For the fifth time - Scripture doesn't interpret itself. No text does.
Can God communicate to man, yes or no? If so can he enshrine that in scripture in language people can understand? Is the English language, or any language, sufficient to transmit important ideas? If not why are we having this conversation at all?
If Jesus says call no man father, but my church has a tradition calling priests father, in direct violation of this clear declaration, do you require an interpreter to tell you you cannot do that?
You don't trust the Pope or the Church holds the correct interpretation. You trust that you do.
You trust the words coming from a human, but don't think the words coming from God can transmit the idea properly. How dangerous is that? Very.
Can God communicate to man, yes or no? If so can he enshrine that in scripture in language people can understand? Is the English language, or any language, sufficient to transmit important ideas? If not why are we having this conversation at all?
How come people read the same text and come to completely different beliefs? How do you determine who's interpretation is correct? Why do you assume you specifically hold the correct interpretation? This is a problem of epistemology and hermeneutics, not theology.
If Jesus says call no man father, but my church has a tradition calling priests father, in direct violation of this clear declaration, do you require an interpreter to tell you you cannot do that?
Do you know what word-concept fallacy is? Do you think for example the word "kid" points to the same concept every time it's used or is it context dependent? You didn't answer if you called your biological father father? I'm pretty sure you did and according to your interpretation you violated God's commandment.
You trust the words coming from a human, but don't think the words coming from God can transmit the idea properly. How dangerous is that? Very.
Dude... I'm worried you're too low IQ to argue about this stuff. Every Christian appeals to Scripture. The point of contention is who holds the authority of interpretation. Catholics believe it's ultimately the Pope. The Orthodox - the Church. You believe it's ultimately you and anyone who reads the Bible. Are you not human just like the Pope?
For the last time, NO TEXT INTERPRETS ITSELF. No text is self-evident but is interpreted through a paradigm that comes with many assumptions that are not found in the text. If the Bible was self-interpreting we'd all agree on what the text means. What part of this reasoning is hard for you?
So you couldn't answer the questions. You know where that logic leads, to trusting in scripture and not the traditions of your religion.
You don't answer questions with more questions, that's deflection. You can answer and then ask questions to open up another line of thought, but otherwise you are running from the truth.
Do you think for example the word "kid" points to the same concept every time
This reminds me of the Muslims who use the phrase about even the first drink of alcohol being evil, and then they pour out the first cup to then drink the rest.
Do you have trouble stopping at a stop sign by any chance? After all you don't have an interpreter there other than yourself. Or are some messages clear and God is capable of making a point clear to those willing to hear the truth?
Can God communicate to man, yes or no? If so can he enshrine that in scripture in language people can understand? Is the English language, or any language, sufficient to transmit important ideas? If not why are we having this conversation at all?
If Jesus says call no man father, but my church has a tradition calling priests father, in direct violation of this clear declaration, do you require an interpreter to tell you you cannot do that?
You trust the words coming from a human, but don't think the words coming from God can transmit the idea properly. How dangerous is that? Very.
How come people read the same text and come to completely different beliefs? How do you determine who's interpretation is correct? Why do you assume you specifically hold the correct interpretation? This is a problem of epistemology and hermeneutics, not theology.
Do you know what word-concept fallacy is? Do you think for example the word "kid" points to the same concept every time it's used or is it context dependent? You didn't answer if you called your biological father father? I'm pretty sure you did and according to your interpretation you violated God's commandment.
Dude... I'm worried you're too low IQ to argue about this stuff. Every Christian appeals to Scripture. The point of contention is who holds the authority of interpretation. Catholics believe it's ultimately the Pope. The Orthodox - the Church. You believe it's ultimately you and anyone who reads the Bible. Are you not human just like the Pope?
For the last time, NO TEXT INTERPRETS ITSELF. No text is self-evident but is interpreted through a paradigm that comes with many assumptions that are not found in the text. If the Bible was self-interpreting we'd all agree on what the text means. What part of this reasoning is hard for you?
So you couldn't answer the questions. You know where that logic leads, to trusting in scripture and not the traditions of your religion.
You don't answer questions with more questions, that's deflection. You can answer and then ask questions to open up another line of thought, but otherwise you are running from the truth.
This reminds me of the Muslims who use the phrase about even the first drink of alcohol being evil, and then they pour out the first cup to then drink the rest.
Do you have trouble stopping at a stop sign by any chance? After all you don't have an interpreter there other than yourself. Or are some messages clear and God is capable of making a point clear to those willing to hear the truth?
You're disporven by the fact of us disagreeing on what certain Scripture passages mean. Do you even logic?
What? I can't read that sentence without my interpreter present. Are you speaking Chinese?