The First Resurrection

[CoreyD]

Question: If I can't trust what the Christian Church has said, and passed on to me as trustworthy, then how can I be expected to even trust the Bible? The Bible is one of those things which I've received from the Church.

-CryptoLutheran

This is an understandable question, which Jesus answers for us in Matthew 23:1-39.
It would be nice to reread the whole Chapter, which I am sure you have read before, but for a less lengthy reading, you just need to read Matthew 23:2, 3

God's word is just that - God's word.
It does not matter whose hands God allows it to go through.
God is in control of what man is allowed to do, or disallowed from doing with his word.
Since it is God's will that "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", "the word of the Lord endures forever". 1 Peter 1:25

For, “All people are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall,
but the word of the Lord endures forever.” And this is the word that was preached to you.​

This can be seen by simply tracing the history of the Bible to now.
Where the Bible came from, and what it has been through for say, 2,000 years, is too remarkable not to ascribe its survival to divine preservation.

The best-selling book of all time is the Christian Bible. It is impossible to know exactly how many copies have been printed in the roughly 1,500 years since its contents were standardized, but research conducted by the British and Foreign Bible Society in 2021 suggests that the total number probably lies between 5 and 7 billion copies.​

A few facts that stand out to me as remarkable, are

1. How the Bible was translated into other languages despite the fierce opposition against that task.
2. How God preserved his name so that, as Psalm 83:18 says That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

These works, if you know your history, were not the works of what people consider the Christian Church, but rather, these were works of individuals who went up against the authority of what people consider the Christian Church.

Those who went up against that authority were martyred... but the result? God - not what people consider the Christian Church - God made the Bible available to "common people" and today people can read the Bible in about 3,000 languages.

God is the one who backed the efforts of people to translate the Bible into different languages, and restore his name in its proper place.
There are other things God did, which people don't see, but the truth became available to people hungry for it, despite the efforts of Satan, to hide it.

So, you can trust God, and the Bible.
We know the Bible is true, despite attempts to alter it. God preserved his message, and faithful ones reading it today, can see that "every promise of the LORD your God has come true. Not a single one has failed" - Joshua 23:14

Tyndale Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Tyndale began a translation into English referencing a Greek text compiled by Erasmus from several manuscripts with texts then thought to pre-date the Latin Vulgate (whose Latin Gospel translations owed to Jerome but whose Epistles come from Old Latin versions.) The Vulgate was the only Latin translation in use by the Roman Catholic Church but had accumulated a multitude of small variations between hand-copied manuscript despite several regional efforts over the millenium to make a definitive text.

Tyndale made his purpose known to Bishop of London Cuthbert Tunstall but was refused permission. Thwarted in England, Tyndale moved to the continent.

Tyndale's translations and polemical books were condemned and banned in England by Catholic authorities: in particular almost all copies of his first 1526 New Testament, which authorities regarded as particularly flawed, were bought and burned by Bishop Cuthbert Tunstall...

[Tyndale] was declared a heretic for his Lutheran advocacy and defrocked. Tyndale now being voluntarily outside the protection of the Church, the Habsburg civil authorities then took him and sentenced him to be strangled to death and the body burned...

The Catholic Church had long proclaimed that the only true Church was the Catholic Church. The word church in Catholic teaching could only be used of the Catholic Church...

When Tyndale translated the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía) as congregation, he was thereby undermining the entire structure of the Catholic Church.

Many of the reform movements believed in the authority of scripture alone. To them it dictated how a "true" church should be organized and administered.

Do you think God approved of what some consider to be the Christian Church's actions?
If so, why?

 

[ViaCrucis]

This is an understandable question, which Jesus answers for us in Matthew 23:1-39.

Let's stop there. Seeing as I cannot trust the Christian Church, why should I trust the Church when she tells me that the Gospel according to Matthew is a true and faithful text which contains the very words of Jesus?

Your response here presumes the trustworthiness of the Gospel of Matthew. But the reason why you and I have the Gospel of Matthew is because it, along with Mark, Luke, and John have been received and accepted as the faithful Gospel witness to the life and words, the passion, death, and resurrection, of Jesus.

Without appealing to the history, tradition, and teaching of Christianity how would you try and convince me that I should even believe what is written in Matthew?

Just so we're clear, I'm not denying the authority of Matthew, I believe it is the divinely inspired word of God. But I believe that because I believe what has been passed down to me is faithful and true religion. I believe this because I am a Christian, a member of the Church catholic which Jesus started, holding to the confession of faith that I received.

But if you take that away, if you say the confession which I have received is false, that Christianity is untrustworthy, that the historic community of believing Christians is untrustworthy, then why should I accept what is written in Matthew?

Everything else you've written also presumes the trustworthiness of the Bible, as you make your appeal to Scripture. I'm asking you why I should even accept this collection of books to be God's word if I can't believe those who have told me that it is God's word.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CoreyD]

Let's stop there. Seeing as I cannot trust the Christian Church, why should I trust the Church when she tells me that the Gospel according to Matthew is a true and faithful text which contains the very words of Jesus?

Your response here presumes the trustworthiness of the Gospel of Matthew. But the reason why you and I have the Gospel of Matthew is because it, along with Mark, Luke, and John have been received and accepted as the faithful Gospel witness to the life and words, the passion, death, and resurrection, of Jesus.

Without appealing to the history, tradition, and teaching of Christianity how would you try and convince me that I should even believe what is written in Matthew?

Just so we're clear, I'm not denying the authority of Matthew, I believe it is the divinely inspired word of God. But I believe that because I believe what has been passed down to me is faithful and true religion. I believe this because I am a Christian, a member of the Church catholic which Jesus started, holding to the confession of faith that I received.

But if you take that away, if you say the confession which I have received is false, that Christianity is untrustworthy, that the historic community of believing Christians is untrustworthy, then why should I accept what is written in Matthew?

Everything else you've written also presumes the trustworthiness of the Bible, as you make your appeal to Scripture. I'm asking you why I should even accept this collection of books to be God's word if I can't believe those who have told me that it is God's word.

-CryptoLutheran

Why stop there, lest you don't want to hear?

 

[Grip Docility]

I know one thing for certain in my soul. If the sword comes for me, because of my Hope in Jesus Christ, I'm going to chant the same chant as the thousands of Christian Martyrs from 30AD to now and beyond.

I'm going to be holding on to the Hope in my soul that the slice of the sword will bring me home to Jesus, that very day. I'm going to defiantly and confidently say, by the grace of Jesus Christ, if that ever occurs, by His strength that I'm coming HOME.

No spiritual slight of hand will take this portion of my Armor of God away.

This is my opinon.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Why stop there, lest you don't want to hear?

I read your post, but I would like you to address what I'm asking. Quoting Matthew, or anything in the Bible, presumes the authority and trustworthiness of the Bible.

Why should I consider what is written in Matthew trustworthy in the first place?

Why Matthew and not, say, the Gospel of Thomas, or the Gospel of Philip, or the Qu'ran?

I'm asking for a reason, apart from Christian teaching, belief, and confession that the Bible is God's word, to believe the Bible is trustworthy.

Not because I doubt any of these things, but because you do.

You are the one saying Christian teaching is unreliable. You've gone so far as to quote the Bible to try and defend that position. So now I'm asking you why, if Christian teaching is unreliable, why I should accept this particular Christian teaching: The Bible.

Do you understand why I'm asking this?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CoreyD]

I read your post, but I would like you to address what I'm asking. Quoting Matthew, or anything in the Bible, presumes the authority and trustworthiness of the Bible.

Why should I consider what is written in Matthew trustworthy in the first place?

Why Matthew and not, say, the Gospel of Thomas, or the Gospel of Philip, or the Qu'ran?

I'm asking for a reason, apart from Christian teaching, belief, and confession that the Bible is God's word, to believe the Bible is trustworthy.

Not because I doubt any of these things, but because you do.

You are the one saying Christian teaching is unreliable. You've gone so far as to quote the Bible to try and defend that position. So now I'm asking you why, if Christian teaching is unreliable, why I should accept this particular Christian teaching: The Bible.

Do you understand why I'm asking this?

-CryptoLutheran

The questions you are asking is the same as you previously asked, and I answered this in the post you said you read.
If you did read it, I don't know why you do not see the answer.
Perhaps read it again? I don't know.

 

[Grip Docility]

The questions you are asking is the same as you previously asked, and I answered this in the post you said you read.
If you did read it, I don't know why you do not see the answer.
Perhaps read it again? I don't know.

@ViaCrucis is referring to what is known as the sacred transmission of Scripture that led to finalized Biblical Cannon, while proofing OT and NT validity. Atheist's attempt to future date the transmission of scripture and claim that it was given at a far later date than 70AD and such forth. Atheist's tend to argue that scriptural transmission wasn't real and actually began around 300AD - 600AD.

However, by the writings of the scriptural chain of custody custodians, we can zero in on Scripture all the way back to Jesus, through John the Revelator.

The Custodial names look like this:

Jesus words to the Apostles.
John the Revelator, Disciple of Jesus, and Apostle upon Jesus' death.
To Irenaeus.
To Justin Martyr
To Papias
To Barnabas
To Ignatius
To Polycarp
To Mathetes
To Clement of Rome,

The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325​

Volume I. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus.
Volume II. Fathers of the Second Century
Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria
Volume III. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian
Three Parts: I. Apologetic; II. Anti-Marcion; III. Ethical
Volume IV. The Fathers of the Third Century
Tertullian Part IV; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen
Volume V. The Fathers of the Third Century
Hippolytus; Cyprian; Caius; Novatian; Appendix
Volume VI. The Fathers of the Third Century
Gregory Thaumaturgus; Dinoysius the Great; Julius Africanus; Anatolius and Minor Writers; Methodius; Arnobius
Volume VII. The Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries
Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily, Liturgies
Volume VIII.
The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, The Clementia, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Ages
Volume IX. Recently Discovered Additions to Early Christian Literature; Commentaries of Origen
The Gospel of Peter, The Diatessaron of Tatian, The Apocalypse of Peter, The Visio Pauli, The Apocalypses of the Virgin and Sedrach, The Testament of Abraham, The Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena, The Narrative of Zosimus, The Apology of Aristides, The Epistles of Clement (Complete Text), Origen's Commentary on John, Books I-X, Origen's Commentary on Mathew, Books I, II, and X-XIV
Volume X. Bibliographic Synopsis; General Index [not reproduced]

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers​

Series I​

St. Augustine Volumes​

Volume I. Prolegomena: St. Augustine's Life and Work, Confessions, Letters
Volume II. The City of God, Christian Doctrine
Volume III. On the Holy Trinity, Doctrinal Treatises, Moral Treatises
Volume IV. The Anti-Manichaean Writings, The Anti-Donatist Writings
Volume V. Anti-Pelagian Writings
Volume VI. Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the Gospels
Volume VII. Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliloquies
Volume VIII. Expositions on the Psalms

St. Chrysostom Volumes​

Volume IX. On the Priesthood, Ascetic Treatises, Select Homilies and Letters, Homilies on the Statutes
Volume X. Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew
Volume XI. Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans
Volume XII. Homilies on First and Second Corinthians
Volume XIII. Homilies on the Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon
Volume XIV. Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers​

Series II​

Volume I. Eusebius: Church History from A.D. 1-324, Life of Constantine the Great, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Volume II. Socrates: Church History from A.D. 305-438; Sozomenus: Church History from A.D. 323-425
Volume III. Theodoret, Jerome and Gennadius, Rufinus and Jerome
Volume IV. Athanasius: Select Writings and Letters
Volume V. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises; Select Writings and Letters
Volume VI. Jerome: Letters and Select Works
Volume VII. Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen
Volume VIII. Basil: Letters and Select Works
Volume IX. Hilary of Poitiers, John of Damascus
Volume X. Ambrose: Select Works and Letters
Volume XI. Sulpitius Severus, Vincent of Lerins, John Cassian
Volume XII. Leo the Great, Gregory the Great
Volume XIII. Gregory the Great II, Ephriam Syrus, Aphrahat
Volume XIV. The Seven Ecumenical Councils

I emphasize that I do not use these custodians writings to exegete, because they are post canonical. However, their initial core beliefs and the very chain of scriptural custody, especially pre-200 AD are critical matters in verifying the early church that followed the Apostle's deaths.

By questioning a structural canonical belief in relation to the state of the dead as recorded by the direct successor to John the Revelator, it literally undercuts the validity of canonical validity.

The logic is elementary. If the direct successor of John the disciple of Jesus was Apostate and unreliable, then his claim to accurately transmitting NT cannon is also unreliable, thus invalidating the entire chain of NT and OT scriptural custody.

This is my opinion.

- Grip

 

[CoreyD]

@ViaCrucis is referring to what is known as the sacred transmission of Scripture that led to finalized Biblical Cannon, while proofing OT and NT validity. Atheist's attempt to future date the transmission of scripture and claim that it was given at a far later date than 70AD and such forth. Atheist's tend to argue that scriptural transmission wasn't real and actually began around 300AD - 600AD.

However, by the writings of the scriptural chain of custody custodians, we can zero in on Scripture all the way back to Jesus, through John the Revelator.

The Custodial names look like this:

Jesus words to the Apostles.
John the Revelator, Disciple of Jesus, and Apostle upon Jesus' death.
To Irenaeus.
To Justin Martyr
To Papias
To Barnabas
To Ignatius
To Polycarp
To Mathetes
To Clement of Rome,

The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325​

Volume I. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus.
Volume II. Fathers of the Second Century
Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria
Volume III. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian
Three Parts: I. Apologetic; II. Anti-Marcion; III. Ethical
Volume IV. The Fathers of the Third Century
Tertullian Part IV; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen
Volume V. The Fathers of the Third Century
Hippolytus; Cyprian; Caius; Novatian; Appendix
Volume VI. The Fathers of the Third Century
Gregory Thaumaturgus; Dinoysius the Great; Julius Africanus; Anatolius and Minor Writers; Methodius; Arnobius
Volume VII. The Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries
Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily, Liturgies
Volume VIII.
The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, The Clementia, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Ages
Volume IX. Recently Discovered Additions to Early Christian Literature; Commentaries of Origen
The Gospel of Peter, The Diatessaron of Tatian, The Apocalypse of Peter, The Visio Pauli, The Apocalypses of the Virgin and Sedrach, The Testament of Abraham, The Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena, The Narrative of Zosimus, The Apology of Aristides, The Epistles of Clement (Complete Text), Origen's Commentary on John, Books I-X, Origen's Commentary on Mathew, Books I, II, and X-XIV
Volume X. Bibliographic Synopsis; General Index [not reproduced]

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers​

Series I​

St. Augustine Volumes​

Volume I. Prolegomena: St. Augustine's Life and Work, Confessions, Letters
Volume II. The City of God, Christian Doctrine
Volume III. On the Holy Trinity, Doctrinal Treatises, Moral Treatises
Volume IV. The Anti-Manichaean Writings, The Anti-Donatist Writings
Volume V. Anti-Pelagian Writings
Volume VI. Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the Gospels
Volume VII. Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliloquies
Volume VIII. Expositions on the Psalms

St. Chrysostom Volumes​

Volume IX. On the Priesthood, Ascetic Treatises, Select Homilies and Letters, Homilies on the Statutes
Volume X. Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew
Volume XI. Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans
Volume XII. Homilies on First and Second Corinthians
Volume XIII. Homilies on the Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon
Volume XIV. Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers​

Series II​

Volume I. Eusebius: Church History from A.D. 1-324, Life of Constantine the Great, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Volume II. Socrates: Church History from A.D. 305-438; Sozomenus: Church History from A.D. 323-425
Volume III. Theodoret, Jerome and Gennadius, Rufinus and Jerome
Volume IV. Athanasius: Select Writings and Letters
Volume V. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises; Select Writings and Letters
Volume VI. Jerome: Letters and Select Works
Volume VII. Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen
Volume VIII. Basil: Letters and Select Works
Volume IX. Hilary of Poitiers, John of Damascus
Volume X. Ambrose: Select Works and Letters
Volume XI. Sulpitius Severus, Vincent of Lerins, John Cassian
Volume XII. Leo the Great, Gregory the Great
Volume XIII. Gregory the Great II, Ephriam Syrus, Aphrahat
Volume XIV. The Seven Ecumenical Councils

I emphasize that I do not use these custodians writings to exegete, because they are post canonical. However, their initial core beliefs and the very chain of scriptural custody, especially pre-200 AD are critical matters in verifying the early church that followed the Apostle's deaths.

By questioning a structural canonical belief in relation to the state of the dead as recorded by the direct successor to John the Revelator, it literally undercuts the validity of canonical validity.

The logic is elementary. If the direct successor of John the disciple of Jesus was Apostate and unreliable, then his claim to accurately transmitting NT cannon is also unreliable, thus invalidating the entire chain of NT and OT scriptural custody.

This is my opinion.

- Grip

Perhaps neither of you understood what you read in my post then.
I'll extract those bits then.

God's word is just that - God's word.
It does not matter whose hands God allows it to go through.
God is in control of what man is allowed to do, or disallowed from doing with his word.
Since it is God's will that "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", "the word of the Lord endures forever". 1 Peter 1:25

This can be seen by simply tracing the history of the Bible to now.
Where the Bible came from, and what it has been through for say, 2,000 years, is too remarkable not to ascribe its survival to divine preservation.

A few facts that stand out to me as remarkable, are

1. How the Bible was translated into other languages despite the fierce opposition against that task.
2. How God preserved his name so that, as Psalm 83:18 says That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

These works, if you know your history, were not the works of what people consider the Christian Church, but rather, these were works of individuals who went up against the authority of what people consider the Christian Church.

Those who went up against that authority were martyred... but the result? God - not what people consider the Christian Church - God made the Bible available to "common people" and today people can read the Bible in about 3,000 languages.

God is the one who backed the efforts of people to translate the Bible into different languages, and restore his name in its proper place.
There are other things God did, which people don't see, but the truth became available to people hungry for it, despite the efforts of Satan, to hide it.

So, you can trust God, and the Bible.
We know the Bible is true, despite attempts to alter it. God preserved his message, and faithful ones reading it today, can see that "every promise of the LORD your God has come true. Not a single one has failed" - Joshua 23:14

Wow . It's actually the entire post.
So I put emphasis on the parts that somehow did not register. Though I understand why.

In summary...
God's word passed through hands that treated it with contempt, and God

1. Had the Bible translated in different languages... Spanish, German, English... etc.
2. Preserved his name... which tha Latin Vulgate replaced with titles (Lord and God).

...and others.
God can allow corruption and still reveal truth, in due season.

He did this with the Nation of Israel - allowing the nation to be taken into Babylonian Captivity, and their city desolated, for 70 years, yet restoring it and the nation.
God also allowed the same with his Christian congregation. Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12; 2 Peter 2:1-3


I asked the last question for a reason.
Tyndale Bible - Wikipedia

Spoiler

Tyndale began a translation into English referencing a Greek text compiled by Erasmus from several manuscripts with texts then thought to pre-date the Latin Vulgate (whose Latin Gospel translations owed to Jerome but whose Epistles come from Old Latin versions.) The Vulgate was the only Latin translation in use by the Roman Catholic Church but had accumulated a multitude of small variations between hand-copied manuscript despite several regional efforts over the millenium to make a definitive text.

Tyndale made his purpose known to Bishop of London Cuthbert Tunstall but was refused permission. Thwarted in England, Tyndale moved to the continent.

Tyndale's translations and polemical books were condemned and banned in England by Catholic authorities: in particular almost all copies of his first 1526 New Testament, which authorities regarded as particularly flawed, were bought and burned by Bishop Cuthbert Tunstall...

[Tyndale] was declared a heretic for his Lutheran advocacy and defrocked. Tyndale now being voluntarily outside the protection of the Church, the Habsburg civil authorities then took him and sentenced him to be strangled to death and the body burned...

The Catholic Church had long proclaimed that the only true Church was the Catholic Church. The word church in Catholic teaching could only be used of the Catholic Church...

When Tyndale translated the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía) as congregation, he was thereby undermining the entire structure of the Catholic Church.

Many of the reform movements believed in the authority of scripture alone. To them it dictated how a "true" church should be organized and administered.

Do you think God approved of what some consider to be the Christian Church's actions?
If so, why?

Or, I could ask it differently.
Did God kill Tyndale, or did God use him? What about Wycliffe... Did God use him?
What do you think?

Is your answer "No. God used the Roman Catholic Church - The Vatican."?
I want to encourage you to take a close unbiased look at the history.

 

[Grip Docility]

Perhaps neither of you understood what you read in my post then.
I'll extract those bits then.

God's word is just that - God's word.
It does not matter whose hands God allows it to go through.
God is in control of what man is allowed to do, or disallowed from doing with his word.
Since it is God's will that "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", "the word of the Lord endures forever". 1 Peter 1:25

This can be seen by simply tracing the history of the Bible to now.
Where the Bible came from, and what it has been through for say, 2,000 years, is too remarkable not to ascribe its survival to divine preservation.

A few facts that stand out to me as remarkable, are

1. How the Bible was translated into other languages despite the fierce opposition against that task.
2. How God preserved his name so that, as Psalm 83:18 says That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

These works, if you know your history, were not the works of what people consider the Christian Church, but rather, these were works of individuals who went up against the authority of what people consider the Christian Church.

Those who went up against that authority were martyred... but the result? God - not what people consider the Christian Church - God made the Bible available to "common people" and today people can read the Bible in about 3,000 languages.

God is the one who backed the efforts of people to translate the Bible into different languages, and restore his name in its proper place.
There are other things God did, which people don't see, but the truth became available to people hungry for it, despite the efforts of Satan, to hide it.

So, you can trust God, and the Bible.
We know the Bible is true, despite attempts to alter it. God preserved his message, and faithful ones reading it today, can see that "every promise of the LORD your God has come true. Not a single one has failed" - Joshua 23:14

Wow . It's actually the entire post.
So I put emphasis on the parts that somehow did not register. Though I understand why.

In summary...
God's word passed through hands that treated it with contempt, and God

1. Had the Bible translated in different languages... Spanish, German, English... etc.
2. Preserved his name... which tha Latin Vulgate replaced with titles (Lord and God).

...and others.
God can allow corruption and still reveal truth, in due season.

He did this with the Nation of Israel - allowing the nation to be taken into Babylonian Captivity, and their city desolated, for 70 years, yet restoring it and the nation.
God also allowed the same with his Christian congregation. Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12; 2 Peter 2:1-3


I asked the last question for a reason.
Tyndale Bible - Wikipedia

Spoiler

Tyndale began a translation into English referencing a Greek text compiled by Erasmus from several manuscripts with texts then thought to pre-date the Latin Vulgate (whose Latin Gospel translations owed to Jerome but whose Epistles come from Old Latin versions.) The Vulgate was the only Latin translation in use by the Roman Catholic Church but had accumulated a multitude of small variations between hand-copied manuscript despite several regional efforts over the millenium to make a definitive text.

Tyndale made his purpose known to Bishop of London Cuthbert Tunstall but was refused permission. Thwarted in England, Tyndale moved to the continent.

Tyndale's translations and polemical books were condemned and banned in England by Catholic authorities: in particular almost all copies of his first 1526 New Testament, which authorities regarded as particularly flawed, were bought and burned by Bishop Cuthbert Tunstall...

[Tyndale] was declared a heretic for his Lutheran advocacy and defrocked. Tyndale now being voluntarily outside the protection of the Church, the Habsburg civil authorities then took him and sentenced him to be strangled to death and the body burned...

The Catholic Church had long proclaimed that the only true Church was the Catholic Church. The word church in Catholic teaching could only be used of the Catholic Church...

When Tyndale translated the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía) as congregation, he was thereby undermining the entire structure of the Catholic Church.

Many of the reform movements believed in the authority of scripture alone. To them it dictated how a "true" church should be organized and administered.

Do you think God approved of what some consider to be the Christian Church's actions?
If so, why?

Or, I could ask it differently.
Did God kill Tyndale, or did God use him? What about Wycliffe... Did God use him?
What do you think?

Is your answer "No. God used the Roman Catholic Church - The Vatican."?
I want to encourage you to take a close unbiased look at the history.

I'm not Protestant or Big "C" catholic. I'm little "c" universal invisible Body that binds with all who claim Jesus Christ. I do not protest against my siblings in Jesus and find that more than 29,000 denominations in light of Jesus writing through Paul that division is a fruit of the flesh and Christ should not be divided, says far too much about each physical bodies grievances against each differing divided physical body (Parish).

I believe to read that because of Protest against the Mother Brick and Mortar (Physical) Body, that from your perspective, their entire validity is to be ignored. I will simply say this, just as each believer is dependent on Jesus Christ every second due to human weakness, so is each divided faction of the entire Invisible Body. Christian Agencies of human gatherings have sin. All agencies, because they are all comprised of forgiven sinners.

I understand your perspective and appreciate the time that you have taken to clarify it.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, my Brother CoryD, who is In Jesus Christ

 

[CoreyD]

I'm not Protestant or Big "C" catholic. I'm little "c" universal invisible Body that binds with all who claim Jesus Christ. I do not protest against my siblings in Jesus and find that more than 29,000 denominations in light of Jesus writing through Paul that division is a fruit of the flesh and Christ should not be divided, says far too much about each physical bodies grievances against each differing divided physical body (Parish).

I take it then you do not approve of the murders and tortures carried out by the brothers in the universal church, against their own brothers.

I believe to read that because of Protest against the Mother Brick and Mortar (Physical) Body, that from your perspective, their entire validity is to be ignored. I will simply say this, just as each believer is dependent on Jesus Christ every second due to human weakness, so is each divided faction of the entire Invisible Body. Christian Agencies of human gatherings have sin. All agencies, because they are all comprised of forgiven sinners.

We both know there is an ongoing war which started from the fall. Genesis 3:15
I don't believe Satan goes after Atheist, and left what Jesus started, alone. Nor do I believe Satan has no success, or is not a very intelligent being.
The illustration of the weeds and wheat, is a carry on from that war. Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43

I understand your perspective and appreciate the time that you have taken to clarify it.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, my Brother CoryD, who is In Jesus Christ

Thank you.

 

[Valletta]

Perhaps neither of you understood what you read in my post then.
I'll extract those bits then.

God's word is just that - God's word.
It does not matter whose hands God allows it to go through.
God is in control of what man is allowed to do, or disallowed from doing with his word.
Since it is God's will that "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", "the word of the Lord endures forever". 1 Peter 1:25

This can be seen by simply tracing the history of the Bible to now.
Where the Bible came from, and what it has been through for say, 2,000 years, is too remarkable not to ascribe its survival to divine preservation.

A few facts that stand out to me as remarkable, are

1. How the Bible was translated into other languages despite the fierce opposition against that task.
2. How God preserved his name so that, as Psalm 83:18 says That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

These works, if you know your history, were not the works of what people consider the Christian Church, but rather, these were works of individuals who went up against the authority of what people consider the Christian Church.

Those who went up against that authority were martyred... but the result? God - not what people consider the Christian Church - God made the Bible available to "common people" and today people can read the Bible in about 3,000 languages.

God is the one who backed the efforts of people to translate the Bible into different languages, and restore his name in its proper place.
There are other things God did, which people don't see, but the truth became available to people hungry for it, despite the efforts of Satan, to hide it.

So, you can trust God, and the Bible.
We know the Bible is true, despite attempts to alter it. God preserved his message, and faithful ones reading it today, can see that "every promise of the LORD your God has come true. Not a single one has failed" - Joshua 23:14

Wow . It's actually the entire post.
So I put emphasis on the parts that somehow did not register. Though I understand why.

In summary...
God's word passed through hands that treated it with contempt, and God

1. Had the Bible translated in different languages... Spanish, German, English... etc.
2. Preserved his name... which tha Latin Vulgate replaced with titles (Lord and God).

...and others.
God can allow corruption and still reveal truth, in due season.

He did this with the Nation of Israel - allowing the nation to be taken into Babylonian Captivity, and their city desolated, for 70 years, yet restoring it and the nation.
God also allowed the same with his Christian congregation. Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12; 2 Peter 2:1-3


I asked the last question for a reason.
Tyndale Bible - Wikipedia

Spoiler

Tyndale began a translation into English referencing a Greek text compiled by Erasmus from several manuscripts with texts then thought to pre-date the Latin Vulgate (whose Latin Gospel translations owed to Jerome but whose Epistles come from Old Latin versions.) The Vulgate was the only Latin translation in use by the Roman Catholic Church but had accumulated a multitude of small variations between hand-copied manuscript despite several regional efforts over the millenium to make a definitive text.

Tyndale made his purpose known to Bishop of London Cuthbert Tunstall but was refused permission. Thwarted in England, Tyndale moved to the continent.

Tyndale's translations and polemical books were condemned and banned in England by Catholic authorities: in particular almost all copies of his first 1526 New Testament, which authorities regarded as particularly flawed, were bought and burned by Bishop Cuthbert Tunstall...

[Tyndale] was declared a heretic for his Lutheran advocacy and defrocked. Tyndale now being voluntarily outside the protection of the Church, the Habsburg civil authorities then took him and sentenced him to be strangled to death and the body burned...

The Catholic Church had long proclaimed that the only true Church was the Catholic Church. The word church in Catholic teaching could only be used of the Catholic Church...

When Tyndale translated the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsía) as congregation, he was thereby undermining the entire structure of the Catholic Church.

Many of the reform movements believed in the authority of scripture alone. To them it dictated how a "true" church should be organized and administered.

Do you think God approved of what some consider to be the Christian Church's actions?
If so, why?

Or, I could ask it differently.
Did God kill Tyndale, or did God use him? What about Wycliffe... Did God use him?
What do you think?

Is your answer "No. God used the Roman Catholic Church - The Vatican."?
I want to encourage you to take a close unbiased look at the history.

As I've said so many times before, Wikipedia is not reliable for any subject where there is controversy. Tyndale was preaching many ideas that contradicted the teachings passed down through the Apostles, so it was no surprise he was denied permission to come up with his own translation. Tyndale become a follower of Martin Luther and his translation corrupted a significant amount of Holy Scripture. Henry VIII did ban the Tyndale Bible and ordered all copies to be destroyed. God allows evil, and for many centuries openly opposing the ruler's religion, heresy, ended up in death. Catholics spreading the Gospel did indeed end up in the deaths of many. I think all Christians should remember those Catholic monks and other Catholics who tirelessly copied and translated the Bible into the common language of the people for so many centuries. These were people who preserved the faith, and did not want to change the Bible to support any new theology or religion. As to England, to mention some, Venerable Bede, a Catholic monk, is perhaps the best known for his translation in the 700s. King Alfred the Great had not finished his translation of Psalms before he died, that would have been in the 800s. Now a lot of Biblical texts by Catholics have been destroyed, remember Protestants in England seized Catholic monasteries and gave the land to wealthy Protestants and much that was Catholic was sold off or destroyed. But some do exist, you can find some of Alfred’s translations in a manuscript dated as around 1050. These are in the English of the Saxons: The Illustrated Psalms of Alfred the Great: The Old English Paris Psalter When the Normans took over the English changed, the paraphrase of Orm is dated around 1150 and is an example of a Catholic translation into Middle English. Eventually a Catholic named Gutenberg introduced the printing press, and, of course, the first book he printed was the Bible in 1455. By the way, much of the NT of the King James Bible came from a hurried Greek translation by a Catholic priest, Desiderius Erasmus in 1516. Catholics had to flee England at one time in order to publish an English version (the Douay Rheims) of the Bible (the New Testament was first published in 1582, reprinted in 1600, 1621, and 1633, and a number of times in later centuries), they did so in France and suffered severe consequences for trying to smuggle English Bibles to the people of England.

 

[Grip Docility]

I take it then you do not approve of the murders and tortures carried out by the brothers in the universal church, against their own brothers.

I will answer this because of my conviction. The Mother Church was active 1500 years before the protest. They had over 1500 years in comparison to the Protest churches, which have been around for only 500ish years. 1500 years is a long time to keep a record of wrongs. Fortunately, the Same God of the Protestants is the Same God of the Catholics and He, Being Love Incarnate, keeps no record of wrongs.

I cannot indict either as having more acts of atrocity. Under the guidance of Protestants, Salem happened. I can further say that many puritans enforced torture and death in light of "doctrinal" adherence in the early formation years. Instead of seeing one party as more guilty than the other, I see us as all bound together.

I will state that the Protestant bodies seem to focus on the Spiritual delivery of the gospel and spoon feeding the saints with a bit of physical ministry allotted to a small percentage of individuals here and there.

The Big "C" Mother Church has perpetually out performed the Protestant Physical Bodies in matters of the Physical Gospel. I can't ignore this. Catholics are called to physical ministry in whatever their capacity is, by nature of the doctrines.

We both know there is an ongoing war which started from the fall. Genesis 3:15
I don't believe Satan goes after Atheist, and left what Jesus started, alone. Nor do I believe Satan has no success, or is not a very intelligent being.

I would say that Atheist's militant, not Agnostics and soft Atheist's are more in line with Satan's doctrine than most think. They believe that the entire Law is specifically "Do as thou wilt" (No Love to motivate, Hate taught as normal and necessary) and that there is no Satan.

As for the war against the invisible Body, Paul said Jesus Christ shouldn't be divided, yet the Devil has made over 29,000 successful amputations and separations.

The illustration of the weeds and wheat, is a carry on from that war. Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43

There's only One Jesus. The rest has happened, is happening in real time and is to happen as God described.

Thank you.

This has been a pleasant and thought provoking discussion.

Thank you, as well, CoreyD

 

[CoreyD]

I will answer this because of my conviction. The Mother Church was active 1500 years before the protest. They had over 1500 years in comparison to the Protest churches, which have been around for only 500ish years. 1500 years is a long time to keep a record of wrongs. Fortunately, the Same God of the Protestants is the Same God of the Catholics and He, Being Love Incarnate, keeps no record of wrongs.

I cannot indict either as having more acts of atrocity. Under the guidance of Protestants, Salem happened. I can further say that many puritans enforced torture and death in light of "doctrinal" adherence in the early formation years. Instead of seeing one party as more guilty than the other, I see us as all bound together.

I will state that the Protestant bodies seem to focus on the Spiritual delivery of the gospel and spoon feeding the saints with a bit of physical ministry allotted to a small percentage of individuals here and there.

The Big "C" Mother Church has perpetually out performed the Protestant Physical Bodies in matters of the Physical Gospel. I can't ignore this. Catholics are called to physical ministry in whatever their capacity is, by nature of the doctrines.

I would say that Atheist's militant, not Agnostics and soft Atheist's are more in line with Satan's doctrine than most think. They believe that the entire Law is specifically "Do as thou wilt" (No Love to motivate, Hate taught as normal and necessary) and that there is no Satan.

As for the war against the invisible Body, Paul said Jesus Christ shouldn't be divided, yet the Devil has made over 29,000 successful amputations and separations.

There's only One Jesus. The rest has happened, is happening in real time and is to happen as God described.

I cannot ignore Jesus' teachings and accept wrongdoing.
Matthew 5:43-48; John 13:34, 35; Luke 6:27-36; Romans 12:14, 17-21

Jesus said, at John 16:2-4 2 They will ban you from the synagogue, yet an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering a service to God. 3 These things they will do because they have not known the Father nor Me. 4 But these things I have spoken to you, so that when their hour comes, you may remember that I told you of them. However, I did not say these things to you at the beginning, because I was with you.

When Jesus starts gathering the weeds, he won't be pulling out individual weeds, like we do, when we have a few weeds in our garden.
Jesus will be pulling heaps upon heaps of them, and the collection will be very great in comparison to the wheat. Matthew 7:13, 14

This has been a pleasant and thought provoking discussion.

Thank you, as well, CoreyD

I really hope it was more than thought provoking, but that is still positive.
Thank you.