Replies

That's my point. It's literal when it suits you; and when not, not.

It's not just a few passages here and there. What I see is a lack of real criteria to say what's meant when there can be conflicting interpretations. For instance:

2 Thess 2:11
"God shall send them a strong delusion, so that they should believe a lie."

BUT

1 Cor. 14:33
"God is not the author of confusion."

Acts 2:18
"And on my handmaids on that day I shall pour out my spirit, and they shall prophesy."

BUT

1 Tim 2:1-2
"I suffer not a woman to teach, but to be in silence."

Prov. 13:22
"A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children."

BUT

Matthew 6:34
"Therefore, take no thought for the morrow."

Num 6:5
"In all his days dedicated to God, no razor shall come upon his head. He shall be holy, and let the locks of hair grow freely."

BUT

1 Cor 11:14
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?"

Gen 2:3
"And God blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy."

BUT

Isaiah 1:13
"The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot abide: it is unrighteous."

BUT

Exodus 21:8
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy."

BUT

Romans 14:5
"One man esteemeth one day above another; another man esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

My point is that none of these things are obvious in their meanings, unless you have the advantage of a long-lived, coherent interpretative community of believers.

Which you reject from the git-go.

So if I have the choice between trusting either a many-centuries-long interpretive community, OR Cynical Bear -- well, don't be surprised if I decline to privilege your POV over that of a hundred generations of believers.

1. delusion is NOT the same as confusion

2. Prophesying is NOT teaching.

3. Did you ever notice there is a difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament and "take no thought for tomorrow" simply means that God will provide and we don't have to worry about it? Worrying about tomorrow simply shows a lack of faith in God.

4. Numbers 6 is speaking of a very special vow taken voluntarily for a period of time. Again, the New Testament changed things.

5. Isaiah 1:13 is speaking of corruptions of His Sabbath and Romans 14:5 is New Testament and all those laws and "Holy days" have been set aside through Christ.

>>My point is that none of these things are obvious in their meanings,<<

WRONG! They are all explained either within the passage or within scripture itself.

>>So if I have the choice between trusting either a many-centuries-long interpretive community, OR Cynical Bear<<

No one said you should "trust" me or any other man. It's scripture and the Holy Spirit you should trust. Putting your trust in that "interpretive community" is against what scripture teaches. At least it is for a true born again believer who has the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

John 2:27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit--just as it has taught you, remain in him.

Why do Catholic replace the Holy Spirit with the "magisterium"? Or do they not individually have the indwelling?