What role, if any, should human reason play in the interpretation of Scripture?
540769
Yes, I feel we should reinterpret if it makes no sense.  This is not to say we should change the meaning in order to rationalize our behavior.  If our behavior doesn't agree with spiritual teachings, that's ok.  But we should accept that they are different, and not try to make them "match".\n\nI don't feel one has to view religion/spirituality with an "all or nothing" approach.  If I like 3 things about religion X, and 4 things about religion Y, it's ok for me to believe in both.  (I realize there are people who will disagree with me, but this is how I see it for myself.)
430538
Okay.  I think that part of what people consider contradictions in the Bible are actually specifications.\n\nWhen you have two things that are Biblically based, but polar opposite, I think we have to consider that they are written for two polar opposite attitudes of heart.\n\nWe tend to think that if something is wrong, then what we need to do is the opposite thing.  But what if that's not true?  What if we just need to reign ourselves in a little, not go drastically the other direction?\n\nThe preacher in our congregation when I was growing up used to say, "In order to give someone directions, you have to know two things: where they are and where they want to go."\n\nHis point was that sometimes what people need to do depends on where they start. \n\nYou haven't been specific with the situation, but I'll use this as an example:\n\n Do not answer a fool according to his folly,\n Lest you also be like him.\n Answer a fool according to his folly,\n Lest he be wise in his own eyes.  Proverbs 26:4-5\n\nHow can they both be true, and how do you decide whether or not to answer?\n\nI think if I have a tendency to be rash in my answers, I'd better take verse 4 to heart.  If I answer what I believe to be a foolish remark, I'm probably only going  to show myself to be a fool.\n\nIf I have a tendency not to confront foolish talk because I am shy or insecure, every fool and his brother is going to feel compelled to give me advice because they take my silence as interest or approval. So verse 5 applies to me.\n\nYou say the people have book, chapter and verse.  I'd study context around it and make sure the concept is understood.  Then make sure it makes sense to apply it to the person it's being applied to.\n\nIn the end, each person has to do what they believe to be the correct thing and trust that God will bring about resolution.  If we submit to Him, He will bring us into agreement with each other.  If we care more about being right in an argument than we care about being righteous before God, we have little hope of unity.
1075317
You may have noticed that when people 'quote' the scriptures, they tend to take them out of context. The preachers are there to help 'teach' the things of God more accurately. However, personal study is important.\n People will always quote the bible because they want to be right. Unfortunately many miss the mark of proper scriptural handling.
60118
Perhaps not.  But is it okay to ram your personal interpretation (of that which you have learned as dogma) down the throats of others if you never listen to informed critism?\nIf you have never read the old testiment in Hebrew, how do you really know what is says?  If you do not know Aramaic or Greek, do you really have an informed opinion yourself?\nDo you know the exact reasoning made by the men who decided what should be included in the Holy Bible and what should be left out?  Do you know that all of them did not agree with all of the books included?\nA good computer program can be written to look up an answer (or several rated answers) in the text of the King James Version of the Bible for just about any question, but that does not make the program holy.\nJudgment of others based upon whether or not they interpret scriptures in the same manner as you do may be a sin and certainly has lead to the disruption of the Christian religion into smaller factions.\nNo, it is never okay to critize anything that has not been studied.  Sure people do it, but that does not make it okay.
689950
You need to follow the basic rules of hermeneutics. Understand a passage in the immediate context of the statements before it and after it. Cross reference the words or passages you are studying with the rest of the Bible to get the fuller view. The Bible often explains itself and that explanation is to be accepted before anyone else view. Certain churches or preachers have their own interpretations but it is most important to see for yourself by studying the Scriptures what is the best view. For example if you do a basic check with a Bible concordance on the words or subject of "keys of the kingdom, you will get a better understanding about that instead of what you will get by a dictionary description of the word "key" alone. Follow the basic rule of scripture that "the Scripture cannot be broken". That is to say that a view of certain scriptures should never go against what the Bible says about that subject. Be careful when you run into people who will say things like, " the Bible does say that but that's not what it means" or something similar to that because often they are not putting the Bible first. Often people accept a popular Christian's view or their pastors view because they are held in such high esteem. We should esteem others but not above the Word of God.  As far as the doctrine of salvation, I would not say that it is primarily taught in Acts because Romans and the Gospels hit on it alot as well.
81613
Search the Scripture to find God's will.\n\nRead & study the Scripture with faith, guided by the Holy Spirit. If one reads Scripture looking for errors or contradictions, etc, it is worthless superficial reading which even Satan will help you with.\n\nRely on God's Wisdom to understand Scripture; man's ~wisdom~ is folly.\n\nTrue Faith requires a spiritual relationship; it is not religion or denominationalism or non-denominationalism.
539710
It means to understand that something is based on reason. Therefore words from the bible were written as known to man from words of "Jesus" and the viewpoint is not exchangeable.
1149593
No....we are not bound to what we can/cannot read/see. Better we read and talk about it then say so without reading. Unless you rather not have such things in your head.  I have not read it, but my SIL has and she is a Christian.\nGod judges us by His Law not man made laws. His law is the Ten Commandments.  Nothing should/could persuade us otherwise.\nWhat unsaved people do not realize is we have no boundaries of what we can/cannot do. We have convictions that warn us of the consequences of doing what would be sinful in God's eyes. \nFar as I am concerned:  this book is just another way of trying to make a fool out of Christ.  I don't have to read/see it to know a devil when I hear of one.\nWe have been warned by Godly people.  Even if you do read/see it, mature Christians know the truth.   \nIt is SAD that people will be led down the wrong path that do not yet know the truth.\nNew Christians may just get confused as they are still in the learning stages of growing in Christ.  Better IF they see it to search for the truth as they read their Bible.\nSatan is the author of confusion.  So we already know who is behind it.
783033
One thing you may not realize is that the good translations are translated directly for the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic manuscripts that have been preserved for all time.  There are over 5000 manuscripts recovered and translated. (The most evidence from any major ancient literary source)\n\nScholars do indeed see the human elements in Scripture but that doesnt make Gods truth any less than important.  A wise man one said that the Bible is theologically perfect enough to astonish the wisest of scholars and human enough to give any unbeliever doubt.
623503
Edward O. Wilson's book Consilience deals with this question among others.  He maintains that genetic code associated with ethics and religion played an integral part in early man's life since religion and ethics help people to make sense of things like death, pain, and most importantly, purpose.  Wilson maintains that communities with stronger religion/ethics genes rose above those without it and so people today tend towards religion and ethics for good and sound reasons (that is, it's better for humanity to be driven by a sense of purpose than for it not to be).\n\nSo, in my mind, this is the crucial fork in the road.  Is purpose really a creation of our own, or is it possible that our sense of purpose comes from an outside force?  I think that it is at least possible, but how far does the rabbit hole go down?
483353
Absolutely...a really good book to read is "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman.  He did a lot of research on this topic.
543854
Well, faith can be derived through an authoritarian or a rational approach....although one understands that it starts out as one and moves to the other.  One can use reason to butress faith (as many religions do).  \n\nAgain, one must juggle the semantics of the question.  What does one mean by "reason"?  If one accepts that a person who reasons would use an empirical approach to gaining all knoweledge, then there is a conflict between the two terms based on epistemology.\n\nIn my opinion, the conflict between faith and reason lies entirely in the fact that faith requires a man to forgoe reason and rely on dogma.  This prevents a human being from using all of his/her senses to find out for themselves.  So, in short...the answer is yes, although with reservation as I also believe that reason is used with faith-based systems as well.
1066914
I don't know how others rationalize their errors, but as a Christian I can speak for myself. I have read and studied the Bible, but I also believe (right or wrong) that the Bible was written by humans\nand that the Bible has been translated so many times that it would be difficult to even know what was originally written, and it is also open to interpretation.\nSo MY life as a Christian is based on my belief in God, Jesus Christ as his son, live by the 10 commandments and try to do the best I can.
446179
In examining Scripture, two facts become clear: First, that God is a Spirit, and does not possess human characteristics or limitations; second, that all the evidence contained in Scripture agrees that God revealed Himself to mankind in a male form. First of all, God’s true nature needs to be understood. God is a person, obviously, because God exhibits all the characteristics of personhood: God has a mind, a will, an intellect, and emotions. God communicates, has relationships, and God’s personal actions are evidenced throughout Scripture.\n\nAs John 4:24 states, “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” Since God is a spiritual being, God does not possess physical human characteristics; however, sometimes figurative language used in Scripture assigns human characteristics to God in order to make it possible for man to understand God. This assignment of human characteristics to describe God is called “anthropomorphism.” Anthropomorphism is simply a means for God (a spiritual being) to communicate truth about His nature to mankind, a physical being. Since man is a physical being, man is limited in his understanding of those things beyond the physical realm, and anthropomorphism in Scripture helps man to understand who God is.\n\nSome of the difficulty comes in examining the fact that man is created in God’s image. Genesis 1:26-27 says “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”\n\nWhat this means is that both man and woman are created in the image of God, in that they are greater than all the other creations as they, like God, have a mind, will, intellect, emotions, and moral capacity. Animals do not possess a moral capacity, and do not possess an immaterial component like mankind does. Genesis tells us that when man was created by God, God breathed the “breath of life” into man. No other creation is described this way, and that “breath of life” is the spiritual component that man alone possesses. God created man to have a relationship with Him; man is the only creation designed for that purpose, and that “breath of life” is evidence of that.\n\nThat said, man and woman are only patterned after the image of God—they are not tiny “carbon copies” of God, and the fact that there are men and women does not require that God have male and female features, or that God be a woman. Remember, being made in the image of God has nothing to do with physical characteristics.\n\nWe know that God is a spiritual being, and does not possess physical characteristics. This does not limit, however, how God may choose to reveal Himself to mankind. Scripture contains all the revelation God gave to man about Himself, and so is the only really objective source of information about God. In looking at what Scripture tells us, there are several observations of evidence about the form in which God revealed Himself to mankind:\n\nTo begin with, Scripture contains almost 170 references to God as the “Father.” By necessity, one cannot be a father unless he is male. If what was meant to be communicated was that God chose to be revealed to man in a female form, then the word “mother” would have occurred in these places, not “father.” In the Old and New Testament both, masculine pronouns are used over and over again in reference to God.\n\nDeuteronomy 34:10 has this to say about Moses, who wrote the first five books of Scripture, the Pentateuch: “And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face.” This verse describes how close Moses’ relationship with God was. Since Moses walked so closely with God, we can be
389041
I would say no.  First look at the source of the text.  All texts are set down by humans and therefore even if divinely inspired are subject to human fault. \n\n Then take into account which texts you are mixing.  You have the 10 commandments which are a pretty good guide to running a community or nation, simple compact given at one point in time.  Then other texts that are from different time periods, and different writers.  Even if inspired by God is it really likely that God has a brother and sister, or are these just negative examples given for human learning?\n\nEven so, does it make someone hypocritical to as another to learn from his/her mistakes.  A hypocrite in my definition is one who continues to do an action he/she thinks is negative.  If it was once done and not repeated it is simply good advice.  Not hypocritical.\n\nAnd Moe, if he is talking of earlier scriptures that would be referring to old testament and before, which has nothing to do with Jesus.  Jesus actually had many brothers and sisters from Mary and Joseph.
855719
reasoning is one of the undeniable facts of what make us human. no other creature in the world has our capacity to question or to have faith. reason allows us to form concepts and to have various abstract ideas. it has been a hotly debated topic in philosophy since the beginning.
132871
No, not at all, although reason is an important part of the way people think. We tend to conflate reason with thinking because of Western civilization's philosophical traditions.\n\nHowever other kinds of thought certainly exist. An interesting one is the use of similitude - drawing conclusions because one sentence phonetically resembles another, or evokes similar imagery. Just like logic, those thoughts then chain together, in a way similar to logic, but not strictly speaking based on it. \n\nThis tends to be most apparent in religious systems, where symbolic numbers might repeat in various scenarios so that new situations can be tied to old ones, because of the presence of the symbolic number in both.