www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Sovereignty of God in the Apocryphal Writings

Pastor Joel,

I'm replying to this and your other question.

Yes, there is a way to "clear out" the posts that are not pertinent to the topic. However, for the sake of helping others to understand where you are coming from, and keeping the record straight about our understanding of the role Scripture plays, I'm going to leave them.

Since, however, this can be distracting with regard to the topic of the thread, I might suggest that you start a new thread and begin it with your thesis statment. This way we will have a clear vision of what you wish to discuss.

As for how long the discussion can remain open -- as long as the posts follow the rules and regulations for this forum the discussion may remain open.

Fr. Deacon Edward
Moderator/Administrator

It seems to me you are simply arbitrarily choosing a verse out of context...

In your theological and spiritual opinion do these verses "go against a sovereignty outlook"? - Do you believe they are not inspired and should be excluded from all Canons?

Dear Joel...

Within your own church ... I respect what you layout here for yourself. I, myself, have no problem with the place that you give scriptures - for yourself and your church.

But it does no good to take which for you and your church (assuming that - that is what Jesus wants for you and your church) and apply it to other people who are not - members of your church.

Within our church (Orthodox /Catholic / Byzantine / etc...) Jesus left us an appointed line of authority. That living authority has authority over scripture and its interpretation � if it chooses to exercise it. It has seldom done so. It has cemented only certain portions of scripture for us because scripture (for us) is not the total of Christian life and following Christ. For us � scriptures is produced by the church and it is not that scriptures produces - the church.

Within the letters of Paul (someone help me out as to which) Paul addresses a problem in one of the communities where members are arguing over the meaning of the names given in the geologies of Genesis. Now given that the NT had not yet been formed and letters written by the apostles were as yet - letters - and not scripture yet� the only scripture Paul could possible be taking about anytime that he mentions �scripture� is Jewish scripture (OT). And so Paul never directly said - that the NT is profitable to read and study. What he said was that the OT was profitable (of some value) to read and study.

Be that as it may � Paul addresses the argument over the meaning of scriptures (the meaning of the names within the OT genealogies) by telling them he would rather they put the scriptures away and cease reading them - if they are going to argue about them. So in this case - scriptures was NOT profitable for them to study and read. No Christian should be arguing about the meaning of scriptures (so said Paul) And so there are a few things clear�

1) Paul (as the authority) exercises power and authority over - scripture. The authority of the church (Paul in this case) is not subject to scripture - scripture is subject to Paul. Further - when Paul gives his own interpretation of scripture he again proves his authority over scripture (an authority over scripture which you yourself have quoted as an authority).

2) With these words (�it is profitable to read scriptures�) Paul is judging the value of scriptures. One can not judge something greater than one�s self. A judge can only judge what is less - than himself and less than his own authority. That which is less (scriptures in this case) can not judge that which is greater than itself (Paul in this case).

3) Even if we suppose that scripture is top dog - the greatest authority (and that may be true and good within your own church) there is no guarantee that everyone who reads scripture will fully understand what he is reading. If such a thing were true - then what are we to say about cults such as Jones Town or Jehovah�s Witnesses? They have studied scripture and clearly no guarantee of understanding was at work. You yourself must admit that there are portions of scripture which you do not understand fully - and portions which, in the past, you have misunderstood. And so it is clelar that God has not taken away your free will in order to place upon you any guarantee that you will fully understand (or not error) in you understanding. Perhaps he will do that tomorrow - but as of today - you have to admit he has not done that yet. Please point out to me the man that equals Jesus Christ as to perfect and error free understanding of scripture. Is it you? It is not me! It was not the apostles (who needed to have the portions on Christ�s suffering explained on the road to Emmaus). Who is it that is greater than the apostles in scriptural understanding?

What are we to say about the need for scholars and our habit of quoting scholars who (ostensible) further develop our understanding - or correct something we mistook or misunderstood? Do all scholars agree? We quote them as authorities (they are men) as having authority that we acknowledge - over the meaning of scriptures! (and so over scripture itself). Do they error (think �Jehovah� which name was an error).

No original manuscripts of any NT component - still exists. All we have are copies - translations of transliterations. And among them there are differences. Certainly nothing of the OT exists in the original (or at least not much) - and what we have of that proves also to be translations and transliterations - all this goes to display that man (the translator) has power over selecting which word to use in the translation. Certainly there are some translations which you yourself - object to. Which you would say were not guided by the Holy Spirit - yet that very fact proves that even the ordinary man (un-guided) has authority to shape the meaning (by his act of selecting words) of scripture. There is no magic which prevents any man from writing his own translation.

With that - there is proof that there is no magic bubble around the translation of scripture - to keep it infallible or error free.

Both Paul and James make error in the NT when quoting portions of the OT (scriptures). Shall these errors be attributed to God himself? Yet - there they are. Done. Again - proof that man has authority over scriptures.

And lastly - when one reads scriptures (and we are all trusting some translator who may or may not be in any degree of self holiness or sins) and we study different opinions and such - is it not our own conscience and mind which decided what is right and what is wrong as far as what some portion of scripture means? Yes. Of course. And in doing so - we - our conscience and reasoning - now become - the greater authority than scripture.

Now - am I saying that your way is bad? No I am not. God is free to decide how he might use scripture with and for - you. But in our churches - Jesus left us a way for us - to be sure about the meaning of certain portions of scripture - the meaning which He would like us to understand. He has left us an unbroken line of authority (by appointment) going back to the apostles and to Jesus himself. But even with that - only certain portions of scripture are defined in meaning - for us - by that authority left to us - as scripture is not the totality of Christianity.

I give you these things to consider privately. I am not really interested in debate as I do not post all that much. And I readily admit that for you and your church it is good and valuable and profitable... to have scripture as the rule. But at the same time I remind you that your own conscience and reasoning - is - the authority that you by necessity - have above scripture and its content and meaning. You - yourself - decide what is right and what is wrong - what is the meaning and what is not the meaning. YOU - are the authority that you accept - over scripture.

May the Good Lord guide you well. May you have ears to hear. May you and your church be at peace.

-ray

An enemy like Xerxes was called a Messiah of Israel. +1 for sovereignty.

Babylon was allowed to do these things by a Sovereign act of God. +2 for sovereignty.

Israel is God's chosen people. He allowed this to happen as an act of Sovereigny. +3 for sovereignty.

CDL

Well,

I have enjoyed by time with you all. I will signing off for some time. I have noticed that I am spending too much time on the Internet especially in this particular chat room.

Stay focused on the Lord! Trust wholly on the one who redeemed man from their sinful condition. Looking forward to his return! May be even today.

CDL,

I want to address your comments, but may be can do this at a later period or through personal private messages. Let me know.

Pastor Joel,

That will be fine.

CDL

Ray, quoting a small part of your reply to Joel below:


Originally posted by RayK:
[qb]


Dear Joel...


Within the letters of Paul (someone help me out as to which) Paul addresses a problem in one of the communities where members are arguing over the meaning of the names given in the geologies of Genesis. Now given that the NT had not yet been formed and letters written by the apostles were as yet - letters - and not scripture yet� the only scripture Paul could possible be taking about anytime that he mentions �scripture� is Jewish scripture (OT). And so Paul never directly said - that the NT is profitable to read and study. What he said was that the OT was profitable (of some value) to read and study.

May the Good Lord guide you well. May you have ears to hear. May you and your church be at peace.

-ray (end of quote)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ray,

I am trying to remember where in the letters of Paul what you mention is included, but, alas, with renovating and moving lately plus not here much at all...(active on other forums these days)..and not wishing to enter into debate...just want to agree with and reinforce what you have said above and also comment below.

The earliest letter Paul wrote was one to the Thessolonians (not sure if I or II) and that, if memory serves me , was in 53 a.d. I think this is also the first in the New Testament...and surely years before the Gospels were even written. Oral tradition was how the message was shared at that time.

It is an interesting point you make..that Paul never directly said that all (meaning the NT) was to be considered. But I do wonder that if it had been written would he have meant the NT as well.
Perhaps a mute point...not sure.

Anyway...just a thought..

Porter...

The text I quoted, which matches the verses Pastor Joel wants stripped from the Sacred Scriptures, are found word for word intact in his protestant Bible in 2 Chronicles 36:18-21 - the errors of self-interpretation are revealed. Is it any wonder how Luther found himself with half a Bible?

That's the topic of an entirely different thread. We do not believe that man is inherently sinful. Perhaps you can take this one up at some other time as well.

May the grace of the risen Lord be with you always!

Dear Porter...

Without a doubt - as his successors in authority - do (recommend reading the NT also). Paul makes no mention of the NT because it did not exist yet. As yoiu well point out.

>if memory serves me , was in 53 a.d.
My, my, and I thought you were much younger than that

Much of the foolishness surrounding the desire to make the scriptures into something they are not (an idol - a manual of operation for the human) has to do with - what is inspiration? How is it that scriptures are inspirited by God?

The church has rejected any concept that God - authored - scriptures - through the use of men. We often talk that way (that God authored scriptures) but that is just pious talk.. And not harmful unless taken obsessively in the wrong way.

Men authored scriptures � not God � that is why they are called �Testament� (the written testimony of human witnesses). These men were often inspirited by God - but what IS that inspiration? How? And does inspiration overcome man�s free will (?) to make scriptures entirely accurate and error free??

Early Councils long ago � rejected that kind of notion. But the tendency of fallen man is he must-need an idol to fill the place vacant place in us where God should be. I have often said that the church (and such things of it) are the only idol that God allows - and these things should be transparent - so that we see beyond them at the same time. But - holiness is a progress� and so we all begin by using the church and its things - as an idol. This can not be helped. It is the way of it.

Any kind of �divine dictation� has been rejected by the Church. The authors of scripture did not write down what God told them to write - nor where they in some mystical trance.

God, at no time, violates human free will. Even prophecy of future events - is only given in broad strokes under symbolism (dreams, vision, locution, etc..) because if we did know the certainty of future events - that would make our free will - null and void. We could navigate by our intellect (knowledge) of future events� and God wants us to navigate by our hearts (conscience). That is why all prophecy about the coming of the messiah was - sealed (hidden) only to be fully know - after - the event.

Besides - creation just does not work that way. All past and future is contingent upon the here and now moment. The immediate will of God in responce to the immediate condition of our own conscience and choices of free will. Anyway... I am yakking on.

SEE: The Purpose of The Bible, under the first paragraph titled �Inspiration� of the New American Bible - where it lists those theories which the opinion of the church rejects.

Another mess is the way scripture is called �the Word� when the �Word� is Jesus himself as Logos (Providence). The Word - became - flesh - and dwelt among us. Jesus himself as Logos - is the Word (I believe I have hear you yourself comment on this) and so many times when scripture is talking about Providence (Logos) people are believing that it is talking about - scriptures - the books.

But it is often best not to disturb the �food� of another man - least by our efforts to correct - he have no food at all.

We (Catholic, Orthodox. Byzantine. etc..) have a line of direct authority that other groups do not have. It is reasonable that they would make what the do have - their top authority. Something - must fill that void.

That is the way I see it tonight.

-ray

I think this also ties in with "who should translate the Bible." The Bible is a manual put together by the Church for use in transmitting Holy Tradition. A Protestant church does not have Holy Tradition. It's kinda like having a new bicycle. You get the pieces of the bike and the instruction manual. After you use the manual to assemble the bike, you ride it around rather than sit there and keep staring at the manual.

Dear Ray,

No, not quite THAT ancient. ROFL.

As for the rest of your post...I simply say, "so it is."

Peace and blessings,

Porter

The Church is quite clear on this especially after the Second Vatican Council. You really don't need to speak extemporaneously on this particular subject at all. There are very clear Church teachings available.


This is quite false. Any kind of idolatry is a false worship. The Church is no idol at all.

There are also many Church documents that you can call upon for teachings on the Church as well. It would not only make your posts more accurate, it might render to them a certain brevity and clarity.

Eli

I think you need to take yet another look at Catholic Tradition with respect to the Word and how Scripture was treated by the patristic and the desert Fathers.

I can only say that if you are looking to correct someone with Catholic teaching then the least you can do is offer them correct Catholic teaching.

Eli