Protestants, a pragmatic question

[PJM]

Dear friends in Christ,

How does “self interpretaion of The Bible” differ from writting your own Bible?

Please know that I ask because I just don’t get it, and I’m willing to be educated on a topic that I find to be of great interest.

Love and prayers friends,

Pat

 

[sckcd]

I don’t understand exactly what you mean, unless you mean to ask why we think we can interpret the Bible ourselves. Is that what you meant?

If that is what you meant, then: why wouldn’t you interpret the Bible yourself? What would be the point of reading it if you weren’t applying its message to your life? I’m not saying one should twist the meaning of it to fit one’s agenda, but to think about a verse and consider what it means to you and how you should apply it to your life. Isn’t that the point of God giving us his word? Sure, for anything that you find that you don’t get or understand then seek help in the church, but for most Bible reading I think most people can read and get the message God intended.

I don’t think interpreting it on your own is the same as writing your own bible. However, if someone (like those crazy Westboro/Phelps people) are twisting meanings around and using God’s word out of context to fuel their agenda, then yes, that would be wrong.

If I didn’t understand your question fully, I’m sorry, then ignore this.

 

[Roy5]

I respect all religions and come from a family that has both Catholic and Protestant wings.

In respect to your question, there are many verses in scripture that are not clear. In the Catholic tradition, the belief is that the church will provide the correct interpretation. Among Protestants - especially mainline Protestants - Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, United Church of Christ, etc - there is the freedom to interpret as we may feel led.

For example, I have attended many Bible classes when controversial verses come up. The group prized the opportunity for different people to give their interpretations, and no one shouted him or her down. Instead, the customary reaction would be: "Interesting. Tell us more." 

Take the verse: "Suffer not a witch to live." How does one interpret that? Or what about Jesus' command that "we turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy" and "do good to them that despitefully use you."? 

 Bear in mind that I am not a sola scriptura Protestant. I don't always believe scripture. For example, I cannot believe that God ordered Joshua to slaughter all the civilians in such cities as Jericho and Ai? Or that God commanded Saul to murder every last Amalekite? No. That is not my God of love and mercy who gave us the Ten Commandments ("Thou shalt not kill") and the Sermon on the Mount.

 We could go on, but you get the idea.

 I treasure the freedom to come to my own conclusions re the scriptures. Centuries ago the church, for example, taught that the earth was flat, in part because Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. Furing his lifetime, Galileo was silenced and made to recent his ideas about the place of earth in the universe - something the church rfecently apologized for. The church still teaches Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, the Tower of Babel and other stories that I see as morality fables with perhaps some historic basis (there probably was a huge flood). But they certainly are not genuine history.

  The church has been wrong on Bible interpretation before, and I need the freedom to read and digest and understand - not by being told what to believe by any church or book or preacher. This will be dismissed as egotism by some, but it is essential to me. I refuse to leave my inquiring mind outside when I enter any house of worship. How often I haven't agreed with a minister's sermon - and that is fine with me, and usually with him. At least I was listening and thinking.

  There are some wonderful things about Catholicism, but freedom of belief apparently isn't one of them. In reading St. Thomas Aquinas, I ran across his plan for heretics. They should be delivered to civil authorities to be executed. Thank God we don't live in that atmosphere here in America. Sounds like the Taliban to me.

  God bless Catholics, Protestants and those of every creed, color and country.

 

[NotTooSmart]

Dear friends in Christ,

How does “self interpretaion of The Bible” differ from writting your own Bible?

Please know that I ask because I just don’t get it, and I’m willing to be educated on a topic that I find to be of great interest.

Love and prayers friends,

Pat

How does self interpretation of say a math textbook differ from writing you own math textbook?

Ponder that question and you may get your answer.

 

[PJM]

=sckcd;5814840]I don’t understand exactly what you mean, unless you mean to ask why we think we can interpret the Bible ourselves. Is that what you meant?

If that is what you meant, then: why wouldn’t you interpret the Bible yourself? What would be the point of reading it if you weren’t applying its message to your life? I’m not saying one should twist the meaning of it to fit one’s agenda, but to think about a verse and consider what it means to you and how you should apply it to your life. Isn’t that the point of God giving us his word? Sure, for anything that you find that you don’t get or understand then seek help in the church, but for most Bible reading I think most people can read and get the message God intended.

I don’t think interpreting it on your own is the same as writing your own bible. However, if someone (like those crazy Westboro/Phelps people) are twisting meanings around and using God’s word out of context to fuel their agenda, then yes, that would be wrong.

If I didn’t understand your question fully, I’m sorry, then ignore this.

Hi, Thanks for responding.

As an informed and practicing Roman Catholic, I encounter personal understanding of the Bible that are darn right contrary to what it is actually saying.

This permissive attitude that the Bible is saying what I think its saying is I beleive the root cause of the many, many hundreds of different Protestant secs, each believing what they chose to hold as truth.

Catholic have a uniform understanding that if our understanding is not in accord with what The Church holds to be true, and is Taught by Her as the Truth, then we are wrong.

There can only be one single truth on any specific topic, and on all matters of Faith and Morals [only] that truth resides in Christ Catholic Church.

I struggle to accept the “logic” in personal choice?

Love and prayers friend.

Pat

 

[notacat]

I don’t know that I would call myself a Protestant, but I consider myself a Bible believing Christian. I do not read the Bible with the freedom to interpret it in any way I wish. When those words were written they had a meaning, and my job is to discern what that meaning was.

My goal in studying the Bible is to learn what God’s Word truly says, to know Him better and to be in closer fellowship with Him.

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth. (2Ti 2:15)

Hope that helps

 

[PJM]

=notacat;5819133]I don’t know that I would call myself a Protestant, but I consider myself a Bible believing Christian. I do not read the Bible with the freedom to interpret it in any way I wish. When those words were written they had a meaning, and my job is to discern what that meaning was.

My goal in studying the Bible is to learn what God’s Word truly says, to know Him better and to be in closer fellowship with Him.

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth. (2Ti 2:15)

Hope that helps

Thanks for responding!

If I may freind, what is your understanding of these particular verses?

Acts 10: [44] While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word.

Acts.13: [48] And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of God; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Rom.10: [14] But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher? ] But they have not all obeyed the gospel; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ. But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[sckcd]

Hi, Thanks for responding.

As an informed and practicing Roman Catholic, I encounter personal understanding of the Bible that are darn right contrary to what it is actually saying.

This permissive attitude that the Bible is saying what I think its saying is I beleive the root cause of the many, many hundreds of different Protestant secs, each believing what they chose to hold as truth.

Catholic have a uniform understanding that if our understanding is not in accord with what The Church holds to be true, and is Taught by Her as the Truth, then we are wrong.

There can only be one single truth on any specific topic, and on all matters of Faith and Morals [only] that truth resides in Christ Catholic Church.

I struggle to accept the “logic” in personal choice?

Love and prayers friend.

Pat

So when you read the Bible then what happens if you aren’t interpreting it? How can one read it and not interpet it in some way?

 

[Non_Serviam]

Hi, Thanks for responding.

As an informed and practicing Roman Catholic, I encounter personal understanding of the Bible that are darn right contrary to what it is actually saying.

This permissive attitude that the Bible is saying what I think its saying is I beleive the root cause of the many, many hundreds of different Protestant secs, each believing what they chose to hold as truth.

Catholic have a uniform understanding that if our understanding is not in accord with what The Church holds to be true, and is Taught by Her as the Truth, then we are wrong.

There can only be one single truth on any specific topic, and on all matters of Faith and Morals [only] that truth resides in Christ Catholic Church.

I struggle to accept the “logic” in personal choice?

Love and prayers friend.

Pat

It’s unfortunate that you don’t realize that “the interpretation of the church” you claim to be correct is also your personal understanding of that “interpretation”. If you look around CAF you know quite well that catholics also provide contrary understandings of a topic and back themselves up with encyclicals, catechism paragraphs and the like.

Here’s an excellent example of what I’m describing. You have a number of catholics, all sincere and all believing the church possesses the “truth” unable to agree on what that truth is, in spite of a plethora of writings from popes and saints to guide them. They are unable to agree on the authority and meaning of the documents because they have all formed their own opinion about them.

Instead one thinks document A is infallible and the other thinks the same of document B with both believing the other to be incorrect. Their own opinions become their Magisterium.

Catholics, especially on CAF do the exact same sort of “self interpretation” as protestants, they simply choose from more sources.

So PJM, why hasn’t your “self interpretation” led you to write your own catechism? Or has it and you haven’t realized it?

 

[Anna_Scott]

Dear friends in Christ,

How does “self interpretaion of The Bible” differ from writting your own Bible?

Please know that I ask because I just don’t get it, and I’m willing to be educated on a topic that I find to be of great interest.

Love and prayers friends,

Pat

As a Christian in the Protestant sector, I believe the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Scripture.

I think Catholics probably see “self interpretation of the Bible” by Protestants, in a similar way that Protestants see the Catechism as self interpretation of the Bible by Catholics.

It just depends on your perspective.

Anna

Anna

 

[sckcd]

As a Christian in the Protestant sector, I believe the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Scripture.

I think Catholics probably see “self interpretation of the Bible” by Protestants, in a similar way that Protestants see the Catechism as self interpretation of the Bible by Catholics.

It just depends on your perspective.

Anna

Anna

True that, Anna.

 

[Newbie2]

The church has been wrong on Bible interpretation before,

And that would be…? And you basis for what interpretation is correct is what? Your interpretation differing from that of the Catholic Church?

  There are some wonderful things about Catholicism, but freedom of belief apparently isn't one of them. In reading St. Thomas Aquinas, I ran across his plan for heretics. They should be delivered to civil authorities to be executed. Thank God we don't live in that atmosphere here in America. Sounds like the Taliban to me.

And those aren’t official Church teachings now, are they?

 

[Anna_Scott]

I respect all religions and come from a family that has both Catholic and Protestant wings.

In respect to your question, there are many verses in scripture that are not clear. In the Catholic tradition, the belief is that the church will provide the correct interpretation. Among Protestants - especially mainline Protestants - Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, United Church of Christ, etc - there is the freedom to interpret as we may feel led.

For example, I have attended many Bible classes when controversial verses come up. The group prized the opportunity for different people to give their interpretations, and no one shouted him or her down. Instead, the customary reaction would be: "Interesting. Tell us more." 

Take the verse: "Suffer not a witch to live." How does one interpret that? Or what about Jesus' command that "we turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy" and "do good to them that despitefully use you."? 

 Bear in mind that I am not a sola scriptura Protestant. I don't always believe scripture. For example, I cannot believe that God ordered Joshua to slaughter all the civilians in such cities as Jericho and Ai? Or that God commanded Saul to murder every last Amalekite? No. That is not my God of love and mercy who gave us the Ten Commandments ("Thou shalt not kill") and the Sermon on the Mount.

 We could go on, but you get the idea.

 I treasure the freedom to come to my own conclusions re the scriptures. Centuries ago the church, for example, taught that the earth was flat, in part because Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. Furing his lifetime, Galileo was silenced and made to recent his ideas about the place of earth in the universe - something the church rfecently apologized for. The church still teaches Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, the Tower of Babel and other stories that I see as morality fables with perhaps some historic basis (there probably was a huge flood). But they certainly are not genuine history.

  The church has been wrong on Bible interpretation before, and I need the freedom to read and digest and understand - not by being told what to believe by any church or book or preacher. This will be dismissed as egotism by some, but it is essential to me. I refuse to leave my inquiring mind outside when I enter any house of worship. How often I haven't agreed with a minister's sermon - and that is fine with me, and usually with him. At least I was listening and thinking.

  There are some wonderful things about Catholicism, but freedom of belief apparently isn't one of them. In reading St. Thomas Aquinas, I ran across his plan for heretics. They should be delivered to civil authorities to be executed. Thank God we don't live in that atmosphere here in America. Sounds like the Taliban to me.

  God bless Catholics, Protestants and those of every creed, color and country.

And those aren’t official Church teachings now, are they?

Newbie2: That’s a rather harsh response to Roy5, especially since the topic includes self interpretation of Scripture.

The Church Fathers did not agree on everything, including Salvation. Origen is a good example. He taught that all would be saved, even Satan.

Currently, I’m having a very interesting discussion, with a Catholic Member on another Thread,–who actually disagrees with a particular teaching of Pope John Paul II. So, is he self-interpreting Scripture and creating his own Catholic Bible?

Anna

 

[Newbie2]

Newbie2: That’s a rather harsh response to Roy5, especially since the topic includes self interpretation of Scripture.

The Church Fathers did not agree on everything, including Salvation. Origen is a good example. He taught that all would be saved, even Satan.

Currently, I’m having a very interesting discussion, with a Catholic Member on another Thread,–who actually disagrees with a particular teaching of Pope John Paul II. So, is he self-interpreting Scripture and creating his own Catholic Bible?

Anna

I’m asking the question if Roy knows that they’re not official teachings, which I’m pretty confident he knows. Roy is a smart cookie. He said that the Church “has been wrong on Bible interpretation before”. I’d like to know what he’s referring to.

Harsh? I think not, but my apologies if it seems so.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I’m asking the question if Roy knows that they’re not official teachings, which I’m pretty confident he knows. Roy is a smart cookie. He said that the Church “has been wrong on Bible interpretation before”. I’d like to know what he’s referring to.

Harsh? I think not, but my apologies if it seems so.

I’m sorry N2. :imsorry: I misinterpreted your tone. Easy to do on this format.

Anna

 

[Newbie2]

:hug3:

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Dear friends in Christ,

How does “self interpretaion of The Bible” differ from writting your own Bible?

Please know that I ask because I just don’t get it, and I’m willing to be educated on a topic that I find to be of great interest.

Love and prayers friends,

Pat

“Dogman is by definition nothing other than an interpretation of scripture… which has sprung from the faith over the centuries.” Joseph Ratzinger.

The creed is the “faith of our fathers”.

International Theological Commissions 1989 document regarding the interpretation of the scriptures, “In the dogma of the Church one is thus concerned with the correct interpretation of the scriptures… A later time cannot reverse that which was formulated under the assistance of the HOLY SPIRIT as a key for the reading of the scriptures”.

The creed recited on Sunday enters into the dogma of faith to which our ancestors were willing to die for. The Catholic Faith dogma interprets scripture from its foundation.

 

[PJM]

=sckcd;5821782]So when you read the Bible then what happens if you aren’t interpreting it? How can one read it and not interpret it in some way?

Excellent question.

God Himself thought of it before Inspiring the authors of the Bible.

The term “One Church” appears some 37 times in the NT. This is significant in response to your question. **Matt. 16:15-19 and 18:15-18 **use the term [give the mandate and power] of “loosing and or binding.”

These were common terms in Jewish law when they were used. They were binding in Jewish law, and referred to Governance. Many cites back them [and Jerusalem even today] are "walled in and fortified with a front and rear gates, that are locked every evening, and opened every morning by the Prime Minister, given rule over that cities day to day activities. They could make law, break law, enforce law and interpret the law. [This is the meaning of [**Mt.16: 15:19].

God intend to start a single world wide church. Only one. He knew that He would have to authorize a system of governance to insure orderly growth.

Thus He set up Peter as His “Prime Minister” with unlimited and complete authority, answerable ONLY to God Himself. Further, God knew the role the Bible would play and anticipated your question. He therefore chose to have His One church as the only ones to whom the entire truth could be found and trusted.

The fact that the Catholic Church is 2000 years old, still growing in number and influence attest to the Wisdom of this decision. Because the Bible came through the Church [OT] and was written by Catholics [NT] is interpretable and historically provable. There were no other Christian churches for hundreds of years, and no other bible for at least 1000 years. So as the authors and editors of the Bible, it was logical and prudent of God to place the TRUST of TRUTH in His Church.

That is why Catholics have to be of one mind, one understanding with what the Church Teaches in regards the Bible.

2Cor.4 Verses 2 to 4 “We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God.”

**1Pet.4 Verses 17 to 18 “ For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? And “If the righteous man is scarcely saved, where will the impious and sinner appear?”
**
2Pet.1 [20] “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,”

Am I saying we are not to read the bible? NO! But we should do so by first praying for Wisdom and Understanding. Secondly, most Bible passages have multiple meaning. One for everyone [the common meaning / obvious and apparent meaning , literal meaning such a Mt. 16:15-19, Jn. 3:5, Jn. 20:22-23, John 6: 40-68.] There is also at times, but not every time a special message from the Holy Spirit to us individually. Here we must apply reason and caution. If there is an apparent meaning as is obvious in the above noted verses, the private meaning cannot in truth ** 2 Tim. 3:16-17] contradict it], it may expand, deepen understanding, even give evidence how it applies to your own life, but as there is only a single truth for every issue, it must somewhat conform to the obvious. When in doubt I use a Catholic Bible Commentary [Haydock’s] which can be Googled.

As an FYI, I’m not pushing the Catholic Church as much as explaining where to find Biblical truth. Hope you find this information useful?

Love and prayers friend,

Pat

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

As a Christian in the Protestant sector, I believe the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Scripture.

I think Catholics probably see “self interpretation of the Bible” by Protestants, in a similar way that Protestants see the Catechism as self interpretation of the Bible by Catholics.

It just depends on your perspective.

Anna

Anna

Not really.

As Catholis, we submit to the authority of the Church because we believe that it is guided by the Holy Spirit.

We don’t lean on our own understanding.

There is unity among faithful Catholics on matters of faith and morals.

There is no unity among faithful protestants.

 

[Non_Serviam]

Not really.

As Catholis, we submit to the authority of the Church because we believe that it is guided by the Holy Spirit.

We don’t lean on our own understanding.

There is unity among faithful Catholics on matters of faith and morals.

There is no unity among faithful protestants.

I’m guessing that you missed my previous post on this topic, since you made the statement above without offering proof-I’ll repost what I wrote:

---

It’s unfortunate that you don’t realize that “the interpretation of the church” you claim to be correct is also your personal understanding of that “interpretation”. If you look around CAF you know quite well that catholics also provide contrary understandings of a topic and back themselves up with encyclicals, catechism paragraphs and the like.

Here’s an excellent example of what I’m describing. You have a number of catholics, all sincere and all believing the church possesses the “truth” unable to agree on what that truth is, in spite of a plethora of writings from popes and saints to guide them. They are unable to agree on the authority and meaning of the documents because they have all formed their own opinion about them.

Instead one thinks document A is infallible and the other thinks the same of document B with both believing the other to be incorrect. Their own opinions become their Magisterium.

Catholics, especially on CAF do the exact same sort of “self interpretation” as protestants, they simply choose from more sources.

So PJM, why hasn’t your “self interpretation” led you to write your own catechism? Or has it and you haven’t realized it?

---

Here’s a thread where the posters are faithful catholics, all citing the Magisterium as the source of their understanding on a matter of faith and morals (the inerrancy of scripture) and yet they are not united in their understanding of the faith. Seems to disprove the opinion that you posted, doesn’t it?