Did Jesus Care about the New Testament?

[TimothyH]

Absolutely! I get in some Bible passages every day, if I can. The Holy Spirit definitely works through God’s written word. No doubt about that, and thank God for it!

The danger lies in people determining doctrine apart from the authority of Christ’s Church by picking verses out of context–the context not only of the passages, but of Sacred Tradition.

Someone claimed that without the Bible Christianity would have died after the Apostles. That’s simply not the case, as we have been at pains to demonstrate.

I’m not talking so much about doctrine but more about things like lectio. I can get doctrine from a bullet list on a website or in a catechism. Sacred scripture is so much more than just a source of doctrine. It is a daily encounter with the divine.

-Tim-

 

[Della]

I’m not talking so much about doctrine but more about things like lectio. I can get doctrine from a bullet list on a website or in a catechism. Sacred scripture is so much more than just a source of doctrine. It is a daily encounter with the divine.

-Tim-

Yes. For us Catholics that’s what it is. But, sad to say, for many non-Catholics it is used more as a proof text for what they believe than a source of touching the divine.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Can someone please point me to a place where it says that Jesus cared about the writing and promulgation of the New Testament?

**Yes, He did care about it. **

When He gave to Saint John His Revelation (The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him and He sent his angel to Saint John). He commanded him: “**Write **what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches” Rev 1:11

And then again

“**Now write **what you see, what is and what is to take place hereafter.” Rev 1:19

And please note that the Revelation takes for granted some knowledge that is been passed before and that obviously has been written down.

Hope this helps.

In the love of Christ and of His Revelation,
Gloria

.

 

[PJM]

=TimothyH;11456531]My point is, and it is my experience that scripture itself has power to move hearts and convert people.

Yes, it is dangerous to approach scripture apart from the Church but I think many Catholics underestimate and/or minimize the importance of scripture to the point where they are passive - sitting idle waiting for it to be read to them and explained to them. Some claim it as organically and exclusively Catholic while at the same time they don’t read it, study it or pray it and that is a shame.

There is much to be learned by simply opening it and reading it in a spirit of prayer and humility.

-Tim-

Tim, my friend,

We ARE in agreement on your last thought. However “Wisdom; Knowledge; Understanding; Fear of the Lord” are ALL GIFTS of and by God… They are NOT attainable by man’s efforts alone…

Evidence of this lies in the reality of thousands of “Christian Faiths” when ONLY one is Christ True Faith. [Eph. 4:4-8]

Can Scripture “move” peoples minds and hearts? INDEED it can when the HOLY SPIRIT DOES THE MOVING.

God Bless you,
Patrick

 

[PJM]

=Gloria de G;11456918]**Yes, He did care about it. **

When He gave to Saint John His Revelation (The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him and He sent his angel to Saint John). He commanded him: “**Write **what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches” Rev 1:11

And then again

“**Now write **what you see, what is and what is to take place hereafter.” Rev 1:19

And please note that the Revelation takes for granted some knowledge that is been passed before and that obviously has been written down.

Hope this helps.

In the love of Christ and of His Revelation,
Gloria

.

VERY GOOD!

Thanks

 

[Abu]

in_servitude #7
the Church still dithered on the acceptance of the Gospel of John as being the inspired Word of God in the 4th century. Therefore, I think that it is still safe to say that the human intellect of Jesus did not anticipate the New Testament, nor even suggest that it was something that needed to be created.

For the 4th century, in fact the books that actually are declared the inspired Word of God was decided by Pope Damasus at a Council of Rome in 382, reaffirmed at the Councils of Hippo, 393, Carthage III 397.

Of course Jesus knew He was God and knew that the N.T. would be written

 

[Della]

**Yes, He did care about it. **

When He gave to Saint John His Revelation (The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him and He sent his angel to Saint John). He commanded him: “**Write **what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches” Rev 1:11

And then again

“**Now write **what you see, what is and what is to take place hereafter.” Rev 1:19

And please note that the Revelation takes for granted some knowledge that is been passed before and that obviously has been written down.

Hope this helps.

In the love of Christ and of His Revelation,
Gloria

.

Yes, this is the only recorded instance of Jesus commanding anyone to write anything. He asked John to write his Revelation for a specific reason and to a specific set of people, but of course it applies to us all.

As for the rest of the NT, it was certainly inspired by the Holy Spirit, but those writings were not, to the best of our knowledge, commanded by Jesus to be written. It’s only natural that some of the Apostles would write accounts of Jesus life and ministry and letters to the faithful–as they all had equal authority in passing on the Gospel and governing the faithful, with Peter as the chief shepherd of them all. Our Lord would have understood that this would happen.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Yes, this is the only recorded instance of Jesus commanding anyone to write anything. He asked John to write his Revelation for a specific reason and to a specific set of people, but of course it applies to us all.

As for the rest of the NT, it was certainly inspired by the Holy Spirit, but those writings were not, to the best of our knowledge, commanded by Jesus to be written. It’s only natural that some of the Apostles would write accounts of Jesus life and ministry and letters to the faithful–as they all had equal authority in passing on the Gospel and governing the faithful, with Peter as the chief shepherd of them all. Our Lord would have understood that this would happen.

Yes but also remember that **Saint John, who wrote the fourth Gospel,also wrote the Apocalypse **. If he thought it was not necessary and neither the will of Christ himself, he will not have written the Gospel. Therefore for us to understand why the New Testament has been written, Saint John left us written the reason, here it is for the ones who think it was not necessary:

** “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” Jn 20:30-31**

In the love of the truth,
Gloria

.

 

[Della]

Yes but also remember that **Saint John, who wrote the fourth Gospel,also wrote the Apocalypse **. If he thought it was not necessary and neither the will of Christ himself, he will not have written the Gospel. Therefore for us to understand why the New Testament has been written, Saint John left us written the reason, here it is for the ones who think it was not necessary:

** “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” Jn 20:30-31**

In the love of the truth,
Gloria

.

I did not say it was not Jesus’ will, merely that Jesus never commanded any books, except Revelation, be written. There’s a clear distinction between the two ideas.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

I did not say it was not Jesus’ will, merely that Jesus never commanded any books, except Revelation, be written. There’s a clear distinction between the two ideas.

OK, sorry, but I will not put it in the way you are saying it because sounds a bit bias.

I wil say it like this:

The only book that Jesus commanded to write was the Book of Revelation, the rest of the New Testament was written to help our faith.

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

 

[Della]

OK, sorry, but I will not put it in the way you are saying it because sounds a bit bias.

I wil say it like this:

The only book that Jesus commanded to write was the Book of Revelation, the rest of the New Testament was written to help our faith.

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.

I certainly agree with the way you want to put it. I’m confused about what bias I’m supposed to have, though.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

I certainly agree with the way you want to put it. I’m confused about what bias I’m supposed to have, though.

That you were giving more importance to say first that Jesus never commission to write the New Testament and then except he commanded to write the Book of Revelation, this is the bias. Is more important to say what he commanded first.

Hope did not offend you,
Gloria

.

 

[Della]

That you were giving more importance to say first that Jesus never commission to write the New Testament and then except he commanded to write the Book of Revelation, this is the bias. Is more important to say what he commanded first.

Hope did not offend you,
Gloria

.

It is not bias to simply state facts. The order in which I stated them was inconsequential, I assure you.

 

[PJM]

=Della;11459713]I did not say it was not Jesus’ will, merely that Jesus never commanded any books, except Revelation, be written. There’s a clear distinction between the two ideas.

So Della, How do you understand the Mandate of mt, 28:19-20 & Mark 16:14-15?

God’s continued Blessings,
Patrick

 

[Gloria_de_G]

It is not bias to simply state facts. The order in which I stated them was inconsequential, I assure you.

OK

 

[Della]

OK

:tiphat:

 

[Gloria_de_G]

:tiphat:

You really make me laugh!!!

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Can someone please point me to a place where it says that Jesus cared about the writing and promulgation of the New Testament?

Does the Bible (or Church teaching) illuminate any assertion that the New Testament would materialize?

Thanks.

Well, I have another quote for you which implies a lot of things:

“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." Jn 17:20

We know that the word is written or spoken, so yes he knew they will write, and he spoke about it here.

In the love of the truth,
Gloria

.

 

[PJM]

=Gloria de G;11462452]Well, I have another quote for you which implies a lot of things:

“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." Jn 17:20

We know that the word is written or spoken, so yes he knew they will write, and he spoke about it here.

In the love of the truth,
Gloria

.

well done:thumbsup:

 

[in_servitude]

Well, I have another quote for you which implies a lot of things:

“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." Jn 17:20

We know that the word is written or spoken, so yes he knew they will write, and he spoke about it here.

In the love of the truth,
Gloria

.

Hmmm…

Some basis for following comments:

1. The Church is organic.
2. From #1, we know that the Church changes over time, it develops, it matures.
3. The Church speaks and writes many words - some of which is the NT.
4. People come to believe by written and spoken words from the Church.
5. Not always is their belief founded on (or strictly on) the NT.

The point of this thread for me is to ask the question if Jesus (prior to his Crucifixion and Resurrection) cared all that much exactly how the Church developed. He knew it would be organic (mustard seed, for example).

I assert:

1. Sin alters the direction and growth of the Church. The creeds, for example, were a type of “immune response” to people twisting the proper teachings of the Church. The Church responds by fighting against error in the form of the creeds.
2. Sin is never desired by God.

St. Paul sinned greatly against God in his persecution of the Church. Through God’s intervention and grace (and St. Paul’s conformity to that grace), St. Paul ends up writing a great deal of the NT. But, to say that the NT is exactly as it is - and it was desired by Christ to be exactly this way - I think goes against some of my basic understanding. (The poster “Timothy” earlier makes a case that the NT was foreshadowed by the two swords in the upper room during the Last Supper.) So, maybe Christ did desire a New Testament.

I freely admit I can be very wrong, and I prefer that actually because once I understand my errors, I get to learn more Truth and shed more error. That’s a great benefit.