Why does the bible divide?

[sunlover1]

I trust all aHis words. When He says--
2 Thess 2:15 says that the Apostolic teaching came both in "word of mouth" and "in letter," and that we are obliged to hold to both.
Thus we have two sources, not one, and that dictum is by the decree of Scripture. So if one is really paying attention to Scripture, then he must acknowledge that Scripture never claims to be the sole source or authority for what one is to believe.

But isn't that taking ONE verse, interpreting it to mean
what you say it means, and then building a doctrine
that isnt found when you rightly divide the WORD
of TRUTH.

What do you think the Word of TRUTH is?

Check this out:
The Sower went out to sow.
The SEED was the Word.

(Was Jesus talking about Scripture there?)

THEN... notice that the devil comes BECAUSE
of the Word. (He HATES that Word, do you think
it's the ECF that he hates?)

Jesus asked His own disciples, "if you can't
understand THIS parable, how will you understand
all the rest?"

Not to be mean, but what she said is pretty
right on, Meditate on God's WORD (not those
guys you quote so well) just for a month
let's say.. and let it transform you.
WHAT can it hurt,,, really?

Anyhow, just something to consider.
I am only sharing because of what it's
done for me, meditating on His Word.

ECF writings cannot transform, they don't have
that power, they can only confuse imo.
Because some say one thing and some say another.
And you absolutely must know this is true, because
you've read them WAY more than I have.

I wish you all the best God has,
sunlover

 

[Fireinfolding]

I trust all aHis words. When He says--
2 Thess 2:15 says that the Apostolic teaching came both in "word of mouth" and "in letter," and that we are obliged to hold to both.
Thus we have two sources, not one, and that dictum is by the decree of Scripture. So if one is really paying attention to Scripture, then he must acknowledge that Scripture never claims to be the sole source or authority for what one is to believe.

If this is true...

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest he reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUND A LIAR.

And we are to PROVE ALL THINGS (As the Bereans were commended for) by searching the scriptures to test the authenticity of Pauls words) then others NOT meeting WHAT criteria after what measure are found LIARS?

Rev 2:2 ...Thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast FOUND THEM LIARS:

Again...I think this played into THAT

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest HE reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUND A LIAR.

Paul could be searched out otherwise the Bereans would not have been commended for being more noble in searching to find whether what Paul was saying was true.

Fireinfolding

 

[Trento]

Until someone came along and saw that men within the Church has moved away from truth using Tradition.

A cursory look at the beliefs of the first Christians renders that statement false.

 

[Trento]

If this is true...

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest he reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUNDA LIAR.

And we are to PROVE ALL THINGS (As the Bereans were commended for) by searching the scriptures to test the authenticity of Pauls words) then others NOT meeting WHAT criteria after what measure are found LIARS?

Rev 2:2 ...Thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast FOUND THEM LIARS:

Again...I think this played into THAT

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest HE reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUNDA LIAR.

Paul could be searched out otherwise the Bereans would not have been commended for being more noble in searching to find whether what Paul was saying was true.

Fireinfolding

So you think the Bereans were busy checking their Scriptures every day to verify every point of Paul's apostolic message, not just the fact that Jesus was the Messiah? Okay, let's test that. First of all, the word "Scriptures" in this verse obviously refers only to the Old Testament because (1) these guys were Jews, and (2) the New Testament hadn't been written yet. So you are claiming that the Bereans were able to verify what Paul "taught on many subjects to them" by looing in the Old Testament to see if these things were true. Presumably, then, you are able to do the same today. You can verify everything that Paul taught in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc., from the Old Testament alone. I also assume that like a good Berean you have actually done this, and you didn't just accept those apostolic letters because someone else put them in a leather binding and told you they were the Word of God. I assume you verified that allegation for yourself.

Well, if you did, I'm very impressed, because I say that much of Paul's teaching can't be verified by comparing it to the Old Testament for the simple reason that it was new revelation from God. According to Paul himself, this new Gospel "was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets." (Eph. 3:5). It had been "kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints." (Col. 1:26). Therefore, I say your claim that every time Paul opened his mouth, the Bereans would have been able to "see if what Paul said was true" by searching the Old Testament is nonsense. However, I'd like to give you the opportunity to prove me wrong. I want you to pretend for a moment that you are a first-century Berean Jew. Now suppose one Saturday a stranger comes into your synagogue and addresses the congregation. He says that his name is Paul, and he brings you the exciting news that the long-awaited Messiah has finally come! No, he didn't actually restore the kingdom to Israel, as expected. In fact he was murdered a few decades ago by the Romans. But, Paul says, that this is exactly what was supposed to happen to the Messiah, and he offers to prove it from Scripture. As he does so, you read along with him to make sure he's giving you the straight scoop. Eventually, you're convinced. Jesus is the Messiah, and Paul is his "ambassador" (2 Cor. 5:20). So now that that's out of the way, Paul can get down to the business of sharing with you the Messiah's new teachings. What I want you to do, being the good Sola Scriptura Jew you supposedly are, is whip out your pocket Tanakh (with words of Moses in red) and show me the verses you'd use to verify the following apostolic teachings: "If you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all." (Gal. 5:2. HINT: see Gen. 17:10-14).
"You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you." (Gal. 4:10-11. HINT: see Ex. 12:17, Ex. 31:13, Lev. 23:31, Lev. 23:41).
"y observing the Law no one will be justified." (Gal. 2:16. HINT: see Lev. 18:5).
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
"[After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air." (1 Thess. 4:16-17).
"["As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself" (Rom. 14:14).
["For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. . . . When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." (1 Cor. 15:22-26, 28).
"Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!" (1 Cor. 6:2-3).
"And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming." (2 Thess. 2:8).
"[The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator." (Gal. 3:19 Where does the OT say the law was put into effect through angels?)

If you can not answer you must admit that your foundational premise is in error. In fact there was obviously new revelation given that in many places could not be found in the Old Testament. Now if you could find the answers above from the OT, you may have a point, but please give the texts if you can to prove the NT dependence on the OT as the sole source of divine revelation.

 

[Fireinfolding]

So you think the Bereans were busy checking their Scriptures every day to verify every point of Paul's apostolic message, not just the fact that Jesus was the Messiah? Okay, let's test that. First of all, the word "Scriptures" in this verse obviously refers only to the Old Testament because (1) these guys were Jews, and (2) the New Testament hadn't been written yet. So you are claiming that the Bereans were able to verify what Paul "taught on many subjects to them" by looing in the Old Testament to see if these things were true. Presumably, then, you are able to do the same today. You can verify everything that Paul taught in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc., from the Old Testament alone. I also assume that like a good Berean you have actually done this, and you didn't just accept those apostolic letters because someone else put them in a leather binding and told you they were the Word of God. I assume you verified that allegation for yourself.

Well, if you did, I'm very impressed, because I say that much of Paul's teaching can't be verified by comparing it to the Old Testament for the simple reason that it was new revelation from God. According to Paul himself, this new Gospel "was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets." (Eph. 3:5). It had been "kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints." (Col. 1:26). Therefore, I say your claim that every time Paul opened his mouth, the Bereans would have been able to "see if what Paul said was true" by searching the Old Testament is nonsense. However, I'd like to give you the opportunity to prove me wrong. I want you to pretend for a moment that you are a first-century Berean Jew. Now suppose one Saturday a stranger comes into your synagogue and addresses the congregation. He says that his name is Paul, and he brings you the exciting news that the long-awaited Messiah has finally come! No, he didn't actually restore the kingdom to Israel, as expected. In fact he was murdered a few decades ago by the Romans. But, Paul says, that this is exactly what was supposed to happen to the Messiah, and he offers to prove it from Scripture. As he does so, you read along with him to make sure he's giving you the straight scoop. Eventually, you're convinced. Jesus is the Messiah, and Paul is his "ambassador" (2 Cor. 5:20). So now that that's out of the way, Paul can get down to the business of sharing with you the Messiah's new teachings. What I want you to do, being the good Sola Scriptura Jew you supposedly are, is whip out your pocket Tanakh (with words of Moses in red) and show me the verses you'd use to verify the following apostolic teachings: "If you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all." (Gal. 5:2. HINT: see Gen. 17:10-14).
"You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you." (Gal. 4:10-11. HINT: see Ex. 12:17, Ex. 31:13, Lev. 23:31, Lev. 23:41).
"y observing the Law no one will be justified." (Gal. 2:16. HINT: see Lev. 18:5).
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
"[After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air." (1 Thess. 4:16-17).
"["As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself" (Rom. 14:14).
["For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. . . . When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." (1 Cor. 15:22-26, 28).
"Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!" (1 Cor. 6:2-3).
"And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming." (2 Thess. 2:8).
"[The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator." (Gal. 3:19 Where does the OT say the law was put into effect through angels?)

If you can not answer you must admit that your foundational premise is in error. In fact there was obviously new revelation given that in many places could not be found in the Old Testament. Now if you could find the answers above from the OT, you may have a point, but please give the texts if you can to prove the NT dependence on the OT as the sole source of divine revelation.

Trento, KING of copy paste, Im not sitting here while you take every argument from OFF the internet and throw it at me to perform for you.

Paul couldnt go into some other things, its not like God left us without His Spirit. Neither did Paul go into the "visions" He would ~go on into~ nor the revelations He would either. He "could not" speak of other things (unlawful for a man to utter). The Cross of Christ (the gospel) WAS preached. All who trust in Him would receive the promised Spirit who would lead us into all truth. ALL knowledge (thats IF you have ALL) is still listed as knowing IN PART and is imperfect.

But please, dont start this copy pasting stuff off of other sites because theres honestly no end to it (on every topic).

Fireinfolding

 

[Trento]

If this is true...

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest he reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUNDA LIAR.

And we are to PROVE ALL THINGS (As the Bereans were commended for) by searching the scriptures to test the authenticity of Pauls words) then others NOT meeting WHAT criteria after what measure are found LIARS?

Rev 2:2 ...Thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast FOUND THEM LIARS:

Again...I think this played into THAT

Prov 30:6 ADD THOU ~NOT~ unto HIS WORDS, lest HE reprove ~thee~, and ~thou~ BE FOUNDA LIAR.

Paul could be searched out otherwise the Bereans would not have been commended for being more noble in searching to find whether what Paul was saying was true.

Fireinfolding

Trento, KING of copy paste, Im not sitting here while you take every argument from OFF the internet and throw it at me to perform for you.

Paul couldnt go into some other things, its not like God left us without His Spirit. Neither did Paul go into the "visions" He would ~go on into~ nor the revelations He would either. He "could not" speak of other things (unlawful for a man to utter). The Cross of Christ (the gospel) WAS preached. All who trust in Him would receive the promised Spirit who would lead us into all truth. ALL knowledge (thats IF you have ALL) is still listed as knowing IN PART and is imperfect.

But please, dont start this copy pasting stuff off of other sites because theres honestly no end to it (on every topic).

Fireinfolding

I have been on different boards for eight years and lerned to save answers in a file beause the same subject has to be answerd again and again.
Promoting Scripture alone is a formula made to create division and uncertainty within the people of God.- It validates any individual's position against all others with no way to have a final authorative decision.
If wrong conclusions are made they are made in ignorance as Scripture does not, can not speak out and say " hey that is the wrong understanding" , or have the writer speak out from the written record "hey that is not what I taught through the Church", "that is not the understanding I had when I wrote" etc; etc; - the reader stays in ignorance until they compare their "insights" with the teachings of Christ's Church.
Take the very means of salvation.

We have those of the Pentecostal persuasion promoting some truth in knowing the necessity of sanctification for salvation but distorting the emphasis so much to claim those who are Baptised in the Spirit and speak tongues go to Heaven and those who do not to Hell – all this “proved” by Scripture alone.

We have those who claim salvation is by election alone – that God decides before we are born to send us to Hell or to Heaven and we are totally passive to His salvation. Again this is “proved” by Scripture alone.

We have those who claim salvation is by fiducial faith alone – a legal declaration of alien righteousness based on the premise of being less than perfect under the Law and the need for someone to “pay the price” – allowing one to continue in sin but deemed righteous.

We have arguments about whether Baptism regenerates, is necessary, the nature of Grace, the need for charity/love for salvation as well as faith, the need and understanding of sanctification/holiness – all different but all from the same source devising every wind of doctrine.

The constant daily diatribe says “where is that in Scripture??

 

[New_Wineskin]

Why does the bible divide christians instead of unite them?

For one thing , Paul specifically states that the Law is not based on faith - yet , people want to define faith *by* the Law ( Scriptures ) . Another thing is that people are looking to the Scriptures and not the Lord who created them . Many groups even place the Scriptures as the first point in the *statement of faith" and place the Lord *at best* second though I have seen Him listed far below that . Unity comes through the Lord - not the Scriptures .

 

[New_Wineskin]

So you think the Bereans were busy checking their Scriptures every day to verify every point of Paul's apostolic message, not just the fact that Jesus was the Messiah? Okay, let's test that. First of all, the word "Scriptures" in this verse obviously refers only to the Old Testament because (1) these guys were Jews, and (2) the New Testament hadn't been written yet. So you are claiming that the Bereans were able to verify what Paul "taught on many subjects to them" by looing in the Old Testament to see if these things were true. Presumably, then, you are able to do the same today. You can verify everything that Paul taught in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc., from the Old Testament alone. I also assume that like a good Berean you have actually done this, and you didn't just accept those apostolic letters because someone else put them in a leather binding and told you they were the Word of God. I assume you verified that allegation for yourself.

Well, if you did, I'm very impressed, because I say that much of Paul's teaching can't be verified by comparing it to the Old Testament for the simple reason that it was new revelation from God. According to Paul himself, this new Gospel "was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets." (Eph. 3:5). It had been "kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints." (Col. 1:26). Therefore, I say your claim that every time Paul opened his mouth, the Bereans would have been able to "see if what Paul said was true" by searching the Old Testament is nonsense. However, I'd like to give you the opportunity to prove me wrong. I want you to pretend for a moment that you are a first-century Berean Jew. Now suppose one Saturday a stranger comes into your synagogue and addresses the congregation. He says that his name is Paul, and he brings you the exciting news that the long-awaited Messiah has finally come! No, he didn't actually restore the kingdom to Israel, as expected. In fact he was murdered a few decades ago by the Romans. But, Paul says, that this is exactly what was supposed to happen to the Messiah, and he offers to prove it from Scripture. As he does so, you read along with him to make sure he's giving you the straight scoop. Eventually, you're convinced. Jesus is the Messiah, and Paul is his "ambassador" (2 Cor. 5:20). So now that that's out of the way, Paul can get down to the business of sharing with you the Messiah's new teachings. What I want you to do, being the good Sola Scriptura Jew you supposedly are, is whip out your pocket Tanakh (with words of Moses in red) and show me the verses you'd use to verify the following apostolic teachings: "If you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all." (Gal. 5:2. HINT: see Gen. 17:10-14).
"You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you." (Gal. 4:10-11. HINT: see Ex. 12:17, Ex. 31:13, Lev. 23:31, Lev. 23:41).
"y observing the Law no one will be justified." (Gal. 2:16. HINT: see Lev. 18:5).
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
"[After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air." (1 Thess. 4:16-17).
"["As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself" (Rom. 14:14).
["For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. . . . When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." (1 Cor. 15:22-26, 28).
"Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!" (1 Cor. 6:2-3).
"And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming." (2 Thess. 2:8).
"[The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator." (Gal. 3:19 Where does the OT say the law was put into effect through angels?)

If you can not answer you must admit that your foundational premise is in error. In fact there was obviously new revelation given that in many places could not be found in the Old Testament. Now if you could find the answers above from the OT, you may have a point, but please give the texts if you can to prove the NT dependence on the OT as the sole source of divine revelation.

Great points ! I am glad that I didn't see anything about tradition and heirarchy to make me write "some" great points .

 

[New_Wineskin]

Paul couldnt go into some other things, its not like God left us without His Spirit. Neither did Paul go into the "visions" He would ~go on into~ nor the revelations He would either. He "could not" speak of other things (unlawful for a man to utter). The Cross of Christ (the gospel) WAS preached. All who trust in Him would receive the promised Spirit who would lead us into all truth. ALL knowledge (thats IF you have ALL) is still listed as knowing IN PART and is imperfect.

Fireinfolding

Absolutely correct !

 

[mont974x4]

He and His Word are divisive.
Mat 10:34 "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword


There's been some good responses so far, our own pride and ego get in the way.

Haven't we all tried to run from Scripture and people bringing us His truth when the Word convicts us?

Are families not divided when some are saved and some are not?

Isn't it division when we follow the example of the Bible and we follow through on church discipline?

 

[Fireinfolding]

I have been on different boards for eight years and lerned to save answers in a file beause the same subject has to be answerd again and again.
Promoting Scripture alone is a formula made to create division and uncertainty within the people of God.- It validates any individual's position against all others with no way to have a final authorative decision.
If wrong conclusions are made they are made in ignorance as Scripture does not, can not speak out and say " hey that is the wrong understanding" , or have the writer speak out from the written record "hey that is not what I taught through the Church", "that is not the understanding I had when I wrote" etc; etc; - the reader stays in ignorance until they compare their "insights" with the teachings of Christ's Church.
Take the very means of salvation.

We have those of the Pentecostal persuasion promoting some truth in knowing the necessity of sanctification for salvation but distorting the emphasis so much to claim those who are Baptised in the Spirit and speak tongues go to Heaven and those who do not to Hell – all this “proved” by Scripture alone.

We have those who claim salvation is by election alone – that God decides before we are born to send us to Hell or to Heaven and we are totally passive to His salvation. Again this is “proved” by Scripture alone.

We have those who claim salvation is by fiducial faith alone – a legal declaration of alien righteousness based on the premise of being less than perfect under the Law and the need for someone to “pay the price” – allowing one to continue in sin but deemed righteous.

We have arguments about whether Baptism regenerates, is necessary, the nature of Grace, the need for charity/love for salvation as well as faith, the need and understanding of sanctification/holiness – all different but all from the same source devising every wind of doctrine.

The constant daily diatribe says “where is that in Scripture??

Trento...I have a hard to reading your font (though who am I to complain? Im queen of bad font)

First of all you talk to me as if I sit under a multitude of teachers, and by now you should know I dont. I consider scripture very self corrective (its given for correction) and I find as I continue in it I can adjust myself accordingly as I read and take heed how I hear. Its by what measure we use its measured to us. I can give multitude of self corrective examples in the simple reading of it that quickly adjust my approach to reading it. Actually they were awesome discoveries I found most delightful.

One can feel free to go beyond what is written and into the doctrines of men (that option has always existed) what do you want me to say? I wouldnt change my mind about it just because others do. What others feel permitted to do is not what I might feel permitted to do. I cant change what others do. Heck, we are to prove ourselves a workman unto God that needs not be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth. Will some be ashamed? Aparrently so. Im not ashamed of His words and Im convinced of Who it is Im seeking, Im not always convinced of what others might be seeking. Sometimes men are self seeking and that even among our own number. I wouldnt encourage keeping our eyes on them but on Him.

But making such comparisons between others (as you did above) isnt recomended

2Cr 10:12 For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.

Hey, we work out our own salvation, and theres no one who is going to do that for any of us. Thats our responsibilty not someone elses. I try to pay attention to my own life and doctrine (proving all things) and being diligent, not to mention not going beyond my measure.

God has definately not fallen off His throne here nor lost the ability to reveal anything (by way of understanding) concerning Himself or His words. They speak of Christ upon whom our faith should rest, I trust in Him. I dont trust in men though. Call it trial and error and turning (and more then once). Praise His faithfulness which said, "told ya so" on those occasions (despite the many voices to the contrary). I trust that inner voice (leading, or whatever you want to call that).

Just because I trust His words does not mean I deny that God can through the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation grant the light of the knowledge of Him verses the form of it alone. We are called to "know" the love of God in Christ and THAT ~surpasses knowledge~ just (as does) His peace pass understanding. The things which are written speaks to that which is not when it comes to Him (He is not the book, but the Lord of it). So dont think just because I trust the scriptures alone that removes God (who inspired them) out of the picture or the Spirit (which gives understanding) out of the way either, thats not what I mean. They speak to Him not of themselves.

Theres not a one of us that puts in our two cents that ever says, "I dont know what Im talking about". Thats why we are to prove all things. We all start somewhere and we are supposed to excercise ourselves unto discernment (not remaining children) tossed to and fro and (that) by men. Its all par for the course. I must admit I think its it pretty strange that Christians have such a problem with other Christians trusting in His words. I thought I saw them all till I come here and heard that. I see more of seeking to turn others attention to men rather then the power of God upon which others faith should rest, namely Christ. I honestly dont get that at all

His words are wholesome and by His pure words we all grow thereby, whats not to consent to? Just because I dont trust in men doesnt nessesarily mean I cant hear in another that they might be right on about something or that I cant learn something from others, to the contrary. But its that voice behind me (within me, or wherever ya want to put it) that I listen to that might bear witness of another I might (personally) feel led to give heed to. That happens. Its often not that someone yelling in my ear trying force feed me either. The saying is true, His sheep hear his voice and a stranger they simply will not listen to.

Now even that could just become an argument concerning which ~voice~ any one of us can hear and play the unwise comparison game. I dont like to "go there" because its fruitless. If we all paid attention to our own walks and connectedness to Him and felt not only secure in that but knew the awe in Him it wouldnt matter we'd rejoice not in men but in Him together with one voice.

So what if others trust Gods words? I mean really...Dont cha think theres bigger fish to fry? (I cant believe Im saying this to another christian) Why not (in your own mind) consider others (who trust in His words) "less spiritual" then yourself? I'm being sarcastic, but honestly Trento, I dont think I have ever heard a peep out of you concerning trust in the power of God. Concerning that which is written (regarding a word) holding the smallest disputeable instances wherein you blow up into mountains in order to direct back to men (every chance you get). Thats the only thing that is apparent in your posts. We have chatted on some threads before (and more then once) and you appear to cling (always) to redirect others faith to men. At least thats how it appears to me. It does seem like a reoccuring theme with you.

Fireinfolding

 

[SpiritDriven]

We protestants believe that the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church (or should i say Orthodox Church) obsure the teachings of the Bible by convolution with Church history and man's doctrines. Scripture alone with the Holy Spirit (and with the help from trusted Bible teachers). Sola Scriptura was established in principle that no tradition will be used down by word of mouth, no rabbinical opinion, and no other innovation was to be accorded authority equal to the Word of God (The Bible).

Hmmmm...sounds reasonable....lets Check out the word that first proceeded out of the mouth of God then..


God has shut up all men in disobedience that He may show mercy to all (Romans 11:32).


It does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy (Romans 9:16).

 

[tz620q]

FireinFolding,
First, I have read many of your posts and it is evident that you are an honest, seeking Christian and I think we can both give a firm Amen to the efficacy of God's Word as written in our modern Bible. Second, I don't think Trento is trying to set himself above other posters here. The point that I got out of Trento's post on the Bereans was that often the Bereans are held up as proto-Protestants that used the "sola scriptura" approach to prove Paul's message was God's true revelation. Trento was trying to point out that using this approach would have resulted in their rejecting Paul's gospel as "man-made traditions" and not agreeing with Old Testament scripture. So what it really comes down to is how would the Bereans know to trust Paul's teachings? Did he perform signs of great wonder or healings? If he did, it is not recorded. The only record that we have is the following from Acts, chapter 17

In Berea

10 As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 Many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.
13 But when the Jews in Thessalonica learned that Paul was preaching the word of God at Berea, some of them went there too, agitating the crowds and stirring them up. 14 The believers immediately sent Paul to the coast, but Silas and Timothy stayed at Berea. 15 Those who escorted Paul brought him to Athens and then left with instructions for Silas and Timothy to join him as soon as possible.

Can we truly derive a doctrine like sola scriptura from the half sentence above that shows the Bereans studying the Old Testament for proof? What I think Trento, you, and I could agree on when reading this passage is that it exhorts us to use what God had revealed to us to test any new revelations. Where we depart in our understanding is what we would each classify as God's true revelations. Trento is trying to show that we should accept all of Paul's teachings as revelation, not just those that he wrote in letters, but also those that he taught the Bereans by preaching to them. As a Catholic, I assure you that I would not accept anything blindly without some level of investigation into whether it was against what was written in the Bible. I do agree that in the past many people lived a life of implicit faith, accepting that which was taught them without such investigation. To you, maybe, this seems like a dead or misguided faith, but many of these people did not feel educated enough to read the Bible and form their own opinions. They lived their faith by loving and showing the fruits of a Christ-filled life. Is that a dead faith? As Thomas a Kempis said in "Imitation of Christ", "what good is knowledge, without fear of God?" I am not trying to build a strawman here. I have a feeling that you would agree with me on most of what I have said. As we are both Christians, we serve the risen Lord in whatever way we are called to do; but again how do we know today what God is calling us to do? It is my contention that even the Bereans used more than the scriptures to become believers in Paul's gospel. The only evidence that I have is present in Trento's post that would show that if they had used only the Old Testament scriptures, Paul would have seemed to be preaching a false gospel.

God's Peace be with You.

 

[Kristos]

I didn't read all the posts, but my answer to the OP is PRIDE.

 

[Fireinfolding]

FireinFolding,
First, I have read many of your posts and it is evident that you are an honest, seeking Christian and I think we can both give a firm Amen to the efficacy of God's Word as written in our modern Bible. Second, I don't think Trento is trying to set himself above other posters here.

tz620q,

I been here awhile and I read many of trentos posts. I do speak to him having them all in mind regarding the subject. Each time a huge copy paste is utilized from an opponent site to slam. Sometimes the same things have been adressed (repeatedly) so please forgive me because my responses to him often have these things in mind. The same thing goes for Peter, three scriptures are used for the foundation of the argument, same with the tradition Paul speaks of on many threads and it appears pointless to go there.

The point that I got out of Trento's post on the Bereans was that often the Bereans are held up as proto-Protestants that used the "sola scriptura" approach to prove Paul's message was God's true revelation. Trento was trying to point out that using this approach would have resulted in their rejecting Paul's gospel as "man-made traditions" and not agreeing with Old Testament scripture. So what it really comes down to is how would the Bereans know to trust Paul's teachings? Did he perform signs of great wonder or healings? If he did, it is not recorded. The only record that we have is the following from Acts, chapter 17

The gospel Paul preached came not in word only but power

1Thes 1:5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

2Cr 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Which Christ gave His own

Acts 1:18 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

10 As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 Many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.
13 But when the Jews in Thessalonica learned that Paul was preaching the word of God at Berea, some of them went there too, agitating the crowds and stirring them up. 14 The believers immediately sent Paul to the coast, but Silas and Timothy stayed at Berea. 15 Those who escorted Paul brought him to Athens and then left with instructions for Silas and Timothy to join him as soon as possible.

Can we truly derive a doctrine like sola scriptura from the half sentence above that shows the Bereans studying the Old Testament for proof?

I definately dont use just the Bereans alone, the signs of an apostle were present as well as the power of God confirming His word a power that worked in them that believed.

What I think Trento, you, and I could agree on when reading this passage is that it exhorts us to use what God had revealed to us to test any new revelations.

I would agree here, God is able to give any of us a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him.

Where we depart in our understanding is what we would each classify as God's true revelations.

Definately I know me and Trento disagree here

Trento is trying to show that we should accept all of Paul's teachings as revelation, not just those that he wrote in letters, but also those that he taught the Bereans by preaching to them.

I would agree, except when He left his coat at troas, Im not sure if that was inspired, though I dont doubt he left his coat there

The revelation of the mystery of God Paul was a steward of was Christ in you your hope of glory and it was Christ He preached. He also confirmed that the gospel WAS preached to every creature under heaven.

Another thing to keep in mind, He became all things to all men. To those "under the law" he became as one under it, to the Jew a Jew to those without the law as one without.

As a Catholic, I assure you that I would not accept anything blindly without some level of investigation into whether it was against what was written in the Bible.

You would not need to assure "me" concerning your own workmanship and proving unto GOD (not me or men) in regards to anything.

If that be so then you are doing what is required of you in proving all things as should we all. None of us should then be shaken by way of comparing ourselves with others if we come to differences in how we see a thing.

I do agree that in the past many people lived a life of implicit faith, accepting that which was taught them without such investigation.

There are false teachers I wouldnt think that wise, and hopefully what came to them was the truth. I do believe in Christ there is simplicity.

To you, maybe, this seems like a dead or misguided faith, but many of these people did not feel educated enough to read the Bible and form their own opinions.

As I have stated a couple of times on this forum, I (myself) could not read (past a 4th grade reading average) until the age of 24. It was a God given hunger for His words to know what was written that I actually learned to read coming to Christ. I can (in truth) say, the book (wherein) I learned to read was the scriptures itself. I needed to look up every word. I do recall starting with "THEE and THOU" oblivious to "versions" so I started out on the tougher one... well for me (that is). I have learned to wait (hopefully) in the forming opinions because I understood (two years later) what a spirit of wisdom and revelation was (to my joy).

They lived their faith by loving and showing the fruits of a Christ-filled life. Is that a dead faith?

God knows, I really cant say and I do not take anyone word for things very easily.

Rev 2:12 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.

These too showed the same of themselves. Dead? No because the works were more then the first and faith without works is dead.

As Thomas a Kempis said in "Imitation of Christ", "what good is knowledge, without fear of God?"

Prov 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

I am not trying to build a strawman here.

I dont even know what straw people are

I have a feeling that you would agree with me on most of what I have said.

Agree here and disagree (there) I suppose, thats no biggy (to me) that I dont see eye to eye with anyone honestly.

As we are both Christians, we serve the risen Lord in whatever way we are called to do; but again how do we know today what God is calling us to do?

To love Him and each other. I do believe in not being corrupted from the simplicity in Christ. When it starts getting complicated I do start to see red flags. Sometimes you can detect a hidden agenda (you might not be able to put your finger on) but you feel inwardly warned and I trust in the one I feel gives me that.

It is my contention that even the Bereans used more than the scriptures to become believers in Paul's gospel.

They proved Him by searching the scriptures to see if the the things Paul preached were so. The foundation to which the scriptures testify of is Jesus Christ (as He himself said). Accompanying Paul was not word only but power as well as signs of an apostle which were wrought among them (and known within them). His gospel came with that and MUCH assurance was given with the Holy Spirit. There was many evidences present, not just his word for it. Once that was established (By Christ) who made it evident to them their trust was earned.

1Thes 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Christ (the word of God and the power of God) was revealed in Paul SO THAT he might preach HIM which He did. The word did effectually work in them that believed. The LORD confirmed them.

1Cr 1:6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed ~in you~:

Mark 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and ~confirming the word~ with signs following.

The only evidence that I have is present in Trento's post that would show that if they had used only the Old Testament scriptures, Paul would have seemed to be preaching a false gospel.

God's Peace be with You.

If all you have is a sealed book, and no understanding (given by the Spirit) or the power of God (Jesus Christ) confirming anything Id admit the same. This also is just as true....

1Titus 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

The more sure word of prophecy is within. Its God who pours out His Spirit unto us and makes His words known to us. The trust is in Him and His words and those He would naturally confirm by the witness they would have in themselves, HE is trustworthy and true.

Peace

Fireinfolding

 

[IamAdopted]

tz620q,

I been here awhile and I read many of trentos posts. I do speak to him having them all in mind regarding the subject. Each time a huge copy paste is utilized from an opponent site to slam. Sometimes the same things have been adressed (repeatedly) so please forgive me because my responses to him often have these things in mind. The same thing goes for Peter, three scriptures are used for the foundation of the argument, same with the tradition Paul speaks of on many threads and it appears pointless to go there.



The gospel Paul preached came not in word only but power

1Thes 1:5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

2Cr 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Which Christ gave His own

Acts 1:18 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.





I definately dont use just the Bereans alone, the signs of an apostle were present as well as the power of God confirming His word a power that worked in them that believed.



I would agree here, God is able to give any of us a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him.



Definately I know me and Trento disagree here




I would agree, except when He left his coat at troas, Im not sure if that was inspired, though I dont doubt he left his coat there

The revelation of the mystery of God Paul was a steward of was Christ in you your hope of glory and it was Christ He preached. He also confirmed that the gospel WAS preached to every creature under heaven.

Another thing to keep in mind, He became all things to all men. To those "under the law" he became as one under it, to the Jew a Jew to those without the law as one without.



You would not need to assure "me" concerning your own workmanship and proving unto GOD (not me or men) in regards to anything.

If that be so then you are doing what is required of you in proving all things as should we all. None of us should then be shaken by way of comparing ourselves with others if we come to differences in how we see a thing.



There are false teachers I wouldnt think that wise, and hopefully what came to them was the truth. I do believe in Christ there is simplicity.



As I have stated a couple of times on this forum, I (myself) could not read (past a 4th grade reading average) until the age of 24. It was a God given hunger for His words to know what was written that I actually learned to read coming to Christ. I can (in truth) say, the book (wherein) I learned to read was the scriptures itself. I needed to look up every word. I do recall starting with "THEE and THOU" oblivious to "versions" so I started out on the tougher one... well for me (that is). I have learned to wait (hopefully) in the forming opinions because I understood (two years later) what a spirit of wisdom and revelation was (to my joy).



God knows, I really cant say and I do not take anyone word for things very easily.

Rev 2:12 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.

These too showed the same of themselves. Dead? No because the works were more then the first and faith without works is dead.



Prov 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.




I dont even know what straw people are



Agree here and disagree (there) I suppose, thats no biggy (to me) that I dont see eye to eye with anyone honestly.




To love Him and each other. I do believe in not being corrupted from the simplicity in Christ. When it starts getting complicated I do start to see red flags. Sometimes you can detect a hidden agenda (you might not be able to put your finger on) but you feel inwardly warned and I trust in the one I feel gives me that.



They proved Him by searching the scriptures to see if the the things Paul preached were so. The foundation to which the scriptures testify of is Jesus Christ (as He himself said). Accompanying Paul was not word only but power as well as signs of an apostle which were wrought among them (and known within them). His gospel came with that and MUCH assurance was given with the Holy Spirit. There was many evidences present, not just his word for it. Once that was established (By Christ) who made it evident to them their trust was earned.

1Thes 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Christ (the word of God and the power of God) was revealed in Paul SO THAT he might preach HIM which He did. The word did effectually work in them that believed. The LORD confirmed them.

1Cr 1:6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed ~in you~:

Mark 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and ~confirming the word~ with signs following.



If all you have is a sealed book, and no understanding (given by the Spirit) or the power of God (Jesus Christ) confirming anything Id admit the same. This also is just as true....

1Titus 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

The more sure word of prophecy is within. Its God who pours out His Spirit unto us and makes His words known to us. The trust is in Him and His words and those He would naturally confirm by the witness they would have in themselves, HE is trustworthy and true.

Peace

Fireinfolding

Amen and Amen sister..

 

[Fireinfolding]

Amen and Amen sister..

Hey sis, where you been? I been meaning to catch up with you whenever I could find you. You been elusive lately.

I found this and thought immediately of you

<--- I know you love cats

Hugs

Fireinfolding

 

[ProdicalChristian]

I didn't read all the posts, but my answer to the OP is PRIDE.

Its depends on point of view.

I can look at the "Church's" pride by claiming to have "authority" and requires members to submit no matter what. In my position, we all are Christian first according to Jesus Christ's teachings (not the Church's teachings). We must be careful not to disobey God's Word to any church reasoning. We have to remember that the Bible is truth while doctrines (i.e. Tradition) are taught by man. I would rather disobey the teachings of man rather than disobeying God. In Acts 5, Peter responded to Sanhedrin, the high priest that "We must obey God rather than men!"

You know Peter, who is supposed to be the "first Pope" of the RCC. Just clarifying.

 

[Trento]

Its depends on point of view.

I can look at the "Church's" pride by claiming to have "authority" and requires members to submit no matter what. In my position, we all are Christian first according to Jesus Christ's teachings (not the Church's teachings). We must be careful not to disobey God's Word to any church reasoning. We have to remember that the Bible is truth while doctrines (i.e. Tradition) are taught by man. I would rather disobey the teachings of man rather than disobeying God. In Acts 5, Peter responded to Sanhedrin, the high priest that "We must obey God rather than men!"

You know Peter, who is supposed to be the "first Pope" of the RCC. Just clarifying.

Yes Peter who was just a Man and we see this man in Acts 15:1-6 says there was much discussion and disagreement among the Christians (Paul, Barnabas and certain others) about whether Christians needed to be circumcised. Acts 15:7-12 says that Peter stood up in the midst of the discussion and declared that circumcision would no longer be required for salvation. This decision has been held fast for the last 2000 years. All Christians abide by it. In Acts 15:13-29, James, the bishop of Jerusalem, concurs with Peter's decision, as do all the Apostles and elders, and they agree to send a letter to ALL the Churches telling them what the Council has decided, and that each of these Christians is to obey the edicts of the Council.
The leaders didn’t “negate” Peter’s decision. Peter’s decision was that no Gentile need ever be circumcised in order to become a Christian. No one at the Jerusalem council contradicted that teaching. The only thing they did was add four pastoral directives for the local churches so that Peter’s denouncing of circumcision would proceed more smoothly among the Jews and Gentiles. Looks like everyone in Acts obeyed a Man.

 

[ProdicalChristian]

Yes Peter who was just a Man and we see this man in Acts 15:1-6 says there was much discussion and disagreement among the Christians (Paul, Barnabas and certain others) about whether Christians needed to be circumcised. Acts 15:7-12 says that Peter stood up in the midst of the discussion and declared that circumcision would no longer be required for salvation. This decision has been held fast for the last 2000 years. All Christians abide by it. In Acts 15:13-29, James, the bishop of Jerusalem, concurs with Peter's decision, as do all the Apostles and elders, and they agree to send a letter to ALL the Churches telling them what the Council has decided, and that each of these Christians is to obey the edicts of the Council.
The leaders didn’t “negate” Peter’s decision. Peter’s decision was that no Gentile need ever be circumcised in order to become a Christian. No one at the Jerusalem council contradicted that teaching. The only thing they did was add four pastoral directives for the local churches so that Peter’s denouncing of circumcision would proceed more smoothly among the Jews and Gentiles. Looks like everyone in Acts obeyed a Man.

How does this (Peter’s decision was that no Gentile need ever be circumcised in order to become a Christian) different than Martin Luther's 95 Theses?

So like Acts, looks like many people will obey Church leaders more than God.