There are HUNDREDS of churches believing different; CLAIMING the Bible is their source!

[Mungo]

No, but all that is sufficient to know in order to live godly in him is. (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Psalm 119:105)

2Tim 3:16-17 doesn't say that scripture is sufficient.

 

[Mungo]

??? Work what out for myself, exactly?

I was just pointing out that scripture doesn't say the truth was passed on in Bibles for people to work it out for themselves. They were taught.

 

[for_his_glory]

Scriptures for EVERTHING?
What does God's spirit do- Install Church Dogma?

Scripture is very important for for our learning and understanding. If one does not bring proof to what they say then they are only giving opinions or their points of view separate from what God has already had the prophets and disciples to write. You have been asked many many times to give scripture. If you do not then do not expect anyone to believe anything you put forth.

 

[Tenchi]

I was just pointing out that scripture doesn't say the truth was passed on in Bibles for people to work it out for themselves.

It's both self-evident that the truth was passed on in the Bible and what God in His word says is the case. I've already offered verses to this effect.

I don't recall saying that people should "just work it out for themselves"...

2Tim 3:16-17 doesn't say that scripture is sufficient.

??? Really? What do you think it says, exactly?

 

[Mungo]

It's both self-evident that the truth was passed on in the Bible and what God in His word says is the case. I've already offered verses to this effect.

I don't recall saying that people should "just work it out for themselves"...

The Bible contains God's truth but not all that Jesus taught. The Bible says that.
Moreover the apostles preached God's truth (see post #55)

??? Really? What do you think it says, exactly?

It only says that we need it to be fully equipped.
It doesn't say there are no other things that are needed.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I was just pointing out that scripture doesn't say the truth was passed on in Bibles for people to work it out for themselves. They were taught.

Well, there is a problem of an infinite regression because who taught those who taught? And who taught them?

 

[Mungo]

Well, there is a problem of an infinite regression because who taught those who taught? And who taught them?

Of course there is NOT an infinite progression.
It all started with Jesus.
You can read about in the gospels.
Jesus taught the apostles, who in turn taught others just as Jesus commanded them to.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Of course there is NOT an infinite progression.
It all started with Jesus.
You can read about in the gospels.
Jesus taught the apostles, who in turn taught others just as Jesus commanded them to.

There is no direct line to today without the scriptures. You cannot trace back from teacher to teacher until you come to Jesus. What is more, Jesus himself said the Holy Spirit would teach them. He didn’t promise an unbroken line of men teaching.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Mungo, what became the New Testament was around going all the way back to the first century. Those pieces were copied and taken all over the known world. So it existed long before the 4th century.

 

[Mungo]

Mungo, what became the New Testament was around going all the way back to the first century. Those pieces were copied and taken all over the known world. So it existed long before the 4th century.

I answered tha earlier:

Whilst some of what we now call NT scripture was accepted early (though there is no proof that is was spread quickly), other writings were much disputed. Some of the disputed writings were eventually accepted, some were not.
We don't have a definitive canon until the late 4th century.

 

[Mungo]

There is no direct line to today without the scriptures. You cannot trace back from teacher to teacher until you come to Jesus. What is more, Jesus himself said the Holy Spirit would teach them. He didn’t promise an unbroken line of men teaching.

The gospel was passed on orally. Yes, much of Christ's teaching was written down eventually.
But consider this:
You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. (2Tim 2:1-2)
So we have Paul teaching Timothy - Timothy teaching faithful men - faithful men teaching others.
It's teaching, teaching, teaching. Not a hint of working it out from scripture.

Jesus set up a Church, founded on the apostles to pass on all that he had taught them.
Moreover it was the apostles (and their successors) that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide into all truth not everyone. (John 14:26).

 

[Tenchi]

The Bible contains God's truth but not all that Jesus taught. The Bible says that.
Moreover the apostles preached God's truth (see post #55)

Yes. How does this have any bearing on the fact that all that is necessary to live godly in Christ Jesus can be found in the Bible? I don't have to know everything there is to know about a 747 jet airliner in order to fly in it. Likewise, I don't have to know everything that Jesus taught in order to walk in joyful, holy fellowship with God. His word provides sufficient truth to do so.

It only says that we need it to be fully equipped.
It doesn't say there are no other things that are needed.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Paul here indicates that, through the truth of Scripture, the "man of God" may be complete, adequately furnished, for every good work. Other portions of God's word say other things about the necessity and sufficiency of God's truth delivered to His children in the Bible:

1 Peter 2:2
2 like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation,

By the word of God the Christian is enabled to grow spiritually. Here, too, the "milk" of the word of God is indicated to be as vital to the Christian believer as a mother's milk is to her newborn infant. Not ex cathedra pronouncements from the Pope, or prayers to dead saints, or the confessional booth, etc., but holy Scripture.

Matthew 22:29
29 Jesus answered them, “You are deceived, because you don’t know the Scriptures or the power of God.

The Pharisees, caught up in religious man-made rules and traditions (sound familiar?), had grown ignorant to the truth of Scripture and deceived concerning God. Here, holy Scripture is indicated to be a vital counter to deception and necessary to a proper understanding of God, as well. In particular, Scripture is set in contrast to the corrupt system of religious rituals and rules made by men that the Pharisees represented.

There are, of course, other things that are needed as the born-again child of God "feeds" on the milk and meat of His word: the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10-16; John 14:26; John 16:13), the constraining, guiding and instructive influence of the Body of Believers (Ephesians 4:11-16), submission, faith and holiness (Romans 12:1; Romans 6:13-22; Hebrews 4:2; Hebrews 11:6; Hebrews 12:14; 1 Peter 1:15-16, etc.). However, if a Christian had only the Bible and the indwelling Holy Spirit, they could still come to a deep, true and sufficient knowledge of God and His will and way.

 

[Mungo]

Yes. How does this have any bearing on the fact that all that is necessary to live godly in Christ Jesus can be found in the Bible? I don't have to know everything there is to know about a 747 jet airliner in order to fly in it. Likewise, I don't have to know everything that Jesus taught in order to walk in joyful, holy fellowship with God. His word provides sufficient truth to do so.




2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Paul here indicates that, through the truth of Scripture, the "man of God" may be complete, adequately furnished, for every good work. Other portions of God's word say other things about the necessity and sufficiency of God's truth delivered to His children in the Bible:

I'm not denying that scripture is necessary. But the above does NOT say it is all that is necessary.
When Paul refers to scripture in this text he is referring to the Old Testament scripture.
That was not all that Timothy needed. He also needed Paul's teaching.
But Paul's teaching about Christ was not enough. Timothy also needed the OT scriptures to be fully equipped.

Paul writes to the Thessalonians:
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. (2Thess 2:15)

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I answered tha earlier:

There is proof it was accepted immediately which is the known fact that it was copied and went through the known world. Copies are found from Africa to Europe.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The gospel was passed on orally.

No it wasn’t. Luke wrote it down and said so. Fragments are found from these early pieces proving it was written down. They were learned. Paul wrote letters.

Yes, much of Christ's teaching was written down eventually.
But consider this:
You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. (2Tim 2:1-2)

A written communication. I rest my case.

So we have Paul teaching Timothy - Timothy teaching faithful men - faithful men teaching others.
It's teaching, teaching, teaching. Not a hint of working it out from scripture.

Paul quoted scripture constantly.

Jesus set up a Church, founded on the apostles to pass on all that he had taught them.

Well others who weren’t in the role of apostles also had input.

Moreover it was the apostles (and their successors) that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide into all truth not everyone. (John 14:26).

That’s not limited to them. They died. The Holy Spirit didn’t die with
them.

 

[Mungo]

There is proof it was accepted immediately which is the known fact that it was copied and went through the known world. Copies are found from Africa to Europe.

That is not true.
his LINK shows how the canon of NT scripture was disputed for centuries. It also shows that some books were accepted as part of the NT which were later discarded.
Dave Armstrong compiled it from Protestant sources.

 

[Mungo]

No it wasn’t. Luke wrote it down and said so. Fragments are found from these early pieces proving it was written down. They were learned. Paul wrote letters.

Luke 1:1-4
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.

Luke taught Theophilus orally. Then later he wrote it down.
And where did Luke get it from?

Paul quoted scripture constantly.

Paul quoted from the OT.

Well others who weren’t in the role of apostles also had input.

For example?

That’s not limited to them. They died. The Holy Spirit didn’t die with
them.

As I said the promise was the the apostles and their successors.

 

[Free]

That is not true.
his LINK shows how the canon of NT scripture was disputed for centuries. It also shows that some books were accepted as part of the NT which were later discarded.
Dave Armstrong compiled it from Protestant sources.

While the process is true, it's interesting that he makes the following claim:

"Protestants do, of course, accept the traditional canon of the New Testament (albeit somewhat inconsistently and with partial reluctance — Luther questioned the full canonicity of James, Revelation and other books). By doing so, they necessarily acknowledged the authority of the Catholic Church."

No, not necessarily. His statement actually seems to me to set the Catholic Church in authority over Christ, as it assumes that God was not involved the process. The Protestant view is an acknowledgement of Christ as head of his Church and trust in him, who worked by the Holy Spirit to guide the Catholic Church as to which books were to be included in the canon. If it was merely the Catholic Church making the decisions, based just on human reasoning, then we have significant reason to doubt the entire canon.

However, because the process was necessarily guided by the Spirit, we have reasonable grounds for sola Scriptura.

Paul quoted from the OT.

He also quoted from Luke 10:7:

1Ti 5:18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” (ESV)

And, of course, Peter put Paul's writings on the level of the OT.

 

[BB1956]

Most sprang from the Catholic Church as 'Protestants' - but, essentially taking the core beliefs WITH them!

HOW do you determine as what you have been taught is the TRUTH?

Most people assume that everything that bears the label "Christian" must have originated with Jesus Christ and His early followers. But this is definitely not the case. All we have to do is look at the words of Jesus Christ and His apostles to see that this is clearly not true.

The historical record shows that, just as Jesus and the New Testament writers foretold, various heretical ideas and teachers rose up from within the early Church and infiltrated it from without. Christ Himself warned His followers: "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name . . . and will deceive many" (Matthew 24:4, 5).

We can read many similar warnings in other passages such as Matthew 24:11; Acts 20:29-30; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; 2 Timothy 4:2-4; 2 Peter 2:1-2; 1 John 2:18-26; 1 John 4:1-3.

By late in the first century, we can see from 3 John 9-10 conditions had grown so dire that false ministers openly refused to receive representatives of the apostle John and were excommunicating true Christians from the Church!

The point I'm saying is people saying that the Catholic Church is the true church, I disagree. The church that existed from the 2 century AD onward wasn't the true church that the true apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ had established. Instead it was the false Christian Church or to be more accurate the religious organization of the weeds that existed from the time that the apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ and first century Christians had died off that existed. So people can preach to me that the churches that teach the Trinity doctrine, the Hellfire doctrine and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul are the true Christian churches, I'm going to disagree. People can think of me all they want. I expect people to say the most awful things about me because I disagree that the protestant and Catholic Churches are the true churches that was established by Jesus Christ and his apostles and disciples.

 

[Free]

Most people assume that everything that bears the label "Christian" must have originated with Jesus Christ and His early followers. But this is definitely not the case. All we have to do is look at the words of Jesus Christ and His apostles to see that this is clearly not true.

The historical record shows that, just as Jesus and the New Testament writers foretold, various heretical ideas and teachers rose up from within the early Church and infiltrated it from without. Christ Himself warned His followers: "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name . . . and will deceive many" (Matthew 24:4, 5).

We can read many similar warnings in other passages such as Matthew 24:11; Acts 20:29-30; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; 2 Timothy 4:2-4; 2 Peter 2:1-2; 1 John 2:18-26; 1 John 4:1-3.

By late in the first century, we can see from 3 John 9-10 conditions had grown so dire that false ministers openly refused to receive representatives of the apostle John and were excommunicating true Christians from the Church!

The Bible also teaches that this would continue, right through to the end. These weren't warnings just for the apostles and early church.

1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, (ESV)

2Ti 3:1 But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty.
2Ti 3:2 For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good,
2Ti 3:4 treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
2Ti 3:5 having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
2Ti 3:6 For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions,
2Ti 3:7 always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth.
...
2Ti 3:13 while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. (ESV)

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,
2Ti 4:4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (ESV)

The point I'm saying is people saying that the Catholic Church is the true church, I disagree. The church that existed from the 2 century AD onward wasn't the true church that the true apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ had established. Instead it was the false Christian Church or to be more accurate the religious organization of the weeds that existed from the time that the apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ and first century Christians had died off that existed.

That's a very bold claim, which you need to provide evidence for. Not to mention that what you're saying amounts to a denial of things Jesus explicitly said:

Mat 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (ESV)

Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. (ESV)

Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (ESV)

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
Joh 14:17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
Joh 14:18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. (ESV)

There is simply no reason whatsoever to believe that Christ's true Church didn't continue from the apostles up to now. In fact, to say it didn't but was rediscovered later by Charles Russell (or Joseph Smith) is a serious error that contradicts what Jesus said.

So people can preach to me that the churches that teach the Trinity doctrine, the Hellfire doctrine and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul are the true Christian churches, I'm going to disagree.

And people would be right to disagree with you, especially if you believe the teachings of a man who came around 1850 years later and proclaims to know the truth. Why him? Why not Joseph Smith, who came earlier?

The Trinity is an essential, core doctrine of Christianity.