Then you don't "get" what you said. Which is that
rather than possessing the Scriptures for personal reading as Chrysostom encouraged, you said the Laity in the early Ekklesia, and often even the clergy, were ILLITERATE...
"May I repeat: ILLITERATE..." and that "these early and Holy and manuscripted Scrolls were not intended for private reading and study." "God intended His words to be...read aloud to the faithful for their hearing. NOT for their reading... Faith comes by HEARING - Not by reading."
But rather than your typical either/or assertions, the inspired writings were intended for both, as has been shown despite your assertions to the contrary.
So now its "Not by
all reading," versus "Not by reading," while the point is that the Scriptures were the supreme standard for obedience and testing Truth claims, enlightening the eyes, converting the sou, making wise the simple, obtaining great rewards for the obedient, etc., as
abundantly shown, and thus should be personally studied by lovers of Truth as such.
It is your assertion that Scripture was not intended for reading by laity, versus hearing it, and which is contrary to such testimony as above.
Which simply does not mean Scripture was not also intended for reading by laity any more than the many signs/inscriptions in a pre-literate culture were, and this term does not mean all were illiterate.
And there is evidence of significant literacy in the contentious debate over just how literate people were in the ancient near east around the time of Christ.
Which actually testifies to the importance and esteem of both Scripture and the written word, versus "what is needed is not written verifiction, but direct revelation," as if it was either one or the other, to for the former, as the established Divine revelation, is the judge of the latter.
That Scripture was only written for the sake of the Holy People, but not for Holy People to write such for unbelievers to be converted thereby, is not true, for it also was. (John 20:31)
And saying "Christ did not come into His creation as a Creature in order to write a Holy Book... He came instead to establish a Holy People" is a false dichotomy, and is akin to saying Christ did not come into His creation as a Creature in order to preach to the whole world...He came instead to establish a Holy People." For rather than being mutually exclusionary, they both go together in the plan of God.
God choose a people to reveal Himself to the world, both by preaching and writing His word.
No, this is not hard...
- The NT is based on and abundantly references the prior written Scriptures.
- Which being the word of God was to be preached in and to the world. (Jeremiah 22:29)
- For the world to hear, whereby lost souls were converted by the Truth of the Scriptures, "which are able to make thee wise unto salvation which is in Christ Jesus."
- And which oral preaching was subject to testing by the written word as the established authoritative word of God.
- We know what true direct revelation was by it having been recorded as inspired written revelation which is the supreme standard by which Truth claims are tested.
- If the reading of Scripture was commanded and exhorted, then personal reading should follow, as able and available.
Exactly, versus only being for believers, and the texts were God's own.
As shown, he did preach the gospel which "I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." (Galatians 1:12) But which was tested and established upon Scripture, and "Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures." (Romans 1:2)
Writing, "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." (2 Timothy 3:15)
Being a devout Jews of the Scriptures.
Indeed, and with no conflict with my positions, versus "what is needed is not written verifiction, but direct revelation," as if it was either one or the other, to for the former, as the established Divine revelation, is the judge of the latter.
True regeneration is a supernatural event with effecting profound basic changes in heart and life. Thanks be to God.
Thank God. Yet the validity of which is subject to testing by the assured written word of God, thus there is not conflict.
When you make subjective supernatural dreams and visions etc. "direct Revelation from God" as you describe it, the basis, the standard for Truth, so that "what is needed is not written verifiction, but direct revelation,"
Wrong, and a flailing failing argument.
and set faith in Scripture in contrast to faith in God ("You can put your faith in Scripture... I place mine in God...)
Thus you put faith in false dichotomies, while you also said you believe in the church, but do not say that of Scripture. But as explained, to believe in God is to believe what He said and inspired, and to believe the latter is to believe the former.
Conversely, "He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48)
You need to give this up.
Same fallacy. You simply cannot separate God from His word, even while exalting direct revelation.
Another fallacy, that the NT church which began with common souls having entered into a Scripture-based covenant with the God of Scripture, with its very existence being a fulfillment of Scripture and its preaching reflecting its basis thereof, is somehow not married to the revelation of God.
A warranted one in essence based upon certain statements.
Another fallacy, that the instruments and stewards of express Divine revelation are the assuredly correct authorities on what is of God. Instead, both men and writings of God were established as being so long before there was a church which presumed it was essential for this.
are not your supreme standard but subjective esoteric "direct Revelation from God" is...
Not when the standard for your Prophets is their own "direct Revelation from God," or wherever their traditions came from which distinctives are not what is manifest in the only wholly inspired record of what the NT church believed.
It is a person who cannot be separated from His own words, which we have as Scripture. T
Yes, as a person of 100% Truth/Light, and as revealed by His via His words. The resurrection is also personified as a person, (John 11:24) yet this has a necessary manifestation.
To some degree, and not as much as he must have wished he had.
Because to know Him who is eternal and is life is to know eternal life. Likewise to whom Him who is the Truth is to know His word which is Truth, (Jn. 17:17) and to know the latter is to know the former.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)
Indeed, and by receiving His word one comes to know the God of revelation.
Which means that by the Light of His word and receiving it, one will not simply know ABOUT God but will KNOW God. And feeding upon, and being nourished and built up by it, and by walking in that light one will receive more light.
Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:31-32)
As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: (1 Peter 2:2)
If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. (1 Timothy 4:6)
And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. (Acts 20:32)
And if hearing the word is needful and commanded, and which preaching is tested by, thus personal reading is to be encouraged.