There is NO proof text in scripture.

[Cooper]

You described chaos. I was just saying (and included scripture) that God has got this--in other words, you don't need to have such a dismal outlook.

And the you lost me. What was your point in this last comment?

Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (Joh 6:43-44 KJV)

Murmuring indicates discontent. So Jesus gave it to them straight. He was saying, if you oppose me, you oppose the Father who draws people to me.

In today's idiom, Jesus was telling them to watch out. If you oppose me, you are in trouble from the Father, making your end worse than your beginning.
.

 

[TEXBOW]

Dont fall out of the chair with shock on that one . The CC does a great dark work so marvel not if it dont agree with the truth one brings .

I pray that Mungo and others who have been deceived and are blinded by false tradition one day see the light and truly experience the power of the Holy Spirit.

 

[TEXBOW]

When I see the masses of people in Rome waiting for the Pope to speak or when they go through the process of choosing a new Pope and they are very emotional, crying, and obviously very much committed it's sad. Sad that people have elevated a fallible man (like me) to a deity. They worship him. He allows this false belief rather than rebukes them for making himself a false God. Idolatry is rampant. These masses will not find the Pope on the true Throne.

 

[ScottA]

just know and understand that when your so called Author disagrees with the AUTHOR who INSPIRED that BOOK
it means it cometh of satan not THE AUTHOR , NOT GOD .

Just so you know...that has never happened. Just the opposite.

 

[ScottA]

Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (Joh 6:43-44 KJV)

Murmuring indicates discontent. So Jesus gave it to them straight. He was saying if you oppose me, you oppose the Father, and it is the Father who draws people to me.

In todays idiom, Jesus was telling them to watch out, and don't oppose me.
.

That's all good, but I don't see how it pertains to the discussion.

 

[Cooper]

That's all good, but I don't see how it pertains to the discussion.

You started it in #86.
.

 

[Mungo]

I'm shocked.

OK.

 

[ScottA]

You started it in #86.
.

Okay, thanks.

 

[Cooper]

Okay, thanks.

Did you enjoy that little debate?
.

 

[amadeus]

I appreciate what you are saying, but I am indeed bias of my direct encounter with God. Given the choice of the Author or His Book, I choose the Author as number One, and His book as number two.

Aye, when number One speaks to you, no other interpretation or translation is required!

 

[liafailrock]

I appreciate what you are saying, but I am indeed bias of my direct encounter with God. Given the choice of the Author or His Book, I choose the Author as number One, and His book as number two.

I meant that first of all that voice is the Lord. Secondly, his written word is him. It's also Torah, the Word, a tangible communication of of his very being. That's because it was inspired by him, and an analogy is like a electronic transformer the energy in the primary gives the secondary energy. The secondary then induces current back into the primary. Spirit and then Word analogy. A person needs to connect to the secondary to get energy from the primary, otherwise no primary energy is given.

 

[ScottA]

I meant that first of all that voice is the Lord. Secondly, his written word is him. It's also Torah, the Word, a tangible communication of of his very being. That's because it was inspired by him, and an analogy is like a electronic transformer the energy in the primary gives the secondary energy. The secondary then induces current back into the primary. Spirit and then Word analogy. A person needs to connect to the secondary to get energy from the primary, otherwise no primary energy is given.

I hear ya, and it's a decent analogy. I would still rather prioritize hearing directly from Him who inspires.

 

[GEN2REV]

@ScottA

Not to derail your thread here, Scott, but I do think it's relevant to the topic at hand.

Your book sounds like an effort to reconcile science with religion. Is that correct?

If I may ask, what is the error in the early church that it claims to have found?

 

[ScottA]

Okay--I think it is a good time to AMEND my ORIGINAL POST:

I don't think it is good to just go and edit it and give the impression that you all have wrongly responded, nor do I really think it needs changing. But I would like to give credit where credit is due. Certainly the scriptures are at the very least a close 2nd to hearing directly from God by other means--having been caught up in the Spirit above the earth, I have no qualms about saying so.

But I don't want to paint the scriptures in a bad light either--not even. Heaven forbid. And I have filled in some details about my own use of words studies...so I don't want anyone to think it is actually a bad idea, thinking that was what I was saying. That is not at all what I wanted to say, and I believe if you read the original post clearly, you will see that that is not it at all. But perhaps I swung the pendulum too far for some, giving the wrong impression. I apologize for that. I do. And I guess that is a good example of the problem I did mean to address:

We have a communication problem.

And it seems to occur most around the written or spoken word. So a word of caution is appropriate--but so is a great love for the scriptures, even word studies.

Please accept my apology if I overstated the problem.

 

[ScottA]

@ScottA

Not to derail your thread here, Scott, but I do think it's relevant to the topic at hand.

Your book sounds like an effort to reconcile science with religion. Is that correct?

If I may ask, what is the error in the early church that it claims to have found?

No, not an effort to reconcile science with religion really, but perhaps to appeal to that level of reason.

The error of the early church, was misunderstanding what or who Jesus said He would build His church upon--whereby missing the "soon" return of Christ in the glory of the Father.

 

[keithr]

The Bible does say we don't need a teacher, because we have the Holy Spirit. True, but if you've only been a Christian for a few years I think it is wise to listen to sermons and teachings of the scholars who have been taught by the Holy Spirit for decades and see what they have to say.

Indeed. Jesus also spent time studying the Scriptures and listening to Scripture teachers. Remember the story of when he was 12 years old and he stayed behind in Jerusalem, and it took his parents about three days to find him. He was in the temple. Luke 2:46 (WEB):

(46) After three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the middle of the teachers, both listening to them, and asking them questions.​

He spent a lot of time there in Bible (Old Testament) study.

Jesus' response to his parents is also interesting from a 'word study' point of view! The KJV says:

(48) And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
(49) And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?​

A lot of translations seem to copy the KJV and say that Jesus said he "must be about his Father's business", yet there is no Greek word there that means 'business'. The WEB translates it as:

(49) He said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Didn’t you know that I must be in my Father’s house?”
(50) They didn’t understand the saying which he spoke to them.​

The Cambridge Bible Notes comments:

about my Father’s business] Rather, in my Father’s house. These words are very memorable as being the first recorded words of Jesus. They bear with them the stamp of authenticity in their half-vexed astonishment, and perfect mixture of dignity and humility. It is remarkable too, that He does not accept the phrase “Thy father” which Mary had employed. “Did ye not know?” recalls their fading memory of Who He was; and the “I must” lays down the law of devotion to His Father by which He was to walk even to the Cross. Psalms 40:7-9. “My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me and to finish His work,” John 4:34.

my Father’s] it is remarkable that Christ always says ὁ πατήρ μου (with the article) but teaches us to say πατὴρ ἡμῶν (without the article): e. g. in John 20:17 it is, “I ascend unto the Father of me and Father of you.” God is His Father in a different way from that in which He is ours. He is our Father only because He is His Father.​

 

[keithr]

I appreciate what you are saying, but I am indeed bias of my direct encounter with God. Given the choice of the Author or His Book, I choose the Author as number One, and His book as number two.

But are you assuming that it was God that spoke to you, when it might not have been! I think that is why we are advising caution. It's difficult for us to know when we don't know the details of what you heard. God (or Jesus) has only directly spoken to me once, putting words into my mind while I was asleep and dreaming, when he pointed me to a page in my Bible to answer a question that I had been asking the evening before, trying to understand about fasting. (The next day he healed me of a back problem when I went to a meeting of a visiting Evangelist.) So I, and I suspect most Christians, don't have a lot of experience of God talking directly to us.

I read a news report a couple of days ago about a guy who is accused of murder (Murder accused tells court he heard voice say 'attack, attack' before stabbing). In his defence he said, "There was a knife on the island and I just went completely crazy and I saw the knife and the voice in my head had shouted: ‘Attack, attack’, I picked up the knife and started stabbing my mum." We can be sure that wasn't God speaking to the guy, but Satan is often more subtle than that, mixing truth with error in order to deceive.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Indeed. Jesus also spent time studying the Scriptures and listening to Scripture teachers. Remember the story of when he was 12 years old and he stayed behind in Jerusalem, and it took his parents about three days to find him. He was in the temple. Luke 2:46 (WEB):

(46) After three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the middle of the teachers, both listening to them, and asking them questions.​

He spent a lot of time there in Bible (Old Testament) study.

Jesus' response to his parents is also interesting from a 'word study' point of view! The KJV says:

(48) And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
(49) And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?​

A lot of translations seem to copy the KJV and say that Jesus said he "must be about his Father's business", yet there is no Greek word there that means 'business'. The WEB translates it as:

(49) He said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Didn’t you know that I must be in my Father’s house?”
(50) They didn’t understand the saying which he spoke to them.​

The Cambridge Bible Notes comments:

about my Father’s business] Rather, in my Father’s house. These words are very memorable as being the first recorded words of Jesus. They bear with them the stamp of authenticity in their half-vexed astonishment, and perfect mixture of dignity and humility. It is remarkable too, that He does not accept the phrase “Thy father” which Mary had employed. “Did ye not know?” recalls their fading memory of Who He was; and the “I must” lays down the law of devotion to His Father by which He was to walk even to the Cross. Psalms 40:7-9. “My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me and to finish His work,” John 4:34.

my Father’s] it is remarkable that Christ always says ὁ πατήρ μου (with the article) but teaches us to say πατὴρ ἡμῶν (without the article): e. g. in John 20:17 it is, “I ascend unto the Father of me and Father of you.” God is His Father in a different way from that in which He is ours. He is our Father only because He is His Father.​

You are right. 36 out of 62 English translations use "house". Well, that is where He was. The Father's business/work through His Son started when Hus mission did.
Luke 2:40 states that Jesus was filled with the Spirit and wisdom and durin His time at the temple everyone was astonished at His answers and understanding. This implies that He really wasn't there for a lesson but to teach them. As the Spirit needs no teacher, but teaches. Jesus asked questions to draw them in, get them to think and then likely corrected their errors.
>> My guess is that Jesus was guiding them, preparing them, planting seeds, getting them to reexamine Messianic scriptures ... opening their eyes and enlightening them to what was to come in their lifetime.
We are not surprised when we see a genius 12 year old already in a university, a prodigy. Jesus was/is God in the flesh.
I will someday have a long talk with Him about His childhood. I know He had knowledge, wisdom, powers and abilities as a child that He did not use and put on pause until His ministry would begin. His parents knew who He was. Remember at the wedding of Cana, His mother urged him to do something about the shortage of wine. She knew He could and He reminded her that it wasn't His time yet, but went ahead and performed a miracle anyways.

 

[TEXBOW]

You are right. 36 out of 62 English translations use "house". Well, that is where He was. The Father's business/work through His Son started when Hus mission did.
Luke 2:40 states that Jesus was filled with the Spirit and wisdom and durin His time at the temple everyone was astonished at His answers and understanding. This implies that He really wasn't there for a lesson but to teach them. As the Spirit needs no teacher, but teaches. Jesus asked questions to draw them in, get them to think and then likely corrected their errors.
>> My guess is that Jesus was guiding them, preparing them, planting seeds, getting them to reexamine Messianic scriptures ... opening their eyes and enlightening them to what was to come in their lifetime.
We are not surprised when we see a genius 12 year old already in a university, a prodigy. Jesus was/is God in the flesh.
I will someday have a long talk with Him about His childhood. I know He had knowledge, wisdom, powers and abilities as a child that He did not use and put on pause until His ministry would begin. His parents knew who He was. Remember at the wedding of Cana, His mother urged him to do something about the shortage of wine. She knew He could and He reminded her that it wasn't His time yet, but went ahead and performed a miracle anyways.

In your future conversation, I hope to eavesdrop. To me, the question has been when did Jesus exercise his deity while on earth. Could he perform miracles at 12 or did the Father spoon-feed his deity to him for a purpose? Did the Son of God have certain attributes as an infant different than other infants? It's obvious that he needed Mary, he didn't nurse himself. We know even just prior to his death he said that the Father only knew certain things (his return). The logical side of my brain sees a gradual growth of supernatural power in Jesus's life on earth. He prayed to the Father, for what? In order to seek something, you must not know something. If you need understanding, you don't have it.

 

[ScottA]

But are you assuming that it was God that spoke to you, when it might not have been! I think that is why we are advising caution. It's difficult for us to know when we don't know the details of what you heard. God (or Jesus) has only directly spoken to me once, putting words into my mind while I was asleep and dreaming, when he pointed me to a page in my Bible to answer a question that I had been asking the evening before, trying to understand about fasting. (The next day he healed me of a back problem when I went to a meeting of a visiting Evangelist.) So I, and I suspect most Christians, don't have a lot of experience of God talking directly to us.

I read a news report a couple of days ago about a guy who is accused of murder (Murder accused tells court he heard voice say 'attack, attack' before stabbing). In his defence he said, "There was a knife on the island and I just went completely crazy and I saw the knife and the voice in my head had shouted: ‘Attack, attack’, I picked up the knife and started stabbing my mum." We can be sure that wasn't God speaking to the guy, but Satan is often more subtle than that, mixing truth with error in order to deceive.

No, I am not assuming.

I did not "hear", but called out to God by name and was caught up in the Spirit above the earth into His presents. I might have questioned who it was that answered, but who is able to make God deaf and take His place? If I have assumed anything, I have assumed that no one can do such a thing to God. But I don't assume it, for it is written "Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know."