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!

WHY DID CHRIST SEND HIS DISCIPLES OUT WITH THE GOOD NEWS?

And this refers to the Law (Torah), not the entire Bible. The rest of the OT & NT didn't even exist yet when these verses were written
The Law is type and shadow of the Holy Spirit.
He Authored the whole Bible.
I said Deuteronomy 6:1ff was one of many places you’ll find God declaring obedience to His Word - Old and New Testaments.
 
The Law is type and shadow of the Holy Spirit.
He Authored the whole Bible.
I said Deuteronomy 6:1ff was one of many places you’ll find God declaring obedience to His Word - Old and New Testaments.
As I said, sola Scriptura is not expressly taught in Scripture and Scripture does not come with an inspired "Table of Contents." Even for sake of argument, if we say the Bible does expressly teach sola Scriptura (which it doesn't), the Bible doesn't identify which writings qualify as sacred Scripture beyond the OT. Almost all references to Scripture in the Bible refer to the OT. The one possible exception is the 2 Peter reference to Paul's writings. But this is problematic, because the canonical status of 2 Peter itself as Scripture has long been a matter of dispute (and even if we accept the statement, the verse doesnt say which of Paul's writings are being referred to). The second example people usually give is Paul seemingly quoting Luke "the worker is worthy the wage." But Luke, as a written book, didn't yet exist. Paul is quoting Jesus's words; which circulated as oral tradition before they were written down.

At best, the Bible teaches "Sola Old Testament."
 
As I said, sola Scriptura is not expressly taught in Scripture and Scripture does not come with an inspired "Table of Contents." Even for sake of argument, if we say the Bible does expressly teach sola Scriptura (which it doesn't), the Bible doesn't identify which writings qualify as sacred Scripture beyond the OT. Almost all references to Scripture in the Bible refer to the OT. The one possible exception is the 2 Peter reference to Paul's writings. But this is problematic, because the canonical status of 2 Peter itself as Scripture has long been a matter of dispute (and even if we accept the statement, the verse doesnt say which of Paul's writings are being referred to). The second example people usually give is Paul seemingly quoting Luke "the worker is worthy the wage." But Luke, as a written book, didn't yet exist. Paul is quoting Jesus's words; which circulated as oral tradition before they were written down.

At best, the Bible teaches "Sola Old Testament."
That's because the 'New' was still being written.
 
Don’t you have to interpret your priests orders when given verbally or written?
Same thing.
Sure it has to do with discipline. Peter and the other believers were given authority to forgive the sins and offenses of other believers upon other believers, not given authority to forgive sins and offenses committed towards God.
Jesus already told them to forgive those who offend them

This is another whole thing
 
It’s natural in man.
That’s why the Law against murder.
The Inquisition was a Catholic idea and the whole hierarchy supported it. Scared even common Catholics into submission. That’s not love that Christ taught. It was hellish and Satanic. You know the history. You just ignore it. Just like the man Jesus taught tried to justify himself.
Not even close
Inquisition is only an inquiry into the teaching of priests and monks
Some may have committed abuses but they were not told to do so
 
The church was given by Christ the “sacred deposit of faith” and has a responsibility to see that it is taught and to condemn all error
Jn 16:13 Matt 28:19 eph 4:5 Jude 1:3 Thee faith revealed by Christ


“It is imperative that nothing of the truths which have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but that they be preserved intact in word and meaning”. Pope Agatho
 
Jesus already told them to forgive those who offend them

This is another whole thing
But forgiveness comes with repentance.
And repentance comes with a period of TIME in order to determine if the person really repented.

3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. Lk 17:3.

If the person offends me and asks forgiveness I can say on the spot, "I forgive you. Just don't do it again."

But if he does it again then what's indicated? He hasn't repented (changed his mind) about his actions (offense.)

I can forgive him again on the spot if he asks, but depending on the seriousness of the offense and my desire to have this person stop offending me in the same offense, then I can withhold forgiveness until this person really repents and stops offending me in the same offense.
At what point does wisdom in me 'kick in' and I determine this brethren has an issue somewhere with this particular sin/offense and either he is controlled by that sin or he just doesn't know how to submit to God with this particular sin. Either way, I would be a fool to continue to submit his unrepented offense upon Christ in me to continue to be hurt by his same offense (or others.)
It goes towards relationship between he/she and I, not relationship with God, although that's secondary.
 
As I said, sola Scriptura is not expressly taught in Scripture and Scripture does not come with an inspired "Table of Contents." Even for sake of argument, if we say the Bible does expressly teach sola Scriptura (which it doesn't), the Bible doesn't identify which writings qualify as sacred Scripture beyond the OT. Almost all references to Scripture in the Bible refer to the OT. The one possible exception is the 2 Peter reference to Paul's writings. But this is problematic, because the canonical status of 2 Peter itself as Scripture has long been a matter of dispute (and even if we accept the statement, the verse doesnt say which of Paul's writings are being referred to). The second example people usually give is Paul seemingly quoting Luke "the worker is worthy the wage." But Luke, as a written book, didn't yet exist. Paul is quoting Jesus's words; which circulated as oral tradition before they were written down.

At best, the Bible teaches "Sola Old Testament."
Of course, Sola Scriptura is expressly taught in Scripture due to the Holy Spirit who has guided His Church as to which writings are inspired and which copies are of good copy-ship. He's done this in Authorizing the King James Version for the English-speaking people.

FROM: The Holy Spirit.
TO: The Church at Rome, and Corinth, and Ephesus, and Philippi, and Thessalonica, etc.

When the epistle or writing starts out like that then the Holy Spirit is in effect says, "this is my Word. He that hath ears to hear, hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church (through text.)
 
To answer the question posed on this thread:

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8.

The message was to the children of Israel who lived outside Israel, whether in Jerusalem, or Judaea, or Samaria, or the uttermost part of the earth.

Spoken from the Mount of Olives Jerusalem was west, Judaea was south, Samaria was north, and the uttermost part was east, or towards the Orient, where God had scattered His people. It was to tell them Messiah/Christ had come, and this is the specific message Messiah has given to God's Chosen people Israel.
To the "Jew" FIRST.
 
Sola Scriptura is right here among other places:

Deuteronomy 6:1–2 (KJV 1900): Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which the Lord your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it: 2 That thou mightest fear the Lord thy God, to keep all his statutes and his commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son’s son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged.
Let’s see some New Testament
We’re not under the law

Scripture Verses that contradict the “Bible is our ONLY AUTHORITY”!

Matt 5:14
Matt 13:11
Matt 18:17
Matt 28:19
Lk 1:4
Lk 10:16
Jn 8:32
Jn 16:13
Jn 20:21
Acts 1:8
Acts 2:42
Acts 8:26
Acts 8:31
Acts 18:25
Rom 10:15
1 cor 4:11
1 cor 11:23
1 thes 2:23
2 thes 2:15
Col 2:7
Eph 4:5
Heb 13:7
Heb 13:17
1 Tim 3:15
1 Jn 1:3-5
2 Jn 1:12
Jude 1:3

How can it be said scripture is “sole authority” or the only source of truth or the rule of faith when scripture says we must hear the church Matt 18:17 the apostles are the light of the world Matt 5:14 we must hold the doctrine of the apostles acts 2:42 the church is the pillar and ground of truth 1 Tim 3:15
 
But forgiveness comes with repentance.
And repentance comes with a period of TIME in order to determine if the person really repented.

3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. Lk 17:3.

If the person offends me and asks forgiveness I can say on the spot, "I forgive you. Just don't do it again."

But if he does it again then what's indicated? He hasn't repented (changed his mind) about his actions (offense.)

I can forgive him again on the spot if he asks, but depending on the seriousness of the offense and my desire to have this person stop offending me in the same offense, then I can withhold forgiveness until this person really repents and stops offending me in the same offense.
At what point does wisdom in me 'kick in' and I determine this brethren has an issue somewhere with this particular sin/offense and either he is controlled by that sin or he just doesn't know how to submit to God with this particular sin. Either way, I would be a fool to continue to submit his unrepented offense upon Christ in me to continue to be hurt by his same offense (or others.)
It goes towards relationship between he/she and I, not relationship with God, although that's secondary.
That’s great but this is authority to forgive sins men have committed against God
 
Let’s see some New Testament
We’re not under the law

Scripture Verses that contradict the “Bible is our ONLY AUTHORITY”!

Matt 5:14
Matt 13:11
Matt 18:17
Matt 28:19
Lk 1:4
Lk 10:16
Jn 8:32
Jn 16:13
Jn 20:21
Acts 1:8
Acts 2:42
Acts 8:26
Acts 8:31
Acts 18:25
Rom 10:15
1 cor 4:11
1 cor 11:23
1 thes 2:23
2 thes 2:15
Col 2:7
Eph 4:5
Heb 13:7
Heb 13:17
1 Tim 3:15
1 Jn 1:3-5
2 Jn 1:12
Jude 1:3

How can it be said scripture is “sole authority” or the only source of truth or the rule of faith when scripture says we must hear the church Matt 18:17 the apostles are the light of the world Matt 5:14 we must hold the doctrine of the apostles acts 2:42 the church is the pillar and ground of truth 1 Tim 3:15
And the Church follows and obeys Scripture.
They don't lean on their own understanding and do and say things in the vanity of their mind.
God is a God of order.
And He has ordered we obey Him and His Word.
 
That’s great but this is authority to forgive sins men have committed against God
Only God can forgive sins.

21 And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? Lk 5:21.

The Word of God.
 
True, Jesus is THE Rock
But Jesus also said He would build His Church on Peter the "rock" like the verse you quoted states
I can't agree.
Jesus never called Peter "the rock".
What Peter declared was the rock on which His church was built.
 
Only God can forgive sins.

21 And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? Lk 5:21.

The Word of God.
Jesus told His disciples how often to forgive on a couple of occasions. (Matt 6:12, 18:21-22)
 
To answer the question posed on this thread:

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8.

The message was to the children of Israel who lived outside Israel, whether in Jerusalem, or Judaea, or Samaria, or the uttermost part of the earth.

Spoken from the Mount of Olives Jerusalem was west, Judaea was south, Samaria was north, and the uttermost part was east, or towards the Orient, where God had scattered His people. It was to tell them Messiah/Christ had come, and this is the specific message Messiah has given to God's Chosen people Israel.
To the "Jew" FIRST.
Jesus didn't say "children of Israel".
 
Jesus didn't say "children of Israel".
He didn't have to.
Messiah/Christ was Promised to the children of Israel.
He was the Prophet like unto Moses (Deut. 18:18.)
He was from "your brethren" meaning He would be from the 12 tribes of Israel.
Jesus was from the tribe of Judah.
He appeared [manifested] TO Israel (John 1:31.)
He taught and healed Israel.
His teachings concern the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets.
God kept His Promise to Israel.
Sending the apostles in Matthew 10 was to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.
He emphasized to the Syrophoenician woman (Gentile) He was sent to Israel.
He is a "Jewish" Messiah/Christ and instructed His apostles to herald to the children of Israel scattered across the then-known world the message that God has kept His Promise, that Messiah had come, and that He was their Promised Redeemer to God's people Israel as prophesied in the Old Testament.
 
Jesus is the Rock as stated many times in the Psalms and the Old Testament.
Petros [Peter] means "little stone."
I hear you. And as a Protestant I used to use the same argument all the time against Catholics saying that what Jesus really meant when he said "thou art Cephas/Peter ["little stone"] and upon this Rock [petra = Rock] I will build my church," he meant he would build the church on himself, the Rock [petra] 🪨 , while Peter is just a "little stone" [cephas]. But a Protestant evangelical NT scholar showed me that I was wrong, and that Jesus actually was referring to Peter as the rock he would build His church on (as the leader of the church which Peter was; no one is saying Peter is the Cornerstone Rock---that ROCK IS JESUS, you're right).

But in Matthew 16.8 Jesus really is saying he will build the church on Peter as the leader of the church. It's a play on Peter's Aramaic name Kephas [Greek = Cephas] which means "rock." But "you are cephas [stone] and on this rock [petra]" is the only way to render it in Greek. In Aramaic it reads "thou art kephas [= rock] and on this kephas [= rock] I will build my church."

So, Catholics are indeed correct that Jesus is saying he will build His church on Peter. But Catholics are still incorrect to say this supports apostolic succession, because there is no hint of that in the verse.
 
Back
Top