Quote:Wrong. I'll have to stop you there because you're assuming all other texts are like the Bible; they can't be verified anymore. Guess what? I'm alive and able to tell you what my text means. The authors and pseudo-authors of the Bible are long gone, hence the confusion about what it means.
Well, people have trouble understanding texts today. There are many, many interpreters to authors today. There is not really that much confusion over what the Bible means. I have studied the Early Church Fathers a little bit as well as church history. Theology has essentially remained the same for the last 2000 years with maybe 10-15% variation between churches that are connected to the Bible. I had a book of the early church fathers on Christian doctrine and they are very close to modern Christians in man ways. Some doctrines like dispensational premillenialism came relatively recently.
If you go to seminary, what you learn is not only the Bible, you learn Christian history. The way that the Bible is interpreted is not only through tools people have in the 20th century, it goes back to the commentaries that were written much earlier. One of the first books that I read was Augustine's Confessions, which has commentaries on the Bible that are very similar to modern interpreters.
If you want proof of this, look at the doctrinal differences between the Catholics and the Protestants, two movements in which the people have traditionally not liked each other very much, and which have developed mostly independently of each other. If you study the differences in Catholic doctrine about the Bible, Christian ethics, etc, it is very close to Protestant doctrine.
What you are saying is factually not accurate. The Bible is simple to understand, it is just once you understand the main points there are some very difficult issues that have divided people.
The core issues of the Christian faith, who Christ is, what God is like, how Christians should live, are basically agreed upon.
Quote:This is the truth:
1. The Bible is a complicated book that has multiple interpretations
2. Where there are multiple interpretations, there is no definite, easily discernible interpretation in every case
3. There is no definite, easily discernible interpretation of the Bible in every case
I will accept that 3 is true. But for it to be significant, you must prove 4:
4. If there is no definite, easily discernible interpretation of the Bible in every case, the Bible text cannot communicate anything
or
5. If there is no definite, easily discernible interpretation of the Bible in every case, God has not revealed scripture
Quote:4: in essence the text communicates *something*, but that something is meaningless as we have Christians falling over each other trying to explain their mysterious invisible friend.
If you have two people that disagree over the interpretation of the theory of evolution, that does not mean the theory of evolution is meaningless. Your demand that Christians consider the text meaningless because their are contradictory interpretations would also make the theory of evolution meaningless, as there are different interpretations there.
Quote:Contradictory denominations makes 4 just about self-evident. 5... well, like I said, refute it or deal with it; the Bible is not the "Word of God" but rather a collection of words by fellow mammals.
The Bible prophesies that Jesus Christ will return in Isaiah (see Isaiah 53). It makes many other prophecies (see Ezekiel). It is the most important book in the modern world and the story of the most powerful civilization in history wrestling with concerns that are more relevant and close to human nature than any other book. It has been confirmed by miracles throughout the history of the Christian church. It is substantially confirmed by the Quran and other texts that point back to it. There is very good historical evidence to accept early authorship of scripture and believe that the people who wrote the New Testament experience the things that they testify to. The early Christian church believed the miracles so strongly that they were willing to die for them? Who would be willing to die for a lie? Who was Jesus Christ, was he Lord, liar or lunatic? Why have so many, including myself received miraculous confirmations in which spoke to them, often through the Bible, and revealed things to them.
Quote:
"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin." ~ Cardinal Bellarmine, during the trial of Galileo, 1615
"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." ~ Hitler
Christianity: Fueling ignorance and genocide since the Bronze Age.
I am not sure what these intend to prove. There is 2000 years of mistakes you can dig up about Christianity. What does this prove about the Christian faith? The Christian faith has not fueled ignorance, the most advanced societies have come through Christianity and now have become materialistic and empty.
This doesn't counter point 5 whatsoever. Saying that the narrative has God supposedly doing things ergo the narrative is proof of God doing things is circular reasoning.
Quote:"5. If there is no definite, easily discernible interpretation of the Bible in every case, God has not revealed scripture"
Well, if you were questioning whether the narrative revealed God because of your presupposition that God must work inside of some easily discernible interpretation of the Bible, that would conquer that presupposition if it rested on the Bible text (which it doesn't).
Are you arguing that:
1. God must reveal himself in a definite, easily discernible way, otherwise God is not God?
2. I know this through philosophical theology
3. ...
If so, prove that concept. Why must God reveal himself in a definite, easily discernible way?
Quote:Consider your work cut out for you. I demand explanations, so better start asking your god. Otherwise, consider your belief system invalid or severly questionable until any sort of explanation is given for such fundamental controversies.
Invalid because you can't see the truth of it from your ignorant presuppositions? Why would I think that? You know when I read these forums, I feel badly, because I have had a supernatural experience and i know what I am saying is true, and you are debating me and reasoning about all these things with words.
