Why would the Bible not be meant for our interpretation? If this is the book that we are urged by both the Christians and Jews to read to dedicate our lives to following, what would be the point in doing so if we're not supposed to garner understanding from it by doing so?

 

Assuming it's not meant for our interpretation, how do human scholars garner understanding from it by doing so?

 

I'm assuming that the answer to that is they have a firmer grasp on the history of the time various books were written to make better sense of them.

 

There are Judaic scholars and Christian scholars who have arrived at different significant conclusions about what they believe to be the truth about the Messiah. How do those who rely on experts for guidance decide which experts to follow?

 

Though I don't know how I could conclude that either are correct, but if either one actually is, how would one begin to know how they could conclude which one is the correct one in order to follow them?

 

-Can they both be correct?

 

-Is one of them correct?

 

-Are both incorrect?

 

How do either of the experts conclude what is the truth, and how would they conclude this, and how would one looking for guidance be able to discern the difference?

 

If the Old Testament spells out certain prophecies foretelling of the Messiah, and Christians and Jews alike believe in those prophecies, but if those prophecies weren't fulfilled the way foretold by Christ's existence as stated in the Old Testament, how do Christians who follow the Old Testament's foretold prophecies justify believing that Jesus is the Messiah if they weren't fulfilled as stated in the Old Testament?

 

Whether any of it is the truth or not, The Jews somehow seem to have a point when basing their conclusions on the Old Testament that Jesus didn't fulfill prophesy as foretold in the Old Testament, yet both Jews and Christians follow the Old Testament, but Christians only the New Testament, though it conflicts with the prophesies of the Old Testament.

 

The Jews obviously believe that The Messiah is to one day come, as did the Jews who converted to Christianity upon the arrival of Jesus, but the ones who didn't convert resisted because the prophesy wasn't fulfilled as foretold, and are still waiting. The converted Christians, though believing in the prophesies of the Old Testament, still believed that Jesus was the Messiah though he didn't fulfill the foretold prophesies.

 

It's as if the prophesies were laid out and the Christians said we're cool with that, but ultimately forewent completely following them, and became convinced that the arrival of Jesus was the sign they were looking for though it didn't match up with the sign they were foretold to be looking for.

 

It's puzzling.

 

I guess what I really meant and should have posted was that in situations where there is argument on literal vs non-literal (Adam and Eve's existence comes to mind), I turn to an expert (the Catholic Church's stance) on the subject. How I decide which experts to trust? The only Church that can trace its lineage back to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, Peter, Paul, James, etc. is the Catholic Church, so that is who I follow.

 

In situations about reading the Bible and gaining knowledge/insight, I have no problem with reading it.

Yes, I agree with you in those kind of examples. I was referring more to certain stories or aspects of those stories. Do you believe that God created Man as depicted in the Bible? Adam and Eve were real people, created as the Bible says? Noah's Ark? etc...

 

Yes. I believe God made adam from the Earth and breathed life into his nostrils. I believe that God made Eve afterwards and these two people were the first ever to procreate.

 

Yes I believe in the story of Noah's Ark.

Yes. I believe God made adam from the Earth and breathed life into his nostrils. I believe that God made Eve afterwards and these two people were the first ever to procreate.

Yes I believe in the story of Noah's Ark.

 

Who did Adam & Eve's children procreate with to further the species?

Who did Adam & Eve's children procreate with to further the species?

 

Their siblings. Since I believe Adam and Eve were first, the only possibility was is that they had daughters and Cain, Able, and Seth marries their sisters. Or possibly their nieces if there was enough of an age difference.

 

I believe that Adam and Even probably had children prior to the Fall From Grace and the expulsion from the garden. Now I know the Bible does not confirm that, but it does imply it.

Since original verbal languages over a great amount of time eventually evolved into agreed upon and understood established written languages, and likely first beginning with a immobile pictographs on cave walls chiseled on stone, it stands to reason that the passing along of history relied much on word of mouth and treasured immovable formats until established movable transferable forms of writing came to be.

 

Early humanity all the way back to the very first did a marvelous job carefully transferring it's beginnings and early history in order for the first author/s of the Bible to be able to deliver it with such impeccable accuracy.

 

Though the chances of information to be at certain levels of error, it's an amazing wonder that they passed along the exact indisputable truth to be written in order for centuries of humans to read, and even us today, to be able to see our origins, while we can be completely confident about that without having to question it, allowing us to know for certain that it is an accurate unembellished account. Simply amazing, but nonetheless true.

Does this mean there's no such thing as a talking serpent?!

In rethinking my last post about the origins of truth being passed along, if this truth evolved from the beginning of humanity, then how did polytheism turn into monotheism?

 

If the earlier mindset was of multi-gods, and the authors of the Bible write of one god, how do they explain that their information evolved from the beginning of humanity that taught polytheism before it taught monotheism?

 

and...

 

If polytheism was once the truth, how did it turn into a non-truth giving way to the "truth" of monotheism?

In rethinking my last post about the origins of truth being passed along, if this truth evolved from the beginning of humanity, then how did polytheism turn into monotheism?

 

If the earlier mindset was of multi-gods, and the authors of the Bible write of one god, how do they explain that their information evolved from the beginning of humanity that taught polytheism before it taught monotheism?

 

and...

 

If polytheism was once the truth, how did it turn into a non-truth giving way to the "truth" of monotheism?

 

I am asking out of legitimate curiosity; maybe you posted it earlier and I missed it. Do we have any evidence of polytheism being the earliest 'truth' at the beginning of humanity?

I am asking out of legitimate curiosity; maybe you posted it earlier and I missed it. Do we have any evidence of polytheism being the earliest 'truth' at the beginning of humanity?

 

Perhaps you misunderstood how I put it in my last post, but I wasn't saying that Polytheism was the belief since the beginning of humanity.

 

Polytheism was the belief long before Monotheism was, yet the author/s of the Bible who write about the beginning of humanity write about Monotheism as though it was passed along from the beginning of humanity, when much earlier than when the Bible was written the humans passed along Polytheism before they passed along ideas of Monotheism.

 

If you're cool with this request, please reread my last post and you'll see what I was saying, as it was also in conjunction with the post I posted one post before that as well.

 

I can see depending on how you read it you might've thought that that was what I was saying, but though it might be easy be mistaken to take it the way you read it, it's not the way I wrote it to be read.

Yes. I believe God made adam from the Earth and breathed life into his nostrils. I believe that God made Eve afterwards and these two people were the first ever to procreate.

 

Yes I believe in the story of Noah's Ark.

 

 

When I say that many of the folks I have come across have been literalists, this is what I was referring to. Most of the folks I have gone to church with would agree with you that God breathed life into Adam's nostrils and performed surgery on Adam and along came Eve. Same for Noah's Ark. UKMustang said he's never met a literalist. I've known many.

Prophecy doesn't mean what "will" happen, it means what "could" happen if the message is not understood and followed. Jonah is an example of how listening can change things.

 

I have zero belief that God knows or sees the future.

 

A question about your last sentence. Are you saying that God is not Omniscient?

 

The definition for omniscience is, "God, all-knowing. The omniscience of God is that attribute by which He knows all things past, present, and future."

 

Another definition: "Omniscience is the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything."

I don't believe God necessarily knows everything that is going to happen in the future.I think he knows what will probably happen. I think he can make things happen. But in the Bible there are examples of God being surprised at the actions of some his people.

Does this mean there's no such thing as a talking serpent?!

 

The way I read it it sounds to me that becoming a serpent was the punishment. I think that Satan was probably in the form of a dragon or an Angel speaking to eat.

In rethinking my last post about the origins of truth being passed along, if this truth evolved from the beginning of humanity, then how did polytheism turn into monotheism?

 

If the earlier mindset was of multi-gods, and the authors of the Bible write of one god, how do they explain that their information evolved from the beginning of humanity that taught polytheism before it taught monotheism?

 

and...

 

If polytheism was once the truth, how did it turn into a non-truth giving way to the "truth" of monotheism?

 

There is actually some really good stuff out there that covers this, and explains how the early hebrews moved from poly to mono and the traces that are left still in the Bible of the poly. I will try to dig it up for you, I don't have it handy, there is a video series and some good links.

Does this mean there's no such thing as a talking serpent?!

 

You have to speak parseltongue.