The Weight of Scripture

[PreachTony]

Note to the mods: If this thread is in the wrong forum, please move it to the appropriate one. Given the topic and tenor of this OP, the Bible Study forum seemed the best forum. God Bless.


In a more contentious thread, found here, I posed a question to a fellow BB member and never received a response. I'd like to open that question to the whole board, just to see what people think.

The situation in the other thread left me with a sense that the other BB member assigned greater weight and value to certain scriptures over others. So I asked this question:

Do the word of Jesus recorded in the Bible carry greater weight than the words of Paul (or any other author)? Remember, too, that, per the scriptures, we are told that all scripture is divine in inspiration and is profitable for man.

I'm genuinely curious what you guys think.

 

[kyredneck]

I 'genuinely' believe that the Pauline letters are by far more applicable to the Church than the gospels. I question if, in His capacity of The Prophet, Christ had anything to say directly to the Church.

 

[PreachTony]

I 'genuinely' believe that the Pauline letters are by far more applicable to the Church than the gospels. I question if, in His capacity of The Prophet, Christ had anything to say directly to the Church.

Applicability of scripture, I've always felt, seemed contingent on a person's willingness to allow for spiritualization of the scripture.

I guess the bigger driver behind my original question was that the other poster was basically stating that (and this is from my inference) the words of Jesus essentially overrode the words of the apostles.

 

[kyredneck]

Applicability of scripture, I've always felt, seemed contingent on a person's willingness to allow for spiritualization of the scripture.

:thumbs: That is a profound truth!:

“'Tis ordinarily said, that the Jews were a typical people, the whole divine economy toward them is doctrinal and instructive to us, not immediately or literally, but by way of Anagogy” - Henry Hammond

Anagoge: 1. An elevation of mind to things celestial. 2. The spiritual meaning or application; esp. the application of the types and allegories of the Old Testament to subjects of the New.

However, we must first abide by this:

1. The Scriptures are to be taken in the sense attached to them in the age and by the people to whom they were addressed. - Charles Hodge

(BTW, this is Hodge's first rule of interpretation, not his only rule.)

I guess the bigger driver behind my original question was that the other poster was basically stating that (and this is from my inference) the words of Jesus essentially overrode the words of the apostles.

As far as the scriptures are concerned, it's ALL the 'words of Jesus'.

 

[plain_n_simple]

I 'genuinely' believe that the Pauline letters are by far more applicable to the Church than the gospels. I question if, in His capacity of The Prophet, Christ had anything to say directly to the Church.

He is the Head, the church is His Body

He is the Bridegroom, the church is the Bride

I think He has plenty to say

 

[kyredneck]

As 'The Prophet', He came 'in a special way' to Israel:

...I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mt 15:24

22 Moses indeed said, A prophet shall the Lord God raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me. To him shall ye hearken in all things whatsoever he shall speak unto you.
23 And it shall be, that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the people. Acts 3

 

[PreachTony]

As 'The Prophet', He came 'in a special way' to Israel:

...I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mt 15:24

22 Moses indeed said, A prophet shall the Lord God raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me. To him shall ye hearken in all things whatsoever he shall speak unto you.
23 And it shall be, that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the people. Acts 3

True, to the scripture, but consider also that Jesus came as not only as a Prophet, but as Messiah to redeem. Depending on your interpretation and application, the Bible states that there was a pre-determined time for the chosen people to basically be the only ones hearing the Word. Then, over the course of a short period of time after the Resurrection, the Word was directed to the Gentiles as well.

That being said, I agree that the Word should all be considered Jesus. After all, as John wrote, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." I've always tried to consider the scriptures of equal weight, as the Spirit gave directive in the writing, therefore it is the Word of God penned down by men divinely inspired of God. Regardless the mess we make trying to interpret it, the Word remains the Holy writ of the Lord.

 

[convicted1]

Genesis 1:1 carries as much weight as Exodus 20:18, Mark 12:6, Revelation 6:3, &c...just throwing out verses, and not with any motive involved at all....

All scripture is God-breathed, as holy men of God wrote as they were moved by Him as they penned them...

 

[convicted1]

Jesus stated, "Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye may have eternal life. And they are they which testify of Me."

Now, what scriptures were He referring to? The OT, seeing the NT hadn't been penned yet...

ALL scripture is proffitable for correction, for doctrine, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness. This also includes the OT...

John was given the Word to eat, and he had to eat it all, just as do we...

I uphold the DoG, but I don't know everything about the bible. If someone asks me a question I don't know, I tell them accordingly. I don't know everything about the bible, but I know it's the truth...

 

[kyredneck]

.... the Bible states that there was a pre-determined time for the chosen people to basically be the only ones hearing the Word. Then, over the course of a short period of time after the Resurrection, the Word was directed to the Gentiles as well....

True, the gospel was to the 'Jew first', but that's not what I'm talking about. Christ's words as 'The Prophet' warning Israel of the wrath soon to come upon 'that generation' has immediate application only to, well, 'that generation'. And, a whooooole lot of what He said is concerning the consequences soon to come upon 'that generation'.

 

[blessedwife318]

All Scripture is God Breathed and it all has the weight and importance. That means Leviticus is just as important as Romans or even the Red Letters in the Gospels. When we give more weight to one area of Scripture over another we end up missing something that God is revealing about Himself. As Pauls says about the OT it was given for an example for us (1 Cor 10:11).

 

[OldRegular]

I 'genuinely' believe that the Pauline letters are by far more applicable to the Church than the gospels. I question if, in His capacity of The Prophet, Christ had anything to say directly to the Church.

Sounds like a dispensationalist to me!

 

[PreachTony]

True, the gospel was to the 'Jew first', but that's not what I'm talking about. Christ's words as 'The Prophet' warning Israel of the wrath soon to come upon 'that generation' has immediate application only to, well, 'that generation'. And, a whooooole lot of what He said is concerning the consequences soon to come upon 'that generation'.

That view seems to carry an implicit requirement of preterism, though maybe not full preterism. While I have no doubt that some of the things Christ said were specific to those hearing Him at that very moment, it does not mean they are less important today. There are still great lessons to be learned and applied in our own lives from words spoken 2000 years ago.

This rationale is partly why I hold to a slightly more eclectic reading of the scripture than most. Some people I've dealt with hold that certain verse only apply to a certain group at a certain time. To me, that makes these passages of scripture extraneous to us in the present. Spiritually, I feel there is still much to glean from scriptures that have already been fulfilled.

As an example, the Biblical account of Josiah, Hilkiah the priest, and the finding of the book of the law in 2 Chronicles 34. I have always viewed that as an account that, while definitely being historical, serves as a sort of type and shadow to us about how to use the finding of the law and, as the law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Jesus Christ to aid us in cleaning up the sin and refuse we allow to accumulate in our lives. I know not everyone will agree with that, but the wonderful thing is that you don't have to agree with me, and I'd like to believe that we all know we won't agree on everything.

Does that make sense?

 

[Revmitchell]

Sounds like a dispensationalist to me!

OH no! Everyone run for the hills the big bad dispy monster is attacking! Run I say run!

 

[kyredneck]

That view seems to carry an implicit requirement of preterism, though maybe not full preterism. While I have no doubt that some of the things Christ said were specific to those hearing Him at that very moment, it does not mean they are less important today. There are still great lessons to be learned and applied in our own lives from words spoken 2000 years ago.

This rationale is partly why I hold to a slightly more eclectic reading of the scripture than most. Some people I've dealt with hold that certain verse only apply to a certain group at a certain time. To me, that makes these passages of scripture extraneous to us in the present. Spiritually, I feel there is still much to glean from scriptures that have already been fulfilled.

As an example, the Biblical account of Josiah, Hilkiah the priest, and the finding of the book of the law in 2 Chronicles 34. I have always viewed that as an account that, while definitely being historical, serves as a sort of type and shadow to us about how to use the finding of the law and, as the law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, Jesus Christ to aid us in cleaning up the sin and refuse we allow to accumulate in our lives. I know not everyone will agree with that, but the wonderful thing is that you don't have to agree with me, and I'd like to believe that we all know we won't agree on everything.

Does that make sense?

Never mind.

 

[OldRegular]

Note to the mods: If this thread is in the wrong forum, please move it to the appropriate one. Given the topic and tenor of this OP, the Bible Study forum seemed the best forum. God Bless.


In a more contentious thread, found here, I posed a question to a fellow BB member and never received a response. I'd like to open that question to the whole board, just to see what people think.

The situation in the other thread left me with a sense that the other BB member assigned greater weight and value to certain scriptures over others. So I asked this question:

Do the word of Jesus recorded in the Bible carry greater weight than the words of Paul (or any other author)? Remember, too, that, per the scriptures, we are told that all scripture is divine in inspiration and is profitable for man.

I'm genuinely curious what you guys think.

I believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture. Therefore, all Scripture is important and is the inerrant word of God. The Apostle Paul tells us that:

2 Timothy 3:16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

That being said some Scripture is much more relevant than other. Certainly the New Testament is more relevant to the Christian than the Book of Leviticus.

The first three Chapters of Genesis may be the most important in all the Bible for if God did not Create, if Adam and Eve did not rebel against God, then why did Jesus Christ die on the Cross.

I would also note, because I believe it, that the fulfillment of prophecy is one of the greatest proofs that the Bible is the Word of God and that Jesus Christ provides the only access to God and Eternal Life. Therefore all Scripture is important!

Every other religion in the world is the invention of mankind and is false!

 

[PreachTony]

Never mind.

If I've offended you, then I apologize, as it was not my intent. I was merely sharing my point of view. I was quite enjoying the conversation we were having.

 

[kyredneck]

Sounds like a dispensationalist to me!

Sheesh OR, you might as well accuse me of being a revenuer snitch...

The relevance of 'audience relevance' is something many totally ignore when approaching scripture. One should be very careful before deriving Church doctrine from the gospels.

 

[convicted1]

OH no! Everyone run for the hills the big bad dispy monster is attacking! Run I say run!

What he said. :smilewinkgrin: :wavey: :saint: :flower:

 

[OldRegular]

OH no! Everyone run for the hills the big bad dispy monster is attacking! Run I say run!

It is a little shocking to hear the Redneck say:

I 'genuinely' believe that the Pauline letters are by far more applicable to the Church than the gospels. I question if, in His capacity of The Prophet, Christ had anything to say directly to the Church.

Jesus Christ came to establish the Church in its New Testament form. Everything He said is said to and for the Church. Sadly some don't understand that to their own loss!