do we give the meaning to spiritual doctrines...?

Question

how do you know that you are interpreting (whatever) spiritual text in the correct way it was first conveyed?

example- the word sin was derived from an archery term that meant to miss the mark.

changes things a bit doesn't it?

Answer 1

The meaning is in the words, but the words are not in the meaning. You are right about sin. I'm working on a 'puzzle' involving the word sin. Truth is the target, the correct conclusion. Intention is your aim. What is the arrow?

Answer 2

I believe that every person should interpret spiritual text(s) in their own way. That is how they were meant to be interpreted. Every person is at a different stage of their spiritual pregression which accounts for this. It is when you decide to follow someone else's interpretation instead of taking the time to do your own, that you indeed "miss the mark".
Just my thoughts on the matter.

Answer 3

When you have demonstrated the healing power behind spiritual truth, many of the puzzle pieces quickly come together. We do not give, but receive the meaning. If we were to give, it would be false, as man is not a god.
It is interesting, but sin always misses the mark.

Answer 4

Nope. I saw a show the other day, where they showed a book being translated from one laungage into another. It was utterly fascinating to watch the process, and a mere sentence took nearly a half and hour just to be done correctley.

Changes things for me, no. Shows me exactly why if took 51 men working around the clock for 7 years to make sure they got the Bible right. Definition, laungages, context ALL have to be considered.

Answer 5

~~~ zen ,,,Keep searching and you'll find much more hidden(occult) symbolism which is plentiful. For instance why did the term "Lucifer", which means "Morning Star", suddenly come to be a synonym for Satan,,, and while you're at it, check out the origins of "Satan" itself. ,,, or howabout the term "Passover" no longer referring to it's original meaning of a constellation which will "passover" and herald a new 'season' or Time of Man,,, I have yet to verify for myself from a source which told me that in the Ancient Greek language that "Jesus" means 'fish'. Now doesn't that put an interesting spin on things,,, but not when one realizes, and correctly takes into account that the Science of Astrology, yes Astrology, being accepted at the time as the Spiritual Aspect of Astronomy,,, then we begin to 'see' the sacrificial bull of Taurus in India and Egypt, the sacrificial Lamb of God being Aries, and finally the Christian Fishers of Men wearing their FishHead Hats(called a miter) with the mouth pointing to Heaven for Divine Guidance, being the House of Pisces which "coincidentally" became the dominant Zodiacal Influence in the Sky(father) as " ,,,this too will come to pass(over)" . Etc, etc, etc, ~~ Keep an Open Mind, keep studying and asking questions and you will remove ALL of your Veils of Ignorance.

Answer 6

Sorry to disillusion you but I'm afraid there is no 'interpretaion' allowed in Dogma...the correct term for doctrine....

You either believe it blindly or else...you know what happens....

Don't believe me either...??

I suggest you consult the rule book....the Pope is the undisputed authority and I'm afraid his authority is Infallible.....on issues of Dogma and Morality.....not much grey area here at all for interpretation of any kind......

So married couples have to take the word of a serving batchelor, you either believe or its the big fire man.....

I hope he's right......for me, I'll use my mind and logical thought...don't need someone else to tell that up is down or the earth is made of cheese....

Answer 7

Actually, sin, in the Hebrew is:

chaṭṭâ'âh chaṭṭâ'th
khat-taw-aw', khat-tawth'
From H2398; an offence (sometimes habitual sinfulness), and its penalty, occasion, sacrifice, or expiation; also (concretely) an offender: - punishment (of sin), purifying (-fication for sin), sin (-ner, offering).

And in the Greek it is:

hamartia
ham-ar-tee'-ah
From G264; sin (properly abstract): - offence, sin (-ful).

and:
hamartanō
ham-ar-tan'-o
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly to miss the mark (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

They all mean pretty much the same thing. We don't "interpret" the Bible, we read it for what it is. If it is history, we read it as history, if it is a proverb, we read it as such. It also helps to compare Scripture with Scripture and consider the context and who the passage was written to.

Answer 8

yeah, otherwise they're just symbols on a page. Rather than using the word sin, I like to use the word error, it doesn't hold that "going to hell" mentality to it.

As for misinterpretations, I think the mentality that is associated with words holds true for a person's beliefs, that is why sin is the way it is.

Answer 9

No. It doesn't. It's a facet of a truth. Why there are four gospels that seem to say the same thing. To further ' complicate ' matters they are not of private interpretation. Or: There is no question about it. One way only.

Answer 10

I would say yes to some and no to others, if I were a believer. It's up to the individual to determine which is right. Don't let the Church hear about this - they used to burn people for what you're asking!