The Weight of Scripture

[PreachTony]

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.

I've added emphasis to your post, OR, because it fits well with my original intent with this thread. In the other thread linked in the OP, I was involved in a discussion with someone who seemed to hold that the recorded spoken words of Christ carried more weight, and therefore could override or flat-out negate earlier or later writings. Since that BB member never would answer the question, I kicked it over here.

To me, there is a difference between relevance to the audience and actual weight of the passage. The genealogies in Genesis, Chronicles, etc don't really carry as much spiritual weight as the deepest prophecies of Daniel, Ezekiel, or John. To a modern audience, these genealogies are nothing more than history, and therefore viewed as less relevant. They are, however, equally divinely inspired. All scripture is relevant to us in some form, as it is profitable for us. Even though we might struggle to see the profitability in the more historical aspects of the scripture.

 

[kyredneck]

It is a little shocking to hear the Redneck say...

It is a little shocking to see your lack of comprehension of the statement.

 

[convicted1]

It is a little shocking to hear the Redneck say:

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!

Matthew 18 readily comes to mind...

 

[Revmitchell]

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.

When it comes to talking about the word of God you and I almost always agree. On this I disagree. The reason is that I believe all books are just as relevant as any other. They may not be relevant in the same way but they are all equally relevant.

 

[convicted1]

It is a little shocking to see your lack of comprehension of the statement.

Well, seeing one is from Virginny, and t'other is a 'stiller' from bloody Breathitt, I can understand both of your confusions.....


Running....

 

[OldRegular]

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

Sorry i squealed brother but Scripture does say something about every idle word? I just thought that was the reason you had to flee Bloody Breathitt!

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.

When Jesus Christ said the following:

John 17:3-5
3. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

And part of that finished work was the Church in its New Testament form!

 

[OldRegular]

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

There have always been Gentile believers! Scripture tells us there were believers before there was an Israel!

 

[OldRegular]

It is a little shocking to see your lack of comprehension of the statement.

I lean toward literal interpretation unless the context indicates otherwise! That is the reason i was Shocked, I say Shocked. Shaken might be more appropriate, to my cold bare feet I might add!

 

[kyredneck]

Prophet, Priest, and King.

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

 

[kyredneck]

Just as with every other prophet before Him, His audience was Israel.

What is the audience of the Pauline epistles?

 

[Revmitchell]

The Epistle to the Corinthians was to the church in Corinth. Does that means that what Paul wrote only applies to that singular church? I do not think anyone would suggest that. In the same way we should not apply the gospels to only the Jews. The gospels are as much for the church as the Epistles.


Understanding the audience serves to help us interpret scripture but application is made from all of scripture.


2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[OldRegular]

Just as with every other prophet before Him, His audience was Israel.

Not necessarily! What about Jonah?

What is the audience of the Pauline epistles?

Without the Gospels there would have been no Churches for Paul to write to. Neither would Peter, James, or John have had anyone to write to or about. Jesus Christ instituted the New Covenant in the Gospels. God through the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Hebrews demonstrates, masterfully of course, the superiority of the New Covenant and the priesthood of Jesus Christ over the Levitical priesthood. The Gospels show that much of the ministry of Jesus Christ was spent rebuking the Jews!

"O thou who art a refugee from Bloody Breathitt" I know full well you have not been seduced by the brotherhood of dispensationalism, I just believe you are wrong about the Gospels

 

[kyredneck]

Egad OR. Never mind.

 

[percho]

When it comes to talking about the word of God you and I almost always agree. On this I disagree. The reason is that I believe all books are just as relevant as any other. They may not be relevant in the same way but they are all equally relevant.

I agree with you. I also do not believe there are any rabbit trails. One thing leads to another and no OP is independent of itself.

Paul tells when he is speaking for himself rather tht something the Lord as told him to speak.

 

[Revmitchell]

Paul tells when he is speaking for himself rather tht something the Lord as told him to speak.

The difference between the two is not whether it is inspired when he says that but that it whether it is direct revelation or not. All of it is inspired.

 

[kyredneck]

....2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

...four times now on this thread that this passage has been quoted or referenced and I guarantee you there's no one on this board that believes that any more than I do.

 

[JamesL]

Egad OR. Never mind.

fwiw, I agree with you - with a minor tweak.

Some of what Jesus spoke in the gospels was exclusively applied to the apostles. Such as when He told them that the Spirit would guide them into all truth.

Also, John 17:12 when He prayed "of all you have given Me, I lost none" He was specifically speaking of the apostles.

Others examples too

 

[Revmitchell]

...four times now on this thread that this passage has been quoted or referenced and I guarantee you there's no one on this board that believes that any more than I do.

I do not have any doubts about that. I believe you are sold out on scripture and I believe you would most likely be willing to die defending its truths.


It appears, and I could be wrong, that you think some scripture has more weight for the church than other scripture.

All I am saying is that all scripture has equal weight and relevance today. How it is applied is another matter.

 

[kyredneck]

I do not have any doubts about that. I believe you are sold out on scripture and I believe you would most likely be willing to die defending its truths.


It appears, and I could be wrong, that you think some scripture has more weight for the church than other scripture.

All I am saying is that all scripture has equal weight and relevance today. How it is applied is another matter.

Thank you. Once again my original statement:

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.

 

[JamesL]

All I am saying is that all scripture has equal weight and relevance today. How it is applied is another matter.

I'm curious what you mean by relevance, and what do you mean by weight?

Are those meant to be synonyms for profitable, useful, etc?

Or does weight imply binding prescripts?

What do you mean by application, and how do you contrast it against weight and relevance?


Can you speak with less ambiguity, and leave less to interpret?