It is Written

[Buzzard]

that if the people who can claim a direct line of teaching from the first apostles are wrong

That just might be the Problem with
“Just accepting anything” that was taught by the 1st Day Church,
Too many of the Students of the Apostles;
either just didn’t get it right, or they Apostized

~{1John 2:18}~
18 Little children, it is the last time:
and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come,
even now are there many antichrists;
whereby we know that it is the last time.
19 They went out from us,
but they were not of us; for if they had been of us,
they would no doubt have continued with us:
but they went out, that they might be made manifest that
they were not all of us.
But they still went forth claiming Apostolic Authority

~{2Cor.11:13}~

13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also
be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;

.

That John claims these Apostate Students were Anti-Christ,
and Paul says they transformed themselves into Apostles
and were accepted as ministers or teachers of Righteousness is just
one more reason for the Standard of the Written word,
as Luke saith~{Luke 1:1-4}~
to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
wherein thou hast been instructed

.

Its plain that not all the 1st day church got everthing right,
and their understanding left something to be desired~{John 21:23}~
Then went this saying abroad among the brethren,
that that disciple should not die:
yet Jesus said not unto him,
He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

Just one more reason for the written wordIt seemed good to me also,
having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first,
to write unto thee

Oral Teachings and Traditions leave a lot to be desired,
unless they are backed up in writting from those chosen to write scripture for us
other wise we are left at the mercy of our teachers~{Acts 15:1}~
*And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said,
Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

---

------ James Speaking -------
Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them,
which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them,*

and

25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord,
to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,

Just one more reason for the written word,
that men, over the years have twisted and rejected it for something else
“* and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon*”
is not the fault of the Scriptures~{1Cor.10:11}~
Now all these things happened unto them for examples:
and they are written for our admonition,
upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Just on more reason for
That Which is Written as the final authority

 

[jeffreedy789]

so where did ‘that which is written’ come from?

 

[WBB]

jeffreedy789:

so where did ‘that which is written’ come from?

Well, from the bible, of course!

 

[RobedWithLight]

Buzzard:

Just one more reason for the written word,
that men, over the years have twisted and rejected it for something else
“* and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon*”
is not the fault of the Scriptures

• ~{1Cor.10:11}~
  *Now all these things happened unto them for examples: *and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Just on more reason for
That Which is Written as the final authority

Which brings us back to the same old question : Who is to rightfully interpret “that which is written”?

The fact of the matter is that 30,000 plus Christian denominations** all** claiming the same thing can’t seem to agree even among themselves.

Gerry

 

[Apologia100]

Give me enough time, and I can prove ANYTHING from scripture. However, time and conviction don’t make my interpretation correct.

 

[Buzzard]

RobedWithLight:

Which brings us back to the same old question : Who is to rightfully interpret “that which is written”?

The fact of the matter is that 30,000 plus Christian denominations** all** claiming the same thing can’t seem to agree even among themselves.

Gerry

Thats true; Altho I question your 33,000 plus figure
theologyreview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=811%between%

Let’s see … Webster calls a ‘denomination’ a “a religious organization uniting local congregations in a single legal and administrative body”

Protestants are under the control of
a single legal and administrative body"
and that would be God the Father

---

for as Christ saith
his kingdom is not of this world
They may be split as to the correct understanding of certain doctrines,
They may have opposing views as to the correct way of doing things
They may be in disobedience to the command of the Husbandman,
They may be confused and blindly following the wrong leaders
They may call themselves by different names
but they are all under **the sole administration of God the Father

**

~{Matt.25:14}~
14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country,
who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two,
and to another one; to every man according to his several ability;
and straightway took his journey.

And you know the rest of the story
Notice he did not put all his goods
in the care of only One Servant
-----{Peter}----
nor did he place One Servant
as Lord over the others
He left his goods “divided” amongst his Servants,
As he saw fit
And each one was given and had complete control
over how he used the portion given to him by the master,
And answerable only to the Master,

 

[RNRobert]

Buzzard,

You need to realize that

• Oral tradition was all Christians had to go on for the first couple decades of the church
• It took a few centuries for the NT canon to be settled

So, if oral tradition went off the rails from the start, then how can you trust the NT? For all you know, a writing written by heretics may have been accepted while a genuine apostolic writing may have been rejected. This is what Dan Brown claims in his book The Da Vinci Code: That the Church “suppressed” writings about the “real” Jesus.

Furthermore, there are thousands of denoms that claim to use the Bible to teach contradicting doctrines. Without oral tradition, there is no way of knowing what the Apostles meant when they wrote.

 

[Buzzard]

RNRobert:
You need to realize that

Oral tradition was all Christians had to go on for the first couple decades of the church

No; Not so;

They had Moses and The Prophets

~{Luke 24:25}~

**

*Then he said unto them, *

O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets,

*he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. *

~{Acts 17:11}~

**

*And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: *

who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
*11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, *

#1:
Oral Teachings

**

*in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, *

#2:
It is Written

**

and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
12 Therefore many of them believed;

*also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. *
.

 

[Buzzard]

Evidently Oral Teachings are just not reliable,
For this whole heresy in the church started with
**
And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said,
*…………………………………… ect. ect. *

• The Apostolic Example ~{Acts 15: 13}~ **

*And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, *

*Men and brethren, hearken unto me: *

• Oral Testimony *14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, **to take out of them a people for his name. *

---

It is Written15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

*16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; *

and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
*17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, *

and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
19 Wherefore my sentence is,

that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them,

*that they abstain from pollutions of idols, *

and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him,

being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
*22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, *

to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas;

namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; ………………

……………………………………………………….
.

 

[Buzzard]

Then we have Peters own words

Moses and the Prophets even more sure than

His own testimony

~{2Peter 1:16}~
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables,

when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory,

when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory,

This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard,

when we were with him in the holy mount.
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy;

whereunto ye do well that ye take heed,

 

[RNRobert]

Buzzard:

No; Not so;

They had Moses and The Prophets

Yes, but Moses and the prophets said absolutely **nothing **about Jesus. When the Council of Jerusalem met to discuss what to do with Gentile converts (Acts 15) they could not 'search the Scriptures to solve the problem because the NT didn’t exist and the Old Testament didn’t apply.

 

[hlgomez]

Protestants are under the control of
a single legal and administrative body"
and that would be God the Father

Buzzard,

Where did you get the idea of the underlined words above? If indeed you are under the “single legal and administrative body,” then how come all of Protestant denominations differ in doctrines? (I’m referring to not just one Protestant denomination.)

I agree that at the start of the Reformation, there was only one group of Protesters, that which was headed by Martin Luther. BUT as time goes by, this original group and their successors went on to have so many splits because of their varying interpretations of Scripture. Is this what you call as governed by “one single head”? It is very obvious that it’s quite the contrary.

Pio

 

[Exporter]

The poster idenified as “THE BUZZARD” is a nondenominational person…see his Profile.

He needs to condense his thesis.

 

[Buzzard]

RNRobert:

Yes, but Moses and the prophets said absolutely **nothing **about Jesus. When the Council of Jerusalem met to discuss what to do with Gentile converts (Acts 15) they could not 'search the Scriptures to solve the problem because the NT didn’t exist and the Old Testament didn’t apply.

• Yes, but Moses and the prophets said absolutely **nothing **about Jesus.

~{Luke 24:25}~
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

• the Old Testament didn’t apply.

I suppose you are going to have to explain that too me,
because I’m just not sure what you mean

 

[RNRobert]

Where in the Old Testament does it tell about the life and teachings of Jesus? When the Bereans consulted the Scriptures, they were simply checking to confirm that what Paul preached about Jesus matched the OT prophecies.

Interestingly, Peter tells the Jerusalem council in Acts 15: 7: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. (Hmmm… nothing about hearing the gospel from reading the scriptures there).

Paul tells the Thessalonians in his second epistle to them ( Chap 2, v 14) to them to stand fast to the traditions they received, whether by word of mouth or epistle. Apparently Paul considered his oral tradition to be just as binding as anything he set to paper.

If Scripture is to be our sole rule of faith, then can you please answer the following four questions using Scripture alone?

---

1) Where it says that the number of books in the New Testament is officially 27.

**2) Where does it say what books belong in the NT? **

3) Where does it say what versions of the books belong in the NT? For example: There was a version of Matthew’s Gospel that had 8 chapters worth of text. Another with 18. A third with 28. Which one is the correct one, using Scripture alone?

4) Where does it say which TRANSLATION of the books in the NT is the correct one?

To reiterate: All the early Christians had to go on was oral teaching. If oral teaching is unreliable, then everything we know about Jesus and his teachings are suspect, and that includes the New Testament.

---

---

 

[MichelleTherese]

Protestants have one Bible but thousands of different interpretations. Why would the Holy Spirit author such caos? You have to ask: Which Protestant church has the correct interpretation of scripture? After all, does baptism save or is it just a symbol? And do you or don’t you baptise infants? (for example)

How do you know which Protestant church is the one Christ founded 2,000 years ago?

I’ll stick with the one Church that has never changed its teachings or removed/added things to the Bible.

 

[jimmy]

Buzzard:

• Yes, but Moses and the prophets said absolutely **nothing **about Jesus.

~{Luke 24:25}~
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

• the Old Testament didn’t apply.

I suppose you are going to have to explain that too me,
because I’m just not sure what you mean

I would like to see you find the teachings of Jesus from the Old Testament, not from the New. If all you can find is from the gospel of Luke, then it seems you have nothing.

 

[RNRobert]

Buzzard:

• Yes, but Moses and the prophets said absolutely **nothing **about Jesus.

~{Luke 24:25}~
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Jesus was speaking to the Jews, and so were the apostles at the beginning. But OT prophecies met little to the Gentiles who knew little or nothing of the Jewish religion. When Paul spoke to the Athenians in Acts 17, he didn’t refer to the OT prophecies at all, but met them on their level, even quoting some of their philosphers.

Buzzard:

• the Old Testament didn’t apply.

I suppose you are going to have to explain that too me,
because I’m just not sure what you mean

When Jesus died on the cross, the Jewish ceremonial law was no longer binding on his followers. This meant Christians did not have to be circumcised. But there is nothing in the Old Testament about this. The decision made by the Apostles at the Council was by them through the work of the Holy Spirit without any appeal to a written word.

 

[Buzzard]

jimmy:

I would like to see you find the teachings of Jesus from the Old Testament, not from the New. If all you can find is from the gospel of Luke, then it seems you have nothing.

~{Matt.5:5}~
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

~{Psalms 37:11}~
But the meek shall inherit the earth;
**
~{Deut.8:3}
man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD

~{Matt.4:4}
*Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
*

 

[jimmy]

~{Matt.5:5}~
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

~{Psalms 37:11}~
But the meek shall inherit the earth;

How does that teach about Jesus? I could not draw one conclusion from those verses other than that the meek shall inherit the earth.