My OperaVerifying everything
Saturday, October 6, 2007 1:11:22 AM
I know we can all take verses from the New Testament and say they say this or that or that the meaning of them is this or that. How are we to know if what James or Peter or any of the apostles were saying is true and how can this be verified?
Can we take the book of Galatians and say it is not saying this or that because James says in his book something somewhat to the opposite? Can we be unsure of something that is said in Romans because Peter in his epistles says something a bit different, or so it would seem to us? No, that is looking for confusion as far as what the New Testament says about any subject.
So how do we verify what the true meaning of anything in the New Testament says and whether we are to believe it or not? We are to do what Jesus said to do, and I quoted this verse in my post yesterday, and that is to go to the law, the Psalms and the prophets because they said everything there was to know concerning Him. In Acts 3:18 we see Peter saying that what had happened in their midst had been prophesied by ALL his prophets.
I believe that before we take anything from the New Testament and make some sort of doctrine out of one or two verses, we have to make sure these things are verified by the prophets because everything was revealed to them. It is easy to take some sort of stand on something we read in the New Testament that may not be able to be verified by the scriptures. I believe this is of utmost importance because by not doing this, we see divisions; new denominations and what have you just rise up over some misunderstood verse in the New Testament.
A lot of the positions taken by some of the apostles are not valid when compared to what the Old Testament scriptures said regarding redemption. I know what I’m saying here is not a very popular stand but why would Jesus tell them to go to the Scriptures (OT) to see if what he had done at the cross was valid? He told them that because it had been revealed to the prophets and that is where validation has to come from. I believe Paul’s stand on things were valid because he was a top teacher of the law prior to his Damascus road experience when the Lord revealed Himself in Him, all the things He knew about a coming Messiah came to light in his heart and that is why he could say he wanted to know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.
Evangelical Christianity has built huge empires based on verses of the Bible that are not verified by Old Testament prophets. There is probably no movement that has more confusion and different beliefs than that, simply because their doctrines are not validated by the Old Testament scriptures. The scriptures (OT) are for doctrinal proof.
Take as an example in James where he says in 2:20 “oh vain man” that says we are justified by faith alone. Do you suppose he was talking about Paul when he said “vain man” because of what Paul had confronted him and others with? Paul had made it clear to them it was by faith alone, apart from any works or the law. If he was referring to Paul, then I think I would go by what Paul said and not James. Paul verified everything by the scriptures. I am sure James did as well in many areas but I am just making a point here that doctrine has to be verified by Old Testament scriptures, according to what Jesus said.
I recall a while ago talking to my friend Bill and he said this….the New Testament was an attempt by the apostles to interpret what the Old Testament said. In some places it is accurate and some other places it is not because it clearly contradicts what the prophets of old prophesied about the coming redeemer of the world. I agree with what Bill says regarding this. I know this is not popular amongst most but truth never the less.
Can we take the book of Galatians and say it is not saying this or that because James says in his book something somewhat to the opposite? Can we be unsure of something that is said in Romans because Peter in his epistles says something a bit different, or so it would seem to us? No, that is looking for confusion as far as what the New Testament says about any subject.
So how do we verify what the true meaning of anything in the New Testament says and whether we are to believe it or not? We are to do what Jesus said to do, and I quoted this verse in my post yesterday, and that is to go to the law, the Psalms and the prophets because they said everything there was to know concerning Him. In Acts 3:18 we see Peter saying that what had happened in their midst had been prophesied by ALL his prophets.
I believe that before we take anything from the New Testament and make some sort of doctrine out of one or two verses, we have to make sure these things are verified by the prophets because everything was revealed to them. It is easy to take some sort of stand on something we read in the New Testament that may not be able to be verified by the scriptures. I believe this is of utmost importance because by not doing this, we see divisions; new denominations and what have you just rise up over some misunderstood verse in the New Testament.
A lot of the positions taken by some of the apostles are not valid when compared to what the Old Testament scriptures said regarding redemption. I know what I’m saying here is not a very popular stand but why would Jesus tell them to go to the Scriptures (OT) to see if what he had done at the cross was valid? He told them that because it had been revealed to the prophets and that is where validation has to come from. I believe Paul’s stand on things were valid because he was a top teacher of the law prior to his Damascus road experience when the Lord revealed Himself in Him, all the things He knew about a coming Messiah came to light in his heart and that is why he could say he wanted to know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.
Evangelical Christianity has built huge empires based on verses of the Bible that are not verified by Old Testament prophets. There is probably no movement that has more confusion and different beliefs than that, simply because their doctrines are not validated by the Old Testament scriptures. The scriptures (OT) are for doctrinal proof.
Take as an example in James where he says in 2:20 “oh vain man” that says we are justified by faith alone. Do you suppose he was talking about Paul when he said “vain man” because of what Paul had confronted him and others with? Paul had made it clear to them it was by faith alone, apart from any works or the law. If he was referring to Paul, then I think I would go by what Paul said and not James. Paul verified everything by the scriptures. I am sure James did as well in many areas but I am just making a point here that doctrine has to be verified by Old Testament scriptures, according to what Jesus said.
I recall a while ago talking to my friend Bill and he said this….the New Testament was an attempt by the apostles to interpret what the Old Testament said. In some places it is accurate and some other places it is not because it clearly contradicts what the prophets of old prophesied about the coming redeemer of the world. I agree with what Bill says regarding this. I know this is not popular amongst most but truth never the less.
