Results 1 - 12 of 12
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48182 | ||
Joe, After reading the stuff at your link I find nothing that disagrees with me except this guy's own opinion. The RCC declared these books part of the canon because they have been in use for centuries. They didn't just invent the idea. As a matter of fact there have been many canons throughout the centuries. They differ from time to time and from east to west. Parts and all of the apocrypha have been incuded. In fact the Old Testament that we now have is bigger than the original Jewish canon. It all depends on what year and in what context you are looking. Here is a question for you; when did the "protestant" church ever officialy declare it's canon? I missed that in any of the info you referred to. Again, my question was how do you or anybody else determine the authority to decide what is scripture? |
||||||
2 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 48207 | ||
You wrote: "Parts and all of the apocrypha have been incuded. In fact the Old Testament that we now have is bigger than the original Jewish canon." The Protestant Old Testament is different in size than the Jewish Tanakh? And you neglect the fact that it was not Luther who took the Apocrypha out of the Bible (it was actually in the appendix of his translation, just like it was in the Vulgate), but rather the Council of Trent who declared dogmatically that they were canonical as a response to the Reformation. You are absolutely correct that the extent of the canon has varied over time, but the books of the Apocrypha were never universally considered to be canonical, while the books which both Protestants and Catholics agree upon were pretty much settled by the turn of the 6th century. You wrote: 'Here is a question for you; when did the "protestant" church ever officialy declare it's canon?' Good question! The Protestant churches were pretty much universal in their recognition of which books were canonical. We see in Chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith the 66 books listed as the Holy Scriptures. It is also found in Article 4 of the Belgic Confession, Article 7 of the Thirty-nine Articles, etc. "Again, my question was how do you or anybody else determine the authority to decide what is scripture?" The church of Jesus Christ RECOGNIZES what is Scripture. How do YOU determine that the RCC has the authority to determine what Scripture is? --Joe! |
||||||
3 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48221 | ||
"(it was actually in the appendix of his translation, just like it was in the Vulgate)" It depends on how you look at this. Sure, Jerome didn't consider these books on par with the others, so they were isolated between the Old and New Testaments. But why do you suppose he left them in? It was because there were others who believed that they should be there and he didn't have enough of an argument to remove them. There was a difference between the Alexandrian texts and the Palestinian texts. The majority of complete manuscripts that come from the Alexandrian variety included the apocryphal books. You seem to think that because it wasn't until Trent that the RCC declared these books scripture that it was a new thing. You obviously don't know how the RCC works. Before they consider it dogma it has been the norm for some time. As you say, Luther originally didn't remove them, but moved them to the back. This shows that they were in there before the reformation. I am not Catholic by the way. But I do respect the doctrine, theology and heritage that they bring. It is very short sighted, in my opinion, to just ignore over 1600 years of Christian history. You ask me how do I tell what is scripture? That is a good question. I don't think there is a right answer to that. That is my point. I am not trying to argue in favor of the RCC Bible. I am trying to say that either position is not Biblical. |
||||||
4 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 48259 | ||
You wrote: "It is very short sighted, in my opinion, to just ignore over 1600 years of Christian history." On that we can agree, and the classical Reformation position takes the same view. You wrote: "You ask me how do I tell what is scripture? That is a good question. I don't think there is a right answer to that." Well, I think you will agree that we have to draw the line SOMEWHERE. We can't just accept every writing that anyone claimed is inspired. In my mind, it says a lot about the Roman Catholic view of the Apocrypha, however, when claims are made that books like Judith and Tobit are not factual accounts of real individuals. Claiming that there are divinely-inspired works of fiction in the Old Testament just doesn't sit well with me at all. It just doesn't "fit." --Joe! |
||||||
5 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48385 | ||
"Claiming that there are divinely-inspired works of fiction in the Old Testament just doesn't sit well with me at all. It just doesn't "fit." " I realize that you probably consider this a heresy, but there are Christians that consider the garden story of Adam and Eve to be a parable. That doesn't mean that it wasn't inspired, or doesn't convey God's truth. It isn't out of God's character to tell parables at all. Jesus did it all the time. The Bible even says that: Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets. Notice the use of the word "similitudes". If Jesus uses parables, why can't they exist in the Bible? Does it destroy your faith if you find out that God uses parables? I guess you have to ask youself is the Bible a history book, a science book, or a testament of God's grace? I am willing to give on the history and the science. I don't think that was the intention. I think that people have made too much out of the Bible today. It has become an idol for many. They worship it more the Christ himself. Christ indwells the church. We are his body. The Bible is a book. When it comes down to it, I go with the body of Christ. We have the knowledge of the truth through the power of the Holy Spirit, not the Bible alone. I beleive that God can reveal himself to us without the Bible, but the Bible is nothing without the Holy Spirit in us. |
||||||
6 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | srbaegon | 48392 | ||
Hello dschaertel Within any written work there can be different literary forms. Genesis is historic narrative. Joe was speaking of fiction. Big difference. You said: "We are his body. The Bible is a book. When it comes down to it, I go with the body of Christ." How does that measure up with this? Psalm 138:2 (ESV) I bow down toward your holy temple and give thanks to your name for your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word. God places a high premium on His word. I don't see a problem with giving it a rightful place. Steve |
||||||
7 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48448 | ||
I beleive that the Bible clearly identifies the temple of God as the church. And it clearly identifies the Word as Christ, and it clearly identifies the body of Christ as the church. But nowhere does the Bible say anything about the Bible. Hello... is this mic on? Where does the Bible say anything about a collection of 66 books, or what ever number you want, that will be collected in the future that is to be used to discern all truth? Where is this prophecy? Show me? Nobody has even come close yet. |
||||||
8 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | srbaegon | 48452 | ||
Hello dschaertel By making these statements, you have acknowledged that no written work is or ever can be God's final word. You use the Bible to attack the Bible (i.e. your response to Joe about seeing flesh Bibles lately). You have demonstrated a gross lack of understanding about spiritual things (i.e. your rejection of Makarios' explanation of authoritative works). I conclude you have no desire to listen, therefore I will not continue. Steve |
||||||
9 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48479 | ||
"By making these statements, you have acknowledged that no written work is or ever can be God's final word. " No, not at all. I am saying that they are not flawlessly self evident. That the church has named a set of books as being inspired by God. The reality is that there are different lists. I don't have a problem with that. Some people do, so they deny the truth and glorify their own imaginations. They must, because they worship the Bible and there can't be any ambiguity in the one you worship. Yes, I am against Bible worship. I do believe it is inspired. I read and study it every day. I have no less than 7 translations that I read. I take what the Bible says very seriously. But if there is an ambiguity, or if God uses parables to make a point, I'm OK with that, because I don't worship it. If all my Bibles were destroyed and I was unable to read them anymore, I wouldn't lose anything of eternal value. Because I beleive in the finished work of Jesus Christ, and that He lives to day in and though His church. |
||||||
10 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 48483 | ||
Hi dscharertel, Is there any ambiguity in the One you worship? The one that is spoken of in parables is not the One that we worship. From the heart, Ray | ||||||
11 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | dschaertel | 48484 | ||
"Is there any ambiguity in the One you worship? The one that is spoken of in parables is not the One that we worship. " I am confused by this. Are you saying that a parable and ambiguity are the samething? Jesus says that the Kingdom of Heaven is like.... and gives us several parables. Are you suggesting there is some question as to the truth of what he is saying because he used a parable? I'm not sure what you mean. |
||||||
12 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 48494 | ||
Hi dschaertel, The parables such as Matthew 22:1-14 are earthly stories with heavenly meanings. The "one" that is in the story is just an earthly man or king but the significance of the story was that they were trying to "trap Him in what He said" [literally, in word].***** So the question throughout the New Testament is whether He was who He said He was; the Son of God. God Himself in the flesh.***** For the interest of your discussion, the books that are in the Cannon are the ones who portray Him thus and glorify Him thus. So if a book would portray Him as just a man with some particularly fine skills, then they wouldn't make it into the Cannon. This isn't just a man as per a parable that we worship. The choice we have to make for this parable is seen in the previous verse, Matthew 21:46, "And when they sought to seize Him, they feared the multitudes, because they held Him to be a prophet [sic]. Jesus was more than a prophet, He was the Expected One, even the Prophet who was to come.****** Mark 6:20, NKJ, "Others said, "It is Elijah." And others said, "It is the (Prophet), or like one of the prophets." Or Mark 6:20,NASB, "But others were saying, "He is Elijah." and others were saying, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old."***** Matthew 21:42, "Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone; This came about from the (Lord), And it is marvelous in our eyes.'"***** Psalm 118:23, "This is the (Lord's) doing; It is marvelous in our eyes."***** Romans 9:33, "just as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, And he who believes in (Him) will not be disappointed.""****** To my mind we can not just believe in him, we have to believe in Him. Parentheses were for comparison. From the heart, Ray |
||||||