Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Joe, is the Bible not sufficienct? | Lev 16:34 | Bill Mc | 20191 | ||
Dear Joe, You write: 'Saying "all I need is me and my Bible" doesn't work, either, because most of what we hold regarding the Holy Scriptures was taught to us by others...' Are you saying that if a person knew how to read and all that he had was the Bible, that it would not be enough for him to arrive at a saving faith? If so, that is a pretty strong statement, even for you. Granted, most all of us sit under someone's teaching. But how do you know if it is valid teaching or not? The Bible. I do believe that all that is necessary in a humble soul, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit of God. In fact, I would recommend that any new Christian avoid sitting under anyone's teaching for at least a year so that only he and the Holy Spirit can spend time learning what God's Word says and means before having it filtered through someone else. I don't know about you, but I have no desire to chew someone else's food to get my nourishment. God promised me that he would lead me into all truth through His Word. Right or wrong, I trust Him to do so. Commentaries are exactly that - 'com'ments from 'men', nothing more, nothing less. I recently tried to discuss an issue with my pastor and all he wanted to do is read from his commentary. I said, "Pastor, why can't we just stick with God's Word and let the Holy Spirit and other scripture interpret this passage." "Oh, this commentary explains it very well," he replied. Made me what to puke. Commentaries have their place AFTER God's Word, not before it or alongside it. What do you think? Does one truly require more than the Bible and the Holy Spirit to know truth? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
2 | Joe, is the Bible not sufficienct? | Lev 16:34 | srbaegon | 20226 | ||
My response to your question is this: It is impossible to do without commentaries. Now let me explain. As you have stated, commentaries are the words of men. They are the interpretation and application of the Scriptures. When you or I teach, preach, or disciple, we are living commentaries. Now, I understand what you were driving at--going to the commentary first before digging for ourselves. After all, didn't the Lord Jesus promise that the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth? For the record, I've read of men (very few) who never used printed materials other than their Bibles. Some did well, some did not. Steve |
||||||
3 | Joe, is the Bible not sufficienct? | Lev 16:34 | kalos | 20230 | ||
Steve: You have made many good points and stimulated much thinking and discussion regarding this topic. In addition to all that has been written in this thread, may I point out the following? Back before 1900 A.D. a group of men gathered around a kitchen table armed only with the King James Version of the Bible and an English dictionary. Over a period of time they took the words of the Bible in an overly literal sense and then gave symbolic meaning to what THEY felt was symbolic. They pretended there was no such thing as 1900 years of the historic Christian faith which could aid them in interpreting the Bible. The result? The Watchtower Society, better known as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Grace to you. |
||||||
4 | Is job security being threatened here? | Lev 16:34 | Bill Mc | 20232 | ||
Dear kalos, Sounds like someone's 'job security' is being threatened here, doesn't it? Do we really have to resort to drawing an analogy between a 'sola scriptura' attitude and the start of a cult? They re-wrote the Bible. Did I ever once suggest that? To even imply that someone with just a Bible and no supplemental material is the sure way to a cult is ludicrous. You missed my point entirely, kalos. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
5 | Is job security being threatened here? | Lev 16:34 | kalos | 20235 | ||
I was not *implying* that someone with just a Bible is the sure way to a cult. All I did was point out when one *particular* group of men took the Bible only and ignored everything else, the result was *in fact* the beginning of a cult. Yes, the JWs eventually re-wrote the Bible -- more than 50 years AFTER the startup of the Watchtower Society. But by using the King James Version itself they managed to create a new cult. I have no idea what you mean by "Is job security being threatened here?" |
||||||
6 | Is job security being threatened here? | Lev 16:34 | Reformer Joe | 20342 | ||
I might add it is when UNEDUCATED men took the Bible that we see things like cults form. And Jehovah's Witnesses are far from the only cult that claim the Bible as an authority but refuse sound teaching. Taking the argument of Bill to its logical conclusion, everyone can make up his or her mind what the Bible really means, and defend their erroneous views by saying that such false doctrine is "what the Spirit taught them." If one is saved, apparently, that means that they can never be wrong about the Bible if they are "walking in the Spirit." The problem, of course, comes about when two people with different views claim to have been taught by the Holy Spirit. Is that a "Holy Spirit stalemate"? Being unteachable is a heinous thing for a Christian to be. --Joe! |
||||||