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.
(Hebrew writings + Christian writings) - non-canonical writings = Catholic Bible.

( (Hebrew scriptures + Christian scriptures) - non-canonical writings) - Deuterocanonicals = Protestant Bible.

…right?
 
How do you know this is talking about Scripture?

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.

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
Edwin, You use such terms as know, shown, convince, in your appraisal of what I said. It is not my intention to convince or convict you or anyone else of anything. What my intention is is to show what I beleive to be the light of the gospel message. Heb.11:1 says: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. And in 1Cor.2:12-14 we see:
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I beleive it is absolutely vital that when we open the bible we do so with the conviction that this is indeed the word of God and that we look at it, not with the eyes of the world but through the eyes of spiritual discernment. Consider Jn. 1:1-14
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Edwin, Let me ask you this. How was the light of Jesus manifest to the world? Wasn’t it through what he said. Through his words.
and isn’t he still being manifest to us through the WORD.

I beleive that God has a plan for us and that plan has only good things in it for us. It says in Jn.1:12 that God will give us the power to become his sons, but that power will only be given to those who receive the light, even to them that beleive on his name.
THE WORD. Sincerly Richard
 
Edwin, You use such terms as know, shown, convince, in your appraisal of what I said. It is not my intention to convince or convict you or anyone else of anything. What my intention is is to show what I beleive to be the light of the gospel message.
And as you said, “show” was one of the words I use. You will not “show” us anything if you simply recite odd conflations of Biblical texts resting on a framework of radical Protestant tradition which we do not accept and you do not acknowledge. You will only succeed in showing us that tradition is even more necessary than we previously thought!
Edwin, Let me ask you this. How was the light of Jesus manifest to the world? Wasn’t it through what he said. Through his words.
In part. But first and foremost through His deeds, principally His death and resurrection.
and isn’t he still being manifest to us through the WORD.
Again, you are moving automatically from the words Jesus spoke to Scripture. But obviously most of Scripture does not record the words Jesus spoke on earth (only four books do that, plus one quote in Acts). And the Gospel of John tells us that many of Jesus’ teachings were not written down. Whether we have access to them in any other way is, of course, open to debate.

In Christ,

Edwin
 
And as you said, “show” was one of the words I use. You will not “show” us anything if you simply recite odd conflations of Biblical texts resting on a framework of radical Protestant tradition which we do not accept and you do not acknowledge. You will only succeed in showing us that tradition is even more necessary than we previously thought!
In part. But first and foremost through His deeds, principally His death and resurrection.
[/QUOTE]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top