0
What Christian religion has a loose interpretation of the Bible?
Wiki User
∙ 16y ago
In one way, this is not a fair question, because everydenomination has a range of attitudes towards interpretations of The Bible, from this--is-what-the-Bible-says-so-do-it to this-is-what-I-think-so-do-what-you-like. Also, another problem is that of 'cherry-picking' particular verses and ignoring others to justify doctrines of that particular church. It could be said that the Episcopalian church has a loose interpretation of the Bible (for example, regarding homosexuality) , but this doesn't apply to all of them because some congregations are strong , and others feel so strongly about it they have broken away to form another branch; the same thing could be said for the Uniting Church.
Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, also the branches.
Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and became a sharer of the root and the fatness of the olive tree with them,
Rom 11:18 do not boast against the branches. But if you boast, it is not you that bears the root, but the root bears you.
Rom 11:19 You will say then, The branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.
Rom 11:20 Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be high-minded, but fear.
Rom 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, fear lest He also may not spare you either!
Rom 11:22 Behold then the kindness, and the severity of God; on those having fallen, severity; but on you, kindness, if you continue in the kindness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And those also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in. For God is able to graft them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if you were cut out of the natural wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a goodolive tree; how much more these being according to nature will be grafted into their own olive-tree?
It comes down to the attitude of the leadership (for example, the Bishops) towards the Bible. Does the leadership hold to all the Bible, or to its own interpretation ? Does the leadership hold Scripture high, or not ? No denomination holds all the Bible high and does not put its own interpretation on anything: otherwise there would be no denominations!
On this basis, that of interpretation, the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are out because they teach heretical doctrines, have their own bibles, and thus are Non-Christian (even though they call themselves 'Christian') . Do not have anything to do with them as they are not Christian at all.
It is important to recognize that every Christian Church has non-christians in it: every single one. You cannot do a 'head-count' of Christians versus non-christians in a church denomination: you have to go on the attitude towards interpretation of the Bible by the leadership of that particular church.
In that particular respect,that of interpretation, the Roman Catholic church wins hands-down: this is because their church tradition (codified in the 'Magisterium') always takes precedence over what the Bible says, even if there is no conflict. Also, independence of thought is discouraged by the threat of excommunication and loss of salvation, and not actively encouraging the reading of the Bible. The church as a whole is not christian. However, IT MUST BE STRESSED THAT THERE ARE CHRISTIANS IN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. The church as a whole is not christian, but there arechristians in it. It has a loose interpretation, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Mat 15:10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Mat 15:11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Mat 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
I realize the above will offend some, but the basic question is:
'Where is your heart - is it close to God?' [PS My sister is a Roman catholic]
Wiki User
∙ 16y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Did Thomas Jefferson have a strict or loose interpretation of the constitution?
It was based on a loose interpretation of the Constitution because he wasn't really allowed to by the land, and he had to justify his actions by his hopes for the nation
Could you give me a sentence for loose interpretation?
The Federalist Party of Early America favored a loose interpretation of the Constitution.
What religion was Jim Morrison of The Doors?
He was born into a heavily Christian family, but was unsure about his own beliefs. However, he could debate about Christianity and theology. It could be suggested that Morrison had developed his own brand of spirituality, or shaman religion, in that he frequently thought he was channeling an old indian spirit, and he would frequently describe animals as having spirits watching him. This is a very loose interpretation of both the word "spiritualism" and "religion".
Is the ObamaCare a loose interpretation of the constitution?
No.
Who favored loose interpretation of the constitution?
Alexander Hamilton
What is loose contructionism?
refers to a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation.
Which political party favored a loose interpretation of the Constitution?
The party that believed in loose interpretation of the constitution and strong ties with Great Britain was the Federalist Party, which only birthed one president, John Adams. Presently, loose interpretation has been recognized with the Democratic Party.
What was Alexander Hamilton's loose interpretation of the constitution based on?
yes
Was Jefferson's purchase of Louisiana based on A loose or strict interpretation of the constitution?
It was based on a loose interpretation of the Constitution because he wasn't really allowed to by the land, and he had to justify his actions by his hopes for the nation
What is the difference between the strict interpretation and the loose interpretation?
A strict interpretation of the Constitution states that the government of the United States holds only those powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution. A loose interpretation of the Constitution posits that the government of the United States hold all powers that are not specifically denied to it by the Constitution.
What are the loose and strict constructions of the Constitution and who favored each?
It's your interpretation of the constitution. The philosophy that allows narrow constitutional interpretation is called strict construction and the philosophy of broad constitutional interpretation is called loose construction. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison favored the strict constructions, and Alexander Hamilton favored the loose construction.
How did hamiltons and jeffersons views toward the interpretation of the constitution different?
Alexander Hamilton believed in a loose interpretation, while Thomas Jefferson believed in a strict interpretation.
