I would like for someone here to explain to me how, “Bible alone” and “personal interpretation” of the Bible… is a good thing.

[sandusky]

Now I know where the schizophrenic patients are coming from. I use to work in a pysch ward. I get this similar response from them. They so love and read the bible. Yet, they land in the court system, jail, prison, in the news (mostly due to crimes) and psych ward to be medicated because of their private interpretation and what the Holy Spirit had/is spoken/speaking to them. God bless them and have mercy on us.

Can somebody explain this to the victims, family and whoever is affected by this thinking and therefore behavior?. Perhaps another thread.

What does that have to do with the fact that there is no prohibition against private interpretation of scripture in scripture?

Care to elaborate on that?

 

[po18guy]

I’m opposed to personal interpretation, but I’m also opposed to the CC interpretation. I think both have caused problems at times.

“Christ, the cause of dissension” “A sign that will be contradicted” “I have not come to bring peace, but a sword!”

Yes, the truth is hated by this world, which sees Christ as trouble.

Christ’s peace.

 

[estesbob]

I’m opposed to personal interpretation, but I’m also opposed to the CC interpretation. I think both have caused problems at times.

I bleive there are less than a half dozen verses that the Catholic Church has given definitve interpretations on so i cant see how that could cause many problems.

 

[po18guy]

What does that have to do with the fact that there is no prohibition against private interpretation of scripture in scripture?

Care to elaborate on that?

WHAT??? :bigyikes:

2 Peter 1:19-20 (King James Version) We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Christ’s peace.

 

[estesbob]

Here Catholic, read this: Did Martin Luther say, “Be a Sinner and Sin Boldly?”

OK-I read it and it says exactly what Jimmy B said it did.

 

[sandusky]

WHAT??? :bigyikes:

2 Peter 1:19-20 (King James Version) We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Christ’s peace.

You stopped before the concluding verse. Keep reading.

 

[estesbob]

You stopped before the concluding verse. Keep reading.

OK-we disagree on how those verses should be interpreted. How do we resolve that?

 

[po18guy]

You stopped before the concluding verse. Keep reading.

How on earth does that change a single thing? The chosen men of God, inspired by the spirit, both wrote scripture and interpreted prophecy. The church is not Burger King.

Consider: by putting my own spin on scripture, making it comfortable, how am I denying myself or taking up my cross? I would seem to be accommodating myself and laying down my cross.

Christ’s peace.

 

[cyberjacques]

You stopped before the concluding verse. Keep reading.

Ok, the NIV finishes the verse like this:
For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Unless you want to argue that everyone is their own prophet, that anyone who picks up a bible is instantly filled with a prophetic gift from the Holy Spirit, AND that the Holy Spirit would give different “truths” to different people, I don’t see how this helps your case.

 

[teancum79]

I bleive there are less than a half dozen verses that the Catholic Church has given definitve interpretations on so i cant see how that could cause many problems.

whither by official of by very common unofficial interpretations many clear statements have been understood so far from their original meaning that it is surprising that anyone buys into it. The Image of God discussions that was going on not to long ago is a prime example.

 

[sandusky]

estesbob:

OK-we disagree on how those verses should be interpreted. How do we resolve that?

I’ll stay with my interpretation; you’ll stay with yours.

po18guy:

How on earth does that change a single thing? The chosen men of God, inspired by the spirit, both wrote scripture and interpreted prophecy. The church is not Burger King.

Consider: by putting my own spin on scripture, making it comfortable, how am I denying myself or taking up my cross? I would seem to be accommodating myself and laying down my cross.

Thanks for your thoughts.

cyberjacques:

Unless you want to argue that everyone is their own prophet, that anyone who picks up a bible is instantly filled with a prophetic gift from the Holy Spirit, AND that the Holy Spirit would give different “truths” to different people

That’s not what I’m stating; I’m stating that there is no prohibition against private interpretation of scripture in scripture.

cyberjacques:

I don’t see how this helps your case.

It supports by my statement.

teancum79:

whither by official of by very common unofficial interpretations many clear statements have been understood so far from their original meaning that it is surprising that anyone buys into it. The Image of God discussions that was going on not to long ago is a prime example.

I agree, particularly those interpretations pertaining to the Marian dogmas.

 

[dessert]

2 Peter 1; 20-21
Often cited, along with 2 Tim 3;16 on the "inspiration " of scripture or against private interpretation, these verses in context are directed against false teachers of ch 2 and clever tales (16). The prophetic word in scripture comes admittedly through* human beings* (21) , but moved by the holy Spirit not from their own interpretation, and is a matter of what the author and Spirit intended, not the personal interpretation of false teachers.

(under the influence of God = “holy ones of God” )

 

[dessert]

Here Catholic, read this: Did Martin Luther say, “Be a Sinner and Sin Boldly?”

here is an article within your article, if you had read all of your article you would have seen it
catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0302clas.asp

 

[embertx3]

What does that have to do with the fact that there is no prohibition against private interpretation of scripture in scripture?

Care to elaborate on that?

Some of the schizophrenic patients (at the psych ward that I use to work) read the Bible according to their interpretation (Bible alone and personal interpretation) because they are in line with your statetment. They don’t think there is any prohibition to private interpretation and interpret the Bible according to how how they see fit. Now, the OP ask is this a good thing? Is this “Bible alone” and personal interpretation a good thing?. Post #32 gives verses/scriptures and instructions about private interpretation about scriptures…

 

[sandusky]

embertx3:

Some of the schizophrenic patients (at the psych ward that I use to work) read the Bible according to their interpretation (Bible alone and personal interpretation) because they are in line with your statetment. They don’t think there is any prohibition to private interpretation and interpret the Bible according to how how they see fit.

They’re correct as there is no prohibition against private interpretation.

Moreover, there are members of the RC in the Philippines who attend the church regularly, and who observe all obligatory feast days, and around Easter time they nail themselves to crosses—an interesting interpretation of take up your cross and follow me; wouldn’t you say?

embertx3:

Now, the OP ask is this a good thing? Is this “Bible alone” and personal interpretation a good thing?

Personal interpretation is a good thing; how else would the people of God know who’s teaching the truth?

For that matter, what method have you employed to determine what is the truth, if not private interpretation? :ehh:

embertx3:

Post #32 gives verses/scriptures and instructions about private interpretation about scriptures.

And none of them prohibits the believer’s right to interpret the scripture.

 

[inJESUS]

They’re correct as there is no prohibition against private interpretation.

which means there is no problem if 100 people interpret scriptures while opposing each others?

Personal interpretation is a good thing; how else would the people of God know who’s teaching the truth?

 

[sandusky]

inJESUS:

which means there is no problem if 100 people interpret scriptures while opposing each others?

It wouldn’t matter if there were millions; the fact that there’s no prohibition stands, and it indicates that God’s expectation is for His people to know and to understand His words.

Moreoever, it’s obvious that God expects false and erroneous interpretations and teachings because He warns His concerning that; wouldn’t you agree?

What method have you used to determine that what you believe is true?

inJESUS:

so who is teaching the truth among the thousands of Protestans branches?

ISTM that you are assigning questionable teaching of “Christian” truth only to Protestants; why?

 

[inJESUS]

It wouldn’t matter if there were millions; the fact that there’s no prohibition stands, and it indicates that God’s expectation is for His people to know and to understand His words.

it wouldnt matter if millions are teaching opposing things?

Moreoever, it’s obvious that God expects false and erroneous interpretations and teachings because He warns His concerning that; wouldn’t you agree?

 

[Henning]

1 John 4:8…God is love.

to interpret…

 

[pismopal]

These arguments are, at least some of them, from non Catholics in good faith but…this is exactly why I entered the Catholic Church. I was tired of all the graduates of match book cover preacher schools coming up with their own private versions of a faith that was shaped 2000 years ago and even worse, some of these persons didn’t even graduate from a preacher school.