Why We All Should Be A Skeptic...Are You A Good One?

[Elora]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

 

[Gordy327]

Follow the evidence to where it leads, not to where you want it to go.

 

[Dragonfly]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

The irony is HUGE here.

Here, test #1.

The Noah's Ark story.
In your opinion, is it literally, historically, and factually accurate as written?

 

[Dragonfly]

Also, here's an actual honest look at Skepticism:

https://debatepolitics.com/threads/the-art-of-positive-skepticism.326374/

 

[devildavid]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

You aren't skeptical.

 

[soylentgreen]

Before I buy into what looks like complete crap. Someone give me an example of exegesis.

How does anyone apply exegesis when to even consider the bible as a source of information means you would have had to apply eisegesis thinking in the first place.

 

[Lisa]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

A JW talking about that we should all be skeptics is hilariously ironic.

You aren't skeptical.

Ya think, maybe...........?

 

[Dragonfly]

Before I buy into what looks like complete crap. Someone give me an example of exegesis.

Based on my experience with @Elora it means:

I’mma using the Bible as a source to prove the Bible because the Bible is evidence of the Bible being the truth because the truth is the Bible being the source for proof of the bible…

 

[Elora]

Before I buy into what looks like complete crap. Someone give me an example of exegesis.

How does anyone apply exegesis when to even consider the bible as a source of information means you would have had to apply eisegesis thinking in the first place.

Hellfire, for one, the trinity, for another, and the immortal soul...also the belief that everyone good goes to heaven...

 

[devildavid]

Hellfire, for one, the trinity, for another, and the immortal soul...also the belief that everyone good goes to heaven...

The entire bible is made up stuff. Skepticism should be applied to every version of every bible.

 

[soylentgreen]

Hellfire, for one, the trinity, for another, and the immortal soul...also the belief that everyone good goes to heaven...

And you went looking in that silly book for answers to preconceived ideas. And we call that......?

 

[Elora]

And you went looking in that silly book for answers to preconceived ideas. And we call that......?

No, I always believed such doctrines until I studied the Bible for myself to find out they are lies...

 

[Lisa]

Hellfire, for one, the trinity, for another, and the immortal soul...also the belief that everyone good goes to heaven...

Your ideas aren't skeptical thinking. They are circular because you are just confirming what you already believe. Being skeptical means that you question everything that you believe instead of rubber-stamping it.

This is circular logic, and an example of what you are doing.

 

[devildavid]

No, I always believed such doctrines until I studied the Bible for myself to find out they are lies...

I am politely skeptical about your claim you studied the bible for yourself and just coincidentally agreed with every single thing that the JW organization says.

 

[Dragonfly]

No, I always believed such doctrines until I studied the Bible for myself to find out they are lies...

Which is a lie.

You were told what to believe by the JW’s and accepted what you were told.

 

[pinqy]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

So we should start without assuming the Bible is God’s word or inspired. We should not accept the claimed authorship of the Gospels. We should not accept the claim that Satan was the serpent. And we have to examine what Paul (assuming it was Paul) considered scripture in 2 Timothy.

Sounds like a good start to me.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

If you had even a shred of real skepticism in you, you wouldn't be capable of being a Christian.

 

[Elora]

So we should start without assuming the Bible is God’s word or inspired. We should not accept the claimed authorship of the Gospels. We should not accept the claim that Satan was the serpent. And we have to examine what Paul (assuming it was Paul) considered scripture in 2 Timothy.

Sounds like a good start to me.

Actually, it would be best to start with no preconceived notions...just let the written word speak to you with the idea of getting to the truth...I know when I went into it, believing what I believed, it took much longer to test what I was studying and to finally realize what I had been taught since I was old enough to talk, was wrong...much of it has to do with going back to the original Hebrew and Greek words and their meanings...

 

[Lisa]

Actually, it would be best to start with no preconceived notions...just let the written word speak to you with the idea of getting to the truth...I know when I went into it, believing what I believed, it took much longer to test what I was studying and to finally realize what I had been taught since I was old enough to talk, was wrong...much of it has to do with going back to the original Hebrew and Greek words and their meanings...

This idea is blind faith, which is the opposite of being skeptical. A skeptic would ask if there is objective proof that God exists and who wrote/why did they wrote the bible.


Start by asking the 5 Ws. Who, What, When Where, and Why.

 

[RAMOSS]

Christians should study Scripture for themselves so they recognize error...

In seminary they taught us the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

Eisegesis = starting with a belief and searching for Scriptures to support it. This typically involves taking verses out of context and twisting their meaning. To see an example: Popular Teachings of Joel Osteen.

Exegesis = the opposite of eisegesis. It means studying Scripture carefully to form our beliefs.

A number of dangerous philosophies are based on eisegesis, and many Christians unwittingly accept them because they usually appeal to our fallen human nature.

We should question any philosophy that is as popular in the world as in the church. Being politely skeptical like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 prevents us from being taken captive:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8

Have you accepted teachings without testing them with Scripture?
https://biblelovenotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/politely-skeptical.html?m=1

The first question should be 'Is the source I am using supposed to be literal or allegorical'. Next, is a reliable. That includes the bible.\

 

[Elora]

The first question should be 'Is the source I am using supposed to be literal or allegorical'. Next, is a reliable. That includes the bible.\

Dismissed...I am speaking of searching for the truth of the Bible...

 

[Dragonfly]

Dismissed...I am speaking of searching for the truth of the Bible...

Why can't you be honest?

What you meant to say is this:

I'm speaking of searching for the truth of the Bible within the Bible, while using preconceptions derived by people who've told me how to interpret the truths I read within the Bible.

 

[Elora]

Why can't you be honest?

What you meant to say is this:

No, I'm speaking of searching for the truth of the Bible within the Bible, by considering the original words used along with their original meanings...

 

[Dragonfly]

by considering the original words used along with their original meanings

More untruths.

You don't speak the original languages, and you're not from those times.

Therefore you MUST rely on fallible and BIASED modern day humans to TELL YOU what those words and phrases mean.

Based on the JW's track record, those telling you what the "original words" mean don't know jack shit about it either.

 

[Lisa]

No, I'm speaking of searching for the truth of the Bible within the Bible, by considering the original words used along with their original meanings...

That is not being a skeptic. That is being a blind follower.