Oh, Kathy
Last night I listened to an “internet Church of Christ radio show” thing and I sent them some e-mails; normally I wouldn’t do anything like that, but these sounded like intelligent men. They had a top 10 list of things people “hate” about the Bible; I sent in an e-mail stating how (I think) they are legalizing the New Testament thus distorting its purpose.
Then my next e-mail was my own version of this top-whatever list. I wrote it in a hurry, but it’s (fairly) decent. They invited me to call them, but I’m not. I’ll just leave them alone now. I realized this thing was getting out of control when they invited me to call them. I was just stating that love is important and that none of us have enough of it, but now they want to make an entire show off of my list! My word! I just wanted to add to the discussion, not dominate it in any way. This has really become more an argument of “who’s right?” which divides as opposed to uniting us in Christian love.
At any rate, here is the top sixteen list of things (I think) the Church of Christ “hates” about the Bible-
1) Jesus never told us to follow a book or collection of books
2) That loving is better than religious obligation (Mark 12:33)
3) That the New Testament never claims to be perfect
4) That Jesus ate with prostitutes
5) That the Paul included his personal opinion in supposed “Scripture” (1 Cor 7:12)
6) That the New Testament never claims that people are currently burning in hell
7) That the New Testament quotes pagans (Acts 17:28; 1 Corinthians 15:33, 2 Peter 2:22)
8 ) That the book of Jude quotes the Assumption of Moses and the Book of Enoch (not scripture)
9) That the New Testament never “teaches” congregationalism
10) That the New Testament never gives a list of canon of what should be contained in the New Testament
11) That Jesus supposedly quotes something that isn’t in Scripture (John 7:38).
12) That baptizing the “household” of someone would include babies (1 Cor 1:16)
13) 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 teaches that even supposed heretics (like Martin Luther) are going to be saved
14) That sola scriptura is NOT Taught in the New Testament
15) That Peter said some things written by Paul are hard to understand (2 Peter 15-16)
16) That Paul had an out-of-body experience (2 Cor 12:1-6)
Wednesday, May 14, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Is this a joke since everything on your list is wrong or makes no sense? If you’re serious, then you really do not know much about the Bible or the churches of Christ.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008 at 2:43 pm
LOL Scott! At first when I saw your comment I said to myself, “Maybe this list wasn’t as good as I thought it was =/” But upon reading the list again, I’m very satisfied with it. Everything makes sense and nothing is “wrong” (9 may be a matter of opinion).
If it’s so “wrong” then why don’t you tell me which ones are wrong instead of just getting defensive and saying that I don’t know much about the Bible or the Churches of Christ?
Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Sure. I was hoping that you’d ask.
1) “Jesus never told us to follow a book or collection of books” Jesus did not need a list for OT though He did give a reference of acceptance excluding the Apocrypha in Luke 24:44. Jesus does not need a list then neither does His Church. The OT was put together with the oversight of prophets and priests and so was the NT in the 1st century to 2nd century.
“That the book of Jude quotes the Assumption of Moses and the Book of Enoch (not scripture)” Why does it matter if the book of Jude quotes the Assumption of Moses and the Book of Enoch? Ironically, it is an assumption that Jude quotes from the Assumption of Moses while others claim that this is from Philo, Josephus, Enoch, and some other sources. You all can debate over the source. The fact of the matter is that Michael did contend with the Devil for the body of Moses as the Spirit revealed in Jude not in any other source. Add to this that Jude presented Enoch as a prophet who fell away as Cain and Balaam. Where did Jude get this? The New Catholic Bible says in a footnote, “The Book of Enoch is apocryphal. St. Jude does not here approve the entire book, but only this prophecy.” (New Catholic Bible, op. cit., New Testament, p. 323.). I wholeheartedly agree with the Catholics on this point, but wait, am I now saying that I totally agree with the Catholic church? Certainly not, and so is the same for Jude and others who quoted others who are not inspired.
2) “That loving is better than religious obligation (Mark 12:33)” You’re saying that we hate the Bible because we are told to love God. Yet, we show our love to God by keeping His commands (John 14:21-24). This is a very hypocritical claim from the Catholics who make void the commands of God by the commands of men (Mark 7).
3) “That the New Testament never claims to be perfect” If by “perfect” you mean the Greek word “telios” which is means “complete”, then it does make this claim in 2 Tim. 3:16-17, which does refer to the NT (1 Tim. 5:18). Does the Bible include all the works of Christ? Certainly not (John 21:25), but we do have everything that we need that is every Apostolic tradition though the Catholic church disagrees with the Holy Spirit on this one. Is this what you hate about the Bible? Do you only believe what you want to? If you meant that the NT has errs in it, then you need to consult the Catholic church, who you believe put it together. Besides this, you blaspheme the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit implying that their revelation is wrong.
4) “That Jesus ate with prostitutes” We have no struggle with Jesus eating with prostitutes. It would be hard for churches not to so today with our food banks and inner city ministries. We certainly do not hate this part of the Bible.
5) “That the Paul included his personal opinion in supposed ‘Scripture’ (1 Cor 7:12)” Not all Scripture is a binding command. Are the words of Satan binding upon us? Add to this that you are assuming that Paul was giving His opinion rather than a command from himself rather than a command directly from Christ. Paul did already claim inspiration (1 Co. 2). Paul did write the commands of the Lord (1 Cor. 14:37). The Apostles did speak the words of Christ since Christ did not reveal all His commands by His own mouth in His life on earth (John 16:12-13). Do Catholics hate the inspiration of Paul’s words?
6) “That the New Testament never claims that people are currently burning in hell” Here is another assumption of yours. Jesus said that the rich man is burning in Hell (Luke 16). The thief on the cross was with Christ in paradise that day. Look how there is no purgatory.
7) “That the New Testament quotes pagans (Acts 17:28; 1 Corinthians 15:33, 2 Peter 2:22)” The New Testament does quote pagans and we have no problem with this (Acts 17:28). I don’t mind quoting from the Catholic Encyclopedia to show truth to the Catholic church from their own authority. First Corinthians 15:33 is a stretch to be from Menander. Second Peter 2:22 is a quote of Prov. 26:11. Would the Catholic church be offended by the book that they claim to have assembled?
9) “That the New Testament never ‘teaches’ congregationalism” I don’t know what you mean by “congregationalism”. If you mean how the hierarchy of the Catholic church is no where to be found in the Scriptures, then would not Catholics hate this?
10) “That the New Testament never gives a list of canon of what should be contained in the New Testament” The OT nor the NT has a list of books. I guess that is your strike against the Law of Moses, the Jews and Jesus too since Jesus did not need such a list. The OT and the NT are canons to themselves. Anyone familiar with the NT knows that all of Paul’s letters were “canonized” according to 2 Peter in the first century (2 Pet. 3:15-16). Add Paul’s canon of Luke (1 Tim. 5:18). Add Luke’s canon of the Gospels and Acts (Luke 1:1-3, Acts 1:1-4). Add John’s canon of the Apostles (1 John 1:1-4). Add Peter’s canon of Peter and John (2 Pet. 1:16-21). The Scriptures were gathered under the oversight of the Apostles in the 1st century. I would think the Catholics hate that the Bible shows the “canonizing” of Scripture since they claim to have put the Bible together in the 4th century, but then again there was the Catholic/Orthodox Bishop Athanasius who said that the 27 books were simply passed down to them from the Apostles (The 39th Festal Letter of Athanasius).
11) “That Jesus supposedly quotes something that isn’t in Scripture (John 7:38).” Jesus is certainly not quoting here, but referring to Zechariah 14:8.
12) “That baptizing the ‘household’ of someone would include babies (1 Cor 1:16)” No one knows if any of these households had babies or that non-believers were baptized according to their will. Though Christ taught that one be baptized by their own belief (Mark 16:16) and Peter gave the choice to be immersed (Acts 2:38).
13) “1 Corinthians 3:10-15 teaches that even supposed heretics (like Martin Luther) are going to be saved” This passage teaches that it matter what you build upon Christ. Much of Luther’s teaching will be burned up especially “faith without works” salvation.
14) “That sola scriptura is NOT Taught in the New Testament” This has already been addressed. Second Timothy 3:16-17 and other passages show this statement to be false.
15) “That Peter said some things written by Paul are hard to understand (2 Peter 15-16)” Who denies this? There are some things hard to understand. There is no one in the Church who rejects this.
16) “That Paul had an out-of-body experience (2 Cor 12:1-6)” Again, the Church accepts this Scripture that Paul was caught to the 3rd Heaven.
Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 12:05 pm
[...] Catholic’s Attack Against the Bible The following is a reply to a Catholic’s attack against the Bible calling it “the top sixteen list of things (I think) the Church of Christ ‘hates’ [...]
Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 2:47 pm
You missed the point entirely with number one. I wasn’t speaking to canon of the Scripture, I’m talking about the fact that Jesus never told us to follow our lives as closely as possible to a book(s).
Regarding loving God- God’s commands for us are to love. Seems paradoxical, doesn’t it? God told us to love and we serve him by loving. That’s the beauty of Christianity; it is all about love and compassion and trying to be like Christ.
You seem to employ a lot of ad hominem attacks and make many baseless statements with regards to the Catholic Church. You also make the claim that the Bible is the revelation of the Trinity. Well, where does it say that in the Bible? As a Christian, I believe that Jesus Christ was the God’s revelation to humanity; Jesus is the word of God, not some book.
You missed my point entirely in regards to the prostitutes. Jesus ate with them out of love and to show people that everyone was holy; this is most important to him. Restorationists believe that the most important thing is to make sure our lives are lived as rigidly to a book and that our worship conform to it. As a Christian, I believe that the most important thing is to love and have compassion; this is worship to me, and indeed true and spiritual worship.
Try as you might to evade the statement, the Bible never says that there are people currently burning in hell. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus does speak of the rich man burning, but then again, it’s a parable and is supposed to teach a lesson; the lesson isn’t “Do good lest you burn,” because what lesson is that? Any faith system that is based off of that idea is not Christian at all. We are to do good out of love because we want to help others, not because we’re scared of burning in hell.
You’re wrong about 2 Peter 2:22, by the way. The first part is a quotation from Proverbs; the second, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire,” is of pagan origin. “The fact of the matter is that Michael did contend with the Devil for the body of Moses as the Spirit revealed in Jude not in any other source.” That’s an interesting way to dodge the statement. The quote is most clearly from the Assumption of Moses. The reason this is pertinent is because Jude then uses the Assumption of Moses and 2 Enoch as authoritative sources. My whole point with the quoting of the pagans and apocrypha is that if anything it proves that there is wisdom OUTSIDE the Bible. For people to claim that the Bible has all the answers if foolish.
re: congregationalism- I’m speaking of church autonomy and the fact that it is no where to be found within the Bible, unless one makes exaggerations and strange interpretations.
You can make all the interpretations and ignore all the modern day scholarship that you want in regards to true authorship. Of course, if I were to mention that we are missing some letters that are mentioned in the New Testament (such as the first letter to the Corinthians), I’m sure the claim would be made that we “didn’t need it.” If everything Paul wrote was Scripture, how can this letter be lost? If the Lord supposedly let the first one disappear, why is it that we have the second and third ones? Naturally, if there are any that “aren’t necessary,” it would be the latter ones.
No, Jesus wasn’t quoting Zechariah 14:8. “From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.” is not to be found in Zechariah, though the stretch could be made (as you claim) that Jesus was quoting Zechariah.
Interesting how you didn’t try to make some extravagant claim that Martin Luther is indeed going to hell in spite that 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 claims that he isn’t. You rightly quoted Paul; his works will be burned up for what they are, but he himself will be saved.
This is the real reasoning behind my asking the questions: I’m not trying to attack the Churches of Christ. I’m simply trying to show that Christianity is about being like Christ and living like him and loving as he does and having compassion. This is what Christianity is all about, not worshiping without instruments or trying to follow an outdated book as closely as possible. Being a Christian means being like Christ and following his example. If Christ did to the Old Testament what the Restorationists do to the New Testament, he wouldn’t have even been Christ. Jesus sets us free from the law; why ruin that?
Apparently I’m not getting this point across very well; you keep getting mixed up in thinking that I’m saying, “Well my church is right and yours is wrong.” I’m saying that your line of thinking is wrong.
Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Hear a discussion of these questions here:
http://www.theVirtualBibleStudy.com