What would Christians do if there were no bible?

[sentipente]

I guess I didn't realize that you didn't know what 'inspiration' is--sorry, I'll be more specific in the future as to not leave you the dust when I speak.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Do you realize what the word ALL means? The Bible is one set of scriptures. It does not constitute ALL scripture.

 

[sentipente]

Sent--I have no problem with reality or understanding what you people believe and I don't appreciate you always talking down to me, ET AL in this forum. If you want to dialog with me fine--but leave the personal attacks to yourself.

I can only talk to you where you place yourself. You tried to "talk down" to moicherie and in the process exposed yourself. Be nice and no one will have to point it out to you.

 

[sentipente]

I guess I didn't realize that you didn't know what 'inspiration' is--sorry, I'll be more specific in the future as to not leave you the dust when I speak.

And what is the reason for this condescension? Keep on doing it and I will have to expose the extent of your own lack of understanding.

 

[freeindeed2]

I've made it many times. Am I to be frowned upon because you refuse to acknowledge it?

LOL. OK...

Or perhaps you and Stormy just don't understand the implications that such a question gives rise to, which is what I have been trying to point out this whole time. But because you and Stormy refuse to see anything that I have to say as being worth something of value you will not grasp the point that I have been trying to make this whole time.

Yeah...

And my point is that if there were no standard of truth whereby to measure all things that are inculcated as ideas that ought to be accepted, you wouldn't even have a faith that you could really rely on, as you wouldn't know for sure that what you believe is really true. And this is precisely what Paul was getting at when he wrote 2Tim. 3:15-17

Really!??? So only people who have Bibles can have faith in God??? Is that what you really believe??? Hmmm...So faith in God can only come from Scripture in your view, not from God himself? Interesting concept!

He didn't tell Timothy to listen to his inner voice. He instructed him to go to the Holy Scriptures for truth.

But you're avoiding the hypothetical question.

But such a question is pointless because there is a Bible. Why speculate about never having something that we have had for more than 2000 years?

If you believe it's pointless then why are you here? You must not really believe it's pointless.

And the NT, the instructions given directly to the church, is not yet 2000 years old.

And if a Christian holds the Bible as dear to his heart and speaks as though he couldn't live without it, then why would he be criticized for thinking like that? Wasn't it Christ who said man can't live by bread alone?

The Bible doesn't save us. It points us to Christ who does. I hold the Bible dear and spend time in it every day. But this discussion here is about what we would do if we didn't have it.

Only an enemy of the faith would make a mockery of such a person.

Why would I be making a mockery of myself?

A true brother in Christ would commend that person for being so loyal to God's written word!

I think the problem is that you view the Bible and God as being one in the same.

Some believe that their misapplications of Scripture means that they're being loyal. The Bible points to Christ, Christ promised us his Spirit living IN us, and the Spirit is the one who convicts and converts. He's God and following Him is loyalty to God.

 

[woobadooba]

Your behavior here shows that this is not the problem. The problem is that some hold the Bible dear to their heart and speak as if EVERYONE ELSE must live according to the conclusions they have drawn about the Bible. If you simply held to what you believe without trying to impose it forcefully on others there would be peace like a river. The problem arises when one person tries to live their lives as well as the lives of others.

I think we need to clear something up here.

Because a person corrects someone that is in the wrong that doesn't mean he is trying to live that person's life, or that he is endeavoring to impose his ideas on that person. Many are called by God to serve Him in different ways. Who are you to tell me what my calling is?

Furthermore, if I weren't open to correction then I would say you have a valid point here. However, I am open to correction. It's just that I want people that disagree with my conclusions on scripture to use scripture as a means to refute me if I am in error. After all, this is what Paul encouraged Timothy to do in 2Tim. 3:16.

What I see in this forum however, is a lot of opinions being thrown around that really have no substance to them as they are not in agreement with what is written in the Holy Scriptures. In fact, I rarely see many of the members of this forum even quote from scripture when making a point. And when they do, it is usually taken out of context.

In fact, your post to me is a perfect example of this in that you are telling me that I need to behave in a certain manner while not providing me with a scriptural basis for your idea. You are in essence telling me that I ought to be more tolerant of views that I don't agree with. Well, on matters of taste I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, on moral issues and doctrines I find no such counsel in the Holy Scriptures.

To the contrary, I find the opposite:

Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish. (Psa 1:1-6 KJV)

Should I then be expected to be tolerant of such an idea when it is very clear that you have nothing but mere opinion to base it on? Why should I accept what you have to say when you haven't given me good reason to do so? Just because you feel I should be more tolerant of such views that doesn't mean your feelings agree with what God expects from me.

You want to be my teacher, so it seems. Well then, show me that you are a man that speaks for God and I will listen to what you have to say. But if you endeavor to inculcate ideas that are contrary to what is written in the Holy Scriptures, don't expect me to be tolerant of them.

In fact, it is quite evident that you are adhering to a double standard in that you expect me to be tolerant of all views while showing yourself to be intolerant of my view that we shouldn't be tolerant of all views. So by the very nature of your argument I find it unreasonable to accept what you have to say as truth as your view is not even consistent with itself.

Is God the author of confusion? Of course not. So why should I be expected to accept an idea from you as being of God when it is not even consistent with itself?

Furthermore, you are telling me that I shouldn't be dogmatic about what I believe, yes? Would you say the same thing to Paul? He was even more dogmatic than I am. And he wasn't ashamed to admit it.

For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled. (2Co 10:3-6 KJV)

Now I don't mean to place myself on a level of equality with Paul in assuming myself to be an apostle or a prophet. However, it is quite evident that just as he was not tolerant of views that opposed the knowledge of God we should likewise be intolerant of such views. After all, would it make sense to be tolerant of such views, while knowing that they oppose the truth as it is in Jesus Christ?

We are called to love the sinner, but that doesn't mean we ought to be tolerant of his views. Therefore, just because we refuse to be tolerant of such ideas which oppose the knowledge of God, that doesn't mean we lack love for those that adhere to these ideas. To the contrary it shows that we have greater love for God, which is what we are encouraged to have.

It was Jesus who said: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. (Mat 10:34-39 KJV)

Does this sound like tolerance to you?

Truth is, to some degree we are called to judge others, to determine if their ideas are of God. If this weren't so then there would have been no sense in the apostles warning the brethren about false teachers. And there would have been no sense in Jesus saying what He had said above.

As a result of this people will turn against us. They will persecute and mock us to no end. Yet, their abuse will come to an end at some point when they find their place in the lake of fire. And those that compromised the integrity of the truth as it is in Jesus Christ for the sake of keeping the peace with them through tolerance will likewise join them in receiving the full wrath of God.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2Ti 4:3-4 KJV)

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal 5:19-21 KJV)

It is then our responsibility to make sure that we learn how to rightly divide the word of truth so that we can discern both good and evil. Without such knowledge we wouldn't know how to recognize a wolf in sheepskin; and we would thereby be in danger of being corrupted by their false ideas which lead to destruction. 2Pt. 3:16

 

[sentipente]

If I weren't open to correction then I would say you have a valid point here. However, I am open to correction. It's just that I want people that disagree with my conclusions on scripture to use scripture as a means to refute me if I am in error. After all, this is what Paul encouraged Timothy to do in 1Tim. 3:16.

Then you are using Paul as your standard rather than Scripture. Your problem is that you cannot support your claim that only your holy book constitutes Scripture. It may be the Christian Scriptures but it is not the only scripture.

 

[sentipente]

In fact, it is quite evident that you are adhering to a double standard in that you expect me to be tolerant of all views while showing yourself to be intolerant of my view that we shouldn't be tolerant of all views. So by the very nature of your argument I find it unreasonable to accept what you have to say as truth as your view is not even consistent with itself.

Are you a prophet to know my position before I have responded to what you had not yet posted?I am not intolerant of a view that refuses to be tolerant of all views. I would only say that such a view is a sign of ignorance and a lack of learning.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

Don't allow your bias to cloud your thinking. Being able to relate to what Woob says does not mean he is not wrong in his conclusions. Everybody who enters a brothel is not going there to find a prostitute.

I'm not letting it cloud my thinking, because I've seen it happen. I believe that both cases can be right, that God can guide us by faith and we can be truely following Him that way..but I also believe that without some kind of standard it is hard to distinguish what to follow for some people. I believe this because I've experienced both sides of it in some form or another.

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

 

[woobadooba]

Then you are using Paul as your standard rather than Scripture. Your problem is that you cannot support your claim that only your holy book constitutes Scripture. It may be the Christian Scriptures but it is not the only scripture.

It was Peter who gave the implication that the writings of Paul are to be treated as Holy Scripture. It appears that you have overlooked this point!

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2Pe 3:16 KJV)

So why shouldn't I adhere to what he has to say and regard it as coming from God?

Yet, you speak of other Holy Scriptures. Which ones are you referring to besides those that we find in the Bible that have been declared by God's prophet to be God breathed?

And do I deny that it is possible for there to be other Holy Scriptures? No. If that were the case then I would have to conclude that the gift of prophecy ended with the Apostles.

The task then that remains, is to examine such ideas that are extra-canonical and are referred to as Holy Scripture, to see if they agree with what we find in the Holy Scriptures that we know to be contained in the Bible as they were the standard of truth for the Apostles, and ought to be the measure for truth for us.

So what are these other Holy Scriptures that you speak of?

 

[StormyOne]

as I said in another thread....It has finally occurred to me what is happening.... there are those who are members on this forum who don't know how to "discuss" things..... They believe that for every issue there is a "right" answer, one right answer in fact and once they provide it (you knew they would have to provide it) then its end of that discussion. So those members aren't looking for discussion, they might be interested in pontificating, or telling us what we should do or think, but not interested in genuine exchange. As such, when they enter a thread their goal is to give the right answer according to them and shut down the discourse.

The other thing going on is this idea that someone can post long comments (more like a sermon) as something to be read and digested, not necessarily discussed.....

who am I referring to? Anyone who fits that description....

 

[StormyOne]

And this comment of yours represents the 'right' answer that everyone is expected to adhere to, or agree with?

it is an observation, if the observation does not fit you, then you have nothing to worry about..... no one has to adhere to or agree... thats what you want, that is not my issue....

 

[sentipente]

It was Peter who gave the implication that the writings of Paul are to be treated as Holy Scripture. It appears that you have overlooked this point!

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2Pe 3:16 KJV)

That word other does not help you. Consider the word holy, because scriptures means holy writings. The writings are holy because men set them apart, not because they came from God. Before you continue please consider that everything on the earth came from God, including the heroin in the poppy plant.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Don't allow your bias to cloud your thinking. Being able to relate to what Woob says does not mean he is not wrong in his conclusions. Everybody who enters a brothel is not going there to find a prostitute.

Since you seem to be the expert on brothels--fill us in on what other something a person might be interested in, in a brothel.

 

[woobadooba]

That word other does not help you. Consider the word holy, because scriptures means holy writings. The writings are holy because men set them apart, not because they came from God. Before you continue please consider that everything on the earth came from God, including the heroin in the poppy plant.

And what do you have in the Bible to substantiate this claim?

Nothing! Because according to God's prophet the Holy Scriptures are "God breathed". 2Tim. 3:16

Thus this means that the message which they contain does find its origin in God, even though He used mortal men to pen it. It is also important to note that it was God who set these men apart for a holy purpose. Likewise it was God who gave them a holy message to proclaim.

So we have the prophetic word strongly confirmed. You will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dismal place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. First of all, you should know this: no prophecy of Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, moved by the Holy Spirit, men spoke from God. (2Pe 1:19-21 HCSB)

At this point I do not perceive you to be one who speaks for God as your message does not agree with the Holy Scriptures. Therefore, I will no longer continue this discussion with you as I have been warned to avoid the teachings of those who do not agree with the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

[NightEternal]

Your behavior here shows that this is not the problem. The problem is that some hold the Bible dear to their heart and speak as if EVERYONE ELSE must live according to the conclusions they have drawn about the Bible. If you simply held to what you believe without trying to impose it forcefully on others there would be peace like a river. The problem arises when one person tries to live their lives as well as the lives of others.

This is the bottom line Senti. It's pure arrogance to come barging in here in OUR area with both guns blazing, making demands of people, rebuking, berating, telling them how they should think and what they should believe.

Of course, he thinks he has been commissioned by God to clean up the Prog subforum. Such an attempted endeavor is only going to be met by, at the very least, fierce resistance.

So, unless he decides to stay out and quit trying to command us as if we were his theological lackeys, I only forsee more conflict on the horizon.

 

[NightEternal]

as I said in another thread....It has finally occurred to me what is happening.... there are those who are members on this forum who don't know how to "discuss" things..... They believe that for every issue there is a "right" answer, one right answer in fact and once they provide it (you knew they would have to provide it) then its end of that discussion. So those members aren't looking for discussion, they might be interested in pontificating, or telling us what we should do or think, but not interested in genuine exchange. As such, when they enter a thread their goal is to give the right answer according to them and shut down the discourse.

The other thing going on is this idea that someone can post long comments (more like a sermon) as something to be read and digested, not necessarily discussed.....

who am I referring to? Anyone who fits that description....

Hear ye, hear ye the word of truth from Stormy!

That about sums it up.

 

[woobadooba]

This is the bottom line Senti. It's pure arrogance to come barging in here in OUR area with both guns blazing, making demands of people, rebuking, berating, telling them how they should think and what they should believe.

Of course, he thinks he has been commissioned by God to clean up the Prog subforum. Such an attempted endeavor is only going to be met by, at the very least, fierce resistance.

So, unless he decides to stay out and quit trying to command us as if we were his theological lackeys, I only forsee more conflict on the horizon.

I would appreciate it if you would stop backbiting. If you have something that you want to say about me say it to me directly via PM. Don't talk about me behind my back.

 

[NightEternal]

I would appreciate it if you would stop backbiting. If you have something that you want to say about me say it to me directly via PM. Don't talk about me behind my back.

Woob, do you honestly think I don't know you are here reading this thread? Your name is RIGHT THERE in the window as I type these things. So, no, I am not in the least afraid to say what I think of you here right to your face. Please!

I merely talk about you in the second person because I really have no desire to have direct exchanges with you.

It's better for everyone here if we keep that sort of dialogue very minimal.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

Thread closed for staff review.​