Is Word of God equal to scripture?

#1. From Mark 7 it is "obvious" that Christ IS calling the Exodus 20 text - the WORD of GOD.

#2. From a first perusal of the scriptures they contain even MORE inspired text than Exodus 20.
So AGAIN it is OBVIOUS that there is MORE to the Word of God than Exodus 20 ALONE. IT is ALL inspired according to St. Paul.

#3. This shows that the WORD of God IS the Scriptures. However I believe our Catholic bretheren would like to "ADD" to that.

But in so "wanting" to do that - why deny that the scriptures ARE the Word of God? Is that not "wrong headed" for Christians - even "catholic" ones?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Three pages in, and no one has shown that the Word of God is Scripture. Sure, it's been shown again and again that Scripture is the Word of God, but not vise versa, and no, they do not mean the same thing.

Something to ponder.

Jesus is the Word of God, made flesh. Is Jesus Scripture? No, but Scriptures are of Jesus (the Word of God).

If the Word of God = Scripture, then that limits what the Word of God is, and that means that everything that God has ever said is contained in Holy Scripture. However, to say that Scripture is the Word of God only necessitates that what is in Scripture is God's Word, but does not mean that God's Word is confined solely to the pages of Scripture.

 

You're so tricky, Bob. Stay on topic, will you?

No one said that the Scripture is the Word of God. The question is, is the Word of God SCRIPTURE? They are not the same thing.

 

Thess --

I do not know of a single person in the world who is completely correct regarding everything they think about what the Bible teaches. I believe that every single person and every single entity will be amazed in eternity to find out that much of what they thought sure was built upon sinking sand. Unfortunately, that includes people who think themselves to be true believers, because they will be the ones crying, "Lord! Lord! Did we not . . . ."

But there are things in the Bible that are clear and other things which require study. There are church and synagogue ideas, which they call "doctrine," which are in error, yet these are built upon misunderstandings of the Bible. Fortunately, some misunderstandings are honest error, but others are outright "high hand in the face of our God" sin. Each one of us just needs to make their salvation sure, individually, not depending upon some organization to save us.

 

The Bible MUST ALWAYS be translated and understood, in the context of itself and the literary style in which it was written.

An example today would be if someone said, "So shoot me, I'm wrong!" It is an exageration and its intent is to make the other person realize that the speaker thinks a criticism was far too abrupt or nasty. The speaker doesn't want to be shot-----although there are days I wouldn't mind it (just a figure of speech on my part).

This is also true within the Bible. I believe that this is what Jesus was doing concerning the Lord's supper. I also believe that Jesus was making a poignant play of words surrounding Peter's name and connecting it with what Peter had just previously stated.

Obviously,one's motive will effect how one will attempt to understand what Jesus stated. If one is trying to uphold the authority of one's own church, one will see the remark in one way; however, if one is trying to understand who Jesus represented himself to be, one will see the statement in a different light. It depends on where one places one's importance. It is either Christ or Church authority. Which is more important to you and which understanding BEST reflexs your personal value.

 

Thess, my friend, you are teaching your opinions,
based upon what your church has taught you, to
think that your church is the one and only. Do
you not understand that each person decides
upon her/his religious affiliation based upon what
that person perceives is the right way, unless that
person is inherently evil?

You have chosen your way, and I have chosen
mine. Your church is no more my "mother church"
than is a Buddhist monistary. Nailed down, I would
have to look you in the face and say, "I believe your
church is dead, that it is wrong, that it has insur-
mountable problems that it will never rectify. That
is why I am not of your belief." In other words, for
you to tell me to "humble myself" and become
catholic is a ludicrous request.

I love people, Thess. I enjoy them. I take no pride
in putting them down or in being "in their faces,"
but when you come at me with such a statement,
of what use is it?

 

Thessalonian:

I feel VERY strongly that the authorities of the Roman Catholic church have been disobedient to the inspired Word of God and have placed themselves and their traditions ABOVE GOD's Word.
They have systematicly brainwashed their flock into believing that THEY and not Christ is in command of His Church, and that there is not personal interaction between GOD and His children
without authoritative mediation controlled by church officials.

Perhaps that is why the Roman Catholic church doesn't understand who the rock really is...

 

Greetings to my brother from the Garden State/ A Christian,

The Roman Catholic view of grace is this. The Church is looked on as the 'depository of grace' and the sacraments are the channels through which the grace of God reaches the soul. Normally, the efficacy of the sacraments for the purpose of administering grace to the communicant depends on the properly constituted priesthood.

The Protestant perspective of grace is that it does fully recognize the importance of the Church and the ministry. However, the ministry is regarded as less determinative than that of the Roman Catholic Church. The primary reason is there is a difference in the concept of the Holy Spirit. The ordained ministry and sacraments are vital, yet the laity have the right to direct access to God and His grace. [Matthew 11:28-30] This concept is expressed in the phrase 'the Priesthood of all believers.' [Revelation 1:6] The implication is that the Holy Sprit, whose office it is to minister grace to the soul of a human being, is not limited to any one group of men, much less to the correct use of any man made form or ceremony.

Grace is received by receiving God's Son. [John 1:12 & I John 5:12-13] God's grace does not come via the hands of the priest at every mass. God's view of things does not factor in a 'pay as you go' philosophy where the communicant is indebted to any human agent, even a Catholic priest. Christ and His grace are free. [Ephesians 2:8-9]

The priest, Martin Luther was truly enlightened when he said, 'The just shall live by faith.' [Romans 5:1]

Your post that started out by saying, 'I feel STRONGLY . . .' was an excellent writing.

 

Ray,

The Israelites were also called a "royal priesthood," but they were not all ministerial priests.

 

Thess, as I have said before, I am not one who
enjoys argument, nor do I take pride in one-
upmanship. This is why I have remained fairly
quiet here. While I enjoy a good discussion and a
good debate, this is really neither.

You asked for Scripture, and you were given
Scripture, if I remember correctly. Perhaps I need
to go back and look to be sure, but I think you just
did not like the Scripture given.

How about this, then? When you used a Scripture
here earlier, in an attempt to prove that what your
church says has the same weight as Scripture, I
showed you that you misused the verse you
quoted. You did not refute me, nor did you come
back and give us any Scripture to prove your case
that what your church says is as Scripture.

The sword swings both ways, Thess.

 

Neither has mine, Thess.

You have a BIble, I am sure. Try to find in the
BIBLE any Scripture which states that your pope's
word is equal to Scripture. While there are a few
cults which claim that their leader's or church's
words and written materials are equal to Scripture,
yours is the only mainline church that will say that.
Those of us who are not RCc can see through that
quite readily, and we are just as amazed about this
as you are with your question.

I once belonged to a church in which a huge
number of its members held the same view of their
ministers and written words. I find the whole
concept to be ludicrous.

 

By the way, Thess, you stated clearly in one of your
posts that you believe the Bible to be the Word of
our God. This is one of the things that confuses me
here. Do you believe what you wrote or do you not?
If you believe what you wrote, there is no argument;
the argument, then, is that you believe that your
church also regularly produces the word of our
God. It is YOU that needs to prove your point.

Your church has told you that they are the word of
our God. You have their word on it. Their word
and a dollar-fifty will not buy coffee around here.