Is the Word of God only found in scripture?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
example: of the word of God not in the Bible alone!

Lk 3:2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Or
1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

these are divine revelation!
Inspired by the Holy Spirit!
And the word of God!

why do some only accept them after they are written down?

they are divine revelation and the inspired word of God when they were received, and when they were taught to the people, and when they were written down! Why only accept them in the written form or “Bible alone”???

Where does Christ or scripture say that all the divinely reveled truths are in scripture?
Where does Christ say what is and what is not scripture?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
How do we know what is scripture?

Dan 13

is it the inspired word of God or not?
How do you know from scripture alone please?
 

Windmillcharge

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2017
2,934
1,823
113
68
London
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
hese are divine revelation!
Inspired by the Holy Spirit!
And the word of God!

And they are in the bible.

Study the history of the bible, try 'Why 66 ' from Day One publications for an explanation of how we got the bible.
Basicly the early church leader used a simple test. Was the author known to have been or associated with an apostle.
Did what was written agree with what was in the other accepted books.

By these test the many 'so called lost gospels' can be seen to be late fakes.

Should we accept a message from a prophet today?
basicly why should we. Look at the many 'so called prophets' we have either today or since the bible was completed.
Every one of them disqualifies them selves either by saying something contrary to scripture or makes a prophercy that does not come true.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
example: of the word of God not in the Bible alone!

Lk 3:2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Or
1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

these are divine revelation!
Inspired by the Holy Spirit!
And the word of God!

why do some only accept them after they are written down?

they are divine revelation and the inspired word of God when they were received, and when they were taught to the people, and when they were written down! Why only accept them in the written form or “Bible alone”???

Where does Christ or scripture say that all the divinely reveled truths are in scripture?
Where does Christ say what is and what is not scripture?


God still speaks! So there are still Words of God to be heard and written. However when we speak of the Word of God (the Bible), these are the only words God chose to preserve for all time. All words of God are "inspired" per se, but all Words of God are not "canonical" meaning rising to the level of Scripture.

why? Don't know, it is just the way it is
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agios

Heart2Soul

Spiritual Warrior
Staff member
May 10, 2018
9,863
14,508
113
65
Tulsa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God still speaks! So there are still Words of God to be heard and written. However when we speak of the Word of God (the Bible), these are the only words God chose to preserve for all time. All words of God are "inspired" per se, but all Words of God are not "canonical" meaning rising to the level of Scripture.

why? Don't know, it is just the way it is
Could bias have any part of how they chose which books to include and which to exclude? Possibly...but the Vatican still has what they call the Apocrypha....there is the "dead sea scrolls" to consider as well.
But my opinion is that God is a very wise God and He is able to bring us to His Truth one way or the other....and if we SEEK HIM we will find Him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truman

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And they are in the bible.

Study the history of the bible, try 'Why 66 ' from Day One publications for an explanation of how we got the bible.
Basicly the early church leader used a simple test. Was the author known to have been or associated with an apostle.
Did what was written agree with what was in the other accepted books.

By these test the many 'so called lost gospels' can be seen to be late fakes.

Should we accept a message from a prophet today?
basicly why should we. Look at the many 'so called prophets' we have either today or since the bible was completed.
Every one of them disqualifies them selves either by saying something contrary to scripture or makes a prophercy that does not come true.

what about dan 13 & 14?

the 66 did not come by the teaching authority of the apostles and their successors but the tradition of men under king James
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God still speaks! So there are still Words of God to be heard and written. However when we speak of the Word of God (the Bible), these are the only words God chose to preserve for all time. All words of God are "inspired" per se, but all Words of God are not "canonical" meaning rising to the level of Scripture.

why? Don't know, it is just the way it is

In other words there is private revelation but no new public revelation
The church decides what is and what is not scripture
Ever read of the great faith of Susana in dan chapter 13?
 

quietthinker

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
11,562
7,588
113
FNQ
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
example: of the word of God not in the Bible alone!

Lk 3:2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Or
1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

these are divine revelation!
Inspired by the Holy Spirit!
And the word of God!

why do some only accept them after they are written down?

they are divine revelation and the inspired word of God when they were received, and when they were taught to the people, and when they were written down! Why only accept them in the written form or “Bible alone”???

Where does Christ or scripture say that all the divinely reveled truths are in scripture?
Where does Christ say what is and what is not scripture?
‘Is the word of God only found in scripture?’
Ahhh, a little insinuation here, a little doubt thrown in there. This tactic is not new .....’did God say.....?’
First you undermine the credibility before planting the poison. We know where that source comes from!
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Could bias have any part of how they chose which books to include and which to exclude? Possibly...but the Vatican still has what they call the Apocrypha....there is the "dead sea scrolls" to consider as well.
But my opinion is that God is a very wise God and He is able to bring us to His Truth one way or the other....and if we SEEK HIM we will find Him.

Despite mens frailty and biases. God oversaw the project and insured that what He wanted-He got.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heart2Soul

Robert Gwin

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2021
6,888
1,587
113
69
Central Il
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
example: of the word of God not in the Bible alone!

Lk 3:2 Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Or
1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

these are divine revelation!
Inspired by the Holy Spirit!
And the word of God!

why do some only accept them after they are written down?

they are divine revelation and the inspired word of God when they were received, and when they were taught to the people, and when they were written down! Why only accept them in the written form or “Bible alone”???

Where does Christ or scripture say that all the divinely reveled truths are in scripture?
Where does Christ say what is and what is not scripture?


No, but the Bible is the only book that contains the Inspired Word of God.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In other words there is private revelation but no new public revelation
The church decides what is and what is not scripture
Ever read of the great faith of Susana in dan chapter 13?


There is many private revelations. god warns and guides us, but He will never contradict His Word!

and no th
church does not decide what is SCripture. God decides what is SCripture and simply used the church to select which books He wanted and then close th ecanon of Scripture.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
‘Is the word of God only found in scripture?’
Ahhh, a little insinuation here, a little doubt thrown in there. This tactic is not new .....’did God say.....?’
First you undermine the credibility before planting the poison. We know where that source comes from!

im not saying scripture is not the divine revelation and not the word of God I’m asking about what they received, what it divine revelation and the word of God, and then when they taught it? Why only when it was written down decades later?

Why is the story of susana’s great faith not scripture? Dan 13 what authority of the tradition of men under king James have to decide if it’s scripture or not?
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
im not saying scripture is not the divine revelation and not the word of God I’m asking about what they received, what it divine revelation and the word of God, and then when they taught it? Why only when it was written down decades later?

Why is the story of susana’s great faith not scripture? Dan 13 what authority of the tradition of men under king James have to decide if it’s scripture or not?


What you need to realize is the apocryphal books were not canonized by Rome until the mid 16th ce3ntury. This was done as one of the actions against the reformation. Just like in Judaism who has the pseudepigrapha. They are writings but not SCripture. So too with the a[pocryphal books. They are writings but do not rise to the level of Scripture.
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,761
25,324
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hello Theefaith,
The below scripture came to me immediately after reading your OP:

"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
John 21:25
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heart2Soul

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
What you need to realize is the apocryphal books were not canonized by Rome until the mid 16th ce3ntury. This was done as one of the actions against the reformation. Just like in Judaism who has the pseudepigrapha. They are writings but not SCripture. So too with the a[pocryphal books. They are writings but do not rise to the level of Scripture.

Utter Rubbish

The deuterocanonical books that Protestants leave out of their Bibles are Tobit, Judith, 1&2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch and parts of Esther & Daniel.

Trent listed the books and then stated: "But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition...."

The "old Latin vulgate edition" is the one produced by Jerome at the end of the 4th century.


Going back in time from Trent, the Ecumenical Council of Florence 1438-1445 Session 11:
It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon [Chronicles], Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John.


The Eastern Orthodox Churches which broke away from the Catholic Church in 1054 also include these books in the their canon, as do the Oriental Orthodox Churches who broke away after the Council of Chalcedon in 451.

Prior to that the Council of Rome in 382 also listed the Deuters as canonical. This was confirmed by the local councils of Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419.

See this site for the Decree of Galasius
The Catholic Voyager: The canon of scripture, Damasus, and the "Gelasian Decree"

Another Protestant resource confirms Jurgens and the timeline I have posited above:
A council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the 'Gelasian Decree' because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent. (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed., p. 232)

The Catholic Encyclopedia on the New Advent site (NEW ADVENT: Home), in it's section on the status of the canon in the Church in the first 3 centuries states this:
"St. Irenæus, always a witness of the first rank, on account of his broad acquaintance with ecclesiastical tradition, vouches that Baruch was deemed on the same footing as Jeremias, and that the narratives of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon were ascribed to Daniel.."
and
"Origen employs all the deuterocanonicals as Divine Scriptures, and in his letter of Julius Africanus defends the sacredness of Tobias, Judith, and the fragments of Daniel, at the same time implicitly asserting the autonomy of the Church in fixing the Canon"
and
"St. Hippolytus (d. 236) may fairly be considered as representing the primitive Roman tradition. He comments on the Susanna chapter, often quotes Wisdom as the work of Solomon, and employs as Sacred Scripture Baruch and the Machabees. For the West African Church the larger canon has two strong witnesses in Tertullian and St. Cyprian. All the deuteros except Tobias, Judith, and the addition to Esther, are Biblically used in the works of these Fathers."

So it is clear that these books were considered canonical from very early times.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Utter Rubbish

The deuterocanonical books that Protestants leave out of their Bibles are Tobit, Judith, 1&2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch and parts of Esther & Daniel.

Trent listed the books and then stated: "But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition...."

The "old Latin vulgate edition" is the one produced by Jerome at the end of the 4th century.


Going back in time from Trent, the Ecumenical Council of Florence 1438-1445 Session 11:
It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon [Chronicles], Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John.


The Eastern Orthodox Churches which broke away from the Catholic Church in 1054 also include these books in the their canon, as do the Oriental Orthodox Churches who broke away after the Council of Chalcedon in 451.

Prior to that the Council of Rome in 382 also listed the Deuters as canonical. This was confirmed by the local councils of Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419.

See this site for the Decree of Galasius
The Catholic Voyager: The canon of scripture, Damasus, and the "Gelasian Decree"

Another Protestant resource confirms Jurgens and the timeline I have posited above:
A council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the 'Gelasian Decree' because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent. (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed., p. 232)

The Catholic Encyclopedia on the New Advent site (NEW ADVENT: Home), in it's section on the status of the canon in the Church in the first 3 centuries states this:
"St. Irenæus, always a witness of the first rank, on account of his broad acquaintance with ecclesiastical tradition, vouches that Baruch was deemed on the same footing as Jeremias, and that the narratives of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon were ascribed to Daniel.."
and
"Origen employs all the deuterocanonicals as Divine Scriptures, and in his letter of Julius Africanus defends the sacredness of Tobias, Judith, and the fragments of Daniel, at the same time implicitly asserting the autonomy of the Church in fixing the Canon"
and
"St. Hippolytus (d. 236) may fairly be considered as representing the primitive Roman tradition. He comments on the Susanna chapter, often quotes Wisdom as the work of Solomon, and employs as Sacred Scripture Baruch and the Machabees. For the West African Church the larger canon has two strong witnesses in Tertullian and St. Cyprian. All the deuteros except Tobias, Judith, and the addition to Esther, are Biblically used in the works of these Fathers."

So it is clear that these books were considered canonical from very early times.

The apocryphal books were included in older bibles, but they were not canonized formally until April 8, 1546 by the Council of Trent.

Individuals can have their opinions but the canon was done by the church. the New Testament in c. 397 and the OT in c. 382

all the rest is just distraction.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The apocryphal books were included in older bibles, but they were not canonized formally until April 8, 1546 by the Council of Trent.

Individuals can have their opinions but the canon was done by the church. the New Testament in c. 397 and the OT in c. 382

all the rest is just distraction.
The deuterocanonicals were formally canonised in 382 along with the rest of the OT as I showed in my quotes.

From a Protestant source:
A council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the 'Gelasian Decree' because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent. (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed., p. 232)

From the Catholic Encyclopedia
Two documents of capital importance in the history of the canon constitute the first formal utterance of papal authority on the subject. The first is the so-called "Decretal of Gelasius", de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, the essential part of which is now generally attributed to a synod convoked by Pope Damasus in the year 382. The other is the Canon of Innocent I, sent in 405 to a Gallican bishop in answer to an inquiry. Both contain all the deuterocanonicals, without any distinction, and are identical with the catalogue of Trent.


In addition, the list proclaimed including the deuterocanonicals was confirmed by the Synods of Hippo in 383 and Carthage in 397 and 419.

The attempt by Protestants to fix the canon to Trent is because they can't admit that they removed the deuterocanonicals from the canon but to claim the Catholic Church added them.

 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
There is no historical evidence of a 66 book canon used as a Bible before the 14th century. It is a man made tradition.
 

Windmillcharge

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2017
2,934
1,823
113
68
London
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
what about dan 13 & 14?

the 66 did not come by the teaching authority of the apostles and their successors but the tradition of men under king James

They were judged as not meeting the requirement to be in scripture.