Behold
Well-Known Member
That's because discerning Christians who understand the word of God, recognize it as the final authority.
Why trust the "Early Fathers?"
- Thread starter MatthewG
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
That's because discerning Christians who understand the word of God, recognize it as the final authority.
ScottA
Well-Known Member
No, that does not answer the question--you left out 1,500 years where "the spirit of anti-Christ was already at work", with apparent total disregard and denial of the 5 out of 7 churches that Jesus reported He had "somewhat against." Your claims are against Christ.
So, no, you did not find what you think you have.
Hello @Behold,
I don’t see it as the final authority.
I was sharing earlier where I read about Jesus who was the one taught with real authority.
Like I was saying to Dan, while Jesus taught with authority a lot of the content and context reveals Jesus speaking to a living breathing people in that day. That would mean some of the things in there as people where spoken to and about things pertain to them, and not everyone pertains to us today.
God continues to remain the final authority, at least in my opinion. Which may or may not be right.
I don’t see it as the final authority.
I was sharing earlier where I read about Jesus who was the one taught with real authority.
Like I was saying to Dan, while Jesus taught with authority a lot of the content and context reveals Jesus speaking to a living breathing people in that day. That would mean some of the things in there as people where spoken to and about things pertain to them, and not everyone pertains to us today.
God continues to remain the final authority, at least in my opinion. Which may or may not be right.
Being the pillar or ground of the truth is somewhat subjective as far as they are they who abide in the truth and the truth in them.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him,
I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
He also said,
John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth:
thy word is truth.
John 8:47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not,
because ye are not of God.
And true as well
1 John 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.
And sealed with the Spirit through belief in the truth, so as far as seducers go even the apostle John says
1 John 2:26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.
1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
And again as far as seducers go as the apostle Paul says,
2 Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
2 Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
2 Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2 Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Although on the same note, can the ground of the truth, or the expression of the same be derived from first Adam in anyway ? For example, I was thinking
The first Adam, was formed man of the dust of the ground (1 Cr 15:45 who was made a living soul)
So dust we are and to dust we shall return.
The Last Adam, is Jesus Christ (1 Cr 15:45 was made a quickening spirit)
We being the dust of ground, have Christ formed in us (Col 1:27)
That would make anyone who has Christ in them "the ground" of him in that way. As far as they abide in him and he in them. But they themselves are not the truth, but a pillar (or support) and ground of him.
Behold
Well-Known Member
That's obvious.
Think on this..
If you can't accept that the Bible is the final authority...then what is left?
Think about that and then compare THAT........to the word of God.
Perhaps this can help you see more clearly the eternal value of God's Holy Bible. @MatthewG
Last edited:
ScottA
Well-Known Member
The word of God (the Bible) can indeed be trusted.
However, the Bible itself (God) declares the error of the church including some of the church fathers. Peter said of this church age, "there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies" (2 Peter 2:1); and Paul "because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12); and John "this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world" (1 John 4:3).
Meaning, that in spite of God being true, the church will suffer attack, and destructive doctrines of false interpretations will be taught. Meanwhile, God has availed His word and Himself to us, and Christ has sent another Helper: the Holy Spirit.
Behold, I find the Bible to be of tremendous value in teaching us about life, and about living in the spirit. Gods the final authority on those matters. When it come down to brass tax of things, I trust the Bible. I just don’t trust human beings as much, and instead trust God more than human beings.
Bob
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your provocative post.
Some examples, please of false doctrine promulgated by Martin Luther.
Peace.
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
Why? Is Luther authoritative? I don't think so.
Anyway, Sola Scriptura is often misunderstood. The Reformers had 5 solae - sola scriptura, sola fide, sola gratia, solus christus, and soli Deo Gloria. If the point was to replace the church with the Bible as an authority, there could be only 1. (Call this the Highlander argument?)
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
None of those even come close to implying that you ONLY need Scripture. What does St. Paul say in Scripture is the "pillar and foundation of truth?" (Hint: Look to 1 Tim 3:15)
Jesus didn't write a book to spread His truths. The Bible under one cover didn't exist until the late 4th century. Some of the books that are included were unknown to most. Some they thought would make the cut didn't (Didicahe, Shepherd of Hermas). The Church, at the Councils of Rome (382 A.D.), Hippo (393 A.D.), and Carthage (397 A.D.) went through over 300 documents, letters, etc., that had been circulating around and chose the 27 we now call the New Testament. The vast, vast majority of humanity was illiterate until the latest 100 years give or take. A Bible only approach would have been impossible until centuries after Christianity was started.
Dan Clarkston
Well-Known Member
So you admit then that you do not believe anything God says in His Word right?
If you claim the Bible is not the Word of God, then you are admitting that it's all lies... and with that admission one cannot even accept Jesus since after all we know about Jesus and getting born again thru the Bible.
Looks like the devil has tricked you onto that slippery slope of unbelief and has you sliding down fast in to darkness.
No, those who do not believe God has put His Word in written form don't accept the teachings of Jesus or His Apostles.
Well, he could always sit cross legged and sing kumbaya and whatever thought that pops in his head he can think that's "god" speaking to him... some claiming to be Christians are doing this actually. They cal, it contemplative prayer and it's a great way to get in touch with demons and be taught doctrines of demons
Wrong... Jesus thru the Holy Ghost led biblical writers to write God's Word down
Without God's written Word we would not have access to the whole counsel of God and we wouldn't even know there ever was a Jesus much less know about Jesus going to the Cross for our salvation
Behold
Well-Known Member
1.) Jesus is "the Word made flesh"
2. ) The bible is the word of God.
3. ) Jesus said.. """Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of ME.""
4.) Notice that Jesus recognized that the Bible and Himself are "one".
5 ) Jesus said..."""The Spirit is He that gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the WORDS that I have spoken unto you, they are Spirit and they are life.""
= And where are the life giving words of Jesus found ????????????????????????
A.) Bible
Accept no substitute like "scholarship" or "man made doctrines" or "online videos" or "commentary sets"... that are created by men who are not found within The Pages of the : Holy word of God.
Hebrews 13:9 (KJV).
Preterism is part of proper New Testament interpretation. You might as well state the trinity doctrine is totally proven.
Last edited:
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Not the same. God did inspire the Scripture writers. But that's not what Jesus set up to spread His truths whatsoever! He founded a (ONE) Church in which to do so. The Bible under one cover didn't even exist until the late 4th century. And the vast, vast majority of humanity was illiterate until the last 100 years, give or take, in history. The Bible is tool of the Church. The writers of the New Testament were all members of this one Church. The Bible without the Church is pointless. Just look at the over 40,000+ man-made, heretical denominations (and counting), none of whom can agree what the Bible says. All use the same basic Bible and all claim to be led by the same Holy Spirit. Yet, they come up with 40,000 different interpretations. That cannot possibly be the source of the fullness of truth that Christ brought mankind.
But "Jesus" was the second word, and it became flesh rather than was made flesh.
Unscriptural, and unsupported.
Valentinus believed experiences given by words gave life. This is not true in the physical sense, and was true in a temporal sense. Like a neo Passover reception of manna.
That one church has be to Syrian, Coptic, Russian, Greek, or Roman Orthodox. The Syrians and the Copts are full blown Heretics. The Russians undervalue you precious Mary idols, and the Eastern and Greek Orthodox can over Heresies of the Roman Catholics. Oh, and I think the Pope is rich like Donald Trump.
Last edited:
1st of all, the various NT writings were circulated. And, that's the reason for the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit in the early church days, which provided prophesy, knowledge, etc
and became manifest by the laying on of the apostle's hands. Documents such as you mentioned, like the did ache provided guidance contrary to the word of God, which unfortunately, people follow to this day claiming they were created by the early "church fathers", and therefore are valid and should be ALSO used as supplemental to the actual inspired scriptures. So, Bible only for today is a rule of thumb that I adhere to which is consistent and not contaminated with man's ideas. And yes, Scripture is the pillar and foundation of truth, inspired scripture only, which is the bible. And the aforementioned doesn't say you need the bible only, but sure imply that you shouldn’t tamper with the word of God or add to, or take away from it.
Similar threads
