|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Investigating Peshat Not Blasphemy | |||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
Whenever we get into a discussion investigating traditional Christian teachings against the plain text reading of the Bible, someone plays the blasphemy card. So I want to look at whether that is a valid claim.
Within the plain text of the Bible, does God/Jesus make it clear that it is wrong or blasphemous to check out the veracity of a religious teaching?
Mark 3:28-30 "Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin "-- because they were saying, "He has an unclean spirit." Even speaking against Jesus if forgivable.
Matthew 12:32 "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come. But when Christians question a religious teaching by checking it against the plain text of the Bible, they are not speaking against God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. If they disagree with the teaching, they are disagreeing with the teachings of man.
Blasphemy or slander carries the meaning of speaking a falsehood about someone. In Matthew the Pharisees were comparing Jesus to the ruler of the demons, which is not a true statement.
Matthew 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "This man casts out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons." In Mark, they claimed Jesus was an unclean spirit, which again is untrue. Given the religious turmoil of the first century, Paul’s words to not quench the Spirit; do not despise prophetic utterances. But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thessalonians 5:20-21) was very good advice for his audience. Is it any less important for us to examine everything carefully today, especially since we are so far removed from the event and the authors? Comparing teachings or claims against the plain text is not rebelling against God or the teachings of Jesus. If the plain text reading does not agree with the teachings or claims of today, again not rebelling against God or the teachings of Jesus. To be blasphemy or slander, the Christian would have to proclaim something false or contrary to what the plain text is saying. Bible Study is my preference.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
AdminQuetzal Inactive Member |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
This thread is off topic from the get go. What does it have to do with either evolution or creationism? What kind of an OP question is this:
Within the plain text of the Bible, does God/Jesus make it clear that it is wrong or blasphemous to check out the veracity of a religious teaching?
Is this forum about advertizing religious principles, or is about EvC? ”HM Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Content Hidden: If you must view use the peek button, but do not respond.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
If you have a problem with this topic being promoted take it to the Moderation Thread.
Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread. Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout. Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Hi, purple! I'm not quite sure what the focus of this topic is, but I'll give it a go. Pick a number:
1) Bible says one thing, Dogma says another. 2) One interpretation of text to mean A, another interpretation to mean B. The first example would be a logical examination of the plain text, right? IMHO, the text means nothing if the character behind the text is not a living reality. Thats my belief, however. The second example is simply taking a given scripture as it is and discussing what it means to you. Which one is closer to what you are saying?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
This is the question:
Within the plain text of the Bible, does God/Jesus make it clear that it is wrong or blasphemous to check out the veracity of a religious teaching? "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
PD,
This should have been a neat topic. I have been away a few days and I see only a few responses. You speak about the plain text. As a Catholic, I am aware of the varying ways to read the Bible, etc. I do not believe that a plain text or literal reading would be blasphemous in the least. 'Dogma' is the word that Phat used. I believe many Christians would shy away from this word because they take it to mean something non-Biblical. In the Catholic tradition it often is. Nonetheless, I see that all Christians have their preferred interpretations. Certain texts mean one thing and one thing only. The accepted standard interpretation of a passage does readily become the doctrine of a particular group. Problem is, often the plain text reading does reveal more than one interpretation. When this happens we get more into the area of apologetics. We also see elaborate speculations that lead far astray of the plain text. Within denominations, it is one interpretation over another that defines the credo of that group. So, for my two cents, it's not about the plain text at all. We are all reading that. Folks just don't like to have their take on that plain text questioned. What we would call that in the RCC is heresy. A false teaching. I suppose that in less strictly defined dotrines the commonly accepted meaning is gold even if the word 'doctrine' is not used...and that these Christians will get hot behind the ears to have something questioned if they don't have the apologetics to back it up.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5953 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
PD writes: Within the plain text of the Bible, does God/Jesus make it clear that it is wrong or blasphemous to check out the veracity of a religious teaching? As far as this is concerned, I believe that we are asked to check out the veracity of a religious teaching. I do not make a distinction between God/Jesus, or Paul, or Job, or Moses, etc. when to comes to reading the Bible. With this in mind, I think that Paul is clear on several occasions that we should not accept each and every doctrine of rule. Of course, there is always a BUT. If we are to keep going back to the plain text we are essentially doing what all of the fundamentalist idealists did. There is a beauty to doing that, as well as an insane lack of conformity and the 'fortune cookie' reading of the Bible. 'Open a page and see what is tells you about your life' is the trendy thing...not sure if that is relevent...it is actually the opposite of the plain text reading.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:My idea of reading the plain text includes reading the whole story associated with a verse and not just the verse by itself. Just as our society changes over time, religion also changes to accomodate the changing society. For Christians, the Bible is the only written source that I know of for the foundation of the religion. The only written source available for all to see. Even those who choose to follow Christianity need a means to verify the veracity of what a clergy or layperson is teaching or preaching without being verbally abused by their own people. Yes, I make a distinction between God, Jesus and Paul. Paul was an evangelist who wrote letters. If he hadn't written letters, odds are, we probably wouldn't know much if anything about him. He wrote for his time and his audience. Some of his teachings are still applicable today and others are not. I stated in Message 1 that Paul gave his followers good advice. Which is a more reliable way to check out the veracity of a teaching: Pray for a sign or check it against the reality of the Bible text? If the reality of the text doesn't support the teaching, then we are left to our own devices to decide whether the teaching has a sound practical application or not. That's why sometimes we need to work through the religious jargon to find the psychology or purpose behind the teaching. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
P'shat (pronounced peh-shaht' - meaning "simple")
The p'shat is the plain, simple meaning of the text. The understanding of scripture in its natural, normal sense using the customary meanings of the word’s being used, literary style, historical and cultural setting, and context. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024