The BIBLE only is the standard for truth... (2)

[simonthezealot]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "The BIBLE only is the standard for truth..."

 

[ananda]

Yes, I noticed your comment earlier in reference to "law, prophets, gospels" and took note of it.
But I certainly believe that the epistles are "Scripture" as they do have power.

I agree that the apostolic epistles are "Scripture" ... they are inspired traditions and equivalent to the "Prophets", so to speak.

On the other hand, the Roman Catholics (for example), may be seen as having elevated their 72 books into the realm of "Law", and now consider their catechisms and magisterium (their new traditions) as new entries in their "Prophets" section.

 

[simonthezealot]

I agree that the apostolic epistles are "Scripture" ... they are inspired traditions and equivalent to the "Prophets", so to speak.

On the other hand, the Roman Catholics (for example), may be seen as having elevated their 72 books into the realm of "Law", and now consider their catechisms and magisterium as new entries in their "Prophets" section.

Jesus' own words
"16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it."

IOW no more scruipture is to be written by prophets.

They (rcc)would fall into the everyone category then?

"God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world,"

 

[simonthezealot]

And as far as prophets go their words count insofar as the follow the teachings of the apostles written instruction.

1 Corinthians 14:37 (NASB95)
37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment.

 

[simonthezealot]

Once the foundation was laid their (prophets and apostles work was done)
20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone

 

[ananda]

Jesus' own words
"16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it."

Have you considered this alternative: "The Law and the Prophets were until John; since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and you are all inflicting violence upon it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the Law to fail."

I suggest that the Pharisees (whom Messiah was preaching against in that context) were inflicting violence upon the gospel (Messiah's authoritative interpretations & traditions regarding the Law and the Prophets, which will not fail).

IOW no more scruipture is to be written by prophets.

I suggest that the apostles are also prophets - spokesmen for YHVH & Messiah ... so Messiah wasn't saying that there was to be an end of the Prophets, just that He was establishing the true authoritative traditions (interpretation) regarding the Law and the Prophets ... and simultaneously rejecting the traditions (interpretation) of the Pharisees.

 

[simonthezealot]

Why is it that the Old Testament writers, Jesus, and the apostles turn to the Scriptures as their measuring stick, and commend the same to any of us that would follow them.

 

[simonthezealot]

Have you considered this alternative: "The Law and the Prophets were until John; since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and you are all inflicting violence upon it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the Law to fail."

I suggest that the Pharisees (whom Messiah was preaching against in that context) were inflicting violence upon the gospel (Messiah's authoritative interpretations & traditions regarding the Law and the Prophets, which will not fail).

I suggest that the apostles are also prophets - spokesmen for YHVH & Messiah ... so Messiah wasn't saying that there was to be an end of the Prophets, just that He was establishing the true authoritative traditions (interpretation) regarding the Law and the Prophets ... and simultaneously rejecting the traditions (interpretation) of the Pharisees.

I agree with some of this, the apostles in a sense picked up where the prophets left off...As is mnow teachers and evangelist picked up where the apostles left off.

 

[ananda]

I agree with some of this, the apostles in a sense picked up where the prophets left off...As is mnow teachers and evangelist picked up where the apostles left off.

The problem is ... the Biblical standard for a "prophet" is extremely high. An authentic prophet may interpret authoritatively, given a direct mandate from Heaven (e.g. OT prophets, apostles). Regular teachers and evangelists can only claim to give personal opinions.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

The issue is not whether the bible is the Word of God, the question is who gets to interpret it?



We all should study scripture, but by what authority could we challenge the interpretations of the Church?

 

[simonthezealot]

The issue is not whether the bible is the Word of God, the question is who gets to interpret it?



We all should study scripture, but by what authority could we challenge the interpretations of the Church?

Paul gives some insight in a couple different areas...

Paul wrote...
“If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual,let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor 14:37)

The Holy Ghost, out of the mouth of Paul, says, "Prove all things. Hold fast that which is good." Here are two great truths:

1st...The right, duty, and necessity of private judgment. "Prove all things."

2nd...The duty and necessity of keeping firm hold upon truth. "Hold fast that which is good."

 

[simonthezealot]

The problem is ... the Biblical standard for a "prophet" is extremely high. An authentic prophet may interpret authoritatively, given a direct mandate from Heaven (e.g. OT prophets, apostles). Regular teachers and evangelists can only claim to give personal opinions.

prophets authority only goes as far as it aligns with what is written as shoeewn above.

teachers and evangelists as well... It does not mean they will not err..Hence false teachers and false prophets.

 

[Root of Jesse]

From the closed thread to Solomon:

Originally Posted by Root of Jesse

I haven't called you anti-Catholic, or anything of the sort, have I? I understand that you reject the belief of infallibility. But do you so reject that the apostles were infallible? Remember what the term means to us...
​

I was in no way implying that you did call me that.
When it comes to claims about infallibility-incapable of making a mistake in specified matters-it goes beyond human capability of anybody.

You're right, it is beyond human capability. It is not, however, beyond God's capability. It's the Holy Spirit that provides the charism, not the human.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Here's a great critique of the improper use of scripture from Irenaeus:


Texts of Holy Scripture used by these heretics to support their opinions.


And it is not only from the writings of the evangelists and the apostles that they endeavour to derive proofs for their opinions by means of perverse interpretations and deceitful expositions: they deal in the same way with the law and the prophets, which contain many parables and allegories that can frequently be drawn into various senses, according to the kind of exegesis to which they are subjected. And others of them, with great craftiness, adapted such parts of Scripture to their own figments, lead away captive from the truth those who do not retain a steadfast faith in one God, the Father Almighty, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.



Contrasted with the Church:

2. As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world.

CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, I.3 (St. Irenaeus)

 

[Root of Jesse]

Sunlover1, you said:

I would think the sound of God's voice would far
outweigh " a room full of speakers" in this case

My reply:
It's an analogy. God's word is not limited to what's been written, and wasn't written to begin with.

 

[Root of Jesse]

BobRyan, you said:

Originally Posted by Root of Jesse

Depending on whose Bible translation you're using...we agree-if it contradicts Scripture, it's wrong.
​

You would think that this would be the "easy starting point" from which to have the discussion. Instead of that we often have to wrangle the RCC side out of starting off taking a baseball bat to it.

I am glad that there is at least one that will accept this as a good starting point.

in Christ,

Bob

My reply:
It's waaaaay more than one. We start with Scripture, on an equal footing with Sacred Tradition and Magisterium. They're all God's word.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Albion, you said:
Originally Posted by Root of Jesse

Depending on whose Bible translation you're using...we agree-if it contradicts Scripture, it's wrong.
​

If it supplements Scripture, it's equally wrong.

My reply, there's nothing against supplements. There is an issue with contradictions. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Scripture alone is the only authority.

 

[simonthezealot]

My reply, there's nothing against supplements. There is an issue with contradictions. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Scripture alone is the only authority.

Equally, it is evident that Scripture argues for its own authority, yet Scripture nowhere argues for authoritative tradition being equal with Scripture.

Furthermore, the Old Testament writers, Jesus, and the apostles all turn to the Scriptures as their measuring stick.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Equally, it is evident that Scripture argues for its own authority, yet Scripture nowhere argues for authoritative tradition being equal with Scripture.

Scripture is self-attesting? Show me.

Furthermore, the Old Testament writers, Jesus, and the apostles all turn to the Scriptures as their measuring stick.

Jesus quoted non-Biblical traditions in his teaching. So did the Apostles. The Canon of Scripture was different in different Jewish circles. Sadducees didn't believe in the prophets, only the Torah. So there was no canon of Scripture until after the Christian Church developed its canon of Scripture.

 

[simonthezealot]

Scripture is self-attesting? Show me.

Really? Christ Himself chastising one by stating, "have you not read what God has spoken to you"

Peter called Paul's writings Scripture. In turn, Paul called Scriptures "God-breathed," and Jesus said the Scriptures cannot fail.
John stated his words scripture..
the list goes on and on.

Christ appealing to the authority of scripture against the devil, why because scripture is how God exercises his authority, it is His word!