The Bible - Required or Not? [Archive] - Page 2

Nadiine

8th November 2006, 11:20 AM

But there ARE conflicts and contradictions. We just have ways of reading them so that they harmonize. We have explanations. They may be correct or not, but they don't erase the fact that one piece of scripture contradicts another. For example, one gospel says both the men who were crucified with Jesus mocked him, while another says that one mocked and one repented. That's a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make the accounts less credible, though, quite the opposite - it proves their authenticity and that people apparently took more care preserving the text than harmonizing it with the other.

I knew it would get down to this... this is the BASIS of the entire issue.. SCRIPTURE VALIDITY/AUTHENTICITY.
You either accept the claims of the Authors, or you do not.

Without the Bible, and without God's prophets and others who were used to validate/confirm His truth prior to scripture, YOU ARE LEFT TO SOLELY DECIDE WHO GOD IS with no means of systematic verification.
Not that we can't know who God is OUTSIDE of scripture... but when you ARE given the word of God, THAT HAS BECOME HIS PREDOMINANT MEANS of relaying His will and truth (to those who have access to that means)

To reject that is to claim that you are the authority on deciding who GOD is, and what He wants or does. YOU the decide what is TRUE about God, according to your worldview.
As you sit and debate those of us who accept scripture validity.
You're telling us we're wrong, yet have no support other than YOUR OPINION. Do you have any outside support for your position?

Please teach us how to pick out the "GOOD" parts of the Bible, and reject the false teachings that mislead us.

thanks for any help you can give me to show me the right way to the right God.

- DRA -

8th November 2006, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by - DRA -

If we can trust the promises of God ... we probably should consider these passages:

Isaiah 40:8 says, "The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever (NIV)."

And, Mark 13:31 says, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away (NIV)."

While it is true that God inspired the original books/epistles (2 Tim. 3:16a), God also made promises about the endurance of His word. Either God had lied to us (see Hebrews 6:18), or He had preserved His word accurately (even with the minor variations that exist between the majority and minority texts).

As for interpretation of Scripture, passages such as Matthew 4:5-7 and Matthew 22:23-33 should be considered. Harmony should exist between Scriptures -- not conflicts or contradictions.

But there ARE conflicts and contradictions. We just have ways of reading them so that they harmonize. We have explanations. They may be correct or not, but they don't erase the fact that one piece of scripture contradicts another. For example, one gospel says both the men who were crucified with Jesus mocked him, while another says that one mocked and one repented. That's a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make the accounts less credible, though, quite the opposite - it proves their authenticity and that people apparently took more care preserving the text than harmonizing it with the other.

Jesus' point in both Matthew 4:5-7 and Matthew 22:23-33 is that contradictions between Scriptures occur because of erroneous understandings. An erroneous understanding of Psalm 91 didn't authorize Him to jump from the top of the temple (such an action would contradict Deuteronomy 6:16), nor did an erroneous understanding of Deuteronomy 25:5 mean that there would be no resurrection (this understanding overlooked the implications/inferences of Exodus 3:6). Are you suggesting that Jesus used an invalid line of reasoning? :confused:

Matthew's account of the crucifixion says that the two criminals both mocked/reviled Jesus (27:44). Mark's account also says both reviled Him (15:32). Luke's account says that one reviled Jesus (23:39), but the other rebuked him (verses 40-41). John's account mentions the two crucified with Jesus, but records nothing they said. So, which account is true? If we accept that "All Scripture is God-breathed" (2 Tim. 3:16a - NIV), then all accounts are true. Both criminals/thieves mocked Jesus. Later, one repented and then defended Jesus. That's how I envision things happening. Note Matthew 27:45. I imagine that a three hour window gives a dying man a lot of time for personal reflection. I conclude that one of the two criminals came to his senses and made the right move.

Rather than contradictions, these four accounts of the same event are all true. They give us four different "snapshots" of an event that occurred over several hours. Matthew's and Mark's accounts describe the period when both thieves mocked Jesus, Luke's during the time when one mocks and is rebuked by the other, and John's account doesn't elaborate on anything said by the thieves to Jesus.

elsbeth

8th November 2006, 02:30 PM

I knew it would get down to this... this is the BASIS of the entire issue.. SCRIPTURE VALIDITY/AUTHENTICITY.
You either accept the claims of the Authors, or you do not.

People keep claiming that the Bible says all the things they claim- validity/authenticity above- others say 100% God's word, infallible, inerrant, etc. But the scriptures that they quote just don't say that. "Inspired by God" doesn't, literally, mean "written by God" as many people claim. Neither does "God-breathed".

Without the Bible, and without God's prophets and others who were used to validate/confirm His truth prior to scripture, YOU ARE LEFT TO SOLELY DECIDE WHO GOD IS with no means of systematic verification.

The original question was: is the Bible required? Most of the posters who say no, it's not required, still DO NOT throw out the Bible, we just don't put so much emphasis on it. I read it, study it, and God uses it to teach and correct me. I believe strongly in personal contact with and revelation from the living God. But if I thought I was receiving a revelation from Him that contradicted the basic sense of the Bible I would take that as a red flag, that possibly I was listening more to my own mind or to the devil's whispers than to God. Where I have a problem with the Bible is where someone says that every word is just as God wrote it and every word has absolute authority. I say men wrote it about God, and therefore it shouldn't be used in that kind of authoritative manner.
but when you ARE given the word of God, THAT HAS BECOME HIS PREDOMINANT MEANS of relaying His will and truth (to those who have access to that means)

I agree that it has become that way, but WHO SAYS that it should be that way?

To reject that is to claim that you are the authority on deciding who GOD is, and what He wants or does. YOU the decide what is TRUE about God, according to your worldview.

Is this not what believers all the way back to Abraham HAVE done? Is this not still what each believer has to do? Parts of the Bible are open to the interpretation of the reader, else there would not be different versions of the Bible and churches would not read different meanings into verses and so have different doctrines. FOR MY LIFE (not for other peoples') yes, I decide what is true about God, based on the Bible AND my personal contact with God, and on other writings about God, other people's testimonies.
[quote=Nadiine;28698614]

holo

8th November 2006, 03:05 PM

Nadiine,
I know we can discuss stuff like this in a civil manner, so please consider your attitude. I'm not dumb or a heretic just because I no longer subscribe to a common christian doctrine.

I knew it would get down to this... this is the BASIS of the entire issue.. SCRIPTURE VALIDITY/AUTHENTICITY.
You either accept the claims of the Authors, or you do not.Why not both? I mean, surely you yourself don't take it as literal truth that the world stands on poles, do you? You interpret it, like anyone else.

Without the Bible, and without God's prophets and others who were used to validate/confirm His truth prior to scripture, YOU ARE LEFT TO SOLELY DECIDE WHO GOD IS with no means of systematic verification.What about Paul (Saul) then? He knew the scriptures, but he was still blind. Granted, after his conversion he obviously saw it in a new light, but the fact is that the very basis for his entire faith and his ministry was that Jesus came down and knocked him off a horse!

Not that we can't know who God is OUTSIDE of scripture... but when you ARE given the word of GodI don't agree that the bible should be considered the word of God. I mean, it's fine by me that people think it, but I find it unrealistic to expect that I should subcribe to that view based on a few bible verses. It's a bold claim to make, and it needs to be backed up. At the very least people should know WHICH bible is the word of God. Which canon is the word of God?

THAT HAS BECOME HIS PREDOMINANT MEANS of relaying His will and truth (to those who have access to that means)How do you figure? Not saying I disagree, just asking.

To reject that is to claim that you are the authority on deciding who GOD is, and what He wants or does. YOU the decide what is TRUE about God, according to your worldview.No no no. You're no different from me here. YOU've decided that the bible=the word of God, infallible etc, no question about it, and based on that you judge everything else. YOUR decicion. You've decided that God can't be unlike how you interpret scripture. Don't accuse me for doing the same thing as you.

As you sit and debate those of us who accept scripture validity.I'm not suggesting the scriptures aren't valid, in fact I just affirmed that I hold it to be true and useful etc. What I'm saying is that the bible and the word of God isn't the same thing.

In fact, I tend to take the bible pretty much at face value (or whatever it's called); when something is introduced as a psalm written by king David, I read it as a psalm written by king David. The good Lord who is able to teach me through anything from music to pastors, is surely able to teach me something throug the psalms too - in fact it seems natural that he will - I and David believe in the same God.

But I find it almost offensive to both God and David to claim that no, this isn't a song written by a real and sad or happy man, it's the very speech of God himself. It simply doesn't make sense. God's word is what God says, and I'm pretty sure that when God gets you face to face, he won't concentrate too much on genealogies, for example (unless that's what you happen to need to hear about there and then).

You're telling us we're wrong, yet have no support other than YOUR OPINION. Do you have any outside support for your position?Do you? Isn't it you OPINION that the bible is the word of God? On what basis should I accept that claim? Just because you say so? Because it's somehow obvious? Do you have any outside support for your position?

Please teach us how to pick out the "GOOD" parts of the Bible, and reject the false teachings that mislead us.I've never said anything even remotely like the bible containing false teachings.

BTW, the epistles themselves seem to suggest that I'm not to be your teacher, and neither you mine, but that the Spirit shall teach each of us.

mont974x4

8th November 2006, 03:16 PM

hmmm Holo, since some are gifted and called to teach....then that would be an aparent conflict with your stance.

holo

8th November 2006, 03:17 PM

Are you suggesting that Jesus used an invalid line of reasoning? :confused:No, but we (including me) do :)

I belive that when God speaks, he's able to get his message across. I don't think he ever intended for us to be dependant on our own intellects, let alone the intellects of others, to dechipher God's word and will. Every time I've felt God actually speaking to me in some way or another, it has without exeption been coherent, understandable, personal and powerful. But here christians will fling bible verses around expecting them almost to do some sort of magical trick because "the word of God never fails" etc.

Matthew's account of the crucifixion says that the two criminals both mocked/reviled Jesus (27:44). Mark's account also says both reviled Him (15:32). Luke's account says that one reviled Jesus (23:39), but the other rebuked him (verses 40-41). John's account mentions the two crucified with Jesus, but records nothing they said. So, which account is true? If we accept that "All Scripture is God-breathed" (2 Tim. 3:16a - NIV), then all accounts are true. Both criminals/thieves mocked Jesus. Later, one repented and then defended Jesus. That's how I envision things happening. Note Matthew 27:45. I imagine that a three hour window gives a dying man a lot of time for personal reflection. I conclude that one of the two criminals came to his senses and made the right move.That's a valid view, although I think it's a bit of a stretch. I find it far more logical to think that different people saw it from different angles, concentrating on different things, and, as is natural, at least one of them was mistaken about some of it.

The only reason to believe otherwise, IMO, is if you've decided beforehand that everything in the bible MUST be 100% flawless.

But, as mentioned earlier, I find these things to strengthen the credibility of the NT rather than compromise it, especially to unbelievers who may find it suspicious (rather than miraculous) that the scriptures are so in tune with another.

holo

8th November 2006, 03:24 PM

hmmm Holo, since some are gifted and called to teach....then that would be an aparent conflict with your stance.Good point. I'm not too decided on how to read those verses. But generally, and for now, I take them to mean that since we are all "priests" in the kingdom of God, and the Spirit has come, the Lord is both willing and able to guide and teach and keep all of us individually. And anyway, even Jesus could read scripture to me and I wouldn't get anything out of it without the Spirit revealing it to me supernaturally.

mact

8th November 2006, 05:27 PM

Actually, there is more dispute over this than people think. For example, it's not so sure that the story of Jesus and the adulterous woman was there to begin with. And different copies are different copies whether or not the differences are huge. Also, either the catholic or the protestant church is very very wrong about what the word of God is.

Apparently, then, God has allowed millions of christians to either have a bible that's been added to, or an amputated bible. Doesn't sound like protection and preservation to me.
I agree with Holo.... we should just trust our feelings and bag this word of God stuff... our feelings are what is important... they can't be wrong...

mact

8th November 2006, 05:36 PM

Nadiine,
I know we can discuss stuff like this in a civil manner, so please consider your attitude. I'm not dumb or a heretic just because I no longer subscribe to a common christian doctrine.

Holo... you are a heretic. Your views are heretic. You posts are heretic.... you are a heretic.

Heretic: A person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Church.

The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd century church would have said YOU ARE A HERETIC.

Now in a new age church that doesn't follow the bible I would be a heretic.... but to the church in it's purest form (1st and 2nd century) you would be a heretic.

Rick

RonnyRulz

8th November 2006, 05:37 PM

hmmm if we don't want to fully know God do we really love Him?
In my opinion, I'd say of course we really love Him, but if we don't want to fully know God, we aren't IN love with Him. Loving Him and being IN Love with Him are two different things.

But who truly loves God? If the Bible says "If you love me, you will follow my commandments." and "If God lives in you, you will sin no more." But who is without sin? Who follows his commandments without failing? If you take the Bible's literal word for it, nobody loves God.

But I don't care what the Bible says, because I love God, and I know I love God, and I truly love God. Although I fail at keeping his commandments to Love and Love, and I continue to sin, I still love God though.

And I see where you're getting at with that question you asked in response to my statement. I do want to fully know God, and I never once said I didn't. You are mistaken if you think I don't want to fully know God. If you think that, you do not understand what I said, or didn't read what I said.

I said I only care about knowing the one-sided Love part of God. The rest of it is something I can't grasp on Earth, even the slightest bit. And although I can't grasp the Love part, I can at least in the slightest bit. And I will never amount to fully know the Love of God while on earth, or even in Heaven, so I will always be wanting more of God, and wanting to know God fully.

You are mistaken if that question was directed at me, because if it was, you do not understand the vastness of God. If you were to study, know, and learn of just one trait of God, for all of eternity, you will never fully know that trait. That's how eternal God is. That's how infinite He is. And that's why I say I fully want to know God, but only the one-sided Love part while on Earth, because that's the only part that I can even slightly grasp, the only part I need, the part I desire the most, and the greatest part.

I am a man after God's own heart.

shlama

8th November 2006, 08:11 PM

The Bible is definitely required because the Bible is GOD Himself.

Nadiine

8th November 2006, 08:27 PM

The Bible is definitely required because the Bible is GOD Himself.

I don't believe the Bible "IS" God "Himself"... anymore than a living will I may write is "ME" literally or an autobiography IS the author.

The writing relays the heart, mind and intents of the Author, the Bible is God's living Word to us; relaying the 'mind of God'...

I hope you don't think God IS the book itself? :confused:
:wave:

RonnyRulz

8th November 2006, 10:58 PM

God's Word isn't God's Person.

That's a big thing too, because God doesn't want people to love Him for His acts, for His hands, He wants them to love Him for WHO HE IS. His PERSONALITY. His PERSON. HIM. The Heart of Him.

Not for what He can do or what He says, but for WHO He is.

salida

8th November 2006, 11:46 PM

Ronny-

Yes, the Bible is required because its God's Living Word- its a spiritual book. This is like saying in the natural that food isn't required to live. Spiritually the Bible is required to live spiritually. Without it - you will spiritually starve to spiritual death.

God is His Word - the Bible. One needs the Holy Spirit in their heart; and to read the Bible - to renew your spirit and mind. One can't grow spiritually without this and won't have the power to do so.

***Luke 4:4

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by - DRA -
Are you suggesting that Jesus used an invalid line of reasoning? :confused:

No, but we (including me) do :)

I belive that when God speaks, he's able to get his message across. I don't think he ever intended for us to be dependant on our own intellects, let alone the intellects of others, to dechipher God's word and will. Every time I've felt God actually speaking to me in some way or another, it has without exeption been coherent, understandable, personal and powerful. But here christians will fling bible verses around expecting them almost to do some sort of magical trick because "the word of God never fails" etc.

Okay ... here goes.

Matthew 4:5-7. The devil quoted Psalm 91:11-12 in an attempt to get Jesus to deliberately jump from the top of the temple. In response, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:16, which says, "Do not test the Lord your God as you did at Massah (NIV)." Do you see anything in that passage about jumping from the top of the temple? I sure don't. However, Jesus applies it to that specific situation. Deliberately jumping from the top of temple violates the principle taught in Deut. 6:16 -- not the specific problem being addressed in that context (idolatry).

Like you, I believe that God is very capable of getting His message across. However, there are times, such as in this text in Matthew, that demands some deep thought to appreciate what Jesus does. He shows us not only how to apply a biblical principle, but also that an erroneous understanding of a certain passage of Scripture will conflict with other passages. Certainly, it is one thing to just "fling" a passage out there, but quite another to show how it is true and that it harmonizes with other passages.

On the other hand, maybe I've got it all wrong. Perhaps God has spoken to you and you will be able to help us get on track. Matthew 4:5-7 would be an excellent place to start. Please explain to us what Jesus really wants us to learn.

RonnyRulz

9th November 2006, 12:35 AM

Yes, the Bible is required

Well, I guess when I'm in Heaven, I'll wave to the millions of christians in the dark ages, millions of christians who never learned how to read, the millions of christians who didn't have the bible, adam, eve, abraham, moses, and all of those people, I'll wave to them while they're burning in Hell.

Me In Heaven: Sorry guys, you have to learn to read to enter Heaven!

Oh yea, and don't forget the blind and deaf. I'll wave to them too.

Me In Heaven: Sorry everyone, you have to be able to see or hear to enter Heaven.

That's a lot of Christians in Hell.

RonnyRulz

9th November 2006, 12:38 AM

Attention Everyone

The Blind and Deaf can't be Christians and won't enter Heaven.

You have to see and hear to be a Christian.

The Bible is a Requirement.

mont974x4

9th November 2006, 12:41 AM

It is required...how it's delivered is far less important than its being delivered....but it's still His Word and it is still required.

FollowTheLamb

9th November 2006, 12:52 AM

In Hebrews 1:1-2 we find that God communicated in times past through the prophets, bu today through His Son. If we want God to communicate to us, we need to read the words of His Son.
Is the Bible necessary? I have 69 promises in the back of my Bible which I've compiled over the years. All are promises for those who read the Word. Cases in point:

John 14:21, 23. If we obey Jesus, He will make His home in us. You can't obey if you don't know the Word.

2 Tim. 3:15-16 tells me that the Holy Scriptures are able to make me wise for salvation. You can't get it on your own. the word is profitable, not unprofitable, for doctrine - it give objective truth and sets me straight. It instructs me in righteousness and scolds me when I'm wrong - something my pride and biases will not do.

Psalm 119. Read the whole thing. The Word is mentioned in almost every verse. Obviously, the author saw benefits that many of us have overlooked.

Prov. 1:1-7. The Word makes us wise. It will teach us what experience and the world and its media will never mention. It teaches the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom.

The Bible is required if we are to grow in our salvation, in our understanding of God, in wisdom and the fear of the Lord. It transforms us into capable ministers who are able to train up others for the kingdom.

RonnyRulz

9th November 2006, 12:55 AM

It is required...how it's delivered is far less important than its being delivered....but it's still His Word and it is still required.
So I'll see the deaf, blind, and those without hands in hell.

Although though they can feel, smell, and use their mind and spirit to be with God, they are going to hell because they are deaf, blind, and numb.

I guess that's almost everyone deaf and blind that's in a wheelchair. Oh well. Too bad they have to goto Hell.

You've got to be joking.

The Bible is not required, and that's a fact. To think anything more is foolish.

Hey, at least I know how to send you mont974x4 (a christian) to Hell and take away your christianity. I just have to take away your eyes, ears, and hands. Then you will no longer be a Christian because the Bible is required.

RonnyRulz

9th November 2006, 12:59 AM

Isaiah 29:13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=29&chapter=29&verse=13&version=31&context=verse)
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men.

Rules such as adding to the requirements. Instead of "You only need God." you add the Bible as a requirement. As well as who knows what. Your religion is just rules taught by men...

RonnyRulz

9th November 2006, 01:01 AM

The Bible is required if we are to grow in our salvation, in our understanding of God, in wisdom and the fear of the Lord. It transforms us into capable ministers who are able to train up others for the kingdom.

Tell that to the Blind, those who can't read, those who can't read brail, the deaf, those who can't afford electricity to play bible on tape, those who can't afford anything and are blind and deaf.

Tell that to them. Tell that to those whose hands cannot read brail. Whose eyes cannot read text. And whose ears cannot hear words.

Tell that to them.

mont974x4

9th November 2006, 01:05 AM

rocklife

9th November 2006, 01:34 AM

I'm already saved, and what I know now, I will be held accountable for...regardless if you take my Bible from me.

This imagined deaf, blind man with no hands? I have no doubt that God can overcome that in His own miraculous way....and it will be Gods Word, in whatever form necessary.

I agree with mont974x4. Helen Keller said the bible was her favorite book. This website http://www.afb.org/BrailleBug/askkeller.asp?issueid=20059 is from Helen Keller's Kids Museum and her great grand-niece says Ms. Keller read the bible daily. I've heard from Corrie Ten Boom (christian author, survivor of Ravensbruck concentration camp) she knew of a paralyzed bed ridden woman who used her teeth to type out copies of the bible when they were scarce because communism and nazis persecuted christians. God can make a way, and to whom is given much, much will be required. those with little will be held responsible for the little they have

rocklife

9th November 2006, 01:38 AM

I wonder if it's possible to learn braille with your feet? with God nothing is impossible

noparty

9th November 2006, 01:48 AM

This imagined deaf, blind man with no hands? I have no doubt that God can overcome that in His own miraculous way....and it will be Gods Word, in whatever form necessary.

When I was posting in this thread, that was the point I was trying to make. Apparently I didn't do a very good job. :)

HephzibahBenJudah

9th November 2006, 04:07 AM

You must start with the Word of God which is the Bible. It has all the answers for everyday lifes' delimmas. It is one way He talks with us everyday. The Bible alone isn't enough; we must be led by the Holy Spirit. The word gives the Spirit something to work with. Just like the Spirit hovering over the face of the deep in Genesis...so it is He still hovers over the Word to bring it to pass. The Bible says my people perish for lack of knowledge. We need to know what the Word says and live by it. It takes the power of the Holy Spirit to live what we read. There can't be all knowledge yet deny the power thereof. For it is the power of God unto salvation. The Word and the Spirit go together. It won't be balanced unless you have the two.

Followers4christ

9th November 2006, 04:49 AM

The Bible is God's Holy word and the word of God will stand forever (2 Timothy 3:16,2 Peter 1:20-21,Isaiah 40:8).The Bible is required because it is our instruction book.Without it how will you know what sin is and what is not? By denying the Bible, your deny God's Holy Word.God Bless :preach:

Nadiine

9th November 2006, 06:05 AM

Tell that to the Blind, those who can't read, those who can't read brail, the deaf, those who can't afford electricity to play bible on tape, those who can't afford anything and are blind and deaf.

Tell that to them. Tell that to those whose hands cannot read brail. Whose eyes cannot read text. And whose ears cannot hear words.

Tell that to them.

I know many bedridden who have had loved ones, caretakers and Clergy who come to their bedsides AND READ THEM SCRIPTURE to soothe their minds and hearts.

My mom read the bible to my grampa at his bedside daily as he laid there unable to read.
None of these excuses remove the necessity of holy scripture - they are simply special circumstances for some, and just becuz SOME are unable to do something, doesn't remove the necessity or importance of it overall.

Can we say just becuz someone is deaf, that all Ipods & stereos are useless become unimportant for all people?
If someone is computer illiterate, that ALL computers are unecessary, useless?
They merely find other ways or means.

SecretBlessings

9th November 2006, 06:16 AM

I believe it's important to read the Bible to be spiritually healthy and be close to God

holo

9th November 2006, 07:37 AM

I agree with Holo.... we should just trust our feelings and bag this word of God stuff... our feelings are what is important... they can't be wrong...What about your intellect, your understanding? Is that more reliable?

And I'm not suggesting we go by emotions, I just don't think the word of God is a book.

Holo... you are a heretic. Your views are heretic. You posts are heretic.... you are a heretic.Oh noes!11!!1!

mact

9th November 2006, 08:35 AM

I believe it's important to read the Bible to be spiritually healthy and be close to God
But, do you believe the Bible is required?
R

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 12:57 PM

I don't believe the Bible "IS" God "Himself"... anymore than a living will I may write is "ME" literally or an autobiography IS the author.

The writing relays the heart, mind and intents of the Author, the Bible is God's living Word to us; relaying the 'mind of God'...

Bingo!

1 Corinthians 2 (NASV)

1 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.
3 I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling,
4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,
5 so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.
6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away;
7 but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory;
8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory;
9 but just as it is written, "THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD, AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN, ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM."
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,
13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.

The Spirit has revealed to us the mind of Christ. It was revealed through the apostles and first-century Christians, and then written down and preserved for us today.

:clap:

elsbeth

9th November 2006, 01:40 PM

10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,

:clap:

It seems to me that this quote is making the argument that the Bible is NOT the primary way we know about God. It states that "we have received...the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God". We still, as Christians, receive that Spirit today (or at least we CAN, if we are willing), and the Spirit still speaks to us about God.
Why do you believe that God only speaks today thru the Bible?

holo

9th November 2006, 03:32 PM

But, do you believe the Bible is required?
RCome to think of it, I'd like you to elaborate on your claim that I'm a heretic. It's really quite offensive.

If not agreeing with this or that church on some matter makes me a heretic, that's ok. But if you mean anything else than that, I'd like you to back it up. Am I not saved, for example? Does the bible itself say I need to believe this or that about it? Which canon must I hold to be the word of God to not be a heretic?

holo

9th November 2006, 03:41 PM

Like you, I believe that God is very capable of getting His message across. However, there are times, such as in this text in Matthew, that demands some deep thought to appreciate what Jesus does. He shows us not only how to apply a biblical principle, but also that an erroneous understanding of a certain passage of Scripture will conflict with other passages. Certainly, it is one thing to just "fling" a passage out there, but quite another to show how it is true and that it harmonizes with other passages.I agree. A problem is, we see it described in the bible itself - that ungodly people and even satan himself quotes the bible. The word of God, as it were, becomes the word of the devil. That alone is reason good enough for me to not simply call the bible the word of God. Because when God speaks, something happens, something constructive. So if anyone quotes the bible to bring me down or condemn me, it's NOT the word of God. Because it's not what God says.

I believe there are good and useful principles we can use when reading and trying to understand the scriptures, such as context and the culture they were written in. But I've also had God suddenly reveal to me, and work a great mircale by a single verse I'd read a hundred times before. He brought it to life, you might say (it became the word of God when he told me something through it). But of course I can't simply quote that verse to others for the same effect.

On the other hand, maybe I've got it all wrong. Perhaps God has spoken to you and you will be able to help us get on track. Matthew 4:5-7 would be an excellent place to start. Please explain to us what Jesus really wants us to learn.Ah, I wouldn't want you to place your trust in neither your intellect, nor mind. But there may be a situation where God has revealed something to me, and I can share it with others. In fact, I could get it all wrong, and God would still be able to teach others through my mistake. In any case, it's a work of the Spirit, not of my brain.

My interpretations are
a) interpretations, and
b) mine,
and should be taken as such. But keep an open mind, I might have a gem or two :)

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Salida

Yes, the Bible is required

Well, I guess when I'm in Heaven, I'll wave to the millions of christians in the dark ages, millions of christians who never learned how to read, the millions of christians who didn't have the bible, adam, eve, abraham, moses, and all of those people, I'll wave to them while they're burning in Hell.

Me In Heaven: Sorry guys, you have to learn to read to enter Heaven!

Oh yea, and don't forget the blind and deaf. I'll wave to them too.

Me In Heaven: Sorry everyone, you have to be able to see or hear to enter Heaven.

That's a lot of Christians in Hell.

Actually, there will be lot of folks who think they are going to saved and serving God, but are not... from Matthew 7:
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
22 "Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
23 "And then I will declare to them, `I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

No one said a person has to be able to see, hear, or even read to be saved from their sins and remain faithful to God. Consider Acts 2. The Holy Spirit came upon the apostles just as Jesus promised e.g. John 16:7-14. Peter then preached to the Jews. He quoted or alluded to portions of Joel 2, Psalm 16, 2 Samuel 7, and Psalm 110. I seriously doubt that all the Jews in the audience had a written copy of the O.T. Scriptures in their hands. However, they knew the passages that were discussed. Three thousand of the Jews obeyed what they were told to do to receive the remission of their sins and were saved. Later, the incident there was written down and recorded for later generations to understand what took place. How hard is that to understand?

Now, let's think about the Scriptures that Peter, under direct influence of the Holy Spirit, quoted. They were spoken and written down centuries before. Romans 10:17 says, "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ [or God] (NASV)." The point? A knowledge of God's word was necessary to understand that Jesus was the fulfillment of it. It didn't mean that the Jews had to have an open copy of the O.T. in their hands as Peter spoke to them. But, those Scriptures were written down, and could later be thoroughly and diligently considered i.e. Acts 17:10-11.

Now, consider Acts 2:38. Peter told the Jews what was necessary to be saved from their sins. He didn't quote that from the O.T. Rather, it was directly inspired by the Holy Spirit. Any in the audience who were blind could have heard the message and understood it. And, any who were deaf could have read the lips of the apostles or others discussing what had been said. Any way you look at it, those with the capability of communicating in some form or fashion would have had access to the knowledge that Jesus had been declared to be both Lord and Christ (verse 36), and that the terms for salvation had been offered (verse 38), and that some of the Jews were obeying the gospel of Christ (verse 41).

Today, we have God's word preserved for us. We have everything that we need to serve and please God in His word (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It reveals the mind of God to us (2 Corinthians 2). It is able to save us ... if we do what it says (James 2:21-25).

On the other hand, we do have the option of not accepting that God's word gives us all that we need. If we decide to travel that path, we can either decide to "pick and choose" select Scriptures that we agree with -- and accept only those, or we can reject all the Scriptures. Either way, we end up doing what we want to do and believe what we want to believe. Furthermore, we can even presume or assume that God likes this approach, and that he'll reward us just as He does those who faithfully follow His word and obey Him.
And, to spice up our act, we can always throw in a lot of talk about love ... even throw in some John Lennon.

What a shame! :(

SteelDisciple

9th November 2006, 04:03 PM

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 04:28 PM

I agree. A problem is, we see it described in the bible itself - that ungodly people and even satan himself quotes the bible. The word of God, as it were, becomes the word of the devil. That alone is reason good enough for me to not simply call the bible the word of God. Because when God speaks, something happens, something constructive. So if anyone quotes the bible to bring me down or condemn me, it's NOT the word of God. Because it's not what God says.

Disagree. Just because the devil quoted Psalm 91:11-12 doesn't mean it ceased to be God's word. The devil tried to apply it in the wrong way. That was the problem.

Consider what Jesus said to the Jews in Matthew 22:23-33. Note verse 29, in which Jesus says, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God (NASV)." Note verse 32. Jesus quotes Exodus 3:6. See the point? Jesus used Scripture to show them their reasoning was wrong. Therefore, in applying what you say, Jesus was not really speaking the word of God when He used Ex. 3:6 the way that He did.

I believe there are good and useful principles we can use when reading and trying to understand the scriptures, such as context and the culture they were written in. But I've also had God suddenly reveal to me, and work a great mircale by a single verse I'd read a hundred times before. He brought it to life, you might say (it became the word of God when he told me something through it). But of course I can't simply quote that verse to others for the same effect.

Ah, I wouldn't want you to place your trust in neither your intellect, nor mind. But there may be a situation where God has revealed something to me, and I can share it with others. In fact, I could get it all wrong, and God would still be able to teach others through my mistake. In any case, it's a work of the Spirit, not of my brain.

My interpretations are
a) interpretations, and
b) mine,
and should be taken as such. But keep an open mind, I might have a gem or two :)

You're squirming. The issue is at hand is whether or not Scriptures must harmonize. Jesus maintains that they do in Matthew 4:5-7 and 22:23-33.

Don't worry. My trust isn't in my intellect -- nor in yours. That's why I keep appealing to the Scriptures. I trust God's word. Not the version of that little light bulb that comes on in your mind, but the version that God gave many years ago -- the one that has been written down and preserved.

Now, back to Matthew 4:5-7. Why not see if you can't get the Spirit to help us out. Surely the Spirit doesn't want to keep us in the dark about what the passage means, does He?

Sorry, but I am not in the market for the "gems" that are up for sale (Proverbs 23:23).

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 04:34 PM

To answer the OP's question:

Is the Bible required for Salvation? No. Only Jesus.

BUT, the Bible (which is proven to be the Word of God, confirmed by the Holy Spirit) is VITAL to spiritual growth. It is soul food. It's the instruction manual for life, it answers your questions.

Please explain. Jesus died on the cross, right? Then, approximately 50 days later the Jews were told what to do to have their sins forgiven (Acts 2:38), right?

Why weren't those Jews already saved? Jesus is all that is required, right?

Think about it. :idea:

MaidforHim

9th November 2006, 04:56 PM

Holo and those who think that the Bible is simply a book written by man about God, I would like to ask you why then does it have His divine signature on it?

I believe God signed it for us, He left his finger prints all over it!!!!!!!
He want's us to know it's His Word and no one elses and He's given us proof. The "Seal of Seven", God's signature, exists throughout scripture OT and NEW.

It is impossible for man create.
We can't even create it with our most powerful computers.
The probability for one author to do this, not to mention haveing it make sense, remain relevent and agree with itself, is astronomical, it can't be done.
The probability for many authors, all separated by many years, all writing about specific circumstances beyond their control is down right impossible.

Considering these solid, mathematical facts ALONE how can anyone deny that God is the author of the Bible?

If man can't do it and you say "God didn't do it" then who did???????

This is the a tiny portion of information re: The Seal of Sevens.
It is from: http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/efinck/GODSEAL.HTM#Page110 (http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/efinck/GODSEAL.HTM#Page110)

Snip.....

Does the Bible in fact bear any seal whereby we can identify it?
Can the Bible be brought into the scope of Divine Workmanship?
Can it be shown that the Author of the seals in sevens, some of which we have examined, is also the Author of the Bible?
Look first on the surface of the Scriptures.
It has long been known, and appreciated, by those who have studied the Word, how the number seven has been used to convey a certain and specific conclusion. It usually denotes God's fullness of purpose, or completion of a specific period

Snip....
Before leaving this section I would like to take one portion from the Old Testament.

Those vital opening words of Genesis 1:1.

'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.'

The very foundation of God's Word.
If God were going to Seal any words, surely He would seal these, and seal them He has.

The verse consists of exactly SEVEN Hebrew words.7
These seven words have exactly 28 letters4-7's
There are three nouns. God. Heaven. Earth. Their total numeric value is
exactly 777111-7's
There is one Hebrew verb. 'Created.' Its numeric value is exactly 20329-7's
The first three Hebrew words contain the subject. They have exactly
14 letters2-7's
The other four contain the objects with 14 letters2-7's
The fourth and fifth words have exactly 7 letters7
The sixth and seventh words have exactly 7 letters7
The Hebrew words for the two objects. 'The heaven' AND 'and the earth'
EACH has exactly 7 letters7
The value of the first, middle and last letters, in the verse is 13319-7's
The numeric value of the first and last letters, of the whole 7 words is 1,393199-7's
The value of the first and last letters, of the first and last words is 49771-7's
So the value of the first and last letters, of each of the words between is
896128-7's
The Hebrew particle 'ETH' with the article, 'THE' is used twice 40658-7's
The last letters of the first and last words, equal 49070-7's

As we see how these seven Hebrew words were so marvellously chosen and arranged by God that the number seven is literally woven into them in every conceivable way, we are still only seeing but a glimpse of what is hidden within these words. It has been found that there are over thirty different numeric features in the verses, and calculated that the chance of co-incidence accounting for the above 15 is one in thirty three trillion or more.

Some of the world's foremost mathematicians, after studying it, have concluded that not even the cleverest man that ever lived could have devised such a Sublime mathematical problem and hide it in such a simple statement, which declares the first stupendous miracle of God.

Hidden, within itself, is not only found the Seal of seven, but also a mathematical key to unlock every aspect of its fundamental truths, some of which were not known to man until the advent of Christ. 'By Whom also He made the worlds.' Hebrews 1:2.
We will examine this further later.

Panin wrote. 'No mortal in a hundred years could possibly have carried out the design found in a single book of the Bible, if he devoted the entire hundred years to the task.'

It must be remembered that with each additional sentence the difficulty greatly increases and, owing to the limitations of human intellect, soon becomes hopeless. Each word is important, for instance, the word 'baptise' forms an elaborate pattern which connects practically the whole of the New Testament and, if this word were removed even once, it would completely upset this design of some 20 features of seven's.

Again, there are twenty six writers named in the Bible, and whilst these twenty six names are distributed from Genesis to Revelation, they not only form one perfect pattern such as the total numeric value, 7,931 . . . . . 1,133-7 s, but are so distributed that they form an amazing set of designs.

There are many other ways in which these numeric patterns appear also. Each of the New Testament books has a number of words not found in any other New Testament book, each includes its own design, and yet they each only form a part of the complete pattern.

It can be demonstrated that, for all the New Testament writers to have compiled their books, unaided by a Supreme Intelligence, each one would have needed to know what the others had written, in other words, each of the books would have to have been written last, a literal impossibility.

No doubt God has reserved this thing as an answer to those who would challenge His Word.

'The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.' 1 Corinthians 3:19.

Those who have done so are faced with but two alternatives. Either they must acknowledge the truth that God alone was the Author, or else credit those writers, whom they branded as just simpletons, with wisdom far exceeding that of any man today.

However despite the wonder of this phenomenon it is only a Seal of God's Hand there in His Word, just as in all Creation, and having discerned that it does have His Divine watermark we should now go back to the Scriptures themselves with renewed zeal to discover the many other treasures which await us there because He had a Plan for all who believe which He wanted each of us to discover for ourselves as Hebrews 11:6 tells us plainly.

'But without faith it is impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.'

....This is such a small picture of what The Seal of Sevens actually is, I hope some of you will check out the link/last chapter and see for yourselves how really big this is.

I believe God has left us proof of His authorship.
However, maybe you have to have FAITH to see it.

holo

9th November 2006, 05:29 PM

Disagree. Just because the devil quoted Psalm 91:11-12 doesn't mean it ceased to be God's word. The devil tried to apply it in the wrong way. That was the problem.But the effect is the same. Even if God himself had said something, the devil could twist it and use those same words to say something else. I guess you could still call it the word of God, but it wasn't meant to say, and didn't say, what God actually WOULD say.

Consider what Jesus said to the Jews in Matthew 22:23-33. Note verse 29, in which Jesus says, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God (NASV)." Note verse 32. Jesus quotes Exodus 3:6. See the point? Jesus used Scripture to show them their reasoning was wrong. Therefore, in applying what you say, Jesus was not really speaking the word of God when He used Ex. 3:6 the way that He did.The word of God is what God says. People even quote Jesus when they bash each other. That doesn't mean that's what Jesus says to that person.

You're squirming. The issue is at hand is whether or not Scriptures must harmonize. Jesus maintains that they do in Matthew 4:5-7 and 22:23-33.I'm not saying the scriptures don't harmonize. They do contradict each other in places, but there are more or less good explanations for that. Being in harmony doesn't mean it must be infallible, for example.

Don't worry. My trust isn't in my intellect -- nor in yours. That's why I keep appealing to the Scriptures. I trust God's word. Not the version of that little light bulb that comes on in your mind, but the version that God gave many years ago -- the one that has been written down and preserved.You trust the bible, but the bible is subject to your interpretation. Surely there have been cases where you've misunderstood it, hasn't it? I mean, the car and the road may be perfect, but you may not be a perfect driver. So it doesn't make sense to trust the car or the road.

You're never simply referring to scriptures. You're always, inevitably, referring to your understanding of them. That understanding may be right, but it can't compete with revelation.

Sorry, but I am not in the market for the "gems" that are up for sale (Proverbs 23:23).I'm not trying to sell you anything, only suggesting that you be as open-minded as possible. Had Saul been more open-minded, Jesus wouldn't have had to knock him off a horse to get his attention. BTW, keep in mind that if Saul put his trust in anything, it was the scriptures...

Anyway, God has communicated with me through such various means as music and dialogues from TV shows I don't even like, so I don't think one needs to be close-minded in any way. Perhaps all you hear from God is through bible verses. And maybe that's because it doesn't occur to you to listen for him anywhere else?

SteelDisciple

9th November 2006, 06:42 PM

Please explain. Jesus died on the cross, right? Then, approximately 50 days later the Jews were told what to do to have their sins forgiven (Acts 2:38), right?

Why weren't those Jews already saved? Jesus is all that is required, right?

Think about it. :idea:

You are assuming they were saved to begin with. They weren’t. Many were corrupt, yet still thinking they were saved. They were following the old covenant which Jesus broke when he came to this world as well….since then they had already heard the gospel MANY times before Paul’s speech after receiving the gift of tongues and the gift of the Holy Spirit. It was after the speech that MANY came to accept Christ.

holo

9th November 2006, 07:46 PM

Holo and those who think that the Bible is simply a book written by man about God, I would like to ask you why then does it have His divine signature on it?I don't think the bible is "simply a book written by man about God" - in a factual sense, it is, of course, but I think it's much more than that. I don't think it's a coincidence that we have it.

About this divine signature, I can't deny it, and I'm somewhat sceptical of accepting it based on the little I know now (bible codes and such high-flying stuff comes to mind). But hey, it may be true. I hope it is. But is that the reason you call the bible the word of God (I take "word of God" to mean "what God says")? I mean, I think most people believe the bible=the word of God simply because it's a christian doctrine, it's simply held as self-evident. And I think most christians are absolutetly terrified of questioning even WHY they believe that. And that fact by itself shows that something's wrong.

I believe God has left us proof of His authorship.Maybe, but then I hope there's more than mathematics discovered in the last few hundred years :)

BTW, does this apply to the catholic or the protestant bible, or both?

However, maybe you have to have FAITH to see it.That just might be the case :)

- DRA -

9th November 2006, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Please explain. Jesus died on the cross, right? Then, approximately 50 days later the Jews were told what to do to have their sins forgiven (Acts 2:38), right?

Why weren't those Jews already saved? Jesus is all that is required, right?

Think about it. :idea:

You are assuming they were saved to begin with. They weren’t. Many were corrupt, yet still thinking they were saved. They were following the old covenant which Jesus broke when he came to this world as well….since then they had already heard the gospel MANY times before Paul’s speech after receiving the gift of tongues and the gift of the Holy Spirit. It was after the speech that MANY came to accept Christ.

The Jews in Acts 2:38 were commanded to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Three thousand obeyed (verse 41), and were saved and added to the church (verse 47). No assumptions. That is what the text says.

The 3,000 obeyed the gospel of Christ -- not the old covenant (the law of Moses).

Uh, I'm sure you meant Peter, right? He's the one that gave the speech or sermon recorded in Acts 2. Paul wasn't converted until Acts 9.

Now, let's go back to your original premise. You said that Jesus was all that is required to be saved. I think you need to clarify your reasoning. Once again, going back to the chronology of events, Jesus died on the cross. However, some 50 days later, the Jews were still in their sins (as were the Gentiles). Borrowing from the language of Hebrews 9:15-17, you can view the sermon in Acts 2 as the reading of Jesus' will. Once the terms to His will were promulgated, those that obeyed His terms were promised the inheritance (eternal life in heaven). The point? Jesus died on the cross. End of story, right? Wrong. People needed to hear that He was resurrected from the dead and offers eternal life to those that accept His gospel (see Mark 16:15-16, Matthew 28:18-20. Then, once the people heard it, they needed to obey it (1 Peter 1:22a, Hebrews 5:9, 2 Thessalonians 1:8). Make sense?

Reyanah

10th November 2006, 02:48 AM

We need to walk in the light of the Word and led by the Holy Spirit you can't seperate the two they are both essential for Christianity.

New_Wineskin

10th November 2006, 08:23 AM

shlama

10th November 2006, 10:57 AM

He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in Me and I in them. ~ Elaw

MaidforHim

10th November 2006, 12:32 PM

Maybe, but then I hope there's more than mathematics discovered in the last few hundred years :)

BTW, does this apply to the catholic or the protestant bible, or both?

:)

It is the original text in hebrew and greek in which the signature exists. Much more than just math to support the Bibles authorship, but this aspect is facinating as many have tried to challenge it and have been unable to succeed or even explain how this could have happened. Many many teachings on the Seal of Sevens some mentioned in the text. It's not the basis of my faith but an utterly facinating proof the complexity of which just compounds more and more as the text continues to build on the sevens signature.

Nadiine

10th November 2006, 03:59 PM

- DRA -

10th November 2006, 11:59 PM

It seems to me that this quote is making the argument that the Bible is NOT the primary way we know about God. It states that "we have received...the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God". We still, as Christians, receive that Spirit today (or at least we CAN, if we are willing), and the Spirit still speaks to us about God.
Why do you believe that God only speaks today thru the Bible?

1 Corinthians chapter 2 is making the point that the Holy Spirit searched the mind of Christ and revealed His will directly to the apostles and first-century Christians.

Consider the promise Jesus made to the apostles in John 16:13 -- "... When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth ... (NKJV)." The Spirit did that by cofirming both the message and the messenger i.e. Hebrews 2:3-4.

The Spirit guided both the oral and written word (1 Thess. 2:13) to complete God's revelation to mankind -- "the perfect law of liberty" (James 1:25).

Note 2 Timothy 3:16-17, which says, "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 complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." Do you believe what these Scriptures teach?

Does the Spirit still work today? In the miraculous sense, no. However, He still continues to work today through His word i.e. "preach the word" - 2 Tim. 4:2. And, He also works in indirect ways e.g. Psalms 19:1-3, Romans 1:20, Hebrews 13:1-2.

I accept what 2 Tim. 3:16-17 says. :bow: The Holy Spirit was directly involved in bringing God's word to mankind, and used it to draw men/women to Christ in the first century -- just as He does today.

Make sense?

mont974x4

11th November 2006, 12:25 AM

1 Corinthians chapter 2 is making the point that the Holy Spirit searched the mind of Christ and revealed His will directly to the apostles and first-century Christians.

Consider the promise Jesus made to the apostles in John 16:13 -- "... When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth ... (NKJV)." The Spirit did that by cofirming both the message and the messenger i.e. Hebrews 2:3-4.

The Spirit guided both the oral and written word (1 Thess. 2:13) to complete God's revelation to mankind -- "the perfect law of liberty" (James 1:25).

Note 2 Timothy 3:16-17, which says, "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 complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." Do you believe what these Scriptures teach?

Does the Spirit still work today? In the miraculous sense, no. However, He still continues to work today through His word i.e. "preach the word" - 2 Tim. 4:2. And, He also works in indirect ways e.g. Psalms 19:1-3, Romans 1:20, Hebrews 13:1-2.

I accept what 2 Tim. 3:16-17 says. :bow: The Holy Spirit was directly involved in bringing God's word to mankind, and used it to draw men/women to Christ in the first century -- just as He does today.

Make sense?
nicely done.

However, off topic, but I do disagree with the point about miracles. I believe they still occur. Perhaps given our relatively easy society we don't see them as often here...or they happen quite often we just don;t recognize them.

Regardless, I see nothing in Scripture that says the miracles ended.

- DRA -

11th November 2006, 12:54 AM

I haven't read DRA claiming that the bible is the ONLY means God speaks to us.

You are correct.

It is however a primary way.

To claim it is the ONLY way God speaks to man today is to claim that the Bible is indeed required for salvation. DRA hasn't said that in any posts I've read, and I certainly haven't said it.

The Bible is not a requirement for salvation. It is the knowledge that the Bible contains that is necessary e.g. the gospel of Christ - 1 Cor. 15:1-8. After initially coming to Christ and being saved from our sins, it provides us with the necessary knowledge to remain faithful to God - "to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20).

noparty

11th November 2006, 01:44 AM

The Bible is not a requirement for salvation. It is the knowledge that the Bible contains that is necessary e.g. the gospel of Christ - 1 Cor. 15:1-8. After initially coming to Christ and being saved from our sins, it provides us with the necessary knowledge to remain faithful to God - "to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20).

I agree. How much of that knowledge countained in the Bible would you guys say is necessary?

Nadiine

11th November 2006, 07:18 AM

I agree. How much of that knowledge countained in the Bible would you guys say is necessary?

Well, I think anyone who is genuinely born again in the Living God can answer this one - just ask: "how many of us have been given straight, lengthy text information that comes right out of the bible?" (I go back to another post I wrote, asking "what parables, miracles & stories has God personally relayed to you that you haven't read in the Bible that you know due to His private visitation to you?") --

I've never been given lengthy information I find in the Bible straight from God and I think I know why, HE ALREADY GAVE THAT WORD TO US... if we're going to reject it as 'unnecessary' to learn more of Him, why is God going to jump thru MORE hoops to feed your skepticism to relay the same things He already went to the trouble to get to you?

God operates by FAITH, not willful skepticism.
(and how do we know that?? SCRIPTURE!:idea: )

How are you going to REMEMBER all of it even if He did reiterate the entire thing back to you? We have to write down grocery lists to remember what we need to buy at a store... can we Retain all God has in the bible:doh: ?
(***then, how do you share that info. with others and how do THEY know it's genuinely FROM HIM when He only gave it to YOU?). They have to essentially trust that YOU are getting direct info from the True God! (trust in YOU).
How do THEY verify it's authentically "from God"?

How do we know MOST of what we know as believers today? the BIBLE.
MOST of what we write here in discussion is mainly due to what we've read in the Bible about God. We do rely on it for truth.

There are many more points that can be made as to why it's "necessary" - & that doesn't necessarily mean that those who do not have access to a Bible are 'lost' or "spiritually immature/weak"... God knows who doesn't have one and can work in each life individually to give them more intimate knowledge directly.

The point is, God HAS given us His direct Word - He has already chosen THIS SPECIFIC WAY to reveal Himself & His truth to everyone. Who am I to shun His means of delivery to force Him to relate to me in a different/PRIVATE way than the one He's chosen?!!
Am I more special than everyone else?

WE'RE BLESSED TO HAVE THIS LUXURY OF GOD'S WORD to better know Him and His will for mankind.

Nadiine

11th November 2006, 08:09 AM

I agree. A problem is, we see it described in the bible itself - that ungodly people and even satan himself quotes the bible. The word of God, as it were, becomes the word of the devil. That alone is reason good enough for me to not simply call the bible the word of God. Because when God speaks, something happens, something constructive. So if anyone quotes the bible to bring me down or condemn me, it's NOT the word of God. Because it's not what God says.

In reply to a previous post where you asked me to check my attitude, my profile explains my discussion method... I don't have an attitude problem at all.:holy:

So, in other words, no one can use the bible to CORRECT you?.. any correction becomes "condemnation" if it "brings you down"? (All correction "brings us down", who enjoys it!!?)
And since the Bible is and can be [mis]used, it becomes invalid or not God's word?

TRUTH is meant to change us FROM THE FALSE TO THE TRUE, for our own good and benefit. Even if a Christian has a poor delivery (method) of relaying that truth, it doesn't negate its TRUTH and that it's God's will for you to obey that truth.

Pro 27:17 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Pro/Pro027.html#17) Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
2Ti 3:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2Ti/2Ti003.html#16) All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Pro 15:32 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Pro/Pro015.html#32) He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding.

Sure, the devil can pervert ANY good or neutral thing... a TV can be used for good or evil... the TV itself isn't bad; it's how it's used. MONEY... money can buy food we need, and it can buy pornography -- it's HOW it's used that makes it 'evil' or 'good'.
Procreation is a gift from God with the stipulation that it is only to be used within the boundaries of marriage... yet THAT act is perverted and abused DAILY... does that mean the act of 'intimacy' is ruined in & of itself?

Satan's (or anyone's) [mis]use of scripture, DOESN'T CHANGE OR REFUTE THE TRUTH OF WHAT IS WRITTEN.
If you say it does, then you must consistently render everything that's been misused as "not true, not good, impure, unholy, bad, wrong, useless, harmful" as you have done with the Bible here.
Do you?

It's unfair to do this only w/ scripture, and nothing else that gets abused and perverted regularly (showing a bias).

If the bible is "subjective" (interpretations are true for the person privately interpreting it's meanings as they view them personally) as you seem to promote, then that makes OUR opposing position on it correct as well. We both have to be right because that's how we view it - As God's direct written Words of Truth to mankind - as proclaiming followers of Christ.
Now what?

Again, all you give us here is your private opinions with no backup of any kind to support your claims.
(some that fall right apart on their foundations)
It's your own heresay and there's nothing supportive that allows me to check your statements against anything substantial to know that it's TRUE or RIGHT. :scratch:

Harlan Norris

11th November 2006, 08:16 AM

Which do you think?

1) The Bible is required.

2) You don't have to have the Bible.

In all honesty, it appears, at least in my view and opinion, that Christians worship the Bible more than they worship God.

What do I think?

I think that the Bible is good to have and very helpful, but it's not required, or even needed. My God is ALIVE. The Bible even says

1 John 2:27
As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

It is God who teaches us, not the Bible. Although the Bible is useful and helpful, and God can use it, it's not required, nor is it needed. And it's my opinion that Christians worship the Bible greater than they worship God, and more people read the Bible themselves (Man's Wisdom) than do even listen to God at all.

Who is the true God of Christianity? A book or a Person? The Bible or the Spirit of Jesus Christ? And don't say "Both" because the Bible is only called the Living Word because God is the Living part. Without God, it's just a bunch of words that NO ONE but God Himself could ever understand. Without God the Bible is useless, to us humans just words on a page, dead wood. With God it is alive, but is it the Bible that's really alive or is it just God alive and we give the credit to His written words instead of His Living Spirit?

I'm not asking any questions, no debate. I just want to know everyone's view and opinions on the question: Is the Bible required or not? Answer #1 or #2?

GO!!!!!!!!
Yes the Bible is required. However, like any tool,it can be misused.The Bible is Gods word. Here is scripture.John;1:1, In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God...Of course I realise that the gospel was spread by mouth,by the hearing of the word.However, if it had not been necessasary to write the word,God would not have done so. The Bible is a blessing or a curse,depending on how you use it.The gospel is quite clear and easily understood. The two commandments Jesus gave us Christians are the foundation of all the rest. When confusion on a given point arises, the question can be settled by those two commandments. If an opinion is contrary to either of them,it is in error. These endless disputings over scripture are the result of our unwillingness to do those two commandments.

holo

11th November 2006, 08:46 AM

So, in other words, no one can use the bible to CORRECT you?.. any correction becomes "condemnation" if it "brings you down"?God can correct by various means, through my reading of the bible, for example, or via other posters on CF. But, unlike people and satan, God never brings me down. He never condemns me. He teaches me, inspires me, cheers me on, loves me. The Spirit is gentle.

And since the Bible is and can be [mis]used, it becomes invalid or not God's word?If God tells me "take the first plane to London and meet a guy in a blue jacket," that's God's word to me. I could quote it and say it to you. But it wouldn't be God's word to YOU. See what I mean? Of course, there's the chance that you may learn from what God said to me, but it would be insane to assume that since God told me to go somewhere, he also said it to you.

TRUTH is meant to change us FROM THE FALSE TO THE TRUE, for our own good and benefit. Even if a Christian has a poor delivery (method) of relaying that truth, it doesn't negate its TRUTH and that it's God's will for you to obey that truth.Sure. But when Jesus spoke to pharisees, does it follow that he would tell me the very same thing? You can't simply say "God has said this, period, no question" and ignore the context and the persons involved etc.

Sure, the devil can pervert ANY good or neutral thing... a TV can be used for good or evil... the TV itself isn't bad; it's how it's used. MONEY... money can buy food we need, and it can buy pornography -- it's HOW it's used that makes it 'evil' or 'good'.Exactly. We agree on that. :)

Satan himself is quoted in the bible, but even that can be used for good.

If you say it does, then you must consistently render everything that's been misused as "not true, not good, impure, unholy, bad, wrong, useless, harmful" as you have done with the Bible here.
Do you?No. I'm attacking the misuse, not the words themselves. I'm not challenging the bible, but people's view and use of it.

If the bible is "subjective" (interpretations are true for the person privately interpreting it's meanings as they view them personally) as you seem to promote, then that makes OUR opposing position on it correct as well. We both have to be right because that's how we view it - As God's direct written Words of Truth to mankind - as proclaiming followers of Christ.
Now what?

Again, all you give us here is your private opinions with no backup of any kind to support your claims.
(some that fall right apart on their foundations)
It's your own heresay and there's nothing supportive that allows me to check your statements against anything substantial to know that it's TRUE or RIGHT. :scratch:What am I to check YOUR opinions against then? You're not simply quoting bible verses, you're telling me what you think they mean. It's your opinion. It may be supported by a million others, but that doesn't make it true.

Nobody truly reads the bible "as it is," literally. Nobody believes the Earth actually stands on poles, for example, even if the bible says so. You have your private interpretation, like everybody else.

BTW, I'd still like to know which canon of the bible you consider to be the word of God, and why.

noparty

11th November 2006, 12:28 PM

What about someone who decides to become a Christian because he/she loves God, then devotes the rest of his/her life to helping the poor, feeding the hungry, finding shelter for the homeless, etc, without feeling the need to read the Bible, including the verses requiring Christians to read the Bible?

Nadiine

11th November 2006, 12:52 PM

God can correct by various means, through my reading of the bible, for example, or via other posters on CF. But, unlike people and satan, God never brings me down. He never condemns me. He teaches me, inspires me, cheers me on, loves me. The Spirit is gentle.

Was the Spirit "gentle" with Job? Jonah? Ezekiel? Paul? Peter? Annaias & Saphira?....

Do parents raise their children their same way? NEVER making a child feel "down"? Never punishing/disciplining/reprimanding/correcting?
Even the most intimate human relationships don't operate this way; yet you apply it to a loving God?

And again, this is how YOU view Him.. the Bible however does not. What if your personal perceptions are wrong and the bible is correct? HOW WOULD YOU KNOW YOU ARE WRONG if you refuse to accept any teaching from a source other than yourself? mere feeling again? God is simply "that which I think He should be, what I want Him to be?".
Basically, you set yourself up to be unteachable and all knowing.

According to your views here, there is absolutely NO WAY your feelings can be changed with any outside means.

No. I'm attacking the misuse, not the words themselves. I'm not challenging the bible, but people's view and use of it.

Ok, let me ask you this, how do you challenge your own views of it?

I'm glad to hear this... but again MOST of the scriptures are clear in how God expects us to live (His Moral law).
We can disagree on MINOR doctrines and in depth issues not as clearly taught... they don't affect salvation.
But we cannot say that just becuz people can disagree on scripture, that it makes YOUR ideal the right one either!.
The authors of scripture had an intended truth and intent when writing.
2 Peter 3:15-17 just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,

16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness,

When the Bible says do not steal, commit adultery, lie, bear false witness, covet, fornicate, lust, get drunk, gossip etc. THOSE ARE VERY CLEAR and God's moral law that we know (right from wrong) are reiterated - confirmed in the scriptures along with what we must know and do to be saved.

As Peter says, those who distort & twist the scriptures to say what it doesn't say, do it TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION... it isn't making it TRUTH for them, they're simply WRONG and it carries a negative consequence with it.

What am I to check YOUR opinions against then? You're not simply quoting bible verses, you're telling me what you think they mean. It's your opinion. It may be supported by a million others, but that doesn't make it true.

Ok, WHO DO YOU ALLOW TO TEACH YOU ANYTHING? Is no one but yourself qualified?
Are you the SOLE authority on God and all truth? Are you so far above all others in knowledge, relationship with God & spiritual matters that you cannot be taught by anyone?

Pro 27:17 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Pro/Pro027.html#17) Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
2Ti 3:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2Ti/2Ti003.html#16) All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Pro 15:32 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Pro/Pro015.html#32) He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding.

It sounds to me like you're removing all means of learning and being corrected by anyone in anything spiritual as if you alone decide all truth regarding God.
What are your credentials to be the sole authority on discerning and being correct in all spiritual truth?

Nobody truly reads the bible "as it is," literally. Nobody believes the Earth actually stands on poles, for example, even if the bible says so. You have your private interpretation, like everybody else.

BTW, I'd still like to know which canon of the bible you consider to be the word of God, and why.

I read the bible as it is - literally (where it's obviously literal or figurative or narrative, etc.).
I also claim there are some [minor] doctrines that I'm not positive about yet until I study further... I may never know. Paul even says we won't grasp ALL things right now.
But we CAN know many things that are plainly revealed.:)

I accept the general bible: Genesis to Revelation. I don't accept Gnostic gospels (for many reasons incl. heresy and time of writing) or the Maccabees|Apochrypha, some reasons: earlier Jewish & Christian fathers rejected them due to historic inaccuracies & moral incongruities.
The Reformers rejected some due to heretical teachings (ie. praying to the dead) etc.

- DRA -

11th November 2006, 10:55 PM

I agree. How much of that knowledge countained in the Bible would you guys say is necessary?

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

The essence of this text is that "all Scripture" is "profitable" and results in a man/woman that is "competent" in their service to God. Thus, anything less than "all Scripture" would result in someone who is incompetent, right? That is the inference or implication. Therefore, my answer to your question is, "100%."

New_Wineskin

11th November 2006, 11:23 PM

Saying that ALL of a group of things are "profitable" or "beneficial" or even "useful" for ANYTHING does *not* make ANY of them "necessary" or "important" or "required" for ANYTHING . Many things are beneficial but not required ( for whatever thing one is looking at them being beneficial or required ) .

icedtea

12th November 2006, 03:55 AM

I find myself much more uplifted by reading the bible. It brings verses to my mind when I need them, even if I don't recall reading them recently.

Nadiine

12th November 2006, 07:50 AM

Saying that ALL of a group of things are "profitable" or "beneficial" or even "useful" does *not* make ANY of them "necessary" or "important" .

Again, necessary, important or required: FOR WHAT?
Not salvation...
Spiritual Maturity & knowledge? Absolutely, they are necessary, important and required. Why?
It gives us direct instruction as to God's will and information about Him & His kingdom; it instructs us on HOW to mature in Christ and HOW to serve Him.

And because 40 separate writers (eyewitnesses) who dealt directly with God over a span of thousands of years felt it was necessary, important and required that they WRITE these events and information.

The mere fact that God had it written makes it important and required for something.
The mere fact that Jesus Christ Himself quoted the OT repeatedly in reply to others including Satan, makes it "important/necessary" enough to Him to use it.

Maybe the fact that society today has become so morally bankrupt, corrupt, hard hearted and spiritually apathetic, that the Bible teachings don't mean anything they used to in prior years?
It used to be that the majority held a basic respect for God & scripture even if they weren't "Christian". It was at least given a place of honor. That's all but gone today. :swoon:
(Evenso, it doesn't negate the importance or necessity of it - in fact, it supports the written prophecy of man's poor spiritual condition near the end times).

Jesus also mentioned several times that the scriptures had to be fulfilled by Him (which means He was literally proving His authenticity thru prophetical foretelling from the OT writers).
And, that scriptures are never broken.

Aside from that, the Bible itself reveals its importance in many verses... 2 Pet. 3:16 Peter says untaught/unstable people can twist scriptures "to their own destruction"... so Peter thought that manipulating or changing written truth can lead to destruction in one's life.

Rev 22:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev022.html#7)[B] Behold, I come quickly: blessed [is] he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.
Rev 22:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev022.html#18) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
If these don't relay "necessity, importance or requirement", then I don't know what would? It boils down to, "do you believe the Bible is God's authentic word to man THRU men He chose to pen it" or not.

holo

12th November 2006, 11:39 AM

[/QUOTE] Was the Spirit "gentle" with Job? Jonah? Ezekiel? Paul? Peter? Annaias & Saphira?....Yes, I believe so. Sure, God has been known to shake people up if need be, and I've experienced that myself. But God has never ever in any way condemned me, not even when I was condemning myself. God's purpose is never to make anyone feel bad. However, it does seem he allows people to hit the wall, for example when we try to make it on our own and save ourselves. He's not a dictator, and the world may hurt us, but the Lord only loves us.

Do parents raise their children their same way? NEVER making a child feel "down"? Never punishing/disciplining/reprimanding/correcting?
Even the most intimate human relationships don't operate this way; yet you apply it to a loving God?I think God is better than people. You would never deny your own child, and even if you did, God wouldn't :)

I wouldn't determine too much about God from how the average person does things, but yeah, it can give you and idea.

And again, this is how YOU view Him.. the Bible however does not. What if your personal perceptions are wrong and the bible is correct?What if your personal perception of the bible is wrong?

HOW WOULD YOU KNOW YOU ARE WRONG if you refuse to accept any teaching from a source other than yourself?I don't refuse to accept any teaching form anyone, not even people I hold to be legalistic fools (not you).

Basically, you set yourself up to be unteachable and all knowing.No, quite the opposite in fact. I'm saying that I can't put too much trust in neither MY understanding nor YOURS. Basically, I believe what I believe because of experience. I know God is love because I've received his love. There are heaps of things in the bible and in christianity with which I have no real experience, and can only talk about theoretically.

According to your views here, there is absolutely NO WAY your feelings can be changed with any outside means.Then you mistunderstand me completely.

Ok, let me ask you this, how do you challenge your own views of it?I began by daring to ask myself the question "why do I believe the bible is the word of God" and "how do I know?" I still don't have the answers, I hope to find them, but in the meantime I have to be honest and admit that I don't have the grounds to call the bible the word of God.

When the Bible says do not steal, commit adultery, lie, bear false witness, covet, fornicate, lust, get drunk, gossip etc. THOSE ARE VERY CLEAR and God's moral law that we know (right from wrong) are reiterated - confirmed in the scriptures along with what we must know and do to be saved.And here, already, our opinions differ :)

I don't think the bible is so clear as you suggest. In fact, I think most of christianity has misunderstood large portions of it, regarding salvation, for example. I think it's a misinterpretation that we have to do something to be saved (other than accept it as the gift it is). Now, I could give you a lot of bible quotes to support my view, but the reason I believe it is because I've experienced salvation in spite of my bad behaviour. I was saved when I was a depressed drug addict, and I stayed a depressed, lying, stealing drug addict for quite some time afterwards, because deep down I believed I was still a sinner and that I didn't really have a choice, and christians had made me believe that I couldn't expect anything from the Lord. They were wrong, and as I discovered that, I became free from my addiction(s), my fear, etc.

For many years, "the bible was clear" that I was lost and hopeless because of my filthy lifestyle. But those interpretations turned out to be wrong, because I experienced otherwise.

As Peter says, those who distort & twist the scriptures to say what it doesn't say, do it TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION... it isn't making it TRUTH for them, they're simply WRONG and it carries a negative consequence with it.I agree. Many lives have been destroyed by misapplied bible verses, and I think that if we would dare ask more questions, perhaps people wouldn't have the power to destroy themselves and others with the bible.

Ok, WHO DO YOU ALLOW TO TEACH YOU ANYTHING? Is no one but yourself qualified?Anyone is qualified.

Are you the SOLE authority on God and all truth? Are you so far above all others in knowledge, relationship with God & spiritual matters that you cannot be taught by anyone?No, and that's exactly why I won't claim that I know the entire truth about anything, or accept that anybody else does.

It sounds to me like you're removing all means of learning and being corrected by anyone in anything spiritual as if you alone decide all truth regarding God.Quite the opposite.

I read the bible as it is - literally (where it's obviously literal or figurative or narrative, etc.).
I also claim there are some [minor] doctrines that I'm not positive about yet until I study further... I may never know. Paul even says we won't grasp ALL things right now.
But we CAN know many things that are plainly revealed.

I accept the general bible: Genesis to Revelation. I don't accept Gnostic gospels (for many reasons incl. heresy and time of writing) or the Maccabees|Apochrypha, some reasons: earlier Jewish & Christian fathers rejected them due to historic inaccuracies & moral incongruities.
The Reformers rejected some due to heretical teachings (ie. praying to the dead) etc.That's cool, but when push comes to shove, don't you have to admit that the way you view the bible boils down to a matter of faith? That's not a bad thing, it's good. But don't forget that it IS a matter of faith. If it was only about fact and logics, everybody would surely accept the bible.

Nadiine

12th November 2006, 01:38 PM

holo:
Yes, I believe so. Sure, God has been known to shake people up if need be, and I've experienced that myself. But God has never ever in any way condemned me, not even when I was condemning myself. God's purpose is never to make anyone feel bad. However, it does seem he allows people to hit the wall, for example when we try to make it on our own and save ourselves. He's not a dictator, and the world may hurt us, but the Lord only loves us.

You had said God is always "gentle"... "never brings you down". I think it falls into the defintion of what Godly LOVE is. Our human defintion of love isn't the same as the Biblical God's definition in most cases.
He wasn't "gentle" with Job OR Annanias & Saphira. God also caused Israel to go into captivity and be overtaken by their enemies several times due to their rebellion.
(and I also don't claim that it makes God "bad" not to be gentle when He sees fit for His purposes which are always meant for the greater good, or for purposes of discipline/punishment).

Job underwent a terribly hard test (losing all his children, all his material goods and had boils for starters), and Annanias & Saphira were struck DEAD on the spot for lying about their offerings to God.
If anyone ever "felt down", it was Job.

If that's "gentle", then perhaps you and I have different defintions of the word?
In context of your earlier issues with "God doesn't 'bring me down", or is always "gentle", I'd say there's a conflict somewhere?

(have to finish the rest later,) :)

holo

12th November 2006, 03:44 PM

holo:

You had said God is always "gentle"... "never brings you down". I think it falls into the defintion of what Godly LOVE is. Our human defintion of love isn't the same as the Biblical God's definition in most cases.
He wasn't "gentle" with Job OR Annanias & Saphira. God also caused Israel to go into captivity and be overtaken by their enemies several times due to their rebellion.God was gentle, but sometimes people had to suffer the consequences of their actions. God won't strike me down for being wrong about something. Those who tried to fool the Holy Spirit were probably in a situation quite unlike anything I'll ever be.

Also, I wouldn't define it too much from the OT, before Christ came and the punishment was laid on him. God has always been gentle to me, but still, he has allowed me to make a mess of myself, and used that to teach me a lesson. It was never his will that I messed my life up though. God's will is good.

If that's "gentle", then perhaps you and I have different defintions of the word?Quite possible :)

In context of your earlier issues with "God doesn't 'bring me down", or is always "gentle", I'd say there's a conflict somewhere?Well, as I've mentioned, I don't see it like it's God who brings me down. The Lord has revealed plenty of shortcomings to me and areas where I've been mistaken or I've fooled myself etc. But, in a miraculous way, he does so without leaving me feeling condemned. It's a divine quality. Rather than feeling ashamed and guilty about it, I see how he's been even more gracious and patient to me than I realized - he bore over with my weaknesses, and I'm inspired to do better, to turn yet another part of my life over to him. God has never judged me, and I don't think he ever will.

Nadiine

12th November 2006, 04:40 PM

God was gentle, but sometimes people had to suffer the consequences of their actions. God won't strike me down for being wrong about something. Those who tried to fool the Holy Spirit were probably in a situation quite unlike anything I'll ever be.

Also, I wouldn't define it too much from the OT, before Christ came and the punishment was laid on him. God has always been gentle to me, but still, he has allowed me to make a mess of myself, and used that to teach me a lesson. It was never his will that I messed my life up though. God's will is good.

Quite possible :)

Well, as I've mentioned, I don't see it like it's God who brings me down. The Lord has revealed plenty of shortcomings to me and areas where I've been mistaken or I've fooled myself etc. But, in a miraculous way, he does so without leaving me feeling condemned. It's a divine quality. Rather than feeling ashamed and guilty about it, I see how he's been even more gracious and patient to me than I realized - he bore over with my weaknesses, and I'm inspired to do better, to turn yet another part of my life over to him. God has never judged me, and I don't think he ever will.

What I'm glad to see in your replies is that you aren't sticking to a rigid opinion - you do recognize (at least Biblically), that God operates in many ways; sometimes ways that aren't "gentle".

I agree with you, for the most part, God has dealt with me & my shortcomings very mercifully & gently too - when I've deserved some heavy chastening, He was gentle with me (except one time! LOL)..
and I end up 'condemning' myself for my issues too - I might be harder on myself than even God is? (I'll find that out when I meet Him face to face - GULP):o :(

But, even in that one instance where He stepped aside and let my sinful decision harm me, it was the strongest and most powerful lesson I ever learned which forever changed my walk with Him - "patting me on the wrist" wouldn't have produced much.

I admit that I find your posts confusing (somewhat contradictory in meanings - which could be just me not grasping your points fully, or you not explaining your points in fullness)... but I'm happy to see you weren't putting God in a 'box' and limiting His methods of reaching you, me or anyone else. We never know how He'll work in any given person/any given circumstance. :)

holo

12th November 2006, 05:24 PM

What I'm glad to see in your replies is that you aren't sticking to a rigid opinion - you do recognize (at least Biblically), that God operates in many ways; sometimes ways that aren't "gentle".Thank you. I try to be open-minded and open to change, but as soon as I butt heads with someone and it gets heated, we tend to stick to our views so rigidly. We get defensive, I guess. I try not to be :)

I end up 'condemning' myself for my issues too - I might be harder on myself than even God is?IMO that's a common christian activity, to condemn oneself. Being harder on yourself than God is. It sounds kinda holy, doesn't it, to talk about how unworthy you are etc. But in fact, it's saying the opposite of what God says. He has removed all your sin and all your guilt, from the moment you turn to him. So there's never any need to punish oneself for days or even seconds. That's the real freedom - it makes you so grateful and so less scared of God that you just want to focus on him all the time, and by looking at him we are "transformed into the same image".

I admit that I find your posts confusing (somewhat contradictory in meanings - which could be just me not grasping your points fully, or you not explaining your points in fullness)... but I'm happy to see you weren't putting God in a 'box' and limiting His methods of reaching you, me or anyone else. We never know how He'll work in any given person/any given circumstance. :)My posts can be confusing for all of the reasons you mention, actually. It happens that I write something too fast to realize I've forgotten an aspect of it, and there's always the risk of being misunderstood.

While I tend to wage war against what I perceive as legalism, I can't deny that God's grace is enough even for legalists - that He loves and is able to make use of even those whom I disagree with the most. It's humbling.

But then again, we don't have to be scared of debate and disagreement to begin with.

I think I forgot what we were agruing about... nevermind.

- DRA -

13th November 2006, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by - DRA -

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

The essence of this text is that "all Scripture" is "profitable" and results in a man/woman that is "competent" in their service to God. Thus, anything less than "all Scripture" would result in someone who is incompetent, right? That is the inference or implication. Therefore, my answer to your question is, "100%."

Saying that ALL of a group of things are "profitable" or "beneficial" or even "useful" for ANYTHING does *not* make ANY of them "necessary" or "important" or "required" for ANYTHING . Many things are beneficial but not required ( for whatever thing one is looking at them being beneficial or required ) .

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says,
KJV - 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
NKJV - 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
NASV - 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
NIV - 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Now, that we have five credible English translations before us to consider, let's ensure that we look at the big picture before jumping to any rash conclusions. The ESV indeed says that all Scripture is "profitable." However, it doesn't stop there. It tells us how it profits us. It makes us "competent, equipped for every good work" (ESV). Compare this to the four other translations listed. The point should be obvious. Scripture makes us competent ... perfect ... complete ... adequate ... thoroughly equipped for every good work. God's word gives all that we need to serve Him. Like it or not, that is what the passage says.

Why not continue reading in 2 Timothy? Note chapter 4 ... verse 2. See that part about "preaching the word?" Note how those react who don't want to hear "sound doctrine" (verse 3 - NKJV). Rather than listening to God's word, they secure teachers who will tell them what they want to hear. The result? They are turned aside from truth ... to fables (verse 4).

I suspect that those with "itching ears" have a different perspective of the Scriptures. :(

- DRA -

13th November 2006, 10:55 AM

I find myself much more uplifted by reading the bible. It brings verses to my mind when I need them, even if I don't recall reading them recently.

:amen:

RonnyRulz

14th November 2006, 05:36 PM

Spiritual Maturity & knowledge? Absolutely, they are necessary, important and required. Why?
It gives us direct instruction as to God's will and information about Him & His kingdom; it instructs us on HOW to mature in Christ and HOW to serve Him.

If this is true, your god is incapable of teaching without it. Your god's power isn't very powerful at all.
Omnipotent? Yea right, not even close. If your god, without a book, can't tell you his will and information about Him & His kingdom, or instruct you on HOW to mature and HOW to serve Him, he isn't powerful at all.

If what you say is true, you worship a powerless god.

My God, on the other hand, is different. He, by Himself, ALONE, without anything at all, can speak to you, give you His Will, His Teachings, His Maturity, and can and does tell you directly anything He desires, without any book, without any medium, without anything at all, even if stuck in a prison with nothing but a stone cold floor and rock walls, void of any objects besides bars and stone.

My God is a Powerful God, capable and able to do all things. He is also a Loving and Personal God, desiring to not just speak through a book alone, but also to speak through thousands of venues, and especially desiring to speak directly without any physical medium.

I can know God's Will, knowledge about God, How to mature, How to serve him, and everything else, while stuck alone in a 5'x5' metal box, with NOTHING with me. No clothes, no food, no objects, nothing at all, just me in a completely empty and void box. Why? Because my God is both omnipresent and my God is ALIVE, capable and desiring to be with me 1on1 without any physical medium. My God is a Living God, a Powerful God, a Real God. Not just a book.

pete223

14th November 2006, 08:22 PM

If this is true, your god is incapable of teaching without it. Your god's power isn't very powerful at all.
Omnipotent? Yea right, not even close. If your god, without a book, can't tell you his will and information about Him & His kingdom, or instruct you on HOW to mature and HOW to serve Him, he isn't powerful at all.

If what you say is true, you worship a powerless god.

My God, on the other hand, is different. He, by Himself, ALONE, without anything at all, can speak to you, give you His Will, His Teachings, His Maturity, and can and does tell you directly anything He desires, without any book, without any medium, without anything at all, even if stuck in a prison with nothing but a stone cold floor and rock walls, void of any objects besides bars and stone.

My God is a Powerful God, capable and able to do all things. He is also a Loving and Personal God, desiring to not just speak through a book alone, but also to speak through thousands of venues, and especially desiring to speak directly without any physical medium.

I can know God's Will, knowledge about God, How to mature, How to serve him, and everything else, while stuck alone in a 5'x5' metal box, with NOTHING with me. No clothes, no food, no objects, nothing at all, just me in a completely empty and void box. Why? Because my God is both omnipresent and my God is ALIVE, capable and desiring to be with me 1on1 without any physical medium. My God is a Living God, a Powerful God, a Real God. Not just a book.
agreed

New_Wineskin

14th November 2006, 08:30 PM

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
(NIV)

Yes , there are those that like to have their ears tickled and none more than those that maintain traditions that raise up paper and ink as a god and will add to that ink by making their book-god say what it doesn't .

The word is "useful" for teaching - not "required" .
The word is "useful" for rebuking - not "required" .
The word is "useful" for correcting - not "required" .
The word is "useful" for training in righteousness - not "required" .
The word is "useful" so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work - not "required" .

The passage does *not* say that the Scriptures are the ONLY things useful for those topics . The passage does *not* say that there are NO OTHER things useful for those topics . But , those who are not satisfied with their own god made of woodpulp and add to the passage say that the passage DOES say those things . The passage makes absolutely no statement that the Scriptures are exclusive to those topics . It uses the weak word "useful" and not the strong word "necessary" for a reason - the Law is indeed useful - but *not* necessary .

They would even take the passage :
2Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. (NIV)
They add to this passage saying that it is discussing the Scriptures . It isn't . They know that there is no context for it , either . Yet , they ignore the next statements after that and have allowed their itching ears to be satisfied by saying that it does .

New_Wineskin

14th November 2006, 08:32 PM