Comments on: ken silva's reading problem

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 23:31:09 +0000

But then aren't you interpreting? The passage does not actually say "I'm reestablishing order in a church gone wild." It explicitly says, by the very nature of things, men having long hair is a disgrace, and that a women should pray with her head convered. You're reading the passage, trying to discern the intent behind it, and then making a conclusion on how to apply that intent today, which, incidentally, you're applying differently than Paul did in Paul's day. That's interpretation isn't it?

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:31:09 +0000

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:30:10 +0000

that's not a circle, it's really just a very simple question.

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:29:26 +0000

how are you studying it? it's not how long you spend on it, but how you spend that time that matters. i am not being smug, just asking specific questions about your methods.

By: 1John

1John — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:20:43 +0000

I will leave your site Dreww because thinking yourself to be wise you are becoming a fool!

By: 1John

1John — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:16:24 +0000

I have been studying the Book of John since Jan 1 and am right now in the 10th chapter. That is practically 9 full months in 10 chapters and I am not even beginning to believe I have mastered these 10 chapters. Your smugness is not very becoming of a man of God.

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:13:35 +0000

i think i respond to silva to engage in conversations like these which i think are instructive and helpful. as most people in the US do share a more literalistic reading of the bible, it is important to be able to understand from where these views originate and then how to educate people to a better knowledge. as i said in the first sentence, this is an opportunity to learn what not to do, and then to reconstruct what we ought to do in kind.

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:10:43 +0000

well, we don't know if god even "thinks" since in god there is no time at all. so from god's "view" whatever that means, what we know of god is how the historically relative media of revelation comes to us. your understanding of god looks absolutely nothing like that of origen who was central to the history of the church in the first few centuries. was he also "wrong" in his rendering of scripture?

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:08:14 +0000

it's not that it's just subject to interpretation, it is in its very presentation already interpreted. if you take the bible seriously and study it beyond the words you see (which are translations of other words) you will understand why. but i have my doubts that you want to study it in its depths. and that is the problem here. as tracy indicates above this is an act of faith, not one of propositional logic.

By: Drew Tatusko

Drew Tatusko — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:06:12 +0000

so, jesus said that the 66 books to which you refer are "the bible"? you evaded the question.