Is the Bible Enough?

New Horizons (A Publication of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church) ^ | January 2002 | Geoffrey Thomas

[Gamecock]

Our Lord Jesus Christ tells of two men, a rich man who rejects God and a beggar whose trust is in the Lord (Luke 16:19-31). Both of them die, and the beggar goes to heaven, while the rich man goes to hell. One reason he tells this story is so that we may know something of what comes after death. Many will enjoy the pleasures of heaven, but others will suffer the horrors of hell.

This rich man who is suffering the torments of hell makes two requests of Abraham. First, he asks to be relieved of his torment, which is unbearable. But Abraham tells him that that is impossible, saying in effect, "All your lifetime you received your good things; you were reminded of the certainty of death and judgment; you were warned to flee from the wrath to come; you had been told of the mercy and long-suffering of the grace of God; you were told to seek that mercy and find peace through the gospel." But after death it is too late.

The second request of the man in hell deals with his five brothers. They are still in the world, so the man in the pit devises a scheme by which they will not join him there (because their presence, no doubt, would make his hell five times worse). He devises a plan of evangelism—which many human beings do. He imagines a way of delivering his siblings from the place of woe. The five brothers all know the beggar who lived his life at the gate of their rich brother's house, and they all know that he died. So the rich man says to Abraham, "Send that man, Lazarus, from your side back to my brothers to show himself to them as one raised from the dead. The result of that will be that they will all become believers, especially when he tells them about hell. If a man should be raised from the dead and tell them what is happening to me, they will change. They will no longer curl their lip and say, 'Nobody's ever come back,' but they will believe in God and escape hell." That is the wisdom of a man in hell. That is his proposal.

That request sparks a debate between Abraham and the man in hell. Abraham argues one side, and the man in hell argues the other. Abraham defends the position of those who believe in God through the Lord Jesus Christ, and the man in hell defends the position of those who use human reason and never trust the Savior in this world or the next. This argument is still going on. It is important for us to see what this argument consists of and the difference between the two approaches.

The Position of Faith

On one side, there is Abraham and all who believe as he did. One thing is true of every one of them: they are satisfied with the Bible. Theologically, we would say that they hold to the sufficiency of the Scriptures to save any person from hell. Abraham says: "They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them" (vs. 29). Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. There is Genesis, which tells us that God is a personal God, an almighty Lord, and how he made the world, and why the world is in the state it is. It speaks of the great answer to man's rebellion in the Christ who one day will come and bruise the serpent's head. Then, in Exodus, we are told of the Passover, of those for whom a lamb had died substitutionally, and how the angel of death had passed over all of them. Because of the lamb whose blood had been shed, they were forgiven. The book of Leviticus tells us that "without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins" (Heb. 9:22). It points to the sacrifices of redemption instituted by a loving God. The book of Numbers tells us of the brazen serpent lifted up in the wilderness, and that if men obediently look on who and what that represents, they will have life. The book of Deuteronomy tells us of the covenant relationship between God and his people—Jehovah, the great I Am, pledging himself to be their God and Savior for ever and ever.

"They have Moses," Abraham says, and the rich man's brothers also have all the rest of the Old Testament written by the prophets, who together speak of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is there in it all. So Abraham says, "Let them listen to them." How much more should we today listen to those who were eyewitnesses of Jesus' majesty, who were with him in the upper room, and who heard his cry, "Peace be still!" and saw the waves obey him, and who helped unloose risen Lazarus from his graveclothes. Should we not listen to those who by the Holy Spirit were led into all the truth in what they wrote? Do you see Abraham's argument? The Scriptures are enough to bring a man to faith in Jesus Christ. The Scriptures themselves are more than sufficient to save a man from hell.

Then Abraham adds, in words to this effect, in verse 31: "If they do not listen to the Bible, nothing else will convince them; nothing else will do any good, not even the specter of a resurrection before their very eyes." So the question is, Do you agree with Abraham? On one side of the debate, the man in hell says that it seems a great idea to him to send a man back from the grave to the world of the living to warn them (vss. 27-28). But Abraham replies, "They have the Scriptures, let them hear them." "No," the rich man says, "the Bible is not enough." He has no confidence in the Word of God. He is saying, "They need something more than the Bible if they are going to be saved from hell." This man thinks that the Bible is an ineffective book, that you cannot expect anyone to get serious about eternal life and flee from the wrath to come simply by reading the Bible, or by hearing sermons from the Scriptures.

The Position of Unbelief

Now, it is very interesting that the man in hell addresses Abraham respectfully and calls him "father Abraham" (vs. 24), and that the patriarch acknowledges that and responds to him with the word "son" (vs. 25). In other words, this man was a fellow Jew—a member of the Old Testament covenant people. He had been circumcised, and ethnically and outwardly he was a son of Abraham. The Lord Jesus in Luke 16 is speaking to fellow countrymen. He is addressing the Pharisees who are sneering at him—"And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him" (vs. 14 kjv). They could not imagine that they themselves were in any danger of hell. Even when they saw Lazarus raised from the dead, they continued their plotting to kill the Lord Jesus Christ.

This rich man, then, grew up in the synagogue, memorizing the Scripture, hearing it week by week. But he never obeyed it, nor did he love it. He found it boring. He never dreamed for a moment that he would end up in hell. He never thought that one day there would be a great chasm fixed between himself and Abraham. There are many like him who hear the Word of God preached with the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven. Judas heard it; Ananias heard it; Sapphira heard it; Demas heard it; the Judaizers heard it—but all were lost.

Now you see what the rich man is saying from hell—"If the Scriptures are the only thing that you are going to give my brothers, well ... I had them, and what good did they do me? They didn't change me." In fact, he is saying in hell: "It is perfectly understandable that I didn't believe and that they don't believe—all we had was the Bible. I know my brothers; I am aware how they live; I know where they are going. The Bible is not going to touch them—men like them need something more." In effect, he is saying, "I should be excused. If only I had seen a miracle that thrilled me, I would have believed. If only a man had been raised from the dead and spoken to me, then I would have paid attention. If only I could have gone to a meeting where amazing things happened, it would have been different. But all I had was the Bible. The Bible!"

That is what many people say still. "You can't expect the world to be attracted by the Bible, by preaching the Scriptures, by texts outside chapels, and verses on billboards, and tracts with Scriptures on them, and memorizing the Bible, and lessons from the Bible to children in Sunday school, and camps where young people are taught the Bible, and conferences where the Bible is proclaimed. You can't expect people to be attracted by that! We need concerts! We need drama! We need costumes! We need bands! We need choreography! Bring in the drums and the synthesizers. Send in the clowns! Then the people will come. We need superstars and celebrities to give us their testimonies—not just the Bible alone!" But, you see, Abraham was unyielding. "The Bible is sufficient," he said.

Is the Bible Enough?

Not a few religious people argue just like that man from hell. The Roman Catholic Church says that the Bible is not enough, that we must have sacred tradition, too. The Quakers say that the Bible is not enough, that there must be an inner voice in the congregation. Modernists say that Scripture itself is not enough, that it must be interpreted by "the assured results of modern criticism." They say that we must go back to sources "behind" our present gospel narratives to find the "authentic" sayings of Jesus. Cultists say that the Bible is not enough, that men must obey another book—the Book of Mormon, or Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures, by Mary Baker Eddy, or the Watchtower productions of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Many charismatics say that the Bible is not enough, that it needs to be supplemented by miracles and signs. All such people are saying that the Bible is not enough. They say, "It's a good start, but it needs a bit of help from us."

A preacher has written that when the apostle Paul was preaching in Athens, he slipped up and as a result few were converted. Paul used wrong methods; he simply preached the Word of God to the philosophers who were gathered there on Mars Hill, and only a few were converted. So Paul went to Corinth and drastically changed his methods. There he performed miracles, and many were converted. But the conversion of one of the members of the Greek supreme court named Dionysius, and a woman named Damaris, as well as a number of other people (Acts 17:34) would be considered by us to be very encouraging for the first meeting in a community that had never heard the gospel before. But people are taught that this is not "power evangelism." "Unless we can do miracles, there will be no converts."

"No, father Abraham," says the man in hell, "not the Bible alone—the Bible plus something else. The Bible plus informal entertainment. The Bible plus background music. You choose the "plus." You enthuse about it. You give lectures about it, and write books about it. You can grow rich on it—"How I found the plus that helps the inadequate Bible." You can hold seminars and conferences and tell the world the method that you discovered to compensate for the failure of the Scriptures. You can be like this man in hell who had no love for God, but thought of a way to make up for the inadequacies of the Bible.

Now remember that Abraham was in heaven before Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. Abraham had a unique perspective on the books of Moses and the Prophets. Abraham was there in the presence of God when the Lord gave the Word to Moses and to the prophets. He was listening to the Lord on those occasions when God commanded the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of illumination, "Go to Moses, Samuel, David, Solomon, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and assist them to understand my Word, proclaim it, and write the Scriptures, to the very jots and tittles." Abraham heard God speak, and he knew the source and power of that which had come from the throne of the universe. From the lips of the living God had come those words. Abraham knew and loved them: they were Spirit and life. They were powerful words, as effectual as when God had said "Let there be light" and there was light. The Almighty has broken the silence of the heavens. God has spoken to sinners. He has opened his heart and revealed his inmost Being. He is there and he is not silent. We have his Word.

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds" (Heb. 1:1-2 KJV). He is a speaking God, but now in these last days he has spoken by his Son—the Lord from heaven, the speaking Savior, the Prophet, God's final Word. The Lord Christ has said that no one knows the Father except the Son, who alone has that infinite acquaintance. There is the immensity of the Almighty, and only the Son knows him comprehensively. When at the end of his life he is praying, he thanks the Father for all the help that he has had to discharge the commission which the Father gave him. He has omitted nothing, and when Jesus sends his apostles into the world, he gives them the Holy Spirit to lead them into all the truth, and they also omit nothing. Everything has been provided for all that is needed for the over two thousand years of church history. When Paul acknowledges himself as an apostle, he says, "And then last of all to me also" (1 Cor. 15:8). In other words, Paul was the last apostle. No more apostles are needed. No house needs more than one solid foundation (Eph. 2:20).

We have Moses, we have the Prophets, we have the Gospels, and we have the Epistles. We have them all in our own English language. We may hold them in our hands, and we can read them. When John Jewel, one of the great English Reformers, who became the bishop of Salisbury, was preaching on the Scriptures, he ended by rousing his congregation: "Are you a father? Have you children? Read the Scriptures. Are you a king? Read the Scriptures. Are you a minister? Read the Scriptures. Has God blessed you with wealth? Read the Scriptures. Are you a usurer? Read the Scriptures. Are you a fornicator? Read the Scriptures. Are you in adversity? Read the Scriptures. Are you a sinner? Have you offended God? Read the Scriptures. Do you despair of the mercy of God? Read the Scriptures. Are you going out of this life? Read the Scriptures."

Abraham was saying words to this effect: "Do you want your brothers to see a miracle? Your brothers have got a miracle! They have in their hearing at every visit to the synagogue Moses and the Prophets. They may purchase for themselves Moses and the Prophets. They may read and memorize Moses and the Prophets."

We who live twenty centuries later have more, having the Gospels, the Acts, the Letters, and the book of Revelation. These new covenant writings are the miracle which leads the church into the new millennium. When I take this Bible in my hand, I am holding a mighty work of God. I have something absolutely unique. Here is something miraculous in its independence of thought, in the comprehensiveness of its theme, in its utter and invincible confidence that it is the most relevant word to my own life and to that of every man. Sometimes, in moments of doubt, our minds must rest in this: "I have the Bible." I have this great intrusion from heaven, this book that comes from another world in which men may hear the unique utterances of the Son of God. I have read much of human literature at its best, but I find here in this book something that is discontinuous with everything else. Here is a book that is absolutely unique. The Bible is a word from God that knows me, that describes me, that searches me, that finds me. The Scripture speaks to man's deepest needs. Here is a book that contains concepts of unsurpassable grandeur, in words that are invincible in their sheer originality. Every Sunday, when gospel churches meet, they do so around this miracle. Every single service has at its center this miracle—not just those red letter Sundays, when everything is just right. Not merely when the Holy Spirit moves and convicts, but every time we are gathered in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and this book is in the center of our gathering, then we are meeting in the presence of a miracle. Do you say you want a miracle and then you will believe? Well, here is a miracle! Abraham says "No!" to signs and wonders as the means of saving sinners today, because here is the Bible and it is a miracle. "So then, faith comes by hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ" (Rom. 10:17).

Abraham knew that this was God's method. So then, you must go to a church where there is a man sent to preach the word of Christ. That has been and always will be the means of saving anyone. Not since the apostolic age has a single person come to faith in Christ through seeing someone raised from the dead, but millions have become believers through hearing the word. Abraham knew that all the children who were there with him in the presence of God had been saved through the Bible, and that the millions more who would join him there would get to heaven in the same way. It was the Scriptures which made them all "wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15 NKJV). God in mercy has said, "I have as many people coming into the kingdom as the sand on the seashore—they are all going to share heaven with me. They are corrupted rebels. They provoke me dreadfully, but I will forgive their sins, and I will do this for all who believe in Jesus Christ. And this will be my way: by bringing my word to them. I will send them a Christian neighbor. I will put them in a university, and there they will meet witnessing students. I will work through a member of their family, or through the woman who works in that office with them. And I will bring them all to a congregation where they will hear the Word of God preached. That is the way I will rescue them from hell. They don't have to be scholars to understand the Scriptures, but I will open their understanding to know the way of salvation through faith in Christ as that is found so plainly in the Bible. "The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple" (Ps. 19:7 KJV). Ordinary folk can read or hear this message of the gospel and understand it. It tells us that we deserve eternal hell because we are sinners, but that Jesus, because he loved us, died to save us. We have God's message. If men will not listen to it, they will not be convinced even if God should change teeth fillings from amalgam to gold.

The Scriptures are sufficient to make the man of God perfect. How far can the Scriptures take you? They can take you to total maturity, that is, to be "thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:17 NKJV). What lies before us? What duties, challenges, and sacrifices will we be called upon to accept? The Bible will completely equip us for them. How can we grow and put away childish things? How can we become mature men and women? How can we become wise? How can we become conformed to the image of Christ? Through the Bible—that is God's way. The Scripture sanctifies and perfects what is imperfect. It thoroughly enables us for the challenge of every good work in whatever God asks us to do. Every mountain God asks us to climb, every burden he asks us to bear, every service he asks us to give, every pressure he asks us to endure, every sacrifice he asks us to make—the Scriptures can enable us to do it all by preparing us comprehensively for every good work. They tell us how to do it and why we should do it; they give us strength for the task and warn us how not to do it. The Scriptures will complete that good work which God has begun in us. The Bible helps us to put away childish things. The Bible saves a man from being a wimp and delivers him from being a nerd. It transforms him into being "the man of God ... thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:17 NKJV). It is a supernatural blessing to have the Bible.

Our Lord Jesus Christ ends the Sermon on the Mount by speaking about a wise man who built his house upon a rock. And the storms, winds, and floods came, and the house still stood. That man was building his life on the teaching of the Lord Jesus and it stood. Christ was looking forward down the centuries, even looking into the hideous modern era in which we have lived for so long. Christ knew all the storms that would be hurled at little Christian boys or girls; the gales of scientific pretension, of philosophy and humanism, of materialism and fleshliness. Yet every young Christian who stands on the teaching of Jesus will survive any storm. The Savior is absolutely confident about it.

The professing church is in a hopeless, demoralized state whenever its members begin to believe that the Bible is insufficient for the task before us. The Roman Catholic Church, the Quakers, the modernists, the cults, and the charismatics are all looking for some additional signs and voices. None of them is in a healthy state. None of them is convinced about the sufficiency of God's truth. The issue confronting you is, Are you content with the Bible or not?

[Gamecock]

GRPL Ping

[xzins]

In terms of the words of the Lord through His Son, His Apostles, His Prophets, and His Teachers, there is no other voice but that of the Bible. Once we agree that the Bible is the preserved Words of His message to us through His Son and His other spokespeople, then we must obey His words rather than those of any human.

Any religious leader who tells me it’s OK to ignore God’s word in order to listen to their word must prove one thing only to me. They must prove that they outrank God.

[The Cuban]

How is the worlds only truc church the Catholic Church in exactly in an “unhealthy” state? And by the way, never did Jesus mention the word “bible”.

[xzins]

Jesus never mentioned the word “trinity” either, but it is a truth found in the words of God’s servants.

Jesus said many things about His own words and those of His apostles and of God’s spokes people who preceded Him.

He explicitly elevated the words of His apostles.

That message is preserved in their writings. They have preserved His words and their own words, and those words testify to the words of those who preceded them.

So, the issue is what you will do if Jesus tells you to do something and you know that it’s Jesus speaking to you in His authenticated Word. You’ve got 2 choices: You can do it or You can not do it.

[DouglasKC]

Although scripture does teach that scripture is sufficient I’m overwhelmed at how much the author added to scripture when he analyzed the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

[Iscool]

"I have the Bible." I have this great intrusion from heaven, this book that comes from another world in which men may hear the unique utterances of the Son of God.

I have read much of human literature at its best, but I find here in this book something that is discontinuous with everything else. Here is a book that is absolutely unique. The Bible is a word from God that knows me, that describes me, that searches me, that finds me. The Scripture speaks to man's deepest needs. Here is a book that contains concepts of unsurpassable grandeur, in words that are invincible in their sheer originality.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

There is something very unusual about THAT book...And that book only...

[Faith65]

Bookmark

[SLB]

Bump

[kindred]

Yes, the Word of God is the only thing that is enough as the doctrine is best explained therein and where religion fails, the Word of God is able and unites the church, the Body of Christ together by biblical doctrine Spoken by the God of Israel in the person of Jesus Christ only. Every born again believer should dump religion and believe the Word of God, the book is His Word and religion works against His Word as false Christians do not teach or read the Scriptures.

Hebrews

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11 ¶ Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

[kindred]

[There is something very unusual about THAT book...And that book only...]

Amen to that!
The entrance of His Word gives light indeed.

[Cvengr]

Go to this link,

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/

click on the button labeled, “The WORD of the Lord came to me” for this link.

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/WordChapter.pdf

From Page 4

The word for “word” in Aramaic is memra. That means in the passages we looked at a few paragraphs ago, instead of talking about the Logos of God or the “Word” of the Lord, we’d be talking about the “Memra of the Lord” coming to people. It just so happens that in the Targums—those Aramaic translations of the Old Testament the Jews of Jesus’ day were used to reading as their Bible—the Memra of God as a manifestation of God or as a “second God” shows up in many places.

The Memra actually became a well-known character in the Old Testament for Jewish readers of the Aramaic Bible. Throughout the Aramaic Bible, the Memra is introduced or “used” in passages where it looked like there was more than one Yahweh in a passage, or where there was a second god figure who seemed to be interchanged with Yahweh. Let that sink in: Jews who went to synagogue before Jesus’s day were reading a Bible that had the Word—the Memra—as a deity figure in addition to the God of Israel. Jews knew that “the Memra was God” before John ever wrote.

[Godzilla]

good article, thanks for sharing.

[philly-d-kidder]

it depends if you Mean THE BIBLE which is the Catholic bible or A Bible which is missing 7 Books...Like the Protestant ones...One was derived with the help of the Holy Spirit the second was inspired by some guy who is trying to chaNge the Church Chist himself Founded! and CHRIST hIMSELF promised nothing would happen to it until the end of times! Of Course i have been told these wise Protestant men ARE cORRECT AND THE cATHOLIC cHURCH IS wrong!!... SO i ASK WHO WROTE THE PROTESTANT bIBLE PROTESTANT sT jEROME?

[raynearhood]

SO i ASK WHO WROTE THE PROTESTANT bIBLE PROTESTANT sT jEROME?

The answer to your question is:

GOD, through Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Solomon, Obadiah, Joel, Amos, Hosea, Michah, Isaiah, Nahum, Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and a few anonymous writers.

[philly-d-kidder]

you FORGOT THAT 70 YEAR GAP WHERE TRADITION WAS THE CHURCH... NICE TRY! AND THOSE 7 BOOKS YOU FORGOT.... THEY ARE INTREGRAL TO THE OLD AND NEW TESTEMENT!

[LiteKeeper]

sola scriptura

[raynearhood]

First of all, chill with the caps lock, that’s kind of like digitally yelling, and it’s hard to read.

Second, you asked who wrote the Protestant Bible. You didn’t ask who, when, why, or how the books were compiled. The list of authors I wrote the Catholic Church agrees with. Elsewise we would arguing that Ephesians in the Catholic compilation of the Bible was written by Paul, but Ephesians in the Protestant compilation of the Bible wasn’t.

I answered your question completely and correctly. Perhaps you asked the wrong question.

[Gamecock]

The seven books you keep referring to were no even formally entered into the Canon until circa Trent.

[jude24]

But that does raise a very interesting question. How do we Protestants know what constitutes the Bible? It's not as though the Table of Contents is inspired. Clearly the church exercised some sort of Magisterial role in determining what constituted the New Testament - because none of us seriously argue that 1Clement or the Didache or the Shepherd of Hermas belong within our leather bindings. And those are the orthodox writings that were floating around during the time that the New Testament hadn't yet gelled.

And that leads to a somewhat disconcerting question - if I trust the Church to exercise that magisterial role in the past, how can I deny it that role now?

And I haven't heard a satisfactory answer to that question yet from my fellow Protestants. So I must keep searching and examining.

[philly-d-kidder]

please the Holy spirit inspired them..then removed them.... ??The removed Books are interlinked with the new and old testements! cut me a Break!

[Sloth]

Clearly the church exercised some sort of Magisterial role in determining what constituted the New Testament - because none of us seriously argue that 1Clement or the Didache or the Shepherd of Hermas belong within our leather bindings

False-dilemma fallacy. It's like saying "Clearly Regis Philbin must have built my tool shed -- because none of us seriously argue that it just grew there by itself."

[jude24]

Then tell me - how do you know the book of Jude, for instance, belongs in the New Testament, but the Didache does not?

[Gamecock]

The Holy Spirit never inspired them, or they would have made the Canon with the rest of the books.

[philly-d-kidder]

Chaplain why did the protestants remove 7 books from the bible and you Now have A BIBLE...not THE BIBLE.. The Holy spirit removed the Seven books..? You must be Joking ,because Christ himself promised to defend HIS Catholic church until the end of time.. How Could protestants have more Wisdom than Christ and the Holy Spirit?You are aware that the first 70 years the Church was based on tradition...before St Jerome began compiling THE Bible with the assistance of the Holy Spirit until Protestants started dissasembling THE BIBLE into A BIBLE. the SEVEN BOOKS removed are interlinked with the New and old testament!Study them and learn th Truth as it was presented by the Holy Spirit!

[philly-d-kidder]

The Holy Spirit never inspired them, or they would have made the Canon with the rest of the books.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

please the protestants removed them,,, if you actually read them they are reinforced in the new and old testement!
enough with the protestant bluff Somehow the reformers have more wisdom than the church Christ founded and a Pope and the Bishops are direct unbroken sucession of the Apostles..
the first 70 years of the catholic church was based on tradition..not the bible your whole premise is wrong!

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Chaplain why did the protestants remove 7 books from the bible and you Now have A BIBLE...not THE BIBLE..***

Simple question. Maccabees tells us that the SPARTANS were children of Abraham. Were they?

[raynearhood]

I have a crazy idea.

I'm going to give you this link to an article I posted that caused a bunch of ruckus a few months back. As an added bonus I'm giving you the link to the FreeRepublic search engine KEYWORD:canon. That should cover all the info you seek on the Protestant view of the canonicity of the Apocrypha (or deuterocanon.. whatever you want to call it.)

Now, the door is open for you to jump into the discussion on The Sufficiency of Scripture v. Scripture's dependence on tradition and vice versa.... which this article is about in the first place. Enjoy.

[Gamecock]

If you are sincere in your question I suggest you check out this thread.

[narses]

As a faithful Catholic, I am placing this thread on IGNORE If you are Catholic, be aware that this thread contains slanders about the Catholic Church. We should not reward invincibly ignorant anti-Catholic bigots by engaging them in futile debate. Therefore, please do not respond to any of the lies about the Catholic Church contained on this thread. Saint Paul pray for those who hate the Church.

[xzins]

The test for any book had always been that it was traceably apostolic to those early Christians.

So, Jude, once you know you have the word of God, who is in charge, some guy who says, “Hey, I can demonstrate that this came to us with apostolic authority.” or the Word of God itself?

If I can prove that the US Constitution came from the Founders, does that mean I get to run the country? Or does the Constitution itself demand our oath of allegiance?

[xzins]

Philly, see #31.

Protestants did not remove any books from the bible. We went with the early body of opinion that said that the apocryphal books were edifying but not inspired. We still think that.

[jude24]

it was traceably apostolic to those early Christians.

1. How do you know that the documents were written by Paul, Peter, or Mathhew? They weren't self-authenticating?

2. Neither Mark, nor Luke, nor Jude are claimed to have been written by apostles.

3. Hebrews is anonymous.

4. There were a lot of epistles and gospels floating around written ostensibly by the apostles. How do you know the Apocalypse of Peter isn't?

[xzins]

The same reason that I know anything from history, Jude. The research and legacy of those early Christians said that these particular books are of apostolic weight.

This question forces one to 2 choices:

1. They are not apostolic, therefore, that person has no legitimate reason to believe or proclaim Christianity.

2. He accepts them as apostolic.

Now, once one decides that they ARE apostolic, he really has only two choices:

1. He follows what he feels.

2. He follows the apostolic authority.

[jude24]

The research and legacy of those early Christians said that these particular books are of apostolic weight.

So like I said... those particular early Christians exercised a magisterial function.

So the lingering question is - why would we conclude the magisterial function does not continue?

[xzins]

Sure, if we find a new book, then we’ll let them decide if it’s authentic. That was their function.

In the meantime, the decisions have already been made on the other books.

Once you’ve established that it IS God’s Word, who is in charge: God’s word or the people who authenticated the source of the message?

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Protestants did not remove any books from the bible. We went with the early body of opinion that said that the apocryphal books were edifying but not inspired. We still think that.**

I'll agree with that. I have read the Apocrypha several times. They are interesting but I will still deffer to the MAIL BODY of Scripture than these.

Also, I prefer that feisty Jewish ESHTER to that little Greek wimpy Esther.

[The Cuban]

How do I know its his authenticated word? That would require me to place faith in a book that does not even say “authenticated word”. Did the Bible fall from heaven one day in complete form?

[Theophilus]

The Holy Bible, a kissable relic to some but to others: it is “the power of God unto salvation.”

[r9etb]

If the Bible were "enough," there would be no need for the Holy Spirit. As Jesus said, But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. (John 14:26)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

If the Bible were "enough," there would be no need for the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit and Scripture are eternally linked. The word of God is the sword of the Spirit.

"Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.

And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" -- Ephesians 6:16-17

THE HOLY SPIRIT'S ILLUMINATION OF SCRIPTURE

[bdeaner]

The Word of God includes the entire deposit of Faith, according to Catholic belief. The entire deposit of Faith includes both Scripture and the teaching of the Church based on Scripture. In fact, the Bible itself is established by tradition.

Even Martin Luther knew this. See the 16th chapter of his Commentary on St. John, where he says, "We are obliged to yield many things to the papists [Catholics]--that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about."

Gotta hand it to Luther there.

[RochesterFan]

I don’t think of it as a “magisterial function” but, rather, in signal processing terms. What we have is a large sample size of writings of believers from the first three centuries who professed to believe in Christ and whose testimony and lifestyle were known to one another. This gives us a redundant, over-sampled system. As a result, we have a high signal (truth) to noise (error) ratio. We compare these writings to, for example, the pseudepigrapha and can see the difference. So could the believers of the day. One could also attribute this ‘over-sampling’ to the work of the Holy Spirit. The problem with, for example, the Romish view of the Magisterium, is that it has ‘authenticated’ teachings that arose much later than the originals and are contradictory with what we know. The Reformers were correct to reject that view.

[Salvation]

**Is the Bible Enough?**

No

Why Does The Catholic Church Accept Traditions? [Ecumenical]

A Return to Tradition: A new interest in old ways takes root in Catholicism and many other faiths

Scripture Is Tradition

SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION

The Importance of Tradition Today

The Place of Custom and Tradition

Early Church Fathers on (Oral) Tradition - Catholic/Orthodox Caucus

Holy Tradition: The Road That Leads Home

On Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition

Recovering the Catholic Moral Tradition: The notion of happiness

Tradition and Reform

APOSTOLIC TRADITION: Consistency or Contradiction?

Can Vatican II be interpreted in the light of Tradition?

The New Mass: A Return to Tradition???

Pope praises Ukrainian-Catholic Church for upholding Sacred Tradition, communion with Seat of Peter

The Shadow Tradition - Magisterium vs Murk

[Catholic] Tradition catching on with Baptists [Ecumenical Ash Wed. Service]

Pope will preside at Ash Wednesday Mass, procession; act will renew ancient tradition

How Tradition Gave Us the Bible

Papal Supremacy Is Against Tradition

"In Light Of Tradition"... The Society Of St. Pius X And Vatican II

[Iscool]

**Is the Bible Enough?**

No

God says it's enough to be able to believe...And by believing what was written, we KNOW that we have eternal life, right now...

What could any tradition possibly add to that??? Your tradition tells you that you DO NOT KNOW that you have eternal life, right now...

Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

1Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

[Iscool]

Interesting site...

[HarleyD]

The early church fathers talked about the role of the Holy Spirit as revealing truth to us. A clear example of this can be seen in the early church’s belief to distinguish between the inspired and uninspired word of God. They KNEW what was the inspired writings simply because of the Holy Spirit. One of the fathers went on to say that if you were to go into a church and heresy was being preached, you would “cover your ears and run from that church”. That is the power of the Spirit to lead a person to truth.

I agree with you Dr. E, the Holy Spirit and Scriptures are eternally linked. There isn’t any more truth to be revealed than what has been given to us. No example will be given to us than the Son rising in three days. This is the greatest example and the message of the scripture. A perverse generation seeks for more.

[r9etb]

I agree with you Dr. E, the Holy Spirit and Scriptures are eternally linked.

Nevertheless, they are not the same thing. For one thing, the Holy Spirit is God. The Scriptures are not God. If it takes the Holy Spirit to reveal truth from falsehood, or even to lead one to His meanings within the Scriptures, it is rather obvious that the Scriptures in and of themselves are insufficient.

But of course, we knew that already. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. (John 5:39-40)

[HarleyD]

Nevertheless, they are not the same thing. For one thing, the Holy Spirit is God. The Scriptures are not God.

None of us would disagree with this.

If it takes the Holy Spirit to reveal truth from falsehood, or even to lead one to His meanings within the Scriptures, it is rather obvious that the Scriptures in and of themselves are insufficient.

Wow, I never thought I would hear (or see) a Protestant say that the scriptures are insufficient.

2Ti 3:16-17 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

What do you think is missing?

God Told Me