Bibliolatry: Worship/knowledge of the book MORE than the author

[St. SteVen]

I suppose the reason that I admire Paul so, considering the knowledge of most Biblical Doctrine came from his pen.

We can agree on that.
Most of my Bible study and teaching focused on the writings of Paul.

Here's a question for you. I view doctrine as man-made. How do you view them?
A reaction, or analysis, even collected biblical thoughts, around a subject, to codify the information.
Some subjects are black and white, which end up in creeds. (which are then over-worked by committees)
Other subjects have a range of perspectives, views, opinions. The gray areas.

I react poorly to forum posters that say, "Just follow the Bible.", or "Haven't you read the Bible?"
As if our difference of opinion (OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY) indicates that I am ignorant. (Grr...)

 

[St. SteVen]

I agree. I have had communion with God that goes beyond the bible. Some people think the only way to know God is thru the bible. That simply is not correct. We have the Holy Spirit that teaches us to love God and love our neighbor. He also teaches us to obey the commandments.

It is nice to have the bible to refresh our memories about what the Holy Spirit has taught us. And for a history of our faith. But too many think it is the only source of revelation.

Fantastic post, thanks.
That is EXACTLY what I am trying to say.

The Bible makes a great tool, but it is not a replacement for God.
Nor should it be used as a weapon to torment others.

 

[St. SteVen]

A lot of believers, worry about Love, while they are on a Forum spitting on the very word of God that told them to love.
Know anyone like that, St Steven?
So, St Steven, you have to notice who does that., as that person has some issues with the word of God., among other things.

I appreciate your enthusiasm for the topic. Thanks.

Are you okay with being called a Bibliolator? Will you own it?

Question from the OP.
"What would become of your faith if you put your whole library out on the curb on trash day?"

 

[Lambano]

In my experience, the problem isn't that we're "Bibliolators", that we worship "The Book", but rather that we've fallen in love with our own perceived ability to interpret and apply that Book.

And that "we" wasn't some rhetorical flourish; I do it too.

 

[Lambano]

I agree. I have had communion with God that goes beyond the bible. Some people think the only way to know God is thru the bible. That simply is not correct. We have the Holy Spirit that teaches us to love God and love our neighbor. He also teaches us to obey the commandments.

It is nice to have the bible to refresh our memories about what the Holy Spirit has taught us. And for a history of our faith. But too many think it is the only source of revelation.

I work in specs and industry standards, so I think I can relate to the historical processes that produced this mindset. We don't operate in a vacuum; Jesus's people live in community with each other. Human beings are depraved; that particular Reformation doctrine is empirically verifiable. How do you know if someone else's revelation is from God, or just men "doing what is right in their own eyes"? How do God's people know if a prophet is sent from God or a false prophet? And particularly in the case of the Protestant Reformation, what do God's people do when they observe their shepherds (who are supposed to be Christ's representatives on earth) using their position in control of the Means of Grace and fear of post-mortem judgment to extort money for their building project? I've read Luther's theses. The Reformation was only peripherally about Luther's guilty conscience and "justification through faith"; it was really about selling "indulgences".

The Reformers decided to solve the problem by putting a stake in the ground. Sola Scriptura; the Bible is the "industry standard"; there can be no other source of revelation. The canon is closed. No more prophets. No Magisterium. Take the power out of the hands of fallen men.

But of course, the same fallible human beings are doing the interpretation of the "Sola Scriptura"...

 

[Raccoon1010]

I work in specs and industry standards, so I think I can relate to the historical processes that produced this mindset. We don't operate in a vacuum; Jesus's people live in community with each other. Human beings are depraved; that particular Reformation doctrine is empirically verifiable. How do you know if someone else's revelation is from God, or just men "doing what is right in their own eyes"? How do God's people know if a prophet is sent from God or a false prophet? And particularly in the case of the Protestant Reformation, what do God's people do when they observe their shepherds (who are supposed to be Christ's representatives on earth) using their position in control of the Means of Grace and fear of post-mortem judgment to extort money for their building project? I've read Luther's theses. The Reformation was only peripherally about Luther's guilty conscience and "justification through faith"; it was really about selling "indulgences".

The Reformers decided to solve the problem by putting a stake in the ground. Sola Scriptura; the Bible is the "industry standard"; there can be no other source of revelation. The canon is closed. No more prophets. No Magisterium. Take the power out of the hands of fallen men.

But of course, the same fallible human beings are doing the interpretation of the "Sola Scriptura"...

I worked for engineers and designed code to better design deep sea underwater connectors. Later I started my own business and designed and manufactured my own product, but I'm not an engineer, just trained in the machining industry. And still later I'm trying to come up with a theory.

And what I learned from that is to be scientific in my thinking. If it is factual and passes some of the criteria for a fact finding investigation, then we can accept it as fact until a better understanding becomes clear.

The same thinking can be used with revelation. The King James version spells out that "God repented of the evil he thought to do" when Moses talked to him on the mountain. In revelation God taught me that God can do no evil and Satan can do no good. He confirmed it with the Holy Spirit so I know it's true. I now read the New King James version.

I think if someone is a prophet or received some revelation then the Holy Spirit will testify if it is true. Otherwise we are under no obligation to believe them. That's how I was taught when I was LDS, and it makes sense to me still that I'm accepting God's true church as established in the bible.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

my relationship with the author is much more important than my relationship with the book.

“…thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” (Psalms 138:2)

Let's use the Bible to grow closer to God and each other, rather than as a weapon to destroy each other.

“Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29)

If you’re not in error against the word, it does thee no harm.

“…do not my words do good to him that walketh uprightly?” (Micah 2:7)

 

[Wrangler]

You just described a phone book or a dictionary or the the back of an Album cover.

And the Bible as well that fits the description. Revealed as a bibliatory.

 

[Charlie24]

Interesting comment.
Perhaps we can rule out ignorance as a cause for my "descent" into the "heresy" of UR.
I have read the whole Bible and studied much of it. Raised evangelical, former church elder and adult Bible teacher.
Pretty much know my stuff.

Unless I am overlooking something, that leaves deception as the cause? Some cite emotionalism.
As if I should just buckle up and face the hard facts about the horror of our loving God.
Say what?

What is your analysis?
Perhaps you don't know. Having already wrote that it "boggles" your mind.

What is my reward if I "repent"? Fear of a forever burning hell with no hope of escape? No thanks.
Tell me what it is about hell that you are so fond of. Seems so repulsive to me.

Well, I'm sticking with the gene thing.

 

[Charlie24]

We can agree on that.
Most of my Bible study and teaching focused on the writings of Paul.

Here's a question for you. I view doctrine as man-made. How do you view them?
A reaction, or analysis, even collected biblical thoughts, around a subject, to codify the information.
Some subjects are black and white, which end up in creeds. (which are then over-worked by committees)
Other subjects have a range of perspectives, views, opinions. The gray areas.

I react poorly to forum posters that say, "Just follow the Bible.", or "Haven't you read the Bible?"
As if our difference of opinion (OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY) indicates that I am ignorant. (Grr...)

There are steps to be followed to determine sound doctrine.

Sad to say that some doctrine, is man-made, Scripture must interpret Scripture.

An excellent example of man-made doctrine is the UR, there is no Scripture interpreting Scripture.

Only Scripture taken out of context, which is very easy to prove.

 

[St. SteVen]

In my experience, the problem isn't that we're "Bibliolators", that we worship "The Book", but rather that we've fallen in love with our own perceived ability to interpret and apply that Book.

That's a good way to put it.
I think there is a range of... appreciation, shall we say. The most extreme being Bibliolatry. Agree?

 

[St. SteVen]

Well, I'm sticking with the gene thing.

I couldn't help it. A dominant gene.

 

[St. SteVen]

There are steps to be followed to determine sound doctrine.

Sad to say that some doctrine, is man-made, Scripture must interpret Scripture.

An excellent example of man-made doctrine is the UR, there is no Scripture interpreting Scripture.

Only Scripture taken out of context, which is very easy to prove.

Well, even the Apostle we love uses scripture out of context to make a point.
I have wanted to do a topic on this. Here's an example.

Ephesians 4:7-8 NIV
But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 8 This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's look at the scripture being quoted.

Psalm 68:18 NIV
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oops! Which is it?
"... gave gifts to his people." - Ephesians 4:7-8 NIV
Or,
"... received gifts from people..." - Psalm 68:18 NIV

 

[Charlie24]

I couldn't help it. A dominant gene.

I don't doubt a dominant gene, but we must remember that through the fall of man, the gene was effected negatively.

 

[St. SteVen]

There are steps to be followed to determine sound doctrine.

Sure, but is there consensus on the conclusions? (nope) That's my point.

 

[St. SteVen]

I don't doubt a dominant gene, but we must remember that through the fall of man, the gene was effected negatively.

Every metaphor falls apart at some point. We appear to arrived. - LOL

 

[St. SteVen]

I don't doubt a dominant gene, but we must remember that through the fall of man, the gene was effected negatively.

I think Dominant Jeans would be a great brand name for denim pants.

 

[Charlie24]

Well, even the Apostle we love uses scripture out of context to make a point.
I have wanted to do a topic on this. Here's an example.

Ephesians 4:7-8 NIV
But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 8 This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's look at the scripture being quoted.

Psalm 68:18 NIV
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oops! Which is it?
"... gave gifts to his people." - Ephesians 4:7-8 NIV
Or,
"... received gifts from people..." - Psalm 68:18 NIV

Steven, LOL, since I've known you on the different sites, you have presented these things of perceived mistakes in Scripture. It makes me wonder if you're trying to prove the Scripture wrong, or if you believe the Scripture is always true but you need someone to explain it for you. I'm sorry to say, I believe it's the former!

Psalms 68 says, Christ has received gifts, Paul said, Christ gave gifts. Paul is quoting from this verse in Psalms 68 and knows very well wdhat he is saying, apparently Steven has no idea and assumes we have a Biblical mistake.

Psalm 68 is believed to be written by David, BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission, which makes it a prophesy.

Paul brings this prophesy to light AFTER Christ has accomplished His mission, which makes it a reality.

What Christ did (I'll not discuss, it will be very confusing to you) was to receive the gift from His Father to give to man.

So the prophesy is telling us Christ RECIEVED GIFTS,

 

[Charlie24]

Steven, LOL, since I've known you on the different sites, you have presented these things of perceived mistakes in Scripture. It makes me wonder if you're trying to prove the Scripture wrong, or if you believe the Scripture is always true but you need someone to explain it for you. I'm sorry to say, I believe it's the former!

Psalms 68 says, Christ has received gifts, Paul said, Christ gave gifts. Paul is quoting from this verse in Psalms 68 and knows very well wdhat he is saying, apparently Steven has no idea and assumes we have a Biblical mistake.

Psalm 68 is believed to be written by David, BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission, which makes it a prophesy.

Paul brings this prophesy to light AFTER Christ has accomplished His mission, which makes it a reality.

What Christ did (I'll not discuss, it will be very confusing to you) was to receive the gift from His Father to give to man.

So the prophesy is telling us Christ RECIEVED GIFTS,

Steven, LOL, since I've known you on the different sites, you have presented these things of perceived mistakes in Scripture. It makes me wonder if you're trying to prove the Scripture wrong, or if you believe the Scripture is always true but you need someone to explain it for you. I'm sorry to say, I believe it's the former!

Psalms 68 says, Christ has received gifts, Paul said, Christ gave gifts. Paul is quoting from this verse in Psalms 68 and knows very well wdhat he is saying, apparently Steven has no idea and assumes we have a Biblical mistake.

Psalm 68 is believed to be written by David, BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission, which makes it a prophesy.

Paul brings this prophesy to light AFTER Christ has accomplished His mission, which makes it a reality.

What Christ did (I'll not discuss, it will be very confusing to you) was to receive the gift from His Father to give to man.

So the prophesy is telling us Christ RECIEVED GIFTS,

Steven, LOL, since I've known you on the different sites, you have presented these things of perceived mistakes in Scripture. It makes me wonder if you're trying to prove the Scripture wrong, or if you believe the Scripture is always true but you need someone to explain it for you. I'm sorry to say, I believe it's the former!

Psalms 68 says, Christ has received gifts, Paul said, Christ gave gifts. Paul is quoting from this verse in Psalms 68 and knows very well wdhat he is saying, apparently Steven has no idea and assumes we have a Biblical mistake.

Psalm 68 is believed to be written by David, BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission, which makes it a prophesy.

Paul brings this prophesy to light AFTER Christ has accomplished His mission, which makes it a reality.

What Christ did (I'll not discuss, it will be very confusing to you) was to receive the gift from His Father to give to man.

So the prophesy is telling us Christ RECIEVED GIFTS,

This posted while I was typing, don't know what happened. But I'm sure it's enough for you to understand.

 

[St. SteVen]

Steven, LOL, since I've known you on the different sites, you have presented these things of perceived mistakes in Scripture. It makes me wonder if you're trying to prove the Scripture wrong, or if you believe the Scripture is always true but you need someone to explain it for you. I'm sorry to say, I believe it's the former!

It gets back to the information that has been withheld from us by the church. It even happens at my church.

In the interest of defending miracles, people were saying that waking up every morning is a miracle.
On one level, I believe that, but it certainly isn't convincing to the world.
Waking up every morning is a natural occurrence.

Psalms 68 says, Christ has received gifts, Paul said, Christ gave gifts. Paul is quoting from this verse in Psalms 68 and knows very well wdhat he is saying, apparently Steven has no idea and assumes we have a Biblical mistake.

You are missing the point.
This is an obvious misquote. I have no HUGE problem with that. I'm enjoying all your backpedaling and belittling though.

Psalm 68 is believed to be written by David, BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission, which makes it a prophesy.

Paul brings this prophesy to light AFTER Christ has accomplished His mission, which makes it a reality.

Really? David wrote the Psalms BEFORE Christ accomplished His mission? - LOL
So glad you straightened me out on that. - LOL
Cuz im knot two brite.

Wait... so Paul INTENTIONALLY misquotes David?
And this is supposed to be obvious to the reader that this was intentional.

Looks like evangelical workarounds to me.
"There's a OBVIOUS problem here, we need an answer, FAST!"

What Christ did (I'll not discuss, it will be very confusing to you) was to receive the gift from His Father to give to man.

So the prophesy is telling us Christ RECIEVED GIFTS,

Very confusing to me? Wow. (ouch)

"Christ RECIEVED GIFTS" ??? Like what?