What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Bible Says...

rzr

rzr

Member
The Bible says a lot of things, but who of you know how it came to be and what it teaches? I am new on this wonderful site but the more I read, the more I am convinced that most are gullible....Just my 2cents worth. The question is, will you forgive me for such a statement?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rzr said:
The Bible says a lot of things, but who of you know how it came to be and what it teaches? I am new on this wonderful site but the more I read, the more I am convinced that most are gullible....Just my 2cents worth. The question is, will you forgive me for such a statement?
Click to expand...

Sure.
 
If he's coming from a faith perspective, I think he's asking if we knew where the canon of scripture came from, and if we research what the bible says (teaches) as opposed to listening to someone's interpretation of it.

If he's from a non-faith perspective, then maybe he's questioning the history of the bible and if we are aware of what it teaches as compared to accepted theory or fact.

I'll take the former position and state what I believe. The Old Testament are the Jew's scripture. Being a Christian, Christ confirmed them, so I have no issue with the right books being in place there. In other words, if I doubt the Old Testament, then the real issue is actually larger than what should be included in the canon. It's more of an issue of the person of Christ, but that's another topic.

It's the new testament that I am more uncertain about, but church councils aside, I do have some Old testament and the history stated in the book of Acts to help me there, too.

The Old Testament shown types and shadows of things to come with the feast days, the priesthood and the tabernacle objects. All pointed to Christ and His redemptive work. If we notice a common theme of 4 colors to the materials to make the curtains, we see 4 natures of Christ ---- these four natures are exactly (if one wants to say by "coincidence") the same portrayal the 4 gospels have, each one looking at Christ from that facet, i.e. his royal, eternal, servant and human (Perfect man) sides. The book of Acts, supposedly written by Luke, is historical specifically focuses in on the apostle Paul by the book's end as if to see his crescendoing importance. So, what do we have? epistles written mostly by Paul --- two different authors agreeing on this --- and even Peter in one of his epistles testifies about Paul. The rest of the epistles, as few as there are, came from men who were with the Lord directly. So these are first generation apostles and not a few later who could contort the gospel.
Lastly, there is a lot about the book of Revelation that they were not sure if it should be included in canon or not. But the undeniable connection with the book of Daniel and what Jesus said in Matthew 24-25 for example shows it is merely an extrapolation of what is already in the scripture but just not placed in one book all together.
 
originally when paul said this"all scripture is inspired and beneficial for rebuking.." it was primarily the septugaint lxx that he was talking about. this doesnt negate the modern interpretation of that as the nt wasnt put together for some afterwords and if one is honest the torah and tanakh went through the same thing. ever heard of the jewish apochrypha?
 
jasoncran said:
originally when paul said this"all scripture is inspired and beneficial for rebuking.." it was primarily the septugaint lxx that he was talking about. this doesnt negate the modern interpretation of that as the nt wasnt put together for some afterwords and if one is honest the torah and tanakh went through the same thing. ever heard of the jewish apochrypha?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you are asking me or someone in general, but my thoughts on the apocrypha is its the informal Word of God. While they are good for reading, I don't think there's any doctrine in them that the main bible does not already teach. In addition, I Esdras actually says the scripture has 24 books of the bible (39 by Christian reckoning) as the public presentation to read to all. The rest of the books were for the wise which indicates to me that they are addendums to something already taught in the 39 books. I don't have any problems with the apocrypha, but they don't add much to what I know in the bible, either.
 
tim-from-pa said:
I'm not sure if you are asking me or someone in general, but my thoughts on the apocrypha is its the informal Word of God. While they are good for reading, I don't think there's any doctrine in them that the main bible does not already teach. In addition, I Esdras actually says the scripture has 24 books of the bible (39 by Christian reckoning) as the public presentation to read to all. The rest of the books were for the wise which indicates to me that they are addendums to something already taught in the 39 books. I don't have any problems with the apocrypha, but they don't add much to what I know in the bible, either.
Click to expand...
the jewish sanhedrin didnt include them in the bible when christ came to teach if i recall. they were there but as interesting stories ie the maccabeans, but some of those contradict the accounts ie bel and the dragon.
 
jasoncran said:
the jewish sanhedrin didnt include them in the bible when christ came to teach if i recall. they were there but as interesting stories ie the maccabeans, but some of those contradict the accounts ie bel and the dragon.
Click to expand...

That's correct. I'm not aware of Christ alluding to them, either. At first I thought that Paul did with the whole armor of God also mentioned in the Wisdom of Solomon I believe, but then I also found reference in the regular OT as well. Maccabees are historical works and generally do not contain much doctrine, there's some but not a lot. They give one an idea of the situation between the testaments, but already prophesied in the book of Daniel.
 
rzr said:
Because most on this forum can not think for themselves or give a real conviction!http://www.christianforums.net/f15/my-biggest-fear-36058/
Click to expand...

Have you thought that through? How many members are active here? Do you know off-hand or do you need to look it up? What are the specific views of those active members? Can you list them? What's the exact number of free thinking individuals here? If you don't know, then how can you assert that most are not?
 
I know nothing about Canons and apocrypha or any other philosophical wording, but what I do know is that only the Holy Spirit can teach us the difference between the literal and Spiritual word for us to gain all knowledge and understanding of the word of God. Not all understanding is literal as much of the Bible, especially in the NT, is Spiritual for those who have ears to hear what God is teaching us. This is why it says in 1John 4:1-8 to learn to discern what spirits are teaching you as their are only two which are the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error. Just ask the Holy Spirit to help you to rightly divide the word of God for all truths.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top