Do Protestant Churches twist what Scripture says to fit their interpretation of the Bible?

[Robbinson]

At first I was a bit put off by the title of this thread. But being intellectually honest - probably to some extent, but in most cases on a subconscious level. I think this is human nature. I know that I struggle to find a coherent and common theme throughout the Old and New Testatment and, this, coupled with standard Bible study technique that says that God’s Word can’t contravene itself, forces us to try to harmonize difficult verses. I suppose that, just like doing a crossword puzzle, once you are committed to some key words (solutions), you will naturally try to interpret other verses (fill in other parts of the puzzle) in ways which harmonize (fit) with the rest.

On some level, I’m attracted to the idea of a authoritative interpretation of scripture - on the other, hand, I’m fearful of relinquishing my ability to try to gleam God’s Word with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and I’ve witnessed enough corruption in the Church (all Churches of every denomination) to make me nervous.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[brkn1]

LOL
You do realize that overzealous scribes corrupted these verses that muslims have a field day with them using it as evidence that the whold of the bible has been corrupted by Christians to prove their beliefs.

Muslims can have a field day, along with their other nonsense, all they want as far as I’m concerned.
We can go to (Matt. 3:16-17) to see Jesus, the Spirit of God, and the Father indicated.
Jesus often speaks of His Father and also of the Person of the Holy Spirit in the gospels.

 

[Tietjen]

I know there is a God of Heaven, but perhaps you could point out where the Bible uses “King of Heaven”.
The “Queen of Heaven” that you use to define Mary does not exist in Scripture either. There is a “queen of heaven” mentioned, but it is not what you want to title Mary by.
King and queen are terms used to describe rulers on earth. Jesus is the “King of kings”, but that is in relation to His being King over all the kings and people of earth, not “King of Heaven”.
If you are going to use such terms as being biblical terms, please point out where you found them in the Bible. Thanks.

Nope, not going to work brother. Do you or don’t you believe what the Bible says concerning the Real Presence, Using the title Father, Mary as she is described and honored in Revelation, and Peter as the rock on which Christ built His Church? Don’t dismiss my post, let me hear your opinions. Do you or don’t you believe EVERYTHING in the Bible? If you say that you do, yet you deny these specific things, I think that you are confused at best, a liar at worst.

Also, as a note to everyone reading this thread, I do not believe that the vast majority of Protestants “twist” Scripture. I believe that they are usually simply misled or mistaken in their interpretation in some instances. But remember, they have no training wheels on their bicycle. There is nothing there to keep them upright and peddling. They are each left to their own individual ideas to figure out what a verse means. Thus, the reason we have thousands and thousands of Protestants denominations after only 400-500 years since the reformation.

 

[Hisalone]

Muslims can have a field day, along with their other nonsense, all they want as far as I’m concerned.
We can go to (Matt. 3:16-17) to see Jesus, the Spirit of God, and the Father indicated.
Jesus often speaks of His Father and also of the Person of the Holy Spirit in the gospels.

It is not necessary to add to or take away from scripture. 1Jn5 is a good example of Catholics twisting scripture to fit their interpretation. Not only was scripture twisted but actually added to to fit a particular interpretation.

 

[Tietjen]

It is not necessary to add to or take away from scripture. 1Jn5 is a good example of Catholics twisting scripture to fit their interpretation. Not only was scripture twisted but actually added to to fit a particular interpretation.

LOL if you say so… have another glass of kool-aid brother.

 

[Hisalone]

LOL if you say so… have another glass of kool-aid brother.

LOL
Gotcha and you arent even gracious enough to acknowledge it. Whos drinking the koolaide brother?

 

[brkn1]

Nope, not going to work brother. Do you or don’t you believe what the Bible says concerning the Real Presence, Using the title Father, Mary as she is described and honored in Revelation, and Peter as the rock on which Christ built His Church? Don’t dismiss my post, let me hear your opinions. Do you or don’t you believe EVERYTHING in the Bible? If you say that you do, yet you deny these specific things, I think that you are confused at best, a liar at worst.

Also, as a note to everyone reading this thread, I do not believe that the vast majority of Protestants “twist” Scripture. I believe that they are usually simply misled or mistaken in their interpretation in some instances. But remember, they have no training wheels on their bicycle. There is nothing there to keep them upright and peddling. They are each left to their own individual ideas to figure out what a verse means. Thus, the reason we have thousands and thousands of Protestants denominations after only 400-500 years since the reformation.

I noticed that “training wheels” has brought us a “Co-redemptrix” in Mary, which I do not find in the Bible.
Mary was never called a “queen” either, much less the “Queen of Heaven”.
Trusting also in a man that instead of our God-man Jesus for salvation is not biblical either.
You call your Pope “Holy Father”, which was only used by Jesus to address God the Father once in scripture.

 

[ufamtobie]

Please show me where I twisted the bible verses about the title “queen of heaven”. Thanks.

brkn1,

I also stated that you twisted many other gospels as well to fit your interpretation and you only ask about the “queen of heaven”.

So I must assume since you did not question me about the other gospels that you have twisted, only that of the 'Queen of Heaven" you agree with me about you twisting the many other gospels to fit you interpretation.

Again you were wrong about Jesus being King only on earth and not in heaven. Rev. 19: 16 proves you WRONG! For “Jesus is both King in heaven and on earth”

Do you have any coments about (Rev 19:16) A name was written on the part of the cloak that covered his thigh: “KING of kings and LORD of lords.”

May the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ bless you.

Ufamtobie

 

[sandusky]

ufamtobie,

ufamtobie:

Peter, guided by the Holy Spirit was aware of this Happening says in (2 Peter 1: 20-21) First you MUST UNDERSTAND this: there is no prophesy contained in scripture which is a personal interpretation. Pophecy has never been put foward by MAN’S WILLING IT. It is rather that men IMPELLED by the HOLY SPIRIT have spoken under God’s influence.

You say that your interpretation of 2 Pet 1:20-21 is the correct interpretation, without any explanation as to why your interpretation is correct.

Will you explain how that verse prohibits anyone from interpreting scripture, please? I don’t see that it does.

 

[Hisalone]

ufamtobie,

You say that your interpretation of 2 Pet 1:20-21 is the correct interpretation, without any explanation as to why your interpretation is correct.

Will you explain how that verse prohibits anyone from interpreting scripture, please? I don’t see that it does.

Of course it doesnt.
More scripture twisting

 

[brkn1]

brkn1,

I also stated that you twisted many other gospels as well to fit your interpretation and you only ask about the “queen of heaven”.

So I must assume since you did not question me about the other gospels that you have twisted, only that of the 'Queen of Heaven" you agree with me about you twisting the many other gospels to fit you interpretation.

Again you were wrong about Jesus being King only on earth and not in heaven. Rev. 19: 16 proves you WRONG! For “Jesus is both King in heaven and on earth”

Do you have any coments about (Rev 19:16) A name was written on the part of the cloak that covered his thigh: “KING of kings and LORD of lords.”

May the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ bless you.

Ufamtobie

Jesus is KING of kings (of the earth v.19). This does not twist to make Jesus “King of Heaven”, since there is only the one God of Heaven of which Jesus is the Second Person of that Triune Godhead.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

The “Queen of Heaven” that you use to define Mary does not exist in Scripture either. There is a “queen of heaven” mentioned, but it is not what you want to title Mary by.

Rev12 Talks about the woman clothed with the sun and wearing a crown of stars. The church has interpreted this as referring to both Mary and the Church.

Herod asked Jesus if he was a king and Jesus answered that his kingdom was not of this world. He didn’t deny that he was a king. The sign on the cross read: Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.
With the Jewish kings, the most important woman in the kingdom was the queen mother. As Jesus’ mother, Mary would be considered a very exalted queen mother.

 

[Tietjen]

I noticed that “training wheels” has brought us a “Co-redemptrix” in Mary, which I do not find in the Bible.
Mary was never called a “queen” either, much less the “Queen of Heaven”.
Trusting also in a man that instead of our God-man Jesus for salvation is not biblical either.
You call your Pope “Holy Father”, which was only used by Jesus to address God the Father once in scripture.

Again, refusing to answer simple questions… tsk, tsk, tsk, I can address your issues with the above statements, but only after you address the issues I have brought up. It is a very weak defense to raise other questions as a smoke-screen when faced with questions that you cannot answer truthfully. LOL, either way, you show your true colors. Perhaps there really are Protestants who willfully twist Scripture. Too bad, too bad indeed… Still, God bless you. Should you ever wish to address my original points, let me know.

 

[ufamtobie]

ufamtobie,

You say that your interpretation of 2 Pet 1:20-21 is the correct interpretation, without any explanation as to why your interpretation is correct.

Will you explain how that verse prohibits anyone from interpreting scripture, please? I don’t see that it does.

Sandusky,

Listen to yourself! Do you really think that anyone can interpret the Bible, well then again protestants like yourself believe they can and that everyone can, that is SCARY! Perhaps, I should say without a doubt, that is why there is over 30,000 diferent Protestant Church all claiming they have the true interpretation lol

And by the way its not my interpretation its by the Power of the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Churches interpretation that is correct.

(2 Peter 3: 16)Dealing with these matters as he does in all his letters. There are certain passages in them hard to understand. The Ignorant and the unstable DISTORT THEM (just as they do the rest of SCRIPTURE) to their OWN RUIN.

Sandusky, I don’t have to tell you St. Peter will in (2 Peter 3; 16) Above, HAS TOLD YOU that not all can interpret the bible passages.

Those who try to are the ignorant and the unstable mentioned above.

Now is the Protestant Churches is an unstable Church which has divided into thousands.

Ufamtobie

 

[brkn1]

Nope, not going to work brother. Do you or don’t you believe what the Bible says concerning the Real Presence, Using the title Father, Mary as she is described and honored in Revelation, and Peter as the rock on which Christ built His Church? Don’t dismiss my post, let me hear your opinions. Do you or don’t you believe EVERYTHING in the Bible? If you say that you do, yet you deny these specific things, I think that you are confused at best, a liar at worst.

Also, as a note to everyone reading this thread, I do not believe that the vast majority of Protestants “twist” Scripture. I believe that they are usually simply misled or mistaken in their interpretation in some instances. But remember, they have no training wheels on their bicycle. There is nothing there to keep them upright and peddling. They are each left to their own individual ideas to figure out what a verse means. Thus, the reason we have thousands and thousands of Protestants denominations after only 400-500 years since the reformation.

I believe everything in the Bible, but that does not mean that I have to accept the interpretation of any man or group of men to understand the Bible. There are many false interpretations out there, so I am careful about testing and checking such interpretations against all of God’s word. If it does not line up, I know there is something wrong and I search for the truth. I do not accept additions to scripture either, as the Bible said that such additions are not allowed.
The Bible says that the Holy Spirit will guide a true believer into all truth.

Training wheels are for beginning kids and the lazy. Mama’s boys are afraid to try riding without the training wheels. Some mamas like to keep their little boys that way, so they never grow up.

 

[Hisalone]

Again, refusing to answer simple questions… tsk, tsk, tsk, I can address your issues with the above statements, but only after you address the issues I have brought up. It is a very weak defense to raise other questions as a smoke-screen when faced with questions that you cannot answer truthfully. LOL, either way, you show your true colors. Perhaps there really are Protestants who willfully twist Scripture. Too bad, too bad indeed… Still, God bless you. Should you ever wish to address my original points, let me know.

My friend you have made no points.
Make your best point and lets see if it flies.

 

[sandusky]

ufamtobie:

Sandusky,

Listen to yourself! Do you really think that anyone can interpret the Bible, well then again protestants like yourself believe they can and that everyone can, that is SCARY! Perhaps, I should say without a doubt, that is why there is over 30,000 diferent Protestant Church all claiming they have the true interpretation lol

Your point?

ufamtobie:

And by the way its not my interpretation its by the Power of the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Churches interpretation that is correct.

Your church is wrong.

Augustine wrote a treatise explaining what he considered to be the most appropriate way for the everyman to interpret Scripture; in that treatise he said (I paraphrase), that perhaps the studious one who desired to dig deeper into the scripture might learn more than his teacher.

Why do you think Augustine would write that Treatise if the Holy Spirit has a prohibition on private interpretation?

(2 Peter 3: 16)Dealing with these matters as he does in all his letters. There are certain passages in them hard to understand. The Ignorant and the unstable DISTORT THEM (just as they do the rest of SCRIPTURE) to their OWN RUIN.

Sandusky, I don’t have to tell you St. Peter will in (2 Peter 3; 16) Above, HAS TOLD YOU that not all can interpret the bible passages.

That’s not what Peter says.

Peter says that ignorant and unstable men do interpret scripture, but distort what scripture says.

ufamtobie:

Those who try to are the ignorant and the unstable mentioned above.

That’s not what Peter says.

What he says is that the ignorant and unstable interpret and distort the Scripture; the converse of that is that the learned and stable interpret scripture as well, but without distorting it.

ufamtobie:

Now is the Protestant Churches is an unstable Church which has divided into thousands.

Division within a church = that church is unstable.

The Catholic Church has division; therefore, the Catholic Church is unstable.

Welcome to the nut house.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

These verses confirm that the Bible is the supreme and only true rule of what God’s Word is.
A Pope or council are personal interpretators, especially if they add to or change what God said or claim to have the only understanding of what God said.
Anything we understand from a verse or set of verses must always be supported by the rest of Scripture, or it is not correct interpretation. If Jesus said not to call any man “father” in a spiritual sense, then a personal group of persons, who say that it is now OK to do so, is not interpreting scripture properly, since it clearly violates what Jesus said in scripture. That would be a good example of wrong interpretation of scripture, since it violates what scripture said.

That isn’t at all what they mean. Don’t you realize the bible came from the church, was compiled by the church, and can best be interpreted by the church which 1 Tim 4:15 calls the bulwark and pillar of the faith. Don’t you take seriously that the Holy Spirit guides the church to teach truth as Jesus promised?

Your interpretation of the scripture command to call no man father is not accurate or else Paul wouldn’t have referred to himself as the father in the faith to those he taught. In fact, you yourself are interpreting that the scripture means to call no man father* in a spiritual sense* since that isn’t exactly what it says. And it isn’t a “personal group of persons” who permit us to use the term father in the way Paul did; it’s the church that came down from the apostles that allows it.

The church encourages us to read the bible and apply it to our lives. But in those instances where there is controversy, God didn’t leave us clueless as to the truth, He formed one church (not many) so that we would be sure of the truth.

 

[ralphinal]

My only question is what if your interpretation is different than mine. Who is correct?

Are the people on the God allows Christians to perform homosexual acts threads correct? Why is their interpretation wrong?

 

[Tietjen]

I believe everything in the Bible, but that does not mean that I have to accept the interpretation of any man or group of men to understand the Bible. There are many false interpretations out there, so I am careful about testing and checking such interpretations against all of God’s word. If it does not line up, I know there is something wrong and I search for the truth. I do not accept additions to scripture either, as the Bible said that such additions are not allowed.
The Bible says that the Holy Spirit will guide a true believer into all truth.

Training wheels are for beginning kids and the lazy. Mama’s boys are afraid to try riding without the training wheels. Some mamas like to keep their little boys that way, so they never grow up.

Okay, let’s try this nice and slow so that those “big boys” who never learned how to ride a bike can understand.

1. What is your position on the Real Presence talked about in John 6?
2. The primacy of Peter found in Mt 16?
3. Mary’s position as depicted in Rev 11:19 - 12:2? We can of course discuss other things relating to Mary, but I’d like to hear your “take” on this one first.

This will be my final attempt at getting you to answer. As a "mama’s boy, I am not allowed to play with those who avoid and circumvent the Truth. My mama wouldn’t approve and since she’s THE queen, I had better listen.