Search the Community

I'm new here, so I don't know how well some of my 'former-Catholic' religious beliefs will be tolerated, although I also have a certain 'fundamentalist' slant; I'm not a troll and I'm not looking for arguments or to persuade anyone over to my point of view, so I hope I will remain welcome. I am a very conservative and orthodox trinitarian Christian. While I strive to always be kind, polite, loving and compassionate, my views are not typically considered as 'politically correct': I am very much pro-life and consider abortion to be murder, and I don't believe in same-sex marriages nor in heterosexual adultery or fornication, or the sinful direction that our secular society is moving due to materialism and selfishness. At the same time, while I try to speak the Truth of Scripture, I pray that I will not be judgmental because I am a sinner, too, with a plank in my own eye; but if anything, one of my greatest failures as a Christian is in not finding the courage to rebuke others when I really should. I used to be involved in a number of different ministries over the course of my life, but have not been active since I discontinued attending my church many years ago. But I'm still strong in faith, prayer and study, and I'm absolutely convinced that we are living in the last days. Now, before I ask several questions that are on my mind, let me first state that I believe that the entire Bible -- both the Old and New Testaments -- are the "inspired Word of God", and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus Christ. So, as such, it is the Divine Word of God ... and in fact ... _IS_ God. I truly believe that. Now, for clarification, I don't mean the physical appearance of the Word when written on papyrus or parchment or paper (or appearing on a computer screen) -- i.e., literally the 'book and pages' themselves -- "are God", ... as if to say that a half dozen books of the Bible sitting in a room represent the real and actual presence of God six times (ignoring the fact that God is omnipresent and therefore in the room, whether the Bible is there or not). No; I'm saying that the Truth spoken by God (and whatever He speaks _IS_ the Truth), whether by a faint whisper, or a loud shout, or a mere thought never audibly spoken but instead implanted by the Holy Spirit in the minds of the writers of Scripture, ... _IS_ God. That is, the 'command' itself -- "Let there be light" -- actually spoken by Almighty God with all of His power and authority are Divine; _THEY_ are the "Word of God". The same 'TEXT' which merely echos it and is written or printed with ink in a man-made book, are just RECORDINGS of the Holy Word of God, yet still entitled to our due respect and veneration because of what they represent, ... but the 'book' itself is not something to be worshiped because it is NOT God Himself. However, since the original Word itself is from God and IS God, it must, of absolute fact and necessity, be true and infallible IN THE MANNER AND WAY THAT IT IS INTENDED TO BE SO, BY GOD. Let me rephrase that: it is -- as originally dictated, inspired, and INTENDED by God -- absolutely infallible; so, to me that means that the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS (in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek ... as opposed to Latin, English or any other language) ... are absolutely infallible WHEN UNDERSTOOD AS GOD INTENDED THEM TO BE UNDERSTOOD. Allow me to expound a bit on that last phrase to put it into proper context: I believe that there were times when God was teaching a lesson by employing symbolism (e.g., in John 10:9, Jesus is the "door" [or gate] but He is not LITERALLY a physical door). And along those lines of symbolism, I happen to believe, by faith, that there have only been about 6,000 years since the creation of Adam and Eve; there are prophetic reasons for that which I won't digress into at this time. But, at the same time, while I do believe and will certainly acknowledge that Almighty God truly has the awesome power to create all that exists even in just the blink of an eye, and that He therefore COULD have created everything in six 24-hour days, ... I find no inconsistency in accepting in faith that God _could_have_ also chosen, and probably _did_, to take millions of years for the development of the cosmos and the deposits of coal and oil which scientists insist took eons -- or, then again, maybe He did it all instantly. Either way, I find it hard to believe that one position or the other will have anything at all to do with our salvation. Who is going to tell God that He can't speed-up or slow-down His 'clock' whenever and as ever He sees fit? So in my view, God probably allowed billions of years before he created man and woman by giving them a soul, and only ~6,000 years have passed since then. Likewise when we come across certain things in the Bible, such as 2 Kings 2:23-24 -- "From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on the way, some little boys came out of the city and jeered at him: “Go away, baldy; go away, baldy!” The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the children to pieces." I personally view that as fictional but nonetheless an important symbolic story meant to teach a lesson -- not to mock the prophets -- just like the parables told by Jesus taught lessons. If literalists want to believe in every word of the Bible literally, that's their prerogative which I will always respect -- especially because I will ALWAYS recognize and acknowledge that it is absolutely possible that God could chose to have things happen exactly and as literally as is stated in the Bible. So on most points I'll just shrug my shoulders, while on others we will probably just need to agree to disagree. Of course, there are other issues or difficulties in determining the meaning of Scripture, literally or otherwise. For instance, as I understand it, the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and some parts of the New Testament written in Aramaic and others in Greek. I don't speak or read any of those languages, so I must use English translations. With regard to ANY translation of ANYTHING from one language to another, it is very common for some of the 'essence', or even some of the vital meaning, to be 'lost in the translation'. I think a perfect example is when Jesus asked Peter three times whether Peter loved him, repeating it to the point that Peter's feelings seemed to be hurt by our Lord's persistent questioning; to many if not most Christians, the English translation (and I don't care WHAT 'version' you are using) loses an awful lot in the translation unless more than just the naked Scripture is presented to them, because the English language/translations make no distinction between the word for affection that Christ was using versus the word for affection that Peter used. As I've explained to my kids when they were growing up, a clearer distinction in English might be something like this -- Jesus asking: Peter, do you LOVE me? With Peter then responding: Lord, you know I LIKE you. At the very least, there seems to be differences in degree of affection between what the two of them meant. But I'm not writing to discuss or debate that point. And I am aware that there are many people who view any contention that the differences in those two Greeks words for love ("agape" and "phileo") is incorrect and inconsequential; I suppose that remains to be debated, but it is undeniable that the English translations (at least every version that I've checked) uses just one word for love throughout John 21:15-17, whereas the Greek for the same verses uses two different words - "agapas" [strong's G25]; "philO" and later "phileis" [strong's G5368]. Two different word roots with two different meanings! Why? I can't write out the Greek (you can find it easily on the web), but the KJV says: "15So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. In addition, translating from one language to another, even when done during the very same time period of the writing, still presents great difficulties with idioms. I believe that this applies "across the board" regardless of version. And if you don't know what an idiom is, I just used one in the quotes in my last sentence; someone who doesn't understand English and who translates it 'literally' because they don't know any better, will insert their foreign-word equivalents of "across" and "the board", but the result they will reach will have a completely different meaning than my idiomatic phrase which means that it "relates to all without exception". So, I will usually use a parallel Bible and view several different English translations, and sometimes I will even check the Hebrew or Greek and consult Strong's. Although I trust most of the translations (I don't put much faith in transliterations), normally prefer modern to the KJV; however, I also consider the KJV to be divinely inspired, and I find strong evidence in the various readings I've done in Biblical numerology and hidden codes and such. Anyway, I just wanted to let folks know where I am 'coming from', since many future discussions will undoubtedly involve Scripture. God Bless to all.