Which of you

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#1
Dear friends, Which of you agrees with me that is not a

rational basis for rejecting the Holy Trinity doctrine by

calling God "gorilla glue people" and "divine Siamese

triplets" as Mr. Pneumapsuchesoma does? Are any of

you having problems accepting the Trinity doctrine on a

more rational, Bible-based manner? How do you

account for Matthew 28:19 if the Bible, so say you, does

not teach the Trinity doctrine? If the Father, Son, and

Holy Spirit are not 3 co-equal, divine persons, what

better term is there for them? In Erie Scott

 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#2
Dear friends, Which of you agrees with me that is not a

rational basis for rejecting the Holy Trinity doctrine by

calling God "gorilla glue people" and "divine Siamese

triplets" as Mr. Pneumapsuchesoma does? Are any of

you having problems accepting the Trinity doctrine on a

more rational, Bible-based manner? How do you

account for Matthew 28:19 if the Bible, so say you, does

not teach the Trinity doctrine? If the Father, Son, and

Holy Spirit are not 3 co-equal, divine persons, what

better term is there for them? In Erie Scott

Dear friends, I do not mean to pick on "pneumapsuchesoma", because he clearly

had such a bad experience with the doctrine of the Trinity that he can't say anything

but feel bad about it, and he seems to verge on placing an anathema on the Trinity

doctrine for some reason. He clearly has some strong emotions, and these come through

in His words. I don't know. Trinity belief isn't the only thing required: we also need

Christian behavior. For those who have sinned (and all have sinned), there needs to

be a soul-healing and repentance and reconciliation with God through Christ. We

all need the same thing, regardless of how we confess the doctrine of God. We all

need God's mercy and freedom of forgiveness. I don't know why there should be so

much bad feeling about the Trinity doctrine. The people who confess Trinity only

feel sorry for those who have lost their faith in what the Bible clearly teaches. I am not

ashamed of the Gospel. Nor am I ashamed of the word "persons". It is the best word

we have to explain who/what the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are. I don't believe anyone

anytime soon is going to be able to come up with a better word or better more true

explanation of the doctrine of God. Take care. May God bless and heal mr.

pneumapsuchesoma. He may not want to talk with us merely because we believe the

Trinity doctrine, and who knows why, he no longer does. God save us all. In Erie/


Scott R. Harrington

 
O

oncemore

Guest
#3
YES I AM FINDING IT VERY HARD!

as you may knew in the time that jesus christ was around the bible was not in book form so matts. book was not around there was no one in the bible
being baptized in the trinity doctrine. ACTS.2.38. And the man that had the keys to the kingdom baptized in jesus christ name.Matt.16.vs 13.19. ACTS.2.vs.38. SORRY to say this BUT the bible also talks about MELCHISEDEC. Herb.7.vs1 and he met ABRAHAM. SO HE IS A PERSON AND THIS PERSON IS STILL AROUND TODAY. FOR THIS MELCHISEDEC HAD NO BEGING OF DAYS OR END OF LIFE. I CANNOT PLACE THIS MAN IN THE
TRINITY DOCTRINE THAT WOULD MAKE IT FOUR GODS. ANYWAY I AM NOT HERE TO FIGHT. just to say whats in my heart. yours in christ jesus oncemore.
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#4
YES I AM FINDING IT VERY HARD!

as you may knew in the time that jesus christ was around the bible was not in book form so matts. book was not around there was no one in the bible

being baptized in the trinity doctrine. ACTS.2.38. And the man that had the keys to the kingdom baptized in jesus christ name.Matt.16.vs 13.19. ACTS.2.vs.38. SORRY to say this BUT the bible also talks about MELCHISEDEC. Herb.7.vs1 and he met ABRAHAM. SO HE IS A PERSON AND THIS PERSON IS STILL AROUND TODAY. FOR THIS MELCHISEDEC HAD NO BEGING OF DAYS OR END OF LIFE. I CANNOT PLACE THIS MAN IN THE
TRINITY DOCTRINE THAT WOULD MAKE IT FOUR GODS. ANYWAY I AM NOT HERE TO FIGHT. just to say whats in my heart. yours in christ jesus oncemore.


Dear oncemore,
So is your point that you don't believe in the Holy Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
So is your point that Matthew 28:19 is not Scripture, or are you believing in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Three Persons in One God, The Trinity? What say you about Matthew 28:19? If Jesus Christ didn't say this, why not just throw out the rest of the whole NT too? In Erie PA Scott Harrington
 
O

oncemore

Guest
#5
Yes Mr Scott.

I Say that Jesus did say matt28.19 but no one baptized.Like that in Acts I believe one God 3offices jesus had one father. And jesus was the flesh that God himself used.book of revelations. does not say there was three sat in heaven. This teaching started after the early chruch came off the earth(went to sleep). What
is the name In
Matt28.19 father son holy ghost are not Names but you heared this before. So let's just stop there!But thats my point God bless.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
#6
Hey scott this post would qualify what Ramon is talking about in THIS post.

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/21940-avoid-foolish-unlearned-questions.html

its self serving and self justifying and divisive and not for the GLORY OF GOD but for the reassurance of Scott. If you are right then GOD should tell you and you will not need other MEN to confirm the TRUTH.

makes me wonder if perhaps God is speaking to your heart that you might want to find another church besides Orthodox because according to your words so far, its not sounding very Biblical if your thoughts and beliefs accurately reflect the teachings found there in. ONE, Do NOT worship any GOD BUT ONE. No Mary, no three person, ONE GODHEAD. Stop trying to shove God in HUMAN terms and let God be God.

May God give you grace mercy and understanding of His Holy Words. In Jesus name we pray, amen

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/21940-avoid-foolish-unlearned-questions.html

God is God of all of creation. ISn't that enough that He loves you and is willing to call you SON?
YouTube - All Of Creation - Mercyme
 
Mar 22, 2011
386
1
0
#7
YESSSS Anandahya YOUR SERIOUS. NO DISRESPECT SCOTT.1 MUST COME TO GOD LIKE A BABY WILLING TO LEARN. NOT PUFFED UP
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#8
Yes Mr Scott.

I Say that Jesus did say matt28.19 but no one baptized.Like that in Acts I believe one God 3offices jesus had one father. And jesus was the flesh that God himself used.book of revelations. does not say there was three sat in heaven. This teaching started after the early chruch came off the earth(went to sleep). What

is the name In
Matt28.19 father son holy ghost are not Names but you heared this before. So let's just stop there!But thats my point God bless.

That is your false assumption. You assume from the silence of Acts about "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit", that they didn't obey Matthew 28:19. That is impossible. That would mean there was no Church in Acts, for the Church would be disobeying Christ. And that is impossible. You assume error and assume that because Acts says "baptized in the name of Jesus" that it wasn't the same baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Jesus commanded that, so certainly baptism according to Mat. 28:19 is baptism in the name of Jesus! Take care.
 
F

FaithfulChristianMan

Guest
#9
AnandaHya I can say that the purpose of these forums is to answer questions and to gain reassurance from fellow Christians on your feelings and beliefs as Christians. I listen to all questions. I also believe that the idea surrounding the trinity is not to worship 3 people. If you believe that Jesus was God- as all Christians do- then you believe in the trinity. I think the idea surrounding the teaching that there is a trinity, etc. is something that is confusing because it is nothing more than saying that Jesus is God and God is present among us- not an inactive creator who does not show his work in the current world. I also see what Stone is saying referring to Matthew 18:3, you must accept what the bible tells us as a child does. It may seem confusing at times, but that is the key to understanding God's teachings.
 
Dec 19, 2009
27,513
128
0
71
#10
I believe God is one person with three different responsibilities: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. This would be like a man who is a father, son, and husband, all at the same time.
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#11
I believe God is one person with three different responsibilities: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. This would be like a man who is a father, son, and husband, all at the same time.
That is Sabellianism, and is a heresy that was rejected by the early Christian Church. It came some 280 or so years after Christ, and by that time, Trinity belief had been around for some 250 years. Christ taught the Trinity in 30 AD, Matthew 28:19. Take care.
 
Feb 14, 2011
1,783
4
0
#12
Dear friends, Which of you agrees with me that is not a

rational basis for rejecting the Holy Trinity doctrine by

calling God "gorilla glue people" and "divine Siamese

triplets" as Mr. Pneumapsuchesoma does? Are any of

you having problems accepting the Trinity doctrine on a

more rational, Bible-based manner? How do you

account for Matthew 28:19 if the Bible, so say you, does

not teach the Trinity doctrine? If the Father, Son, and

Holy Spirit are not 3 co-equal, divine persons, what

better term is there for them? In Erie Scott

i dont accept any doctrine that is not in the scriptures,because it is mans.what is the purpose of adding the trinity in the scriptures;for it only brings confusion to Gods teachings.the father, his word,and the quality of his word is truth(spirit of truth) all in one God,yhwh.
jesus is in God,the holy truth is in God,all in one God.the word that comes out of God is truth.no need for the trinity.

''wakeup''.
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#13
YES I AM FINDING IT VERY HARD!

as you may knew in the time that jesus christ was around the bible was not in book form so matts. book was not around there was no one in the bible
being baptized in the trinity doctrine. ACTS.2.38. And the man that had the keys to the kingdom baptized in jesus christ name.Matt.16.vs 13.19. ACTS.2.vs.38. SORRY to say this BUT the bible also talks about MELCHISEDEC. Herb.7.vs1 and he met ABRAHAM. SO HE IS A PERSON AND THIS PERSON IS STILL AROUND TODAY. FOR THIS MELCHISEDEC HAD NO BEGING OF DAYS OR END OF LIFE. I CANNOT PLACE THIS MAN IN THE
TRINITY DOCTRINE THAT WOULD MAKE IT FOUR GODS. ANYWAY I AM NOT HERE TO FIGHT. just to say whats in my heart. yours in christ jesus oncemore.
I think you are misreading that Scripture regarding Melchisedek. "It is appointed unto men once to die", so all men must die. All. Enoch and Elijah have yet to die. It is logical, then, they return to preach Christ Jesus unto the Jews of Israel. And then be martyred (die) for Christ.
If you are going to try and prove Melchisedek is divine, give each and every Bible reference of the Scriptures on him, and show us what it means. Don't use private interpretations of Scripture or twist anything (cf. 2 Peter 3:16). Tell it like it is! It is not logical or Christian to say that Melchisedec would make "four gods" in the Trinity. And the Trinity is not "three gods". The Trinity is One God. Take care. Besides God there is no other. There is only one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (cf. Gen. 1:26).
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#14
i dont accept any doctrine that is not in the scriptures,because it is mans.what is the purpose of adding the trinity in the scriptures;for it only brings confusion to Gods teachings.the father, his word,and the quality of his word is truth(spirit of truth) all in one God,yhwh.
jesus is in God,the holy truth is in God,all in one God.the word that comes out of God is truth.no need for the trinity.

''wakeup''.
Dear wakeup, Does the Scripture itself say that every doctrine must be in the Scripture alone? Where does the Bible say we go by the Bible alone? If that were true, the Apostles could not have preached Christ, because that would be adding words about Christ to the Bible. But they did preach oral words regarding Christ. These were spoken of in 2 Thess. 2:15. Oral tradition is added to the Bible, and as it is the tradition of God, it, too, comes from God, and is inspired by God the Holy Spirit. The Holy Trinity tradition is inspired by God, and comes from God, because it comes from the same Church that wrote the whole NT (Mat. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15). Take care. In Erie Scott R. Harrington

 
1

1Covenant

Guest
#15
Dear wakeup, Does the Scripture itself say that every doctrine must be in the Scripture alone? Where does the Bible say we go by the Bible alone? If that were true, the Apostles could not have preached Christ, because that would be adding words about Christ to the Bible. But they did preach oral words regarding Christ. These were spoken of in 2 Thess. 2:15. Oral tradition is added to the Bible, and as it is the tradition of God, it, too, comes from God, and is inspired by God the Holy Spirit.
Humbly, I think I must disagree with this or at least say my peace concerning such uneasy statements. It is true that not every good doctrine is found word for word in the Bible but built upon good and necessary inference, however, it is also true that no good doctrine is without its scriptural underpinnings.

Even when the Apostles taught they used scriptures and unlike us, they were uniquely inspired by the Holy Spirit as well as instructed by Christ himself. Don't forget the numerous times that Christ's instructs His Apostles through scripture and experiences of which are not recorded. Consider the following:

  • And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. (no more is mentioned)
  • But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. (assurance that they will recall and teach rightly concerning what he had taught)
  • but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. (and through the Apostle's teaching it is made known to us.)
  • And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. (Again, shared by the Apostles from the One was the Word and who would have expounded the scripture or event and its meaning.)
  • Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come. (The apostle's testimony matches their teaching).
All that we have from the Apostles is based on their learning from the MASTER of the WORD. A teaching that is not completely made known to us in the Gospels as evidenced above. However, in faith we do believe that the Spirit brought to mind all those things and those are the things that the Apostles expounded upon.
I don't wish to put to fine a point on it, but I would say that the church's tradition since the time of the Apostles is to search the scripture and to test the spirits to see if they be of God (of scripture).
This is the point of SOLA SCRIPTURA (scripture alone). Scripture interprets scripture and when building a doctrine it should rest upon the scriptures and not tradition alone.

I hope that I have not misunderstood your meaning,and if so, you have my apology. If not, I offer my counsel conscious of the fact that I have a log in my own eye.

Respectfully Submitted
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#16

Humbly, I think I must disagree with this or at least say my

peace concerning such uneasy statements. It is true that not every good doctrine is

found word for word in the Bible but built upon good and necessary inference, however,

it is also true that no good doctrine is without its scriptural underpinnings.

Even when the Apostles taught they used scriptures and unlike us, they were
uniquely

inspired
by the Holy Spirit as well as instructed by Christ himself. Don't forget the

numerous times that Christ's instructs His Apostles through scripture and experiences of

which are not recorded. Consider the following:

  • And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the
  • Scriptures the things concerning Himself. (no more is mentioned)
  • But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will
  • teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.
  • (assurance that they will recall and teach rightly concerning what he had taught)
  • but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have
  • made known to you. (and through the Apostle's teaching it is made known to us.)
  • And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written
  • one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that
  • would be written. (Again, shared by the Apostles from the One was the Word and
  • who would have expounded the scripture or event and its meaning.)
  • Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to
  • small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses
  • said would come. (The apostle's testimony matches their teaching).
All that we have from the Apostles is based on their learning from the MASTER of the

WORD. A teaching that is not completely made known to us in the Gospels as evidenced

above. However, in faith we do believe that the Spirit brought to mind all those things

and those are the things that the Apostles expounded upon.

I don't wish to put to fine a point on it, but I would say that the church's tradition since

the time of the



Apostles
is to search the scripture and to test the spirits to see if they be of God (of

scripture).

This is the point of SOLA SCRIPTURA (scripture

alone). Scripture interprets scripture and when

building a doctrine it should rest upon the

scriptures and not tradition alone.

Dear 1covenant, Scripture interprets Scripture?

That is impossible. A book cannot interpret

itself, any more than a book can read itself. A

book requires a human interpreter, a human

person (a man, or woman) who reads and

interprets the book! That is only logical; and

only that is real! Consider well and remember

the case of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts

8:26-40! In context after the Holy Spirit sent

Saint Philip from Jerusalem down to Gaza and

the Ethiopian man, after the Spirit had just

spoken to St. Philip, we read: "So Philip ran to

him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah

[chapter 53:7-8, Scott H.], and said, "Do you

understand what you are reading?" And he

said, "How can I, unless someone guides

men?" And he asked Philip to come up and sit

with him [in his chariot]. The place in the

Scripture, "He was led as a sheep to the

slaughter; And as a lamb before its shearer is

silent, So He opened not His mouth. In His

humiliation His justice was taken away, And

who will declare His generation? For His life is

taken from the earth".
So the eunuch

answered Philip and said, "I ask you, of whom

does the prophet say this, of himself, or of

some other man?" Then Philip opened his

mouth, and beginning at this Scripture,

preached Jesus to him. ...." Acts 8:30-35 NKJV

OSB; page 1483; q.v.

So, it was not Scripture interpreting Scripture.

It was an apostle of Christ interpreting

Scripture for the Ethiopian. We, today, need

men of God who can come to us, at the word

of the Holy Spirit, and interpret Scripture to

show us Christ in all the Scriptures. In Erie PA

Scott R. Harrington

I hope that I have not misunderstood your meaning,and if so,

you have my apology. If not, I offer my counsel conscious of

the fact that I have a log in my own eye.

Respectfully Submitted
 
Feb 14, 2011
1,783
4
0
#17
Dear wakeup, Does the Scripture itself say that every doctrine must be in the Scripture alone? Where does the Bible say we go by the Bible alone? If that were true, the Apostles could not have preached Christ, because that would be adding words about Christ to the Bible. But they did preach oral words regarding Christ. These were spoken of in 2 Thess. 2:15. Oral tradition is added to the Bible, and as it is the tradition of God, it, too, comes from God, and is inspired by God the Holy Spirit. The Holy Trinity tradition is inspired by God, and comes from God, because it comes from the same Church that wrote the whole NT (Mat. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15). Take care. In Erie Scott R. Harrington

you have left out the holy spirit; dont you know that they were led by the holy spirit?
dont you understand that the holy spirit is still active now? today?
Jesus says seek; so, if we seek dont you think that he will send the holy spirit to guide us.do you think the h.spirit is not active now? or is the h.spirit only active before 70ad?
''wakeup''.
 
Feb 14, 2011
1,783
4
0
#18
Dear wakeup, Does the Scripture itself say that every doctrine must be in the Scripture alone? Where does the Bible say we go by the Bible alone? If that were true, the Apostles could not have preached Christ, because that would be adding words about Christ to the Bible. But they did preach oral words regarding Christ. These were spoken of in 2 Thess. 2:15. Oral tradition is added to the Bible, and as it is the tradition of God, it, too, comes from God, and is inspired by God the Holy Spirit. The Holy Trinity tradition is inspired by God, and comes from God, because it comes from the same Church that wrote the whole NT (Mat. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15). Take care. In Erie Scott R. Harrington

scott; i know that you like reading,thats an advantage, but you are reading the wrong books all you need is the bible ,concentrate on the bible genuinely seeking and God will assist you,but you must leave those books,for it will only lead you astray. i realy mean this, because i want you also to know God,and the deep things of God. this is what God wants from us. no need to compete who is the brightest and the smartest; all knowledge is not of our own,it is given to us,nothing to boast about. this is the last thing i will do.
it is not ecceptable to God. may God guide you and bless you with knowledge.for God is very generous.

''wakeup''.
 
Feb 14, 2011
1,783
4
0
#19
Humbly, I think I must disagree with this or at least say my
peace concerning such uneasy statements. It is true that not every good doctrine is

found word for word in the Bible but built upon good and necessary inference, however,

it is also true that no good doctrine is without its scriptural underpinnings.

Even when the Apostles taught they used scriptures and unlike us, they were uniquely

inspired by the Holy Spirit as well as instructed by Christ himself. Don't forget the

numerous times that Christ's instructs His Apostles through scripture and experiences of

which are not recorded. Consider the following:

  • And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the
  • Scriptures the things concerning Himself. (no more is mentioned)
  • But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will
  • teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.
  • (assurance that they will recall and teach rightly concerning what he had taught)
  • but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have
  • made known to you. (and through the Apostle's teaching it is made known to us.)
  • And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written
  • one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that
  • would be written. (Again, shared by the Apostles from the One was the Word and
  • who would have expounded the scripture or event and its meaning.)
  • Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to
  • small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses
  • said would come. (The apostle's testimony matches their teaching).
All that we have from the Apostles is based on their learning from the MASTER of the

WORD. A teaching that is not completely made known to us in the Gospels as evidenced

above. However, in faith we do believe that the Spirit brought to mind all those things

and those are the things that the Apostles expounded upon.

I don't wish to put to fine a point on it, but I would say that the church's tradition since

the time of the



Apostles is to search the scripture and to test the spirits to see if they be of God (of

scripture).

This is the point of SOLA SCRIPTURA (scripture

alone). Scripture interprets scripture and when

building a doctrine it should rest upon the

scriptures and not tradition alone.

Dear 1covenant, Scripture interprets Scripture?

That is impossible. A book cannot interpret

itself, any more than a book can read itself. A

book requires a human interpreter, a human

person (a man, or woman) who reads and

interprets the book! That is only logical; and

only that is real! Consider well and remember

the case of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts

8:26-40! In context after the Holy Spirit sent

Saint Philip from Jerusalem down to Gaza and

the Ethiopian man, after the Spirit had just

spoken to St. Philip, we read: "So Philip ran to

him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah

[chapter 53:7-8, Scott H.], and said, "Do you

understand what you are reading?" And he

said, "How can I, unless someone guides

men?" And he asked Philip to come up and sit

with him [in his chariot]. The place in the

Scripture, "He was led as a sheep to the

slaughter; And as a lamb before its shearer is

silent, So He opened not His mouth. In His

humiliation His justice was taken away, And

who will declare His generation? For His life is

taken from the earth". So the eunuch

answered Philip and said, "I ask you, of whom

does the prophet say this, of himself, or of

some other man?" Then Philip opened his

mouth, and beginning at this Scripture,

preached Jesus to him. ...." Acts 8:30-35 NKJV

OSB; page 1483; q.v.

So, it was not Scripture interpreting Scripture.

It was an apostle of Christ interpreting

Scripture for the Ethiopian. We, today, need

men of God who can come to us, at the word

of the Holy Spirit, and interpret Scripture to

show us Christ in all the Scriptures. In Erie PA

Scott R. Harrington

I hope that I have not misunderstood your meaning,and if so,

you have my apology. If not, I offer my counsel conscious of

the fact that I have a log in my own eye.

Respectfully Submitted

sola scriptura; here again you have left out the holy spirit.
the spirit of truth is in the scriptures.you keep on mentioning the church; the church,but you have your church in your mind.dont you know that Gods church is greater than your church? dont you understand that Gods church consist of living creatures? at christ coming , not only your church will be resurected, does this ever occur to you? who will be resurected? all them that have been feeding on the flesh of christ,not who have been feeding on the flesh of the men who wrote books about the bible. have a good one.

''wakeup''.
 
1

1Covenant

Guest
#20
Dear Scott,

As a fellow orthodox (not the eastern) I humbly point out that one should not jump past the engineering of the engine straight to the mechanic. It is true that the mechanic does the work but he must first be educated by one familiar with the design and engineering and on its uses. The apostles were such. The Word made flesh declared to them in a special way how the Word in the OT scripture was to be interpreted to declare the Word. It is not Phillip as the mechanic who has wrought this explanation but the Spirit through him causing him to recall all that The Word, himself, interpreted for him. This is the NT - the apostles declaring what the WORD has made known about the Word.
This is the case so that we might know that Phillip has not created something new from the scripture but rather revealed something ancient from the passages. What is meant by the scripture interpreting scripture is that you cannot pull out of scripture a meaning that is contradicted by another scripture. Therefore a biblical insight must be built upon two or more witnesses of God's Word and the more witnesses from God's Word the more assured we can be of its validity. This is what it meant by scripture interprets scripture. Interpretation should not occur in a vacuum devoid of the whole counsel of God.
This is why it is said that Phillip taught "beginning at this scripture..." He did not stop with one witness but began with the one the Eunuch was struggling with.

Tradition is well and good and is even beneficial to the weak! A poor man, who is unable to be formally educated in the auto mechanic trade, may learn much about the engine service through observation and imitation of another trained mechanic and it may even enable him to make a living on it. However, he will, in the end, be in danger of lacking crucial knowledge that will avoid error because he has not received the full counsel needed to understand the engine's full design purpose of its many parts.

Respectfully Submitted