Relying on scripture

[Traveler]

How can we determine if our understanding and interpretations of ancient scripture (form a foreign culture and language) is correct?

The Traveler

[applepansy]

We determine the truth of things though personal revelation through the Holy Ghost.

[Vort]

How can we determine if our understanding and interpretations of ancient scripture (form a foreign culture and language) is correct?

I think we probably cannot, in a final sense. Hard to be really sure of a writer's intent across millennia. A more important question, I think, is: How can we be sure that the truths we glean from ancient scriptures are correct?

[Traveler]

We determine the truth of things though personal revelation through the Holy Ghost.

How can you determine your personal revelation is through the Holy Ghost? Especially others (even others you respect) claim personal revelation and have differing results.

The Traveler

[Guest]

How can you determine your personal revelation is through the Holy Ghost? Especially others (even others you respect) claim personal revelation and have differing results.

The Traveler

Because understanding of the sciptures is not purely intellectual but more spiritual. For you, the way to get to Beijing is to hop a plane across the Pacific. For others, the way is to hop a plane across the Atlantic and hop on a train to China. When you're flying over the ocean and the other guy is riding the train, you're both arguing you are doing things wrong... in the end, you both end up in Beijing!

[Anddenex]

Because understanding of the sciptures is not purely intellectual but more spiritual. For you, the way to get to Beijing is to hop a plane across the Pacific. For others, the way is to hop a plane across the Atlantic and hop on a train to China. When you're flying over the ocean and the other guy is riding the train, you're both arguing you are doing things wrong... in the end, you both end up in Beijing!

Although I understand your point Anatess, I don't believe this is what The Traveler's premise was.

For example, one of the many debates I heard on my mission stemming from which Church is true was, and still is, "There are many roads to the same destination. You are a Mormon, this person a baptist, this person.... Different roads to the same destination."

One road teaches that baptism is ok, if water is dumped over your head. Others teach baptism must be immersed. Both can not be correct. (yes, I understand you already know this.)

Another example would be a person who told me once that, in the temple, he received a sure revelation that he should not vote for Mitt Romney, because Mitt Romney didn't serve in the military. He also said, that Jesus Christ told him to tell everybody not to vote for Mitt Romney.

I have had other people tell me, in the temple, they received a sure witness that they should vote for Mitt Romney.

Which one is correct? Whose revelation is right, and whose revelation was wrong. Both cannot be right due to the polar opposite witness.

This is they way I understood The Traveler's point.

[Anddenex]

How can we determine if our understanding and interpretations of ancient scripture (form a foreign culture and language) is correct?

The Traveler

This would be my list (no particular hierarchy):

1. Verification from other sources

2. Personal Inspiration (subject to a person's oneness with God)

3. Prophet's

4. Angelic visit from the prophet who wrote the scripture passage you are reading, and he teaches you.

Scriptures are like journals, your understanding of them is best understood by your relationship with the individual who wrote it. Without a relationship it becomes harder to determine the actual meaning of a persons words.

[applepansy]

How can you determine your personal revelation is through the Holy Ghost? Especially others (even others you respect) claim personal revelation and have differing results.

The Traveler

I believe that within the framework of the restored gospel there is a bit of wiggle room. What is right for me or for my family might be a tad different for someone else.

In my personal experience a prayer was answered with scripture taken out of context. It wasn't the story that was the answer. It wasn't even the principle behind the parable. It was specific words in one verse that were the answer for me.

Do you have a specific example that you're concerned about?

[Guest]

By their fruits ye shall know them. You try out what you believe to have learned, and if it bears good fruit, you develop a testimony of it. As time goes by, you can more reliably trust those promptings and personal revelations. As for what anyone else gets or thinks, what should it matter to me?

If you're talking about someone getting some far-out, false interpretation and insisting that it's true, again, I believe they will be proved or disproved by their fruits.

[Traveler]

I believe that within the framework of the restored gospel there is a bit of wiggle room. What is right for me or for my family might be a tad different for someone else.

In my personal experience a prayer was answered with scripture taken out of context. It wasn't the story that was the answer. It wasn't even the principle behind the parable. It was specific words in one verse that were the answer for me.

Do you have a specific example that you're concerned about?

How about Genesis and the creation? Did G-d create everything from nothing?

Or how about Exodus - Is that a historical account of Israel leaving Egypt and provable by archeology or a spiritual guide of making covenants with G-d and leaving "the world" behind?

The Traveler

[Traveler]

By their fruits ye shall know them. You try out what you believe to have learned, and if it bears good fruit, you develop a testimony of it. As time goes by, you can more reliably trust those promptings and personal revelations. As for what anyone else gets or thinks, what should it matter to me?

If you're talking about someone getting some far-out, false interpretation and insisting that it's true, again, I believe they will be proved or disproved by their fruits.

Excellent!!!! :clap:This may sound harsh but if someone is not convinced that they are the "best" example of what they say they believe and understand what they believe - They are misrepresenting (lying about) their beliefs - likely even to themselves.

The Traveler

[applepansy]

Are you asking what I believe to be true?

I don't look for reasons to doubt scripture.

I believe the creation as explained in Moses and the Temple. Did God, Christ, Michael create the earth? Yes. Did he create all matter. I think He used what was available....whatever that was.

Does it matter or do I hang my testimony on it? No.

Traveler, does it matter?

Thank you Eowyn. Well said.

Edited September 18, 2012 by applepansy

[Traveler]

Are you asking what I believe to be true?

I don't look for reasons to doubt scripture.

I believe the creation as explained in Moses and the Temple. Did God, Christ, Michael create the earth? Yes. Did he create all matter. I think He used what was available....whatever that way.

Does it matter or do I hang my testimony on it? No.

Traveler, does it matter?

I believe it matters what you do with it. And if someone may be able to advance you understanding of such things - how do you know if they do indeed understand the better of it?

The Traveler

[applepansy]

Excellent!!!! :clap:This may sound harsh but if someone is not convinced that they are the "best" example of what they say they believe and understand what they believe - They are misrepresenting (lying about) their beliefs - likely even to themselves.

The Traveler

where does humility fit in?

I believe Christ is the best example of what I believe in.

[applepansy]

I believe it matters what you do with it. And if someone may be able to advance you understanding of such things - how do you know if they do indeed understand the better of it?

The Traveler

I agree it does matter what you do with it. Does it make you a better person? Does it bring you closer to Christ?

Again, as Eowyn said, by their fruits and the feelings from the Spirit. Its the line upon line and precept upon precept concept.

[Traveler]

where does humility fit in?

I believe Christ is the best example of what I believe in.

I think you are missing the forest for the trees. Jesus is the example of what he believed. You are the example of what happens when someone believes in Jesus exactly as you do as I am the example of someone that believes in him as I do. If you think that statement is a criticism and not a compliment - then perhaps you should consider changing what you believe. But to me you are a good example - perhaps our discussion may help someone else - or maybe it is just for me.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I agree it does matter what you do with it. Does it make you a better person? Does it bring you closer to Christ?

Again, as Eowyn said, by their fruits and the feelings from the Spirit. Its the line upon line and precept upon precept concept.

May I explorer you thought? Both Eowyn and the scriptures say by their fruits. But you have added "the feelings from the Spirit". Do you care to be specific why you did that?

The Traveler

[applepansy]

May I explorer you thought? Both Eowyn and the scriptures say by their fruits. But you have added "the feelings from the Spirit". Do you care to be specific why you did that?

The Traveler

I believe the two work together to give us direction.

[applepansy]

I think you are missing the forest for the trees. Jesus is the example of what he believed. You are the example of what happens when someone believes in Jesus exactly as you do as I am the example of someone that believes in him as I do. If you think that statement is a criticism and not a compliment - then perhaps you should consider changing what you believe. But to me you are a good example - perhaps our discussion may help someone else - or maybe it is just for me.

The Traveler

I'm guess I am missing the forest for the trees because I thought I was understanding this conversation until now. :)

EDIT: see bolded. Was there criticism? I didn't think there was. :)

Edited September 18, 2012 by applepansy

[Traveler]

I believe the two work together to give us direction.

I'm impressed - just insure that we are on the same page - do you believe that Jesus forgiving the woman taken in adultery is a good example of how both work together and perhaps the spirit overrides - or is that example more a part of something a little different?

The Traveler

[Vort]

I'm impressed - just insure that we are on the same page - do you believe that Jesus forgiving the woman taken in adultery is a good example of how both work together and perhaps the spirit overrides - or is that example more a part of something a little different?

Did Jesus forgive her? Or did he merely note that he did not condemn her (to death, as per the law of Moses stipulated), as her accusers had been doing?

[Traveler]

Did Jesus forgive her? Or did he merely note that he did not condemn her (to death, as per the law of Moses stipulated), as her accusers had been doing?

Interesting question - what do you think is the difference between saying someone is forgiven of their sins or being healed from some malady? Or not being condemned or forgiven?

Some believe forgiveness includes the restoration of blessings - but I am inclined to believe that when a person is forgiven they are no longer under condemnation. I have struggled with this concept because we are commanded to forgive everyone. So how do we forgive a person that does not repent? Answer - we do not condemn them. I believe that in some cases the scriptures have been miss translated. I believe when it is said not to judge what is really meant is not to condemn.

Would you care to share your thoughts?

The Traveler

[Guest]

Although I understand your point Anatess, I don't believe this is what The Traveler's premise was.

For example, one of the many debates I heard on my mission stemming from which Church is true was, and still is, "There are many roads to the same destination. You are a Mormon, this person a baptist, this person.... Different roads to the same destination."

One road teaches that baptism is ok, if water is dumped over your head. Others teach baptism must be immersed. Both can not be correct. (yes, I understand you already know this.)

Another example would be a person who told me once that, in the temple, he received a sure revelation that he should not vote for Mitt Romney, because Mitt Romney didn't serve in the military. He also said, that Jesus Christ told him to tell everybody not to vote for Mitt Romney.

I have had other people tell me, in the temple, they received a sure witness that they should vote for Mitt Romney.

Which one is correct? Whose revelation is right, and whose revelation was wrong. Both cannot be right due to the polar opposite witness.

This is they way I understood The Traveler's point.

Anddenex, you and I actually agree. The reason why we seem not to is because you think baptism is on the train or over the sea. Baptism is in Beijing.

My philosophy: It doesn't matter as much what religion you are in as long as you are always with all your your heart, body, and soul, humbly, diligently, and tirelessly seeking for truth in all things. Because, I truly believe, that those who are searching for truth will find it. Each person have their own unique journey. It is the sincerity of the way they live their lives according to what they know that determines their fate in the eternities.

I do not believe that my grandparents who died living a very devout Roman Catholic life full of service and love is somehow damned because they just happened to grow up and die never having the chance to gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon.

[Vort]

Interesting question - what do you think is the difference between saying someone is forgiven of their sins or being healed from some malady? Or not being condemned or forgiven?

"Being forgiven" means that the stain and morally disabling character of the sin has been permanently removed. "Not being condemned" means that, for the moment, condemnation -- the exercise of retribution or consequence for a sin -- is being withheld, but does not imply that such will be withheld forever.

The woman taken in adultery was condemned by the law of Moses to stoning to death. Jesus chose not to exercise the weight of the condemnation of the law at that time, especially considering the rank hypocrisy of the woman's accusers. But the moral turpitude and spiritual stain still existed because of the adultery. Jesus did not cleanse the woman from her adulterous stain; he simply told her that he had no intention of exercising the law -- physical death -- upon her, and that she was to "sin no more", which I interpret as a call to repentance.

Interesting how my take on this is approximately 180 degrees from my interpretation of it fifteen or twenty years ago.

[applepansy]

I'm impressed - just insure that we are on the same page - do you believe that Jesus forgiving the woman taken in adultery is a good example of how both work together and perhaps the spirit overrides - or is that example more a part of something a little different?

The Traveler

No, because he didn't forgive her. What he did was not condemn her. He sent her on her way "to sin no more" or in other words to repent. (John 8)