Posted on 07/19/2009 2:17:43 PM PDT by NYer
Yes they obviously searched old testiment scriptures which is an even stronger argument for the excellence of the scriptures. The verse about Jesus doing more than what was written does not detract from the completion or excellence of the scriptures it just says tells us that the Holy Spirit, the perfect editor, did some editing yet gave us ALL we need.
Where in Scripture does Mary declare herself a sinner?
I know that you have to be intelligent enough to see the absurdity of your statement. From what was she saved? (hell fire of course!)
Its unfortunate that you reject God's word.
This Religion Forum thread is labeled “ecumenical” - that means no antagonism is allowed on this thread.
Or, the Old Covenant was one of laws, and the New one is of faith. In order to live according to the law, you needed to have it written to know it, whereas under the New Covenant, you needed to eat the Bread of Life. Written Scripture is not necessary for that purpose.
Because the foreshadowing is a nebulous matter, at best, a matter of personal (often hyperbolic) interpretations, and controversy. Besides, I though faith comes from God, not the Bible. Abraham, Noah, Job, etc., all had true faith (according to the Bible) without the scriptures. If one does not have faith, reading the Bible will not make him "see" the truth (because he hasn't been given the "eyes" to see), right? Yet Acts 17 seems to suggest otherwise.
It absolutely does, but God has given us the Scriptures to know Him better - as has been pointed out on this thread, Scripture *is* profitable, it is just not sufficient.
If one does not have faith, reading the Bible will not make him "see" the truth (because he hasn't been given the "eyes" to see), right? Yet Acts 17 seems to suggest otherwise
Agreed. But faith in God came to +Aquinas in a very different way than it came to +Teresa of Avila. Scripture, coupled with the oral teachings of Paul, is one path to Him - the Bereans apparently took that one.
How do you know that?
Scripture, coupled with the oral teachings of Paul, is one path to Him - the Bereans apparently took that one
Scriptures didn't give them faith, as Acts 17 suggests because multittudes of Greeks believed Paul without the scriptures and foreshadowing metaphors.
2 Tim. 15: "The holy Scriptures...are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."
If Scripture can make you wise, which leads to faith in Christ, then Scripture is a step to knowing God.
Scriptures didn't give them faith, as Acts 17 suggests because multittudes of Greeks believed Paul without the scriptures and foreshadowing metaphors.
I never said Scripture gave them faith. I said Scripture coupled with the preaching of Paul led to their belief. See above - Scripture can help prepare people for salvation.
You left out "since you were an infant." How can infants read the scripture? The whole verse makes no sense. It also implies that faith comes from reading the scriptures, and in this case implies that the Old Testament is sufficient to make you believe in Christ, which is patently wrong.
Regardless, it doesn't say that God gave us scriptures so that we may know him better, as you suggest.
I never said Scripture gave them faith. I said Scripture coupled with the preaching of Paul led to their belief. See above - Scripture can help prepare people for salvation.
What scriptures? Old Testament leads you to belief that Jesus is the Christ? I don't think so. What good is the New Testament if the Old one is sufficient?
That Mary was saved from committing a sin does not indicate she committed one.
I recently was saved from killing myself and my family by a street light. I did not break any traffic rules.
I'm afraid you and I disagree on how this verse is read. I do not believe it implies that the OT is sufficient; I believe it does say that the Gospel of Christ (in this case, through the oral teaching of Paul) is consistent with OT prophecy, and the OT illuminates and is the basis for the Gospel.
What scriptures? Old Testament leads you to belief that Jesus is the Christ? I don't think so. What good is the New Testament if the Old one is sufficient?
Again, and I'll leave it here, but, generally, yes, the OT can be a step to belief in Christ. It is not sufficient by itself.
But since there were pagan Greeks (multitudes) who accepted Paul's teaching without the scriptures from their infancy, it makes the scriptures irrelevant and unnecessary.
Besides, the OT prophesy is not all that clear-cut, or else the Jews in general would have recognized Christ purely on the basis of their scriptures.
One can argue that perhaps God didn't want them to, so what good is scripture is there is no God-given faith?
While I agree that Scripture isn't *necessary* to accept Christ, it doesn't follow that it is irrelevant. You might be able to kill a deer with a heavy rock. That means a rifle is unnecessary. But I don't think you'd argue that a rifle is irrelevant to such action - it is a different means to the same end.
Besides, the OT prophesy is not all that clear-cut, or else the Jews in general would have recognized Christ purely on the basis of their scriptures.
One can argue that perhaps God didn't want them to, so what good is scripture is there is no God-given faith?
Absolutely it is not clear-cut. And faith is necessary to fully comprehend Scripture. But God can use Scripture to build faith - how many stories are there of people changing in a hotel room after reading Gideon's Bible?
Mary was not saved from committing a sin. Mary committed many sins, as all humans do, and as God’s word plainly says.
If it were possible for a human to live a sinless life, there would have been no reason for our Lord to have suffered and die on the cross. (”there is none righteous, no not one”)
Agreed, but that makes the scriptures just one of many, indeed a limitless number of means available to the same end. Yet, most Protestants profess sola scriptura as the only way.
But God can use Scripture to build faith - how many stories are there of people changing in a hotel room after reading Gideon's Bible?
It's not what God can or cannot do, but what is necessary for faith to appear. Frankly it sounds a bit naive to say that God chooses to "download" faith to people like Paul, Job, Lot, Abraham or Noah, while subjecting others to life-long studies of scriptures. God is not partial or changing.
This thing about different means towards the same end sounds a bit like a rationalization to me although on the surface it "makes sense" in a human box. With God, rocks and rifles are not an issue. By definition, God is perfect and perfection does not come in different varieties.
Even a central Amazonian knows God in a way, since the Natural law is still a portion of the Divine Law. He works as He sees fit. To think that Faith cannot be had outside the Scriptures, IMHO, is limiting to grace, and not a position I'd easily ascribe to.
Yet, most Protestants profess sola scriptura as the only way.
Indeed they do. Which is why I cannot follow them.
It's not what God can or cannot do, but what is necessary for faith to appear. Frankly it sounds a bit naive to say that God chooses to "download" faith to people like Paul, Job, Lot, Abraham or Noah, while subjecting others to life-long studies of scriptures. God is not partial or changing.
I would say that God generally beat Paul over the head with faith before he would accept it, rather than a "download." But, two things: (1) is it not your experience that some people generally have a greater faith, even among children raised in the same family? Why this is, I don't really have an answer...do you? (2) I don't believe people acquire faith from "life-long studies of Scripture." In order to have the patience to conduct such a task, you must have some faith as an impetus, I imagine. However, I believe faith can *grow* through study of God - Theology. One realm of such study is through His revelation in Scripture. Would you disagree?
This thing about different means towards the same end sounds a bit like a rationalization to me although on the surface it "makes sense" in a human box. With God, rocks and rifles are not an issue. By definition, God is perfect and perfection does not come in different varieties.
God is perfect, and immutable. Absolutely. We are not, and experience shows us that we generally approach things differently. Which is more pleasing to God: joining a celibate order and dedicating your life to prayer, or marrying and bringing forth a large, loving Christian family?
He works as He sees fit
I am not sure I buy that. The Bible is clear that God is impartial and that we should be impartial. Also, by analogy, we would not treat our children differently, making some work harder than others, or teaching some more and some less.
To think that Faith cannot be had outside the Scriptures, IMHO, is limiting to grace, and not a position I'd easily ascribe to.
Even scriptures tell us that faith existed before scriptures.
is it not your experience that some people generally have a greater faith, even among children raised in the same family? Why this is, I don't really have an answer...do you?
That depends how you define faith, but as far as their differences are concerned, I don't have a clue.
I don't believe people acquire faith from "life-long studies of Scripture." In order to have the patience to conduct such a task, you must have some faith as an impetus, I imagine.
There are well known theologians who are not believers. They study theology because they are fascinated by it. In fact, some claim they became non-believers through it.
However, I believe faith can *grow* through study of God - Theology.
Theology is a study of God (Greek theos + logia), a study of what people wrote about God through their faith in him. Some people may find theological arguments compelling because they express their beliefs in greater detail and in a more scholarly, authoritative way, thereby leading to a sense of "growing" in knowledge of God.
One realm of such study is through His revelation in Scripture. Would you disagree?
I am the wrong person to ask that question.
Which is more pleasing to God: joining a celibate order and dedicating your life to prayer, or marrying and bringing forth a large, loving Christian family?
Why can both not be 'pleasing' to God, just as there may be different innumerable paths towards faith?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.