Please help refute this letter concerning scripture

[justinthemartyr]

Can you please help me to refute these claims and scirptural pretexts that this individual used for his support. I show in the post what I stated and his response to my statements. Thank you so much! any help will do, in love!

---

I asked:
“are you confining Christ to the Bible alone?”

He responded:

"No.

I stated:

“The Word of God was spoken through the apostles, orally and in writing according to scripture. Not just in writing. If you can show me in scripture where Christ confines Himself to the written word alone, then I will listen to you.”

He replied

“You fail to note that Jesus is both the oral (John 1:1) and written (the Scripture, Gal 3:8) word of God. They cannot be divided. When God speaks, He speaks Scripture, for Jesus is the Scripture.”

I stated:

“I see scripture telling us that not everything Christ did and said was written down, in fact most was not, and that all of the books in the world could not hold it. Therefore the “Word” of God cannot be confined to scripture alone in writing.”

He responded:

“It cannot be confined to the 66 books of the Bible that we have, for you are correct about what John says. But, as I pointed out above, it is all Scripture. On the other hand, and here is your error in this, you may not think beyond what is written (1 Cor 4:6), add to God’s word (Prov 30:5-6). Nor may you add to, or take away from, His commands (Deut 12:32) and His law (Deut 4:2). What we have of these things is in the Bible.
If there is more revelation, and there will be, it will line up with the Bible. Being fair-minded, and diligently seeking the Scriptures will reveal if what is revealed is true or not.
As for your “revelation” about the word of God, it is proven fallacious,”

I stated:

“Scripture in the form of a book called the Holy Bible did not exist until the latter half of the 4th century.”

He responded:

"Such a thought is thinking beyond what is written. You have believed the lies of those who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, who departed from the faith centuries before they supposedly canonized the Bible. I have already given you the references for proof of this.

If you believe the liars, it is because you are an evildoer (Prov 17:4).

May God have mercy on you."

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

If you believe the liars, it is because you are an evildoer (Prov 17:4).

“Judge not, that you may not be judged, For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

Honestly though what kind of “intelligent” argument boils down to, “you are wrong and you just don’t see it because you are an evil doer.” Besides we are ALL evil doers, for all have sinned and fallen short… Something which someone so “deep” into scripture such as this person seems to want to think he is would know.

add to God’s word (Prov 30:5-6).

Interesting that he uses an OT verse to support his belief that you are adding to God’s word… Would Jewish believers have something to go on if they said that this man added to God’s word with the NT?

Sorry I couldn’t give you much help, but there really isn’t much you can do when someone has to resort to calling you a lier and evil doer.

God bless

 

[wardrandolph]

There are73 books in the Bible not 66.Seems this person is taking away not scriptures but entire books.Even the King James had these 7 books untill resently(approx.150 yrs ago).Scripture without Teachers(one of the ministry’s ordained by God to help the Church)can be misunderstood.Example;Phil.3:20,says our coversation is in heaven (KJV>)people who spoke the Kings English probubly knew the word conversation meant citizenship,but modern readers,unless they do some digging would not know this.This person needs to read the early church fathers.Where did the Bible come from?answer:The CATHOLIC CHURCH>

 

[justinthemartyr]

Yes, I have stated these things. He states that the canonization is a claim that is a lie and that the bible existed from the first century. he has no proof for his claim though and will not address it. i have asked him extensively about the canon of scripture and if it just fell from the sky one day, and if so, when, and where is his proof, because I do not see it in scripture.

I am looking for refutation concerning the verses he used in the responses he gave me. How they -do not apply- to the way he is using them.

He is a master at pretexts.

 

[larry85704]

You are wasting your time.

 

[wardrandolph]

Any serious or even minor study of how the Bible came about would reveal#1.The Apostles did not carry,distribute Bibles.Some May have had access to the greek O.T.The first NT.writings were written by ST.Paul approx.20 years after the Crucifiction.The first Gospels were written about 15 yrs after this.Bibles were useless for Most christians for several hundreds of years because the majority of people could neither read nor write,and even if they could,they’d have to another several hundred years for someone in germany to invent a printing press.How did people learn?Oral tradition 2Thess.2:15.

 

[ukdal1]

Who is this person you’re discussing this with? He sounds like King Arthur or something!!!Who talks like this?!?!?

“Being fair-minded, and diligently seeking the Scriptures will reveal if what is revealed is true or not.
As for your “revelation” about the word of God, it is proven fallacious,”

and

“You have believed the lies of those who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron,”

He got those sayings on his “word of the day” toilet paper…

Anyway, all this guy is doing is taking a part of a verse here and a part of a verse there and making up a fake defense. He’s already made up his mind and you can’t confuse him with the facts!

 

[wardrandolph]

History(even secular)gives the Catholic Church most of the credit for starting the educational(readind,writing,arithmatic)system. #1.1Co.4:6on’ think of men above what is written.=read the content.Don’t glory in or be puffed up,let the world think your a fool.#2.Prov 30:5-6,What about all the books written after Proverbs?Read the whole chapter and dont pull a verse out of context.#3Deut4:2,12:32 Look at Jn.13:34 Jesus gives a new commandment.1Jn.2:8 John gives a new commandment.Pulling scipture out of context can lead to confusion and hundreds if not thousands of denominations.Hope this helps and may our Lord be with you.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

You are wasting your time.

I agree, one issue here is this is his identity so he can not accept change regardless of the facts

…“You fail to note that Jesus is both the oral (John 1:1) and written (the Scripture, Gal 3:8) word of God. They cannot be divided. When God speaks, He speaks Scripture, for Jesus is the Scripture.”

Jesus did not write for us or even ask others to write, thus he did not intend writings to be our base

…"It cannot be confined to the 66 books of the Bible that we have, for you are correct about what John says. But, as I pointed out above, it is all Scripture…

and thus one of the problems who are you to say 66? or this is all? Where in the bible does it say 66 books? Where in the bible does it define the bible? The truth is you are defining the Bible not the Bible, Scripture, Jesus, or God, so are you a better source?

On the other hand, and here is your error in this, you may not think beyond what is written (1 Cor 4:6),

ah… your Bible contains entries after Corinthian’s

add to God’s word (Prov 30:5-6).

your Bible contains entries after Proverbs

Nor may you add to, or take away from, His commands (Deut 12:32) and His law (Deut 4:2). ).

your Bible contains entries after Deuteronomy

What we have of these things is in the Bible. ).

??? which part? you quote shutting down the Bible on three occasions after Deuteronomy, then Proverbs, and then Corinthians’…so does the Bible have 3 errors? or 2 errors with one of these correct, or are you just…

…

"Such a thought is thinking beyond what is written. You have believed the lies of those who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, who departed from the faith centuries before they supposedly canonized the Bible. I have already given you the references for proof of this.

If you believe the liars, it is because you are an evildoer (Prov 17:4).

May God have mercy on you."

and you as you except scripture after Deuteronomy, Proverbs, and Corinthians’ I wonder do you follow Leviticus?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Can you please help me to refute these claims and scirptural pretexts that this individual used for his support. I show in the post what I stated and his response to my statements. Thank you so much! any help will do, in love!

---

I asked:
“are you confining Christ to the Bible alone?”

He responded:

"No.

I stated:

“The Word of God was spoken through the apostles, orally and in writing according to scripture. Not just in writing. If you can show me in scripture where Christ confines Himself to the written word alone, then I will listen to you.”

He replied

“You fail to note that Jesus is both the oral (John 1:1) and written (the Scripture, Gal 3:8) word of God. They cannot be divided. When God speaks, He speaks Scripture, for Jesus is the Scripture.”

I stated:

“I see scripture telling us that not everything Christ did and said was written down, in fact most was not, and that all of the books in the world could not hold it. Therefore the “Word” of God cannot be confined to scripture alone in writing.”

He responded:

“It cannot be confined to the 66 books of the Bible that we have, for you are correct about what John says. But, as I pointed out above, it is all Scripture. On the other hand, and here is your error in this, you may not think beyond what is written (1 Cor 4:6), add to God’s word (Prov 30:5-6). Nor may you add to, or take away from, His commands (Deut 12:32) and His law (Deut 4:2). What we have of these things is in the Bible.
If there is more revelation, and there will be, it will line up with the Bible. Being fair-minded, and diligently seeking the Scriptures will reveal if what is revealed is true or not.
As for your “revelation” about the word of God, it is proven fallacious,”

I stated:

“Scripture in the form of a book called the Holy Bible did not exist until the latter half of the 4th century.”

He responded:

"Such a thought is thinking beyond what is written. You have believed the lies of those who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, who departed from the faith centuries before they supposedly canonized the Bible. I have already given you the references for proof of this.

Then he has shown by Deut.12.32 that it is a great sin to have the NT. And a good deal of the OT, come to that; I’m assuming he regards Deuteronomy as earlier than most other OT books.​

If you believe the liars, it is because you are an evildoer (Prov 17:4).

Attacking people’s characters because one does not like their beliefs is illogical, & reveals more about the person throwing mud at them than about the belief of the person attacked.​

May God have mercy on you."

It is simply a fact that the formal recognition of all 27 NT writings as a collected body of texts did not take place before the fourth century. St. Athanasius is AFAIK the first person to give a complete list of the NT books, in his 28th Festal Letter, in 367.​

He is right to imply that the NT was in circulation before then - it was, & is quoted very often. What did not happen until the fourth century was its recognition as the collection of 27 books most Churches are familiar with today. A lot of Catholic apologetic fails to make this elementary distinction - & that is not going to impress anyone who knows better. If we are going to engage in apologetics, people deserve better than illogic & half-truths Nothing is gained by underemphasising the great importance of the Bible for the Fathers.

If however he’s going to talk of men “who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, who departed from the faith centuries before they supposedly canonized the Bible”, why should we believe anything those men said ?

This is the difficulty with a certain kind of quoting of St. Augustine against the CC - he did, & believed, & preached, & encouraged, an awful lot of the things Catholic bishops have done through the ages. If Popes are the great Antichrist - St. Augustine was in communion with them. If the Mass is idolatry, he was an idolater. If the veneration of relics is an abomination, he favoured an abomination. So why some people who regard us as damnable beasts don’t regard him as equally beastly & damnable, I don’t know Or, if St. Athanasius was a liar - what possesses those who abominate his doctrine to embrace & insist on his Christology ?

At the very least, this chap needs, if he is going to throw bad names around, to say which of those naughty men departed from the faith, & in what respects. Saying: “Naughty men - nasty” (which in effect is what he is doing) does not help anyone. Errors don’t commit themselves. If he’s going to make accusations, he has a serious obligation to give precise details - or to withdraw the accusations. Disagreement is one thing - blackening people’s characters is an entirely different matter. Even if they lived a very long time ago, & were theologians, hermits, monks, martyrs, or bishops.

 

[Church_Militant]

“The Word of God was spoken through the apostles, orally and in writing according to scripture. Not just in writing. If you can show me in scripture where Christ confines Himself to the written word alone, then I will listen to you.”

He replied

"You fail to note that Jesus is both the oral (John 1:1) and written (the Scripture, Gal 3:8) word of God. They cannot be divided. When God speaks, He speaks Scripture, for Jesus is the Scripture.

"He cannot support that from the Bible because it’s not there.

I stated:

“I see scripture telling us that not everything Christ did and said was written down, in fact most was not, and that all of the books in the world could not hold it. Therefore the “Word” of God cannot be confined to scripture alone in writing.”

He responded:

"It cannot be confined to the 66 books of the Bible that we have, for you are correct about what John says. But, as I pointed out above, it is all Scripture. On the other hand, and here is your error in this, you may not think beyond what is written (1 Cor 4:6), add to God’s word (Prov 30:5-6). Nor may you add to, or take away from, His commands (Deut 12:32) and His law (Deut 4:2). What we have of these things is in the Bible.

1 Cor 4:6, It would appear here that he is the one that has done this, based upon his statements above which do indeed “go beyond what is written”. Moreover, his SS adherence in and of itself constitutes doing exactly that since the Bible nowhere says that it is the pillar and ground of the truth, does it?

Prov 30:5-6, Catholics will say Amen and Alleluia to that passage, but it is a matter of historical FACT that we have not added to the Word of God, but that those who follow the reformers of 500 years ago did in fact remove writings that were in the very same Old Testament used in Our Lord’s day and quoted by he and the apostles in their writings in he New Testament.

Deut 12:32 and Deut 4:2, again, this would not apply to the Catholic faith, but to those who reject it.

If there is more revelation, and there will be

, it will line up with the Bible. Being fair-minded, and diligently seeking the Scriptures will reveal if what is revealed is true or not.
As for your “revelation” about the word of God, it is proven fallacious,"Where precisely in the Word of God is that stated? I have read the Bible many times, and all 73 books and I have never seen such a passage.

As for things being revealed as untrue…that is exactly why I am a Catholic, having “Carefully stud[ied] to present [my]self approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” (2nd Timothy 2:15) I have found that Catholicism is true and most all of the modern post reformation step children are not.

I stated:

“Scripture in the form of a book called the Holy Bible did not exist until the latter half of the 4th century.”

He responded:

"Such a thought is thinking beyond what is written

. You have believed the lies of those who speak lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, who departed from the faith centuries before they supposedly canonized the Bible. I have already given you the references for proof of this. Not so… it IS written…in history!

Proofs? What proofs? History speaks very clearly for itself, and the Catholic Church has not ever departed from the faith and he cannot prove this from sources either in the New Testament or from the writings of the ECF. (which he will reject out of hand without ever having actually read them because they are not scripture…ignoring that they are valid Christian historical writings.

If you believe the liars, it is because you are an evildoer (Prov 17:4).

May God have mercy on you."

At this point he’s into vitriol and rhetoric and there is no further point in the discussion.

Promise to pray for him and then dust off your sandals against him and leave the discussion.

You are wasting your time.

I agree!