"Biblical Authority"

W Putnam:

The proofs of inspiration and confirmation are for all to see. Just because you do not like it does not mean it is not true. The evidence for inspiration has been provided. It was contained in the record of that whcih is written. John 20:30,31. It stands irrefutable to this day. The physical penmen of the Bible did not claim their writings were the work of their mind. Not one. Were they liars? IF YES, PROVE IT!
The Bible is the completely, unique and harmonious book of it's kind. It is the complete will of God. It contains no mistakes of geography, history, facts of science and all it's spiritual truths are in perfect accordance one with another. It contains no contradictions. II Tim. 3:16,17, Rev. 22;18,19 Jude 3. If not, then why not?

If the Bible is not all we need, then please answer this questions: What spiritual need of man is not addressed by the complete will of Jesus Christ as found in the New Testament?

Can one be completed unto all good works by that which is not complete? If yes, then how?

What credentials do the so called successsors of the apostles have today as per II Cor. 12:12, Mark 16;17-20, Mat. 10:1, Acts 20:10- 12. if you say they have changed,who changed them? And, by whose authority?

 

Dhk:
The meeting place is an expedient whether it be a porch, a house, a jail. Who said one had to meet in a church building? And, who made up that term? I do not use it. I do not worship at a church building. The new testament authorizes christians to assemble in any lawful place. I.E. House, Temple, Jail etc. see previous post.
The Bible does not authorize us to play mechanical instruments. Col. 3:16, Eph. 5;19. You are at least consistent in your errors.

 

W Putnam:
The scrioptures were around along time before any body COLLECTED THEM. God had already authenticated them. He did so by miraculous power. Irrefutable manifestationos of the Spirit. Mark 16;17-20, Mat. 10:8 etc.
Furthermore, these inspired docouments were delivered to the various congregations of the church. I Thes. 5;27, Col. 4:16. Therefore, men had all the evidence for the scriptures they needed. They were eyewitnesses to it!! see II Pet.1;16,17. They demonstrated it. Acts 20:10,11. it was established by two or three witnesses. II Cor. 11:1,2.

Your councils came a little to late my friend. and, by the way who authorized them? Your point about the unbiblical term trinity is another case in point for a little too late. God has already revealed the truth about the three that bear record in heaven. I John 5:7, Genesis 1;1,2,27, John 1:1,14;10;30, Mat. 3:16,17. JUST BECAUSE MEN REJECT TRUTH ABOUT THE SUBJECT DOES NOT CHANGE IT! JOHN 12:48. Who is to say one man is not right or wrong over the next man or council.

The answer is simple The Word of God.

Men must accept the truth as it is. In Luke 10;25, the Bible says,  ¶And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26  He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27  And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28  And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. This man using the good mind God gave him GOT IT RIGHT. He interpreted the scriptures correctly. This is the responsibiltiy of the individual, not a magisterium. This concept of an interpretive body such as magisteriums is unbiblical.

I follow the new testament of Christ because of The irrefutable internal evidence of the book. The historical accuracy of it. The verifiable and harmonious testimony of the eyewitnesses. The documented and irrefutable miraculous proofs contained in the book.

On the other hand, I reject all councils of men who simply cannot meet the standard of divine inspiration that confirmed the word of God. This includes the magisterium, the synods, conventions, and high councils.

So, M. Putnam, you can follow the traditons of men if you wish. I will take the complete and all-sufficient word of God. II Tim. 3:16,17. Excuse my logic but those others just do not measure up to the Word of God. John 17:17. What is new is not true and what is true is not new!

 

I saw your previous posts Frank. I also looked at the Scriptures relevant to both meeting places and musical instruments. I know what the Scriptures has to say on both subjects.
Let me ask you directly again. Where does your church assemble. What kind of building do you gather in? Is it a building built especially for the gathering of Christians, or is it a building that is built with some other purpose in mind. If so what? What kind of place do you meet in?
DHK

 

Bill,
I checked out your web-site. it's quite informative. I have a comment for you concerning a statement about Sola Scriptura that you made.

That may or may not be the definition of sola scriptura. I don't think it is quite correct. I do know this, that we as Baptists, don't believe in sola scriptura as the only authority, but rather the final autority in all matters of faith and practice. To say that it is our only authority would be to preclude the use of dictionaries, enculopedias, historical sources, other reference books, etc. It is our "final" authority in all matters of faith and practice, but it is not the only authority that we use.
I hope that makes things more clear, at least from my point of view.
DHK

 

Dhk:
The place we meet is in a building. It was built a number of years ago. I do not know who built it, as that fact is irrrelevant to the truth of God's word. I have never asked nor do I care who built it. Again, the building, house, temple, jail, or oak tree one meets in or under has absolutely nothing to do with the truth of God's word in so much that it is a command of God to meet in or under one. Again, read Romans 16:3-5, Acts 16:25; 5:12-14; 2:46; 17:1-3.

Lydia was worshipping God at a body of water. Acts 16:12,13, Paul preached to her here. If this was unlawful to meet, preach and pray at this river, Paul would have corrected this situation. After all, Paul proclaimed the whole or all the counsel of God. Acts 20:27.

I co-directed a Bible camp last week and we met in an old house, a barn, and a cafeteria to worship God. According to the NEW TESTAMENT OF CHRIST, these are lawful places to meet. Just as lights are lawful to use in order to read scripture, or a pulpit, table, or cabnet to place one's Bible on to read. These things, like a building are lawful expedients ( they do not violate the commands) to exercise the commands of God. Paul calls them EXPEDIENTS.


The Bible says in I Cor. 6:12,¶All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

I say this kindly, but your contention is absurd and without one shred of Biblical support. The same can be said for using mechanical instruments. It is a practice without the support of scripture. The same can be said for assembling for the purpose of giving on Monday- Saturday it is without divine sanction.

You can name call and try to rationalize error, but God's word on these matters will read the same today, tomorrow, and until this world is no more. You have the simple choice of accepting the new testament as authority or rejecting it. God does give us that right. John 12:48, Joshua 24;15. I stand with the new testament of Christ.

 

Jarlaxle:

The Bible is a perfect book in the sense the original language used by God to man was perfect. However, since most people do not speak hewbrew or greek, they must depend on translations of the word into their mother tongue. The translating proces is a human enterprise, not a divine one. However, that still does not disprove my positon as I will now answer your alleged discrepencies.

1. Roman time and Jewish time were different. The Roman day began at 12:00 midnight like our day does presently. The Jewish day began at 6:00 p.m.
The audiences to which Mark and Joh were speaking were diferent. One was jewish and the other roman.

John has Pilate handing Jesus over for crucifixion at 6 a.m., and Mark has Jesus on the cross three hours later at 9 a.m. (i.e., “the third hour”). In fact, John begins his whole account of Jesus’ audience with Pilate by noting that it was “early morning” (18:28). This reference follows immediately after Peter and the rooster crowing incident. Roosters, of course, can crow at any time, but are most famous for signaling the beginning of a new day.
This is perfectly consistent with Mark’s account. The previous evening, Jesus and the disciples traveled from the upper room to the Mount of Olives and then to Gethsemane. The disciples fell asleep, and Jesus had to wake them in order to meet the arresting mob. Mark records the rooster crowing incident, and notes that the Jews delivered Jesus to Pilate “in the morning” (15:1).

Secondly, the stalls question may be answered a number of ways. First, if one uses the Septuagint the passage in Kings is not in the text. Therefore, no alleged problem exists.
Secondly, a scribal error in recording the number is possible.
Thirdly, examinig the totalityof the evidence answers the alleged difficulty.

One can reconcile the number of four thousand by the related information in the text. Of course if you use the Septuagint, you are not even aware of the scribal transmission mistake.

There are some 18-20 numbering situations in the text of scripture which can be reconciled by examining the totality of evidence on the subjects.

 

<Sigh!> Well. I tried! And no, I am open to any and all "proof of inspiration and confirmation," and precious little is seen in scripture!

You sound as if you think I do not consider the Bible as inspired. Please believe me, I do, but I do so from the pronouncement of an authority that preceded the New Testament, the New Covenant for Christianity today.

Finally, I do not consider any of the scribes who wrote the bible as liars. If I were to take scripture as divinely inspired, which I do, how could they be liars.

so, on this count, we are brothers in Christ, Frank!

While I believe that scriptures is divinely inspired, I do not believe it is as "completely unique and harmonious" as you say. If it were so, why are there a confusing multitude of Christian denominations who each interpret scriputre their own way? If scripture was perfectly easy to read and understand, why is there not only one Christian church?

And the correct answer is.........THE CHURCH!
It is only through the central authority of the Church that we can have unity in the faith, doctrines and morals. That Church came before the New Testament, the active "New Covenant" as it was to be eventually written down, through the providence of God.

But a more complete answer is: Both the Church AND scripture, together, in a symbiotic relationship.

No, if you separate works from faith that must precede. Yes, if Faith plus the good works that Christ tells us to do, and then one can be "complete."

The same credentials Christ gave the apostles, the power to "bind and loose" per Matthew 18:18 (which came after Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter and declared He was to build His church upon him, then giving him the "keys of the kingdom," the perfect metaphor for "authority" the Jews understood per Isaiah 22:22, and of course, the power to forgive the sins of man per John 20:22-23 and also the power of the "laying on of hands" in ordination, that the spostolic mission can be passed-on to the successors down through the last 2000 years of the Church.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

Not riches, but God.
Not honors, but God.
Not distinction, but God.
Not dignities, but God.
Not advancement, but God.
God always and in everything.

- St. Vincent Pallotti -

 

That may or may not be the definition of sola scriptura. I don't think it is quite correct. I do know this, that we as Baptists, don't believe in sola scriptura as the only authority, but rather the final autority in all matters of faith and practice. To say that it is our only authority would be to preclude the use of dictionaries, enculopedias, historical sources, other reference books, etc. It is our "final" authority in all matters of faith and practice, but it is not the only authority that we use.
I hope that makes things more clear, at least from my point of view.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I have always had the problem of defining Sola Scriptura that satisfies everyone. The best I could come down to is, "The bible is the sole source of authority for faith, doctrine and morals." (I amy have said it a bit differently in my web site.)

Included in that definition, I often see others claim that the Bible is also "Self Interpreting." I think I idea falls flat on it's face by simple observation: The plethora of a multitude of babbling voices, all preaching a separate gospel, based upon their interpretation of scriptures.

Finally, that was written with a bit ot "tongue in cheek." I hope you enjoyed reading it.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Regina Angelorum, ora pro nobis!

 

The Old Testament? Of course!

The New Testament? Yes, they were around and extant, within a sea of other competing writings that others clamored to be included in a new book called the New Testament.

So to "collect them," they to already exist, right? But to separate the "wheat from the chaf" in the contempory writings of the times was the job of the Church, the only authority around who could do such a task.

Acting as a "devil's advocate" here, how do you know that, Frank? Did the Dove of the holy Spirit alight upon your shoulders and give you a private revelation, whispering into your ears that fact you state?

We BOTH believe God already authenticated, the providence of God being active. But I believe it from other reasons, the holy Spirit acting through Christ's church to so bring the New Testament forth, along with the Old Testament, of course...

Yes, one church may have a copy of a copy of a copy of the Gospel of Matthew, while another had the "Gospel of Thomas" (Part of that long list I gave in a previous post) while another had what Luke wrote.

I am glad you said "church" here, obviously local and regional churches who were a part of THE CHURCH that Christ established. And it was that Church who brought all of those inspired texts together in one book called the New Testament.

Actually, they were local synods, convened by local or regional bishops who have that authority, but their findings had the approval of guess who, Frank? The Bishop of Rome! And there, my friend, where the authority came from!

You and I are in perfect agreement here, Frank, because of course, God does everything through the very Church His Divine Son established! Also, if it is "too late," why then the convening of these synods if there were not a dispute as to the canon of scripture? The answer is, they were convened to settle it - and the New Testament canon was formed!

Which records the very human institution, members being as fallible as all of us, into an institution that was promised by
Christ that "...the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Check out Matthew 16:18-19 and rejoice in the awesome power and authority, Jesus gives to His church through the "keys of the kingdom" and the power to "bind and loose."

The individual can discern the truth of all things Christian, on his own, all by himself in the corner of his bedroom? Frank, even Christian denominations, sects and creeds cannot do it! Else why the diversity in utter confusion that we see? Why are they not in total union in one Church?

A stand I have totally and completely refuted! But I am not glib of tongue enough to convince you otherwise, and actually, I should not attempt to do that anyway, come holy Spirit.

I have already noticed that you reject the very Church Christ established with the authority you reject!

I will continue to follow the very Church established and upon which He gave awesome authority! That also includes the scripture as well, in synbotic relationship with the teaching magisterium of the Church, the same Church Christ founded, the only Church who can trace her history back to Christ Himself!

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


"Gloria in excelsis Deo"

(Intoned by the celebrant of the Mass.)

(The choir response.)

Et in terra pax homininus
bone voluntatis
Laudamus te
Benedicimus te
Adoramus te
Glorificamus te,
Gratias agimus tibi propter
magnum gloriam tuum.
Domine Deus, Rex Coelestis,
Deus Pater omnipotens
Domine Fili unigenite
Jesu Christe Domine Deus
Agnus Dei Filius Patris
Qui tollis peccata mundi
miserere nobis.
Qui tollis peccata mundi,
suscipe deprecationem nostram.
Qui sedes ad dexteramPatris,
miserere nobis.
Quoniam tu solus Sanctus,
Tu solus Dominus
Tu solus Altissimus
Jesu Christe.
Cum Sancto Spiritu
in gloria Dei Patris
Amen.

- The Ambrosian Gloria -


http://www.solesmes.com/sons/gloria.ram

(Real monks chanting....)


Gregorian Chant - God's music!

 

Whose contention is absurd Frank? Look at your own hypocrisy here. A Bible Camp of all things! Where do you get Biblical authority for that? Please give Scripture? A cafeteria! I would like to see an example of that in Scripture as well. Where is your Biblical authority?
You hit the nail on the head when you quoted 1Cor.6:12 "All things are lawful unto me but all things are not expedient; all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any." That is called Christian liberty. You have the Christian liberty to meet in a barn, a cafeteria, a Bible Camp. We and others have the perfect liberty, without condemnation of others to use musical instrument in our praise to God. Neither of the above is found in Scripture. Neither of the above is against Scriptural principles, or practice. You are hypocritical in your stand to allow one and not the other, and very legalistic as well.
DHK

 

Jarlaxle:
God used men to write the Bible. Do you know of another species that can write? LOL!!!

 

Dhk:

The authority for teaching the word of God is found in Mat. 28:18-20. If a man is on a mountain in Tibet inside a religious shrine, is it lawful for me to teach him the gospel of Christ? If not why not? Is it lawful to go to the auditorium of a township in Russia to teach and worship God? If not why not? I have posted the scriptures that authorize meeting places. Romans 16:3-5, Acts 5:12; 16:25; 16:12-16. They are temples, houses, jails, a river. In fact, Jesus said, in Mat. 18:20, For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

In other words, the meeting place is an expedient. An expedient is anything that is used to carry out a lawful command. I Cor. 6:12. Other expedients are song books, pews, rostrums etc.


Now, can you provide scripture PROHIBITING these as being lawful meeting places. I await your BOOK, CHAPTER, AND VERSE, PLEASE, as I have provided mine.

I do not know which Bible college you attended, but you should ask for a refund on that spiritual investment. Oh, I forgot, where does God say by a declarative statement, Dhk, you should attend a Bible college? I guess Bible colleges are unauthorized!

You have fell victim to your own unscriptural and irrational hermeneutic. If you took a course in Hermeneutics, you should try it again because the evidence in this thread indicates you failed the first time.

 

Now can you provide Scripture PROHIBITING these (musical instruments) as being lawful instruments. I await your BOOK, CHAPTER, AND VERSE, PLEASE, as I have provided mine. (Col.3:16)
DHK

 

Dhk:
Yes, I can provide scriptures that prohibit the use of mechnical instruments in worship. In fact,I have already done so. However, let me repeat them. Col. 3;16, Eph. 5:19, Acts 25: 15,16 Hebrews 2:12, James 5:13, I Cor. 14:15, Mat. 26:30, I Cor. 14:15.
God authorizes through his word. John 8:31,32. The passages relevant to the question authorize the following:
1. People are to teach one another. Speaking to yourselves is a reciprocal reflective pronoun requiring human communication though words. Col. 3;16, Eph. 5:19.
2. People are to use their minds as the instrument to be exercised ( plucked- psallo) in the act of singing, Note: The heart. Col. 3:16, Eph. 5:19.
3. The singing requires the both parties to understand the words or singing employed. I Cor. 14:15.
4. The act of singing requires all to participate in the action. Col. 3;16, Eph. 5:19.
5. The act of singing reflects the spiritual words that dwell in us. Col. 3:16, Eph. 5:19.
In the passages of scripture in the new testament, this is what the divine instructions of God authorize. Mechanical instruments of worship were never a part of the new tseatament worship to God by the first centruy church. THIS UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE WAS AN INVENTION OF MAN.

Now, The prohibiiton against mechanical instruments may be esatablished by what is written. This is the only way God authorizes. HE HAS NEVER SANCTIONED AN APPROVED ACT BY SILENCE.
The principle of silence in the new testament is demnstrated by Hebrews 7:14 and Hebrews 8:4. God did not allow Jesus to be a High Priest on Earth. Why? The Bible says because there were men on earth who were already authorized to do so. I.E. Aaron and his sons. Exodus 28-29. Secondly, GOD HAD SPOKEN NOTHING CONCERNING THE PRIESTHOOD BEING FOR OR FROM THE TRIBE OF JUDAH. Therefore, because God did NOT SPEAK about this matter. Jesus could not be a lawful high priest on earth, WHY? BECAUSE IT WOULD VIOLATE THE EXPRESSED WORD AND WILL OF GOD.
Now, it would be an honorable thing for you to answer the questions in my previous post with the same static standard i have used in BOTH my posts.

QUESTION:
Can you provide scripture that authorizwes mechanical instruments?

Has God authorized actions by expressed will or through the lack of it? And, How do you know?

Finally, please entertain my folly on this point, but according to yout reasoning, not scripture, I could stand in the pulpit and preach naked before the congregation.

I could smoke hashish for the Lord's Supper or eat bacon and eggs.

I could stand up and cheer during a prayer.

WHY? Well, God did not say you could not!!!

This line of reasoning is absurd and unscriptural based on the way God has demonstrated in the scriptures the way he authorizes any practice. Dhk, It has always been and always will be, IT IS WRITTEN, IT IS WRITTEN, IT IS WRITTEN. Mat. 4: 4,7,10, Luke 10:25-32.

 

Jarlaxle:
I meet with people everyday both Christians and non-Christians. By the way, by this line of reasoning you must go to Jerusalem to meet everyday. However, that topic is for another time.

Let me ask you a question. What is Truth? I would like to see how you define it and compare it to what God has said truth is.

I ask because your last post was void of any objectivity. You seem to imply truth is just what YOU subjectively think it is. If I am wrong in this conclusion, please enlighten me.

Moreover, my laughter at your previous post was not intended to inflame you. It was a reaction to a question, that had an answer so obvious it was almost surreal it was asked. If I offended you, I apologize!