I call them strings,
Those bits of information the brains needs to get a grasp on the surroundings. He does not think heis the only one that can see "it". In fact, he knows anybody can, and almost everybody does, "see it". But he can see it none the less. The bible is just that "string"used to make sense of "it" for many people. And the bible aint bad for that.
"personal interpretation". This is a valid notion when use to describe how people make sense of their surroundings. It must start in the individual's own mind. This is a valid stance, as Iam sure you understand. It is seen everywhere in psychology. "religion", is that boat that helps people tie intheir personal perspectives with those of the "pack" members around them. Again, notions that ties individuals"with "pack members" is a valid stance for a social animal like humans. Many animals have rituals that do this.
stating that it is "indiscernible" is not true really. What is true that we cannot discern"literal truth" from a book that is "not literal". Or, like the movie titanic, write a history book on that movie. But, that boat sank. Just like "there is a higherpower". Just another angle thatshows a non-literal bible "true". There is too many angles (conditions) that a non-literal" bible holds up under. Far more conditions than the opposing claim.
Yeah,...
You are on the same wave length which will help us to understand what is meant here.
Every interpretation of scripture is a private one, regardless of how old and relatively new it may be.
It may have caught on long ago, and whole churches of people, for generations, repeated that same way of understanding the Bible.
The group or congregation may be so enormously large now, and in such a massive majority, that no one notices it is squelching any minority views.
It is censoring freedom of speech.
It is de facto claiming it has "opened the sealed book."
It is saying the messiah has come, and he was their initial leader, the founder of that church.
Heresy charges in the past have often been followed with the inquisition or witch burnings or what ever.
Strange enough, these same people were attacked themselves, like the Protestants before the Reformation, for instance. Yet they soon became as authoritative and repressive as had the Theocracy of the Roman Church attacking them early on.
Today, this authoritative establishmentarianism will shun or ostracize the adherents to any new takes on the Bible.
But of course history is full of much worse treatments dealt out in the past.
In is rather revealing that when a different and new insight is presented to church people, (where one would think such religious theology ought be taken for review),... that is exactly the most dangerous place in the world to bring new ideas and information.
Why is that?
Simply because these people believe that they HAVE opened to the sealed Book.
Hence, they believe they do God, himself, a service by attacking the person who offers any and all contradictions, criticisms, corrections, or new insights in the Bible.
And, they will defend their behavior by the contradiction that what is being offered is so good that people may actually feed into it.
The observation that other people agree with the "new wine" is the proof that this must be stopped, because it makes too much sense.
In other words, if the insight is really, really good, and has potential for attracting interest and even agreement by people who hear the point of view, it is exactly that which they must silence.
LOL
The BETTER the bible interpretation may be, the more their urgency to silence and ostracize that other private view point.
The more it ring true to the impartial person weighing the ideas, the more certain these other people are that it is evil, because THEY assert that they have the Truth, they have opened the book, they need no more commentary or bible study.
