Does 1 Corinthians 4:6 prove sola scripture?

BobRyan said:

They had no followers saying to themselves "our magisterium has no authentic magisterial authority" and the OT texts as true scripture are not doubted even today by either Jews or Christians.

Still that did not stop that magisterium from rejecting Christ because at some point they went astray and when that happened all the Jews did not instantly "jump off the wagon".

The OT was written and rejected before the time of Christ - and Christ did not start off his ministry saying "the magisterium is now invalid because they rejected the apocrypha".

As I am sure we all know.

Rather the Jews were condemned in the Gospels for their rejection of Christ - not the apocrypha.

John 1:11 "He came to His own and His own received Him not"

Still.. at the start of His ministry He could say this to those who debated against the Jewish religion "salvation is of the Jews" John 4.

So the idea that He started off rejecting their magisterium as illegit - is not supported by the Bible.

Click to expand...

There was no 'fixed' Jewish canon at the time of Christ. The Saducees and the Pharisees did not agree. And the Greek speaking Jews were using the Septuagint which contained those books.

The Jews do not officially canonize their Scripture until the first century, and by this time they have rejected Christ and their authority has been replaced by the apostles in the Church Christ established.

It also takes the Church quite a while to reach concensus on the New Testament canon. But when they do, they also reach concensus on which canon of the OT is legitimate. It is somewhat remarkable to me that Protestantism chooses more than a thousand years later to reject the authority that Christ has established in His Church (the church that Scripture refers to as "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" in 1 Tim 3:14-16) and instead accept as their authority the first century Jewish magisterium to define Scripture for them, even when this group has explicitly denied the truth of the New Testament and Jesus Christ.

BobRyan said:

1 Cor 4:9

6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

Click to expand...

Addressed earlier. This passage has no reference to Scripture and in context is quite clear it’s referring to another book referenced in Scripture – the Lamb’s book of life.

BobRyan said:

Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were so"


If the rule is used in Acts 17:11 "They studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" but if you insert your wording into it -- then that text is saying that only the accepted scriptures as known at the writing of Acts 17:11 is the "Word of God" and only those texts are valid rules for testing faith, tradition and practice. Not the remainder of Acts not even the writings of the NT since the Bereans were surely not reading any NT texts while still non-Christian Jews.

Click to expand...

This makes no sense. This event obviously happens before the writing of the Book of Acts. The NT Scriptures are written between 20-70 years after the resurrection. The only Scripture the Bereans or anyone have available to ‘test’ against are the OT Scriptures. There weren’t any NT texts available for anyone to read, not just the Bereans. That is why they clearly don’t practice sola-Scripture because they accept Truth that has not yet been written in any Scripture.

BobRyan said:

1. The Bereans were not even Christian at all.

2. Paul as a Christian Apostles was an absolute nobody to them

3. The oral teaching of their own majisterium flatly condemned Paul.

4. The only thing they had to go on - was the "sola scriptura test" and based on that alone they defied all the oral teaching of their own magisterium to go with Paul's teaching instead.




True - they had to defy all the tradition and teaching of their own magisterium to go with Paul's teaching instead and the only thing that they could base that on - was their sola scriptura test.






Not according to the text. It says that they "studied the scriptures to SEE IF those things spoken to them by Paul - were so"


If they had not used scripture - then all they would have to go on would be the oral teaching and tradition of their magisterium which demanded that they reject Paul.




Which would lead them to Isaiah 53 as Christ reminds us.


Luke 24

25 And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.


...31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Him; and He vanished from their sight. 32 They said to one another, “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?”


44 Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day




Which they had no reason to do - other than the sola scriptura test that the Acts 17:11 text says they used - since the oral traditions of their own magisterium flatly rejected Paul.


(As already noted0




Which is the salient point behind the argument that they could only have used the "sola scriptura" method to make that leap away from the oral traditions of their own magisterium - rather than - the alternative of "only sticking with the oral traditions of their own magisterium"




Because OT magisterium is the authority over its own texts.


I thought that was the obvious part of my argument.





True and the only reason given in Acts 17:11 for that leap away from their own magisterium - is "they studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by Paul were so"


How is this not the obvious part?

Click to expand...

An authentic application of the principle of sola-Scriptura would have prevented them from accepting the Truth that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled the prophecies they were seeing in Scripture. The minute they accept that Truth from Paul, they cannot be held as an example of practicing sola-Scriptura. They broke the rules defined by Protestants 1500 years later. How is that not the obvious part?

BobRyan said:

There is no "accept the witness of the church" statement in Acts 17:11 as if the text had said "they studied the traditions of the NT church to see IF the things spoken to them by Paul were so" since that would be circular reasoning. the whole point is that their own accepted magisterium oral teaching opposed both the NT Christian church and Paul.


this point is irrefutable.


The point remains.




Which they could not know until they studied the scriptures to "see if" those things were so. Just as the text states.




That is a self-conflicted argument to insist that by studying the scriptures to "see IF" those things were so - they were not relying on the test of scripture to "see IF" those things were so.

Click to expand...

When the text says they “received the word with great joy” – that ‘word’ is the oral proclamation of the Gospel as witnessed by the Church. If they do not accept the witness of the Church that the person of Jesus Christ had risen from the dead which is beyond what they can see in Scripture, they cannot become followers of Christ. Do you profess they did not become Christian?

narnia59 said:

So for the Bereans to become Christian, they had to accept the oral testimony of the Church that the person of Jesus Christ had indeed died and rose from the dead. They had no Scripture to 'check' that fact. Which is why it's a very odd example to try to promote as evidence for sola-Scriptura. For if they had been sola-Scriptura, they would have asked Paul where in the Bible it showed that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled those prophecies, and when it was not to be found there, they should have rejected it. Rather, they received with great joy the word of God as spoken by the apostles (as did all of those at Pentecost). They accepted the oral testimony of the Church as Truth and became Christians.

Click to expand...

There was no need to receive oral tradition. The miracles Jesus did were widely known.
What happened to Jesus on the cross was well known.
Today we would have to check documents to find out what happened, these people already knew what happened.

narnia59 said:

These men in Luke's Gospel had the advantage of a first hand experience of the Risen Lord. The Bereans did not. They accepted the oral testimony of the Church that the person of Jesus Christ had indeed suffered, died, and risen from the dead. Fortunately they did not require that Truth to be found in Scripture, or they would have by necessity rejected it.

Click to expand...

The 2 disciples on the road to Emmaus did not recognize Jesus. His identity was hid from them.
But, they knew the things Jesus had done and Jesus showed them the Scriptures concerning Himself.
These 2 disciples had to see Jesus in the Scriptures by faith, just as the Bereans, just as we do too.

narnia59 said:

It is also the oral word of God as spoken by the apostles as the Scriptures attest

Click to expand...

(Luke 5:1, And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,
Luke 11:28, But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
Acts 4:31, And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.
Acts 13:5, And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.
Acts 13:46, Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
1 Thessalonian 2:13,
Isaiah 1:10,
Jeremiah 19:3,
Luke 8:12, Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
Luke 8:21, Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth.
Acts 13:7, Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God.
Acts 15:7, And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Philippians 1:14, And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.
1 Thessalonians 4:15, For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep
Hebrews 13:7, Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.
2 Kings 23:16, And as Josiah turned himself, he spied the sepulchres that were there in the mount, and sent, and took the bones out of the sepulchres, and burned them upon the altar, and polluted it, according to the word of the LORD which the man of God proclaimed, who proclaimed these words.
2 Chronicles 10:15 So the king hearkened not unto the people: for the cause was of God, that the LORD might perform his word, which he spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat.

How do any of these verses cited say that what they spoke became the Word of God.
The Word was given to them by God and these people proclaimed it.

narnia59 said:

It is also the body of believers, the Church as the Scriptures attest

Click to expand...

Acts 6:7, And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.
Acts 12:24 But the word of God grew and multiplied.

narnia59 said:

Protestantism institutes a doctrine of sola-Scriptura which professes that the only Truth to be accepted must be found in Scripture.

Click to expand...

Not correct ...

Protestantism institutes a doctrine of sola-Scriptura which professes that the only Truth to be accepted must CONFORM to Scripture.

Some might call this suprema-Scriptura, but it's what most Protestants follow ...

BobRyan said: ↑
1 Cor 4:9
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

narnia59 said:

Addressed earlier. This passage has no reference to Scripture

Click to expand...

I had not seen that "solution" before - how do you prove it is more than mere speculation?

narnia59 said:

and in context is quite clear it’s referring to another book referenced in Scripture – the Lamb’s book of life.

Click to expand...

Is it your claim that Paul thought his readers were in heaven reading from the "Lamb's book of life"??

They are the ones “whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain” (Rev. 13:8b).

Nothing in 1Cor 4 suggests Paul's readers had hands-on access to "the Lamb's book of life"

Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to see IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were so"

If the rule is used in Acts 17:11 then "They studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" -- so that is perfect "sola scriptura" example.

But if you insert your wording into it -- then that text is saying that only the accepted scriptures as known at the writing of Acts 17:11 is the "Word of God" and only those texts are valid rules for testing faith, tradition and practice. Not the remainder of Acts not even the writings of the NT since the Bereans were surely not reading any NT texts while still non-Christian Jews.

narnia59 said:

This makes no sense. This event obviously happens before the writing of the Book of Acts. The NT Scriptures are written between 20-70 years after the resurrection. The only Scripture the Bereans or anyone have available to ‘test’ against are the OT Scriptures.

Click to expand...

True - but the principle is the same -- the rule that was used - was the authority of scripture as they had it - at the time - testing all teaching and practice.

There weren’t any NT texts available for anyone to read, not just the Bereans. That is why they clearly don’t practice sola-Scripture because they accept Truth that has not yet been written in any Scripture.

Click to expand...

I believe in sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice - you admit that you do not.
So then -- we use my definition of it since I am the one that believes in it.

And by that definition also used in Isaiah 8:20 "to the law and to the testimony if they do not speak according to this word - they have no light" - the rule is the same in all ages. testing all doctrine and practice against known scripture.

This rule is so rock solid that even the non-Christians of Acts 17:11 are approved for using it.

1. The Bereans were not even Christian at all.
2. Paul as a Christian Apostles was an absolute nobody to them
3. The oral teaching of their own majisterium flatly condemned Paul.
4. The only thing they had to go on - was the "sola scriptura test" and based on that alone they defied all the oral teaching of their own magisterium to go with Paul's teaching instead.

narnia59 said:

An authentic application of the principle of sola-Scriptura would have prevented them from accepting the Truth that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled the prophecies they were seeing in Scripture.

Click to expand...

Only if the term is limited to the definition given it - by those who do not believe in it.

For those of us who do believe in sola-scriptura - it is our definition that we use as we see it practiced in Acts 17:11.

Thus the "if you test by scripture than you do not use scripture to apply the test" ( a self-conflicted statement at best) is not part of our doctrine.

In all cases it is that scripture as known at any given point in time is always sufficient as the "test" of all doctrine and practice.

narnia59 said:

An authentic application of the principle of sola-Scriptura would have prevented them from accepting the Truth that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled the prophecies they were seeing in Scripture. The minute they accept that Truth from Paul, they cannot be held as an example of practicing sola-Scriptura. They broke the rules defined by Protestants 1500 years later. How is that not the obvious part?

When the text says they “received the word with great joy” – that ‘word’ is the oral proclamation of the Gospel as witnessed by the Church. If they do not accept the witness of the Church that the person of Jesus Christ had risen from the dead which is beyond what they can see in Scripture, they cannot become followers of Christ. Do you profess they did not become Christian?

Click to expand...

I profess that the convoluted self-conflicted rule that you are using "the principle of sola-Scriptura would have prevented them from accepting the Truth that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled the prophecies they were seeing in Scripture." was unknown to them and is not used by those today who believe in the Acts 17:11 practice of sola scriptura.

Doug Melven said:

There was no need to receive oral tradition. The miracles Jesus did were widely known.
What happened to Jesus on the cross was well known.
Today we would have to check documents to find out what happened, these people already knew what happened.

Click to expand...

They way they were widely known was via the oral tradition of the Church. How else do you profess that they knew about Christ?

Doug Melven said:

The 2 disciples on the road to Emmaus did not recognize Jesus. His identity was hid from them.
But, they knew the things Jesus had done and Jesus showed them the Scriptures concerning Himself.
These 2 disciples had to see Jesus in the Scriptures by faith, just as the Bereans, just as we do too.

Click to expand...

His identify was revealed to them. Jesus made himself known to them in the breaking of the bread. "30 Now it came to pass, as He sat at the table with them, that He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him; and He vanished from their sight."

Doug Melven said:

(Luke 5:1, And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,
Luke 11:28, But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
Acts 4:31, And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.
Acts 13:5, And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.
Acts 13:46, Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
1 Thessalonian 2:13,
Isaiah 1:10,
Jeremiah 19:3,
Luke 8:12, Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
Luke 8:21, Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth.
Acts 13:7, Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God.
Acts 15:7, And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Philippians 1:14, And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.
1 Thessalonians 4:15, For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep
Hebrews 13:7, Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.
2 Kings 23:16, And as Josiah turned himself, he spied the sepulchres that were there in the mount, and sent, and took the bones out of the sepulchres, and burned them upon the altar, and polluted it, according to the word of the LORD which the man of God proclaimed, who proclaimed these words.
2 Chronicles 10:15 So the king hearkened not unto the people: for the cause was of God, that the LORD might perform his word, which he spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat.

How do any of these verses cited say that what they spoke became the Word of God.
The Word was given to them by God and these people proclaimed it.

Click to expand...

The verses say that what they spoke WAS the word of God. They spoke the word of God. The word of God is not limited to Scripture.

BobRyan has posted more than once that "The Bible is the Word of God". I am simply pointing out that does not mean that the Bible alone is the Word of God.

Doug Melven said:

Acts 6:7, And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.
Acts 12:24 But the word of God grew and multiplied.

Click to expand...

I am not sure about the confusion. As disciples are added to the Church, the 'word of God' increased. Jesus Himself is the Word of God. But we are His body, and as we grow, the word of God increases.

A_Thinker said:

Not correct ...

Protestantism institutes a doctrine of sola-Scriptura which professes that the only Truth to be accepted must CONFORM to Scripture.

Some might call this suprema-Scriptura, but it's what most Protestants follow ...

Click to expand...

I am aware that there are multiple views about what sola-Scriptura means, and I'm not sure anyone can profess to what 'most' Protestants follow. I know from my personal experience that I have never once been asked how a particular belief 'conforms' to Scripture. I have been asked countless times where it is found in the Bible. So I'm not sure that practical experience aligns with your expression here.

The doctrine originates with Luther so I tend to try to go as close to the source as I can. The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord says that the Scriptures are "the only true standard by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged" and that they "alone should be and remain the only standard and rule of doctrine". The explanation given in Book of Concord says that "Everything we need to believe and do as Christians is told us in the Scriptures."

If that is accurate and the Bereans are truly sola-Scriptura, then the Bereans may have been able to accept that Jesus Christ had died and rose from the dead, but it would not have been necessary to believe because they would not have learned that from Scripture.

BobRyan said:

BobRyan said: ↑
1 Cor 4:9
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

I had not seen that "solution" before - how do you prove it is more than mere speculation?

Click to expand...

Why do you assume it's speaking about Scripture when it doesn't say that?
1. It doesn't use the term Scripture ("graphē")
2. It doesn't make a reference to the word of God ("logos")
3. It makes a generic reference to something that is written
4. The context is Paul chiding people for getting puffed up about their, and others, salvation. He states that he does not even judge himself, and that is Christ's role, and that when Christ comes, that He will reveal His decision regarding the judgment of each person.
5. Scripture tells us that when Christ comes, the dead will be judged based upon what is written in the Book of Life. (Rev 20:12) There is the direct tie to the 'writing' Paul is referring to.

So again, why would you decide this is a passage that is referring to Scripture at all when it doesn't say it's about Scripture and the context fits with the Book of Life?

BobRyan said:

Is it your claim that Paul thought his readers were in heaven reading from the "Lamb's book of life"??

They are the ones “whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain” (Rev. 13:8b).

Nothing in 1Cor 4 suggests Paul's readers had hands-on access to "the Lamb's book of life"

Click to expand...

I am not claiming that they had access to the Book of Life or were reading it. But they're assuming they know what's in it. Paul telling them to not go beyond what is written and that when the Lord comes all will be revealed is reminding them that what they are speculating on is already written, and their speculation is going beyond what is written because they're trying to add their own two cents.

narnia59 said:

They way they were widely known was via the oral tradition of the Church. How else do you profess that they knew about Christ?

Click to expand...

Jesus did so many things in 3 1/2 years that even the world itself would not be able to contain all of the books that should have been written.
Everybody in that area must have known about Jesus in that time.

narnia59 said:

His identify was revealed to them. Jesus made himself known to them in the breaking of the bread. "30 Now it came to pass, as He sat at the table with them, that He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him; and He vanished from their sight."

Click to expand...

Jesus walked with them on a 7 mile journey and showing them Scriptures during that time.
That had to have taken hours. In all that time they did not recognize Him.

narnia59 said:

The verses say that what they spoke WAS the word of God. They spoke the word of God. The word of God is not limited to Scripture.

Click to expand...

Today we speak the Word of God. We aren't the originators of it. And if we say something and we say it is the Word of God, but it disagrees with the written Word, we are liars.

narnia59 said:

BobRyan has posted more than once that "The Bible is the Word of God". I am simply pointing out that does not mean that the Bible alone is the Word of God.

Click to expand...

I may disagree with Bob Ryan on many things, but not this. He is correct.

narnia59 said:

I am not sure about the confusion. As disciples are added to the Church, the 'word of God' increased. Jesus Himself is the Word of God. But we are His body, and as we grow, the word of God increases.

Click to expand...

As I said before, we can speak the Word of God, but it is still the Word He told us to speak. And any Word we speak better line up with the written Word.

narnia59 said:

The doctrine originates with Luther so I tend to try to go as close to the source as I can. The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord says that the Scriptures are "the only true standard by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged" and that they "alone should be and remain the only standard and rule of doctrine". The explanation given in Book of Concord says that "Everything we need to believe and do as Christians is told us in the Scriptures."

If that is accurate and the Bereans are truly sola-Scriptura, then the Bereans may have been able to accept that Jesus Christ had died and rose from the dead, but it would not have been necessary to believe because they would not have learned that from Scripture.

Click to expand...

The Bereans saw that everything Jesus did lined up with the Scriptures.

Doug Melven said:

Jesus did so many things in 3 1/2 years that even the world itself would not be able to contain all of the books that should have been written.
Everybody in that area must have known about Jesus in that time.

Click to expand...

That doesn't mean that everything that everyone 'knew' about Jesus was Truth. The Jewish religious leaders knew all about Jesus and denied he had risen from the dead. The only way anybody knew the truth about who Jesus was is because of the oral testimony of the Church he founded.

Doug Melven said:

Jesus walked with them on a 7 mile journey and showing them Scriptures during that time.
That had to have taken hours. In all that time they did not recognize Him.

Click to expand...

No, but then he revealed himself to them. The Bereans did not have that benefit.

Doug Melven said:

Today we speak the Word of God. We aren't the originators of it. And if we say something and we say it is the Word of God, but it disagrees with the written Word, we are liars.

Click to expand...

There is no discrepancy between Christ as the Word, the written word of God, the oral word of God spoken by the Apostles, or the word of God known as His body, the Church. Scripture uses the "word of God" in all of these senses. But there is a difference in Christ who is the Word and is God, and the rest because while they are God-breathed, they are not God.

Doug Melven said:

I may disagree with Bob Ryan on many things, but not this. He is correct.
As I said before, we can speak the Word of God, but it is still the Word He told us to speak. And any Word we speak better line up with the written Word.

Click to expand...

If he is professing that the Bible "alone" is the word of God, the he is not correct and is contradicted by the way Scripture speaks of the word of God.

Doug Melven said:

The Bereans saw that everything Jesus did lined up with the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Only because they trusted that what Paul told them that Jesus did was the Truth.

BobRyan said:

I profess that the convoluted self-conflicted rule that you are using "the principle of sola-Scriptura would have prevented them from accepting the Truth that the person of Jesus Christ had fulfilled the prophecies they were seeing in Scripture." was unknown to them and is not used by those today who believe in the Acts 17:11 practice of sola scriptura.

Click to expand...

Why don't you provide your definition of sola-Scriptura?

narnia59 said:

So again, why would you decide this is a passage that is referring to Scripture at all when it doesn't say it's about Scripture and the context fits with the Book of Life?

Click to expand...

The context of the passage is Paul's chiding of the Corinthians for their divisiveness over leadership ...

1 Corinthians 3

1 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3 You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? 4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings?

5 What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. 6 I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. 7 So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. 8 The one who plants and the one who waters have one purpose, and they will each be rewarded according to their own labor.
...
21 So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, 23 and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.

1 Corinthians 4

1 This, then, is how you ought to regard us: as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the mysteries God has revealed.
...
6 Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.

The question is whether the passage speaks of scripture in general ... or what is written in scripture regarding human leadership in God's kingdom.

Either way, the principle of using scripture as the ultimate test of all truth ... is established.

A_Thinker said:

The context of the passage is Paul's chiding of the Corinthians for their divisiveness over leadership ...

1 Corinthians 3

1 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3 You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? 4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings?

5 What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. 6 I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. 7 So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. 8 The one who plants and the one who waters have one purpose, and they will each be rewarded according to their own labor.
...
21 So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, 23 and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.

1 Corinthians 4

1 This, then, is how you ought to regard us: as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the mysteries God has revealed.
...
6 Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.

The question is whether the passage speaks of scripture in general ... or what is written in scripture regarding human leadership in God's kingdom.

Either way, the principle of using scripture as the ultimate test of all truth ... is established.

Click to expand...

The verse say nothing about what is written being Scripture -- that is merely an assumption. The context of the verse are the 4 verses directly preceding it that you chose to omit, which speak of Christ's revealing all things at the end of time related to our judgment. That directly correlates to Rev 20:12 when Christ at the end of time opens the book of life to reveal what has been written in it.

narnia59 said:

The verse say nothing about what is written being Scripture -- that is merely an assumption. The context of the verse are the 4 verses directly preceding it that you chose to omit, which speak of Christ's revealing all things at the end of time related to our judgment. That directly correlates to Rev 20:12 when Christ at the end of time opens the book of life to reveal what has been written in it.

Click to expand...

I think that it is a definite stretch to assume that Paul is referring to the writing in the Book of Life.

For one thing, what scripture says about the Book of Life, is that the NAMES of the saved are found there, ... not necessarily any judgement upon their works. There are another set of book which details one's works, ... and Christians are not judged from those books.

Philippians 4:3 Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Rev. 20

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

What would be more probable for your scenario is the judgement of works for christians mentioned in 1 Corinthians 3 ...

11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

A_Thinker said:

I think that it is a definite stretch to assume that Paul is referring to the writing in the Book of Life.

For one thing, what scripture says about the Book of Life, is that the NAMES of the saved are found there, ... not necessarily any judgement upon their works. There are another set of book which details one's works, ... and Christians are not judged from those books.

Philippians 4:3 Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Rev. 20

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

What would be more probable for your scenario is the judgement of works for christians mentioned in 1 Corinthians 3 ...

11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

Click to expand...

Since the passage does not refer to either the graphē (Scriptures) or even the logos (word of God) as it does everywhere else in Scripture when referring to itself, I think it's a much bigger stretch to assume that it is referring to Scripture.

I'm not sure why you didn't highlight this part, but it says that "Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. So I am very unclear about your contention that "For one thing, what scripture says about the Book of Life, is that the NAMES of the saved are found there, ... not necessarily any judgement upon their works."

The only book it records as being opened is the book of life, immediately followed by the statement that the dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. I would assume multiple volumes.....

narnia59 said:

Since the passage does not refer to either the graphē (Scriptures) or even the logos (word of God) as it does everywhere else in Scripture when referring to itself, I think it's a much bigger stretch to assume that it is referring to Scripture.

I'm not sure why you didn't highlight this part, but it says that "Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. So I am very unclear about your contention that "For one thing, what scripture says about the Book of Life, is that the NAMES of the saved are found there, ... not necessarily any judgement upon their works."

The only book it records as being opened is the book of life, immediately followed by the statement that the dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. I would assume multiple volumes.....

Click to expand...

Rev. 20

12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

The unsaved cannot be judged out of the Lamb's Book of Life, ... because their names are not found there ...

Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

A_Thinker said:

Rev. 20

12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

The unsaved cannot be judged out of the Lamb's Book of Life, ... because their names are not found there ...

Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

Click to expand...

I acknowledge there are multiple books. Paul's passage still seems very clear to me that this event and book(s) are what he is referencing when he says do not go beyond what is written because it aligns with the context of what he says.

narnia59 said:

I acknowledge there are multiple books. Paul's passage still seems very clear to me that this event and book(s) are what he is referencing when he says do not go beyond what is written because it aligns with the context of what he says.

Click to expand...

Do you realize that the Revelation passage was, most likely, not yet written when Paul wrote to the Corinthian church ?