Jesus Held to Sola Scriptura

[stuart lawrence]

No friend, he was dealing with Pharisees of the law and they would not have left him so quickly without confrontation, unless Jesus had the dirt on them, by pointing the technicalities of the law. This reveals that those Pharisees were shady characters and they knew that Jesus knew and they put their tails between their legs and fled in a hurry, before they would be incriminated.

The point is, Jesus did invoke what he termed one of the higher points of the law, and it isn't written down as sola scripture law in itself is it.
Sola scripture law states the woman should be stoned to death.
I will leave you to carry on your discussion of barrister, defender and prosecutor

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Jesus gave that scenario, whilst confirming the importance of Holy Writ to the living.

Yes.

 

[The Times]

Holy Writ/scripture is our constitution guys, it is given to the living to take as law and prophets and whether it be read or listened to, it has to always be control documented in some form or another. God wrote the commandments on stone and those stones were kept in the ark of the covenant and so this control document of Holy Writ has been provided to us throughout the generations by the Holy Ghost, it is not human inspired or planned, but God made sure that over 5000 pieces of the New Testament were available to theologians for comparative study and boy has God got ways to overcome the Romans and Monguls who tried everything to suppress it.

Now the Holy Writ is in different types of media and languages and even for the blind, in audio. Man ought not take credit for what has been kept and handed down from the very inception of man's dealings with God.

It is my constitutional document which I regard authority above all human capacities and priestly offices, except that of the heavenly Chief Priest Jesus Christ who is the author of my constitutional document.

 

[stuart lawrence]

The Holy writ of the law God desires the believer to follow is written in the mind and placed on the heart of every born again believer under the core terms of the New Covenant.
Heb10:16&17

 

[jimmyjimmy]

It is my constitutional document which I regard authority above all human capacities and priestly offices,

Yes. It is over men. No man is in a place of higher authority than it.

except that of the heavenly Chief Priest Jesus Christ who is the author of my constitutional document.

Even Christ submitted Himself to it. He is not about the law. He is the law.

 

[The Times]

The Holy writ of the law God desires the believer to follow is written in the mind and placed on the heart of every born again believer under the core terms of the New Covenant.
Heb10:16&17

It is written in a controlled manner, so that people who behave like Pharisees within religious institutions are bound by the constitutional document, so that no priest or bishop can subvert his office and subjugate the congregation under his own name and authority. The Romans have raised up such people throughout the past, who have subverted their office of head bishop and in so doing would have been a law onto themselves, least Protestants used Holy Write, our constitutional document to declare what a head bishop can and cannot do in that regard. The 100 point Thesis was a beginning to use scripture, like Jesus used in front of the Pharisees to correct those who use their own authority to persecute the congregation.

Scripture, believe it or not is our constitutional document that protects us from those who abuse the power of their priestly office, just like those Pharisees who were wanting to stone the woman.

 

[Adstar]

Jesus held to the idea that scripture, not church office-holder, is the ultimate authority for the believer, so why don't you?

Oh But i do hold to the Idea that scripture is the Authority..

 

[stuart lawrence]

It is written in a controlled manner, so that people who behave like Pharisees within religious institutions are bound by the constitutional document, so that no priest or bishop can subvert his office and subjugate the congregation under his own name and authority. The Romans have raised up such people throughout the past, who have subverted their office of head bishop and in so doing would have been a law onto themselves, least Protestants used Holy Write, our constitutional document to declare what a head bishop can and cannot do in that regard. The 100 point Thesis was a beginning to use scripture, like Jesus used in front of the Pharisees to correct those who use their own authority to persecute the congregation.

Scripture, believe it or not is our constitutional document that protects us from those who abuse the power of their priestly office, just like those Pharisees to were wanting to stone the woman.

I'm not concerned as to what individual denominations proclaim.
I'm just stating what the core terms of the NC are:

I will write my laws in their minds
And place them on their hearts
Then he adds
Their sins and lawless deeds I will remember no more
Heb10:16&17

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Oh But i do hold to the Idea that scripture is the Authority..

You left out a word. Let me help: Ultimate authority

 

[stuart lawrence]

As for scholars and theologians, Paul warned us about them
1cor ch1:20

 

[The Times]

The point is, Jesus did invoke what he termed one of the higher points of the law, and it isn't written down as sola scripture law in itself is it.
Sola scripture law states the woman should be stoned to death.
I will leave you to carry on your discussion of barrister, defender and prosecutor

Clearly if the Pharisees who were so set and ready to stone the woman, would have just pushed Jesus right out of the way and carried on, thinking they were obeying the law and therefore serving God and his commonwealth, right?

Instead, they abandoned any contentions and fled the scene, before they were implicated by the same law, that they referred to in stoning the woman.

Jesus got the woman off, on a technicality of the law, because those who were trying to enforce it, believed in their hearts from a legal point of view, that they were in no position to carry on, right?

So, Jesus did act as the woman's Barrister and he also pointed to the Holy Writ and used his Holy fingers to write the law on the ground, for those people he created from the dust of the ground, how ironic right?

 

[stuart lawrence]

Clearly if the Pharisees who were so set and ready to stone the woman, would have just pushed Jesus right out of the way and carried on, thinking they were obeying the law and therefore serving God and his commonwealth, right?

Instead, they abandoned any contentions and fled the scene, before they were implicated by the same law, that they referred to in stoning the woman.

Jesus got the woman off, on a technicality of the law, because those who were trying to enforce it, believed in their hearts from a legal point of view, that they were in no position to carry on, right?

So, Jesus did act as the woman's Barrister and he also pointed to the Holy Writ and used his Holy fingers to write the law on the ground, for those people he created from the dust of the ground, how ironic right?

Jesus got the woman off on a higher point of the law, not a technicality.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Some believe heaven hinges on obeying the TC. If they truly followed sola scripture they would soon change their minds

 

[The Times]

Read this.......

At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

Do, you know why these Pharisees did so and from where this was carried over from?

It carried from those Pharisees who wanted to stone the woman and fled, because they could not defend their actions by the law. In the following versus nothing was stopping them in stoning Jesus, yet in previous versus they fled the scene, hmm......

Would they have fled the scene so easily, if Jesus didn't use the law of Moses against them?

I don't think so, so this leaves no doubt that Jesus regarded the Holy Writ as the authority to refer to and as a man to be obedient to.

If in Revelation of Jesus, Jesus tells us to read and listen to what is written, do you think we should or shouldn't?

This is what Jesus says.....

Whoever has my commands/teachings and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them."

If you are a citizen of a country and you want to know your rights to defend yourself, just like the woman the Pharisees wanted to stone, would you not refer to the authority of your countries constitutional document?

As Christians we ought to revere Scripture and uphold it as the Law and the Prophets and to defend the weak who are being prayed upon by religious heads who are leading many to destruction, especially in these troubling times. Are we to lean on men in priestly offices, or look to understand our constitutional document, the Holy Writ?

After all Jesus said, knock and the door will be opened and ask and an answer will be given.

What did Jesus instruct Abraham to say to the rich man?

Go and rely on the Law (Moses) and the Prophets, that is the Holy Writ.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Read this.......

At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

Do, you know why these Pharisees did so and from where this was carried over from?

It carried from those Pharisees who wanted to stone the woman and fled, because they could not defend their actions by the law. In the following versus nothing was stopping them in stoning Jesus, yet in previous versus they fled the scene, hmm......

Would they have fled the scene so easily, if Jesus didn't use the law of Moses against them?

I don't think so, so this leaves no doubt that Jesus regarded the Holy Writ as the authority to refer to and as a man to be obedient to.

If in Revelation of Jesus, Jesus tells us to read and listen to what is written, do you think we should or shouldn't?

This is what Jesus says.....

Whoever has my commands/teachings and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them."

If you are a citizen of a country and you want to know your rights to defend yourself, just like the woman the Pharisees wanted to stone, would you not refer to the authority of your countries constitutional document?

As Christians we ought to revere Scripture and uphold it as the Law and the Prophets and to defend the weak who are being prayed upon by religious heads who are leading many to destruction, especially in these troubling times. Are we to lean on men in priestly offices, or look to understand our constitutional document, the Holy Writ?

After all Jesus said, knock and the door will be opened and ask and an answer will be given.

What did Jesus instruct Abraham to say to the rich man?

Go and rely on the Law (Moses) and the Prophets, that is the Holy Writ.

So if your eye caused you to sin in thought, word or deed, would you pluck it out and throw it away?

 

[stuart lawrence]

BTW
The Pharisees were jealous/ enviousof Jesus, that is why they wanted him killed, as Pilate understood.
And of course, the Pharisees didn't understand the true message contained in the letter. They only had a form of sola scripture?
The letter without the heart of the message the letter contained

 

[The Times]

Jesus got the woman off on a higher point of the law, not a technicality.

The technicality was that Jesus had dirt on those Pharisees and they knew that he knew, small world. Yet further down, we see it carry over to other Pharisees wanting to stone Jesus. So the technicality was that those particular Pharisees could not stone the woman, because their sins were known and would be revealed, if they continued. Yet in versus afterwards we see the other Pharisee wanting to take revenge on Jesus for the situation that he put their Pharisee friends in.

We see a tit for tat and a legal ploy as a revenge, where it is Jesus who flees this time around. So we can now understand it was a legal tug of war between God and man, legal wrestling that is.

 

[stuart lawrence]

The technicality was that Jesus had dirt on those Pharisees and they knew that he knew, small world. Yet further down, we see it carry over to other Pharisees wanting to stone Jesus. So the technicality was that those particular Pharisees could not stone the woman, because their sins were known and would be revealed, if they continued. Yet in versus afterwards we see the other Pharisee wanting to take revenge on Jesus for the situation that he put their Pharisee friends in.

We see a tit for tat and a legal ploy as a revenge, where it is Jesus who flees this time around. So we can now understand it was a legal tug of war between God and man, legal wrestling that is.

The only person who knew of the Pharisees sins was Jesus. For they were careful to clean the outside of the cup. It was the inside that was the problem.

 

[Adstar]

You left out a word. Let me help: Ultimate authority

Well if one isguided by the Holy Spirit in understanding of the Scriptures then yes i can add the Ultimate tag to the word Authority..

 

[The Times]

So if your eye caused you to sin in thought, word or deed, would you pluck it out and throw it away?

Jesus is emphasising a legal position to instruct a person refrain from doing what will get them in legal trouble with God. Look you are going in circles, this line of argument further supports a legal attitude when dealing with the Holy God. In this circumstance it is better to deny the lust of the eye, the temptation of the body, least you get into legal issues with God, as to whether you will be granted access to eternal life or not, based on feeding your lust and temptation or denying yourself for fear of legal implications. Look after all the fear of the law is what deters people from doing what they ought not to. Jesus lays out the law and the penalty and this again is legal talk friend.