Solving the Problem of false doctrine

[JAL]

I asked: "When the prophet Abraham heard a Voice commanding him to sacrifice his son, was he commendable for regarding it as authoritative?"

of course.

Great. This means you've admitted that a voice can be authoritative wherefore Sola Scriptura is utterly a lie from hell. That's a good start.

Now we just need to fill in the specific details. So I ask you, do you have any thoughts on how we can immediately recognize a voice as authoritative without recourse to Scripture?

As I said earlier, it's a pretty simple question because surely there is only one plausible answer. Waiting.

 

[Vanellus]

Were there any scriptures for Abraham to refer to?

 

[All Becomes New]

Were there any scriptures for Abraham to refer to?

I think this is a good question. But my answer is that either God directly told Abraham what he needed to know or the information that Abraham needed to know was passed on since the beginning of humanity (however you want to slice that up).

 

[JAL]

I think this is a good question. But my answer is that either God directly told Abraham what he needed to know or the information that Abraham needed to know was passed on since the beginning of humanity (however you want to slice that up).

What do you mean by "information"? Suppose I have some "information" in my head that tells me I should slaughter my son. Should I proceed, as Abrahaham did?

Abraham was responsive to a voice. Moses and Joshua were responsive to a Voice commanding them to slaughter seven nations to lay hold of Canaan.

How did these three men know that the Voice was authoritative?

 

[All Becomes New]

What do you mean by "information"? Suppose I have some "information" in my head that tells me I should slaughter my son. Should I proceed, as Abrahaham did?

Abraham was responsive to a voice. Moses and Joshua were responsive to a Voice commanding them to slaughter seven nations to lay hold of Canaan.

How did these three men know that the Voice was authoritative?

Some things were given directly from God. But the story of Adam? And Noah? And the Tower of Babel? I'm not sure God directly told them this. Rather I think it's possible these were things that were passed down through the generations. No one is saying that God didn't directly talk to these people. I'm just saying for some things, I reserve my judgment.

 

[All Becomes New]

I'm not following you. Or maybe you're saying that you're just not sure.

Let me put it this way: Did God tell Moses what God said to Abraham, or did Moses find out from the Israelites (which he was one) what God told Abraham? Otherwise you run into the problem of what the point of the written scripture are at all if every person who wrote the Bible got the history of all God's interactions with other people to the person.

 

[JAL]

Were there any scriptures for Abraham to refer to?

Are you sure that would make a difference?

If Abraham had Scripture:
....(1) Would it likely have commanded him to kill his son? If so, why didn't he finish the job?
....(2) Why did he need a voice, if he had scripture?
....(3) Isn't this just pushing the issue back one step further? How would he know that scripture was authoritative?

 

[JAL]

I mean, it's not like anything changed in the NT, right? Paul heard the following voice on the road to Damascus:

"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” He replied.a 6“Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”'

He both believed it and obeyed it. Why? How did he know it was authoritative?

Again, it's a simple question, as it seems there is only one possible answer.

 

[JAL]

In the following passage, a voice was heard in two separate dreams, apparently:

19After Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt 20and said, “Get up, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who were trying to take the child’s life are dead.”

21So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee.

Why obey a dream?

 

[JAL]

Peter had a Jewish understanding of Scripture. Based on a scholarly analysis of Scripture, the Jews shunned the Gentiles as unclean. Then he saw a vision and heard a voice counseling him to regard the Gentiles as clean (Acts 10). Peter heeded the vision at the first opportunity.

Why did Peter allow a voice to override his scholarly analysis of Scripture?

 

[All Becomes New]

Otherwise you run into the problem of what the point of the written scripture are at all if every person who wrote the Bible got the history of all God's interactions with other people to the person.

I don't mean to combat the idea that God did not (or does not) speak directly to people today. I just think it's very plausible that some things were passed down.

 

[JAL]

I don't mean to combat the idea that God did not (or does not) speak directly to people today. I just think it's very plausible that some things were passed down.

Fine. Mostly I've been waiting for @BobRyan to provide a plausible answer as to how we can recognize an authoritative voice.

 

[Jipsah]

Prophecy can't be trusted? Too bad. Guess you'll have to throw out your Bible.

Depends on the prophecy, dunnit? There area bunch of "prophets: out there who can't hit the floor with their hats. But they can says "Thus saith the Lord" with the best of them. So I reckon you'll just have to include all their rubbish in your Bible.

 

[Jipsah]

Prophecy can't be trusted? Too bad. Guess you'll have to throw out your Bible.
First of all, Paul commanded the church to pursue prophecy.

Cool. I hereby proclaim myself a prophet, licensed by the sovereign State of Tennessee. You must now accept anything I say as true. List of new dogmas will be out shortly.

 

[Vanellus]

Are you sure that would make a difference?

If Abraham had Scripture:
....(1) Would it likely have commanded him to kill his son? If so, why didn't he finish the job?
....(2) Why did he need a voice, if he had scripture?
....(3) Isn't this just pushing the issue back one step further? How would he know that scripture was authoritative?

It's odd for you to stress the point that Abraham heard God speaking him to in some way, rather than being guided by scripture, when there wasn't any agreed scripture in Abraham's time for Abraham to study.

 

[JAL]

Depends on the prophecy, dunnit? There area bunch of "prophets: out there who can't hit the floor with their hats. But they can says "Thus saith the Lord" with the best of them. So I reckon you'll just have to include all their rubbish in your Bible.

Cool. I hereby proclaim myself a prophet, licensed by the sovereign State of Tennessee. You must now accept anything I say as true. List of new dogmas will be out shortly.

Aren't these responses a bit childish? You imply that accepting one voice means you have to accept all voices (all or nothing). Yet I was clear that:
....(1) not all voices are authoritative.
....(2) some voices were authoritative as seen in prophets like Abraham, Noah, Moses, Joshua, Peter, and Paul, and even in laymen like Joseph and Mary. I also mentioned Jesus and John the Baptist being led by the Spirit from the mother's womb.
....(3) therefore it's pretty clear that the authority wasn't based on "scholarly analysis". How could a foretelling, for example, be preestablished by scholarly analysis?
...(4) Ergo there must be an intuitive, non-scholarly way to distinguish an authoritative voice from a non-authoritative one. Obviously.

So how to do it? C'mon. I've seen some of your posts. You're a brilliant guy. You really can't figure this out?

 

[JAL]

It's odd for you to stress the point that Abraham heard God speaking him to in some way, rather than being guided by scripture, when there wasn't any agreed scripture in Abraham's time for Abraham to study.

I'm just considering the possibilities. If you're still not sure what I'm driving at, please see the recent summary at post 96.

 

[JAL]

Is the evangelical church unable to figure out how an authoritative voice works? The truth here is twofold, from what I can see.
...(1) They don't really want to figure it out because it undermines Sola Scriptura.
...(2) And, they actually have figured it out, in one sense. Evangelicals are very explicit about the (obvious) solution. They just don't apply it broadly due to #1.

 

[JAL]

Everyone:

Would it help to consider angels? How does an angel know the true God is speaking? Must he rely on a scholarly analysis of Scripture?

 

[JAL]

Christians should feel completely free, safe, and liberated to fearlessly pursue the gift of prophecy (1 Cor 14:1) with a kind of reckless wild abandon. Unfortunately Sola Scriptura has quenched such uninhibited zeal by excluding the idea of authoritative voice. The end result is a multitude of Christians who will never stand a chance of even remotely approaching the maturity-level of prophets like Abraham and David - people who knew God intimately.