Biases

[Eternally Grateful]

The first was done not only to be freed from the bonds of slavery, but also to save lives of the first born as God willed.
The second is done as a remembrance of the first to free the faithful from the bonds of sin, death and the power of the devil; in effect saving the "first born of Christ" i.e. the faithful that believe in the tangible gifts and benefits in the Eucharist the way the Jews believed in God and the promised deliverance.

The first was done to give life to whoever eat of it.

as he said they would never hunger or thirst. Never die, live forever. Be sailed on the last day. Have eternal life. Etc etc.

the second is done to remember the reason why the first became a reality

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Inspiration from the Holy Spirit is not confined to Scripture, why do you wish to limit the Holy Spirit?

Actually yes it is.

don‘et let anyone tell you otherwise.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Actually yes it is.

don‘et let anyone tell you otherwise.

There you go, putting limits on God yet again. So far, from your posts, I understand that after creation the Father's work was done; after Jesus Christ died and was raised from the dead and ascended into heaven, His work is done; following Pentecost and the closing of the cannon of Scripture, the Holy Spirit, His work is done also; so why are you even bothering to post? Seriously.

 

[ViaCrucis]

lol. I study the word. I do not have to just read it out loud.

do you read letters sent to you out loud?

How do you think most Christians experienced Scripture before the invention of the printing press and widespread literacy?

I don't read letters sent to me out loud, but the churches to which St. Paul wrote did, in fact, read these letters out loud. That's the only way they would have been able to experience what Paul wrote to them. That is, in fact, how the New Testament originated: Those letters which were read out loud, copied, sent to other churches, and read out loud; which were ultimately added to the regular Scripture readings (Old Testament) which was taken from Jewish synagogue liturgy. That's where the Bible comes from: What books were read out loud in the churches, i.e., what books were considered holy and divinely inspired Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

I was saved for many years before I even heard of any creed. And was united with many different churches. Of a few denominations.

We were United in the word..

I'm willing to put money that all the different churches shared similar confessions and doctrinal positions; and thus all shared a basic creed and confession.

Pitting Scripture against creeds is like saying we should rely on the textbook but never apply what we learn. The Creed is an example of how we apply Scripture to the Christian life--by coming together to affirm and confess what has been given to us from the beginning, and what Scripture itself attests to.

If you have a problem with anything in the Nicene Creed, it's not because of anything in the Bible--the Creed is in 100% agreement with Holy Scripture. In the language of technology, we would call that user error.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Eternally Grateful]

There you go, putting limits on God yet again.

Limits on God?

No my friend. Just taking God at his word.

God said ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired.

He did not hint or tell us that any other form of communication would be inspired.

That is what happens when we put the words of men above the word of God in scripture..

So far, from your posts, I understand that after creation the Father's work was done; after Jesus Christ died and was raised from the dead and ascended into heaven, His work is done;

Nope. He sent the church out. What did he say was the churches mission?

Luke 24: 46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

there is the mission of the church my friend. God into satan's domain, Go through the gates of hell which will never prevail. and teach the gospel of salvation to all nations..

following Pentecost and the closing of the cannon of Scripture, the Holy Spirit, His work is done also; so why are you even bothering to post? Seriously.

see above.

When your church does not even teach the message of forgiveness by through the blood. You need all these things outside the word of God. because otherwise. people would read the word and your religion would be exposed (sound familiar?)

 

[Eternally Grateful]

How do you think most Christians experienced Scripture before the invention of the printing press and widespread literacy?

well lets see, In pauls day they would have it read to them, or they could go pull a scroll and read it themselves.

I don't read letters sent to me out loud, but the churches to which St. Paul wrote did, in fact, read these letters out loud. That's the only way they would have been able to experience what Paul wrote to them. That is, in fact, how the New Testament originated: Those letters which were read out loud, copied, sent to other churches, and read out loud; which were ultimately added to the regular Scripture readings (Old Testament) which was taken from Jewish synagogue liturgy. That's where the Bible comes from: What books were read out loud in the churches, i.e., what books were considered holy and divinely inspired Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran

I have been to a catholic church, many times. Yes they read a part of scripture. But then that's it.. within 5 minutes I forgot what I even read because the priest was rambling on about something else.

I have seen the same in orthodox churches. and other churches.

In the book of acts. It says they met often (most think almost daily) in the apostles doctrine (they studied the word) Fellowship (they hung out together) the breaking of bread (they had a meal together) and prayer (they prayed together, corporate prayer)

I do not see a church that does this today. even my own church does nto come close. Of course it is kind of hard. Back then they all lived together. today we are all seperated.

But what some people call the church? It looks nothing like the NT church

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I'm willing to put money that all the different churches shared similar confessions and doctrinal positions; and thus all shared a basic creed and confession.

Actually they looked to the word. Not some creed.

Pitting Scripture against creeds is like saying we should rely on the textbook but never apply what we learn. The Creed is an example of how we apply Scripture to the Christian life--by coming together to affirm and confess what has been given to us from the beginning, and what Scripture itself attests to.

lol. I am just pitting the word of God against itself. You want to share some creed. feel free.

I do not need it.

When people ask me my faith. I share the word.

If you have a problem with anything in the Nicene Creed, it's not because of anything in the Bible--the Creed is in 100% agreement with Holy Scripture. In the language of technology, we would call that user error.

-CryptoLutheran

Again, There are two points in the creed with which it could be taken in a wrong way.

So to say it is 100% in agreement, I would say it depends on its interpretation.

which I why I would rather stick to the word.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

God said ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired.

Without the Latin word to disguise the meaning that phrase says "all writing is inspired by God"

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Without the Latin word to disguise the meaning that phrase says "all writing is inspired by God"

My word was written in greek. not latin.. so not sure what your saying here

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

My word was written in greek. not latin.. so not sure what your saying here

Try looking up the etymology of "scripture"

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Try looking up the etymology of "scripture"

Greek word is graphe it means writing scripture.

Again not sure how Latin has anything to do with the Greek

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Greek word is graphe it means writing scripture.

Again not sure how Latin has anything to do with the Greek

Oh dear, I asked you to look up "scripture" but that seems to have been too much to ask.

scripture (n.)​

early 14c., "the sacred writings of the Bible, the books of the Old and New Testaments" (in this sense commonly with a capital); from Medieval Latin and Late Latin scriptura "the writings contained in the Bible, a passage from the Bible," in classical Latin "a writing, character, inscription," from scriptus, past participle of scribere "to write" (from PIE root *skribh- "to cut").​

​

The word in Middle English also could mean "a writing, an act of writing, written characters" (mid-14c.), a sense now rare. The sense of "a passage from the Bible" is by late 14c. Figuratively, of something assuredly true, it is attested by 1570s. As an adjective, "relating to the Scriptures," by 1720.​

​

Scripturalist for "one who adheres literally to the Scriptures and makes them the foundation of all philosophy" is perhaps by 1725, certainly by 1857; earlier in this sense was scripturarian (1670s), scripturist (1620s). Related: Scripturalism.​

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Oh dear, I asked you to look up "scripture" but that seems to have been too much to ask.

scripture (n.)​

early 14c., "the sacred writings of the Bible, the books of the Old and New Testaments" (in this sense commonly with a capital); from Medieval Latin and Late Latin scriptura "the writings contained in the Bible, a passage from the Bible," in classical Latin "a writing, character, inscription," from scriptus, past participle of scribere "to write" (from PIE root *skribh- "to cut").​

​

The word in Middle English also could mean "a writing, an act of writing, written characters" (mid-14c.), a sense now rare. The sense of "a passage from the Bible" is by late 14c. Figuratively, of something assuredly true, it is attested by 1570s. As an adjective, "relating to the Scriptures," by 1720.​

​

Scripturalist for "one who adheres literally to the Scriptures and makes them the foundation of all philosophy" is perhaps by 1725, certainly by 1857; earlier in this sense was scripturarian (1670s), scripturist (1620s). Related: Scripturalism.​

lol

Most of the NT was written in greek my friend

when someone comes up and tells me to look up in Latin. I tend to walk away

The English definition I have learned also is not really too reliable. it is someone's idea of what they think the word means, and it changes all the time (I can remember when the word "ain't" was not in a dictionary, now it is. The word language at one time was not in the english text. it was called tongues. Today the word tongues has a totally different meaning..

stick to the original text. you will not go wrong

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Most of the NT was written in greek my friend

Most of your posts are written in English, or at least "American"

 

[ViaCrucis]

or they could go pull a scroll and read it themselves.

Right, illiterate people could just walk to their local library and pull a scroll off the shelf to read. That's definitely an accurate depiction of the ancient world.

I have been to a catholic church, many times. Yes they read a part of scripture. But then that's it.. within 5 minutes I forgot what I even read because the priest was rambling on about something else.

I have seen the same in orthodox churches. and other churches.

In the book of acts. It says they met often (most think almost daily) in the apostles doctrine (they studied the word) Fellowship (they hung out together) the breaking of bread (they had a meal together) and prayer (they prayed together, corporate prayer)

I do not see a church that does this today. even my own church does nto come close. Of course it is kind of hard. Back then they all lived together. today we are all seperated.

But what some people call the church? It looks nothing like the NT church

It is through the historic Liturgy of the Christian Church that I came to have a better appreciation for what I read about in the Bible. The Liturgy is biblical.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Right, illiterate people could just walk to their local library and pull a scroll off the shelf to read. That's definitely an accurate depiction of the ancient world.

so what do they do today.

It is through the historic Liturgy of the Christian Church that I came to have a better appreciation for what I read about in the Bible. The Liturgy is biblical.

-CryptoLutheran

maybe for you

I have studied the bible for 45 years..

 

[ViaCrucis]

so what do they do today.

What do people who can't read do? What they've always done--rely on those who can.

In the ancient world you couldn't go pull a scroll off the shelf and read it. Even if you could read. Communities, Christian communities, had copies of Scripture, but these were incredibly valuable--each sheet of papyrus or vellum had to be meticulously hand-written. The way Christian experienced the Bible was by having it read to them.

In the Gospel of Luke where Jesus reads from the Isaiah scroll, that was standard Jewish practice. Synagogues had copies of the Torah and the Prophets (e.g. the Old Testament), and there were set readings for the day. Jesus didn't go and pick up the Isaiah scroll off the shelf and just read what He wanted--the scrolls were the property of the synagogue, and the day in question involved the particular reading from Isaiah, and Jesus was that day's reader. It is noteworthy, then, that the reading for that day was the passage in Isaiah about the future Jubilee, the year of Divine Favor; a passage loaded with messianic subtext--so when the Lord says, "Today this has been fulfilled in your hearing", that's the context of what's going on. Jesus read this on the day this was supposed to be read--Jesus' addition, the out of the ordinary here, is that He says, "Today this has been fulfilled"--a bold declaration that He is the Messiah, the One who brings about YHWH's Jubilee for the world.

The first Christians were all Jews, and they continued to worship in a normal Jewish way. Not only in the synagogues before they were eventually kicked out; but also in their own Lord's Day meetings. That's what Acts chapter 2 talks about--meeting together for prayer, the breaking of bread, and the apostles' doctrine. That's the Liturgy. It's right there at the very beginning, at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out on all flesh in fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, as Christ Himself said would happen when He promised the Paraclete who would come, and fulfilling the prophecy of St. John the Baptist, "He who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire". So that when the Spirit fell, the word went forth, and many were brought to faith in the Messiah, and after receiving Baptism (that Baptism which Christ Himself instituted in Matthew 28:19) they didn't re-invent the wheel for how to do a religious gathering. They retained the liturgical customs they were already familiar with, but these were now distinctively Christian. The homily was a Christian homily, the prayers were Christian prayers, the Scriptures were read and understood now through the revelation of the Messiah. What was especially unique here was the celebration of the Lord's Supper, the bread and wine which was the very flesh and blood of the Messiah broken and shed for them--as He Himself said, and the Apostles faithfully taught.

It was all there, right in the beginning.

maybe for you

I have studied the bible for 45 years..

Then you should know better.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What do people who can't read do? What they've always done--rely on those who can.

In the ancient world you couldn't go pull a scroll off the shelf and read it. Even if you could read. Communities, Christian communities, had copies of Scripture, but these were incredibly valuable--each sheet of papyrus or vellum had to be meticulously hand-written. The way Christian experienced the Bible was by having it read to them.

In the Gospel of Luke where Jesus reads from the Isaiah scroll, that was standard Jewish practice. Synagogues had copies of the Torah and the Prophets (e.g. the Old Testament), and there were set readings for the day. Jesus didn't go and pick up the Isaiah scroll off the shelf and just read what He wanted--the scrolls were the property of the synagogue, and the day in question involved the particular reading from Isaiah, and Jesus was that day's reader. It is noteworthy, then, that the reading for that day was the passage in Isaiah about the future Jubilee, the year of Divine Favor; a passage loaded with messianic subtext--so when the Lord says, "Today this has been fulfilled in your hearing", that's the context of what's going on. Jesus read this on the day this was supposed to be read--Jesus' addition, the out of the ordinary here, is that He says, "Today this has been fulfilled"--a bold declaration that He is the Messiah, the One who brings about YHWH's Jubilee for the world.

The first Christians were all Jews, and they continued to worship in a normal Jewish way. Not only in the synagogues before they were eventually kicked out; but also in their own Lord's Day meetings. That's what Acts chapter 2 talks about--meeting together for prayer, the breaking of bread, and the apostles' doctrine. That's the Liturgy. It's right there at the very beginning, at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out on all flesh in fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, as Christ Himself said would happen when He promised the Paraclete who would come, and fulfilling the prophecy of St. John the Baptist, "He who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire". So that when the Spirit fell, the word went forth, and many were brought to faith in the Messiah, and after receiving Baptism (that Baptism which Christ Himself instituted in Matthew 28:19) they didn't re-invent the wheel for how to do a religious gathering. They retained the liturgical customs they were already familiar with, but these were now distinctively Christian. The homily was a Christian homily, the prayers were Christian prayers, the Scriptures were read and understood now through the revelation of the Messiah. What was especially unique here was the celebration of the Lord's Supper, the bread and wine which was the very flesh and blood of the Messiah broken and shed for them--as He Himself said, and the Apostles faithfully taught.

It was all there, right in the beginning.



Then you should know better.

-CryptoLutheran

I do know better

thats why I point people to the bible. not to men or organizations..

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I have studied the bible for 45 years..

That long? That seems unlikely.