I'm just inclined to stick with the Bible that I have in my pocket that I read on a daily basis. I don't feel that I need additions that come from second-hand sources as being on a par with the inspired word of God. Anything that is second-hand, I count as being a subject for Berean study.
Thanks JBF.
As I stated earlier I just want to be clear what each of us is saying to each other. I want to be clear that
I am not saying to you that the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius) are “on par with the inspired word of God”. The early Christian Church considered their writings (especially Clements) to be on par with Scripture. They had IMMENSE respect and formulated doctrine around their instructional letters. Why shouldn’t we, 2,000 years later, have immense respect for their writings?
What I am saying is that when it comes to deciding how to interpret passages from Scripture I would trust the writings of the Apostolic Fathers over any other (wo)mans interpretation after them which
includes me and my own interpretation.
I.E. Ignatius wrote
I desire the Bread of God, WHICH IS THE FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST,.....They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST. Also The Didache, written during the lives of the Apostles, calls the Eucharist “holy”.
Since Jesus said the bread that we partake, in remembrance of him, IS his body AND Paul asked rhetorically is it not a participation in the body of Christ AND the Didache AND Ignatius’s writings agree with what Jesus and Paul said.....I go with them and not Protestant men’s writings which deny those things.
Does that make sense? It doesn’t matter what I, a mere woman, thinks!
If you try to convince me that the Eucharist is not his body because you used your “Berean study” method and you came to the opposite conclusion.....should I believe you or Ignatius?
Throw out your “Berean study” practice in this instance. The writer of the Didache and Ignatious already did you Berean study. They LIVED it and told you what they found out. You, 2,000 years later, don’t have the opportunity to question witnesses or the Apostles like they did. Ignatius did all the work for you.
You say you are inclined to stick with the Bible and do your own studying the Berean way. Can you explain to me why your interpretation of a passage from Scripture , if different than Clements, Polycarp’s or Ignatious’s, should be held in higher regard than theirs?
Thanks for your time....Mary