It’s not biblical!

[Jethro Bodine]

Where does that passage say 'seat'?
Where does that passage say that Moses seat was passed on?

This is a joke, right?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Where does these accounts appear in the OT?

• "But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, 'The Lord rebuke you'" (Jude 1:9).

No, the question is not, "where is it in the OT?"
The question is, "is it in the scriptures?"

You of all people should understand clearly that 'scripture' is both Old and New Testaments!

By virtue of a New Testament writer quoting or using information they effectively made that information part of scripture, to the degree they used it and the purpose of why they used it.

The collection of information contained in the Old and New Testaments is the scripture that fully outfits the Christian believer. We do not need somebody adding anything to it. If you think we do, tell me what it lacks and who provides these needed, but missing parts of scripture for us.

 

[Walpole]

No, the question is not, "where is it in the OT?"
The question is, "is it in the scriptures?"

You of all people should understand clearly that 'scripture' is both Old and New Testaments!

By virtue of a New Testament writer quoting or using information they effectively made that information part of scripture, to the degree they used it and the purpose of why they used it.

The collection of information contained in the Old and New Testaments is the scripture that fully outfits the Christian believer. We do not need somebody adding anything to it. If you think we do, tell me what it lacks and who provides these needed, but missing parts of scripture for us.

Using this argument, you would have to include several pagan philosophers' writings as Scripture. In the New Testament, we find numerous places where St. Pau is quoting and using pagan philosophers. For example...

Phil 2:6-7 ---> The Apostle uses the teaching of Aristotle (de Anima) to explain the essence of Christ.

1 Cor 15:33 ---> He quotes Menander's Thais to teach the faithful at Corinth.

Titus 1:12 ---> He quotes Epimenides' De oraculis to support his own instruction to his young bishop, Titus.

Acts 17:28 ---> He quotes Epimenides' Cretica and Aratus' Phenomena, in which both poets address Zeus. St. Paul in turn quotes and affirms it to the Athenians.

Acts 26:14 ---> When the Apostle describes his conversion experience, he has our Blessed Lord quoting the Bacchae from the Greek pagan poet Euripides' play to him

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Using this argument, you would have to include several pagan philosophers' writings as Scripture. In the New Testament, we find numerous places where St. Pau is quoting and using pagan philosophers. For example...

Phil 2:6-7 ---> The Apostle uses the teaching of Aristotle (de Anima) to explain the essence of Christ.

1 Cor 15:33 ---> He quotes Menander's Thais to teach the faithful at Corinth.

Titus 1:12 ---> He quotes Epimenides' De oraculis to support his own instruction to his young bishop, Titus.

Acts 17:28 ---> He quotes Epimenides' Cretica and Aratus' Phenomena, in which both poets address Zeus. St. Paul in turn quotes and affirms it to the Athenians.

Acts 26:14 ---> When the Apostle describes his conversion experience, he has our Blessed Lord quoting the Bacchae from the Greek pagan poet Euripides' play to him

That's right. That's why I said it is scripture in the context It was used. By itself it is not scripture. And certainly the source it comes from is not scripture.

The argument is that outside material can also be scripture because the scriptures themselves are inadequate. But the proper argument is outside material can be scripture where it has been used in scripture. And again, only to the extent that the author of scripture has used it.

 

[Walpole]

That's right. That's why I said it is scripture in the context It was used. By itself it is not scripture. And certainly the source it comes from is not scripture.

The argument is that outside material can also be scripture because the scriptures themselves are inadequate. But the proper argument is outside material can be scripture where it has been used in scripture. And again, only to the extent that the author of scripture has used it.

You have given a master class on how to make a circular reasoned argument.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You have given a master class on how to make a circular reasoned argument.

I thought we were all in agreement about what OT and NT scripture is.

That being the case, what kind of argument are Catholics trying to make for the insufficiency of the OT and NT scriptures? The canonization of the use of secular information (not the information itself) in no way makes the case for the insufficiency of scripture.

 

[GodsGrace]

It means don't invent junk beyond the law and the prophets.

Some may argue that's exactly what Paul and Jesus did. But they both pointed out how the law and the prophets speak of the things now fully revealed in this New Covenant.

Yeah, well...
If scholars don't know...
I'm not making any guesses.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Yeah, well...
If scholars don't know...
I'm not making any guesses.

You just gotta understand the world of so-called scholars. They aren't like you and I and they can't let themselves be. They get easily misdirected by pride and fortune. They can't be wrong and so they will operate accordingly. I rarely consult commentaries. Too much bias and natural reasoning for the reasons I've given.

 

[GodsGrace]

You just gotta understand the world of so-called scholars. They aren't like you and I and they can't let themselves be. They get easily misdirected by pride and fortune. They can't be wrong and so they will operate accordingly. I rarely consult commentaries. Too much bias and natural reasoning for the reasons I've given.

I rarely consult commentaries too.
I use different versions of the scriptures instead.

But this verse came up somehow and I did look up the commentaries because the comment was made that we can't know what it means - and yet it seems so simple.

Well, turns out it's right.

Now, commentators will disagree with each other, and that's totally different.
But when they can't agree, I do take notice because of the hermeneutics involved.
We can't possibly know more than they do.

 

[Walpole]

I thought we were all in agreement about what OT and NT scripture is.

That being the case, what kind of argument are Catholics trying to make for the insufficiency of the OT and NT scriptures? The canonization of the use of secular information (not the information itself) in no way makes the case for the insufficiency of scripture.

No, we are not in agreement. Your books which comprise the OT are different than the rest of Christendom's OT.

And, were it not for Luther's former chancellor Andreas Karlstadt, you would have even fewer NT books, as Luther wanted to take his scalpel to that canon as well, removing books he did not like such as the epistle of James and St. John's Apocalypse.

 

[donadams]

There were no scriptures then, lol (pre law, of course).

Was there scripture when Peter received truth from the father or John in the wilderness? Matt 16:17 Lk 3:2
The church was founded with authority by Christ before the New Testament was written
The church exercised this authority before scripture was written
The church received the truths of divine revelation from Christ in person and does not require scripture to know truth, and the church wrote the New Testament
The scriptures are a gift of God to His church not to a band of heretics who deny the truth! Thanks

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Walpole and donadams , you two need to stop beating around the bush and just come right out and tell us what we need to add to the scriptures since you say the scriptures we have are insufficient "for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No, we are not in agreement. Your books which comprise the OT are different than the rest of Christendom's OT.

No, it's the inter-Testament books that we don't agree on.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

And, were it not for Luther's former chancellor Andreas Karlstadt, you would have even fewer NT books, as Luther wanted to take his scalpel to that canon as well, removing books he did not like such as the epistle of James and St. John's Apocalypse.

If I remember correctly, Luther later abandoned that charge.

 

[Walpole]

Walpole and donadams , you two need to stop beating around the bush and just come right out and tell us what we need to add to the scriptures since you say the scriptures we have are insufficient "for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim 3:16-17)

"All scripture" ≠ "Only scripture"

 

[Jethro Bodine]

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim 3:16-17)

"All scripture" ≠ "Only scripture"

Now answer the question. Why is scripture NOT sufficient to equip a person? What other authority is there?

 

[GodsGrace]

Now answer the question. Why is scripture NOT sufficient to equip a person? What other authority is there?

I'll tell you why it's not enough Jethro.

Because you and I believe in good deeds and some don't believe they're necessary and some go so far as to day that our good deeds are an insult to God.

We don't believe in OSAS and other Christian's do.

Some believe baptism is necessary and some don't.

Some believe God chooses the saved based on nothing that we can know of, and some believe we must reply to God's grace calling us.

Who's right?
How can we know?

 

[Walpole]

Now answer the question. Why is scripture NOT sufficient to equip a person? What other authority is there?

Profitable means useful, not sufficient. It is profitable (useful) in the instruction in righteousness. You can equip me to go skydiving, providing me with the suit, goggles, container, and parachute. The problem is, though equipped, I have not idea how to sky dive.

Furthermore, implicit in the very passage is an actual violation of sola Scriptura. “Instruction in righteousness.” St. Paul presumes there will be a person present during one’s formation to guide and direct him, just as St. Philip was there for the Ethiopian Eunuch who answered his question “Do you understand what you are reading?” by saying “How can I, unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8:30-31)

St. Paul affirms this earlier in his same letter to his disciple, St. Timothy...

"And the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2 Tim 2:2)

 

[GodsGrace]

Profitable means useful, not sufficient. It is profitable (useful) in the instruction in righteousness. You can equip me to go skydiving, providing me with the suit, goggles, container, and parachute. The problem is, though equipped, I have not idea how to sky dive.

Furthermore, implicit in the very passage is an actual violation of sola Scriptura. “Instruction in righteousness.” St. Paul presumes there will be a person present during one’s formation to guide and direct him, just as St. Philip was there for the Ethiopian Eunuch who answered his question “Do you understand what you are reading?” by saying “How can I, unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8:30-31)

St. Paul affirms this earlier in his same letter to his disciple, St. Timothy...

"And the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2 Tim 2:2)

Jesus gave instruction to the Apostles to teach.
Matthew 28:19
Not to every person He ever came across.
Those Apostles taught others, and so on.

We cannot be our own teachers.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Profitable means useful, not sufficient. It is profitable (useful) in the instruction in righteousness. You can equip me to go skydiving, providing me with the suit, goggles, container, and parachute. The problem is, though equipped, I have not idea how to sky dive.

Furthermore, implicit in the very passage is an actual violation of sola Scriptura. “Instruction in righteousness.” St. Paul presumes there will be a person present during one’s formation to guide and direct him, just as St. Philip was there for the Ethiopian Eunuch who answered his question “Do you understand what you are reading?” by saying “How can I, unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8:30-31)

St. Paul affirms this earlier in his same letter to his disciple, St. Timothy...

"And the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2 Tim 2:2)

This doesn't answer the Catholic church's contention that they have authority over and above scripture, and not scripture over them. We can see the obvious reason why they would insist they have this authority. They become unaccountable and can do whatever they want in the name of apostolic authority. Which they have obviously done. I mean, anyone who reads scripture honestly can see they have done this.