Why does the Bible get misinterpreted so often????

But I'm not the one trying to decide the interpretation of a two thousand year old book that's been revised over and over.

Actually, I really wish you would return to the prior point I made where I provided the definition of the term "interpret", and showed why it is that you interpret the Bible just like the rest of us. Is there a problem with the definition I provided? Do you think the definition does not apply to what you do when you evaluate what the Bible is saying? Or are you just no longer interested in discussing the original issue I took with you in this thread?




Once again, you make claims of sophistry yet fail to back them up, which literally has the effect of turning your own argument back on yourself. Also, I never claimed that interpretation was "necessary", so please do not state that I have. And although interpretation may not be desirable to you, that has no bearing on whether it was desirable to God, or (more importantly) whether it can be objectively shown that interpretation should not be desired.




Please demonstrate why this is the case, taking into consideration my comments above.




I am going to repeat back what I think you have just said in order to ensure I have understood it - please correct me if I have not properly interpreted what I have read.

It seems as if you are claiming that all religionist propositions (regardless of their truth state) cannot be expressed in forensically valid form just because all such propositions are necessarily of such a form that they ultimately rest upon an assumption of self-evidence specifically because they invoke that which has existence outside of the physical realm.

Is that correct?

Regardless of whether my interpretation was correct, I will assert that all propositions ultimately rest upon an assumption of self-evidence, whether metaphysical or not.




Life itself is the prime example of circular reasoning, specifically when one attempts to demonstrate the truth state of any proposition using linear thought. Knowledge of anything at all ultimately rests upon an epistemic basis, the truth state of which cannot be demonstrated using linear thought.

In short, if you consign yourself to knowing only those things that may ultimately be demonstrated through linear thought, you cannot know anything at all, which is itself a self-refuting position to hold to.

I

Given your comments to me above, it would seem that you do not think such evidence could ever be presented. Or do you?

I

Cicerone Imposter Wrote:



Oh really? Seems to me you have no problem at all telling us the way we understand it is wrong. In order to say someone else's interpretation is wrong, you must first have an interpretation of your own

Trusting in religion may not be linear, but it's a crutch for people that wish to believe in some superior creator that may or may not offer eternal life after death.

I see religion as a spiritual opium that lessens the real pain of living on this planet - the fear of eternal death.

I seek my reality from my environment and what is observable as "truth." Could I be wrong? Sure, but I can't prove otherwise. I prefer to error on the side of my reality.

Mr. Imposter,
What puts you in a position to determine what is, and what is not, a crutch for anyone? I don't know what experience you have with opium, but given your logic...it must be considerable.

The very fact that you admit that you can't prove otherwise is an admission that you do not know. Why do you take it upon yourself to tell others that they are wrong if you do not know what is right?

I do not know, because there is no proof one way or the other. My belief goes beyond any message in the bible. If there is such a thing as a creator, IMHO, a god doesn't resemble anything like the interpretation related in the bible. This planet is estimated to be over 4.5 billion years old, and the god of the bible only appears four thousand years ago according to the Torah. The bible itself estimates the earth to be less than six thousand years old. Humans are estimated to have existed over two hundred milliions years. The bible god is too late to show up to be anything but a man-created god as with many other gods created by man.

The bible has to be more accurate that wikipedia?
or even harder to forge?

From my observations, it is inherent in man to create and worship gods. Most believed their god was the "real" one.

Cicerone Imposter Wrote:



What gives you the right to think you can tell me or anyone else what is a crutch in mine or their life? You haven't got the first clue as to why I believe what I believe. You have never IMHO taken the time to even try to understand what I and others have tried to explain to you.

Mr. Cicerone Imposter, just remember that you made the choice to error on the side of your reality and why you made that decision. Someday, it will be more important than you know.

But, until then, please do not presume to tell me anything about why I believe or what I believe. Please do not presume to tell me what the Word of God says. Please do not presume that you have the right to ridicule and belittle those that believe in God.

I feel sorry for you, Mr. Cicerone Imposter. I honestly do. How you can care so little about other people that you would ridicule them just because they believe in God. I am praying for you and your family. You have said many of them are Christian. I can imagine how this hurts them too.

The bible does not say that. YOU say that. Pay attention and learn something.


GRRR! :wink:

Pejoratives about religion aside, here is what you said:



No, you seek reality in what you observe to be truth. You don't objectively observe truth, which is what your statement implied.




Yes.




You are most likely unable to prove either side of the story.




As we all do.


I

neo, I don't say that; bible scholars say that.

Overview:
There is a great diversity of belief concerning the age of the Earth and the rest of the universe:

Most estimates based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, and in particular the belief that the Hebrew word : "yom" in Genesis refers to a 24 hour day, cluster around 6,000 years :± 2,000 years for both the age of the Earth and of the rest of the universe. These estimates are promoted by young-Earth creationists, and by the vast majority of Christian para-church organizations which specialize in origins. In 1738, De Vignoles stated that he had accumulated no fewer than 200 computations of the date of creation, all based upon various diverse interpretations of the Bible.

Cicerone Imposter,

If you do not believe in the Bible, why would you believe anything a Bible scholar says?

If there have been 200 computations, why do you insist that we all think there is only one??????

Not to mention the earth was probably billions of years old before the first day of Genesis.

Also, it's been over 6000 years and day seven is not yet over.

Young Earth creationism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Creationism

History of creationism
Creation in Genesis


Created in God's image.Young Earth creationism is a religious doctrine which teaches that the Earth and life on Earth were created by a direct action of God a relatively short time ago. It is generally held by those Christians and Jews who believe that the ancient Hebrew text of Genesis is an accurate account of historical events, and that evidence for the accuracy of a strictly factual interpretation of the text should be evident in the world today.

Many of its adherents are active in the development of Creation science, a creationist endeavor that holds that the events associated with supernatural creation can be evidenced and modeled through the scientific method. There is no direct support for a young Earth in mainstream scientific journals or amongst mainstream scientific organizations.

The history of young Earth creationism
Young Earth creationism, in the West primarily, has its earliest roots in Judaism. For example, Ibn Ezra's (c. 1089-1164) commentary on Genesis is greatly esteemed in traditional rabbinical circles and he believed the Genesis days were 24 hour periods.[1] The first-century Jewish historian Josephus also accepted a six-day creation and young earth. It was also the dominant view of the Church Fathers and Protestant Reformers.[2]

For much of the history of Christianity, young Earth creationism was the majority viewpoint in the absence of scientific evidence to contradict it. It was widely believed that the universe was made by a rational Creator; this viewpoint was held by many of the founders of modern science, such as Copernicus, Kepler, Faraday, Galileo, Maxwell, Newton, Boyle, Pascal and Nicholas Steno. However, the development of scientific methods of enquiry soon produced a considerable volume of evidence that made a scientific belief in young Earth creationism untenable.

Support for young Earth creationism declined from the 18th century onwards with the development of the new science of geology. It became apparent to early geologists that the Earth had to be ancient to account for the range of geological phenomena that were observable. James Hutton, now regarded as the father of modern geology, opened up the concept of deep time for scientific inquiry. Rather than accepting that the earth was no more than a few thousand years old, he maintained that the Earth must be much older (indeed, he asserted that the Earth was infinitely old). Hutton stated that:

the past history of our globe must be explained by what can be seen to be happening now … No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle.

('Theory of the Earth', a paper (with the same title of his 1795 book) communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and published in Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1785; cited with approval in Holmes, A., Principles of Physical Geology, 2nd edition, Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., Great Britain, pp. 43-44, 1965.]

Hutton's main line of argument was that the tremendous displacements and changes he was seeing did not happen in a short period of time by means of catastrophe, but that the processes happening on the Earth in the present day had caused them. As these processes were very gradual, the Earth needed to be ancient, in order to allow time for the changes. Before long, scientific inquiries provoked by his claims had pushed back the age of the earth into the millions of years ?- still much younger than commonly accepted by mainstream scientists, but a great change from the literalist view of an Earth that was only a few thousand years old.

Hutton's ideas were popularised by Sir Charles Lyell in the early 19th century. The energetic advocacy of Lyell led to the public and scientific communities largely accepting an ancient Earth. This philosophy governed the interpretation of geological data by the Reverends William Buckland, Adam Sedgwick and other early geologists. By mid-century, mainstream science had abandoned leading young Earth creationism as a serious hypothesis. Many religious groups also abandoned Young Earth creationism as a literal description of the Earth's history and came to regard the Biblical account of creation as purely allegorical or mythological.

It would be nice, for once, to have some words come out of C.I.'s own thought process.

The following timeline by Theodore Pederson appeared in The Christian News, March 26, 2001, page 18.

How old is the earth?
If we go back 500 years, we come to the time of Martin Luther (born in 1483), and Columbus, who "sailed the ocean blue in 1492."
If we go back 1000 years, we come to the time of Leif Ericson, Christian explorer, who preached Christ to pagans. (World Book, 1983, vol.6, page 270.)
If we go back 2000 years, we come to the birth of Jesus Christ. Our calendar is dated from His birth.
If we go back 3000 years, we come to the time of David and Solomon; they ruled Israel about 1000 BC.
If we go back 4000 years, we come to the time of Abraham (2000 BC), ancestor of Arabs and Jews.
If we go back 5000 years, we come to the time of Enoch, who "walked with God 300 years … and God took him [into Heaven]."
If we go back 6000 years, we come to the time of Creation, and Adam and Eve (4004 BC). Luke, evangelist and historian, records Adam as the first man (Luke 3:38).
The earth is about 6000 years old. Let God's people rejoice in Him who made them! (Psalm 149:2)

Agreed.

I