RULE#1 For anything to be Officially Christian it must be found in the scriptures.

[Adonia]

There was never given such power to any organization, as the authority lies in the scriptures themselves, and each saved person has the Holy Spirit illumination!

No, the scriptures are authoritative - authority resides in persons. If what you say had been the case, Jesus would just have written a book and that would have been it, but we know that is not what happened. Jesus instead started a church that would exist here on earth and appointed people to run it with the authority to decide things for the faithful. One of the best examples are the scriptures themselves. They just did not magically appear in book form from the heavens, they were compiled by people (the Bishop's) who were in charge of the Christian Church here on earth. They had to decide which writings (of the hundreds that were out there) that were to be included. Authority and authoritative - two different words with two different meanings.

Now, it's long past time that you come out of your fantasy world concerning the Christian experience and learn to accept the truth as evidenced by the complete historical record.

 

[Yeshua1]

No, the scriptures are authoritative - authority resides in persons. If what you say had been the case, Jesus would just have written a book and that would have been it, but we know that is not what happened. Jesus instead started a church that would exist here on earth and appointed people to run it with the authority to decide things for the faithful. One of the best examples are the scriptures themselves. They just did not magically appear in book form from the heavens, they were compiled by people (the Bishop's) who were in charge of the Christian Church here on earth. They had to decide which writings (of the hundreds that were out there) that were to be included. Authority and authoritative - two different words with two different meanings.

Now, it's long past time that you come out of your fantasy world concerning the Christian experience and learn to accept the truth as evidenced by the complete historical record.

The originals were copied early on and were being passed away in local churches, and what would be the 66 Books of the Canon were pretty much agreed upon by end of the first century!
each local church would have had pastors and elders set up by the Apostles themselves, as Bishops and pastors and elders all meant same thing in Bible, it was MUCH later took on meaning of Rome!

 

[AustinC]

No, the scriptures are authoritative - authority resides in persons. If what you say had been the case, Jesus would just have written a book and that would have been it, but we know that is not what happened. Jesus instead started a church that would exist here on earth and appointed people to run it with the authority to decide things for the faithful. One of the best examples are the scriptures themselves. They just did not magically appear in book form from the heavens, they were compiled by people (the Bishop's) who were in charge of the Christian Church here on earth. They had to decide which writings (of the hundreds that were out there) that were to be included. Authority and authoritative - two different words with two different meanings.

Now, it's long past time that you come out of your fantasy world concerning the Christian experience and learn to accept the truth as evidenced by the complete historical record.

Jesus is God. He wrote the whole Bible through His inspired by the Holy Spirit writers.
You seem to think the writers just wrote on a whim or a personal agenda. That is not what the Bible says.

 

[Walpole]

You would have to at least quote some early Christians who stated that rule, if not the first Christian. I have never heard the rule, thus to me, a strawman. They are good for keeping crows from removing The Word of God from the hearts of mankind, no?

Google ---> sola Scriptura

Your faith is listed as Baptist. Perhaps you should brush up on the tenets of your religion...

---> Of the Holy Scriptures — The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

...Or spare us the faux naïveté.

 

[timtofly]

Google ---> sola Scriptura

Your faith is listed as Baptist. Perhaps you should brush up on the tenets of your religion...

---> Of the Holy Scriptures — The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

...Or spare us the faux naïveté.

You cannot provide a quote either. He is making it a rule. If he had claimed a principle, perhaps doctrine, but a suggestion, no thanks.

His rule states Christian not Scripture.


The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith states an external source, the Holy Spirit, Who guides us into truth in accordance with the Bible.

I do not see what you are attempting to say.

 

[timtofly]

No, the scriptures are authoritative - authority resides in persons. If what you say had been the case, Jesus would just have written a book and that would have been it, but we know that is not what happened. Jesus instead started a church that would exist here on earth and appointed people to run it with the authority to decide things for the faithful. One of the best examples are the scriptures themselves. They just did not magically appear in book form from the heavens, they were compiled by people (the Bishop's) who were in charge of the Christian Church here on earth. They had to decide which writings (of the hundreds that were out there) that were to be included. Authority and authoritative - two different words with two different meanings.

Now, it's long past time that you come out of your fantasy world concerning the Christian experience and learn to accept the truth as evidenced by the complete historical record.

It is nice to see that the person in the pew has the same authority as the man behind the pulpit. Some in charge are glad they do not have the understanding to use it.

Got to have that government control, instead of pure communism. You do realize that a shepherd can learn from the flock. The shepherd is just the one held accountable for the flock. To think in a perfect world the flock would be of the very same mind and authority as the shepherd. What a force to be reckoned with. Most would prefer to have controllable flock, full of headache and divisions, to just preach what; condemnation, threats of love, or just sleeping in the pew?

 

[Adonia]

It is nice to see that the person in the pew has the same authority as the man behind the pulpit. Some in charge are glad they do not have the understanding to use it.

Got to have that government control, instead of pure communism. You do realize that a shepherd can learn from the flock. The shepherd is just the one held accountable for the flock. To think in a perfect world the flock would be of the very same mind and authority as the shepherd. What a force to be reckoned with. Most would prefer to have controllable flock, full of headache and divisions, to just preach what; condemnation, threats of love, or just sleeping in the pew?

Hebrews 13:17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.

So tell me, what happens if you disagree with your Pastor? Of course this is an easy decision for you to make because as a Baptist you can just go out and either find another church or as happens often in the Baptist world just start your own.

 

[Adonia]

Jesus is God. He wrote the whole Bible through His inspired by the Holy Spirit writers.
You seem to think the writers just wrote on a whim or a personal agenda. That is not what the Bible says.

No I don't think the scriptures were written on a whim, (God inspired for sure) but before the NT was finally collated there were all kinds of "writings" out there. According to Wikipedia, it took a couple of church Councils and Synods to finally get things altogether for sure. A defined set of the gospels was asserted by Irenaeus in 180, but it took yet more time like up to the early 3rd century. There were disputes about Hebrews, James 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation. Then there was the Synod of Hippo Regius in 393, the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419 under the auspices of St. Augustine. Then there was Pope Damasus I in 382 with his get together. The fact remains, someone had to decide these things and thankfully there was a church here on earth to do it.

As also related in Wikipedia: "some claim that, from the 4th century, there existed unanimity in the West concerning the New Testament canon,[22] and that, by the 5th century, the Eastern Church, with a few exceptions, had come to accept the Book of Revelation and thus had come into harmony on the matter of the canon.[4][23] Nonetheless, full dogmatic articulations of the canon were not made until the Canon of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism,[4] the Gallic Confession of Faith of 1559 for Calvinism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.

See, it all took awhile.

 

[Particular]

No I don't think the scriptures were written on a whim, (God inspired for sure) but before the NT was finally collated there were all kinds of "writings" out there. According to Wikipedia, it took a couple of church Councils and Synods to finally get things altogether for sure. A defined set of the gospels was asserted by Irenaeus in 180, but it took yet more time like up to the early 3rd century. There were disputes about Hebrews, James 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation. Then there was the Synod of Hippo Regius in 393, the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419 under the auspices of St. Augustine. Then there was Pope Damasus I in 382 with his get together. The fact remains, someone had to decide these things and thankfully there was a church here on earth to do it.

As also related in Wikipedia: "some claim that, from the 4th century, there existed unanimity in the West concerning the New Testament canon,[22] and that, by the 5th century, the Eastern Church, with a few exceptions, had come to accept the Book of Revelation and thus had come into harmony on the matter of the canon.[4][23] Nonetheless, full dogmatic articulations of the canon were not made until the Canon of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism,[4] the Gallic Confession of Faith of 1559 for Calvinism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.

See, it all took awhile.

No doubt God had to remove the chaff. Satan, as he does, provides imitators that claim to be Christ speaking (The Roman Catholic Church is one of those imitators). Many apocryphal stories were created. People made money writing them and selling them. Those were the stories told to Muhammed.
We see the Bereans questioning the Apostle Paul and requiring him to prove his assertion in the Bible. They were called noble. It is a noble thing when you question your priest, bishop, archbishop and pope to prove their assertions in the Bible. It is a lazy man who accepts all he is told without questions.

 

[Adonia]

No doubt God had to remove the chaff. Satan, as he does, provides imitators that claim to be Christ speaking (The Roman Catholic Church is one of those imitators). Many apocryphal stories were created. People made money writing them and selling them. Those were the stories told to Muhammed.
We see the Bereans questioning the Apostle Paul and requiring him to prove his assertion in the Bible. They were called noble. It is a noble thing when you question your priest, bishop, archbishop and pope to prove their assertions in the Bible. It is a lazy man who accepts all he is told without questions.

Not a Baptist in attendance among all those synods and councils that were held in those early years. When things are set, and set correctly there is no need for disagreement. Like I said earlier, you disagree with your pastor and off you go to start a new church and BAM! - it's another sect within a sect. (That is not anything to be proud about.) That is just what your leader did - he disagreed and off he went!

 

[timtofly]

Hebrews 13:17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.

So tell me, what happens if you disagree with your Pastor? Of course this is an easy decision for you to make because as a Baptist you can just go out and either find another church or as happens often in the Baptist world just start your own.

What is a disciple?

 

[timtofly]

Not a Baptist in attendance among all those synods and councils that were held in those early years. When things are set, and set correctly there is no need for disagreement. Like I said earlier, you disagree with your pastor and off you go to start a new church and BAM! - it's another sect within a sect. (That is not anything to be proud about.) That is just what your leader did - he disagreed and off he went!

The Baptist were already using a whole Bible. They did not wait around for some religion to figure it out. What a waste of time.

 

[Particular]

Not a Baptist in attendance among all those synods and councils that were held in those early years. When things are set, and set correctly there is no need for disagreement. Like I said earlier, you disagree with your pastor and off you go to start a new church and BAM! - it's another sect within a sect. (That is not anything to be proud about.) That is just what your leader did - he disagreed and off he went!

I disagree. Many baptists were there at Pentacost and onward throughout the history of God's chosen children.
God has always secured His word so that His children can know Him.
Many churches throughout history have turned their back on God. Rome is clearly one of those churches.
Thankfully, God is not bound to Rome. He keeps His children despite the apostasy of Rome.

 

[Adonia]

The Baptist were already using a whole Bible. They did not wait around for some religion to figure it out. What a waste of time.

Once again we see someone who claims something that isn't true. The historical record does not agree with your claim as your faith tradition did not show up until founded by John Smythe in the 17th century, the year 1609 to be exact. You folks need to make this claim as justification because you just were not around in those early years. You can have your own opinion but the facts remain the facts and you just can't change them to suit yourself.

 

[Adonia]

I disagree. Many baptists were there at Pentacost and onward throughout the history of God's chosen children.
God has always secured His word so that His children can know Him.
Many churches throughout history have turned their back on God. Rome is clearly one of those churches.
Thankfully, God is not bound to Rome. He keeps His children despite the apostasy of Rome.

It was the year 1609 when you folks arrived on the scene and that is the truth, a faith tradition started by one man named John Smythe, himself a renegade from the Anglican faith and surely you know that. There was no 1st Baptist Church of Jerusalem and if you believe that than your disregard for the truth is one for the books.

Once again you claim to speak for God and that is a great falsehood. You are a faith tradition like the JW's or the SDA, just another sect claiming to have all the answers, a sect claiming to be the be all and end all of the Christian way. Not so, you are just one of many.

And then you claim to really believe the Bible but when I point out that you should listen to the people God has placed over you in religious matters you deny that. Christianity is not a go your own way religion, the Holy Spirit is not telling you one thing and your pastor another if you disagree with him in some way concerning the scriptures. That is the problem with you folks, you are quite out of the norm within the Christian world.

 

[timtofly]

It was the year 1609 when you folks arrived on the scene and that is the truth, a faith tradition started by one man named John Smythe, himself a renegade from the Anglican faith and surely you know that. There was no 1st Baptist Church of Jerusalem and if you believe that than your disregard for the truth is one for the books.

Once again you claim to speak for God and that is a great falsehood. You are a faith tradition like the JW's or the SDA, just another sect claiming to have all the answers, a sect claiming to be the be all and end all of the Christian way. Not so, you are just one of many.

And then you claim to really believe the Bible but when I point out that you should listen to the people God has placed over you in religious matters you deny that. Christianity is not a go your own way religion, the Holy Spirit is not telling you one thing and your pastor another if you disagree with him in some way concerning the scriptures. That is the problem with you folks, you are quite out of the norm within the Christian world.

John the Baptist started his ministry before Jesus. In fact John baptized Jesus. That is all the history that God required. Does history record every detail of your life? Do you exist? You do claim to be some god, so why are you insisting on non relative facts?

 

[Particular]

It was the year 1609 when you folks arrived on the scene and that is the truth, a faith tradition started by one man named John Smythe, himself a renegade from the Anglican faith and surely you know that. There was no 1st Baptist Church of Jerusalem and if you believe that than your disregard for the truth is one for the books.

Once again you claim to speak for God and that is a great falsehood. You are a faith tradition like the JW's or the SDA, just another sect claiming to have all the answers, a sect claiming to be the be all and end all of the Christian way. Not so, you are just one of many.

And then you claim to really believe the Bible but when I point out that you should listen to the people God has placed over you in religious matters you deny that. Christianity is not a go your own way religion, the Holy Spirit is not telling you one thing and your pastor another if you disagree with him in some way concerning the scriptures. That is the problem with you folks, you are quite out of the norm within the Christian world.

Funny, the Apostles and the early deacons performed water baptism on only the believers via immersion, starting at Pentacost. Yet you say it didn't happen until 1609. Perhaps you just aren't well read.
Funny how other "traditions" got added decades and centuries later. Funny how some of those "traditions" got so twisted that they replaced the gospel of grace with the not gospel of works.
How can we know what got added as a tradition? We read the Bible and we compare God's word with human traditions. When the traditions conflict with God's word...we throw out the tradition. Simple...unless a person worships tradition...

 

[Yeshua1]

Not a Baptist in attendance among all those synods and councils that were held in those early years. When things are set, and set correctly there is no need for disagreement. Like I said earlier, you disagree with your pastor and off you go to start a new church and BAM! - it's another sect within a sect. (That is not anything to be proud about.) That is just what your leader did - he disagreed and off he went!

The true Church of Christ has always held to Baptist like doctrines and practices!

 

[Yeshua1]

I disagree. Many baptists were there at Pentacost and onward throughout the history of God's chosen children.
God has always secured His word so that His children can know Him.
Many churches throughout history have turned their back on God. Rome is clearly one of those churches.
Thankfully, God is not bound to Rome. He keeps His children despite the apostasy of Rome.

The true Church of Christ always held on to those pesky 5 Solas off the Reformation!

 

[Yeshua1]

It was the year 1609 when you folks arrived on the scene and that is the truth, a faith tradition started by one man named John Smythe, himself a renegade from the Anglican faith and surely you know that. There was no 1st Baptist Church of Jerusalem and if you believe that than your disregard for the truth is one for the books.

Once again you claim to speak for God and that is a great falsehood. You are a faith tradition like the JW's or the SDA, just another sect claiming to have all the answers, a sect claiming to be the be all and end all of the Christian way. Not so, you are just one of many.

And then you claim to really believe the Bible but when I point out that you should listen to the people God has placed over you in religious matters you deny that. Christianity is not a go your own way religion, the Holy Spirit is not telling you one thing and your pastor another if you disagree with him in some way concerning the scriptures. That is the problem with you folks, you are quite out of the norm within the Christian world.

The true Church of Christ is not the RCC!