Results 41 - 60 of 77
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: gbennett76 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Lehi Part 1 | Ezek 14:22 | gbennett76 | 95506 | ||
actually evangelical protestants deny the power.. the power of revelation, visions, prophecy, healings...So you are the one with only the form of godliness but the substance is nonexistant | ||||||
42 | a reference to the Book of Mormon and th | Ezek 37:16 | gbennett76 | 95422 | ||
Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and [for] all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou [meanest] by these? Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which [is] in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, [even] with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes." This is a reference to the Book of Mormon and the Bible being companion books, complimenting each other. This is under the Joseph Smith reference because the two go hand in hand. The Book of Mormon is a true volume of scripture, prophesied in the Bible, and brought forth by God. Therefore, Joseph Smith is a Prophet of God. |
||||||
43 | a kingdom,restitution ,angel fly | Dan 2:44 | gbennett76 | 95435 | ||
Daniel 2:44 "And in the days of these kings [the kingdoms that appeared after Rome broke up] shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." Acts 3:20-21 "And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." Revelation 14:6 "And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people." |
||||||
44 | How is Adam "Ancient of Days"? | Dan 7:9 | gbennett76 | 93811 | ||
WHO IS THE ANCIENT OF DAYS? Daniel 7:13 "I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. --"The Ancient of Days" Cannot be Jesus Christ: In the last days, the Son of Man descends in clouds (a familiar description of Christ at his Second Coming) and meets the Ancient of Days, receiving the kingdoms of this world. So the "Ancient of Days" cannot be Jesus. --"The Ancient of Days" Cannot Be God the Father: Most commentaries assume that the "Ancient of Days" (Daniel 7:9-10 and 13-14) refers to God the Father. However, the "Ancient of Days" is unlikely to represent God the Father for the following reasons: Ever since the Arian controversy died down, the major creeds have said that God the Father and Jesus Christ are the same person. So if the Ancient of Days is the Father, then the major creeds are wrong. Thus they have only a shallow understanding of the nature of the Father and the Son, and thus their interpretation of unusual passages like this is so flawed as to be worthless. There is no reason to describe the Father in terms of great earthly age – He is eternal. The fact that He sits on a throne is not the give-away it seems. The language is similar to that describing the throne in heaven in Revelation 4-5. But although God sits on such a throne, so does Christ and so do the redeemed (Revelation 3:21). Similarly, the fact that millions minister or attend to him does not mean that they worship him in the way that millions worship God in in Revelation 5:11. In fact, the NIV text note refers the reader to the reference to the tens of thousands credited to David in 1 Samuel 18:7. The presence of 100 million people does not prove the presence of God – after all, there as twice that number at the battle of Armageddon (Revelation 9:16). Perhaps significant is the fact that the throne in Daniel has wheels – usually associated with angels (Ezekiel 1:15-21), not with God. There is no other reference to our Father residing on earth when Jesus returns, which would have to be such an important event that it would surely be mentioned in other prophecies. --So Who is "The Ancient of Days"? Whoever this person is, he is identified by his great age. Who is the most ancient person we know of? Could it be Abraham, described as the father of many nations, so the idea of millions attending him would be appropriate? No, there is one person more ancient than Abraham (or any mortal), and more significant to the human family. One person was there at the very beginning and would be very appropriate at the very end. One person in all scripture is compared directly with Christ (1 Corinthians 15:45-47). Only one being (besides God) would have a natural right to hand over the kingdoms of this world – the literal father of them all. The simplest identity to give the Ancient of Days is our father Adam. --The Importance of Adam: The idea that God chose a loser for the most important role in creation (second only to the atonement) is silly. The idea (promoted by many "Christian" churches) that Adam spoiled God's original plan (for one man and one woman to live in Eden forever) is crazy. Did God really intend this whole planet for just two people? No, God's plan demanded that Adam eat that fruit. That is why He prepared a Saviour "before the foundation of the world" (1 Peter 1:20). Adam did what God intended, and will be blessed for it. |
||||||
45 | revelations through angels | Dan 10:9 | gbennett76 | 95424 | ||
Daniel 7 through 12 – How angels visit prophets. I once knew of a man who did not believe in the Mormon church because he did not believe Joseph Smith's (first "Mormon" prophet in modern times) description of his visit by an angel. Joseph said he was physically exhausted afterwards, but this man said that a true angel would have left a man full of energy. But Joseph's description matches what is in the Bible .Joseph's message was even repeated three times , as in Acts 10:16. Perhaps more important, simply seeing an angel was not enough for Joseph to start a new church. He understood that signs and wonders are one thing, but authority is quite another. Joseph Smith knew first hand the power of God, and he knew what the reformers had forgotten – that unless God gives you the authority to start his church, you cannot do it. How many churches claim revelations through angels, let alone angels following the exact Biblical pattern? |
||||||
46 | In the last days, young men shall see vi | Joel 2:28 | gbennett76 | 95423 | ||
In the last days, young men shall see visions. This was fulfilled very literally by Joseph Smith. As for "old men dreaming dreams," read about the tremendous conversion stories that mark the restoration of the gospel. Some people say that it was completely fulfilled at the day of Pentecost, but that cannot be the case because: the day of Pentecost was not the last days – the world still had 2000 years or more to go. the rest of the prophecy, concerning signs and wonders, was not fulfilled then but is being fulfilled right now. When Peter quoted this prophecy in Acts 2, his purpose was only to demonstrate that such things are authentic signs of the spirit and therefore the Christians were not mad or drunk. There is no reason to suppose that Peter meant anything more than that. |
||||||
47 | surely the Lord God will do nothing | Amos 3:7 | gbennett76 | 95426 | ||
"surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." How many churches even claim to be led by prophets with new revelation – or do they all claim that God has done nothing since Bible times? One view is that the word translated as "secret" should be translated "council", and this verse indicates that true prophets are shown a vision of the grand council in heaven where they were fore-ordained to their role. If that is the correct translation, then this is a particularly good indication that Joseph Smith (prophet of the "Mormon" church) was the genuine article, as he had just such visions and revelation. |
||||||
48 | but [a famine] for hearing the words of | Amos 8:11 | gbennett76 | 95429 | ||
A complete famine from the word of God. Think about what this means. If "the word of God" refers to the written scriptures, as the Protestants believe, then this prophecy could never be fulfilled since copies of the scripture have always existed. It must therefore refer to the living prophets – there would come a time when all the prophets would be gone. When Was This Prophecy To Be Fulfilled? Does it refer to the period between the Old and New Testament? No – the context is clearly "last days": verse 9 refers to "in that day" and the sun being darkened, classic "end of the world" language. So, in the last days there would be a total and complete loss of the truth. We know from Revelation 11 that there will be prophets at the very end, so this must refer to a time before that. This prophecy speaks of a great apostasy, and (by implication) an eventual restoration, exactly as taught by the "Mormon" church. |
||||||
49 | I am going to send My messenger | Mal 3:1 | gbennett76 | 95421 | ||
" BEHOLD, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts." This is a prophecy to the events that would happen in the Kirtland, Ohio Temple, in 1836. Joseph is the "messenger" spoken of, who will prepare the way of the Lord. The Lord, Jesus Christ, did indeed come to His temple, suddenly. He appeared to Joseph the Prophet and to Sydney Ridgon, on April 3, 1836. An account of this Glorious occasion is recorded in section 110, in the Doctrine and Covenants. |
||||||
50 | Elijah would return | Mal 4:5 | gbennett76 | 95430 | ||
Elijah would return and turn the hearts of the children to the fathers and the fathers to the children. Some people think this was fulfilled by John the Baptist (see Matthew 17:10-13), since the names Elias and Elijah are sometimes interchangeable. But Matthew 17 cannot refer to Malachi 4, because: Matthew 17 refers to a prophecy that Elias who would restore all things, Malachi does not. Malachi refers to an Elijah who would link parents and children. Matthew does not. John himself (John 1:21) said he was not Elias. So presumably there was more at least two Eliases – one referred to in Matthew and one in John, which had not yet returned. The fulfillment of the prophecy in Malachi 4:5-6 occurred when Elijah appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1836, and sure enough world-wide interest in keeping records of births and deaths and in tracing genealogy mushroomed from that period. |
||||||
51 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | gbennett76 | 94832 | ||
And what is this Sprit Prison? One "imprisons" himself or herself through unbelief or through willful disobedience of God. It is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions. In such circumstances, one's opportunities in the afterlife will be limited. Those who willfully rebel against the light and truth of the gospel and do not repent remain in this condition of imprisonment and suffer spiritual death, which is a condition of hell. Furthermore, since a fulness of joy is not possible without the resurrected body, the waiting in the spirit world for the resurrection is a type of imprisonment. However, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ all have a promise of resurrection, and thus of eventual release from this type of spirit prison, although the unrepentant will still be imprisoned by their unbelief. Another more far-reaching definition of "spirit prison" is hell. In this sense, spirit prison is a temporary abode in the spirit world of those who either were untaught and unrighteous, or were disobedient to the gospel while in mortal life. As part of his redemptive mission, Jesus Christ visited the spirit world during the interlude between his own death and resurrection, and "from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness"—in other words, to the spirits in prison.Thus, the gulf between paradise and hell that is spoken of in Jesus' parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) was bridged by the Savior's ministry in the spirit world. This bridging allows interaction among the righteous and wicked spirits to the extent that the faithful present the gospel to "those who had died in their sins, without a knowledge of the truth, or in transgression, having rejected the prophets" Repentance of imprisoned spirits opens the doors of the prison, enabling them to loose themselves from the spiritual darkness of unbelief, ignorance, and sin. As they accept the gospel of Jesus Christ and cast off their sins, the repentant are able to break the chains of hell and dwell with the righteous in paradise. If a man depart this life with lighter faults, he is condemned to fire which burns away the lighter materials, and prepares the soul for the kingdom of God, where nothing defiled may enter. "For if on the foundation of Christ you have built not only gold and silver and precious stones (I Cor., 3); but also wood and hay and stubble,what do you expect when the soul shall be separated from the body? Would you enter into heaven with your wood and hay and stubble and thus defile the kingdom of God; or on account of these hindrances would you remain without and receive no reward for your gold and silver and precious stones? Neither is this just. It remains then that you be committed to the fire which will burn the light materials; for our God to those who can comprehend heavenly things is called a cleansing fire. But this fire consumes not the creature, but what the creature has himself built, wood, and hay and stubble. It is manifest that the fire destroys the wood of our transgressions and then returns to us the reward of our great works." (P. G., XIII, col. 445, 448). The Apostolic practice of praying for the dead which passed into the liturgy of the Church, is as clear in the fourth century as it is in the twentieth. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechet. Mystog., V, 9, P.G., XXXIII, col. 1116) describing the liturgy, writes: "Then we pray for the Holy Fathers and Bishops that are dead; and in short for all those who have departed this life in our communion; believing that the souls of those for whom prayers are offered receive very great relief, while this holy and tremendous victim lies upon the altar." St. Gregory of Nyssa (P. G., XLVI, col. 524, 525) states that man's weaknesses are purged in this life by prayer and wisdom, or are expiated in the next by a cleansing fire. "When he has quitted his body and the difference between virtue and vice is known he cannot approach God till the purging fire shall have cleansed the stains with which his soul was infested. That same fire in others will cancel the corruption of matter, and the propensity to evil." About the same time the Apostolic Constitution gives us the formularies used in succouring the dead. "Let us pray for our brethren who sleep in Christ, that God who in his love for men has received the soul of the depart one, may forgive him every fault, and in mercy and clemency receive him into the bosom of Abraham, with those who in this life have pleased God" (P. G. I, col. 1144). |
||||||
52 | until you have paid the last penny. | Matthew | gbennett76 | 94860 | ||
welcome to perfect.... | ||||||
53 | until you have paid the last penny. | Matthew | gbennett76 | 94861 | ||
and that would be great if you put "once upon a time"... at the beginning of that paragraph LOL | ||||||
54 | of them which killed the prophets | Matt 23:29 | gbennett76 | 95433 | ||
Look in your Bible. Can you find any time in the entire history of Israel (or the church) when Israel (or the church) did not create new scriptures? Moses wrote new scripture. Isaiah did. Malachi did Peter and Paul and John did. All the time when the true church existed, it created new scriptures! The only time when new scripture was not produced was times when Israel was in apostasy, such as the time between the Old and New Testaments. Whenever the church thinks it needs no more prophets, it is because it prefers to kill the prophets. Matthew 23:29-32 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers." The true church is easy to spot. It is the one that produces new scriptures. Amos 3:7 "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." |
||||||
55 | Some things are withheld | Mark 4:11 | gbennett76 | 95436 | ||
The Bible Does Not Contain All of Jesus' Teachings Mark 4:11-12 and 16:12-20 – Some things are withheld. Was it only the meaning of parables that were hidden from the ordinary people (see also Luke 9:21 – how can we be sure the apostles wrote everything down?). The earliest Bibles (such as the Codex Sinaiticus) do not contain the last verses of Mark. This is important, since Mark is apparently the oldest gospel, and was used a source by the other gospel writers. Were these last twelve verses invented hundreds of years after Mark died? If these twelve verses are true, then they must have been written down in the first century, but kept separate for hundreds of years until it was decided to add them to the public version of Mark. So the early church kept some parts of scripture secret! Then we cannot assume, just because we have the Bible, that we have everything the early church ever taught. That is what the Mormons have said all along. N.B. the controversial scholar Morton Smith claims to have found evidence for the secret portions of Mark. His theory is based on a reference in a letter of the respected church father, Clement. Smith describes the evidence in his book The Secret Gospel. The very next verse after the last verse of Mark is Luke 1:1. This plainly states that "many" have written about Jesus before Luke did. Where are these "many" gospels? The good news is, while many of the ancient texts are lost forever, the lost teachings have been restored again from heaven through modern prophets and can be found in the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the book The Pearl of Great Price. Hidden Teachings: Naturally, the traditional churches fight against the evidence for hidden teachings. Their whole theology is based on the Bible being the final and complete word, so all other evidence must be denied. What is the other evidence? Of Course There Are Hidden Teachings! Every field of truth has different layers of understanding. Hence we have basic mathematics, and advanced mathematics. Basic history and advanced studies in history. Basic childcare and advanced courses in childcare. Basic haircutting and advanced haircutting. The only types of knowledge that do not have advanced versions are simple stories that are not true. If the gospel is true, than obviously the basics will be taught first, and the whole grand scheme will not be included in the initial books. It would not make sense to include a chapter on superstring theory or quantum mechanics in an introduction to physics! The fact that some teachings are hidden does not mean that they are shameful or that they contradict the basics, but simply that they are inappropriate for new students. The scriptures we have are the public scriptures – those that were given to non-members and new members. If there was nothing else, if there were no additional teachings, then by analogy with every other field of truth we could conclude that this was a false gospel. Finally, if a teaching was secret, obviously it would not be contained in the Bible. So to say that "all secret teachings must be referred to in the Bible" is clearly nonsense. Scriptures About Hidden Teachings: Matthew 13:11 – Only the apostles (not the general public) are to understand the mysteries. 1 Corinthians 3:1-2 – Milk before meat. Note that 1 Corinthians contains very deep doctrine, yet this is referred to as just "milk" (1 Cor. 3:2 – the saints were STILL not able to cope with the meat). Examples of Hidden Teachings: 1 Corinthian 12:1-4 – Paul talks of the third heaven – without explaining what he means – and says that some things he heard were not to be repeated. 2 Thessalonians 2 – Paul refers to "that which withholdeth," a force that was keeping the apostasy at bay. He told the people in person, but would not write it down. The book of Revelation – Plenty of mysteries here! |
||||||
56 | prophecies of a prophet to come | John 1:21 | gbennett76 | 95437 | ||
"that prophet." The Jews evidently had prophecies of a prophet to come, apart from Christ, and apart from Elias (Christ, Elias, and "that prophet" are three distinct figures in prophecy – verse 25). He cannot have been any of the famous Old Testament prophets, or they would have used the name. What do we know about "that prophet?" The people confused him with John the Baptist, so presumably "that prophet" was expected to be some kind of forerunner. "That prophet" was expected in the future, just as the Christ was expected (though Christ is more important than any prophet). Many people assume that "that prophet" referred to Christ, since Jesus once noted that Moses saw his day. Moses did indeed make a bold statement about a prophet being raised up, in Deuteronomy 18:15. But we must always look at scripture in context. In that chapter, Moses was talking in general terms only. He mentions "a prophet" who is raised up by God, and also "the prophet" who speaks falsely (Deuteronomy 8:18-20). Clearly these are general truths about any prophet. Jesus fulfilled the tests of a true prophet, just as Moses and Peter and Joseph Smith did. (Although there are always those who claim to follow God, the Dathans and Abirams, the Pharisees, and even some self-righteous people today who call themselves Christian, who will claim that true prophets are false prophets.) So Moses was simply referring to the obvious fact that God uses prophets – a fact that most modern day churches seem to have forgotten. It is possible that Christ was referring to that exact prophecy when he spoke about Moses' prophecy – after all, Moses said there would be true prophets, and Jesus, besides being the son of God, was also a messenger from God – a prophet. It is also possible of course that Jesus was referring to some other statement of Moses (now lost), or simply indicating that the entire Mosaic law was a schoolmaster to bring people to Christ, as Paul said. Either way, Moses confirmed that God uses prophets, and the Jews were looking forward to "that prophet", someone quite separate from the expected Messiah. Presumably than "that prophet" is another reference to the prophet mentioned earlier, whose name would be Joseph. |
||||||
57 | spoken by the mouth of all | Acts 3:21 | gbennett76 | 95438 | ||
Speaking of the last days before the Second Coming of Christ, Peter referred to "the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." It must be pretty important if every prophet has spoken of it. Yet the Bible we have only refers to it a few times, so someone must have tried hard to keep the rest of those prophecies out of the Bible that has come down to us. That restitution, or restoration, began in 1830, and is called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but other people call it "Mormonism." |
||||||
58 | Homesexuality? Wrong? | Rom 1:27 | gbennett76 | 92988 | ||
The Torah is composed of the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). It contains numerous laws which make up the Mosaic code. Rabbi Simlai wrote in the Talmud (Jewish traditional commentary about the Hebrew Scriptures) that God gave 613 commandments to Moses. One list finds 3 commandments in Genesis, 111 in Exodus, 247 in Leviticus, 52 in Numbers and 200 in Deuteronomy. These included 365 prohibitions -- a number equal to the nominal number of days in the year. Also included 248 positive commandments which Rabbi Simlai said corresponded "to the number of organs and limbs in the human body." Hundreds of these dealt with animal sacrifices and other topics that are not currently practiced. That leaves about 300 commandments that can be practiced today. The Holiness Code in the Torah permits: slavery (Leviticus 25:44) The code requires: a child to be killed if he/she curses their parent (Leviticus 20:9) all persons guilty of adultery to be killed (20:10) the daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution to be burned alive until dead (21:9) the bride of a priest to be a virgin (21:13) ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19) observation of 7 feasts: Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, Feast of Firstfruits, Feast of Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles (23) a person who takes the Lord's name in vain is to be killed (24:16) The code prohibits: heterosexual intercourse when a woman has her period (Leviticus 18:19), harvesting the corners of a field (19:9), eating fruit from a young tree (19:23), cross-breeding livestock (19:19), sowing a field with mixed seed (19:19), shaving or getting a hair cut (19:27), tattoos (19:28), even a mildly disabled person from becoming a priest (21:18), charging of interest on a loan (25:37), collecting firewood on Saturday to prevent your family from freezing, wearing of clothes made from a blend of textile materials; today this might be cotton and polyester, and eating of non-kosher foods (e.g. shrimp). Christians are free to wear tattoos, eat shrimp, pork or rare meat, wear polyester-cotton blends, seed their lawns with a grass mixture, and get their hair cut. But homosexuality is somehow taboo. We have been unable to find any logical explanation that would justify conservative Christians concentrating so much on these two laws against homosexuality while abandoning most of the rest. |
||||||
59 | The "other" gospel -the dead prophets | Gal 1:6 | gbennett76 | 95439 | ||
Galatians chapter 1 – "another gospel." Modern day critics sometimes quote one part of this chapter – "though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." But they never quote the rest of the chapter. Why? Read the whole chapter and you will see why. Then read it again. Paul is contrasting the gospel of man made churches with the gospel of Christ. The true and original gospel begins with new and life-changing revelation – a literal vision of Jesus Christ. The "other" gospel is the one taught by the established churches, based on centuries of studying the dead prophets. |
||||||
60 | Sola Scriptura-A False teaching | 2 Tim 3:16 | gbennett76 | 94377 | ||
Protestants claim the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative or wrong—and may well hinder one in coming to God. The true "rule of faith"—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly. But Evangelical and Fundamentalist Protestants, who place their confidence in Martin Luther’s theory of sola scriptura will usually argue for their position by citing a couple of key verses. The first is this: "These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name" (John 20:31). The other is this: "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be equipped, prepared for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16–17). According to these Protestants, these verses demonstrate the reality of sola scriptura (the "Bible only" theory). First, the verse from John refers to the things written in that book (read it with John 20:30, the verse immediately before it to see the context of the statement in question). If this verse proved anything, it would not prove the theory of sola scriptura but that the Gospel of John is sufficient. Second, the verse from John’s Gospel tells us only that the Bible was composed so we can be helped to believe Jesus is the Messiah. It does not say the Bible is all we need for salvation, much less that the Bible is all we need for theology; nor does it say the Bible is even necessary to believe in Christ. After all, the earliest Christians had no New Testament to which they could appeal; they learned from oral, rather than written, instruction. Until relatively recent times, the Bible was inaccessible to most people, either because they could not read or because the printing press had not been invented. All these people learned from oral instruction, passed down, generation to generation, by the Church. Much the same can be said about 2 Timothy 3:16-17. To say that all inspired writing "has its uses" is one thing; to say that such a remark means that only inspired writing need be followed is something else. Besides, there is a telling argument against claims of Evangelical and Fundamentalist Protestants. It is the contradiction that arises out of their own interpretation of this verse. John Henry Newman explained it in an 1884 essay entitled "Inspiration in its Relation to Revelation." He wrote: "It is quite evident that this passage furnishes no argument whatever that the sacred Scripture, without Tradition, is the sole rule of faith; for, although sacred Scripture is profitable for these four ends, still it is not said to be sufficient. The Apostle [Paul] requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy. "Now, a good part of the New Testament was not written in his boyhood: Some of the Catholic epistles were not written even when Paul wrote this, and none of the books of the New Testament were then placed on the canon of the Scripture books. He refers, then, to the scriptures of the Old Testament, and, if the argument from this passage proved anything, it would prove too much, viz., that the scriptures of the New Testament were not necessary for a rule of faith." Furthermore, Protestants typically read 2 Timothy 3:16-17 out of context. When read in the context of the surrounding passages, one discovers that Paul’s reference to Scripture is only part of his exhortation that Timothy take as his guide Tradition and Scripture. The two verses immediately before it state: "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:14–15). Paul tells Timothy to continue in what he has learned for two reasons: first, because he knows from whom he has learned it—Paul himself—and second, because he has been educated in the scriptures. The first of these is a direct appeal to apostolic tradition, the oral teaching which the apostle Paul had given Timothy. So Protestants must take 2 Timothy 3:16-17 out of context to arrive at the theory of sola scriptura. But when the passage is read in context, it becomes clear that it is teaching the importance of apostolic tradition! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |