Greatest Sect of Christianity

[MOBIUS]

I must say that Kid is doing a stand up job for filling Ben's shoes!

[Uncle Sparky]

Jets 9:8 Flyers

[Kidlicious]

He probably says "correctly is in the eye of the beholder" because every human is fallible and will interpret it differently. That doesn't mean he thinks everyone's interpretation is equally accurate, in fact he seems to think the "conservative" approach produces very inaccurate interpretations. I'm not even clear on what believing something "in eternity" means because eternity is not a specific point in time.

The reason I didn't respond to you is because two christians should talk about the Holy Spirit. The Gospel says that the Holy Spirit reveals truth to us. So any christian who says "what is truth?" as pilate did isn't a follower of Jesus, but a follower of ancient Greeks.

[Kidlicious]

This is what a rational person would have gleaned. Then again, it is that same "conservative" position that Kid likes to uphold that comes up with the Jesus riding a T-Rex point of view, which makes his statement even more amusing.

Ok so explain how peoples opinions are accurate to different degrees? Why do you believe that the Holy Spirit reveals degrees of truth and not THE TRUTH? Why does the Holy Spirit tell one person one thing and at the same time tell another person something else which is a contradiction?

[Kidlicious]

What foolishness. The "liberal" position on 1 Cor 11:1-16 is not reading it literally because they want to its because if you read the passage in context instead of literally you will see that 1st Letter of Paul to the Corinthians is very concerned with divisions in the Church at Corinth. It is about not calling attention to yourself instead of God during prophecy. In those days, it was common for poor women to be veiled, while rich women would be uncovered and have fancy hair styles - it was a way to mark yourself as someone of status (this from my copy of "Dictionary of New Testament Background", pg. 446 if you are wondering). This could have created a real clash between rich and poor when all were called to be one. Also in that period, unexposed hair was supposed to have created male lust (current Muslim hardliners make this claim today). Also read 1 Cor 11:13-16, ESPECIALLY 16 when Paul speaks about the fact that they have no custom, nor do the churches of God on the issue (after he makes the argument, which is unusual for Paul, from nature).

& if the conservative interpretation is wrong it IS A SIN - because it places legalism above the love for the Spirit of God (you know that thing that Jesus was complaining that the Pharisees do?).

I'll get to your evasion in a moment. My point that you are evading is that a conservative approach to interpretation is the correct way. You seem to almost agree with that yet 1) you still believe in cherry picking the Bible (which is most definitely liberal) and 2) you've chosen to argue the example that I provided instead of my point.

Now, we agree on this. In the early church ALL women were required to wear head coverings out of respect for God and for each other. It's good that we agree.

Now we have a problem today with women having their tits uncovered in church. So would I HATE a woman if I told her to cover her tits? I assume you will say no. So then how am I hating her by telling her to obey God and respect him and other women by covering your head.

[Jon Miller]

I wouldn't say that you hate them, although it would depend on your manner.

I would point out that it was Paul saying this, to women in ~50 AD in the Roman empire. Not God saying this to women or to women today.

His message then, and I think what should be done now, is to dress respectably. What dressing respectably is is different depending on the culture/etc. Now, in most western areas, it means not being nude.

It isn't that I am cherry picking, I am saying that you don't understand Paul. You don't understand what you are reading. I am reading 1 Cor 11:1-16 literally.

Jon

[Kidlicious]

JM, yes I do understand Paul. In fact we agree, women should dress respectfully. That's what Paul meant. Where we disagree is what it means to be respectfull in the way you dress. What you believe, and you have yet to show that this is what the Bible says, is that society dictates what it means to dress respectable. What I believe is that God's word dictates what it means to dress respectful.

[Jon Miller]

If you believe the only way to dress respectfully is to dress as someone did from 0AD. Go right ahead.

I will still say that you are not understanding what you are reading.

The Bible clearly in many points shows that instructions are culturally dependent. Such as if you have one wife or many, for example.

You can not understand the Old Testament or the New without understanding the people with whom God was having a relationship with and who are communicating that relationship to you.

JM

[Kidlicious]

If you believe the only way to dress respectfully is to dress as someone did from 0AD. Go right ahead.

I will still say that you are not understanding what you are reading.

The Bible clearly in many points shows that instructions are culturally dependent. Such as if you have one wife or many, for example.

You can not understand the Old Testament or the New without understanding the people with whom God was having a relationship with and who are communicating that relationship to you.

JM

By this logic it was proper for the Jews to worship idols. Sorry this is nonsense. If it was disrespectful for a woman to show off her physical beauty in the early church it still is today. The only thing that has changed is society (for the bad). God's truth hasn't changed. It never does.

[loinburger]

By this logic it was proper for the Jews to worship idols.

What is it with you and strawmen? Stop it, it makes you look stupid and/or disingenuous.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh wow Imran. You might simply be being stiff-necked or grasping at strawmen. Let me have my coffee and try again.

Just admit I schooled you like nobody's business.

[Kidlicious]

you don't even defend your position

[Lorizael]

What is it with you and strawmen? Stop it, it makes you look stupid and/or disingenuous.

You've clearly not had a lot of experience debating Kid.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ok so explain how peoples opinions are accurate to different degrees? Why do you believe that the Holy Spirit reveals degrees of truth and not THE TRUTH? Why does the Holy Spirit tell one person one thing and at the same time tell another person something else which is a contradiction?

Just as you don't understand Paul, as JM points out, you didn't understand me. "Correctness" being in the eye of the beholder means that EVERY group thinks their interpretation is correct. Conservatives think they are correct and liberals think they are correct. By saying we need the "correct" interpretation means nothing because different people think different ways of interpretion are correct.

And I do not presume to speak for God, but I find that some are more open to the Holy Spirit and some are concerned with their legalism. That doesn't make the legalists bad people, mind.

[Imran Siddiqui]

a conservative approach to interpretation is the correct way.

No it isn't. An approach that reads the texts in their literary and social contexts (you know, what has been derided as liberal) is the correct way of interpretation.

1) you still believe in cherry picking the Bible (which is most definitely liberal) and 2) you've chosen to argue the example that I provided instead of my point.

Because your example proves that you don't know what you are talking about and conservatives cherry pick just as much, if not more, than the liberals. Tell me why a lot of conservative churches don't follow the rules about women teaching in churches or not wearing head coverings? At least liberals look at why Paul said those things in his context and make determinations based on that - conservatives just ignore it.

Now we have a problem today with women having their tits uncovered in church.

That strip club wasn't a church, Kid.

So then how am I hating her by telling her to obey God and respect him and other women by covering your head.

Who said you were hating anyone? You are just wrong on your interpretation by taking a 1st Century command, based on 1st Century reasons, and applying it full scale, without thinking or dealing seriously with the text, into a 21st Century context.

The reason conservative Biblical interpretation is wrong is because they don't take the text seriously. They just apply it rather than trying to figure out why something was said and without any concern for different contexts or situations. That, btw, is called LEGALISM.