Your bold statements are truth! When someone comes and says the Bible is not the final authority, then I would simply ask what is? Just as when someone goes to court, they can appeal all the way to the supreme court but after that judgement, that is final authority! With God, who is higher? No one on earth is higher than God OR Christ or the Hoy Spirit, but some denominations will make thier leaders as high as God and that is something I cannot accept nor their books of doctrine.

BroSonnie, you have hit it on the head. This is why I cannot accpet any other book as "divine" teaching. The books that I can point out (and other points in history of denominations) do NOT fall in line with teaching. It seems more that as the people began to to what the Bible said, more books came out from leaderships of denominations...making rules where there were none (having some marry where other were not permitted for example)...to explain their position and they CHANGED thier doctrine to come more in line with the Bibe but are still not TOTALLY in line. It is because of too long of man made traditions that block them from seeing and doing the true worship.

__________________
Romans 16:16 1 Thess. 5:17 1 Thess. 5:22 1 Tim. 6:12 2 Tim 2:15

The Church of course. After all, the Christian Church was in existance for a good long time before the Christian bible was made official. The bible is the book of the Church, not the other way around.


Peace

The church is still the church of the inspired Scriptures.

The Scriptures were official when God inspired them.

Just because the doors to the church were opened and people were added to it before the Scriptures were fully completed does not make the Scriptures any less authoritative.

Neither does this negate all of the following...

2Pe 1:3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,

What is His divine power?

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

The gospel, God's Word.

It gives us all things pertaining to life and godliness, not some things, but ALL things.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All Scripture, not some, but ALL, is able to make us complete.

We do not need anything other than His Word to help us attain complete godliness.


Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
Joh 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Joh 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

What Jesus spoke was from God and that is what will judge us. There is nothing to judge us other than His Word.

Jesus instructed the apostles to go and teach all that He commanded them.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

How were they to accomplish this?

Joh 16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

The Holy Spirit guided them through "all the truth"... not some, but all.

God did not inspire that the church had the final authority... you have no Scripture to back this up.

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie

You have to take 2Tim 3:16 and 17 in its proper context.
Notice that the passage nowhere even hints that Scripture is "sufficient"—which is, of course, exactly what you think the passage means.

The context of 2 Timothy 3:16–17 is Paul laying down a guideline for Timothy to make use of Scripture and tradition in his ministry as a bishop. Paul says, "But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 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. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (Greek: theopneustos = "God-breathed"), and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Tim. 3:14–17). In verse 14, Timothy is initially exhorted to hold to the oral teachings—the traditions—that he received from the apostle Paul. This echoes Paul’s reminder of the value of oral tradition in 1:13–14, "Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us" (RSV), and ". . . what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2:2). Here Paul refers exclusively to oral teaching and reminds Timothy to follow that as the "pattern" for his own teaching (1:13). Only after this is Scripture mentioned as "profitable" for Timothy’s ministry. Mr. White, the term "man of God" refers to one that has been given authority to preach and teach and that is what is happening in these verses. Paul is giving Timothy a leadership position within the Church.

Now please brothers, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that a person cannot be led to Christ with a bible because I have friends that have been. I am saying that the bible can be misinterpreted by those that do not have the authority to interpret it, as evidenced by all of you. You don’t get it all wrong, but the parts that you do leave you short of the understanding that I know all of you seek. The authority to interpret lies within the one that discerned which books were God breathed, the Holy Catholic and apostolic Church, founded by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Your bible is simply documents of the Church, combined into book form. In fact, not one book of the Bible was written for non-believers. The Old Testament books were written for Jews, the New Testament books for people who already were Christians.

Sonnie, the Bible is not a catechism or a full-scale theological treatise. Just look at the 27 books of the New Testament. You won’t find one that spells out the elements of the faith the way catechisms do or even the way the ancient creeds did. Those 27 books were written for the most part (excepting, for example, the Gospels and the general epistles such as James and, 1 and 2 Peter) as provisional documents addressed to particular audiences for particular purposes.

Most of the epistles were written to local churches that were experiencing moral and/or doctrinal problems. Paul and most of the other New Testament writers sent letters to these local churches (e.g., 1 and 2 Corinthians and Galatians) in order to correct these problems. There was no attempt on the part of the writers to pass on a vast body of basic doctrinal instruction to non-believers or even to simply summarize everything for the believers who received the letters.

You may not agree with any of that and continue to think that the New Testament is the basis of the Christian faith, but how can it be, since the Christian faith existed and flourished for years before the first book of the New Testament was written? The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament.

And that brings up another point. How do you know what constitutes the New Testament canon? How do you know for certain that these 27 books here in your New Testament are in fact inspired and should be in the New Testament? And how do you know for certain that maybe some inspired books haven’t been left out of the canon?

Who Decided? You’re going to say that the early Christians agreed on the 27 books because the Holy Spirit led them to this agreement. I’m in agreement with that gentlemen. Sure the Holy Spirit did, but only over a good long period of time and a study of early Christian history shows that there was a significant disagreement among Christians until the issue of the canon was finally settled. Some early Christians said the book of Revelation didn’t belong in the canon. Others said Pope Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 80) and The Shepherd, an early second-century allegory written by a Christian writer named Hermas did belong in the New Testament. How do you handle that Mr. White?

Mr. White, are you going to say that you know by examining the contents of the books? Sonnie, are you going to say that some books—like 1 Corinthians and Revelation—obviously belong. Others, like Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians, obviously don’t.?

Is it really so obvious? Tell me Steven, what is so obvious in Philemon to indicate that it is inspired? And what is so obviously unorthodox in The Shepherd or the Didache or Clement’s letter or any of the other first and second-century Christian writings? You’ve never even seen the originals of the 27 books in the New Testament. Nobody today has. The earliest copies of those books we possess are centuries newer than the originals. Like it or not brothers and sisters, you have to take the say-so of the Catholic Church that in fact those copies are accurate, as well as her decision that those 27 books are the inspired canonical New Testament Scriptures. You do accept the Holy Catholic Church’s testimony as trustworthy, or else your Protestant Bible would not have those 27 books.

If any of you happen to have the writings of the early Church Fathers, this would be a good time to read from them. The writings are, at least in the case of the apostolic Fathers, rather short, and you can demonstrate that many of these writings seem every bit as orthodox and inspiring (not to confuse the term with "inspired") as the New Testament writings themselves. Then read aloud the book of Philemon or 3 John or some other short canonical book.

Tell me Mr. Hersey, what’s in these books that so obviously makes them inspired? If you didn’t know that Philemon was written by Paul or that 3 John was written by John, would you give either a second reading? Be honest. Would you automatically assume they belong in the Bible as canonical Scripture? It’s not disrespectful to say they don’t have much doctrinal content in them, and that’s not surprising, since they’re too short to contain substantial doctrinal discussions. One can imagine the Christian Church surviving well enough without either.

Neither book claims inspiration for itself. If there is, as a matter of fact, more solid Christian doctrine in other, non-canonical writings (that is to say—if they contain more Christian truths and no religious errors) then how can you say it’s obvious which books are inspired and which aren’t?

Friends, the fact is, the only reason you and I have the New Testament canon is because of the trustworthy teaching authority of the Catholic Church. As Augustine put it, ‘I would not believe in the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church’ (Against the Letter of Mani Called "The Foundation" 5:6). Any of you on this forum accepting the authority of the New Testament does so, whether or not you admit it, because of your unspoken trust that the Catholic Church made the right decision in determining the canon.

The fact is that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church over time to recognize and determine the canon of the New and Old Testaments in the year 382 at the synod of Rome, under Pope Damasus I. This decision was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). You, my Church of Christ fiends, accept exactly the same books of the New Testament that Pope Damasus decreed were canonical, and no others. Yes, you read that right. Your NT was made official by a Catholic Pope.

Additionally, the reason you accept the books you do is that they were in the Bible someone gave you when you first became a Christian. You accept them because they were handed on to you. This means you accept the canon of the New Testament that you do because of tradition, because tradition is simply what is handed on to us from those who were in the faith before us. So your knowledge of the exact books that belong in the Bible, such as Philemon and 3 John, rests on tradition rather than on Scripture itself! You should re-read that last sentence.

The question you should ask yourself is this: ‘Where did we get the Bible?, and maybe this should be in the thread someone else here posted asking that same question. So, Until you can give a satisfactory answer, your denomination, and other denominations, aren’t in much of a position to rely on the authority of Scripture or to claim that you can be certain that you know how to accurately interpret it.

After you answer that question—and there’s really only one answer that can be given—you have some other important questions to ask: ‘If the Bible, which we received from the Catholic Church, is our sole rule of faith, who’s to do the interpreting?’ And ‘Why are there so many conflicting understandings among Evangelicals and Fundamentalists even on central doctrines that pertain to salvation?

We agree on the essentials but disagree on secondary matters is what many Protestant denominations say, perhaps not the Church of Christ folks, but is it really so?

Where in Scripture do we find some doctrines listed as essential, others as ‘secondary’? The answer is: ‘nowhere’. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists disagree on central issues such as baptismal regeneration and the necessity of baptism (is it merely a sign to other Christians, or does it have a real role in the process of justification?), whether or not one can forfeit salvation (some Protestants say that’s impossible to do, others say it is possible). You all claim to be ‘Bible-only Christians,’ but which group is right?


Peace be with you

Everything you write Peace is totally off the hip... speculative.

You have nothing to back it up.

Peter, your Pope idol (of all people I would think you would listen to him)... tells us that God's Word gives us all things pertaining to life and godliness.

God's Word is what Jesus spoke and what the Holy Spirit inspired the apostles to write, which are the Scriptures.

I am not sure how much more sufficient something can be.

The Greek word used in 2Tim 3:16 is "artios", which means "complete, perfect". The inspired words of God, which is what the Holy Spirit guided the apostles to write down, is able to teach, reprove, correct and train us for righteousness... SO THAT WE CAN BE COMPLETE!

I am still not sure with all this proof how you can say this is not sufficient.

What would apply to Timothy would apply to us just as well.

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie

And you are still missing the point...

Jesus instructed the apostles to go and teach all that He commanded them.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

How were they to accomplish this?

Joh 16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

The Holy Spirit guided them through "all the truth"... not some, but all.


If you get this... all those letters that were written to those particular churches were written to saints, brother and sisters in Christ. What was written is what Jesus said to go and teach them, in which He gave them the Holy Spirit to guide them in that teaching. Jesus said go and teach all nations... Mark 16:15, not some nations, but all nations. Jesus wants everyone to be taught and that is why the Holy Spirit guided God's words to be written down.

Those churches are congregations of the one church (and no where is Catholic mentioned in the Bible), the one church which I am also a part of... of which you can also be a part of if you obey the gospel.

The difference between your opinions and what we are writing is we have Scripture to back up what we are explaining, you do not. What you use is not inspired.

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie

I'm sorry Sonnie, but it is not speculative that the Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, gave you your NT. You deny recorded history to think otherwise.

Peace be with you Sonnie

What you are writing is your own opinions, without any regard to what the early Christians actually believed. It is undeniable that the early Church was Catholic but unless you read something other than your bible, you will never know that fact. The early Christians, taught by men that had hands layed upon them by the apostles themselves, taught Catholic doctrine. You don't believe that Christ's Church fell into apostasy even before all the apostles had passed do you? Scripture even admits that it can be hard to understand and warns against self interpretation, yet you feel that you can authoritively interpret it without any error......hmmmmm

I think that your lack of knowledge concerning the Catholic Church is hindering your ability to get beyond the point you are at in your journey. Catholic means universal and that is what Christ's Church is. Christ did not leave us to decipher things on our own-you can see what happens when everybody thinks they are their own interpretting authority. Why would Christ do such a thing? He left his teaching authority which is a Church, entrusted by men by the assurance of the Holy Spirit with the succesion of apostolic tradition through the ages.

Peace be with you Sonnie

What is it Peace? You just ignore God's Word constantly... it is like it just doesn't sink in. Why is it that you keep rejecting the inspired Truth and want to insert your uninspired rhetoric?

Yes... I will deny that recorded history because Scripture does not back it up. It is not inspired, but written and suggested by uninspired men who were not happy with the Truth.

Again... you CANNOT back it up with inspired Scripture. Never have been able to and never will be able to.

I have my inspired Truth, you can keep your uninspired speculation to your own destruction since you refuse to listen to the Truth.

I would much rather take my chances with inspired Scripture rather than a bunch of googly gobble from uninspired men.

Just remember we tried to teach you and you refused to listen...

Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

Mat 10:33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.

2Th 1:8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
2Th 1:9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie

The churches had copies of the letters long before the letters were compiled into one book. The letters were circulated and read by other congregations. Colossians 4:16

There was a period of time when God's will was still being revealed. During that time, there were prophets and apostles who were, through inspiration, teaching and writing God's will down for future generations. That time has ceased and the revelation of the faith is finished. 1 Corinthians 13:9-10, Jude 1:3. Anyone who says they are continuing to receive revelation from God is either 1. sincerely mistaken or 2. deceitful. How do I know there isn't a "3. correct"? Because Jude tells us the faith WAS DELIVERED. That's past tense. The Bible claims to be true and complete. John 17:17, 1 Corinthians 13:10, 2 Timothy 3:16-17. If someone is still receiving revelation today, then the Bible is wrong on this point, is fallible, and thus cannot be trusted on any point... in which case, I think I'll just go do what I want because it won't matter anyway.

The bible is only the book of a particular church if that church is patterned after the church in the Bible.

__________________
--Laura

O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.
Jeremiah 10:23 (NKJV)

A study of the Bible shows that the early church was already going into apostasy, so I do not doubt there were some going that route. Such doesn't make it right. Paul warned the elders at Ephesus of this very thing, stating it would be some of those very elders who would take the church astray. Acts 20:17-31. History has these very elders being the start of the Catholic church. Question for you: was Paul condoning what they were about to do or warning against it?

Here is a lesson appropriate to this topic on the historical falling away of the church.

__________________
--Laura

O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.
Jeremiah 10:23 (NKJV)

I have business right now to take care of but....I just want to say right now that I am really floored.

First, to see someone say that God does not have FINAL authority! And then to say that the Bible is the book of the church but then deny it's very teaching and twist the scriptures to say what they want it to mean...:holycow:

The church came first of course and no one evr said anything otherwise. But the apostles wrote (while they were inspired) so that we would easily know what to do in EVERYTHING in worshipping and living as Christians. When the Bible was completed, we could come to know God and His will.

But the catholics (who wear this name given by man) began to think for themselves and thier own history proves that (along with THEIR books). You see, when I talk about examing books...I mean ANY OTHER book than the Bible...not the books of the Bible. Anyone with faith would know that God is in control and does anyone really think that He wold let His Word be incomplete? Well, the answer is NO!

Laura is right in what she says...and if the book of the church is the Bible, then THAT church should be able to FIND ITSELF in the Bible! I can't find any other church EXCEPT the church of Christ in the Bible. And using the catholics own words..."if it is not INDENTICAL in belief, government, etc., with the primitive church, then it is NOT the church of Christ." (Catholic Facts, p. 27) The only place that we have ANY record of the primitive church IS the Bible. Not through yet...but will continue later...

__________________
Romans 16:16 1 Thess. 5:17 1 Thess. 5:22 1 Tim. 6:12 2 Tim 2:15

You have made multiple assumptions here. First, the passage nowhere mentions tradition. You have assumed that into the passage. Second, you have assumed that Timothy was a bishop. That also is not in the passage, nor is it found anywhere in the Bible. The truth of the matter is, the only way you can shoehorn these things into the teachings of the church is to go outside the scriptures. So what you have is circular reasoning.

__________________
--Laura

O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.
Jeremiah 10:23 (NKJV)

Please don't overreact and distort what I said Mr. White.

Tradition is inferred in Paul's writings to Timothy. And unless you go outside the scriptures and look at the other writings of the Church, you will never know the full story. Like I said before, Scripture was not intended to tell the entire story. Scripture was internal documents of the Church. though they are useful, they are not all there is and by no means the sole authority of Christians. But none the less, good post Laura. We just don't agree.

peace

Correct, you do not agree with the Scriptures... indeed we can gather that much.

The full story in the Word of God, which is all we need... this is obviously flying over your head and you are refusing to accept the Truth. You are rejecting God's Word and rejecting God's final authority.

2Pe 1:3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,

What is His divine power?

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

The gospel, God's Word.

It gives us all things pertaining to life and godliness, not some things, but ALL things.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All Scripture, not some, but ALL, is able to make us complete.

We do not need anything other than His Word to help us attain complete godliness.


Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
Joh 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Joh 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

What Jesus spoke was from God and that is what will judge us. There is nothing to judge us other than His Word.

Jesus instructed the apostles to go and teach all that He commanded them.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

How were they to accomplish this?

Joh 16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

The Holy Spirit guided them through "all the truth"... not some, but all.

No where does the Bible tell us that we need uninspired men and uninspired teachings to be perfectly complete.

The Scriptures we have in the Bible are all sufficient for us.

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie

Please show the proof of this logical inference you claim and further proof that the things that Timothy was to keep were in the form of tradition only and nowhere written down. I await your response.

__________________
--Laura

O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.
Jeremiah 10:23 (NKJV)

Ah, finally something we agree on. I do believe that reading only the bible, a person can receive salvation because through the bible one can come to know Christ. But, guess what? A person can come to know Christ without the bible also and receive that same saving grace.

Peace Laura

Someone can be taught how to obey the gospel and be saved without reading the Bible. I don't think anyone would deny that fact, but had the inspired Scriptures never been made available to us, we would be merely guessing at what to do. Someone has to understand the Scriptures well enough to teach others the truth and what they must do to be saved. Now... if I were that person being taught what to do and did not have a Bible, I would want one to verify what was told me is in fact the truth. The only place I would be able to confirm this truth is the Bible.

I certainly would not want some uninspired book that a mere uninspired man wrote to confirm anything that has to do with being a Christian and getting to heaven. The Bible is the only book available to confirm the truth, as previously proven in many of the posts in this thread.

Psa 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

__________________
In Christ,
brother Sonnie