|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,233 Likes: 14
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,233 Likes: 14 |
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.Yes, YOU. Check out Jesuswordsonly
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Jesus: "Take heed that no man deceive you." Hebrew Roots Judaizer
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,521 Likes: 24
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,521 Likes: 24 |
If God didn't want Paul's teachings in the Bible, they wouldn't be there. God is plenty powerful enough to have keep falsehoods out of it. The Holy Spirit led those who assembled the Bible to include them. I won't naysay the Spirit.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,179 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,179 Likes: 7 |
If God didn't want Paul's teachings in the Bible, they wouldn't be there. God is plenty powerful enough to have keep falsehoods out of it. The Holy Spirit led those who assembled the Bible to include them. I won't naysay the Spirit. Or perhaps they served the purposes of the men assembling the cannon...
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5 |
Luke never knew Christ, he was Paul's companion, but he's an apostle too I guess. Luke doesn't prove Paul as God's word or Luke himself as God's word.
Christ obviously had no need to write words, he wanted people to see a sermon rather than read one.
There is no need to read Paul or Luke or the book of Mormon or some theologian or hear some suit at the pulpit to know Christ and feel the Holy Spirit, that's the bottom line.
Kent
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,935 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,935 Likes: 5 |
krp,
Do you think we should go along with Apostle Peter when he says, "Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?"
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5 |
Through the Holy Spirit.
Problem with people is they can't follow Christ's love thy neighbor. They create religions where they can judge/attack others through written words and actions while claiming the right of righteousness. If you go out to battle others using the shield and sword of chapter and verse you use Paul's word.
Kent
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,779 Likes: 5
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,779 Likes: 5 |
If God didn't want Paul's teachings in the Bible, they wouldn't be there. God is plenty powerful enough to have keep falsehoods out of it. The Holy Spirit led those who assembled the Bible to include them. I won't naysay the Spirit. Or perhaps they served the purposes of the men assembling the cannon... That's an easy accusation to make, but I've never seen anyone detail exactly what the specifics are.
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,423
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,423 |
Please fill me in. Why the lack of respect for the Work of Paul? Wabigoon, I think one of the biggest distractions from "Paul" are the forgerys know as the Pastoral Epistles, i.e. 1st and 2nd Timothy and Titus, that are used to justify so much of the misogyny and bigotry we see here on the fire. These books are the sources for the verses used to attack your own Pastor Missy. Not so much. There are seven books in the New Testament that have some question as to the author. They are not forgeries, they are canonical, and they have been considered canonical since the first or second century after the birth of Christ. But, given that some spoke against them at the time, those books are treated somewhat differently by orthodox Christians. They are referred to as "Antilegomena." or "spoken against." 1. Any portion of those books are good-to-go to use as backup supporting doctrine found elsewhere in the Bible. 2. Consciences can not be bound to support any doctrine found solely in those books (IOW, no other part of the Bible supports similar doctrine). The heterodox or heretical, of course, use whatever source they like to justify whatever doctrine they like. And the non-Christians seem to make it up as they go. To sum up: 1&2Tim, and Titus are good-to-go, are perfectly homologoumena, and Pastor Missy is still cross-wise with orthodoxy. http://cyclopedia.lcms.org/display.asp?t1=A&word=ANTILEGOMENAAntilegomena (Gk. “spoken against”). Certain books of the NT on which there was no unanimity but some uncertainty in the early ch. regarding their canonicity. Distinguished from homologoumena (Gk. “universally accepted”). Because certain false teachers and other unauthorized persons tried to have their writings introd. into Christian congs. (cf. 2 Th 2:2), it was necessary for Christians to be alert, lest false gospels or letters be acknowledged, esp. by being ascribed to true apostles or disciples of apostles. It was due chiefly to this special vigilance that the following books were not accepted by the ch. everywhere before the latter part of the 4th c.: Ja, Jude, 2 and 3 Jn, 2 Ptr, Heb and Rv The author of Heb is not definitely known; the identity of the James who is the author of the letter was not altogether certain, and the content of the letter was misunderstood; 2 and 3 Jn are addressed to private persons and were not made accessible to larger circles; 2 Ptr was most likely written shortly before the death of the author and had no definite addressees; Jude is very short and has a very circumscribed message; and the Rv was under suspicion because of its nature. Over against these objections it is to be noted that all these books are mentioned at a very early date, some of them referred to as early as the beginning of the 2d c. as apostolic writings, and all of them finally accepted by the ch. in the course of the 4th c. Doubts have been expressed about some of them even by orthodox Luth. teachers, but in almost every case the clear apostolic doctrine, the depth of the admonitions and of the whole presentation, and the high prophetic insight into future events speak strongly in their favor. Most of the objections raised in recent cents. have been satisfactorily met by earnest searchers after the truth. See also Canon, Bible, 5, 6. For gen. information see references under Canon, Bible; for the position of Luth. dogmaticians see C. F. Walther, “Ist derjenige für einen Ketzer oder gefährlichen Irrlehrer zu erklären, welcher nicht alle in dem Convolut des Neuen Testamentes befindlichen Bücher für kanonisch hält und erklärt?” L. u. W., II (1856), 204–216.
Regards,
deadlift_dude “The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence.” ----Fred Rogers
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,423
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,423 |
If God didn't want Paul's teachings in the Bible, they wouldn't be there. God is plenty powerful enough to have keep falsehoods out of it. The Holy Spirit led those who assembled the Bible to include them. I won't naysay the Spirit. Or perhaps they served the purposes of the men assembling the cannon... That's an easy accusation to make, but I've never seen anyone detail exactly what the specifics are. Vast majority of canon was settled on by the second century of Our Lord and the last few by the fourth century. The whys and wherefores are well-documented and available to those interested. In short, what became the canon were the works shared amongst the early church fathers and met standards of contemporaneity and doctrine in line with the earliest works.
Regards,
deadlift_dude “The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence.” ----Fred Rogers
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,688 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,688 Likes: 5 |
Good stuff and right on jfuser
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,688 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,688 Likes: 5 |
If God didn't want Paul's teachings in the Bible, they wouldn't be there. God is plenty powerful enough to have keep falsehoods out of it. The Holy Spirit led those who assembled the Bible to include them. I won't naysay the Spirit. Or perhaps they served the purposes of the men assembling the cannon... That's an easy accusation to make, but I've never seen anyone detail exactly what the specifics are. “New Atheism” considers all religion as a deleterious power grab by those who occupy the upper echelons of whatever religious order. As a rationalistic worldview it dismissed out of hand any potential truth of supernatural worldviews. They hold these truths to be self evident like you and I do the existence of God.
|
|
|
|
557 members (1badf350, 10gaugeman, 10Glocks, 160user, 01Foreman400, 10gaugemag, 50 invisible),
2,388
guests, and
1,241
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,336
Posts18,526,783
Members74,031
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|