How do you know the Bible is the word of God

[CopticChristian]

And what is the* biblically-consistent *litmus test which determines whether a prophet was sent from God?

As,

What is your point…?

In many and varied ways God has spoken to us through the Prophets…in these last days He has spoken to us through His son…

What is it you are lacking in your knowledge and understanding you need help with?

 

[CopticChristian]

Of which faith?

The veracity of a prophet or teacher appointed by God is often demonstrated through such signs - but not always. Remember that the magicians of Egypt also performed great signs prior to the Exodus and they definitely were not ordained by God.

As,

There is only one Lord, One Faith and One Baptism…do you ascribe to some other faith?

 

[po18guy]

As,

What is your point…?

In many and varied ways God has spoken to us through the Prophets…in these last days He has spoken to us through His son…

What is it you are lacking in your knowledge and understanding you need help with?

I am imagining that we will soon hear the circular argument that whatever is in the bible is God’s word because it’s in the bible. No bible Christian yet can tell the world just where the “Sacred Table of Contents” came from. Although, I have heard that the bible was inevitable, and would have appeared if there was a Church or not.

Back in the 1970s there was a crude bumper sticker that was meant to mock the evangelicals of that day. It read, "Jesus is coming! And boy is He ****** (vulgar word for angry). I am beginning to see some truth in that now.

 

[Stephen168]

And what is the* biblically-consistent *litmus test which determines whether a prophet was sent from God?

Are you suggesting Christ is not from God?

 

[pablope]

And what is the* biblically-consistent *litmus test which determines whether a prophet was sent from God?

From the example of St. Paul:

Galatians 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days.
Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

Paul had a direct revelation from Christ. Yet, from the two passages above, he goes to visit Cephas/Peter and submits himself to Peter. Gal 2: 2 states his purpose…to present his gospel/message to make sure it is in line with the Apostles and what they were handed down from Christ. A revelation to anybody, in the present time, would not contradict or be in disobedience to what has already been handed down…through the Apostles.

And see how the example of St. Paul fulfills this Scripture:

from 1John 4…6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

Paul listened and obeyed the Apostles…and to this day…how can you be sure…make sure those that you follow has apostolic roots.

Second part of St. Paul’s example:

Now look at Acts 13:
1 Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.

Before Paul and Barnabas went on their first missionary journey, he submits himself to Church authority and are ordained by laying of hands. Then they are sent out to their mission. Paul, by the laying of hands, first becomes an Apostle, he gains apostolic authority, thereby, the Churches he founds have apostolic succession.

This fulfills this passage of Scripture:
Romans 10:
14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? **15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? **As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”[g]

So one does not go by deciding on your own whether you are called by God…the HS will tell someone to send you.

My question to you then…how can you believe someone who is not sent properly (ordained) and has not submitted onself to an apostle. For this what the Bible says of disobedience to authority:

1 Samuel 15:22-23
22 But Samuel replied:
“Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as much as in obeying the Lord?
To obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed is better than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is like the sin of divination,
and arrogance like the evil of idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
he has rejected you as king.”

 

[Scottgun]

victors always write the histroy. [sic]

One of the first historians was Thucydides.
Thucydides wrote the history of the Peloponnesian war between Athens and Sparta.
Thucydides was Athenian.
Athens lost.

So the victors always write the history was disproven right out of the gate.

 

[pablope]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmcrae

1. He does not deny the Truths of the faith.

Of which faith?Quote:

The one handed down by Christ through the Apostles…and their successors…which the first Christians defined as one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic…the four marks of the Church:

star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m3/Mod3.html

God sends signs through him - typically healing and saving miracles, such as raising the dead to life, or healing the sick, or multiplying food abundantly.

The veracity of a prophet or teacher appointed by God is often demonstrated through such signs - but not always. Remember that the magicians of Egypt also performed great signs prior to the Exodus and they definitely were not ordained by God.

From my prior post…from 1John 4…6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

From its OT Roots:

Numbers 27:
15 Moses said to the Lord, 16 “May the Lord, the God who gives breath to all living things, appoint someone over this community 17 to go out and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in, so the Lord’s people will not be like sheep without a shepherd.”
18 So the Lord said to Moses, “Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit of leadership,[a] and lay your hand on him. 19 Have him stand before Eleazar the priest and the entire assembly and commission him in their presence. 20 Give him some of your authority so the whole Israelite community will obey him. 21 He is to stand before Eleazar the priest, who will obtain decisions for him by inquiring of the Urim before the Lord. At his command he and the entire community of the Israelites will go out, and at his command they will come in.”

22 Moses did as the Lord commanded him. He took Joshua and had him stand before Eleazar the priest and the whole assembly. 23 Then he laid his hands on him and commissioned him, as the Lord instructed through Moses.

 

[pablope]

Yes, but by which “test” are prophets to submit “to see whether they are from God?”

See post #222:

…from 1John 4…6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

 

[po18guy]

See post #222:

…from 1John 4…6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

Well, this sounds like one would have to grant assent to the teachings of an Apostolic Church. We know what a tough assignment that can be. It certainly was in my case!

 

[pablope]

Originally Posted by pablope
See post #222:

Certainly…it is tough…it requires surrending and abandoning one’s pride to know it all…and realizing that the Holy Spirit does not guide the individual, the Holy Spirit guides a Church to teach the truth of Christ…and conforming our selves to the teaching of that Church…and not desiring the Church to conform to what we want it to teach.

But then again…didn’t Christ say…to carry our own crosses? But look at the reward after…

 

[stevekehl]

Yes, but by which “test” are prophets to submit “to see whether they are from God?”

What do you mean by prophet? Prophets bringing revelation have ceased, God sent His Son to bring the final revelation, spread by the apostles. Any “prophet” claiming God has sent a new message, a message contrary to Scripture, is a false prophet. A prophet in the sense of social critic, calling people to repentance and returning to God or pointing out an injustice, can bring a message from God. this message still must be in line with Scripture. Finally, a prophet in the prediction sense is proven false if His prediction doesn’t come true. Like Brigham Young, the second Prophet of the Mormon faith. He predicted that people would be discovered on the sun and moon. Ergo, false prophet.

 

[Porknpie]

Like Brigham Young, the second Prophet of the Mormon faith. He predicted that people would be discovered on the sun and moon. Ergo, false prophet.

Maybe we’ll find remains of an ancient civilization on Mars.:choocho:

 

[po18guy]

What do you mean by prophet? Prophets bringing revelation have ceased, God sent His Son to bring the final revelation, spread by the apostles. Any “prophet” claiming God has sent a new message, a message contrary to Scripture, is a false prophet. A prophet in the sense of social critic, calling people to repentance and returning to God or pointing out an injustice, can bring a message from God. this message still must be in line with Scripture. Finally, a prophet in the prediction sense is proven false if His prediction doesn’t come true. Like Brigham Young, the second Prophet of the Mormon faith. He predicted that people would be discovered on the sun and moon. Ergo, false prophet.

Exactly right.

 

[Shibolet]

Since the two of you are guests here, could you please agree on answers between yourselves, then present those answers to these forums for discussion?

I presented my answer on post #192. Instead of discussing the issue, you keep asking what is truth, as you do in post #193. Can you make that easier so that we understand you?

 

[po18guy]

I presented my answer on post #192. Instead of discussing the issue, you keep asking what is truth, as you do in post #193. Can you make that easier so that we understand you?

I was quoting Pontius Pilate (John 18:38). I failed to note that the two of you were from different belief systems. The point I was trying to make was that non-Catholic Christians challenge the beliefs of the Catholic Church, yet they do not agree even among themselves on what revealed truth is. Before say, two protestants question the Catholic Church, should they not agree amongst themselves on issues of revealed truth?

 

[Shibolet]

I was quoting Pontius Pilate (John 18:38). I failed to note that the two of you were from different belief systems. The point I was trying to make was that non-Catholic Christians challenge the beliefs of the Catholic Church, yet they do not agree even among themselves on what revealed truth is. Before say, two protestants question the Catholic Church, should they not agree amongst themselves on issues of revealed truth?

Okay, clear enough, thanks.

“Truth! What does that mean?” That was Pilate’s answer to Jesus when this said that his role was to testify to the Truth. But before he had Jesus’ reply to his question, he left the room. I would have paid anything to listen to that dialogue that did not take place. What in
your opinion did Jesus have in mind?

 

[po18guy]

Okay, clear enough, thanks.

“Truth! What does that mean?” That was Pilate’s answer to Jesus when this said that his role was to testify to the Truth. But before he had Jesus’ reply to his question, he left the room. I would have paid anything to listen to that dialogue that did not take place. What in
your opinion did Jesus have in mind?

Since Christians believe Him to be the Truth, and since He knew all things, He also knew that Pilate would bow to the crowds and allow Him to be crucified. Yet, He had to speak the truth to Pilate - it is just that for Pilate, the truth was very inconvenient, and personally threatening. Should word get back to Caesar that Pilate was ineffective in keeping the peace, a very serious fate would have awaited him. Pilate turned pragmatic and allowed the will of the crowd to prevail.

 

[Shibolet]

Since Christians believe Him to be the Truth, and since He knew all things, He also knew that Pilate would bow to the crowds and allow Him to be crucified. Yet, He had to speak the truth to Pilate - it is just that for Pilate, the truth was very inconvenient, and personally threatening. Should word get back to Caesar that Pilate was ineffective in keeping the peace, a very serious fate would have awaited him. Pilate turned pragmatic and allowed the will of the crowd to prevail.

You mean to imply that the will of the crowd was to get Jesus on the cross? Which crowd? The crowd of the secular Jews or the crowd of Jesus’ own disciples? Before you answer, take a look at Luke 19:38-40. That day when Jesus was entering Jerusalem on a
donkey, his disciples were acclaiming him king of the Jews. That acclamation was the prescription for his arresting and condemnation to the cross. So much so that Pilate nailed his verdict on the top of his cross: INRI. Contrary to Christian opinion, the Pharisees
were the ones who tried to prevent Jesus from being arrested by asking him to rebuke his disciples to stop acclaiming him king of the Jews because he could end up on the cross.
Jesus denied the warning by the Pharisees and said that if his disciples stopped, the stones would cry. Well, he sealed his own fate, and now we should stop accusing the Jewish authorities and start accusing his disciples. How about that?

 

[AlexPetrosPio]

You mean to imply that the will of the crowd was to get Jesus on the cross? Which crowd? The crowd of the secular Jews or the crowd of Jesus’ own disciples? Before you answer, take a look at Luke 19:38-40. That day when Jesus was entering Jerusalem on a
donkey, his disciples were acclaiming him king of the Jews. That acclamation was the prescription for his arresting and condemnation to the cross. So much so that Pilate nailed his verdict on the top of his cross: INRI. Contrary to Christian opinion, the Pharisees
were the ones who tried to prevent Jesus from being arrested by asking him to rebuke his disciples to stop acclaiming him king of the Jews because he could end up on the cross.
Jesus denied the warning by the Pharisees and said that if his disciples stopped, the stones would cry. Well, he sealed his own fate, and now we should stop accusing the Jewish authorities and start accusing his disciples. How about that?

Also, the “trial” that condemned Jesus to be brought before Pilate in the first place was an illegal trial in the dead of night. No matter how you twist the words, it was the reaction of the Sanhedrin that lead to Jesus’ arrest and persecution. They did not have to react that way.

 

[SteveVH]

You mean to imply that the will of the crowd was to get Jesus on the cross? Which crowd? The crowd of the secular Jews or the crowd of Jesus’ own disciples? Before you answer, take a look at Luke 19:38-40. That day when Jesus was entering Jerusalem on a
donkey, his disciples were acclaiming him king of the Jews. That acclamation was the prescription for his arresting and condemnation to the cross. So much so that Pilate nailed his verdict on the top of his cross: INRI. Contrary to Christian opinion, the Pharisees
were the ones who tried to prevent Jesus from being arrested by asking him to rebuke his disciples to stop acclaiming him king of the Jews because he could end up on the cross.
Jesus denied the warning by the Pharisees and said that if his disciples stopped, the stones would cry. Well, he sealed his own fate, and now we should stop accusing the Jewish authorities and start accusing his disciples. How about that?

You should let the History Channel in on this. It would be right up their alley.