.

[Extraneous]

And perhaps you're doing the same-putting your faith in yourself more than you know. I don't doubt your faith in God BTW. I just think it's somewhat misguided and uniformed.

Im free to do what i think is truth. God will judge.

 

[Extraneous]

That wasn't an answer to the question.

You said the early churches didn't understand Scripture. I asked you what was the basis of your accusation.

-CryptoLutheran

I wouldn't want to get into it, its just not worth it. If you think the "early" Churches (the ones you are talking about anyway, not the ones in scripture) if you think they understood scripture then go join RCC.

 

[fhansen]

Im free to do what i think is truth. God will judge.

I don't disagree-that's the same for us all. It was just a suggestion. Personally I've appreciated what Augustine said, "All truth is God's truth". Wherever we find it.

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

That doesn't address the question. How do you know what God's word is? Where did you get that information from? As just an example: Why does your Bible contain the Revelation of John but not the Revelation of Peter? Do you know?

-CryptoLutheran

So you are incapable of comprehending that GOD is more than capable of preserving HIS WORD?

 

[ViaCrucis]

So you are incapable of comprehending that GOD is more than capable of preserving HIS WORD?

That I am capable of comprehending and understanding that idea.

But it still isn't a response to the question I offered.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

That I am capable of comprehending and understanding that idea.

But it still isn't a response to the question I offered.

-CryptoLutheran

Your not accepting my answer does in no way invalidate it does it?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Your not accepting my answer does in no way invalidate it does it?

So the book of Tobit. God's word, yes or no?

How do you know?

"God preserved His word" doesn't answer the question concerning the canonical status of Tobit. Because Tobit still very much exists and is found in Bibles in history and around the world. But if you reject the canonical status of Tobit, how did you arrive at that conclusion? "God preserves His word" doesn't get you to the conclusion that Tobit is Scripture or Tobit isn't Scripture. If your argument is that God preserves His word and therefore Tobit isn't Scripture because God's word was "restored" in the 19th century, well you'll need something to back that up with.

That's why your answer doesn't address the question.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

So the book of Tobit. God's word, yes or no?

How do you know?

"God preserved His word" doesn't answer the question concerning the canonical status of Tobit. Because Tobit still very much exists and is found in Bibles in history and around the world. But if you reject the canonical status of Tobit, how did you arrive at that conclusion? "God preserves His word" doesn't get you to the conclusion that Tobit is Scripture or Tobit isn't Scripture. If your argument is that God preserves His word and therefore Tobit isn't Scripture because God's word was "restored" in the 19th century, well you'll need something to back that up with.

That's why your answer doesn't address the question.

-CryptoLutheran

Your argument is moot because at this point you obviously don't believe God is capable of preserving HIS word nor do you have any faith God is capable of doing so. My question is why do you claim to be a Christian?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Your argument is moot because at this point you obviously don't believe God is capable of preserving HIS word nor do you have any faith God is capable of doing so. My question is why do you claim to be a Christian?

Your accusation is both baseless and offensive.

You still haven't addressed what I've asked, you've dodged it several times now, but you haven't actually addressed it. Further, attacking my faith personally also doesn't address the question.

So for the sake of clarity and to keep the point clear: Why or why don't you accept the book of Tobit as Scripture?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

Your accusation is both baseless and offensive.

You still haven't addressed what I've asked, you've dodged it several times now, but you haven't actually addressed it. Further, attacking my faith personally also doesn't address the question.

So for the sake of clarity and to keep the point clear: Why or why don't you accept the book of Tobit as Scripture?

-CryptoLutheran

Your rantings aren't helping your foolish argument. I have faith in God and that GOD can do whatever HE claimed HE did in the BIBLE. So your accusations are foolish and unchristian

 

[fhansen]

Your rantings aren't helping your foolish argument. I have faith in God and that GOD can do whatever HE claimed HE did in the BIBLE. So your accusations are foolish and unchristian

You've actually placed your faith in a certain group of men-that their particular canon is the correct one.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Your rantings aren't helping your foolish argument. I have faith in God and that GOD can do whatever HE claimed HE did in the BIBLE. So your accusations are foolish and unchristian

Where in the Bible does God tell us the contents of the Bible? Where in the Bible can we find the Bible?

To say that God preserves Holy Scripture in and for the Church we still have to address the question of how we get the Bible in the first place and why we have it in the first place.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Where in the Bible does God tell us the contents of the Bible? Where in the Bible can we find the Bible?

To say that God preserves Holy Scripture in and for the Church we still have to address the question of how we get the Bible in the first place and why we have it in the first place.

-CryptoLutheran

A common theme in some of the more active and contentious threads I've been involved in is the lack of understanding that God uses means. For example, He uses teachers to instruct the church. He uses preachers to preach the gospel. He uses bread, wine and water to impart grace. . .

He acts through people, as in the writing, compiling and preservation of His written word. Men were involved in every step.

 

[Job8]

Should our understanding of God (theology) be based on our own reasoning or feelings, or on the texts of holy scripture?

The answer is self-evident. Scripture is essentially a revelation of God and Christ, therefore we can only arrive at a proper understanding of God through the Bible. Yet there are some who claim to believe the Bible, yet distort the truth about God and Christ. For example, the sovereignty of God is distorted to mean Pre-determinism. The grace is God is distorted so that it does not extend to all humanity. And we could go on and on. So, these distortions are based on human (and humanistic) reasoning.

 

[Job8]

Where in the Bible does God tell us the contents of the Bible? Where in the Bible can we find the Bible?

Read Luke 24:44-48 and 2 Peter 3:15,16. That covers the bulk of the contents of the Bible. Other books [e.g. Exodus (with reference to the Torah) and Revelation] plainly declared that they are divinely inspired.

 

[Job8]

Not all Christians are Sola Scriptura adherants, and that may account for some of the strange views in GT.

That begs the question "Why not?" The Muslims proclaim that their Koran is divinely inspired (and flawless), the Orthodox Jews proclaim that their Tanakh is divinely inspired (and flawless) and so on.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Read Luke 24:44-48 and 2 Peter 3:15,16. That covers the bulk of the contents of the Bible. Other books [e.g. Exodus (with reference to the Torah) and Revelation] plainly declared that they are divinely inspired.

If I wrote a book and claimed my book was divinely inspired, would you believe it? I'd argue therefore that's not a particularly good argument.

Further, neither the passages in Luke nor 2 Peter actually spell out any books for us. I'll grant that we can be infer, based on external knowledge, that the Law and the Prophets refers to the five books of the Pentateuch and the Major and Minor Prophets. What 2 Peter doesn't do is tell us anything about which of Paul's writings are to be accepted--do we accept the letter of Paul to the Laodiceans? Why or why not?

In both passages offered we still have to look outside of Scripture itself to find an answer.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Alithis]

So the book of Tobit. God's word, yes or no?

How do you know?

"God preserved His word" doesn't answer the question concerning the canonical status of Tobit. Because Tobit still very much exists and is found in Bibles in history and around the world. But if you reject the canonical status of Tobit, how did you arrive at that conclusion? "God preserves His word" doesn't get you to the conclusion that Tobit is Scripture or Tobit isn't Scripture. If your argument is that God preserves His word and therefore Tobit isn't Scripture because God's word was "restored" in the 19th century, well you'll need something to back that up with.

That's why your answer doesn't address the question.

-CryptoLutheran

Tobit.. Not inspired by the holy spirit.
Not holy scripture.
Apart from the obvious,that it is fanciful mythical stories.
It was penned during the time that God had already foretold he would NOT speak..
So to say any writings at that time are inspired by the spirit of God is a contradiction of the Spirit of God.

To consider the op question.. I would say..imo, my theology is based firstly on the law and the prophets..by that ,in this case,i mean genesis to Malachi .
Why i say that is..,When the apostle penned under the inspiration of the holy spiritthat "all scripture is God breathed and is profitable for instruction ..".etc.. He had to be referring to the law and the prophets(genesis to malchi) because there was no "new testiment collection".

Nor was he refering to books of the apocrapha for both the reason already given And that he never quotes nor refers to them.
Also i observe that every doctrine in the epistles is found in origin in the law and the prophets.
So the basis (foundation)for my theology is in the old testiment.the explanation and expounding of it in the new and the spiritual comprehension of it given by the holyspirit who bears witness to the truth and leads us into all truth.

 

[BornAgainChristian1]

If I wrote a book and claimed my book was divinely inspired, would you believe it? I'd argue therefore that's not a particularly good argument.

Further, neither the passages in Luke nor 2 Peter actually spell out any books for us. I'll grant that we can be infer, based on external knowledge, that the Law and the Prophets refers to the five books of the Pentateuch and the Major and Minor Prophets. What 2 Peter doesn't do is tell us anything about which of Paul's writings are to be accepted--do we accept the letter of Paul to the Laodiceans? Why or why not?

In both passages offered we still have to look outside of Scripture itself to find an answer.

-CryptoLutheran

It all comes down to your faith that God is more than capable of preserving HIS WORD. That is on you and no one else.

Romans 10:17 [Full Chapter]
Then faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

 

[Job8]

If I wrote a book and claimed my book was divinely inspired, would you believe it? I'd argue therefore that's not a particularly good argument.

Except when it is God who tells us that the Bible is His revelation, we can simply believe it. There are good, solid reasons to believe that only God could have given us this revelation, not least of which are fulfilled prophecy, and the existence of millions of people who are Christians, and believe what God has said, and exhibit a transformed life.

Getting back to the OP, unless our theology is rooted and grounded in Scripture, it is meaningless. And it requires Christians to study and search the Scriptures. Too many pastors and teachers fail to train Christians to actually study the Bible for themselves, and establish their beliefs on what is revealed.

Take the example of eternal Hell (the Lake of Fire). Humanly speaking Hell is abhorrent, and therefore many cults reject the existence of Hell, and teach annihilationism or universalism. But Scripture clearly reveals that there is a place which is called the Lake of Fire, which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, but will also be the ultimate destiny of those who are not saved. Is all this found in the Bible? Absolutely. There are numerous passages that mention Hell (gehenna) or the Lake of Fire, and Christ spoke of the "damnation of Hell": Ye serpents,ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? (Mt 23:33).