SPLIT: Which came first the Bible or the Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Richard_Kastner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Richard_Kastner

Guest
I am a new particapant in this forum. I was just browsing around and I noticed Herman Figueira’s posting #332 in which he asks which came first the bible or the church Catherine S. responded that the church came first. Well doesn’t it say in Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. Wouldn’t that make the bible first. Sincerly, Richard
 
I am a new particapant in this forum. I was just browsing around and I noticed Herman Figueira’s posting #332 in which he asks which came first the bible or the church Catherine S. responded that the church came first. Well doesn’t it say in Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. Wouldn’t that make the bible first. Sincerly, Richard
Welcome to CAF, Richard! To answer the question, John 1:1 speaks of Christ here, not the Bible; even in that verse alone we can see that it says, “the Word is God”, which shows us that it does not pertain to anything written, but rather to Christ. Verse 14 makes that clear: “And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.” Hope that helps.
 
This is a reply to Milliardo, who replied to me that he didn’t think that Jn.1:1 was talking about the bible, that it was talking of Christ. I do beleive it is talking about Christ, but I beleive it is also talking about the bible. This Christ did in various ways. In Jn. 17:17 Jesus prays to his Father "Sanctify them with the truth, thy word is truth. And in Jn.14:6 he says: I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me. Now as I understand it, we are justified before a holy God the minute we accept Christ as our lord and savior. Sanctification as refered to in Jn.17:17 on the other hand is a lifelong process and is accomplished through diligent study of the word, truth, of God, which as you point out in Jn. 1:1,14 refers to Christ.

Consider this, in Jn.6:47-51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Jesus talks about being the bread of life and that bread is His flesh. If you hook this up with Jn.1:1,14 Jn.14:6 and Jn.17:17 I think it is pretty clear that Jesus is saying that we are sanctified through the word, truth and the word, truth that Jesus gives us is the bible.
 
Richard, I’m assuming that you are not a Catholic. In some of what you write, you convey error that is typical of certain protestant denominations, but your suggestion that John 1:1 applies to the Bible would be aggressively shot down even by most Protestants. (Irrelevant to theology it would be a historically inaccurate statement.) If you want, there are plenty of Catholics in here who, if they want, can explain justification to you on this message board. Before, we do, however, I would like to be sure that you are genuinely seeking the truth, and not trying to be antagonistic or force your error upon us.
 
This is a reply to Milliardo, who replied to me that he didn’t think that Jn.1:1 was talking about the bible, that it was talking of Christ. I do beleive it is talking about Christ, but I beleive it is also talking about the bible. This Christ did in various ways. In Jn. 17:17 Jesus prays to his Father "Sanctify them with the truth, thy word is truth.
How do you know this is talking about Scripture?
And in Jn.14:6 he says: I am the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except through me. Now as I understand it, we are justified before a holy God the minute we accept Christ as our lord and savior. Sanctification as refered to in Jn.17:17 on the other hand is a lifelong process and is accomplished through diligent study of the word, truth, of God, which as you point out in Jn. 1:1,14 refers to Christ.
I’m not ruling out the possibility that John 1 could refer secondarily to Scripture, but you haven’t shown this. You have not given any reason to believe that John 17:17 refers primarily or exclusively to Scripture, nor have you supported your rather speculative connection between John 14:6 and John 17:17.
Jesus talks about being the bread of life and that bread is His flesh. If you hook this up with Jn.1:1,14 Jn.14:6 and Jn.17:17 I think it is pretty clear that Jesus is saying that we are sanctified through the word, truth and the word, truth that Jesus gives us is the bible.
This isn’t going to convince anyone who doesn’t already believe it. Again, you haven’t shown that John 6 is talking about the Bible–you just assume this because your tradition tells you to. That would be appropriate if you had orthodox tradition;)

Edwin
 
From John Wesley’s Commentary:
Joh 1:1 - In the beginning - (Referring to Gen_1:1, and Pro_8:23.) When all things began to be made by the Word: in the beginning of heaven and earth, and this whole frame of created beings, the Word existed, without any beginning. He was when all things began to be, whatsoever had a beginning. The Word - So termed Psa_33:6, and frequently by the seventy, and in the Chaldee paraphrase. So that St. John did not borrow this expression from Philo, or any heathen writer. He was not yet named Jesus, or Christ. He is the Word whom the Father begat or spoke from eternity; by whom the Father speaking, maketh all things; who speaketh the Father to us. We have, in Joh_1:18, both a real description of the Word, and the reason why he is so called. He is the only begotten Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father, and hath declared him. And the Word was with God - Therefore distinct from God the Father. The word rendered with, denotes a perpetual tendency as it were of the Son to the Father, in unity of essence. He was with God alone; because nothing beside God had then any being. And the Word was God - Supreme, eternal, independent. There was no creature, in respect of which he could be styled God in a relative sense. Therefore he is styled so in the absolute sense. The Godhead of the Messiah being clearly revealed in the Old Testament, (Jer_23:7; Hos_1:6; Psa_23:1,) the other evangelists aim at this, to prove that Jesus, a true man, was the Messiah. But when, at length, some from hence began to doubt of his Godhead, then St. John expressly asserted it, and wrote in this book as it were a supplement to the Gospels, as in the Revelation to the prophets.
I have looked in several other Protestant commentaries, and all say that the Word is Jesus, not the Bible.
 
To answer the original question. The Bible, which begins in Genesis, existed thousands of years before the RCC was formed by Constantine around 325AD
 
To answer the original question. The Bible, which begins in Genesis, existed thousands of years before the RCC was formed by Constantine around 325AD
This is not true. Please listen to this free MP3 from the Bible Christian Society.
 
To answer the original question. The Bible, which begins in Genesis, existed thousands of years before the RCC was formed by Constantine around 325AD
Okay.
  1. The “Bible” did not exist thousands of years before the Catholic Church, although the Torah and other holy scripture which now belongs to the Old Testament did.
  2. The Catholic Church was not “formed by Constantine around 325AD.”
  3. There was a process to assemble the books of the Bible as we know them today. The various communities had different collections of letters and gospels. Not all of them were accepted as part of the canon of scripture, which we now call the Bible.
But, other than that, I agree with you 100%. 😉
 
Okay.
  1. The “Bible” did not exist thousands of years before the Catholic Church, although the Torah and other holy scripture which now belongs to the Old Testament did.
  2. The Catholic Church was not “formed by Constantine around 325AD.”
  3. There was a process to assemble the books of the Bible as we know them today. The various communities had different collections of letters and gospels. Not all of them were accepted as part of the canon of scripture, which we now call the Bible.
But, other than that, I agree with you 100%. 😉
When was the Roman Catholic Church formed?
 
When was the Roman Catholic Church formed?
The Church existed from The Pentecost. The Church was called “Catholic” at a later date, but that wasn’t a foundation…just a new description of the Church that already existed. The Church in Rome was formed by the apostles Peter and Paul. The Catholic Church is not just Roman, which is probably why you are confused.
 
The Church existed from The Pentecost. The Church was called “Catholic” at a later date, but that wasn’t a foundation…just a new description of the Church that already existed. The Church in Rome was formed by the apostles Peter and Paul. The Catholic Church is not just Roman, which is probably why you are confused.
My question: when was the ROMAN catholic church formed.
 
So the RCC was formed by Peter, who was never in Rome?
Peter was in Rome. He says so in one of his epistles. Peter was martyred in Rome. He was buried in Rome. Every ancient historian who addresses the question agrees.

The problem with some Protestants isn’t that they don’t know anything about the Church, but rather that they know so much that isn’t true.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Peter was in Rome. He says so in one of his epistles. Peter was martyred in Rome. He was buried in Rome. Every ancient historian who addresses the question agrees.

The problem with some Protestants isn’t that they don’t know anything about the Church, but rather that they know so much that isn’t true.

– Mark L. Chance.
Could you point to where the bible states that Peter was in Rome?
I am always willing to learn. Thanks
 
Could you point to where the bible states that Peter was in Rome?
1 Peter 5:12-14: “I write these words to you through Silvanus, who is a trustworthy brother, to encourage you and attest that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it! Your sister in Babylon, who is with you among the chosen, sends you greetings; as does my son, Mark. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ.”

Babylon is a 1st-2nd century Christian code word for Rome. See Revelation 14:8, 16:19, and 17:5 for similar usages.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
1 Peter 5:12-14: “I write these words to you through Silvanus, who is a trustworthy brother, to encourage you and attest that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it! Your sister in Babylon, who is with you among the chosen, sends you greetings; as does my son, Mark. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ.”

Babylon is a 1st-2nd century Christian code word for Rome. See Revelation 14:8, 16:19, and 17:5 for similar usages.

– Mark L. Chance.
This tells you Peter was in Rome?

You actually believe it or are you getting the quote from an apologists website?
Anyway this is off topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top