Kansasdad Posted April 19, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,227 Content Per Day: 0.18 Reputation: 6 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/10/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/19/1964 Share Posted April 19, 2007 "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter". (2 Thessalonians 2:15) Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith...Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. (Hebrews 13:7,17) You ask a great question. The answer is that the 66 books of the Bible we now have are suffiecent but was not available yet when Paul said this. The traditions that he was talking about came by spoken word or letter. It is the letters they wrote that we now consider scripture. The word of God is enough and should be veiwed as such. Everything we hear from preachers, teachers and so on should always line up with scripture. If a tradition that has been handed down through the years does not line up with scripture, it should be counted as trash. Grace be to you , GYPC I cannot say for sure, that every thing spoken by the apostles were recorded in the bible...Just as the Gospel writers admitted that not all miracles performed by Jesus was recorded in the Gospels(which was practically not posible according to them)..So cant there be an instance where-in some of those were handed down to the early chuch leaders maybe as tradions or church constitutions? Even Paul would be pleasantly surprised by now, that most of his letters are now recorded as scriptures...But somehow, Im not convinced that those were the only ones he ever wrote or said....I guess, you see my point! Oh yes.....absolutly but whatever it is that is handed down,....... it cannot go agaisnt scripture. I don't think anyone has a problem with the idea that Apostolic teaching not written down, but given to us by word, would never contradict written scripture. If these oral teachings are protected by the Holy Spirit like the Bible says they are, then they obviously would not contradict the written. I think of much greater value is that they clarify the written. What I find amazing is that when there is a question on interpretation of scripture many people will not even consider what the oral teaching of the apostles have to say about it. If we have written scripture and two possible interpretations , and one interpretation is supported by apostolic oral teaching and one is not, which one should we follow? God Bless, K.D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exrockstar Posted April 19, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 34 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,673 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 111 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/21/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted April 19, 2007 x i have a personal question for you. Have you ever read the bible? or better yet: have you ever read the entire New Testament? yes or no? ... 3xR0c|<stAr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaritateDei Posted April 19, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 400 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted April 19, 2007 x i have a personal question for you. Have you ever read the bible? or better yet: have you ever read the entire New Testament? yes or no? ... 3xR0c|<stAr Yes I have, pal. Many times. Have you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Openly Curious Posted April 19, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 55 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,568 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 770 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/18/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted April 19, 2007 I have been amongst those who side with the doctrine of Sola Scriptura(Scriptures alone)...But then, I dont know much when it comes to the doctrine of Sola Dei Verbum (Only the Word of God) How do we, as Christians view the 2 doctrines? Were the scriptures truly self-suffiecent? In that case, what do we really mean by apostolic traditions , that Paul talks about in 2 Thessalonians "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter". (2 Thessalonians 2:15) Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith...Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. (Hebrews 13:7,17) How do we view the above verses? What do we mean by the "spoken Word of God"? Has anyone recorded them down? or passed on to church leaders by the early church fathers? I wish to get some clarity regarding these! God Bless! It simply means that the things that Jesus taught the disciples when He was on this earth is the things that has been also handed down to us as saints of God. As the apostles in the New Testament instructed further in those things. And faithful leaders and followers after them will take on the task of teaching the word they got and recieved to others making further disciples even today. It says in the book of Ephesians that we are built upon the prophets and apostles--meaning the things that the old testament prophets foretold and predicted to us and the new testament apostles and the new testament prophet being John the Revelator. As Jesus still has a future role in this earth to fulfill. But the word of God has been entrusted to those who would stand faithfully and bodly and proclaim the word of God being the bible for that is the spoken word of God that the scripture your referred to was speaking about and that word alone. OC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Well, kansasdad, that was excellent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gypc Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 24 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 972 Content Per Day: 0.13 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/15/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/07/1964 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Wow!! This thread really got off subject!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metropolitan Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 84 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/09/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/17/1975 Author Share Posted April 20, 2007 I dont know much about the history of the acceptance and selection of the New Testament..who selected the books or how were they selected to be passed of as scriptures...I dont know if all the 27 books conformed to the 'canons', what i do know is the there were no disputes on 20 out of 27 books which included the 4 gospels and most of Pauls Epistles...I dont know how a particular letter or writing is accepted as a canonical writing, and which is not. I have some more queries(i seem to have many of them) 1) What are scriptures? ( please dont come heavily on me, as that is a honest question) 2) Jesus spoke aramaic largely, as that was the prevalent language at that time...Jesus never really wrote anything except for those few words he scriblled on the ground...None of his disciples knew Greek, and hence I believe that Jesus's discourses or teaching for them were very much in spoken Aramaic..Out of the 4 gospels, 2 were written by apostles, and the other 2 by their friends...If the new testament were written in Greek, then who interpreted for them? That means the original manuscripts shud have been in aramaic itslef(we dont anything about them) The first person to list the twenty-seven books now canonized into the New Testament was Athanasius (c. 293-373), a bishop of Alexandria. And it was not until the fifth century that disputes about what books compose the canon generally ceased. Thus it would appear that the New Testament canonization took place after the historical redemptive events and therefore should be judged as a matter of church history, not a part of the events. How do we know for sure, then that there werent any more epistles in letters which may have been lost out in the canonisation... If we can accept the letters(which again was spoken by one, and written by another), cant we for a moment think that there wud have been some other instructions which were part of the spoken word of the apostles not recorded or accpeted by the council of Athanisius?! Im pretty much a sola scriptura person(without knowing what the scriptures are), but I dont mind debating about them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricH Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 366 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 10,933 Content Per Day: 1.57 Reputation: 212 Days Won: 1 Joined: 04/21/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted April 20, 2007 I am going to aks that we stick to the original intent of the OP. That is discuss the sufficienty of the sciptures. If you want to discuss the relationship between faith and works, please start a new thread. Thanks, the mod team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metropolitan Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 84 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/09/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/17/1975 Author Share Posted April 20, 2007 Im still waiting for some thought-provoking scriptural responses! Atleast someone will start by telling me what exactly are sciptures? Im not a seminary student, and I have been largely doing the self study on my own! Its been a privilege for me to interact with such learned, well informed and blessed saints here in this forum! My word-study and walk with the Lord has been enriched ever since I have joined in! Thanks and God Bless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted April 20, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Simply put, the Scriptures are the prophecy of God. It concerns His plan of love and redemption for mankind, and His provision for a Saviour to reconcile us to Him, and how we can achieve right relationship with Him, and be His hands, feet and voice to this dark place, bringing the lost to Him through the power of the Holy Spirit which is taught in those very Scriptures. John 5:39 "You search the Scriptures because you think they give you eternal life. But the Scriptures point to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts