The words of "others"

[KennethC]

So basically Ken you are saying the Bible is incomplete and there are books that should not have been added. So God allowed "men" to compile His Word which is in a sense wrong? So are we reading the Word of God that is actually incorrect? So God has let this "inaccurate" Bible exist without Him "fixing" it? If any or all of these are true then what can we believe in God's Word if one little part is wrong?

Here is the thing that some do not want to face and that is without the Holy Spirit guiding one through the word no man or woman can comprehend what is written within the scriptures correctly, and the part people do not seem to want to face is that from the KJV on there are translation errors as well as other errors in newer translations.

Example: Original translation had 2 Samuel 21:19 say Elhanan killed Goliath, but we know this is not correct because David did, therefore later translations added the "brother of" back into the scripture to correct this.

The ESV, NASV, HCSB, ISV, and a few others did not put this correction back into their bibles.

This is why the Holy Spirit of God is to be relied on more than man or man made teaching systems, because these errors even though few in some versions such as the KJV are still used against us in debates from unbelievers. In order to stand firm and defend the word we must be well studied in why these errors were done during translation.

It is not that the Word of God is wrong, it is of the fact that men are prone to making errors and this is shown by the translation errors as well as other deliberate changes to scriptures in other versions.

 

[KennethC]

More proof of your ignorance....

Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

God uses men every day to give his word, make the sense known and give a reasonable application<--Ezra

Way to go Dcon use a scripture from the OT to defend your stance, when the NT states that if we have any questions ask God in prayer and He will reveal the truth of His knowledge to us by the Holy Spirit.

There is more then one place the NT says the Holy Spirit will guide us in all truth, and that we do not need to seek out guidance of man over God. John 16:13, 1 John 2:27, and James 1:5-8 are three places that say this !!!

You call me ignorant when I am stating what the bible says, so please keep from your false allegations !!!

 

[KennethC]

Hi Ken, I am sorry to see that the Holy Spirit was quenched on this thread since I last visited Therefore in an effort to restore us to our more joyful position....

....I agree with what you said above, and the process of making it a gospel of man seems to me to be very subtle, so that things appealing intellectually are favoured over the clear word of God, or things said by people who are regarded as scholars are favoured, regardless of what God says clearly.

Often I feel I want to go back to the Gospels and speak Jesus' words because that simplicity is too often abandoned.

Jesus said Matt 18:3
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Also Luke 18:17
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Easy enough, you would think lol.

Then Paul backs this up by his experience in 1 Cor 2 1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

2 For I determined not to know any thing among you,

save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.



3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom,

but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:


5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.



And further down in the chapter he says something interesting, that there are 2 types of spiritual under the Holy Ghost’s eye:


12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world (1),

but the spirit which is of God; (2)

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. (1 and 2)


….There is the the stuff which man’s wisdom speaks… and then there is that which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual with spiritual.
IMO man’s wisdom will lead us up the garden path into dangerous complexity, while the Holy Spirit will always straighten things out in simplicity.


It's all in there Ken!!!

Yes and those are the things that I speak on because some put to much faith on what another man says or teaches and automatically take it as truth without actually testing it by the Holy Spirit and the scriptures. Then they turn around attribute it to the Holy Spirit when it came from man.

We who it really comes from when they make statements such as the Holy Spirit does not speak to us directly but only through the word. Their meaning says the Holy Spirit only speaks to us through the word when reading the bible, any other time He doesn't. I know that to not be true !!!

I have never put down education as I am all for studying the word of God, as even the word says study to prove yourself acceptable to God. (2 Timothy 2:15)

However that studying nowhere in the bible says you have to go to a bible college or a Seminary school, and it grieves my heart and my spirit, as well as the Holy Spirit those who think they are better than others just because they have gone to them.

How do you think the original 11 Apostles who walked with Jesus felt when here comes Paul along later on and has just as much if not more gospel knowledge then them revealed to Him. I do not see anywhere they gave him grief for not being around as they were walking with the Lord personally and given the knowledge directly from Him.

They could have easily said to Paul what gives you the right to be an Apostle like us, and how is it that you are rebuking a few of us (Like he did Peter) in how we are not operating properly in the faith. Instead they accepted his placement among them instead of belittling or degrading him just because he received the knowledge apart from walking personally with the Lord as they had.

This is what I see from the pride of those who go to these man made systems, they look down and belittle others who have not gone to these things and make snide remarks toward them and false accusations. The sad thing is I have many who have not gone to those schools who have just as much knowledge if not more then those that have.

 

[dcontroversal]

Way to go Dcon use a scripture from the OT to defend your stance, when the NT states that if we have any questions ask God in prayer and He will reveal the truth of His knowledge to us by the Holy Spirit.

There is more then one place the NT says the Holy Spirit will guide us in all truth, and that we do not need to seek out guidance of man over God. John 16:13, 1 John 2:27, and James 1:5-8 are three places that say this !!!

You call me ignorant when I am stating what the bible says, so please keep from your false allegations !!!

What I said was correct pal as it was your statement that was in error...

Originally Posted by KennethC

I believe I can understand the word as the Holy Spirit guides me in the studies for God and God alone is what the scriptures say is all we need to receive the truth in His knowledge.

Where does the bible say different than this, I have yet been lead to a place that says put your trust in man and man made teaching systems above that of God and His Holy Spirit.

For it is God that reveals all truth by His Holy Spirit not any man, book, or teaching system we seek out on our own.<--YOUR WORDS

And my quote was from Timothy and the statement in Ezra still stands and is the responsibility of every pastor/teacher....

Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.<--GOD's WORD

God uses men every day to give his word, make the sense known and give a reasonable application<--Ezra

And No where did I state that the Holy Spirit is not what makes it real pal.......Your sinless attitude has deluded you to any error...almost every time you speak there is some error attached!

 

[KennethC]

What I said was correct pal as it was your statement that was in error...

Originally Posted by KennethC

I believe I can understand the word as the Holy Spirit guides me in the studies for God and God alone is what the scriptures say is all we need to receive the truth in His knowledge.

Where does the bible say different than this, I have yet been lead to a place that says put your trust in man and man made teaching systems above that of God and His Holy Spirit.

For it is God that reveals all truth by His Holy Spirit not any man, book, or teaching system we seek out on our own.<--YOUR WORDS

And my quote was from Timothy and the statement in Ezra still stands and is the responsibility of every pastor/teacher....

Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.<--GOD's WORD

God uses men every day to give his word, make the sense known and give a reasonable application<--Ezra

And No where did I state that the Holy Spirit is not what makes it real pal.......Your sinless attitude has deluded you to any error...almost every time you speak there is some error attached!

Again you bend scripture to seek out guidance from man alone without that of the Holy Spirit involved.

I gave you 3 clear places in the NT that states the Holy Spirit gives us all truth in John 16:13, 1 John 2:27, and James 1:5-8, and yet you still say I am error when those scriptures clearly say that.

Also the bible says do not be called Teacher, because we are only the vessels that the Holy Spirit operates through to give the truth of His word as we are the instructors of His teachings.

Once again I am not against those bible colleges or Seminary schools if they teach correctly, but what I am against is those who go through them and then in their pride think that those 4-6 years they know it all !!!

I know of preachers that never went to either one that could bible thump you and me under the table and make us look like we just started studying yesterday. And they even say with the many 25+ years they have in study they still are revealed new truths every year in the word.

And yes once again if you place those men, books, or teaching systems before God and His Holy Spirit and accept what you are taught as truth from them without testing them by the Spirit and the word, then yes the chances of being lead in error is extremely high.

Look at the History and Discovery channels whenever they do a special on the bible, those individuals on those programs went to bible college or Seminary school. Yet I see them being right with the word maybe 15% of the time !!!


Where did I ever claim to be sinless, again with your false accusations of accusing me of something I never said !!!

 

[elf3]

It never ceases to amaze me how some try to add or take away from Scripture when the Bible clearly states that we are to do neither. The Bible that we have IS the Word of God. Do you not think that if what we have is wrong God would have fixed it? Do you think God would allow us to read something from Him that is incomplete or wrong while trying to grow closer to Him? God is the ONLY Sovereign so I am pretty sure He would not have us trying to learn about Him in something that was wrong. It would be kinda like building a house from car schematics. I know God is way smarter than that.

 

[Angela53510]

Here is the thing that some do not want to face and that is without the Holy Spirit guiding one through the word no man or woman can comprehend what is written within the scriptures correctly, and the part people do not seem to want to face is that from the KJV on there are translation errors as well as other errors in newer translations.

Example: Original translation had 2 Samuel 21:19 say Elhanan killed Goliath, but we know this is not correct because David did, therefore later translations added the "brother of" back into the scripture to correct this.

The ESV, NASV, HCSB, ISV, and a few others did not put this correction back into their bibles.

This is why the Holy Spirit of God is to be relied on more than man or man made teaching systems, because these errors even though few in some versions such as the KJV are still used against us in debates from unbelievers. In order to stand firm and defend the word we must be well studied in why these errors were done during translation.

It is not that the Word of God is wrong, it is of the fact that men are prone to making errors and this is shown by the translation errors as well as other deliberate changes to scriptures in other versions.

And you know that these words from 2 Sam. 21:19 were taken out and then added back because of your fluency in Hebrew, Aramaic, Ugarit, etc, and have followed the extant manuscripts?

You advocated for adding spurious books supposedly written by Barnabas, when they are obvioulsy not inspired because of the numerous errors in history, geography and theology, and WHEN they were written. Yet you somehow come up with some ancient manuscripts taken away the words, and others adding them back at a much later time. I wonder how those much later scribes knew to add words that weren't in the manuscripts! Like I said, the Byzantine scribes added many embellishments that were not in the original manuscripts. God has firmly warned about adding or taking away from the Words of the Bible!

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." Rev. 22:18-19

Your system of Biblical interpretation is one of the most man made I have ever encountered. Because it is all about "me, myself and I" and the Holy Spirit only giving inspiration to me, a man lacking in even a rudimentary understanding of Biblical hermeneutics to say nothing of understanding lower textual criticism, or understanding the basics of Hebrew or Greek. And using the internet as his primary source of information on the Bible, a place where anyone can set up a website and say anything they want. No sources, no education, and maybe mad or insane!

In Seminary, we had various world renowned scholars come in and teach on different books of the Bible. These men would basically read the Greek or Hebrew from their Bible, and then talk about the meanings that do not come through in English, and how important they are to the text. How do they know these things? Because they have studied to show themselves approved workers. And they were all incredibly humble, and admitted they did not know all things, but were continuing to study, and be corrected and learn.

Some people are unable to take correction or admonishment in this forum, because they are arrogant and somehow think God has picked them to be a prophet and the only one right on pretty much any Biblical topic, even when they can be shown how wrong they are and twisting Scripture.

Being humble - a good thing for all of us to contemplate as we discuss the Scriptures!

 

[convallaria]

Yes and those are the things that I speak on because some put to much faith on what another man says or teaches and automatically take it as truth without actually testing it by the Holy Spirit and the scriptures. Then they turn around attribute it to the Holy Spirit when it came from man.

We who it really comes from when they make statements such as the Holy Spirit does not speak to us directly but only through the word. Their meaning says the Holy Spirit only speaks to us through the word when reading the bible, any other time He doesn't. I know that to not be true !!!

I have never put down education as I am all for studying the word of God, as even the word says study to prove yourself acceptable to God. (2 Timothy 2:15)

However that studying nowhere in the bible says you have to go to a bible college or a Seminary school, and it grieves my heart and my spirit, as well as the Holy Spirit those who think they are better than others just because they have gone to them.

How do you think the original 11 Apostles who walked with Jesus felt when here comes Paul along later on and has just as much if not more gospel knowledge then them revealed to Him. I do not see anywhere they gave him grief for not being around as they were walking with the Lord personally and given the knowledge directly from Him.

They could have easily said to Paul what gives you the right to be an Apostle like us, and how is it that you are rebuking a few of us (Like he did Peter) in how we are not operating properly in the faith. Instead they accepted his placement among them instead of belittling or degrading him just because he received the knowledge apart from walking personally with the Lord as they had.

This is what I see from the pride of those who go to these man made systems, they look down and belittle others who have not gone to these things and make snide remarks toward them and false accusations. The sad thing is I have many who have not gone to those schools who have just as much knowledge if not more then those that have.

Amen Kenneth well said.

And here come the quenchers again.....

 

[KennethC]

It never ceases to amaze me how some try to add or take away from Scripture when the Bible clearly states that we are to do neither. The Bible that we have IS the Word of God. Do you not think that if what we have is wrong God would have fixed it? Do you think God would allow us to read something from Him that is incomplete or wrong while trying to grow closer to Him? God is the ONLY Sovereign so I am pretty sure He would not have us trying to learn about Him in something that was wrong. It would be kinda like building a house from car schematics. I know God is way smarter than that.

Adding or taking away from the word has nothing to do with reading or being allowed to read outside sources for more guidance and understanding if the Holy Spirit guides us there to do that.

Adding means you add things that people have to do or obey that is not written in the scriptures, and taking away is saying people don't have to obey or pay attention to parts of His word.

I have done neither and bringing up those other books does not do that either as long as we don't use them to override what is written in the word of God we have. Those other sources can be used however as more witnesses to the truth of what is written.

To accuse another of adding or taking away just because they bring up outside sources is a false accusation if you do not understand why or how they use and apply them, or why they were even lead to them. In my case the Holy Spirit guided me to them to confirm what the early church clearly taught by the Word of God so there would be no misunderstanding of what was really being said in the scriptures.

 

[KennethC]

And you know that these words from 2 Sam. 21:19 were taken out and then added back because of your fluency in Hebrew, Aramaic, Ugarit, etc, and have followed the extant manuscripts?

You advocated for adding spurious books supposedly written by Barnabas, when they are obvioulsy not inspired because of the numerous errors in history, geography and theology, and WHEN they were written. Yet you somehow come up with some ancient manuscripts taken away the words, and others adding them back at a much later time. I wonder how those much later scribes knew to add words that weren't in the manuscripts! Like I said, the Byzantine scribes added many embellishments that were not in the original manuscripts. God has firmly warned about adding or taking away from the Words of the Bible!

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." Rev. 22:18-19

Your system of Biblical interpretation is one of the most man made I have ever encountered. Because it is all about "me, myself and I" and the Holy Spirit only giving inspiration to me, a man lacking in even a rudimentary understanding of Biblical hermeneutics to say nothing of understanding lower textual criticism, or understanding the basics of Hebrew or Greek. And using the internet as his primary source of information on the Bible, a place where anyone can set up a website and say anything they want. No sources, no education, and maybe mad or insane!

In Seminary, we had various world renowned scholars come in and teach on different books of the Bible. These men would basically read the Greek or Hebrew from their Bible, and then talk about the meanings that do not come through in English, and how important they are to the text. How do they know these things? Because they have studied to show themselves approved workers. And they were all incredibly humble, and admitted they did not know all things, but were continuing to study, and be corrected and learn.

Some people are unable to take correction or admonishment in this forum, because they are arrogant and somehow think God has picked them to be a prophet and the only one right on pretty much any Biblical topic, even when they can be shown how wrong they are and twisting Scripture.

Being humble - a good thing for all of us to contemplate as we discuss the Scriptures!

Those words was not put in the original translation because the earliest manuscript they used was a little deteriorated to where they could not make out some of the words or they were missing.

We know David killed Goliath therefore Elhanan could not have as the original translation said in 2 Samuel 21:19, but we also know that this was an error do to 1 Chronicles 20:5 that says Elhanan killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath.

Those books from Barnabas that I mentioned (not the gospel of Barnabas) have been dated by many scholars to be from the 2nd century, and if that be the case there is nothing wrong with that dating for them to either be written or at least dictated by him.

Second bringing up those books does not mean I take them to change the integrity of the scriptures in the bible, therefore I am not adding or taking away from the bible that has been falsely put on me. They give insight to what the early church really taught which is why the Holy Spirit guided me to them is because I was in a early church history study.

A world renowned scholar does not make them always right and I am glad they even admitted to not know everything, as once again Augustine was thought of the same way but history proves he went the way of Apostasy in his teachings.

Still I have never been rash, harsh, or demeaning toward you as I have received back from you.

What you speak on as correction or admonishment is only by your understanding, as what you call trying to correct me I came back and showed you how your sources you mentioned were wrong.

Example:

Your source stated the "epistle of Barnabas" was a 2nd century document, but also stated Origen calling it a Catholic epistle.

Problem: The Catholic church did not exist in the 2nd century, therefore that epistle can not be a Catholic only document as it came before that church was formed.

Just because a person has not gone to Seminary or Bible college does not make them unstudied or unlearned, as I have done multiple studies on the scriptures, church history, Jewish customs and traditions, as well as on the aspects of the law.

We are to be humble and in that humbleness does not require rash or harsh statements toward an individual when they have not done it to you !!!

 

[KennethC]

Amen Kenneth well said.

And here come the quenchers again.....

Yeah it amazes that just because a person has not gone the route they have gone they believe they are unlearned and unstudied or uneducated. They would be surprised how many hours (years) in study I really have !!!

 

[elf3]

He has always inspired others in what they do and write, which is why we can not just focus on what is in the bible.

I will catch some flack on this but;

Remember the word of God says the scriptures were written by men who were inspired by God, nowhere does it say the putting together of the bible we have was. I say this because there are other writings from the early Apostles such as Barnabas that is not in the bible.

We must ask ourselves why, because the bible shows Barnabas and Paul worked side by side at first until the went there separate ways to give the good news in different areas.

Here you seem to say that the "book of Barnabas" should have been added to the Bible.

Adding or taking away from the word has nothing to do with reading or being allowed to read outside sources for more guidance and understanding if the Holy Spirit guides us there to do that.

Adding means you add things that people have to do or obey that is not written in the scriptures, and taking away is saying people don't have to obey or pay attention to parts of His word.

I have done neither and bringing up those other books does not do that either as long as we don't use them to override what is written in the word of God we have. Those other sources can be used however as more witnesses to the truth of what is written.

To accuse another of adding or taking away just because they bring up outside sources is a false accusation if you do not understand why or how they use and apply them, or why they were even lead to them. In my case the Holy Spirit guided me to them to confirm what the early church clearly taught by the Word of God so there would be no misunderstanding of what was really being said in the scriptures.

Here you seem to say that you didn't try to say the "book of Barnabas" should have been added to the Bible.

And yes trying to say some other book should have been added is a way of adding to the Bible. In an earlier post by you you seem to say three books that are in the Bible shouldn't be there....that would be taking away from the Bible.

Using other teachers in comprehension is actually one thing God tells us that He gave to us. But also we must make sure they are credible teachers.

Not a single "book" that others try to add to the Cannon of Scripture has a credible source and a couple of them only have one copy still available to even translate.

Now you are correct in that we are not to add or remove any doctrine in the Bible but trying to add books too or remove books from the Bible is the exact same thing. You would be adding "new" doctrine too and removing "sound" God given doctrine from the Bible.

 

[Angela53510]

Those words was not put in the original translation because the earliest manuscript they used was a little deteriorated to where they could not make out some of the words or they were missing.

We know David killed Goliath therefore Elhanan could not have as the original translation said in 2 Samuel 21:19, but we also know that this was an error do to 1 Chronicles 20:5 that says Elhanan killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath.

Those books from Barnabas that I mentioned (not the gospel of Barnabas) have been dated by many scholars to be from the 2nd century, and if that be the case there is nothing wrong with that dating for them to either be written or at least dictated by him.

Second bringing up those books does not mean I take them to change the integrity of the scriptures in the bible, therefore I am not adding or taking away from the bible that has been falsely put on me. They give insight to what the early church really taught which is why the Holy Spirit guided me to them is because I was in a early church history study.

A world renowned scholar does not make them always right and I am glad they even admitted to not know everything, as once again Augustine was thought of the same way but history proves he went the way of Apostasy in his teachings.

Still I have never been rash, harsh, or demeaning toward you as I have received back from you.

What you speak on as correction or admonishment is only by your understanding, as what you call trying to correct me I came back and showed you how your sources you mentioned were wrong.

Example:

Your source stated the "epistle of Barnabas" was a 2nd century document, but also stated Origen calling it a Catholic epistle.

Problem: The Catholic church did not exist in the 2nd century, therefore that epistle can not be a Catholic only document as it came before that church was formed.

Just because a person has not gone to Seminary or Bible college does not make them unstudied or unlearned, as I have done multiple studies on the scriptures, church history, Jewish customs and traditions, as well as on the aspects of the law.

We are to be humble and in that humbleness does not require rash or harsh statements toward an individual when they have not done it to you !!!

Kenneth, what I am objecting to is you setting yourself as the be all and end all in Bilble interpretation, just because you are "led by the Holy Spirit", seeing that all the rest of us are too!

Anyone not being "led by the Holy Spirit" is not a Christian, because a Christian has the Holy Spirit.

So all things being equal, ALL of us being led by the Holy Spirit, there have to be others ways of correctly dividing the truth of God's Word besides, "I said so!"

One of those ways is weighing Scripture against Scripture. Another is weighing Scripture in the light of history, learning about the writers, and the original languages. Or learning someone from a valid teacher, whose books have stood the test of time, unlike internet sites which are set up by disaffected and angry people who have been rejected by the church for heresy.

When someone comes up with totally different doctrines, like adding books or taking away books, then everything that person says comes into disrepute!

And this happens because you are not correctly educated in how to read the Bible correctly! In all my quotes, I put a link to the source or the book where I got the information.

In your posts, including the one above you are asserting many things about the nature and formation of the canon, added words, words taken away, you have never posted a single source to defend your views. Not a single explanation using the original languages Instead, you rail against people with these extraneous ideas, with no support from literature, the Bible or anything resembling scholarship.

And then you have the nerve to criticize people who have seriously studied the Bible in Seminary or College who have looked deeply into these issues, using correct scholarship, by saying something to the fact that they are still ignorant!

And you did start the debate. I am not going to stand back and have you slander me, and everyone else I know who has graduated from Seminary and is serving God in multiple capacities. Like being pastors, missionaries, helping in para church organizations, teaching and leading in their local church, etc.

It is an ignorant person who says that the educated people are the ones who are ignorant. Now, not everyone who seeks further education in studying the Bible is perfect or called by God. And certainly there are many people who have studied the Bible extensively on their own, and have discovered good doctrine from their studies and using lots of good sources to support the Bible.

But this blanket condemnation of higher education to learn the Bible better is based on jealousy, pride or shame.

I think if you are going to make such completely off the wall statements about the Bible, adding to it, subtracting from it, including entire books, you better back up your claims with some reputable sources. Since you have never done that on any issue, I will assume that you are happy to remain ignorant and pushing beliefs and doctrines which are not based on any substantial research or community understanding of the Bible, the church and for that matter - Jesus Christ himself!

If that is mean, I am sorry. It is not meant for you personally, although a good portion of this can specificallty apply to you, because we are discussing your extrabiblical revelation. But it also applies to other people who are unable to correctly divide the Word of God because of no teaching or bad teaching.

Teaching, right? It all comes back to the OP, and that we should not be afraid to read from multiple sources and authors to supplement our Bible studies. But that also means knowing a lot about these teachers, and comparing what they say against the Word of God. But if someone does form a strange doctrine, they need to be prepared to give a strong account of where they learned it, and why they think it is valid. And certainly be prepared to have it refuted by people, especially those who are educated to recognize heresy when they see it.

PS. I am not talking about the Catholic Church and when it was formed, which I agree was probably sometime in the 4th century. I am talking about the numerous times you present doctrine which comes right out of your modern day RCC indoctrination when you were studying to be a Catholic.

 

[pwrnJC]

Of course, GOD uses others to reach to us and help also...I value a real holy spirit filled person's advice, prophetic messages and words of encouragement. WE each have a gift and it needs to be used for HIS glory..why stomp out the possibility that HE uses His own? What if JESUS never used His own chosen Apostles to help others? We would have have had the spread of CHRISTIANITY in the way that it was planned in GOD's mind. I personally, enjoy reading and studying past evangelists such as John G. Lake, Billy Sunday, Smith Wigglesworth, etc.

 

[elf3]

So now in this discussion the matter of "school" has been brought up.

In any legitimate "church" one requirement to become a pastor is a Masters degree. There is a reason for this. The want a "teacher" who has been taught in subjects of God's Word beyond the "average" lay person. They want someone who has studied the ancient languages (a requirement to get a degree), someone who has studied hermeneutics (a requirement), has taken at least one class in apologetics (required) and a few other classes that are required. They don't want "just anyone" to lead the Body of Christ. God also doesn't want "just anyone" to lead His Church. He himself appoints these leaders and, again, He tells us this in His Word. If a leader fails in His task then it is on the leader. Now obviously God will remove someone but it is upon the leader to stay in God's Word and follow His commands.

There is only one group, that I know of, that does not follow this "basic rule" when appointing a "leader" in their so called church. This would be the JW's. (This is from what I have read and been told by a few JW's. Coincidentally they tend to be very quiet about this). First you have to "convert" to JW. Then you have to stay with them and follow their rules for many years. Then you have to take their classes. Then you get this so called "degree" of theirs. They also do not allow one of their teachers to just stay at one "church" and teach. They rotate "churches" week to week. This is so the cannot be "held accountable" for a specific group of people. Another interesting thing is that each week every "teacher" is saying the exact same thing given them by their "head office" (or whatever they call it). This is what would be considered a cult.

So by arguing against "school" in any fashion is to basically say "I don't care what their background is as long as they tell me what I want to hear." Would you rather learn the Word of God from someone who doesn't know the OT from the NT or would you rather learn from someone who has spent years learning the Word of God from others who "know" the Word of God?

 

[AceMichaels]

Kenneth, what I am objecting to is you setting yourself as the be all and end all in Bilble interpretation, just because you are "led by the Holy Spirit", seeing that all the rest of us are too!

Anyone not being "led by the Holy Spirit" is not a Christian, because a Christian has the Holy Spirit.

So all things being equal, ALL of us being led by the Holy Spirit, there have to be others ways of correctly dividing the truth of God's Word besides, "I said so!"

One of those ways is weighing Scripture against Scripture. Another is weighing Scripture in the light of history, learning about the writers, and the original languages. Or learning someone from a valid teacher, whose books have stood the test of time, unlike internet sites which are set up by disaffected and angry people who have been rejected by the church for heresy.

When someone comes up with totally different doctrines, like adding books or taking away books, then everything that person says comes into disrepute!

And this happens because you are not correctly educated in how to read the Bible correctly! In all my quotes, I put a link to the source or the book where I got the information.

In your posts, including the one above you are asserting many things about the nature and formation of the canon, added words, words taken away, you have never posted a single source to defend your views. Not a single explanation using the original languages Instead, you rail against people with these extraneous ideas, with no support from literature, the Bible or anything resembling scholarship.

And then you have the nerve to criticize people who have seriously studied the Bible in Seminary or College who have looked deeply into these issues, using correct scholarship, by saying something to the fact that they are still ignorant!

And you did start the debate. I am not going to stand back and have you slander me, and everyone else I know who has graduated from Seminary and is serving God in multiple capacities. Like being pastors, missionaries, helping in para church organizations, teaching and leading in their local church, etc.

It is an ignorant person who says that the educated people are the ones who are ignorant. Now, not everyone who seeks further education in studying the Bible is perfect or called by God. And certainly there are many people who have studied the Bible extensively on their own, and have discovered good doctrine from their studies and using lots of good sources to support the Bible.

But this blanket condemnation of higher education to learn the Bible better is based on jealousy, pride or shame.

I think if you are going to make such completely off the wall statements about the Bible, adding to it, subtracting from it, including entire books, you better back up your claims with some reputable sources. Since you have never done that on any issue, I will assume that you are happy to remain ignorant and pushing beliefs and doctrines which are not based on any substantial research or community understanding of the Bible, the church and for that matter - Jesus Christ himself!

If that is mean, I am sorry. It is not meant for you personally, although a good portion of this can specificallty apply to you, because we are discussing your extrabiblical revelation. But it also applies to other people who are unable to correctly divide the Word of God because of no teaching or bad teaching.

Teaching, right? It all comes back to the OP, and that we should not be afraid to read from multiple sources and authors to supplement our Bible studies. But that also means knowing a lot about these teachers, and comparing what they say against the Word of God. But if someone does form a strange doctrine, they need to be prepared to give a strong account of where they learned it, and why they think it is valid. And certainly be prepared to have it refuted by people, especially those who are educated to recognize heresy when they see it.

PS. I am not talking about the Catholic Church and when it was formed, which I agree was probably sometime in the 4th century. I am talking about the numerous times you present doctrine which comes right out of your modern day RCC indoctrination when you were studying to be a Catholic.

BRAVO....BRAVO!!!!!

 

[Stephen63]

Here you seem to say that the "book of Barnabas" should have been added to the Bible.



Here you seem to say that you didn't try to say the "book of Barnabas" should have been added to the Bible.

And yes trying to say some other book should have been added is a way of adding to the Bible. In an earlier post by you you seem to say three books that are in the Bible shouldn't be there....that would be taking away from the Bible.

Using other teachers in comprehension is actually one thing God tells us that He gave to us. But also we must make sure they are credible teachers.

Not a single "book" that others try to add to the Cannon of Scripture has a credible source and a couple of them only have one copy still available to even translate.

Now you are correct in that we are not to add or remove any doctrine in the Bible but trying to add books too or remove books from the Bible is the exact same thing. You would be adding "new" doctrine too and removing "sound" God given doctrine from the Bible.

It "seems" to me after reading what he said that you're putting words in his mouth.

It "seems" to me if that's what you got outta that, your understanding is unfruitful at the least, & falsely accusing at the most.

If you wanna accuse someone, look in the mirror & cry "fraud"!

Really, what do you call someone who thinks they're heard for their many words?

So now in this discussion the matter of "school" has been brought up.

In any legitimate "church" one requirement to become a pastor is a Masters degree.

You're either lying through your teeth, or you're ignorant of the truth. Several denominations' local churches ordain their own preachers. My son-in-law was ordained by his church.

And BTW, do you know anything about the MULTITUDES of liberal seminaries that is producing hirelings by the thousands?

There's an old saying..... "If there are icicles in the pews, it's because there's a polar bear in the pulpit."

I don't have enough fingers & toes to count how many polar bears I've encountered on this site.

 

[Angela53510]

I've just been thinking about the math of your pseudepigrapha, Kenneth.

Since dating the chronology of the New Testament is based on a stone inscription tht was uncovered at Delphi, which speaks of Gallio being the proconsul in Corinth from July of 51 to July of 52 AD. This name appears in Acts 18:12, when Paul had to appear before Gallio in Corinth.

Acts 12:25-14:28 suggest that Paul's first missionary journey followed relatively soon after Paul and Barnabas' return from Jerusalem to deliver famine relief for the poor.

Since Paul was already a member of the Sanhedrin when he watched Stephen being stoned in Acts 7, he was a minimum of 30 years older, perhaps even older. Barnabas means "encourager" and as he encouraged Paul in the faith, it could possibly point to an older man mentoring the "younger Paul" who was probably somewhere between 40-50 when he traveled with Paul.

Since in Gal. 1:18 ;and 2:1 Paul describes intervals of three and fourteen years respectively between his first two trips to Jerusalem, they likely correspond to Acts 9:28 and 11:30. Even if Paul's famine relief mission in 11:30 were as late as 47 AD, this would push his conversion back to AD 30, a full 17 years earlier. But that doesn't leave much time for the events in Acts 1-8 to occur. Thus, by the time Paul and Barnabas had their trip together, Paul was likely in his early 50's. It is unlikey that Barnabas was any younger, but we could scale back his age to between 40 -50, just to err on the safe side.

So by the 2nd century AD, Barnabas would have been between 90-100, just at the turn of the century. I find it highly unlikely that he would be writing his manuscript that late in his life. And of course, they could have been copied from earlier manuscripts, but then why would there not be more extant manuscripts if what he wrote was truly inspired? Like the rest of the New Testament? Or more likely the 5th century date is the best option of all!

In fact, this pseudographepigrapha of the epistle or acts of Barnabas is a forgery and a scam. This is born out by the mistakes in the document.


Dates come primarily from:
** Craig L. Blomberg From Pentecost to Patmos: An Introduction to Acts Through Revelation.

 

[Willie-T]

I've just been thinking about the math of your pseudepigrapha, Kenneth.

Since dating the chronology of the New Testament is based on a stone inscription tht was uncovered at Delphi, which speaks of Gallio being the proconsul in Corinth from July of 51 to July of 52 AD. This name appears in Acts 18:12, when Paul had to appear before Gallio in Corinth.

Acts 12:25-14:28 suggest that Paul's first missionary journey followed relatively soon after Paul and Barnabas' return from Jerusalem to deliver famine relief for the poor.

Since Paul was already a member of the Sanhedrin when he watched Stephen being stoned in Acts 7, he was a minimum of 30 years older, perhaps even older. Barnabas means "encourager" and as he encouraged Paul in the faith, it could possibly point to an older man mentoring the "younger Paul" who was probably somewhere between 40-50 when he traveled with Paul.

Since in Gal. 1:18 ;and 2:1 Paul describes intervals of three and fourteen years respectively between his first two trips to Jerusalem, they likely correspond to Acts 9:28 and 11:30. Even if Paul's famine relief mission in 11:30 were as late as 47 AD, this would push his conversion back to AD 30, a full 17 years earlier. But that doesn't leave much time for the events in Acts 1-8 to occur. Thus, by the time Paul and Barnabas had their trip together, Paul was likely in his early 50's. It is unlikey that Barnabas was any younger, but we could scale back his age to between 40 -50, just to err on the safe side.

So by the 2nd century AD, Barnabas would have been between 90-100, just at the turn of the century. I find it highly unlikely that he would be writing his manuscript that late in his life. And of course, they could have been copied from earlier manuscripts, but then why would there not be more extant manuscripts if what he wrote was truly inspired? Like the rest of the New Testament? Or more likely the 5th century date is the best option of all!

In fact, this pseudographepigrapha of the epistle or acts of Barnabas is a forgery and a scam. This is born out by the mistakes in the document.


Dates come primarily from:
** Craig L. Blomberg From Pentecost to Patmos: An Introduction to Acts Through Revelation.

Quite interesting. Makes me puzzle upon the timing of the writings of John, probably about the same age.

 

[Stephen63]

And this happens because you are not correctly educated in how to read the Bible correctly!

Thank you for making the statement that one can be educated incorrectly. Now go take a good, long look at yourself, being one who is a cessationist. NOWHERE in scripture is any proof the gifts of the Spirit ceased..... yet many seminaries teach it.

And then you have the nerve to criticize people who have seriously studied the Bible in Seminary or College who have looked deeply into these issues, using correct scholarship, by saying something to the fact that they are still ignorant!

It is an ignorant person who says that the educated people are the ones who are ignorant.

Remember Gamaliel? He was considered a top educator in OT law, yet when Jesus walked through the streets, he couldn't recognize his own Creator! Does it make me ignorant to say he was ignorant?

Does it make me ignorant to say all those educated people who stand behind the ecumenical movement are ignorant? Most of those people ARE seminary graduates!

Seminary was good in its day..... now most of them cannot be trusted.

Let's not forget that those who led the people to shout "crucify Him!" were highly educated scribes & pharisees.