Biases

[Always in His Presence]

Yes it is. It is his writing. so it is him..

in the beginning was the word. the word was God.

That sir is Idolatry.

No sir - that is Holy Scripture - Have you not read the Gospel of St. John?

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (LOGOS), and the Word (LOGOS) was with God, and the Word (LOGOS) was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.​

​

John 1 :: King James Version (KJV)

John 1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

www.blueletterbible.org

​

​

 

[Always in His Presence]

Scripture is Latin, Graphe is Greek. I have no idea what the Aramaic word for writing is.

No - Holy Scripture was not originally written in Latin - But in Greek and Aramaic -

Oh dear!

Read what I wrote again. You've made a mess of it.

The mess is not mine

Really? I must be good with words!

I'd have to refute the absence of words being indicative of proficiency.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

No sir - that is Holy Scripture - Have you not read the Gospel of St. John?

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (LOGOS), and the Word (LOGOS) was with God, and the Word (LOGOS) was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.​

​

John 1 :: King James Version (KJV)

John 1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

www.blueletterbible.org

​

​

This is what I referred to before, you confuse spoked word (Logos) with written words (scripture) and hence you advocate idolatry. The spoken word of God became flesh, he did not become paper and ink in a leather-bound book. I shall not follow you in idolising a book, that is a sin, contrary to the commandment to worship no other Gods.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

No - Holy Scripture was not originally written in Latin - But in Greek and Aramaic -

Read what is written! "scripture" is a Latin word, Graphe is a Greek word. Your posts show total incomprehension of the meaning of those words.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No - Holy Scripture was not originally written in Latin - But in Greek and Aramaic -

The mess is not mine

I'd have to refute the absence of words being indicative of proficiency.

And Hebrew with some Chaldean spread in I believe

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

And Hebrew with some Chaldean spread in I believe

The NT is in Greek with an occasional phrase spoken in Aramaic. it is the OT that is written in Hebrew and some Aramaic.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The NT is in Greek with an occasional phrase spoken in Aramaic. it is the OT that is written in Hebrew and some Aramaic.

The Holy scripture is the OT and NT

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Holy scripture is the OT and NT

For me that is so, but for you it is a Tanakh with a Catholic NT.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

For me that is so, but for you it is a Tanakh with a Catholic NT.

It puzzles me why any group called Christian relies on post Christian Judaism to decide the canon of their holy books! It's a scandal.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It puzzles me why any group called Christian relies on post Christian Judaism to decide the canon of their holy books! It's a scandal.

It puzzles me how you do not know anything about a person. Yet claim you know them.

when a person starts falsly accusing others its prety much a sign they have lost the battle and admitted defeat.

So good luck

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

It puzzles me

Slippery

 

[Always in His Presence]

N

 

[Always in His Presence]

It puzzles me how you do not know anything about a person. Yet claim you know them.

when a person starts falsly accusing others its prety much a sign they have lost the battle and admitted defeat.

So good luck

QFT

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

QFT

Not truth, just tradition, Jewish tradition at that.

 

[The Liturgist]

Yes it is. It is his writing. so it is him..

in the beginning was the word. the word was God.

John 1:1-18 is talking about Jesus Christ. Applying John 1:1 to Scripture is disastrous Eisegesis, and is actually idolatrous insofar as it would have us believe that Scripture is uncreated, like the Quran, and worthy of worship and adoration, instead of the Incarnate Son and Word of God. It also contradicts the idea that Scripture is divinely inspired since if Scripture is eternal and uncreated it could not later have been God-breathed. And we do know that God in inspiring Scripture has allowed individual authors leverage to express themselves, which is why for example the Psalms are credited to David, or Asaph, and so on, and why different New Testament writers like the Holy Apostles and Evangelists Paul, John, Peter and Luke and other Biblical authors such as the Holy Prophets Moses and Jeremiah and King Solomon have distinct literary styles which are consistent across their corpus of writings, and this is something about the Holy Scriptures I love very much,

Additionally I just want to make that clear that in correcting the eisegetical error of @Eternally Grateful I am not taking sides against my friend @Always in His Presence or my friend @Xeno.of.athens because I recognize both Protestants and Catholics to be Christians.

 

[The Liturgist]

No sir - that is Holy Scripture - Have you not read the Gospel of St. John?

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (LOGOS), and the Word (LOGOS) was with God, and the Word (LOGOS) was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.​

​

John 1 :: King James Version (KJV)

John 1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

www.blueletterbible.org

​

​

I believe Xeno was objecting to the idea implicit in the post of @Eternally Grateful that John 1:1-18 do not refer to Jesus Christ, when of course they do (since Scripture did not become incarnate and is not God, rather John 1:1-18 is referring to the Incarnation of the Only Begotten Son and Word of God.

Scripture is also the word of God because it describes Jesus Christ, who is the Word of God and God, but it would be wrong to call scripture the word of the Word, because Jesus Christ is God, so in this respect Scripture is the inspired word of God which reveals Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ is the Incarnate Word of God which reveals God the Father according to John 1:1-18.

I should stress this is an ecumenical understanding and our Lutheran friends @MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis both of whom believe in Sola Scriptura should be able to clear up any misunderstanding that might arise, or if anyone mistrusts me because of my Eastern Orthodox status (despite my background as a Protestant minister and my decades-long love affair with the Church of England).

 

[Always in His Presence]

Additionally I just want to make that clear that in correcting the eisegetical error of @Eternally Grateful I am not taking sides against my friend @Always in His Presence or my friend @Xeno.of.athens because I recognize both Protestants and Catholics to be Christians.

I am glad more than one of us do that.

As for your exegesis - we will have to agree to disagree.

@Eternally Grateful was not wrong - look at the Greek which I put in parenthesis - The Holy Spirit, through John's hands used LOGOS -

Logos :

λόγος lógos, log'-os; from G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ):—account, cause, communication

Jesus is His manifested Word - Holy Scripture is His written Word - the two are one - the two agree and the two are the seamless will of the Father. Because of that - it is greater than tradition, it is greater then reasoning, it is greater than man.

Without becoming too redundant:

Paul outlined it perfectly in

2 Tim 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness: 17 that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.

The Word of God (Holy Scripture) is what is needed for teaching, reproof, correction and instruction. The Holy Scripture in inerrant and infallible. It is the measuring line of truth, and needs nothing else for it's efficacy in our lives both now and eternal.

Revering God's word and testament is not idolatry, it is giving respect to the Father.

 

[ARBITER01]

in the beginning was the word (logos)

Scripture is God.

Let's take a step back, shall we?

Do let's.

Scripture is not an extension of the GODHEAD. It does have the very imprint of The Holy Spirit within and behind those words we read, but it of itself is not GOD.

It still requires The Holy Spirit to provide the quickening to our human spirit when we read it, so no, it is not self edifying, and not GOD.

 

[The Liturgist]

Jesus is His manifested Word - Holy Scripture is His written Word - the two are one - the two agree and the two are the seamless will of the Father.

That’s basically what I said. As long as you are not asserting the Bible is a person of the Holy Trinity or God or uncreated, in which case I believe that would be a violation of the CF.com Statement of Faith for Christian Only Forums.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

John 1:1-18 is talking about Jesus Christ. Applying John 1:1 to Scripture is disastrous Eisegesis, and is actually idolatrous insofar as it would have us believe that Scripture is uncreated, like the Quran, and worthy of worship and adoration, instead of the Incarnate Son and Word of God. It also contradicts the idea that Scripture is divinely inspired since if Scripture is eternal and uncreated it could not later have been God-breathed. And we do know that God in inspiring Scripture has allowed individual authors leverage to express themselves, which is why for example the Psalms are credited to David, or Asaph, and so on, and why different New Testament writers like the Holy Apostles and Evangelists Paul, John, Peter and Luke and other Biblical authors such as the Holy Prophets Moses and Jeremiah and King Solomon have distinct literary styles which are consistent across their corpus of writings, and this is something about the Holy Scriptures I love very much,

Additionally I just want to make that clear that in correcting the eisegetical error of @Eternally Grateful I am not taking sides against my friend @Always in His Presence or my friend @Xeno.of.athens because I recognize both Protestants and Catholics to be Christians.

It is astounding to me that anybody can take John 1:1-18 as a discussion about the holy scriptures instead of a discussion about our Lord and God, Jesus Christ. John 1:1 and John 1:14 make the identity of "the Word" absolutely clear, it is Jesus who was made flesh and dwelt among us. I am sure that what causes this terrible error - which is truly idolatry - is equating the holy scriptures with "the Word". It is terrible to make this identity.