When was the Bible validated by God?

[roman]

Your still loading your question. When you put the word complete in the question.

Oh, OK. I wasn't trying to load the question with that word. It's just that so many people keep saying that God has said everything we need to know.

In no way is the Bible complete in all amnner of things---God is still speaking and revalation is still coming---but for this dispensation---he will only speak thru his word

Ah, OK. I wasn't aware this was your point of view.

May I just ask you if you think God spoke again after the Apostolic era, and if He will speak again? And if yes, what form did/will that speaking take: a prophet, a new book of scriptures, an angel, or something else?

In fact, since you are speaking in the present time ("God is still speaking and revelation is still coming"), may I ask what form do that speaking and revelation take?

Del

Del;

Now we are getting some where----Please allow me to get back to you later or even tommorrow-----I've got workmen in my back yard building me a storage building---and they need me----so its off i go

BTW---excellant questions

Del; thanks for being patience with me to get back to you on this. First of all once again excellant questions----so here goes. You ask

1. Has God spoken since the apostloic era. Yes he has-----thru his word by the power of the Holy Spirit. Remember that the Book of Danial was to be sealed until the last day------the truths in that book where locked away from us---but we believe now that some of those truths are being revealed

2. Will he speak again----yes, But i think you are driving at brand new never reveled truths---[that is not what I mean by the above comment on the Book of Danial] I mean My father and I talk every day.

3. What form will this speaking take-----I don't know, but I do know that Christ said that his followeres knew his voice and that we wouldn't follow another---We he speaks we will know it then. Also I don;t believe new scriptures are coming----what we have in the Bible is far more that we can ever contain in many life times---Gods word [the Bible] is so vast and deep and full of great things---past present and future

4. All I know is what God said in Hebrews 1:1&2----that is these last days he has spoken by his SON.

Another thing that may help you understand my position is this----God loves all his creation---all peoples and wants them all to be saved and know him in this life time. I don't believe for one second that God is going to let all the Muslims---Hindus---and all the rest you follow a false God to simply disapear off the face of the earth --without a wittness from Jesus. After all scripture teaches us that Christ is going back after a church that is without spot or wrinkle---A glorious church---one that flows in power--authority--anointing and purpose of God---- We are about a billion miles from that today---so it is my belief that God is going to do something awesome in these last days to draw the muslim--hindu---and other false god worshippers to himself-----So in order to do this he must speak---act or manifest something that will draw all men to himself----what that is --I don't have a clue and neither does anyone else--------but I'm sure that it will be out of his word and we will reginize this bt his word and by the Spirit that abides in us.

As I read and understand scripture God can and will us anybody in his body to show himself--I believe the day of a prophet as the lds claim and use is long time past----every single believer in Jesus Christ has the ability to recieve revalation from God and be used of God for the manifistation of truth-----I don't need somebody that I don't know or who doesn't know me telling me what to believe------My pastor may help illuminate truth---but it is only the Holy Spirit that reveals it

When lds say that ONLY and I mean ONLY JS has recieved a revalation on the Bible---I laugh and say---what udder stupidity-----I have a revalation that the Bible is Gods word ---believe it or not---that won't affect me--In fact every believer who spends much time studying the Bible ---will have that wittness---or should----I Timothy1:4 and 2 Peter 1: 16-----an eyewittness account of things and in Acts 1:3 beening seen and speaking of thins pertaining to the Kingdom of God---with infalliable truths---I beleive the Bible is Gods word and what he has spoken---because I have a wittnes of it and I believe the eyewittness accounts

I know I rabbled abit here and cover more that you ask--hope this helps

Also I may not get a chance to reply--as Momday I'm leaving town---and all weekend it will be the workers on my poutdoor shed

Thanks Del.

[Zakuska]

This puzzled me:

4. All I know is what God said in Hebrews 1:1&2----that is these last days he has spoken by his SON

When did we determine that God was the Author of Hebrews?

The Pastor on the Radio calls the Author of this book... "The Author"... he says we really dont know who wrote it.

[Del March]

1.  Has God spoken since the apostloic era.  Yes he has-----thru his word by the power of the Holy Spirit. Remember that the Book of Danial was to be sealed until the last day------the truths in that book where locked away from us---but we believe now that some of those truths are being revealed

I must admit I don't really know what you're talking about. Would you mind explaining a bit more about the Book of Daniel, and how you feel the truths it contains are being revealed today? (I'll do some homework in the meantime, and try to figure out some about that Book myself).

2. Will he speak again----yes, But i think you are driving at brand new never reveled  truths---[that is not what I mean by the above comment on the Book of Danial]  I mean My father and I talk every day.

Oh, sure. He and I talk too But I must admit I meant my question to be more about God talking to the world, not just to individuals.

3. What form will  this speaking take-----I don't know, but I do know that Christ said that his followeres knew his voice and that we wouldn't follow another---We he speaks we will know it then.

Hum, sure, but how do we recognise between the voice of Jesus and a false voice? LDS believe that Jesus has been speaking through His prophets for almost 2 centuries. We don't believe in another God, we believe in Jesus. We don't believe our prophets have heard the voice of another God, we believe they have heard the voice of Christ. So wouldn't this fulfill the scripture?

Also I don;t believe new scriptures are coming----what we have in the Bible is far more that we can ever contain in many life times---Gods word [the Bible] is so vast and deep and full of great things---past present and future

Just because there is so much in the Bible doesn't mean that God can't yet give even more, does it?

4. All I know is what God said in Hebrews 1:1&2----that is these last days he has spoken by his SON.

1 GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 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;

I don't see that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews meant "these last days" to mean OUR last days: he meant HIS last days. And I see nowhere where it says that God won't talk again. In fact, this scripture infers quite the opposite: God talked to the people of the OT through the prophets, He talked to the people of Jesus's time through Jesus, so logically He should talk to people in our time through prophets again.

Another thing that may help you understand my position is this----God loves all his creation---all peoples and wants them all to be saved and know him in this life time. I don't believe for one second that God is going to let all the Muslims---Hindus---and all the rest you follow a false God to simply disapear off the face of the earth --without a wittness from Jesus.

Except that God has already done that. He has already let millions of people disappear off the face of the Earth without having so much as a remote chance of hearing about the Gospel of Christ.

every single believer in Jesus Christ has the ability to recieve revalation from God and be used of God for the manifistation of truth

And yet when we LDS claim to have received such personal revelation from God, we are made fun of...

I don't need somebody that I don't know or who doesn't know me telling me what to believe------My pastor may help illuminate truth---but it is only the Holy Spirit that reveals it

This is in accordance with LDS doctrine. The prophet teaches, but only the Holy Ghost can reveal.

When lds say that ONLY and I mean ONLY JS has recieved a revalation on the Bible---I laugh and say---what udder stupidity-----I have a revalation that the Bible is Gods word

That's not at all what we meant. What we mean is that the LDS church is the only denomination on Earth who can claim to have received an official approval of the Bible, straight from God.

By the way, I have also received from the Holy Ghost a revelation that the Bible is the Word of God. And also the BoM and the D&C and the PoGP...

In fact every believer who spends much time studying the Bible ---will have that wittness---or should----I Timothy1:4 and 2 Peter 1: 16-----an eyewittness account of things and in Acts 1:3 beening seen and speaking of thins pertaining to the Kingdom of God---with infalliable truths---I beleive the Bible is Gods word and what he has spoken---because I have a wittnes of it and I believe the eyewittness accounts

Why don't those same criteria apply to the BoM then?

Also I may not get a chance to reply--as Momday I'm leaving town---and all weekend it will be the workers on my poutdoor shed

No problem There is no hurry. We can get back to it anytime.

  Thanks Del.

You're welcome Thanks to you too.

Del

[Dear Mee]

Gee, DACOOK, i thought Mee gave a "really-good-answer", way back on page 5: "NEVER!" I'm not sure if this debate is more pointless or amusing? However, it is most interesting.

DEL, once more i say, the LDS church is not exclusively my "target", for lack of a better word. My criticism is of all institutionalized christian churches pretending to be Christ-like in their teachings. Granting of course that they do some good-stuff. I'm grateful that they all, including OUR LDS church do so.

I hoped you would be able to see this discussion in a broader, less personal and narrow perspective.

QUOTE 

IMVHO, there is/was only one person who even comes close to that state of being. That One is Jesus of Nazareth! All else seem but feeble attempts to gain glory by vain repetions of His name. At the same time denying the faith to follow him beyond the comforts of cushioned pews and air-conditioned places of ritual.

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about...

And just FYI, my home branch has never had cushioned pews or air-conditioning. There was a time when we didn't even have a place to call our own to meet in. And there was also a time when we didn't even have a branch. And yet we always kept following the instructions of God, as much as was possible for us.

1. Jesus of Nazareth truly represents God! IMO, all others just claim to--as does Mee. Well intended they/we go about adapting simple Jesus-stuff into a modern complex life style that allows a Cultural Christianism that accomodates our wants.

2. I joined a branch that met in an Orange-Hall and contributed (willingly) cash and sweat-equity into a phase-one that is now a very small corner of a Stake Centre. All completely irrelevant to your original question. So i apologize for confusing the issue.

"Validating the bible?" Even attempting to validate LDS scripture? Why do you think that is necessary? Today most readers are well enough informed to know it wasn't written by the finger of God. Many even question the interpretations of the translations. J.Smith--following M.Luther--the founder of our sect(ion) of the whole added his own additional writings; again, not by the finger of God.

Does any of it--OT,NT, BM, DC, PGP and, yes, even the Ensign --have to be seen as "God's word" to have any value to humanity? I think not. I think reading, understanding and applying, to the best of one's ability, those things worthy of application--many are not--and a person's life will be changed for the better. So has been my experience.

DEL, another term you tend to favour, "Bible only people", seems more divisive than conciliatory?

QUOTE 

Del, you are absolutely correct: "...LDS claim to base our theology on direct revelation..." It is simply an "LDS claim" to be believed or not. "...and allow all other men the same priviledge..." The Articles of Faith are simply 13 Items of Belief that base LDS faith in varying degrees of individual strength. 

That's not the point I was making. The point I was making is that LDS claim to base their theology on God Himself, through the revelations He gives prophets. While our critics claim to base their theologies on an old book compiled by men who didn't claim to have received God's guidance while doing so. Once again, we're not in the same league. And yet somehow, our critics keep thinking that we are the ones who have no strong basis. When comparing between God Himself and the Bible, they conclude that the Bible is a stronger basis. I wonder how they come to that conclusion 

You did it again: "... the LDS claim..." That is presicely what LDS do, present their claim--to be believed or not, as one may choose to do.

"...an old book compiled by men who didn't claim to receive God's guidance..." i suggest you discuss that one with bible literalists--JWs might be a good start?

DEL, i wonder if humanity, designed by our Creator to grow in truth and justice, might be moving from the Age of Revelation into the Age of Inspiration? Theists in both camps atribute enlightenment to God. That being the case, is one a more "valid" means than the other?

It appears to Mee that Inspiration is more active than Revelation. Would you agree? When i look around i am over come by the advantages i have over my ancestors. As a theist i can only give thanks that some minds are brighter (more in tune?) than others. I don't know about you, but see more of God's validation than ever before. This is not said in blindness to injustice and human suffering still with us, of course. There is yet much to do. I wonder will it be done by those waiting for Revelation, or by those inspired moment by moment to...

Thanks for your question. The numerous answers are most worthy of consideration. Belief...???

[Del March]

I hoped you would be able to see this discussion in a broader, less personal and narrow perspective.

Except that this is not the point of THIS thread. The point of this thread is for me to know on what basis the Bible-only people reject modern revelation, because it is quite obvious to me that it CANNOT be based on the Bible, contrarily to what they pretend.

And no, Dear Mee, I am not the one who is being divisive by talking of "Bible-only people": THEY are, by refusing to discuss with us as equals, simply on the basis that we are NOT Bible-only.

Del

[dacook]

Gee, DACOOK, i thought Mee gave a "really-good-answer", way back on page 5: "NEVER!" I'm not sure if this debate is more pointless or amusing? However, it is most interesting.

I guess it was an answer, but I can't call it "really good" because I'm not sure what you mean by it, or how it answers the original question.

This debate is not pointless at all. I have a young neighbor who is troubled by a friend's claim that the bible is the whole word of God and there can never be any more. If there is no valid authority for the friend to make this claim, the trouble goes away. That's why I like Del's questions so much, and why I'm watching this thread; I want to see if the "bible only" people have a good answer to support claims like my neighbor's friend's.

So far I haven't seen any.

[emaughan]

I think this is a great question and a good thread.

"Validating the bible?" Even attempting to validate LDS scripture? Why do you think that is necessary?

Mee I'll just second what others of said. Many of the antiMos claim to validate there authority, doctrines, and "organization" on the bible. Yet no where in the bible (except maybe Ezekial) does the bible testify of itself, grant authority, interpret itself, preach sermons about itself, etc... Del has brought up a good point and I would like to commend her on bringing up a very valid issue.

Today most readers are well enough informed to know it wasn't written by the finger of God.

Hang with some of our critics Mee on this board. If only I had a nickle for all of the biblidolators that have posted here.

[Dear Mee]

DA COOK, please take a 2nd look:

(Dear Mee @ Mar 26 2005, 04:20 AM)

Gee, DACOOK, i thought Mee gave a "really-good-answer", way back on page 5: "NEVER!"  I'm not sure if this debate is more pointless or amusing? However, it is most interesting.

I guess it was an answer, but I can't call it "really good" because I'm not sure what you mean by it, or how it answers the original question.

This debate is not pointless at all. I have a young neighbor who is troubled by a friend's claim that the bible is the whole word of God and there can never be any more. If there is no valid authority for the friend to make this claim, the trouble goes away. That's why I like Del's questions so much, and why I'm watching this thread; I want to see if the "bible only" people have a good answer to support claims like my neighbor's friend's.

So far I haven't seen any.

The original question, "WHEN was the B validated by God?" How could i be more specific? The question was TIME RELATED, not LOCATION RELATED.

As for your young neighbor--for whom i have the deepest sympathy--why not suggest, (never tell:-) "It doesn't matter!"

I suggested "pointless" because there is absolutely no substantial evidence that either the "pot" or the "kettle" can point to except in their own minds--their claim. This 'claim-thing' is what seperates Science and Religion; fantacy and fact, dreams and reality. Evidence!

Where is Religious Evidence--other than subjective? Religion is philosophical, which does not mean it is valueless. It has changed many individuals for the better. While at the same time R has provoked much havoc in lives and societies.

A piece of Jesus-stuff, "...agree with thine adversary...(lest he drive you nuts with his sillyness, and you him)..." (Matt 5:25) Paraphrased of course.

Another bit of Jesus-stuff, (Luke 9:50) "...he that is not against us is for us..." (In this case L was referring to a mortal situation, such as we experience daily. In L 11:23 the referrence is allegorical and opposite.)

I respectfully suggest when we engage in theological combat we distance ourselves from the Truth and Spirit we "claim" to represent? IMVHO.

'HAPPY EASTER, everyone!"

[Del March]

I suggested "pointless" because there is absolutely no substantial evidence that either the "pot" or the "kettle" can point to except in their own minds--their claim. This 'claim-thing' is what seperates Science and Religion; fantacy and fact, dreams and reality. Evidence!

Just because my evidence is spiritual doesn't mean it isn't factual. You can choose to reject one type of evidence because it is admittedly unscientific (science being an invention of men, with rules set by men that don't necessarily accurately reflect the laws of the Universe), but that doesn't in any way mean that this evidence doesn't truly exist.

A real testimony from the Holy Ghost is NOT subjective. Just because you want to be able to dismiss it doesn't mean you have a right to qualify it as something that it is not.

Del

[Dear Mee]

DEL,

(Dear Mee @ Mar 27 2005, 04:24 AM)

I suggested "pointless" because there is absolutely no substantial evidence that either the "pot" or the "kettle" can point to except in their own minds--their claim. This 'claim-thing' is what seperates Science and Religion; fantacy and fact, dreams and reality. Evidence!

                                    *    *    *    * 

                               

Just because my evidence is spiritual doesn't mean it isn't factual. You can choose to reject one type of evidence because it is admittedly unscientific (science being an invention of men, with rules set by men that don't necessarily accurately reflect the laws of the Universe), but that doesn't in any way mean that this evidence doesn't truly exist.

A real testimony from the Holy Ghost is NOT subjective. Just because you want to be able to dismiss it doesn't mean you have a right to qualify it as something that it is not. Del

DEL, please read Mee with care and caution. I do tend to confuse, jumping about as i do, so i will try to clarify.

From the bottom up: The last thing i want to do is dismiss Your Testimony! It is a most valuable part of You, as mine is of Mee. I respectfully, suggest that Personal-Tesimonies, though we might defend them to our death, as many have, bear no influence upon those who do not accept them as the 'truth' we 'know' they are.

Science, i suggest, has sprung from human experience, observation and reasoning powers that are exclusively human--as God intended--in my understanding of our Universe. Good science has little option but to abide "the laws of the Universe"? Science as a craft has evolved from the simple that most can, some what, understand--gravity only pulls down. Don't you agree? Advanced science is way beyond my scope of understanding, however it is not beyond my faith. Hence, i relax at 30,000 feet... knowing i'm in the hands of science that learned how to over come gravity. Thank God???

[Big Dogger]

After Christ's Resurrection, missionaries spread the Good News of Jesus by preaching. Eventually, Christians felt a need to preserve thir heritage in writing. Collections of the sayings of Jesus , liturgical prayers, and professions of faith began to appear. In A.D. 51 or 52 Paul started to write letters to the cities he had evangelized. These letters were preserved and shared. Soon they were recognized as having a special authority. By A.D. 65 or 70 the Gospel of Mark was written. Other gospels and writings followed. Some were accepted by the Church as inspired by God, while others were rejected. By A.D. 125 all twenty-seven books of our New Testament were written. By A.D. 250 or so they were compiled into a list (canon) and were generally recognized as inspired.

During these years, the sacred books of the Jewish people were evaluated by Christians. Since the entire New Testament was written in Greek for Greek-speaking Christians of Jewish and gentile origin, New Testament writers used the Alexandran version of the Old Testament. They usually quoted the Old Testament from the Alexandrian version and frequently referred to the books found only in this version. Church councils at Rome in A.D. 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 gave lists of the books of the Christian Bible based on the Alexandrian version. The early Church accepted the Bible as Catholics accept it today (twenty-seven New Testament books and forty-six Old Testament books).

Peace be with you.

[emaughan]

Big Dogger,

I believe that the Catholics and EO churches are in a far stronger position on this issue than the protestant faiths. Del's question focuses on those that claim all their authority and doctrine comes from the bible - yet the bible does not make claims of veracity (for itself) or give authority of any kind. It is as you pointed out it is a collection of books put together into one book.