles. Why can't God, whose wisdom is way beyond man's and who knows how the mind and perceptions of man work, author a book that has but one correct interpretation and that is an interpretation that is accessible to men who want to know it, regardless of their individual perceptions.

 

Now that I've made it ( to the point of your thread as you understand it : D ), what have you left us to make of it? All the bits fit, FTSOA. lol What is missing however is your seeing that god, FTSOA, would have to be the last piece placed. That a true interpretation is "accessible" via the desire to access it is not in question, but that being interpreted!

LOL