So I've been wondering

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZzzzZzzZzzZzzzz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
God inspired the writings that were later compiled into the bible via the members of the early Catholic Church. Jesus Himself did not write it, but Jesus, being the Messiah, was clearly prophesied in the Old Testament, and written of and described in the New Testament. Jesus did not write bible and send it forth. Based on the bible itself, that would be foolish, and there is no foolishness in Him. Rather, He trained and sent Apostles, promising them the guidance of the Holy Spirit in all of their teaching.
 
ZzzzZzzZzzZzzzz said:
[did jesus write the bible?]
Click to expand...
Jesus did not write one, single word of the bible. The bible tells of our salvation history and is a collection of inspired writting from various authors throughout the centuries. The Catholic Church assembled them into one volume.
 
ZzzzZzzZzzZzzzz said:
[did jesus write the bible?]
Click to expand...
NO! Well sorta, maybe 😃

READ 2 Tim. 3:15-17

Inspired is not dictation, nor is it direct authorship. But WHAT God wanted included in His Bible is exactly what is in the Bible; in the words of the authors under the direction of God Himself.

Love and prayers,

Pat
 
PJM said:
NO! Well sorta, maybe 😃

READ 2 Tim. 3:15-17

Inspired is not dictation, nor is it direct authorship. But WHAT God wanted included in His Bible is exactly what is in the Bible; in the words of the authors under the direction of God Himself.

Love and prayers,

Pat
Click to expand...
The thoughts and expressions are God’s but the words remain man’s. God is the Creator of the multiplicity of languages which are meant to confuse us, so I really doubt that He inspired some in Aramaic, then later switched to Greek. Just as God uses us to accomplish His purposes, He also uses our languages to convey His Truth.

As to the OP, Jesus had three years in which to write, or even create a bible, yet He did not. The one time in which it is recorded that He wrote, no one described what it was (John 8:6). What He actually did was to make Apostles and send them forth to teach. A few of them wrote down a tiny bit of what Jesus said and did. The rest is contained in the deposit of faith of His Church.
 
=po18guy;7327635]The thoughts and expressions are God’s but the words remain man’s. God is the Creator of the multiplicity of languages which are meant to confuse us, so I really doubt that He inspired some in Aramaic, then later switched to Greek. Just as God uses us to accomplish His purposes, He also uses our languages to convey His Truth.
Click to expand...
As to the OP, Jesus had three years in which to write, or even create a bible, yet He did not. The one time in which it is recorded that He wrote, no one described what it was (John 8:6). What He actually did was to make Apostles and send them forth to teach. A few of them wrote down a tiny bit of what Jesus said and did. The rest is contained in the deposit of faith of His Church.
Click to expand...
So friend, is this your proclamation of disbeleif in God and His Bible?

If the Bible is not inspired an completely true; it is of NO value fo Faith or teaching.

2 Tim. 3:15-17 ** "and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.* All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,*** that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

** 2nd. Peter Chapter One verse 20-21 ** “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. “

**2Pet.3: 16 “**peaking of this as he [PAUL] in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. “

May God grant you proper understanding my friend!
Pat
 
Humanly speaking Jesus did not write the Bible (or anything that we know of except in the sand when the Pharisees were about to stone an adulteress, but we don’t know what He wrote there absent private revelation) while on earth any more than Socrates wrote anything. Jesus, like Socrates, spoke his teachings, and his followers and their followers (etc., etc., etc.!) wrote them down. That’s speaking humanly.

Doctrinally speaking we believe that each Person of the Blessed Trinity - particularly the Holy Spirit but the Father (Yahweh) and the Son (Yeshua) included - was heavily, deeply and even obsessively involved in every letter of Scripture, hence its sacredness, its reliability, its power!

Now, there is a slight disagreement between traditional, orthodox, educated and faithful Catholics and the general run of Catholics who’ve assumed the sort of fashionable but absurd position that the Second Vatican Council nullified everything before it.

I personally am hard pressed to find anyone who walks the balance beam of prizing tradition - particularly infallible dogma of the past, the Church Fathers and Church Doctors! - and in light of said tradition discern what of the Second Vatican Council (a provisional, pastoral council) can be taken as totally Catholic and awesome and what needs to be qualified lest it result in scandal. I think many shy away from the Church Doctors and Fathers because they weren’t politically correct and throught we were supposed to convert everyone, even Jews. Though they will staunchly deny it many of today’s Catholics tell themselves that such views are radical vestigial views the modern Church needs to shun and disown as much as possible.

Yet to the balanced observer the Second Vatican Council doesn’t say half the things the louder voices in today’s Church say it says. The so-called “Spirit of Vatican II” has about as much to do with the Second Vatican Council as the “American Spirit” and “American Dream” have to do with the United States Constitution: approximately zilch.

To take this to a more general realm there will always be people who settle for the feel-good-never-think version of Truth assuming the real thing is too harsh. Ostensibly that’s why God created purgatory, or let us hope that’s why…People today think feelings are all that matter, and the heart of the matter is really that simple.

As to Divine Revelation, I think the Church will have a spring cleaning sooner or later where she reemphasizes that, yes, God inspired every word of Scripture, since there could be no meaning without words. “Meaning” as it’s been used here seems to be a Jungian carry-over, and we know Jung to be a toxic nerve gas to culture, academics and theology. I strongly recommend anyone of any literacy and inclination to get to the bottom of our modern woes read The Aryan Christ: The Secret Life of Carl Jung. See if that by itself doesn’t shock all the heresies out in a way perhaps catechisms weren’t able to do in certain cases.

God bless you all in your noble quest for Truth. I aspire to be friend and brother to you all. May Christ’s peace rule your hearts and minds today and forevermore! Amen!
 
PJM said:
So friend, is this your proclamation of disbeleif in God and His Bible?
Click to expand...
No! Not at all! I expressed it poorly. What I was trying to say was that the languages in which scripture is written are not God’s language - the heavenly language - but man’s languages. Example: I don’t think that Matthew heard our Lord’s voice in Aramaic telling him word for word what to write (even though the Lord spoke clearly to them at Jesus’ baptism and at the Transfiguration). I am thinking that the Lord inspired the sentiment in the scripture writer’s spirit and the writers themselves then put quill to papyrus in their native language. Is this any clearer?

The point being that the bible is not a simple transcription of the exact words which our Lord dictated to the writers. Some Christians today allege something similar to this, in that they view the bible as a form of paper and ink “ten commandments” that was handed to the Church by God, and the Church had no involvement other than to pass it on. This, of course, completely discounts the authority of the Church to write, compile and canonize scripture into the bible.

The nature of the OP’s question brought this concern into my mind. It may have nothing at all to do with his question, though.
 
It isn’t wrong to say God inspired the words of Revelation. God does not have just one language. God inspired the meaning and sentiment and feeling…but primarily the words which carry all three. The Bible does not merely carry meaning and sentiment but a good many specific, concrete things. I know you mean well, but if you really thought about the Church’s perennial teachings juxtaposed with what you’re saying and the logical consequences of watering down the meaning of Sacred Scripture you’d realize the imprudence of downplaying the direct nature and potency of Divine Revelation.
 
There are two parts to the Christian Bible, the Old Testament and the New Testament. The first five books of the Old Testament are ascribed to Moses; the rest of the books of the Old Testament are ascribed to other Jewish prophets. The books of the New Testament are ascribed to some of the apostles of Jesus Christ and to some associates of the apostles.
 
=po18guy;7328535]No! Not at all! I expressed it poorly. What I was trying to say was that the languages in which scripture is written are not God’s language - the heavenly language - but man’s languages. Example: I don’t think that Matthew heard our Lord’s voice in Aramaic telling him word for word what to write (even though the Lord spoke clearly to them at Jesus’ baptism and at the Transfiguration). I am thinking that the Lord inspired the sentiment in the scripture writer’s spirit and the writers themselves then put quill to papyrus in their native language. Is this any clearer?
Click to expand...
The point being that the bible is not a simple transcription of the exact words which our Lord dictated to the writers. Some Christians today allege something similar to this, in that they view the bible as a form of paper and ink “ten commandments” that was handed to the Church by God, and the Church had no involvement other than to pass it on. This, of course, completely discounts the authority of the Church to write, compile and canonize scripture into the bible.

The nature of the OP’s question brought this concern into my mind. It may have nothing at all to do with his question, though.
Click to expand...
Sincere thanks for the well done clairification! 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top