Is the Bible God's Word? (Do you believe the Bible is the only word of God?)

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible1-3.html ^ | Ahmed Deedat

[Stourme]

THE CATHOLIC BIBLE

Holding the "Douay" Roman Catholic Version of the Bible aloft in my hand, I ask, "Do YOU accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?" For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic Truth Society have published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form. This Version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today. The Christian questioner is taken aback. "What Bible is that?" he asks. "Why, I thought you said that there was only ONE Bible!" I remind him. "Y-e-s," he murmurs hesitantly, "but what Version is that?" "Why, would that make any difference?" I enquire. Of course it does, and the professional preacher knows that it does. He is only bluffing with his "ONE Bible" claim.

The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today. Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the "cults"* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra "books" which they contemptuously refer to as the "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as "Revelation" by the Protestants), it is "revealed":

". . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book." (Revelation 22:18-19)

But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God! The outcasts are:

The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias
The Book of Baruch
The Buck of Esther, etc.
* This disparaging title is given by the orthodox to Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists and a thousand other sects and denominations with whom they do not see eye to eye.

[Elsie]

Jesus was hard on the Pharisees - the religious rulers of that day.

And we ANTIs are 'hard' on the MORMONs - the WANNABE 'christians' of today.

[Elsie]

Now, show me a passage in which the NEW TESTAMENT states that the NEW TESTAMENT is the sole rule of faith.

Sorry; but you've shifted away from Sola Scriptura.

Show ME where we are to use TRADITIONS OF MEN along WITH Scripture.

[Elsie]

This passage is significant in that (a) it shows the existence of living traditions within the the Apostolic teaching,

No, it doesn't.

It shows that WHAT THEY SAID was the same as WHAT WAS WRITTEN.

Acts 17:11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

[Elsie]

Sacred Tradition complements our understanding of the Bible and is therefore not some extraneous source of Revelation which contains doctrines that are foreign to it.

I guess that transubstantiation thing is mere 'misunderstanding' between good men.

[Elsie]

Sacred Tradition complements our understanding of the Bible and is therefore not some extraneous source of Revelation which contains doctrines that are foreign to it.

I guess that "PETER is the rock" thing is mere 'misunderstanding' between good men as well...

---

[Elsie]

Anyone who is truly seeking to Jesus Christ wouldn't scoff at the possibility of getting more of His words. Or His instruction.

Then they'd must FOLLOW the Stuff that was available in the past, and NOT follow anything that comes along that is AGAINST what was already said in the past, right?

(Unless you want to believe in a GOD that changes HIS mind on a whim.)

[Elsie]

The burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise.

?Yeah, yeah, yeah...

[Elsie]

Was a lurker for years but have only posted under this name.

Then you're doing mighty fine since you finally decided that SOMEthing was worth arguing for.

[Elsie]

But the Catholic doctrine is that the immediate rule of faith for the Christian is the teaching authority of the Church--an authority to teach and interpret both Scripture and Tradition

Likewise...

The MORMON doctrine is that the immediate rule of faith for the MORMON is the teaching authority of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints--an authority to teach and interpret both Scripture and Tradition that ONLY the LDS Organization, based in SLC, has.

[Elsie]

[Elsie]

Share Jesus with everyone you meet - use words if you have to.

Good advice!

[Elsie]

It takes more faith to admit the truth and yet understand that the mistakes were made by men and continue to believe.

And yet you fail to apply this SAME criteria to MORMONism.

Strange...

[GreyMountainReagan]

thank you.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

>>>The Bible does not contain the Word of God — it IS the Word of God.

>>>The title “Word of God” is reserved for Jesus Christ. Not a book.

“...we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth, commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” 2 Corinthians 4:2

“....we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.” 2 Corinthians 2:17

“Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. Now the ones that fell among thorns are those who, when they have heard, go out and are choked with cares, riches, and pleasures of life, and bring no fruit to maturity. But the ones that fell on the good ground are those who, having heard the word with a noble and good heart, keep it and bear fruit with patience. “ Luke 8:11-15

Not so much...

[Godzilla]

He will be equally hard on the religious rulers of this day.” He pulled no punches with the Pharisees etc - the religious rulers - and we should be similiarly hard on the false teachings heard in “Christian” churches and on TV today.

Once again- false teachings in Christian churches. . . . as compared to false teachings promulgated by a false prophet who used divination to dictate another scripture?

Many, if not most, Christians are in a box and see only that aspect of God that the want to see, or that they can see through their little peep-hole.

As compared to so-called prophets and their peep stones?

Yes, and Paul was addressing the problem of false teachers and prophets in the churches - in churches he planted. The religious leaders today are failing in addressing this problem in their own areas of responsibility.

Such a shallow view of the bible. If Paul was only addressing the issues of the churches at that time - there would be no reason to preserve them for today. Paul's (as well as Jesus' admonitions to watch for false teachers) are just as valid today as then.

That is not the often heard Hell-Fire and Brimstone gospel message, though it is direct and speaks to the heart of those hearing.

Logical fallacy, one example representing all conditions. However, for your statement to stand, you ignore this portion of the passage

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

Here is another example to the contrary:

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 ¶ Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Ranting at or about those religionists (LDS, JW, Scientolgists, etc) who do not have the truth will have little to do with changing them. Approaching their adherents individually and presenting the message of Jesus to them in a loving way has been and is successful, when the Holy Spirit touches the individual’s heart and new birth results.

You seem to ignore the effects of conditioning these cults perpetuate. If by ranting you associate comparing the teaching of these cults to the truth of Christianity. If the object of your faith is false, no matter what you call it, it is in vain.

[Godzilla]

1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Wow, nice documentation of the Trinity.

Inerrant? Sooner or later common sense and truth have to win out. The Bible is not inerrant. Groups that claim that the Bible is inerrant in my opinion, have paper thin faith. It takes more faith to admit the truth and yet understand that the mistakes were made by men and continue to believe.

And this come from a belief system that holds up the book of mormon as being true. Show me the truth of where the bom cities are located here in the americas. I'll even spot you the location of hill Coumorah. Where are the tons of artifacts that an advanced culture numbering in the millions upon millions, from sea to sea should have left behind.

[Stourme]

And this come from a belief system..

blah blah blah...blah blah...blah blah.. Instead of trying to getting some extra mileage out of a dead horse, why can't you address what I said.

Inerrant? Sooner or later common sense and truth have to win out. The Bible is not inerrant. Groups that claim that the Bible is inerrant in my opinion, have paper thin faith. It takes more faith to admit the truth and yet understand that the mistakes were made by men and continue to believe.

Godzilla, what church do you belong to?

[Stourme]

If by ranting you associate comparing the teaching of these cults to the truth of Christianity.

To which "true" christianity are you referring?

Are you referring to those that claim baptism for infants?

Are you referring to those that claim against baptism for infants?

Are you referring to these

Or these..

Sam I am?

[Elsie]

 Instead of trying to getting some extra mileage out of a dead horse, why can't you address what I said.

 

Ok...

 

Galatians 1:7-10
 7.  Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
 8.  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
 9.  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

 

 

2 Corinthians 11:14-15
 14.  And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
 15.  It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

 

 

 

 

 

2 Corinthians 11:12-15
 12.  And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about.
 13.  For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Revelation 13:13-15
 13.  And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
 14.  And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

 

 

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/19#19
  17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
  18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
  20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”  

 

It appears that EXPERIENCES can be deceiving...

 

 

If one believes the Bible is correct, then, by that Standard, Mormonism fails the test.

 

 

If, however, you are convinced that the Bible is either in error, been corrupted or mis-interpreted, then you are free to believe whatever you wish.

 

Genesis 3:1  Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made.

                  He said to the woman, "Did God really say, `You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
 

 

 

 

 

 

[bdeaner]

Sorry; but you've shifted away from Sola Scriptura.

First of all, no, I was not shifting away from Sola Scriptura. I was stating the fact that Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine that is supported by Scripture, and therefore Sola Scriptura is a contradictory doctrine that is fundamentally at error with itself. The Scripture you cited was referencing the Old Testament, not the New Testament. So, I am very much keeping on topic. The fact of the matter is, you cannot find a NT citation that says the NT is the sole rule of faith -- which is what Sola Scriptura implies must be the case -- and that is because such Scripture does not exist in the Bible. Hence, Sola Scriptura is bunk. I'm not sure how to be any more clear or direct on the matter.

Show ME where we are to use TRADITIONS OF MEN along WITH Scripture.

No one, least of all the Church, says that the traditions of men are an authority. The Sacred Tradition -- which includes both the oral and written Word of the authoritative Church, including the Bible -- is the authority. This is not a tradition of men, but rather a tradition of the Church guided by the Holy Spirit through History, as was promised by Christ. Big difference.

The Bible says so. The Church recieved Christ's promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Matt. 16:18), that He would always be with it (Matt. 28:20), and that He would give it the Holy Spirit to teach it all truth. (John 16:13). To the visible head of His Church, St. Peter, Our Lord said: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdowm of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and, whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." (Matt. 16:19). It is plainly evident from these passages that Our Lord emphasized the authority of His Church and the role it would have in safeguarding and defining the Deposit of Faith.

But if that isn't enough for you, realize that Scripture itself states that it is insufficient of itself as a teacher, but rather needs an interpreter:

We read in 2 Peter 3:16 that in St. Paul's epistles there are "certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest [distort], as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction."

In this one verse we note three very important things about the Bible and its interpretation: (a) the Bible contains passages which are not readily understandable or clear, a fact which demonstrates the need for an authoritative and infallible teacher to make the passages clear and understandable; (b) it is not only possible that people could "wrest" or distort the meaning of Scripture, but this was, in fact, being done from the very earliest days of the Church; and (c) to distort the meaning of Scripture can result in one's "destruction," a disastrous fate indeed. It is obvious from these considerations that St. Peter did not believe the Bible to be the sole rule of faith. But there is more.

In Acts 8:26-40, we read the account of the deacon St. Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. In this scenario, the Holy Spirit leads Philip to approach the Ethiopian. When Philip learns that the Ethiopian is reading from the prophet Isaias, he asks him a very telling question: "Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?" Even more telling is the answer given by the Ethiopian: "And how can I, unless some man show me?"

Whereas this St. Philip (known as "the Evangelist") is not one of the twelve Apostles, he was nonetheless someone who was commissioned by the Apostles (cf. Acts 6:6) and who preached the Gospel with authority (cf. Acts 8:4-8. Consequently, his preaching would reflect legitimate Apostolic teaching. The point here is that the Ethiopian's statement verifies the fact that the Bible is not sufficient in itself as a teacher of Christian doctrine, and people who hear the Word do need an authority to instruct them properly so that they may understand what the Bible says. If the Bible were indeed sufficient of itself, then the eunuch would not have been ignorant of the meaning of the passage from Isaias.

If that is not enough for you, there is also 2 Peter 1:20, which states that "no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation." Here we see the Bible itself stating in no uncertain terms that its prophecies are not a matter for which the individual is to arrive at his own interpretation. Is is also most telling that this verse is preceded by a section on the Apostolic witness (verses 12-18) and followed by a section on false teachers (chapter 2, verses 1-10). St. Peter is obviously contrasting genuine, Apostolic teaching with false prophets and false teachers, and he makes reference to private interpretation as the pivotal point between the two. The clear implication is that private interpretation is one pathway whereby an individual turns from authentic teaching and begins to follow erroneous teaching.