Why? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Bible



Message

guessed -> Why? (8/17/2008 10:54:50 AM)

I've been reading through various threads on this and other fora and have a question regarding the NT (I’m not including the OT because Judaism is a different religion and the deity is ineffable and transcendent).

If these words of God are so absolutely and unequivocally clear why then are there so many different Christian denominations and why do they so often disagree with each other about ways of worshipping and the interpretation of these texts?



LBolt -> RE: Why? (8/17/2008 11:03:41 AM)

quote:

(I’m not including the OT because Judaism is a different religion and the deity is ineffable and transcendent).


[8|][8|], please clarify this statement. Much of the NT is a quote of the OT.



guessed -> RE: Why? (8/17/2008 11:51:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LBolt

quote:

(I’m not including the OT because Judaism is a different religion and the deity is ineffable and transcendent).


[8|][8|], please clarify this statement. Much of the NT is a quote of the OT.


Could you please clarify what you understand by the use of the word 'quote' in this instance?

The Jewish religion has been, and still, is strictly aniconic regarding representations of God. Judaism has existed for centuries longer than Christianity yet has not sub-divided and split into hundreds of disparate groups each worshipping in their own particular form of synagogue and each with their own very individual view of what the OT says. Yet this is exactly what Christianity has done and these different denominations often even use their own very theologically biased translations of the Bible. Why is this?



LifeisGalatians220 -> RE: Why? (8/18/2008 10:00:04 AM)

Just curious as to why you are here?
Are you feeling compelled to know for certain whether or not there really is a God you can have a relationship with? or are you here for debate? I only ask this because you have already set parameters for the answers you want. (as well as using words I have never even heard of let alone have the capacity for using in a casual conversation [sm=hammerhead.gif])

1. "regarding the NT (I’m not including the OT because Judaism is a different religion and the deity is ineffable and transcendent). "

You may not know that what is called the New Testament, the writings which show why Jesus (a Jewish rabbi) came, are actually showing what God's Law, looks like when lived out in human form. Both the good things that Jesus did and taught, and the crucifixion that He would have to endure because of sin are spelled out very clearly in the Old Testament. I know that was where I once was.


2. "Judaism has existed for centuries longer than Christianity yet has not sub-divided and split into hundreds of disparate groups each worshipping in their own particular form of synagogue and each with their own very individual view of what the OT says."

Maybe not hundreds, but a quick search on the internet will give you plenty of opportunity to see that there are many divisions within modern Judaism, though I do have to wonder if there could ever be as many as among modern Christianity. [;)]


3. different denominations often even use their own very theologically biased translations of the Bible. Why is this?
Good question. I've wondered that myself, and will leave that to others on this board who have searched that out. But what I do know is this: it is impossible to understand how God's Word fits together, reconciling the Old and the New, without Him having made it possible for me to understand it.

I hope you find what you are looking for.
Blessings,
Melanie



Him4all -> RE: Why? (8/18/2008 10:25:41 AM)

Guessed,

It appears to me that you may not know as much as you think you do, concerning the Jewish religion. They did have denominational differences...waaay back. There were the Deuteronomist's and the Yahweist's and the Masoretic's for just a few. And those denomination's each had their own scribes who did 'tweak' their manuscripts, based upon their own particular 'doctrinal' persuasions. That's what led to the cry of Jeremiah against those who hang their hats on the dead letter of the 'book of God' moreso than the living letter of the logos (Christ), who is the 'God of the book'.

JER 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.

Then there was the denominational differences between the Pharisee's and the Sadduccee's noted in Acts 23:6. Their differences concerning a 'resurrection and after life' was so divided that Paul made use of their religious biases by causing an argument, when Paul was brought before the high priest on 'religious' charges.

But none of these problems/faults you mention, nulify the 'faithfullness of God'. It just goes to show that 'the people' of God are still immature in their goal of attaining to the "high calling of Christ".

EPH 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;

You might take note of this saying, Guessed: Only immaturity is intollerant of immaturity. Even your post seems to carry a bit of 'disdain' founded upon that same fault IMO. [:)]

DR



drmark -> RE: Why? (8/18/2008 10:01:24 PM)

quote:

If these words of God are so absolutely and unequivocally clear why then are there so many different Christian denominations and why do they so often disagree with each other about ways of worshipping and the interpretation of these texts?
Do you consider "ways of worshipping and the interpretation of these texts" part of essential Christian doctrine? If yes, then please provide Scriptural support. If no, then please re-read 1 Cor 10:23 - 11:1.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Why? (8/18/2008 11:09:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Him4all

They did have denominational differences...waaay back. There were the Deuteronomist's and the Yahweist's and the Masoretic's for just a few.

Certainly this is true. Even today, I understand, there are different shades of Judaism. For example, Orthodox Jews are different from Reformed Jews. I don't really know that much about it, but I do know that the Jews today do, in fact, have "denominations" if you wanna call 'em that.



rabstark -> RE: Why? (8/18/2008 11:47:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

Even today, I understand, there are different shades of Judaism. For example, Orthodox Jews are different from Reformed Jews. I don't really know that much about it, but I do know that the Jews today do, in fact, have "denominations" if you wanna call 'em that.


"Denomination" is actually a pretty good term for it. There are about 3 major "denominations", "Reform" (VERY liberal theologically), Conservative (range from liberal to conservative), and Orthodox (VERY conservative). Additionally there are smaller groups that don't really fit neatly into any of the major categories. IE... Reconstructionist (even more liberal than the Reform), Traditional (more conservative than the Conservatives, but not quite to the level of the Orthodox), Ultra-Orthodox (about as conservative as it's possible to be). And even some of these groups subdivide into distinct "denominations". There are at least two major and probably a half a dozen or more minor divisions within the Ultra-Orthodox. Then there are groups that don't fall into any category at all like the Kabbalists.

So yeah, "Judaism" isn't exactly a monolithic religion any more than Christianity is. As to why "Christianity" is as splintered as it is, well, there are roughly a billion of us who call ourselves "Christians", spread out over 6 of the 7 continents... differences of opinion are inevitable on cultural grounds alone.

*edited because I apparently can't count [:'(] *



FurGodWurLivin -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 6:56:56 AM)

Allow me to quote a scholar....
quote:

There is no greater commentary on the Old Testament than the New Testament... yet the New Testament only makes sense through the lense of the Old Testament.
And again...
quote:

The Old Testament is New Testament Theology lived out.
Considering that Jesus came at the opening of the New Testament to satisfy the Jewish promise of a Messiah in the Old Testament, the two religions are far more related that most would realize.
quote:

If these words of God are so absolutely and unequivocally clear why then are there so many different Christian denominations and why do they so often disagree with each other about ways of worshipping and the interpretation of these texts?
There are three specific reasons that allow for the many different denominations.

1) All information is processed through the brain. Because of our extreme focus on "individuality", all of our brains process information differently based on (A) our family settings, (B) our various subcultures, and (C) whatever psychological woundings or "filters" we have in us because of our settings. Due to this, different scriptures that seem "unequivically clear" become radically different in their practice.

2) Many denominations use different translations of the Bible, so not everybody is getting the exact same information to start with.

3) Due to the decentralization of doctrinal understanding brought about by the Reformation, there is almost no structure of discipline for heretics or doctrinal error. Due to this, if anyone comes under intense pressure because of their doctrine, they can either change denominations, or start their own. That is how we end up with 100 different forms of "Baptists".

So here is how the process works.... (1) we choose a source of information that might or might not match everyone else's (NKJV is my favorite, personally), (2) we apply that information based on our understanding of the text, and (3) we part ways over our disagreements. This extreme dislike of people who disagree with us is the "generational curse" of the Protestant church... traceable all the way back to Luther and Zwingli. Hope that helps a little bit. If you need a clear-cut and exhaustive example of these differences, check out a couple systematic theologies (for instance, compare Grudem with Arthur... those guys came to radically different conclusions).

To bring in a quote from a Comedian....
quote:

It's not smart or correct, but it's one of the things that makes us what we are...


Adam



guessed -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 8:40:53 AM)

Nobody has actually addressed my initial point.

Judaism may have half a dozen or so different groups it hasn't got hundreds and it's been around for longer than Christianity.

So I ask again why are there so many different Christian groups who disagree with each other (often quite vehemently) about textual interpretation and forms of worship?

If the words of God as laid down in the NT are so unequivocal such divisions are surely unnecessary?



drmark -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 8:57:13 AM)

quote:

So I ask again why are there so many different Christian groups who disagree with each other (often quite vehemently) about textual interpretation and forms of worship?
And you didn't answer my question - are these part of essential Christian doctrine?



JimboFletch -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 9:07:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: guessed

Nobody has actually addressed my initial point.

The one on the top of your head?
[:D]

Sorry...

The US Constitution is so clear. Why, then, do we even need a Supreme Court? Is the fault the document or people.

For that matter, why is there a need to seek a second opinion when one is given all the clear results of multiple tests by a medical doctor?

You are wasting your time and ours with a question that could be answered correctly by your average fifth grader.



drj11 -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 10:07:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: guessed

Nobody has actually addressed my initial point.

The one on the top of your head?
[:D]

Sorry...

The US Constitution is so clear. Why, then, do we even need a Supreme Court? Is the fault the document or people.

For that matter, why is there a need to seek a second opinion when one is given all the clear results of multiple tests by a medical doctor?

You are wasting your time and ours with a question that could be answered correctly by your average fifth grader.


Hmm... I have made this exact point over in the science and origins section when debating the soundness of a literal interpretation of genesis and the confidence with which it is proclaimed. Usually this argument results in a flurry of posts saying God's word is perfectly plain and clear, unambigious and not in need of such examinations (unlike legal documents, or the constitution).



drmark -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 10:27:47 AM)

quote:

You are wasting your time and ours with a question that could be answered correctly by your average fifth grader.
Actually, unless the average fifth grader is a born-again Believer, it's most unlikely that they would understand the relevant maxim - "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity."

quote:

I have made this exact point over in the science and origins section when debating the soundness of a literal interpretation of genesis and the confidence with which it is proclaimed.
Is the "literal interpretation of Genesis" considered essential Christian doctrine? (Obviously you're excused from answering, drj!)



drj11 -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 10:35:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:

I have made this exact point over in the science and origins section when debating the soundness of a literal interpretation of genesis and the confidence with which it is proclaimed.
Is the "literal interpretation of Genesis" considered essential Christian doctrine? (Obviously you're excused from answering, drj!)


Any interpretation is core to just about any denominations doctrine... it is unavoidable. Your chosen interpretation will have implications for any doctrine derived from reading scripture.



Him4all -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 10:40:21 AM)

Guessed,

quote:

Guessed: Nobody has actually addressed my initial point.


You dissappoint me...I did answer your initial point. Are you sure you're looking for answers?

quote:

DR #5: It just goes to show that 'the people' of God are still immature in their goal of attaining to the "high calling of Christ".


Question: Why do you think it's even important that everyone agree on every point as it pertains to "worship and textual interpretation"? As I study the NT I see more importance in accepting a brother/sister simply because they are a brother/sister...and not because they're a 'twin' brother/sister. But even if we were 'religious twins' that still doesn't mean immature twins won't still fight.

You seem hung up on the imperfection of man's humanity when you should be seeking the perfection of God's divinity for man. Where are you with that quest.

DR



drmark -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 10:49:35 AM)

quote:

Any interpretation is core to just about any denominations doctrine... it is unavoidable. Your chosen interpretation will have implications for any doctrine derived from reading scripture.
No, this is incorrect. In fact, many denominations in my tradition specifically state in their doctrinal beliefs that specific interpretation of God's Word is applicable only to matters pertaining to salvation. I would like to hear from Christians on this issue as it seems to me directly related to the OP.



Him4all -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 12:01:07 PM)

DrMark,

I'm curious as to what you mean by saying "many denominations in my tradition".
quote:

...interpretation of God's Word is applicable only to matters pertaining to salvation. I would like to hear from Christians on this issue...


This is an interesting point that you're talking about IMO. Our church actually went through this very situation when we hired our new pastor 6 years ago. He decided we needed to write up a new 'statement of faith (doctrine)'. In the discussion of what "needed" to be 'in' there, he wanted the 'rapture' included. Since only half of the elders believed in the rapture he had a surprizing dilemma. I was quite pleased when they decided that it was not a doctrine essential to the faith and just left it out for that very reason.

While proud of the elders on that point, they still put plenty in, that I personally think should have also been dumped...but hey, who else in town is mature enough to even allow an 'option' concerning 'the rapture' in their congregation. You esssentially believe one way or the other, for the right hand of fellowship in whichever Sunday school group you're in. That is a statement of generalization, of course.

DR



benelchi -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 12:13:58 PM)

quote:

The Jewish religion has been, and still, is strictly aniconic regarding representations of God. Judaism has existed for centuries longer than Christianity yet has not sub-divided and split into hundreds of disparate groups each worshipping in their own particular form of synagogue and each with their own very individual view of what the OT says. Yet this is exactly what Christianity has done and these different denominations often even use their own very theologically biased translations of the Bible. Why is this?


This is entirely untrue!

Within Judaism you have reconstructionist, reformed, conservative, orthodox, messianic, etc...



guessed -> RE: DUH! (8/19/2008 1:18:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: guessed

Nobody has actually addressed my initial point.

The one on the top of your head?
[:D]

Sorry...

The US Constitution is so clear. Why, then, do we even need a Supreme Court? Is the fault the document or people.

For that matter, why is there a need to seek a second opinion when one is given all the clear results of multiple tests by a medical doctor?

You are wasting your time and ours with a question that could be answered correctly by your average fifth grader.


Why don't you answer it then? Presumably you have passed 5th grade? Or are you comparing divine revelation with the words of mere mortal men?



guessed -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 1:30:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

So I ask again why are there so many different Christian groups who disagree with each other (often quite vehemently) about textual interpretation and forms of worship?
And you didn't answer my question - are these part of essential Christian doctrine?


Insofar that these texts constitute what you believe I would have thought it was imperative. Or do different Christian denominations hold to variant Christian doctrines, and if so why?


Surely you all worship the same deity, don't you?

Or does Pat Robertson's concept of deity differ from that of the Pope's? Is the Pope's concept different from that of the Patriarch of Constantinople? Does a Calvinist believe in the same things as an English Anglican and/or American Episcopalian? Do the Pentecostals adhere to the same beliefs as the Lutherans? Are the Southern Baptists the same as ordinary Baptists? The list goes on and on!

I note that already some correspondents to this thread appear to be at variance with each other!



benelchi -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 2:07:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: guessed

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

So I ask again why are there so many different Christian groups who disagree with each other (often quite vehemently) about textual interpretation and forms of worship?
And you didn't answer my question - are these part of essential Christian doctrine?


Insofar that these texts constitute what you believe I would have thought it was imperative. Or do different Christian denominations hold to variant Christian doctrines, and if so why?


Surely you all worship the same deity, don't you?

Or does Pat Robertson's concept of deity differ from that of the Pope's? Is the Pope's concept different from that of the Patriarch of Constantinople? Does a Calvinist believe in the same things as an English Anglican and/or American Episcopalian? Do the Pentecostals adhere to the same beliefs as the Lutherans? Are the Southern Baptists the same as ordinary Baptists? The list goes on and on!

I note that already some correspondents to this thread appear to be at variance with each other!

`

The range of Christian doctrine is almost the same as it is in Judaism. Most Christian churches are in agreement on doctrines essential to salvation, doctrines about who God is, and doctrines about who Jesus is. Most of the differences in doctrines would be similar to the differences in teachings by the different rabbinical authorities in Judaism.

There are churches that are on the extreme ends of liberal / conservative viewpoints similar to the Hasidim and Reconstructionist movements in Judaism. If you can understand how two different Jewish people can read the same texts, and one interprets the text as saying that God requires them to obey all of the Halakah while the other interprets the text as not requiring any obedience at all to a impersonal God force, then you should have not have any problem understanding why there is such a divergence of opinion within Christianity.

Sidenote: I personally have just as hard a time understanding the interpretations of the Jewish Reconstructionists as I do with that of the very liberal Christians. It seems to me that both of these groups completely ignore the intent of the author to arrive at their interpretations.



Him4all -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 2:48:18 PM)

Guessed,

quote:

Surely you all worship the same deity, don't you?

Yes! Yes! Yes!

quote:

Or does Pat Robertson's concept of deity differ from that of the Pope's?

Yes again!!...you are really on a roll now. [:)] The only thing you're missing is the answer I keep giving. What's the difference in their 'concepts'???? What determines their differing concepts?...Spiritual maturity! But, 'Concepts about God' have nothing to do with determining the 'reality of God'.

Maybe the Pope has a toddler's view of the heavenly Father, and Pat has a teenager's view...or vice versa. Does that make either viewpoint wrong? Is either relating from a 'mature in Christ' point of view???...The answer is NO to both questions.

You appear to be holding up some kind of imaginary standard of perfection/maturity for proof that Christians don't meet the standard of acceptance concerning a man before God.

Or, even more ludicrous, you might even appear to be insinuating that 'that failure' on our part, precludes the very existance of God. Say it isn't so. [:o]

The questions you should be asking yourself just might be these:
DO YOU BELIEVE THERE IS A GOD?
DO YOU BELIEVE ONE CAN KNOW HIM?
Lastly, CAN YOU KNOW HIM AND STILL BE IMPERFECT?

quote:

I note that already some correspondents to this thread appear to be at variance with each other!


Does this variance have to do with differing 'spiritual lineage' or merely religious 'doctrinal persuasion'? If you say 'spiritual lineage' I must say that there is probably only one person on this thread, that the rest of the 'correspondents' would think, falls into that catagory. But if that variance is due to 'doctrinal differences' and 'concepts of God'...then all those here would give a heartly AMEN. If they're mature enough to do so that is....[;)]



DR



drmark -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 4:19:43 PM)

quote:

Insofar that these texts constitute what you believe I would have thought it was imperative. Or do different Christian denominations hold to variant Christian doctrines, and if so why?


Surely you all worship the same deity, don't you?
What do you know of "our deity", guessed?



drmark -> RE: Why? (8/19/2008 5:34:09 PM)

quote:

I'm curious as to what you mean by saying "many denominations in my tradition".


I have very little familiarity with specific doctrinal beliefs regarding the authority and application of Scripture to non-salvation beliefs outside my own denomination. That's why I asked for other Christian viewpoints for comparison. Here is an exerpt from my denomination's Articles of Faith:
quote:

We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, given by divine inspiration, inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation.


Clearly this refutes drj's assertion that every denomination bases every doctrinal teaching on specific Scriptural interpretation.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI