Divisions

[Free]

Glad you think so. But I know many people who are not as settled as you appear to be.
And I don't think your point was very persuasive.

There simply are no other books that are to be considered Christian Scripture. It's been that way for 1600+ years. Any who disagree are one reason why there are divisions. It goes right back to the OP and 2 Tim 4:3.

50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has x number of books.
50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has y number of books.
So we are in agreement.

Sounds like a hung jury to me.

And, yet, as I have at least twice pointed out, both have the same 66 books.

 

[for_his_glory]

Glad you think so. But I know many people who are not as settled as you appear to be.
And I don't think your point was very persuasive.

50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has x number of books.
50% of the body of Christ think the Bible has y number of books.
So we are in agreement.

Sounds like a hung jury to me.

Where do you get your percentages from for as far as I know every Christian that owns a Bible would know that it contains 66 books that were written by those in whom God inspired to write down His spoken word. Unless you are a Mormon or a JW who use other books like many different religions do that teach the man made doctrines of their church, the Bible stands alone as the authoritive word of God. Division only comes by those who do not have Spiritual ears to hear what the Holy Spirit wants to teach them as they are indoctrinated by what their church teaches.

 

[dwb001]

Where do you get your percentages from for as far as I know every Christian that owns a Bible would know that it contains 66 books that were written by those in whom God inspired to write down His spoken word. Unless you are a Mormon or a JW who use other books like many different religions do that teach the man made doctrines of their church, the Bible stands alone as the authoritive word of God. Division only comes by those who do not have Spiritual ears to hear what the Holy Spirit wants to teach them as they are indoctrinated by what their church teaches.

If you followed this thread then you would know that the Catholic Bible has 73.

 

[dwb001]

There simply are no other books that are to be considered Christian Scripture. It's been that way for 1600+ years. Any who disagree are one reason why there are divisions. It goes right back to the OP and 2 Tim 4:3.


And, yet, as I have at least twice pointed out, both have the same 66 books.

73 vs 66... sounds like a difference.

What is your point about 2 Tim 4:3?
Not settled.

 

[Free]

73 vs 66... sounds like a difference.

What is your point about 2 Tim 4:3?
Not settled.

2Ti 4:3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, (ESV)

People who think there are other books which should have been included in canon, such as the Gospel of Thomas, are those described in 2 Tim 4:3.

Scripture is Scripture and there are no other books. So, what is your point in all of this? Why are you making such a big deal of it?

 

[dwb001]

2Ti 4:3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, (ESV)

People who think there are other books which should have been included in canon, such as the Gospel of Thomas, are those described in 2 Tim 4:3.

Scripture is Scripture and there are no other books. So, what is your point in all of this? Why are you making such a big deal of it?

Me making a big deal??? I am just responding to your posts.
Why is Scripture Scripture? Please back up your claim.
One of my points is to get past the blind faith I see in posts such as this.

What makes 2 Tim 3:16 Scripture?
2Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

If you say... because it is in the Bible... then you would have to face the circular logic problem.
It's Scripture because it says it's Scripture. Not a valid reason.
Would Paul write a letter to Tim and expect that his letter be considered Scripture? Not likely.

But please... offer your defence of why all the NT is considered Scripture.

 

[Free]

Me making a big deal??? I am just responding to your posts.

You started it back on page 1.

Why is Scripture Scripture? Please back up your claim.
One of my points is to get past the blind faith I see in posts such as this.

What makes 2 Tim 3:16 Scripture?
2Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

If you say... because it is in the Bible... then you would have to face the circular logic problem.
It's Scripture because it says it's Scripture. Not a valid reason.

Simply saying that it is Scripture because it is in the Bible isn't itself circular. Those books that are Scripture and included in canon were decided upon by the church based on at least four main criteria--apostlicity, catholicity, orthodoxy, and inspiration.

Would Paul write a letter to Tim and expect that his letter be considered Scripture? Not likely.

Which is irrelevant as to whether or not it is Scripture, especially since Peter says it is. However, Paul did know he had the authority of an apostle, given by Christ himself, so he would have known that in some sense his writings were authoritative.

But please... offer your defence of why all the NT is considered Scripture.

Firstly, because Peter equates Paul's writings with the OT Scriptures. Secondly, because Paul quotes Luke and says it is Scripture. Thirdly, because the early church determined the books of the NT were Scripture.

You initially made the unsupported claims that "the only part of the Bible that can accurately be called Scripture is the Books of the Law" and that is how a first century Jew would have viewed things. Ever since, you have kept arguing against the idea that the NT is Scripture. So, again, what is your point in questioning what is and isn't Scripture?

 

[dwb001]

You started it back on page 1.

I'm just responding to people and their ideas.

Simply saying that it is Scripture because it is in the Bible isn't itself circular. Those books that are Scripture and included in canon were decided upon by the church based on at least four main criteria--apostlicity, catholicity, orthodoxy, and inspiration.

But that isn't your reason for calling it Scripture... but some 3rd century opinions.

Which is irrelevant as to whether or not it is Scripture, especially since Peter says it is. However, Paul did know he had the authority of an apostle, given by Christ himself, so he would have known that in some sense his writings were authoritative.

I write a letter and my other friend calls it Scripture... is it Scripture?
That would be an appeal to authority fallacy... wouldn't it?

Firstly, because Peter equates Paul's writings with the OT Scriptures. Secondly, because Paul quotes Luke and says it is Scripture. Thirdly, because the early church determined the books of the NT were Scripture.

So three reasons to call something Scripture is to get at least 3 groups to agree that it is Scripture?

You initially made the unsupported claims that "the only part of the Bible that can accurately be called Scripture is the Books of the Law" and that is how a first century Jew would have viewed things. Ever since, you have kept arguing against the idea that the NT is Scripture. So, again, what is your point in questioning what is and isn't Scripture?

When did I say that the NT isn't Scripture?
Please don't insult my character without proof.
What is your point in saying that Scripture is settled... when the two largest branches of the faith can't agree on Scripture?
You say that CC and Prods agree on 66 books... but do the Prods agree on the other books being Scripture? No. So they disagree.

 

[journeyman]

It would seem to me then that God has ordained it to happen this way .
Did there come a point where God's chosen people did not endure sound doctrine as well ?
And these are people who had been witness to the physical appearing of God in the form of a cloud .
More than anything it just amazes me that we have endured as long as we have .
God's will is in this as well.

Heb 11:27
By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.

Hello Consecrated life.
I believe God has ordained a way for everyone to be able to recognize false teaching and reject it. I believe God has ordained the way of salvation for anyone who desires it.
It makes perfect sense that false teaching is the result of not wanting to know God.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Hello Consecrated life.
I believe God has ordained a way for everyone to be able to recognize false teaching and reject it. I believe God has ordained the way of salvation for anyone who desires it.

Yes and I believe that has always been the case .
So what is Paul saying here ?

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;" 2Tim.4:3

"..the time will come.." in particular is a phrase that strikes me as Paul giving prophecy that it will occur according to God's will.
It " will come" .
I may be wrong but I perceive this to mean that there will be a deterioration in receptiveness
of the average unsaved person towards the Word of God.
Let me give an example of what I am talking about in terms of the unsaved public's ability to " ENDURE SOUND DOCTRINE" in the past as compared to today, and the direction it is going towards what Paul Prophesized coming to pass.
I can recall a time in my youth when things Christian, speech, displays, were not controversial at all .
They were "endured"
I attended a public high school and I can still remember on occasions when there were car accidents, house fires, sicknesses, involving students & the principle of this publicly funded school offered a Christian prayer to the whole school over the intercom .
All this happening numerous times without one word of objection, protest, demands for him to be fired, etc,etc,etc,,.
Quite the opposite the sound doctrine of petitioning the Lord of Glory while certainly there were some non-believers who considered it waste of breath, were quite willing to listen and felt better for it .
To me Paul is talking about society becoming more & more hostile to Christianity , while at the same time becoming more infatuated with religion in the sense that there will be an increasing desire towards the spiritual , but towards spiritual doctrines and teachers that are actually focused on the world, the flesh and lust of the flesh.
I never would have become a Christian if I had not first been willing to endure the presentation of " sound doctrine"
Paul's description certainly matches up with the progression I have seen in my short lifetime.
I believe we are living in the very pivotal time that Paul has described .

 

[Christ_empowered]

Yes! That articulates my own thoughts so well. People will diy spirituality building a belief system that suits each person…

Sound doctrine? Not so much.

 

[journeyman]

Yes and I believe that has always been the case .
So what is Paul saying here ?

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;" 2Tim.4:3

"..the time will come.." in particular is a phrase that strikes me as Paul giving prophecy that it will occur according to God's will.
It " will come" .
I may be wrong but I perceive this to mean that there will be a deterioration in receptiveness
of the average unsaved person towards the Word of God.
Let me give an example of what I am talking about in terms of the unsaved public's ability to " ENDURE SOUND DOCTRINE" in the past as compared to today, and the direction it is going towards what Paul Prophesized coming to pass.
I can recall a time in my youth when things Christian, speech, displays, were not controversial at all .
They were "endured"
I attended a public high school and I can still remember on occasions when there were car accidents, house fires, sicknesses, involving students & the principle of this publicly funded school offered a Christian prayer to the whole school over the intercom .
All this happening numerous times without one word of objection, protest, demands for him to be fired, etc,etc,etc,,.
Quite the opposite the sound doctrine of petitioning the Lord of Glory while certainly there were some non-believers who considered it waste of breath, were quite willing to listen and felt better for it .
To me Paul is talking about society becoming more & more hostile to Christianity , while at the same time becoming more infatuated with religion in the sense that there will be an increasing desire towards the spiritual , but towards spiritual doctrines and teachers that are actually focused on the world, the flesh and lust of the flesh.
I never would have become a Christian if I had not first been willing to endure the presentation of " sound doctrine"
Paul's description certainly matches up with the progression I have seen in my short lifetime.
I believe we are living in the very pivotal time that Paul has described .

I agree my friend. I remember the days of prayer not being objected to by anyone, but the days of Noah and the people of Sodom certainly fit Pauls' description of a time when sound doctrine wasn't endured.
In a very real sense, the "time to come" has always been here.

 

[Christ_empowered]

It’s on the right wing too. They’ll say I love Jesus…

And go on rants about people on welfare immigrants and all that. Really?

 

[ezrider]

Yet, the Catholic Bible still has the same 66 books that comprise the entire Protestant Bible. The only books in question are the Apocryphal ones; the Jews rejected them, which is in large part why the Protestants do.

The Jews rejected them? Why that is some real sound reasoning there. The same Jews who rejected Jesus!

By your reasoning then I must conclude that in large part Protestants have rejected Jesus too.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I think it means the criteria for inclusion was not met.,,

 

[Free]

The Jews rejected them? Why that is some real sound reasoning there. The same Jews who rejected Jesus!

By your reasoning then I must conclude that in large part Protestants have rejected Jesus too.

And, yet, the Jews gave us the Protestant OT. So, by your reasoning, we should reject it because they rejected Jesus.

Maybe try reading my post again. Someone else understood it, so there is no reason why you can’t, if you really want to.

 

[ezrider]

First you have to ask yourself, why did God NOT ALLOW them into His Word?

And exactly why is this a question I must first ask myself? Who can declare what book God allowed and which God did not? Are you God that you can declare such things? Now why a counsel of men decided which book belonged, these things we might consider. Why were the books in the 1611 King James removed? Your conclusion is that God removed them?

You ought be careful you have not elevated the words of a book above the Lord Himself, making it an idol.

There is a reason, and it is because something written in it, is NOT what God wants in His Word, therefore did not allow it into His Word.

It is written in the gospels that if all the things that Jesus had said or done were to be written, the world itself could contain the books.

But this is Better to do. NOT read any of them at all. Even though i have read most (if not all) of them. The reason is, is Because satan will have another whole set of tools to use against you, by believing in those OTHER BOOKS.

You have it mistaken. Satan does not use the other books as a tool against you: He uses the ONE Book, as he used the fruit of ONE tree; desirable, one to make you wise that YOU might be as god.

In the book it is written that God did give to man all the trees of the garden to eat, but of the ONE tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil, he was commanded do not touch, for in the day that you do you will DIE. Of all the BOOKS in the world, only ONE gives you the knowledge of good and evil, and the knowledge of DEATH, and the HOPE of SALVATION.

 

[DiscipleDave]

If you say... because it is in the Bible... then you would have to face the circular logic problem.
It's Scripture because it says it's Scripture. Not a valid reason.

It is for those who have FAITH. Those who do not have Faith and merely believe they are Scriptures, seek PROOF, seek evidence. These are they that are in the Matrix, judging everything by what they see, feel, taste, smell, and hear. Those who judge everything via their five senses, are Carnally minded, and do not have the mind of Christ.
All 66 Books are Scriptures, don't need to prove that to you, they just are. If then YOU are the one that doubts they are, then it seems to me, the issue is with you.

Would Paul write a letter to Tim and expect that his letter be considered Scripture? Not likely.

Well i totally understand why YOU THINK that, because you don't believe the Word of God and what it says. Hence the reason you are so confused about all of it, it seems.
Know you not the Word of God? It is the Holy Ghost who taught them what to say.

1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Everything that Paul taught are COMMANDMENTS of the Lord. Or Do you think it was only what brother Paul said to the Corinthians that were commandments of the Lord?

Know you not that the Holy Ghost taught them all what to say? Even before they penned a letter, God knew that all they said, that would be in His WORD, would come from Him, because it is the Holy Ghost who taught them what to say.

i can't tell you how many times i will be typing something, and the Holy Ghost tells me, NOPE, delete that, it is not from me but from you. So then i would delete it. What the Holy Ghost does that for me, but NOT for all the Apostles? You do error thinking that they wrote letters that were not by the hand of God.
EVERYTHING all the Apostles wrote is FROM GOD, therefore Scriptures. This generation of Nicolaitan Christians can't grasp or understand, that even though a human wrote something, that it was Guided by GOD HIMSELF.

What kind of God, would allow something to be in His Word (which has His NAME on it) to be wrong? If you think there are things in His Word that is not from Him, you serve a different God than i do. The God i serve does not make mistakes. The God i serve, would not allow brother Paul to say anything to anyone that was not from God.

All 66 Books are Scriptures, and are indeed inspired by God, NOT inspired by the humans who penned them, as this pathetic last days generation would have you to believe.

But please... offer your defence of why all the NT is considered Scripture.

No. Don't have to prove to you anything at all.

1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

So the Holy Ghost teaches people what to write, what to say.

Know you not that it is written a little bit of leaven leaveneth the whole lump. If then one verse is NOT inspired by God, then the WHOLE is corrupted.

The Father in Heaven is 100% Pure.
The Son Jesus is 100% Pure.
Light is 100% Pure.
His Word likewise is 100% Pure. no darkness in it. if it had even one verse that is NOT inspired by God, then His Word is NOT 100% PURE, but is tainted by the UNinspired verse that is in it. Woe to those who believe this lie from satan himself. They will most certainly not be able to come to the Truth of God. Until they realize that His Word is TRUTH, 100% PURE TRUTH. Every verse Inspired by God.

 

[DiscipleDave]

And exactly why is this a question I must first ask myself?

Concerning why this or that Book was not added, this should be the first question you ask about the books that God did not allow to be in His Word. Every Book that is NOT in the 66 Books we have today was not allowed to be in His Word. Therefore the logical question should be, why not?

Who can declare what book God allowed and which God did not? Are you God that you can declare such things?

i am not God, but a child of God, and i can declare with 100% assurity what Books God allowed by opening up any KJ Bible. Now if you lack Faith they are, then that is an entirely different topic. But the proof of what Books God allowed are plainly revealed in the Word of God.

Now why a counsel of men decided which book belonged, these things we might consider.

Where they are counsel of Atheist men? No. Were they are counsel of ungodly men? No. Were they a counsel of devil worshiping men? No. They were Godly men, who were being led by the Holy Ghost.

Tell me, if you were a King of an entire Country, would you write down the thousands of Laws, or would you choose men to write them down for you? And the men you chose to write down your laws, you would choose very carefully, trusting them to write down the laws, correct? Now that is HUMANS.

God on the Other hand, already KNEW every single word they would write, and therefore chose that person to write His Words. God already knew full well the 66 Books that would be in His Word. What then? You think God did not know what was going to be in His Word, before He even created Adam and Eve?

What is wrong with this last days generation that they can't seem to understand or grasp, the Power of God. God KNEW every single thing that each Apostle was going to write, before that apostle was even born into the World. Jesus chose who He chose knowing what they would write for all humans till He Returns.

God KNEW full well that all brother Paul said to the Galatians would apply to ALL Christians. Everything Paul said to the Corinthians was to and for ALL CHRISTIANS till He Returns. What brother Paul was saying to the WOMEN in those days, is to ALL Christian women till His Return. Woe to the person who does not understand these things.

Why were the books in the 1611 King James removed? Your conclusion is that God removed them?

God did not remove them, if they were indeed removed. Human removed me, being led by the Holy Ghost to do so.
The Holy Ghost, is yet another thing this last days generation can't grasp or understand either.

You ought be careful you have not elevated the words of a book above the Lord Himself, making it an idol.

An idol is something you WORSHIP. Any person who WORSHIPS words in a book is not right with God.
However the Word of God, IS GOD.


Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Those who claim with their mouths they believe in Jesus, but then do not believe His Word, do NOT believe in Jesus, no matter how much they THINK they do.

 

[DiscipleDave]

It is written in the gospels that if all the things that Jesus had said or done were to be written, the world itself could contain the books.

This is True.

You have it mistaken.

No, i do not.

In the book it is written that God did give to man all the trees of the garden to eat, but of the ONE tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil, he was commanded do not touch, for in the day that you do you will DIE. Of all the BOOKS in the world, only ONE gives you the knowledge of good and evil, and the knowledge of DEATH, and the HOPE of SALVATION.

Are you saying there are NO Books in the world that teaches good and evil? You do error if you believe that, there are many Books in the world by authors who try to teach others what is Good and what is evil. However there is ONLY ONE Word of God.

MANY BOOKS in the world teaches Good and Evil, But EVERY BOOK should be compared with the Word of God.
Even OTHER versions of the Bible all teach about Good and Evil, and the knowledge of DEATH, but they are NOT the Word of God, they are merely interpretations by humans who felt the current Word of God was in need of an update, It wasn't, but such are the actions of Last days generation.

Don't get me wrong, or assume this or that about me. i am not saying Other Versions of the Bible are evil, Because any version that can bring a person to the Lord Jesus Christ is not an evil version.
however NONE of those OTHER versions are the Word of God, only the noncopyrighted KJV is the Word of God, and all other versions, if questions arise, should be compared to the KJV Bible as the Word of God.