Why do you believe the Bible is the Word of God?

[Contarini]

I did not have the privilege to be raised Christian. Therefore, our stories are quite different. As a pagan partying surfer who first heard of the gospel of God at Calvary Chapel Costa Meas as wild teenager, you really don’t get into these issues regarding the canon of Scripture.

But presumably you ought to be able to address them now?

There was a point in my life that I really believed,

And no doubt you are sure you know just when you “really believed.” I’m dubious that you really know this, ironically for reasons that have to do with our common Augustinian heritage.

maybe in my later twenties, after spending several days with Mormon missionaries. God the Holy Spirit brought to my mind relevant scriptures to refute the Mormon gospel, even though I was quite ignorant of the Bible and Christian doctrine at the time.

Were any of those passages from Esther?

You still haven’t addressed my point. Why, just because *certain passages *of Scripture have impressed themselves on you, are you so certain that the 66-book canon, and only the 66-book canon, is the Word of God?

Why do you personally believe that the Bible is the Word of God, because of your church upbringing?

My family thought organized churches had mostly compromised the faith, so “church upbringing” sounds odd
But more relevantly, I was not giving that point the significance you are. We all hear the Faith at some point and come to believe it (or not). Whether we hear it through our upbringing or at some point later in life ought not, surely, to be an extremely significant point. And if you have a theology that only really works for “pagan surfers” who hear the Faith at some relatively late point in life, then maybe that is a problem with your theology.

If God the Holy Spirit doesn’t reveal to evangelical children that the Bible is the Word of God, then later in life they will drift away into a secular life and a non-Christian worldview.

This is a very convenient way of saying “anyone who agrees with me has heard from God, and anyone who doesn’t hasn’t; and I don’t have to give an account of why I believe what I do, because God revealed it to me and if you were really a Christian he’d have revealed it to you as well.” One wonders why, with such views, you even bother coming onto a discussion forum.

It seems you struggle some when I read your postings in what to believe.

And it seems to me that you heard the Gospel in a powerful way in an evangelical Protestant context, and have never challenged some of the assumptions that you then imbibed. You have moved on to a more rational and coherent version of Protestantism (Calvinism), but that’s a fairly easy step, since evangelical Protestantism as a whole is confused and watered down Calvinism. If Episcopalians are “Catholic lite,” most evangelicals are “Calvinist lite.” (Actually, Anglicans can be “Calvinist lite” as well, but that’s another topic.)

Edwin

 

[Reformed]

But presumably you ought to be able to address them now?

And no doubt you are sure you know just when you “really believed.” I’m dubious that you really know this, ironically for reasons that have to do with our common Augustinian heritage.

Were any of those passages from Esther?

You still haven’t addressed my point. Why, just because *certain passages *of Scripture have impressed themselves on you, are you so certain that the 66-book canon, and only the 66-book canon, is the Word of God?

My family thought organized churches had mostly compromised the faith, so “church upbringing” sounds odd
But more relevantly, I was not giving that point the significance you are. We all hear the Faith at some point and come to believe it (or not). Whether we hear it through our upbringing or at some point later in life ought not, surely, to be an extremely significant point. And if you have a theology that only really works for “pagan surfers” who hear the Faith at some relatively late point in life, then maybe that is a problem with your theology.

This is a very convenient way of saying “anyone who agrees with me has heard from God, and anyone who doesn’t hasn’t; and I don’t have to give an account of why I believe what I do, because God revealed it to me and if you were really a Christian he’d have revealed it to you as well.” One wonders why, with such views, you even bother coming onto a discussion forum.

And it seems to me that you heard the Gospel in a powerful way in an evangelical Protestant context, and have never challenged some of the assumptions that you then imbibed. You have moved on to a more rational and coherent version of Protestantism (Calvinism), but that’s a fairly easy step, since evangelical Protestantism as a whole is confused and watered down Calvinism. If Episcopalians are “Catholic lite,” most evangelicals are “Calvinist lite.” (Actually, Anglicans can be “Calvinist lite” as well, but that’s another topic.)

Edwin

I think you are at that fork on the road. It sure seems you are leaning toward that Roman Road. We know that Roman Catholic doctrine cannot change. Therefore, your views would have to change. We all know in part, but the centrality of the gospel of God’s grace is crystal clear. Do you reject imputation and a forensic justification?

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

In other words he’s putting forth the circular arguement “what I say is true because I say it’s true.”

 

[Reformed]

In other words he’s putting forth the circular arguement “what I say is true because I say it’s true.”

I am not asking anyone to believe what I say to be true. Just wrestle with the scirptures in an honest way through prayer and diligent study of the Scriptures.

 

[cfrancis]

I am not asking anyone to believe what I say to be true. Just wrestle with the scirptures in an honest way through prayer and diligent study of the Scriptures.

You’ve put the cart before the horse. The first wrestling to be done is - the theme of this thread - is who or what tells us the books in the Bible are the Scriptures inspired by God.
Unless you can produce a verse from, say, Matthew’s gospel where he tells us such, we have to look elsewhere.

 

[Contarini]

I think you are at that fork on the road. It sure seems you are leaning toward that Roman Road.

Oh, I’ve been leaning in that directly for about 13 years now!

We know that Roman Catholic doctrine cannot change.

Why do you know this? I’ve challenged you on this before. It makes no sense. Why would someone reject every other claim the RCC makes but accept this one? If you believe that they don’t change, then you are more of a Roman Catholic than I am. One of the reasons I have not become RC is that I worry that this claim is historically dishonest. Apparently you have no such worries.

Therefore, your views would have to change.

Of course. Why is that so scary? It’s called “repentance.”

We all know in part, but the centrality of the gospel of God’s grace is crystal clear.

Yes, but Calvinism does not have a lock on the Gospel of God’s grace. Calvinism has just put some weird twists in it.

Do you reject imputation and a forensic justification?

I would not say that this doctrine is heretical, if properly interpreted, but it certainly seems unnecessary. The only concept of “imputation” I find in Scripture is the imputation of faith to Abraham for righteousness, which is very different from the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to us taught by Luther. At best, forensic justification based on imputation is a rather clumsy way of saying something important. At worst, it seriously distorts the Gospel, which is about God transforming us by grace, not God engaging in legal trickery.

By the way, I grew up in the “Holiness movement”–just so you understand where I’m coming from. We Wesleyans have always had misgivings about imputation, at least in the form in which it’s often presented.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[With_Questions]

So, is it possible that all denominations are able to claim this?

Since I do not believe that the church of Jesus Christ consists of exclusively one denomination, then yes a denomination can claim this, I’m just not buying it.

How are we one with different doctrine? How are we universal with separation?

We are one by virtue of our common faith in Jesus Christ, by being a part of the Body of Christ and being the future Bride of Christ.

We are universal because those who have a common faith in Jesus Christ and are part of the body of Christ span the entire globe.

Of course the questions you ask more rightly (in my way of thinking anyway) pertain to the larger question of to what extent has the Church of Jesus Christ fallen short to what the Lord Jesus Christ had in mind when He established the church. Separate issue.

BTW…I find I am sort-of-liking both Edwin and Reformed. That is one thing I enjoy about this forum…intelligent Protestants who are not the same as myself. Odd that I find this on a Catholic forum.

 

[dawid]

I am not asking anyone to believe what I say to be true. Just wrestle with the scirptures in an honest way through prayer and diligent study of the Scriptures.

Your argument holds no water!

There can be as many interpretations as there are readers, however, given the holy Spirit-inspired authority of the Magisterium, we can arrive at a valid interpretation.

With your approach, each person is a pope, albeit without the authority handed down from the Christ to Peter and his successors.

However, your line of argument appears to be leading nowhere!

There are two approaches to assessing the veracity of the holy Scriptures:

• Conduct research based on historical evidence.
• Grace and faith.

Out of interest, I read the book :“The case for the real Jesus” by Lee Strobel. He was an agnostic/athiest who came to believe. In this book, he interviews several biblical history professors. The book reveals that the Bible is the most rigorously researched book. In respect of history and freedom of real errors, its integrity is beyond reproach. Several agnostic/athiest researchers came to believe after following this path.

This type of book on its own is not adequate for faith - His Grace is essential - without it, we are nothing.

The holy Spirit inspires us when studying Scriptures - this reveals Him to us!
We must also caution that satan will also gladly subvert this process - thus in the final analysis, authority lies with the Magisterium.

 

[ralphinal]

Since I do not believe that the church of Jesus Christ consists of exclusively one denomination, then yes a denomination can claim this, I’m just not buying it.

Ok.

We are one by virtue of our common faith in Jesus Christ, by being a part of the Body of Christ and being the future Bride of Christ.

We are universal because those who have a common faith in Jesus Christ and are part of the body of Christ span the entire globe.

Of course the questions you ask more rightly (in my way of thinking anyway) pertain to the larger question of to what extent has the Church of Jesus Christ fallen short to what the Lord Jesus Christ had in mind when He established the church. Separate issue.

BTW…I find I am sort-of-liking both Edwin and Reformed. That is one thing I enjoy about this forum…intelligent Protestants who are not the same as myself. Odd that I find this on a Catholic forum.

That question, how have we fallen short, is a big one, and one that we should look at sometime. The why for that is a good one too.

Edwin is great. Reformed has his moments. You hold you own quite well. You should not be surprised that you find this on a Catholic site. First, the Catholic Church promotes intellegent conversation about doctrine and faith. Just look at how much has been written about it. Some non-Catholic groups have a more “subjective” faith system, based on what an individual feels or sees in scriptures. To discuss intellegently, you must approach it as such. Second, the cut and paste, bomb and blast, emotional posters don’t last on here for long. They get frustraited and go away.

I love this site. Even the Muslims. Not too sure about the Calvinists, though. I think I was predestined to have issues with them