The Bereans

[shinbits]

Acts 17:11:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

This passage proves that Scripture is to be held the ultimate authority, certainly more so than "oral testimony". The Bible goes so far as to commend the Bereans as "more noble" than another group, for checking what was testified against Scripture.

This DOESN'T mean that "oral testimony" isn't important; so nobody needs to cry about how the Bereans wouldn't have know Jesus came if not for testimony; it simply means that Scripture is the ultimate authority, not "oral tradition". Oral tradition is good, only if it is in light of Scripture. The Bereans wouldn't have accepted Paul's testimony if it didn't line up with Scripture.

Peace.

 

[Dark_Lite]

Acts 17:11:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

This passage proves that Scripture is to be held the ultimate authority, certainly more so than "oral testimony". The Bible goes so far as to commend the Bereans as "more noble" than another group, for checking what was testified against Scripture.

This DOESN'T mean that "oral testimony" isn't important; so nobody needs to cry about how the Bereans wouldn't have know Jesus came if not for testimony; it simply means that Scripture is the ultimate authority, not "oral tradition". Oral tradition is good, only if it is in light of Scripture. The Bereans wouldn't have accepted Paul's testimony if it didn't line up with Scripture.

Peace.

Where does this say scripture is the ultimate authority?

 

[shinbits]

Where does this say scripture is the ultimate authority?

I didn't say it "says" that. I said it proves Scripture is the ultimate authority. And I explained why in the OP.

 

[Dark_Lite]

I didn't say it "says" that. I said it proves Scripture is the ultimate authority. And I explained why in the OP.

Ok then, where does it prove that Scripture is the ultimate authority?

So far as I can see, it's a reiteration that everything should be tested against Scripture. Things not being allowed to contradict Scripture does not mean that Scripture is the ultimate authority. And that's not even bringing in the problem of interpreting Scripture into this yet.

 

[Standing Up]

Right, the Bereans heard the testimony from Paul, may have even experienced a miracle or two, and then checked the oral teaching against scripture. But why? Why not just accept the teaching magesterium or the patriarch's or pastor's word?

To see if these things were true.

" ... and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. "

Here's a question. Since they searched the scriptures to verify oral teaching, why didn't that lead to schism, to hundreds of denominations? Because they searched the scriptures, because oral tradition was subordinate to scripture. When men began teaching oral tradition is equal to God's word, then schism occurred, then hundreds of denominations arose. It became 'my word' versus 'God's word'. It became don't read, don't verify, just accept, you can't be saved unless you do.

 

[shinbits]

Ok then, where does it prove that Scripture is the ultimate authority?

So far as I can see, it's a reiteration that everything should be tested against Scripture. Things not being allowed to contradict Scripture does not mean that Scripture is the ultimate authority. And that's not even bringing in the problem of interpreting Scripture into this yet.

If "everything" should be tested against Scripture, doesn't that logically make Scripture the ultimate authority?

 

[Dark_Lite]

If "everything" should be tested against Scripture, doesn't that logically make Scripture the ultimate authority?

Nothing can contradict the truth that 2 + 2 = 4. Does that make 2 + 2 = 4 the ultimate authority over everything?

When examined in historical context, we realize that most of the New Testament (if any of it) wasn't even written at this point. It would be another 300-400 years before the Bible as Christians know it today was compiled. The Bereans weren't examining the Protestant 66 book Bible.

Just because something cannot contradict something else does not mean that something is necessarily the ultimate authority. If the Bible is a set of information that cannot be contradicted, it simply means that the set of all "other information" cannot contradict the set of information in the Bible.

It's sort of like how correlation does not imply causation. There is no direct statement in this verse that says everything is subservient to Scripture. It simply says that the message was tested against Scripture (which I will again reiterate half of which didn't exist yet).

And when we examine the situation in Thessalonica, we see that the Thessalonians were arguing with Paul, both of them using the Old Testament. The only difference between the Bereans and the Thessalonians is that the Bereans were actually receptive to what Paul had to say. Or, maybe they just had a different interpretation of Scripture...

 

[Fireinfolding]

Jesus says...

John 7:16-17 Jesus answered them, and said,My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

The testing of the apostles words was commended in the Bereans through the searching of the scriptures to prove their words.


Acts 17:7 These were **more noble** than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and ***searched*** the scriptures daily, whether those things **WERE SO**.

Which would be fruitless to TRY if what the apostles spake was not written in there (or added to it) Which agrees agree with this...


Prov 30:6 ADD THOU NOT unto **HIS WORDS**, lest he ~reprove thee~, and THOU be **FOUND A LIAR**


Which is exactly what they found of certain which "claimed" they were apostles which were not after the same.

Rev 2:2...and thou hast **tried them** which **say** they are apostles, and are not, and hast **FOUND THEM LIARS**

Romans 3:4.... let God **BE TRUE**, but every man ** A LIAR**; as it is written, That thou mightest be ~justified~ in ~thy sayings~, and mightest **overcome** when thou art judged.

His sayings, wheras it says...

John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

So it says...

1Cr 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

Because we are told...

1Thes 5:21 **Prove** all things; hold fast that which is good.


1Cr 9:8 SAY I these things AS A MAN? or saith not **the law**the same also?

Why does he say this?

Jerm 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth IN MAN

Isaiah 8:20 TO **the law** and TO **the testimony** ~IF~ they SPEAK NOT according to this word, it is **because** there is **no light** in them.

Got it

1Cr 10:15 I speak as to wise men; **judge ye** what **I say**.

Prove all things, Kool

Now here it says

2Titus 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to **make thee wise** UNTO salvation **through faith** which is in Christ Jesus.

Howso?

2Titus 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness


Prov 1:23 ~TURN YOU~ AT my reproof **behold** ((( I will pour out my spirit unto you))), I will make known ~my words~ to you.

Nough said

Ezek 2:7 And thou shaltspeak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.

Example is found here...

Jerm 28:2 Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. Within two full years will I bring again into this place all the vessels of the LORD'S house, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took away from this place, and carried them to Babylon: And I will bring again to this place Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, with all the captives of Judah, that went into Babylon, saith the LORD: for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon.

Now Jeremiah confronts this false prophet coming in the name of the Lord of hosts (the God of Israel) and reminds the people (of the prophets of old) so as they dont buy his poop here...

Jerm 28:5 Then the prophet Jeremiah said unto the prophet Hananiah in the presence of the priests, and in the presence of all the people that stood in the house of the LORD, Even the prophet Jeremiah said, Amen: the LORD do so: the LORD perform ***thy words** which thou hast prophesied, to bring again the vessels of the LORD'S house, and all that is carried away captive, from Babylon into this place.

Jerm 28:7 Nevertheless hear thou now this word that I speak in thine ears, and in the ears of all the people; The prophets that have been before me and before thee of old prophesied both against many countries, and against great kingdoms, of war, and of evil, and of pestilence. The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the LORD hath truly sent him.

Shortened for length, you can read in between as Hananiah repeating his lies after Jermemiah confirmed Gods words (as truth) in contrast to his lies

Jerm 28:15 Then said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah; The LORD hath not sent thee; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie.

Intermittence...

Psalm 40:4 Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.

Jerm 28:16 Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD.

Which he did that same year.

To teach contrary to his words is to teach rebellion against the Lord and here below shows the same

Psalm 107:11 Because they rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the counsel of the most High:

His counsel being his words and reproof likewise the scriptures

Prov 1:30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.

Even as scripture is given for instruction

Psalm 50:17 Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee.

Just as they rebelled against His words, and Hananiah taught rebellion (speaking contrary to the words of God) rebellion also shown being as the sin of witchcraft in the context of rejecting his words

1Sam 15:23 For rebellion **is as** the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

Hey even in signs that come to pass or words taking ya away from Him he uses this to prove whether we love Him in accord with Jesus own words

Duet 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God (((( proveth you))) **to know** whether **ye love** the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

As Jesus speaks accordingly

John 14:24 He that **loveth me** not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.





Thats why we are told to prove all things.

This is one of the shortest studies I have on it as you can show it likewise through various keywords, using "the law and the prophets" out of which Paul reasoned, though keeping in mind the words of Jesus in parabolic form are also expressed though somewhat harder to immediately catch, in searching things out, not just with a casual glimpse (but an every day one) its awesome to see how these things comfirm. Sorry for length, I'll add more when I have adequate time

 

[Mr Dave]

Ultimate authority implies that it is all we should use; if it's the ultimate, why bother with anything else. The verse doesn't suggest this. Scripture should take primacy over other things but this doesn't mean other things should be neglected.

 

[sunlover1]

Right, the Bereans heard the testimony from Paul, may have even experienced a miracle or two, and then checked the oral teaching against scripture. But why? Why not just accept the teaching magesterium or the patriarch's or pastor's word?

To see if these things were true.

" ... and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. "

And one we often don't emphasis .. they searched the Scriptures 'daily'.

 

[Fireinfolding]

And one we often don't emphasis .. they searched the Scriptures 'daily'.

Exactly, its not like they gave them a casual glance but digged deeper then that

 

[sunlover1]

Ultimate authority implies that it is all we should use; if it's the ultimate, why bother with anything else. The verse doesn't suggest this. Scripture should take primacy over other things but this doesn't mean other things should be neglected.

Amen... good point!
As someone who practices Sola Scriptura.. I am aware that
our God is able to teach us many things about life and about
Himself through other means: nature, other vessels, other
literature and so forth. But i have learned to schedule my life
(try to anyhow) around His Word because His word contains
His very heart.. and mind...and my (and your) destiny!
Blessed be the name of the Lord !

His word is active and alive!
I can't slay dragons with
"As A Man Thinketh"
but I can with a two edged sword
IT IS WRITTEN!

 

[Chesterton]

Right, the Bereans heard the testimony from Paul, may have even experienced a miracle or two, and then checked the oral teaching against scripture. But why? Why not just accept the teaching magesterium or the patriarch's or pastor's word?

To see if these things were true.

" ... and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. "

Here's a question. Since they searched the scriptures to verify oral teaching, why didn't that lead to schism, to hundreds of denominations? Because they searched the scriptures, because oral tradition was subordinate to scripture. When men began teaching oral tradition is equal to God's word, then schism occurred, then hundreds of denominations arose. It became 'my word' versus 'God's word'. It became don't read, don't verify, just accept, you can't be saved unless you do.

You've got it completely backwards. There weren't hundreds of denominations until men started using scripture apart from oral tradition.

 

[shinbits]

Nothing can contradict the truth that 2 + 2 = 4. Does that make 2 + 2 = 4 the ultimate authority over everything?

Obviously, I meant every Scriptural. I know the Bible can't be used to very strategies for beating Mike Tyson's Punch Out on Nintendo.

When examined in historical context, we realize that most of the New Testament (if any of it) wasn't even written at this point. It would be another 300-400 years before the Bible as Christians know it today was compiled. The Bereans weren't examining the Protestant 66 book Bible.

Doesn't matter. They were examining Scripture, which is the point.

It's sort of like how correlation does not imply causation. There is no direct statement in this verse that says everything is subservient to Scripture. It simply says that the message was tested against Scripture (which I will again reiterate half of which didn't exist yet).

There doesn't need to be a direct statement, does there? The Bible clearlly holds those who check testimony against Scripture in higher esteem than those who don't. Doesn't take a detective.

And when we examine the situation in Thessalonica, we see that the Thessalonians were arguing with Paul, both of them using the Old Testament. The only difference between the Bereans and the Thessalonians is that the Bereans were actually receptive to what Paul had to say. Or, maybe they just had a different interpretation of Scripture...

The Bible clearly says there were some Thessalonicans who were receptive. Furthermore, the Thessalonicans weren't arguing out of doctrinal disagreement; the Bible clearly says in Acts 17:5 that it was out of jealousy. In fact, the Bible doesn't even say they were arguing over Scripture; the Bible just says they "caused trouble" for Paul. NOT that they "argued" over Scripture.

You've misrepresented the Bible with what you tried to imply.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Oh that I myself was so noble

Search for 'Genesis 1:1' in the version

Young) Acts 17:11 and these were more noble/eugenesteroi <2104> than those in Thessalonica, they received the word with all readiness of mind, every day examining the Writings whether those things were so;

Textus Rec.) Acts 17:11 outoi de hsan eugenesteroi twn en qessalonikh oitineV edexanto ton logon meta pashV proqumiaV to kaq hmeran anakrinonteV taV grafaV ei ecoi tauta outwV

Rotherham) 1 Corinthians 1:26 For be looking at the calling of you, brethren,--that [there were] not many wise, according to flesh.
Not many powerful, not many high-born/eugeneiV <2104>


Strong's Number G2104 matches the Greek &#949;&#8016;&#947;&#949;&#957;&#8053;&#962; (eugen&#275;s), which occurs 3 times in 3 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV [Luke 19:12, Acts 17:11, 1 Corin 1:26]

2104. eugenes yoog-en'-ace from 2095 and 1096; well born, i.e. (literally) high in rank, or (figuratively) generous:--more noble, nobleman.

 

[sunlover1]

J
2Titus 3:15 And thatfrom a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to **make thee wise** UNTO salvation **through faith** which is in Christ Jesus.

Howso?

amen...
Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have
sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart.
For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable,

through the living and enduring word of God.

 

[narnia59]

Acts 17:11:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

This passage proves that Scripture is to be held the ultimate authority, certainly more so than "oral testimony". The Bible goes so far as to commend the Bereans as "more noble" than another group, for checking what was testified against Scripture.

This DOESN'T mean that "oral testimony" isn't important; so nobody needs to cry about how the Bereans wouldn't have know Jesus came if not for testimony; it simply means that Scripture is the ultimate authority, not "oral tradition". Oral tradition is good, only if it is in light of Scripture. The Bereans wouldn't have accepted Paul's testimony if it didn't line up with Scripture.

Peace.

So it's no longer Scripture alone? You're making progress. Because like I said on the last thread, if the Bereans were sola-scriptura, there's no question they'd still be Jews.

The "ultimate authority" is Christ, and Scripture records he gave his authority to the apostles, not Scripture. As St. John says of the apostles, "We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error."

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

The Bereans were checking Paul and Silas's story about Jesus against the Old Testament prophecies.

This is good. But this doesn't mean that everything which Paul and the others taught was written down in the Gospels and letters which make up the New Testament. For example, if we talk of the death, resurrection and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Protestants are skeptical since it is not written down in Acts but that hardly makes it less true or less reasonable.

The teachings of Christ and the apostles (Divino-Apostolic Tradition) which were written down do not conflict with those things which were not written down. So where is the issue? Using the example from above, Scripture does not say that Mary died and was buried either. We also know that everyone will be raised from the dead at the end of the world and be body and soul together in Heaven or hell. It is certainly not unreasonable or anti-Scriptural then that the Blessed Virgin is in Heaven body and soul right now.

Feel free to read the Scriptures and check them against Catholic teaching, you will find no contradictions and much support. You may of course find contradictions between Catholic interpretations of a particular passage and a given denomination's interpretations of a particular passage, just as we could have plenty of conflict on GT if there were only Protestants here.

The stereotype that Catholics are rather ignorant of Scripture is unfortunate and poor catechesis over the past 50 years has not helped. The Catholic religion itself -- teaching, Mass, Office and other prayers -- however, is profoundly Scriptural.

There is no conflict.

 

[sunlover1]

Here's a question. Since they searched the scriptures to verify oral teaching, why didn't that lead to schism, to hundreds of denominations? Because they searched the scriptures, because oral tradition was subordinate to scripture. When men began teaching oral tradition is equal to God's word, then schism occurred, then hundreds of denominations arose. It became 'my word' versus 'God's word'. It became don't read, don't verify, just accept, you can't be saved unless you do.

If it were only that easy.
But even as SS they could argue over what it meant..
but I don't think that argument over Scripture was their
only problem either.
they were also divided in allegiance ... to men
Wasn't the EO RC split over interpretation?
(was it interpretation of Scripture or of ECF?)

If "everything" should be tested against Scripture, doesn't that logically make Scripture the ultimate authority?

Yes of course.
It's God's word so that's a given.

Nothing can contradict the truth that 2 + 2 = 4. Does that make 2 + 2 = 4 the ultimate authority over everything?

But we don't 'test everything' in math against 2+2=4.
So that is an improper comparison..
These guys were 'testing' everything they were taught against what God's Word said.

When examined in historical context, we realize that most of the New Testament (if any of it) wasn't even written at this point. It would be another 300-400 years before the Bible as Christians know it today was compiled. The Bereans weren't examining the Protestant 66 book Bible.

Good point. They had the Septuagint I believe (Jesus has quoted from it)
and some of the epistles for sure...
Those guys WERE noble. for them to examine the Scriptures DAILY coud
not have been an easy task.. like you said, they couldnt just grab a pocket Bible.. or download an app.

Just because something cannot contradict something else does not mean that something is necessarily the ultimate authority.

Right, it just means that God's Word is more authoritative than anything else.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

So it's no longer Scripture alone? You're making progress. Because like I said on the last thread, if the Bereans were sola-scriptura, there's no question they'd still be Jews.

LLOJ still is

http://www.christianforums.com/t7322018-101/
Is SOLO Scriptura Scriptural?