Verse out of context

[Cassia]

Does the religionism of some that takes verse out of context while disregarding contextual verses show up in our judgement of people? Do we take a snapshot of a moment in time and use that to label people?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Does the religionism of some that takes verse out of context while disregarding contextual verses show up in our judgement of people? Do we take a snapshot of a moment in time and use that to label people?

What's "religionism" it is not in any dictionary I own.

 

[Cassia]

What's "religionism" it is not in any dictionary I own.

Verse out of context. Next question.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Verse out of context. Next question.

What's the context for a verse? Do you mean the immediate paragraph or chapter? What about the culture and religious community that wrote it or to which it was written? Does that count as context too?

 

[Cassia]

What's the context for a verse? Do you mean the immediate paragraph or chapter? What about the culture and religious community that wrote ot or to which it was written? Does that count as context too?

no ... of course that all counts ... not verse out of context that so many hang dirty pool doctrine on. But certainly not creeds over verse.

 

[MoreCoffee]

no

Then you're quoting out of context!

 

[MoreCoffee]

no ... of course that all counts ... not verse out of context that so many hang dirty pool doctrine on. But certainly not creeds over verse.

I like creeds and sometimes they do a stirling job of summarising what the holy scriptures teach plus they have the advantage of including apostolic teaching not present in the holy scriptures or if present then only present by implication.

 

[Cassia]

I like creeds and sometimes they do a stirling job of summarising what the holy scriptures teach plus they have the advantage of including apostolic teaching not present in the holy scriptures or if present then only present by implication.

Explicitly to contain a person's pov to one post and not take contextual evidence into consideration is the equivelant of religionism, and I know you know what I'm talking about and who it pertains to.

No creed but Christ

There is no doubt that those who do those things lack spirituality.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Explicitly to contain a person's pov to one post and not take contextual evidence into consideration is the equivelant of religionism, and I know you know what I'm talking about and who it pertains to.

No creed but Christ

There is no doubt that those who do those things lack spirituality.

Everybody interprets Cassia, it is not possible to read the holy scriptures in English without somebody having interpreted them first to make the translation and when you or anybody else reads them they too interpret them. Is your interpretation to be preferred over all others? Would not that be the very thing you've complained about? If you must interpret and those who formulated the creeds interpret then you have no higher claim than they, in fact the ones who wrote the creeds have a better claim because they claimed to draw their teaching from the Spirit and from the mouths of the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Cassia]

Everybody interprets Cassia, it is not possible to read the holy scriptures in English without somebody having interpreted them first to make the translation and when you or anybody else reads them they too interpret them. Is your interpretation to be preferred over all others? Would not that be the very thing you've complained about? If you must interpret and those who formulated the creeds interpret then you have no higher claim than they, in fact the ones who wrote the creeds have a better claim because they claimed to draw their teaching from the Spirit and from the mouths of the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Perhaps you are misinterpreting the topic.

 

[Cassia]

Actually I don't think you misinterpret but instead you know that it's about the treatment of another member but you choose to be antagonist instead of letting the topic run it's course without the whitewash. too much

 

[MoreCoffee]

Perhaps you are misinterpreting the topic.

Labels applied to people are only applicable if they fit the label. If they interpret according to the way called heresy by the orthodox then the label is just is it not? Of course those who teach heresy do not think of their teaching as heresy. Oftentimes they count their reason and their interptrtation as justification for their teachings. That has always been so even among those whose heresy was most disruptive and cost the lives of countless thousands.

 

[Cassia]

Labels applied to people are only applicable if they fit the label. If they interpret according to the way called heresy by the orthodox then the label is just is it not? Of course those who teach heresy do not think of their teaching as heresy. Oftentimes they count their reason and their interptrtation as justification for their teachings. That has always been so even among those whose heresy was most disruptive and cost the lives of countless thousands.

So heresay is saying things one way (label) then explaining it quite thoroughly as to meaning in followup posts is heresay. whatever

 

[MoreCoffee]

So heresay is saying things one way (label) then explaining it quite thoroughly as to meaning in followup posts is heresay. whatever

Heresy is to make a choice to go against orthodox teaching. It is from a greek word whose root meaning is choice. Nobody teaches heresy unless they choose to teach it. And the choice they make is to oppose what God has revealed in the holy scriptures, in apostolic tradition, and in the teaching of God's church.

 

[Cassia]

Heresy is to make a choice to go against orthodox teaching. It is from a greek word whose root meaning is choice. Nobody teaches heresy unless they choose to teach it. And the choice they make is to oppose what God has revealed in the holy scriptures, in apostolic tradition, and in the teaching of God's church.

That's just catholic googlygook

 

[MoreCoffee]

That's just catholic googlygook

No, it is plain speaking in English. It means exctly what it says. Unless I made a typo or some grammatical error.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Actually I don't think you misinterpret but instead you know that it's about the treatment of another member but you choose to be antagonist instead of letting the topic run it's course without the whitewash. too much

I think I know who you have in mind and who you think may have been wronged. I do not agree with your assessment of the one you accuse. I am inclined to agree with you about the one allegedly wronged. But it is not for me to speak for ether one or the other. My posts in this thread are about the ideas intorduced in the first post in the thread. The idea of "religionism" and "out of context interpretation". For me the meaning of the word and the phrase matter enough to ask for clarification. The questions asking for clarification have been asked and answers offered. Now we move to the idea of who is to decide what the context is and what the true meaning of the verses really is. That is why heresy and orthodoxy are part of the discussion. You dismiss the idea as "catholic gobblety gook" but I think you know better - it is not catholic and it is not gobbletigook. It is Christian direct speaking.

 

[Lamb]

STAFF NOTICE:

I have moved this thread to Ask a Christian.

 

[Rens]

Lol a guy once preached about it. He was funny. He said you cant just simply pick a text and use it, like, dunno what text it was,
the Lord says: you're a fat cow.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Lol a guy once preached about it. He was funny. He said you cant just simply pick a text and use it, like, dunno what text it was,
the Lord says: you're a fat cow.

There were seven fat cows in Pharaoh's dream.