Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Tazman, Mar 1, 2006.
Any scriptures come to mind from the above?
yes... a few... It sure doesn't read like my AV though
Those aren't from the Bible. Probably some early extra-canonical writings, although I can't identify them.
Those are not quotes from the Bible but from the letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, sometimes called 1st Clement, and it was written approximately 96 AD.
You can not insert something "into the Bible" simply by saying "the person was inspired".
Anna the prophetess at Jesus dedication was "inspired" but nothing she wrote is in scripture.
Philips daughters "inspired" as prophetesses but nothing added by them to scripture.
What is your contention? Or are you just answering my question?
I do believe that The Authority of the Apostles is greater than those they taught.
But I also believe that those that were closer to the apostles has more credit worthiness than anyone in our time.
I'm tempted to agree, but I kind of curious as to why you think this way.
Also, who is Inserting and how?
The quotes in the OP appear to be used to ask the question about "inspiration". Later we see a comment about the Bible vs Clement. My point is that the Bible is more than just "inspired" it also has a binding authorotative purpose in the sense of Acts 17:11. It becomes the authorotative text by which all others are judged. It is "the standard" by which all doctrine, all teaching, all practice is judged.
My intent was not to position early christian writings against the bible, but in full view of the bible and to allow the early passages from those who lived during and after the apostles time to shed some light of some "Bible" passages that are often misunderstood today.
I agree with the Authority of the bible. However, this is not to say that I don't see early christian writings as not useful or inspired. There were some teaching given by Paul that are often misinterpretated to fit our modern day culture, but Its totally wrong compared to how the early church understood it.
Example would be 1 Cor 11
In sertain cultures "Head Covering" wouldn't pose a threat, but to western cultures it does. Because it does, we have to find a way to make it fit into our culture or render it's importance obsolete.
Many passages are approached that way.
I think we are agreeing on the point that other inspired (as in Spiritual Gifts - inspiration) Christians existed. Philip's daughters, Agabus, Anna in the temple with the infant Christ etc and we have no reason to doubt that they may have existed in every century.
Is this a "new law" or an explanation of an existing one? Is Paul 'introducing' this concept or does he write as though the reader already knows it?
If the reader already knows it - is the source culture and tradition - or the Bible?
In Col 3 Paul goes into a great deal of effort to address the duty of slaves to serve their masters. Is this a new commandment from God or a long standing system of slavery? (He even sends an escaped slave back to his master -- so we are talking about "real" slavery)
As expected, these are good questions. I don't know if it relates to the OC or not, but Paul usually destinguish between something from Himself or Something From God. And so my first choice it to accept it as needed.
At this point is where I sought to see what the leader during Pauls time taught their churches as they understood what the background behind what Paul was addressing. The only most reliable sources would be Paul and the Corinthians. But since we can't really ask them directly, we should then go to the next reliable source: The Early church fathers in order to see how they understood it. That's all.
Again Paul doesnt' say from Him or God on this one, so I would lean that it was standing, but redefined (like with what Jesus done with the Sabbath) - This stands as my opinion on the matter. Presently many scriptures and thoughts are running through my head, but below is what I can share so far.
That topic is sensitive, but I don't believe that slavery maintian the same "Order" that It once held in the times of war for the Jews. God use them to carry out his judgements against other nations sometimes making them slaves (not often to be abused though). Able to gain freedom.
And not all forms of slavery were war related, but business and financially.
Slaves, though, were NOT to be traded, but to be love with Christ love.
1 Timothy 1:10