• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why did NT authors (Saints) read scripture

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
In the many references we see in the NT to "Scripture" it appears that the NT saints "think" that scripture has value.

Why is that? If they really did not need anything in God's Word unless it was speaking to saints after the cross (and even AFTER 70 AD for some who slice the Bible down to that small snippet) why do they keep pointing their readers to "Scripture" as if it has value and authority?

How many books does "your Bible" have?
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
BobRyan said:
In the many references we see in the NT to "Scripture" it appears that the NT saints "think" that scripture has value.

Why is that? If they really did not need anything in God's Word unless it was speaking to saints after the cross (and even AFTER 70 AD for some who slice the Bible down to that small snippet) why do they keep pointing their readers to "Scripture" as if it has value and authority?

How many books does "your Bible" have?
Hi Bob,

I'm not sure what you have in mind here, but I think you maybe addressing others post. So this maybe out of line...but i want to address this in the light that I 1st read your post. I for one place great value in Gods Word. This is both the OT and the NT. The OT has so many types of Christ it is rich in the truth.

Jacob's Ladder

Jesus presents himself as the reality to which the stairway pointed. The patriarch saw in a dream the reunion of heaven and earth through the One Mediator, Jesus Christ, which is now brought to reality both for Jacob and for all believers.

Moses

Moses was the deliverer from Egypt, Christ is now the greater Deliverer from this present evil world (Galatians 1:5), from the devil and from our sin.

The Temple

The OT tells of the "tent outside the camp"...A picture of Gods Holiness
The the tent was moved to the middle of the camp..A picture of Christ coming to earth and living with us.
In the NT the temple is the body of the believer.

Boaz

I have no doubt that Boaz is a type of Christ, who became incarnate, springing from Judah too, in order to acquire for himself a bride from the Gentile nations. He was willing to do so (as Boaz was willing to redeem and marry Ruth)....He has to power to do so, .....and He is our Kinsman, with the right to do so.

The Cleansing with Hyssop

The covenant was ratified by the blood of sprinkling, applied by dipping the hyssop into it. This sprinkling of the blood finds its antitype in Jesus Christ and his shed blood on Calvary. Sprinkling of blood was part of the Old Testament ritual service. In general, the appearance of blood advertises the death of a victim. Christ's shed blood cries for forgiveness.

The Two Turtledoves or Young Pigeons

The need for Mary's purification arose from her being ceremonially unclean for seven days after the birth of a son. For another thirty-three days she was to keep away from holy things. The mother was then to offer a lamb plus a dove or pigeon. If she was poor her offering was two doves or two young pigeons (Leviticus 12:6-8). Mary gave the offering of the poor. "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might become rich" (2 Corinthians 8:9).

At the same time the first male child of every mother was presented to the Lord (Exodus 13:2). As he was "redeemed" by the sacrifice of two turtledoves, He was to be the true Redeemer of God's children who were scattered abroad. He was "sanctified" that He might sanctify others.

Manna

1) The bread provided through Moses as much as it proved God's care and provision, was only material and temporary...... Christ and his sacrifice satisfies the soul eternally.

2)Just as manna came down from heaven, even so the Son came down from heaven

Jonah

Jesus mentions Jonah's three-day experience in the belly of the fish as indicative of what would happen to Him.... his death and resurrection the third day

Melchizedek

Melchizedek is a type of Christ as a royal-priest: King of Salem (righteousness) and king of peace. His priesthood is eternal, and it is non-transferable.


others....
http://www.bible-topics.com/Types-of-Christ.html

In Christ..James
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
I personally have no problem at all with those who find that the infallible Word of God has 66 books and should be read, accepted, believed and preached. I like starting with Genesis chapter 1 verse one and just enjoying the infallible truths as they come -- in the text!
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The claim IN scripture ABOUT scripture is that the Bible is something that is authored by God Himself and not the mere product of mortal man's "best ideas".

2Peter 1:

20 no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God



So that means that those who revise the text as if it is “merely the word of Man” or the Word of “Moses” whereas the NT is “the Word of God” are simply not reading the NT!

Paul says "it is GOD's not MAN's"
1Thess 2:13
And we also thank God continually because, when you received the Word of God which you heard FROM US, you accepted it NOT AS THE WORD of MEN - but for what it is - the WORD OF GOD

For a specific example of scripture labeling itself as the very WORDS of God rather than
the words of man we see Hebrews 3 quoting the Pslams. -

7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, "" TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME, AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,...
 

Joseph M. Smith

New Member
BobRyan said:
In the many references we see in the NT to "Scripture" it appears that the NT saints "think" that scripture has value.

Why is that? If they really did not need anything in God's Word unless it was speaking to saints after the cross (and even AFTER 70 AD for some who slice the Bible down to that small snippet) why do they keep pointing their readers to "Scripture" as if it has value and authority?

How many books does "your Bible" have?

I don't think I understand your question. It seems self-evident to me that the NT writers would depend on OT Scripture (and in a few cases some apocyphal items) to support what they are saying. The Pauline corpus and Hebrews are replete with OT references in order to support their arguments; why not? That was their thought-world and that of their audience as well.

So maybe I am not hearing your question.

Isn't it interesting, by the way, how II Peter refers to the writings of Paul, even at that early date, as "Scripture"? I surely do agree with the writer of II Peter that "there are some things in them difficult to understand." If he didn't understand them, how much more am I going to have a hard time with them <grin>!
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The Church of Christ is well known for saying that only the NT (specifically that which is AFTER the 4 Gospels) is actually applicable to Christians.

Others here have made similar statements.

Matt and others think it is horrible that in Acts 17:11 "They study the scripture daily to SEE IF those things told to them by Paul were so" -- because the "scriptures" they were studying was just the OT and "of course we can't go by that".

Others think that Christ came to "Destroy" the OT system, teaching, religion, view-of-God, Gospel etc.

So if you are going to have 66 books in your Bible - what do you do with the OT?
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
typcially - when someone is not happy with what the bible is saying - they don't want to see much of what contradicts them in scripture "posted" and they need to find ways to abolish parts of the text.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
While I appreciate JArthur's endorsement of all 66 books - I though that others might also agree with him as well.

Anyone?

I know that the Church of Christ does not take this view of the OT as "applicable" to NT saints such that NT saints would read it and be instructed from it as though it is "authorotative scripture" -- but does everyone else here reject it as well?
 

mima

New Member
I once had the experience of living in a "hot.bed" of Church of Christ followers. And as a denomination they believe in the New Testament selectively. They believe only in that part of the New Testament that they want to believe in.
As a group, Church of Christ people are a little standoffish, and very pleasing to themselves In their own eyes.
 

Marcia

Active Member
The OT is as much God's word as the NT. Jesus referred to the OT over and over again, calling it scripture and recognizing its authority.

We are, however, to read the OT in light of the NT - that's a principal of biblical hermeneutics. We are also to read the OT in context - who was God talking to and how to apply that.

But I'm not getting into a discussion of the Sabbath, if that is what this is leading to. Count me out. I've already read and posted on those threads before.
 
Top