"Why are there so many different Christian interpretations? If all Christians have th

[jmcrae]

Of course one must first possess the Holy Spirit before he can even attempt to accurately interpret Scripture (see 1 Cor. 1:12-13 contrasted with verse 14). But simply possessing the Holy Spirit, of course, does not guarantee that one will interpret accurately.

No, not at all. We all (Catholics) receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but we don’t suddenly gain the education needed to correctly interpret Scripture.

There is what is called in the world of theology, “hermeneutics,” which is the art and science of Biblical interpretation.

Yes, we’ve heard of it. (I’m pretty sure we invented it … )

Have you read the original post on this thread?Therefore you, on your part, must assume that every Pope (and member of the Magisterium) possesses the Holy Spirit simply because the man occupies that lofty position.

Well, as you point out, it is a rather lofty position - we don’t just drag in homeless people to occupy these offices as part of a “work experience” program, you know. The majority of our Bishops have been studying the Scriptures, theology, Church history, and related subjects from the age of 12, if not younger.

But in reality, it’s Rome that makes that authoritative proclamation for itself, and its many devotees, as a personal act of submission and faith, accept that proclamation. It must be done without question.

Very few people make it through the RCIA process or the Catholic education system without ever asking any questions. In fact, the whole point of having such a lengthy process is in order to allow people the space and time to ask whatever questions they want to ask.

This is in total contrast to other churches, where they sit you down for four weekends of “Sunday School” (if you’re lucky) where they give lecture-style presentations on their beliefs, without giving very much in the way of opportunities to comment, question, or do extra research into their teachings. Certain things are simply taken as axiomatic, and the preacher is simply assumed to be speaking on God’s behalf, without anyone ever getting into any kind of an explanation of how he gains the authority to do so.

 

[lak611]

No, not at all. We all (Catholics) receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but we don’t suddenly gain the education needed to correctly interpret Scripture.

Actually, we receive Him at baptism. We receive His fullness at confirmation.

 

[RNRobert]

Couldn’t you load that question a bit more?

I’m not loading that question at all. Lutherans believe Scripture teaches that Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper, while Baptists believe Scripture teaches that it is a mere memorial supper. Lutherans believe Scripture teaches that baptism regenerates, while Baptists teach that it is only a symbol. Are they both right? Or if not, does it matter?
Seventh Day Adventists claim that Sunday worship is false and that you must worship on the Jewish Sabbath. Are they right? They quote Scripture to prove their beliefs correct.
How is one, using the ‘Bible alone,’ to know which is correct and which isn’t?
I wasn’t always a Catholic. When I became a Christian was interested in going to church, but which one? They all claim to follow Christ and the Scriptures, but they cannot agree on what the Scriptures say. Does it matter? Can being a Christian be nothing more a vague 'believing in Christ" and joining whatever church teaches what suits your fancy? I didn’t want to join just any church, but the church that Christ and his Apostles founded.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Of course, any human can be wrong.

Well, then I’ll repeat the question:

8) When the believer checks his fallible interpretation against the Bible, are his interpretations of other verses, the ones he’s checking his first interpretation against, also fallible?

Yes/No/I don’t know

 

[apophasis]

Let me look at your point here. You are saying that we must interpret the Bible through the teachings of the Catholic Church?

Yes, the operative word here being “must,” meaning, no choice in the matter.

What’s wrong with that? Other posters can correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t see a problem with that. The teachings of the Catholic Church are very Biblical. They’re totally Biblical.

In this context “Biblical” is a sloppy term. The problem is whether or not the teachings are accurate. The issue is that for a RC it doesn’t matter, tradition reigns, even over the Scriptures. You must interprepet the Scriptures according to already established, RC tradition.

How do you interpret the Bible? (an honest question-not loaded). Do you do it totally by yourself (Praying first-granted)? Or do you find a good Bible study group to help you learn?

I have done both. I have also been formally educated, spent extensive time doing my own research, etc.

Or do you purchase a Bible study on tape or book or DVD or something akin to that to help you learn?

I’ve done this, as well. The operative word here being “help.”

Then how is that different in regards to filtering?

The difference is between the word “help” and “filter.” All the above have “helped” me in my pursuit of Biblical studies after my initial salvation through personal faith in Christ. You could do exactly the same as I have done except all that you learn from these various teaching aids must then be filtered through your already established tradition, and that which does not conform to it must be discarded. It matters not at all if it’s accurate. You MUST cast it out.

We’re just saying that we believe that the Pope is infallible in regards to teaching ethics and morality.

He’s not restricted to just ethics and morality. And as a RC that is exactly what you MUST believe. It’s a part of RC tradition.

Now, I’m not the brightest bulb in the box so if I’m wrong…please let me know.

You don’t need to be the brightest bulb in the box, in fact, when it comes to Biblical interpretation, you are not allowed to shed any light at all. Your Pope is the illuminator, you’re merely a reflector of his “light,” no matter how dim, no matter how bright. And if his light has gone out, so has yours. Your faith rests not in the Word of God but in his infallibility.

 

[apophasis]

Well, then I’ll repeat the question:

8) When the believer checks his fallible interpretation against the Bible, are his interpretations of other verses, the ones he’s checking his first interpretation against, also fallible?

Yes/No/I don’t know

Not if she “believes” she’s infallible.
To you “infallibility” is not a matter of fact but only one’s belief.

 

[Researcher]

Jesus gave authority to Peter that whatever he binds on earth will be bound in heaven. This means Peter gets to make the rules! Therfore, when Peter decrees that we can eat that which is unclean then God in heaven accepts it. If this is not what Jesus said or what was meant, I do not understand what else it could mean.

The entire Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, address authority over what is good and what is evil and obediance to that authority. Begining in the Garden of Eden what is the name of the tree that Adam and Eve are not to eat from? Yes, it the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So right from the begining the authority to know what is good and what is evil belongs not with man but with God. However, Adam and Eve found the temptation to eat of this fruit to be too great. Does this not continue to happen today?

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that anyone who believes has the authority to interprint the real meaning of the Bible. I do not have it. If you choose to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil that is your choice.

I know many protestants try with all their heart to follow Jesus and the will of God. It is not my intent to slam any of them. But those who claim to follow the Bible, appear to me anyway, to follow only parts of the Bible that they choose.

Abram was asked by God to sacrafic his son. Abram was obediant to the authority of God. Noah, Moses, Jonah and many others were obediant to God. Now Jesus, who was given the authority of God at his baptism and confirmed in front of Peter, James and John at the transfiguration, gave the authority to Peter. Why does Paul go to Peter regarding the dispute over circumcision? Why does Paul not simply beak away and start his own church? He goes to Peter because Peter has the authority. Paul does not boast of going to Phillip or Mathew or anyone else. It is Peter. Why?

We see how authority is passed on when the Apostles appoint Mathias to replace Judas and Paul appoints Timothy, Barnabus and others. There is a resonable logic to this.

On the other hand, if we look at what has happened to the church since the reformation, it is a house in disarray. Aside from the fact that the authority and infallibilty of the pope is Bible based, it is the only appraoch that makes any sense.

 

[SusanL]

Yes, the operative word here being “must,” meaning, no choice in the matter.In this context “Biblical” is a sloppy term. The problem is whether or not the teachings are accurate. The issue is that for a RC it doesn’t matter, tradition reigns, even over the Scriptures.

No. That’s simply not true. Where did you get that from? Number 1: Tradition does not contradict Scripture. Number 2: The Roman Catholic Church dictates that it must not contradict the Bible.
As for the term “accurate,” here we go back again to who determines what is considered “accurate.”

You must interprepet the Scriptures according to already established, RC tradition.

RC Tradition (big T versus little t)helps us to understand the Bible and Salvation History. You don’t agree with our Catechism, do you? The Catechism explains what we believe and why. It goes right back to the Bible. Not the other way around, which you seem to say. You’ve got it backwards, my friend.

I have done both. I have also been formally educated, spent extensive time doing my own research, etc.

Were you formally educated in theology? Does that mean college or church courses? That can make a difference.

I’ve done this, as well. The operative word here being "help."The difference is between the word “help” and “filter.” All the above have “helped” me in my pursuit of Biblical studies after my initial salvation through personal faith in Christ. You could do exactly the same as I have done except all that you learn from these various teaching aids must then be filtered through your already established tradition, and that which does not conform to it must be discarded. It matters not at all if it’s accurate. You MUST cast it out.

You’ve got a strange idea on what we “must” do. For the sake of argument, just suppose we have the Truth. If that is true then what you are calling “filtering” is actually more along the lines of educating. You are calling it filtering because you disagree with it. You would call it “helping” if you did agree with it. This seems more of a matter of what you agree vs disagree with.

I ask many many questions. Believe me. There is no way I would have taken the big plunge if my questions weren’t answered satisfactorily. It would have driven me crazy. I would have been living a lie and I couldn’t do that. It’s interesting because I see most of the posters here revealing that they are converts. They don’t look like robots to me.

Look at Scott Hahn. He went through years and years of questioning everybody he could to disprove the RC teachings. He was on a mission. Much to his dismay (but later joy) he found himself agreeing with the RC Church and joining it. This man had a doctorate in theology in his particular denomination. To hear him speak, you can tell that the man is brilliant.

There are simply too many converts (including pastors from Protestant denominations) willing to give up the life they had and risk being ostracized from their families for you to say that we can’t question. We questioned then and we can question now; however, it is up to us to do our research. That research can include writers from the secular world and other faiths.

He’s not restricted to just ethics and morality.

Can you clarify this for me. What, then, is he infallible in? Did you know that the Pope goes to confession?

And as a RC that is exactly what you MUST believe. It’s a part of RC tradition.You don’t need to be the brightest bulb in the box, in fact, when it comes to Biblical interpretation, you are not allowed to shed any light at all. Your Pope is the illuminator, you’re merely a reflector of his “light,” no matter how dim, no matter how bright. And if his light has gone out, so has yours. Your faith rests not in the Word of God but in his infallibility.

It is precisely because of my faith in the Word of God that I believe in his infallibility. You’ve got it backwards again.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Well, then I’ll repeat the question:

8) When the believer checks his fallible interpretation against the Bible, are his interpretations of other verses, the ones he’s checking his first interpretation against, also fallible?

Yes/No/I don’t know

What Apophasis said.
Kay cee may I be honest with you-- Im getting bored with all of this. Could you just make your point.

The truth is this thread is just going in circles and Neither of us are going to change our positions. So I stand behind my initial post and add the following and that is all I have on the subject. Im not going to try to convince you anymore then you can convince me. I believe in the following statement as Im sure you do as well. This is how I am choosing to live my life. Trying to debate someone into believing one side or another doesnt work. The following statement sums up my belief in how I know I have understanding in how I read the bible. I believe this with all my heart, soul and mind.
“What is the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives today?”

After the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ, of all the other gifts given to mankind by God, there is none greater than the presence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit has many functions, roles, and activities. First, He does a work in the hearts of all people everywhere. Jesus told the disciples that He would send the Spirit into the world to “convict the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and concerning judgment” (John 16:7-11). Everyone has a “God consciousness,” whether they admit it or not, because the Spirit applies the truths of God to men’s own minds as to convince them by fair and sufficient arguments that they are sinners. Responding to that conviction brings men to salvation.

Once we are saved and belong to God, the Spirit takes up residence in our hearts forever, sealing us with the confirming, certifying, and assuring pledge of our eternal state as His children. Jesus said He would send the Spirit to us to be our Helper, Comforter, and Guide. “And I will pray the Father and He will give you another Helper that He may abide with you forever” (John 14:16). The Greek word translated here “Helper” means one who is called alongside and has the idea of someone who encourages and exhorts. “Abiding” has to do with His permanent residence in the hearts of believers (Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 6:19, 20; 12:13). Jesus gave the Spirit as a “compensation” for His absence, to perform the functions toward us which He would have done if He had remained personally with us.

Among those functions is that of revealer of truth. The Spirit’s presence within us enables us to understand and interpret the Word. Jesus told His disciples “when He, the Spirit of Truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13). He reveals to our minds the whole counsel of God as it relates to worship, doctrine, and Christian living. He is the ultimate guide, going before, leading the way, removing obstructions, opening the understanding, and making all things plain and clear. He leads in the way we should go in all spiritual things. Without such a guide, we would be apt to fall into error. A crucial part of the Truth He reveals is that Jesus is who He said He is (John 15:26; 1 Corinthians 12:3). The Spirit convinces us of Christ’s deity and sonship, His incarnation, His being the Messiah, His sufferings and death, His resurrection and ascension, His exaltation at the right hand of God, and His role as the Judge of all. He gives glory to Christ in all things (John 16:14).
Another of His roles is that of gift-giver. First Corinthians 12 describes the spiritual gifts given to believers in order that we may function as the body of Christ on earth. All these gifts, both great and small, are given by the Spirit so that we may be His ambassadors to the world, showing forth His grace and glorifying Him.

The Spirit also functions as fruit-producer in our lives. When He indwells us, He begins the work of harvesting His fruit in our lives - love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). These are not works of our flesh, which is incapable of producing such fruit, but they are products of the Spirit’s presence in our lives.

The knowledge that the Holy Spirit of God has taken up residence in our lives, that He performs all these miraculous functions, that He dwells with us forever and will never leave or forsake us is cause for great joy and comfort. Thank God for this precious Gift – the Holy Spirit and His work in our lives!

I trust the bolded statement with all my heart and soul and mind. I really have nothing more to say–it all boils down to trust and faith.

God Bless and I hope all of you here feel the same way.

 

[Researcher]

How do we know we are being led or moved by the Holy Spirit or being deceived by the evil spirit?

 

[SusanL]

AllForHim, what’s really interesting to me in this whole discussion is finding out what some Protestants believe that we as RC believe. There is a lot of misunderstanding. And a lot of stubbornness.

Is it possible, I wonder, for the Protestants here to accept as a possibility that we might have a point? You don’t have to accept our way of faith. Just that we might not be entirely wrong?

Can all of you accept that there is a way to interpret the Scriptures the way we have without saying that we are blindly following the Pope?

 

[ncgolf]

How do we know we are being led or moved by the Holy Spirit or being deceived by the evil spirit?

There is an old saying that “the devil can quote scripture too”. An example is when Jesus was tempted durng his 40 days in the desert the devil quotes a psalm in Luke 4:10. So the source of the teaching or interpretaton is important … hmm I wonder where that could be?

 

[ALLFORHIM]

How do we know we are being led or moved by the Holy Spirit or being deceived by the evil spirit?

I cant answer that because that is something only the person can know.

 

[sandusky]

RNRobert:

I’m not loading that question at all. Lutherans believe Scripture teaches that Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper, while Baptists believe Scripture teaches that it is a mere memorial supper. Lutherans believe Scripture teaches that baptism regenerates, while Baptists teach that it is only a symbol. Are they both right? Or if not, does it matter?
Seventh Day Adventists claim that Sunday worship is false and that you must worship on the Jewish Sabbath. Are they right? They quote Scripture to prove their beliefs correct.
How is one, using the ‘Bible alone,’ to know which is correct and which isn’t?
I wasn’t always a Catholic. When I became a Christian was interested in going to church, but which one? They all claim to follow Christ and the Scriptures, but they cannot agree on what the Scriptures say. Does it matter? Can being a Christian be nothing more a vague 'believing in Christ" and joining whatever church teaches what suits your fancy? I didn’t want to join just any church, but the church that Christ and his Apostles founded.

Which of those three that you have singled out—Lutherans, Baptists, SDA—do you think has the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and explain how you have arrived at that conclusion?

Researcher:

How do we know we are being led or moved by the Holy Spirit or being deceived by the evil spirit?

Researcher, tell us how you know that you are not being deceived but are being led by
the Holy Spirit?

SusanL:

Can all of you accept that there is a way to interpret the Scriptures the way we have without saying that we are blindly following the Pope?

I can only tell you whether or not I accept the way, after you explain it.

ncgolf:

There is an old saying that “the devil can quote scripture too”. An example is when Jesus was tempted durng his 40 days in the desert the devil quotes a psalm in Luke 4:10. So the source of the teaching or interpretaton is important … hmm I wonder where that could be?

I’m not sure what you saying, ncgolf; will you restate it less cryptically, please?

 

[ALLFORHIM]

AllForHim, what’s really interesting to me in this whole discussion is finding out what some Protestants believe that we as RC believe. There is a lot of misunderstanding. And a lot of stubbornness.

Is it possible, I wonder, for the Protestants here to accept as a possibility that we might have a point? You don’t have to accept our way of faith. Just that we might not be entirely wrong?

Can all of you accept that there is a way to interpret the Scriptures the way we have without saying that we are blindly following the Pope?

Well, I think the CC does have some intrepretations correct. That is why I would never say the CC is all wrong. I dont think any church Protestant or Catholic teaches all wrong or all right. Hence my OP.

Im sure there are catholics out there who are blindly following the pope. I would never presume to judge who they are. Lets face it it is easier to blindly follow anyone(hence some cults) then do the hard work yourself. I would rather do that because Im lazy but the HS apparently has other plans for me . The HS has given me this drive to want to learn scripture like I have never wanted to before. I do give the HS all the credit for that because I am a lzy person when it comes to studies. I hate to read(SHH dont tell my kids )but I cant seem to get enough of the bible.

Now that I have said that: Is it possible for the catholics here could admit that the protestants may have a point and we not be all wrong either?

 

[Researcher]

sandusky; I do not know that I have the truth. That is why I turn to the one and only Church who received the truth from Jesus Christ.

allforhim; How can you know that it is the Holy Spirit and not the one who deceives? My point is you can’t. Oh, you can have a guess and you can have a feeling about it. We know the evil spirit works by deception as in the Garden of Eden. So how do you really know which spirit is working on you? To know that it truely is the Holy Spirit it must be consistant with all that has been revealed before. And who knows this the best? The church created by Jesus, who appointed Peter to be its authority, who hands on that authority, not to us, but to the successor he appoints.

 

[SusanL]

Now that I have said that: Is it possible for the catholics here could admit that the protestants may have a point and we not be all wrong either?

Do you want a shocker? I believe that the Protestants are not all wrong either. I believe that the Holy Spirit can and has worked among them. Us Catholics have not always done our part in listening to the Holy Spirit. (By that I mean the people, not the Church. Although there are members of the Church hierarchy who are following their own egos and not the Holy Spirit, IMO, for what its worth). I still firmly believe that the Pope cannot teach against the Holy Spirit. I believe that the Holy Spirit restrains him from teaching in error when he is preaching from the chair of Peter. I believe that based on Scripture (but you already know that).

There is actually a lot that Protestants and Catholics have in common. I hope that none of you believe that we are all in danger of going to hell simply based on the fact that we’re Catholic.

I guess, what I really wanted to know was…

Can you understand how we can come to interpret the Scriptures that we have quoted to you whether or not you are in agreement with our interpretations? For instance, a Bible verse about the keys being handed to Peter could be interpreted to what we say? (Not that you have to agree. Just that you can understand how someone could come up with that interpretation.) Is it possible?

You know, people say that the Bible can be interpreted in many different ways, that you have to pray and listen to the Holy Spirit for guidance. And you can look at a verse and say, “yeah, I can see where you might think that but I disagree.”

Can you see where we might think that about a verse? Any of the verses that we’ve quoted so far. Is it possible?

(Breathe before you answer. )

 

[sandusky]

Researcher:

sandusky; I do not know that I have the truth. That is why I turn to the one and only Church who received the truth from Jesus Christ.

Researcher, please define your phrase, “…have the truth.”

 

[ALLFORHIM]

sandusky; I do not know that I have the truth. That is why I turn to the one and only Church who received the truth from Jesus Christ.

allforhim; How can you know that it is the Holy Spirit and not the one who deceives? My point is you can’t. Oh, you can have a guess and you can have a feeling about it. We know the evil spirit works by deception as in the Garden of Eden. So how do you really know which spirit is working on you? To know that it truely is the Holy Spirit it must be consistant with all that has been revealed before. And who knows this the best? The church created by Jesus, who appointed Peter to be its authority, who hands on that authority, not to us, but to the successor he appoints.

The only way I can answer that is to say thatif my thoughts and actions lead to love, peace, joy,patience, kindness, goodness,faithfulness, gentleness, self-control it comes from the HS

Galations 5:16-26

 

[Researcher]

sandusky; great question, what is the truth? To contemplate this question one can understand Pilate when he asked the same question of Jesus. Yes, what is the truth?

I can read the Bible and I can get enough doctorate degrees in theology to cover a whole room and proclaim the truth as I see it. But it remains to be as I see it under my authority. I can boast of personal guidance by the Holy Spirit and it will only remain my truth.

To define truth we must go to the authority established by Jesus Christ. The authority that taught the early church and that continues to teach us today. The same authority that established the canon of the Bible. There is only one and it is not me.