He that believes and is baptized will...
William

Eastaboga, AL

#144 Jul 16, 2013
JC are you scared to read the Bible for yourself? Is A Church of Christ preacher smarter than you?

2 Timothy 2:15 tells you to study to show yourself approved unto God, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Better hop to it. Exam time will be here soon enough.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#145 Jul 16, 2013
William wrote:
JC are you scared to read the Bible for yourself? Is A Church of Christ preacher smarter than you?
2 Timothy 2:15 tells you to study to show yourself approved unto God, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Better hop to it. Exam time will be here soon enough.
Nope I believe like the Bereans check out what is said with the scripture. However for you to deny influences from others is a Lie.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#146 Jul 16, 2013
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
A book for you. How we got the Bible .... Lightfoot.
Interesting review of Lightfoot's book:

"Lightfoot does a good to excellent job introducing the original MSS of Scripture, the origins of the text, and an overview of the accuracy of the Bible (until the mid-20th century).

However, Lightfoot does not present the history of the Vulgate in a strait-forward manner. On p. 42, he claims that Jerome failed to produce a masterpiece because he merely revised the Old Latin translation (which was not very accurate). But this strains the truth, and on p. 72, Lightfoot admits that Jerome spent many years translating the OT from the original Hebrew. On p. 43 he accuses the Church of preserving the Vulgate better than the original Greek (the NT), but admits that Jerome made his NT translation directly from the Septuagint (p. 24). Lightfoot insists that Protestant Bibles are more valid precisely because they are translated directly from the Septuagint, something he denies of the Catholic Bible. Did he write these pages in two separate decades? He goes on to say that the Vulgate, despite its shortcomings, was wrongly made the "official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church," and in this he is mistaken.

Lightfoot asserts that a book attains canonicity by its "general acceptance" as Scripture. Ignoring that one billion Catholics accept 1 and 2 Maccabees as Scripture. He says that no Church or group bestowed on any book of the Bible its infallibility. Okay, fine. But this is rarely contested. In the very next sentence Lightfoot substitutes the word "infallibility" for "canon," claiming that no Church can make a book canonical (he himself distinguishes between the meanings of these words). How then does a book become canonical? By its "general acceptance" of course. Not by Church council? No. Even though Martin Luther took this license himself? No. Even though Lightfoot himself does so when he denies the canonicity of certain portions of the Bible in this very book? Portions of scripture that can be found in all but a few very ancient MSS of the Bible all the way up to the present? Still no. It was "wrong" for 1500 years, but now it's back on track?

If Lightfoot cannot accept the importance of the Catholic Church and the historic Church councils in the formation of the canon and the preservation of Scripture then on what authority does he teach about the Bible? Apparently on his own authority, and that is not good enough."
William

Eastaboga, AL

#147 Jul 16, 2013
You are about as Berean as a Muslim. Somebody else always leads you around doctrinally by the nose. Same as these Catholic sheeple.

Your church filters the Bible for you and you go right along with the scam. Afraid to study.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#148 Jul 16, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting review of Lightfoot's book:
"Lightfoot does a good to excellent job introducing the original MSS of Scripture, the origins of the text, and an overview of the accuracy of the Bible (until the mid-20th century).
However, Lightfoot does not present the history of the Vulgate in a strait-forward manner. On p. 42, he claims that Jerome failed to produce a masterpiece because he merely revised the Old Latin translation (which was not very accurate). But this strains the truth, and on p. 72, Lightfoot admits that Jerome spent many years translating the OT from the original Hebrew. On p. 43 he accuses the Church of preserving the Vulgate better than the original Greek (the NT), but admits that Jerome made his NT translation directly from the Septuagint (p. 24). Lightfoot insists that Protestant Bibles are more valid precisely because they are translated directly from the Septuagint, something he denies of the Catholic Bible. Did he write these pages in two separate decades? He goes on to say that the Vulgate, despite its shortcomings, was wrongly made the "official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church," and in this he is mistaken.
Lightfoot asserts that a book attains canonicity by its "general acceptance" as Scripture. Ignoring that one billion Catholics accept 1 and 2 Maccabees as Scripture. He says that no Church or group bestowed on any book of the Bible its infallibility. Okay, fine. But this is rarely contested. In the very next sentence Lightfoot substitutes the word "infallibility" for "canon," claiming that no Church can make a book canonical (he himself distinguishes between the meanings of these words). How then does a book become canonical? By its "general acceptance" of course. Not by Church council? No. Even though Martin Luther took this license himself? No. Even though Lightfoot himself does so when he denies the canonicity of certain portions of the Bible in this very book? Portions of scripture that can be found in all but a few very ancient MSS of the Bible all the way up to the present? Still no. It was "wrong" for 1500 years, but now it's back on track?
If Lightfoot cannot accept the importance of the Catholic Church and the historic Church councils in the formation of the canon and the preservation of Scripture then on what authority does he teach about the Bible? Apparently on his own authority, and that is not good enough."
You did this review?
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#149 Jul 16, 2013
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope I believe like the Bereans check out what is said with the scripture. However for you to deny influences from others is a Lie.
The Bereans did not believe in SS. They were more noble than the Thessalonians who did.

The Thessalonians said their interpretation of the scriptures did not agree with Paul.

The Thessalonians rejected Paul and his message, and after
denouncing him, they became jealous that some believed, and they treated Paul with contempt and violence — they threw him ignominiously out of town. Why? "For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the scriptures" in the synagogue as was his custom. They did not revile Paul the first week, or the second, rather, they listened and discussed, but ultimately
they rejected what he had to say. They obviously had listened, compared it to the Old Testament scriptures, and then decided that Paul was wrong. We must remember that there were many proclaiming a wide variety of new teachings, supposedly based on the Scriptures and revelations from God.

The Bereans, on the other hand, were not adherents of sola Scriptura for they were willing to accept Paul's new ORAL teaching as the word of God (as Paul claimed his very oral teaching was). The Bereans, before accepting the oral word of God from Paul, a
tradition as even Paul himself refers to it, examined the Scriptures to see if these things were so. They did so for it was their common ground with the Christian, Paul.

They were noble-minded precisely because they "received the word with all eagerness."8 Were the Bereans commended primarily for searching the Scriptures? No. Their open-minded willingness to listen was the primary reason they are referred to as noble-minded!not that they searched the Scriptures. A perusal of grammars and commentaries make it clear they were "noble-minded" not for studying Scripture, but for treating Paul better, more civilly than the Thessalonians — with an open mind and generous courtesy.9 They were noble-minded for they were eager and warmly greeted Paul; the Thessalonians were not noble-minded for they abused Paul in an terrible manner.10

But what were the Bereans doing when they listened to Paul? They were examining the Scriptures because the Old Testament Scriptures were the only point of common ground between the Christians and the Jews. Paul often related to the Greeks by quoting from their philosophers (Acts 17:22 ), using the source of authority the Greeks understood, were familiar with, and respected. The Jews in Berea and Paul the Christian claimed the Old Testament in common, and it was upon this common ground that they.

The Thessalonians, SS, ran Paul out of town. The Bereans were more noble than the Thessalonians. They search the scriptures and agreed with Paul because he had Authority.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#150 Jul 16, 2013
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
You did this review?
No. It was quite enough for me to learn he graduated from Duke!
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#151 Jul 16, 2013
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
You did this review?
All of you Prots think whatever you dream up today after reading a Catholic book is something new, never thought of before.

The Truth was established by the Apostles in the first century and handed over to the Church for safe keeping until the end of ages.

What you think the Truth should be is irrelevant. All you have snippets of it.

The rest of it comes from you own imaginations of what you think it should be.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#152 Jul 16, 2013
Paul said OUR faith is imputed to us for righteousness, not someone else's.

Think I also discussed with you before, the correct Greek translation is faith IN Christ, not faith of Christ.

We are made the righteousness of God in Him, 2 Cor. 5:21.
William

Eastaboga, AL

#153 Jul 16, 2013
Christ's faith is imputed to us for righteousness. The faith OF Jesus Christ is our faith. Faith in what he did for us.

Romans 4
Barnsweb

Alliance, OH

#154 Jul 16, 2013
We aren't being made into anything if we are not abiding in the words of life He taught. He came preaching the kingdom of God. Those in a kingdom are subjects of its king. Subjects do what the king says, they have no authority to bind upon the king - they have no authority, as all authority resides with the king.

We are in the kingdom of God when we become faithful subjects to the King, the Lord of our salvation. The Kingdom is within the subjects at this time. You are not in the Kingdom unless you are subject to the King in all things.

Acts 3:22,23. Whoever will not hear Him in whatever He had to say will be cut off from the brethren. God declared this through Moses and Jesus and Peter and John and James...and through Paul when he was telling the truth.

Israel refused God as their King when they wanted an earthly king, they finally rejected Him altogether, which brings us to the matter of if Jesus taught the kingdom, and that we submit to that Kingdom if we believe.

As we abide in His word, we come to know the truth of what He taught. As we refuse to hear whatever He said on the subject, we open the door to false doctrines and false teachers who pervert the word of truth.

"If they speak not according to the Law and the Testimony, there is no light in them." Jesus taught according to them. Learn from Him if you want to know the truth, and as you know and accept all He said - you won't have questions and it will be that 'they won't say to everyone his brother, know the Lord, for they shall all know Him.'

How many of these discussions center their answers on what Jesus said? One says 'Catholic Church' another 'New Testiment CENI that centers on what Paul said', and others 'Just trust He did it all for you and bask in your salvation by grace alone.'

What did He teach?'Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.'
William

Eastaboga, AL

#155 Jul 16, 2013
He also told a young man to sell everything he owned and give it to the poor too.

Everything.

He didn't, and neither have any of us. Especially these churches that "claim" the events of Acts 2 as being "their" church. Acts 2:45 separates the men from the boys.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#156 Jul 16, 2013
William wrote:
Christ's faith is imputed to us for righteousness. The faith OF Jesus Christ is our faith. Faith in what he did for us.
Romans 4
Romans 4 and Galatians doesn't say that.
Dave P

Nicholasville, KY

#157 Jul 16, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
Acts 3:22,23. Whoever will not hear Him in whatever He had to say will be cut off from the brethren. God declared this through Moses and Jesus and Peter and John and James...and through Paul when he was telling the truth.

How many of these discussions center their answers on what Jesus said? One says 'Catholic Church' another 'New Testiment CENI that centers on what Paul said', and others 'Just trust He did it all for you and bask in your salvation by grace alone.'
What did He teach?'Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.'
1. Perhaps we need a separate thread to address your issues with Paul. You are saying that a writer of the majority of the NT is a liar. Your problem is actually two fold: with those that pervert what Paul actually taught; and with those who would rather throw out what Paul said to center with their theology. Jesus said He would sent wise men and scribes; yet you call one of those scribes a liar. We are not in the church of Paul. Yet he wrote extensively of doctrinal issues in the church. Therefore he has no merit?

2. If studied and "rightly divided", Paul's letters echo the Master's teachings exactly. Those things you often bring up as "contradictions" are either misunderstandings, or some people have attempted to willfully discredit him much as the Corinthians did.

Then don't forget others who look at the verse that is the subject of this thread and simply say it is a fraud or a forgery. If Paul lied, Mark 16 and Matthew 28 are forgeries, other scriptures are spurious, then we're all wasting our time here. None of it is true.
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#158 Jul 16, 2013
William wrote:
He also told a young man to sell everything he owned and give it to the poor too.
Everything.
He didn't, and neither have any of us. Especially these churches that "claim" the events of Acts 2 as being "their" church. Acts 2:45 separates the men from the boys.
Like most Catholic Priests and Bishops. They give up everything and followed him.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#159 Jul 16, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bereans did not believe in SS. They were more noble than the Thessalonians who did.
The Thessalonians said their interpretation of the scriptures did not agree with Paul.
The Thessalonians rejected Paul and his message, and after
denouncing him, they became jealous that some believed, and they treated Paul with contempt and violence — they threw him ignominiously out of town. Why? "For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the scriptures" in the synagogue as was his custom. They did not revile Paul the first week, or the second, rather, they listened and discussed, but ultimately
they rejected what he had to say. They obviously had listened, compared it to the Old Testament scriptures, and then decided that Paul was wrong. We must remember that there were many proclaiming a wide variety of new teachings, supposedly based on the Scriptures and revelations from God.
The Bereans, on the other hand, were not adherents of sola Scriptura for they were willing to accept Paul's new ORAL teaching as the word of God (as Paul claimed his very oral teaching was). The Bereans, before accepting the oral word of God from Paul, a
tradition as even Paul himself refers to it, examined the Scriptures to see if these things were so. They did so for it was their common ground with the Christian, Paul.
They were noble-minded precisely because they "received the word with all eagerness."8 Were the Bereans commended primarily for searching the Scriptures? No. Their open-minded willingness to listen was the primary reason they are referred to as noble-minded!not that they searched the Scriptures. A perusal of grammars and commentaries make it clear they were "noble-minded" not for studying Scripture, but for treating Paul better, more civilly than the Thessalonians — with an open mind and generous courtesy.9 They were noble-minded for they were eager and warmly greeted Paul; the Thessalonians were not noble-minded for they abused Paul in an terrible manner.10
But what were the Bereans doing when they listened to Paul? They were examining the Scriptures because the Old Testament Scriptures were the only point of common ground between the Christians and the Jews. Paul often related to the Greeks by quoting from their philosophers (Acts 17:22 ), using the source of authority the Greeks understood, were familiar with, and respected. The Jews in Berea and Paul the Christian claimed the Old Testament in common, and it was upon this common ground that they.
The Thessalonians, SS, ran Paul out of town. The Bereans were more noble than the Thessalonians. They search the scriptures and agreed with Paul because he had Authority.
I know this will be hard for you because it is scripture. What did Paul reason with 1. The scripture. or 2. The church documents?

7 Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 [a]explaining and [b]giving evidence that the [c]Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying,“This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the [d]Christ.”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#160 Jul 16, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bereans did not believe in SS. They were more noble than the Thessalonians who did.
The Thessalonians said their interpretation of the scriptures did not agree with Paul.
The Thessalonians rejected Paul and his message, and after
denouncing him, they became jealous that some believed, and they treated Paul with contempt and violence — they threw him ignominiously out of town. Why? "For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the scriptures" in the synagogue as was his custom. They did not revile Paul the first week, or the second, rather, they listened and discussed, but ultimately
they rejected what he had to say. They obviously had listened, compared it to the Old Testament scriptures, and then decided that Paul was wrong. We must remember that there were many proclaiming a wide variety of new teachings, supposedly based on the Scriptures and revelations from God.
The Bereans, on the other hand, were not adherents of sola Scriptura for they were willing to accept Paul's new ORAL teaching as the word of God (as Paul claimed his very oral teaching was). The Bereans, before accepting the oral word of God from Paul, a
tradition as even Paul himself refers to it, examined the Scriptures to see if these things were so. They did so for it was their common ground with the Christian, Paul.
They were noble-minded precisely because they "received the word with all eagerness."8 Were the Bereans commended primarily for searching the Scriptures? No. Their open-minded willingness to listen was the primary reason they are referred to as noble-minded!not that they searched the Scriptures. A perusal of grammars and commentaries make it clear they were "noble-minded" not for studying Scripture, but for treating Paul better, more civilly than the Thessalonians — with an open mind and generous courtesy.9 They were noble-minded for they were eager and warmly greeted Paul; the Thessalonians were not noble-minded for they abused Paul in an terrible manner.10
But what were the Bereans doing when they listened to Paul? They were examining the Scriptures because the Old Testament Scriptures were the only point of common ground between the Christians and the Jews. Paul often related to the Greeks by quoting from their philosophers (Acts 17:22 ), using the source of authority the Greeks understood, were familiar with, and respected. The Jews in Berea and Paul the Christian claimed the Old Testament in common, and it was upon this common ground that they.
The Thessalonians, SS, ran Paul out of town. The Bereans were more noble than the Thessalonians. They search the scriptures and agreed with Paul because he had Authority.
This will be tough also. What were the Bereans examining daily? What were the Thessalonics mad about Paul proclaimed?

10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea,[j]and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica,[k]for they received the word with [l]great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed,[m]along with a number of prominent Greek women and men. 13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica found out that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Berea also, they came there as well, agitating and stirring up the crowds.
William

Eastaboga, AL

#161 Jul 16, 2013
"Romans 4 and Galatians doesn't say that."

It does in the Bible that I read. And the ones that came before it, prior to 1611.

I think you've been fed some bad intel from the enemy regarding ops orders, Gunny. Fall back and recheck your position with HQ.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#162 Jul 16, 2013
Mike Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Like most Catholic Priests and Bishops. They give up everything and followed him.
Have they given up molesting alter boys?
Mike Peterson

Birmingham, AL

#163 Jul 16, 2013
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
This will be tough also. What were the Bereans examining daily? What were the Thessalonics mad about Paul proclaimed?
10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea,[j]and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica,[k]for they received the word with [l]great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed,[m]along with a number of prominent Greek women and men. 13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica found out that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Berea also, they came there as well, agitating and stirring up the crowds.
The Thessalonians were upset because Paul was telling them what the scriptures meant and they did not agree. Sola Scriptura. They were like protestants today. They did not agree with his interpretation..

The Bereans agreed with Paul. He represented the Church Paul preached and the Bereans said yes he is right. They searched the scriptures and found what Paul was teaching about. They were more noble because they didn't run Paul out of town.

Protestants are the modern day Thessalonians. They disagree with the Church.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Martinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How many of the 10 commandments have you broken? (Feb '12) Mar 22 sam i am 145
the church of Christ insider discussion boards (Aug '10) Mar 20 Democrappy ... 12
dr.joel smithers (Sep '16) Feb '17 YEPP 4
Is there anything to do here??? Bored..... Jan '17 ATTheWizard85 1
Church of Christ rules and principles (Apr '13) Dec '16 Credal Drone 305
THE CHILDREN of THE GOD MOST HIGH (May '14) Dec '16 randy 6
thomas jefferson edwards (Apr '16) Oct '16 NUKS67 3

Martinsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Martinsville Mortgages