[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

So your simply saying your right and believe your context is correct? That is exactly what creates denominations!

That's not what I have said at all.

I'm saying the Bible is right.

I said nothing about "my" context. I was talking about taking verses in the context of the chapter, and taking chapters in the context of the book, and taking books in the context of the whole work.

You saying you have read the bible and only you know what it truely means is your justification?

Not at all, friend. Anyone who reads it and doesn't try to apply creative interpretation to the parts they don't like, but accepts it as God's plainly spoken unambiguous word, will understand it.

And my points are invalid because they are Catholic propaganda when I am Orthodox?

No, they are invalid because they are bare assertions with nothing to back them up.

Thank you for your insightful counter-point...I believe I know where you stand.

Why don't you try to calm down a little bit, friend?

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Brother Lazarus]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

This discussion has taken us to the argument of the Bible being the only authoritative item in the Christian faith as a basis for doctrine.

No this discussion has taken YOU to an "argument". I've posted several verses for you to discuss. You have failed to do so and I find it disappointing. You prefer to argue whether or not the Bible is the only authoritative item in the Christian Faith. I won't argue the point because the Bible is the Holy Word of God Himself. If you want to argue, argue with God.

You mention some false Christian Churches. A key difference is that these so called Christians use different versions of the Bible. The Jehovah's Witnesses made one up on their own! We use the KJV1611, the only true translation into English

Now why don't you post some scripture that suggests we are wrong in relying on God's Holy Word, the Bible.

Yours in Christ
Brother Lazarus

[Orthodox]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

There are a lot of people who claim to believe what the Bible says, but many of them haven't actually read it and don't know what it says, so they believe what their preacher tells them to believe. Many others like to say they believe what the Bible says, but they ignore or apply create interpretation to the parts of the bible that they wish weren't there.

If everyone read the whole Bible in context and understood it literally as God's plainly spoken Word to man, then there wouldn't be any denominations and we'd all be in agreement.

I didn't address your other points because they are unsubstantiated assertions, nothing more than Catholic propaganda.

So your simply saying your right and believe your context is correct? That is exactly what creates denominations!
You saying you have read the bible and only you know what it truely means is your justification?

And my points are invalid because they are Catholic propaganda when I am Orthodox?

Thank you for your insightful counter-point...I believe I know where you stand.

[Orthodox]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

If you have doubts about the Rapture, consider these verses from 1 Thessalonians chapter 4:

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

It is quite clear that the Rapture is in the Bible. The word “Rapture” is not in the Bible but these verses are quite clear in explaining what the “Rapture” is.

What is your interpretation? Do you still want to “interpret” the Bible on your own and anger God in the process? Or, do you see the wisdom in the Landover Baptist approach and rely on Jesus to instruct you as you read?

The idea of the Rapture and the Christians being taken up to avoid the persecution in the end times was invented by a Scotish minister in 1807 and is inconsistant with Mathew Chapter 24.

The Christians will not be saved from the evil and persecution in the end times. Is is after the reign of the Anti-Christ and the persecution of christians as outline in Mathew 24.

using your own words...if there anything else you would like to "interpret"?

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

"Why (if the Bible is sufficient apart from Holy Tradition) can a Baptist, a Jehovahs Witness, a Charismatic, and a Methodist all claim to believe what the Bible says and yet no two of them agree what it is that the Bible says?"

There are a lot of people who claim to believe what the Bible says, but many of them haven't actually read it and don't know what it says, so they believe what their preacher tells them to believe. Many others like to say they believe what the Bible says, but they ignore or apply create interpretation to the parts of the bible that they wish weren't there.

If everyone read the whole Bible in context and understood it literally as God's plainly spoken Word to man, then there wouldn't be any denominations and we'd all be in agreement.

I didn't address your other points because they are unsubstantiated assertions, nothing more than Catholic propaganda.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Orthodox]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Thanks Pastor Bill Reuban, Bobby-Joe and Brother Lazarus for your caring reply.

This discussion has taken us to the argument of the Bible being the only authoritative item in the Christian faith as a basis for doctrine.

I would like to reference an article that I doubt most will read, but explains what I cannot say in mere forum posts.

http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx

here are some points extracted from it...

"Why (if the Bible is sufficient apart from Holy Tradition) can a Baptist, a Jehovahs Witness, a Charismatic, and a Methodist all claim to believe what the Bible says and yet no two of them agree what it is that the Bible says?"

There are over 20,000 denominations of christianity because of Sola Scriptura

" ...Lord said, "every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a bad tree bringeth forth evil fruit" (Matthew 7:17). If we judge Sola Scriptura by its fruit then we are left with no other conclusion than that this tree needs to be "hewn down, and cast into the fire" (Matthew 7:19)."

"When the Church officially canonized the books of Scripture, the primary purpose in establishing an authoritative list of books which were to be received as Sacred Scripture was to protect the Church from spurious books which claimed apostolic authorship but were in fact the work of heretics (e.g. the gospel of Thomas). Heretical groups could not base their teachings on Holy Tradition because their teachings originated from outside the Church, so the only way that they could claim any authoritative basis for their heresies was to twist the meaning of the Scriptures and to forge new books in the names of apostles or Old Testament saints. The Church defended itself against heretical teachings by appealing to the apostolic origins of Holy Tradition (proven by Apostolic Succession"

"By establishing the canonical list of Sacred Scripture the Church did not intend to imply that all of the Christian Faith and all information necessary for worship and good order in the Church was contained in them"

[Brother Lazarus]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

For example, "the rapture" was an invention that was made in the last several hundred years and not held as a belief by Christians before this. That is one exmaple.

If you have doubts about the Rapture, consider these verses from 1 Thessalonians chapter 4:

16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

It is quite clear that the Rapture is in the Bible. The word “Rapture” is not in the Bible but these verses are quite clear in explaining what the “Rapture” is.

What is your interpretation? Do you still want to “interpret” the Bible on your own and anger God in the process? Or, do you see the wisdom in the Landover Baptist approach and rely on Jesus to instruct you as you read?

Yours in Christ
Brother Lazarus

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Thank you for sharing the knowledge about the the Bible's history. Was a good read.

But I did not mean to debate the legitmacy of the Bible. It was to discuss the ligitimacy of how to read it and to learn how the original Christians believed its words. There are many generally accepted teachings that were not believed by the early Christians.

For example, "the rapture" was an invention that was made in the last several hundred years and not held as a belief by Christians before this. That is one exmaple.

The discussion is on reading the bible with the proper understanding of what it means. If you don't then you start to adopt new beliefs that are not christian.

I think you are putting the cart before the horse here friend. Groups with agendas like the pagan Catholics hijacked Christianity and suppressed teachings like The Rapture in order to promote their false goddess Mary. PRAISE Jesus but these Satanic plots were crushed when He gifted the world with the KJV1611 and we could clearly see the patters of God’s dispensations upon man.

Most the teachings in the interim of the pagan interruption were done by people mislead by pagan propaganda. Worse many of these people were active and knowing conspirators in this futile attempt to thwart God’s will. Of course there were good and true Christians during the pagan interruption, the Crusades proves that, but only way we can separate the sheep from the goats it with The KJV1611 Bible.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Hi everyone,

Hi, Orthodox. You wouldn't happen to have a good gyro recipe? I can get the lamb tender enough, but I haven't been able to get the seasonings quite right.

I know that the Orthodox church over in Winston-Salem makes some good gyros. They have a big gyro supper about once a year, and I always go get one and then pass out some Chick tracts hoping to get some of them saved.

I'll just begin with a simple point on the Bible. It is my understanding that the bible is a collection of books.

Of course it is. The very word "Bible" comes from the Greek word Biblos, which roughly translated means collection of books. But I'm sure you already knew that as your Greek is probably much better than mine.

Now the debate on what was to be included in the bible was not done until the 7th century or so. I could be wrong on this point but I think we can agree it was not before the 4th century. Now the different books of the bible and many other writing by the Church Fathers definetly existed in the early years of christiantiy. The writings and the letters that were written were read at the secret services held by christians during the time of persecution.
Obviously all of the christian writings could not fit into 1 collection of books, so certain ones were chosen.

All of the books that are the Word of God were chosen. Histories such as the Book of Jasher or the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah weren't included because they weren't inspired. Other works such as the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Maccabees, or the Gospel of Judah weren't included because they are heretical and contradict the inspired works.

My point is that the Bible is essentially (though not to be reduced in importance) a summary of Christian beliefs.

The Bible is much more than that, friend. The Bible is God's eternally preserved word to man. Without it, the only way to know God's word is through hear-say from people thousands of times removed from the source. Have you ever played a child's game called "telephone"?

Reading the bible and quoting verses without looking at the context of the chapter is like walking without a compass. It is easy to get off track and find yourself somewhere else.

I agree wholeheartedly. Many so-called "Christians" like to take a single verse out of context from the middle of an early chapter in the book of John, and claim that verse is the whole point of the Bible.

Christian history is so rich and extensive that it is almost insulting to assume it has nothing to offer the world except 4 gospels and some letters written by the apostles. What of the countless saints and their writings and experiences?

I agree here too. Those writings and experiences can be a tremendous source of inspiration.

They are not, however, a suitable base for doctrine. That job belongs solely to the Bible. II Tim 3:16.

If, as you said, God would not allow anything to happen to the bible he doesn't approve of...then how do you explain the MANY diffferent versions of the bible that exist today?

There are many counterfeit Bibles out there. However, God promised to keep His word pure and preserve it forever (Ps 12:6-7). That means that there has to be a book, somewhere, that holds God's pure, preserved word.

We've already proven how we know that book is the KJV elsewhere on the forum. You can do a search.

And to put it bluntly, the bible is not the Word of God...Jesus is the Word of God. The Bible as we have it, is the written record translated down through the ages. It does not dimish in value and should still be revered for what it represents but we are not Muslims. We do not have a book that was thrown down from heaven into our hands.
For Islam, a book came down from heaven.
For Christianity, Jesus - the very Word of God - came down from heaven.

That's a nice attempt at a strawman, but no one here claims the Bible appeared supernaturally. But, the authors of the Bible wrote what God put upon their hearts to write. Therefore it is, in fact, God's word.

Go back and read the third chapter of 2 Timothy again. Here's a link if you don't have a real Bible handy.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Brother Lazarus]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Thank you for sharing the knowledge about the the Bible's history. Was a good read.

But I did not mean to debate the legitmacy of the Bible. It was to discuss the ligitimacy of how to read it and to learn how the original Christians believed its words. There are many generally accepted teachings that were not believed by the early Christians.

For example, "the rapture" was an invention that was made in the last several hundred years and not held as a belief by Christians before this. That is one exmaple.

The discussion is on reading the bible with the proper understanding of what it means. If you don't then you start to adopt new beliefs that are not christian.

If you read the Bible with the predisposition that you are going to interpret it yourself, you are being arrogant and spitting at God by thinking you can determine for yourself what God is saying.

If you read the Bible properly, with your mind open to inspiration from Jesus, you then, and only then, will truly understand God's Holy Word.

Consider these verses from 2 Timothy:

16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Tell me what you think about those verses. Are they open to interpretation?
Yours in Christ
Brother Lazarus

[Don the Baptist]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

For example, "the rapture" was an invention that was made in the last several hundred years

wouldn't want to stand to close to you in a thunderstorm...

[Orthodox]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Here at Landover Baptist we know that the Bible is the Literal Word of God and should be followed in its entirety. God didn't put things in the Bible for you not to believe. You can't pick and choose the parts of the Bible that you like and dislike. That is the path to Hell.

Thank you for sharing the knowledge about the the Bible's history. Was a good read.

But I did not mean to debate the legitmacy of the Bible. It was to discuss the ligitimacy of how to read it and to learn how the original Christians believed its words. There are many generally accepted teachings that were not believed by the early Christians.

For example, "the rapture" was an invention that was made in the last several hundred years and not held as a belief by Christians before this. That is one exmaple.

The discussion is on reading the bible with the proper understanding of what it means. If you don't then you start to adopt new beliefs that are not christian.

[Brother Lazarus]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

So what did the Christians use before the bible was put together several hundreds of years after Christ? They used the writings ans teachings that were past on.

Actually the New Testament of the Bible in its present form was generally accepted by 200 A.D. Of course various theologians over the next couple of hundred years debated back and forth over which books should be added or deleted. By the late fourth and early fifth century "final" versions emerged in both the eastern and western churches. Actual canonization didn't occur until the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as the numerous schisms from the Catholic Church emerged.

The Catholic Church uses an O.T translated from a Greek translation of the O.T texts called the Septuagint. This was a translation by Greeks of Hebrew to Greek, but for some reason the Greeks chose to add three books that were not part of the Hebrew texts. In some New Testament versions you will find these books in the Apocrypha.

The King James Version was translated from 1604 to 1611. The New Testament was translated from the Greek Textus Receptus (Received Text}. The Old Testament was translated from the Masorectic Hebrew text which was a translation from Hebrew to Greek by Hebrews. The King James Version of the O.T is obviously correct since it was originally translated from Hebrew to Greek by Hebrews and didn’t contain any books added by the Greeks.

Here at Landover Baptist we know that the Bible is the Literal Word of God and should be followed in its entirety. God didn't put things in the Bible for you not to believe. You can't pick and choose the parts of the Bible that you like and dislike. That is the path to Hell.

Yours in Christ
Brother Lazarus

[Orthodox]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

Hold it there friend, were does this several hundred years of being put together come from? The Gospels were written by eye witness to the events under Christ's guidance. Christ then guided various other writers to translate The Bible from Aramaic, to Greek and then to English and that is why the world has the KJV1611 now. These people were just human pens used by Christ.

There have been many attempts to sneak heretical doctrine in. However Christ has unmasked them all. I hope you are not suggesting the Will of God can be thwarted by mere men.

Yes i agree with you friend. The Gospels were written by witnesses of Christ. The King James version and the Bible we know it today was not put together until several hundred years after Christ. Not every church had all the collection of writtings that were made.
And when I say "put together" I do not mean "created". The Gospels existed but were books of their own. There was a council of all the churches to decide what to include and exclude so there would be no overlap and have a proper summation of the beliefs.

It was at these councils where the Creed was developed...where false beliefs were brought forth etc

The "BIBLE" as we know it today did not exist in the early days.

What I am trying to reveal here is that people get so focused on quoting Scripture and ONLY Scriputre that they forget that there have been 2,000 years worth of Christians who have walked our same path and have outlined it for us. I'm calling for you to open your eyes and look at the teachings of the church, the saints etc. These are the compasses that help us know the truth of the message of the Scripture.

Christ is the Word of God...the Bible is the writtings of Man inspired by the Word - it is a Holy Text. Its words should not be so easily thrown around without. Those that quote from it and draw their own conclusions without seeking guidance are doomed to change the meaning.

[Don the Baptist]

Re: Hi there...i'm new here

So what did the Christians use before the bible was put together several hundreds of years after Christ?

If the King James Bible was good enough for the apostle Paul, it is good enough for me! The apostle Paul quoted the KJV daily, just look in any of the epistles and you can see for yourself. Wow, are you a wacky one. I don't know where you get some of this stuff.