Itching ears

[Heidi]

2 Timothy 4:3, Says; "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers who say what their itching ears want to hear."

Well the time has come, folks. Here's what itching ears want to hear that has absolutey nothing whatsoever to do with the sound doctrine of the bible:

1) That salvation is by the works of man, not the blood of Christ, and therefore can be lost by the lack of works of man
2) That salvation is only by man's goodness and intelligence to accept it
3) That monkeys can breed human descendants
4) That the earth wasn't created in 6 days but a gazillion years ago
5) That Mary was the firstborn of the Holy Spirit, not Jesus
6) That Mary remained a virgin throughout her life
7) That we should pray to people, especially dead ones, as well as to God
8) That any interpretation of the bible is correct, so we can make it say anything we want it to say
9) That there are other books that are the inspired Word of God, other than the bible
10)That man can choose not to sin and therefore, we didn't need Christ's atonement on the cross
11) That all men will be saved, including the wicked who will jump out of the fires of hell

I've heard all of these teachings on this forum and on all Christian forums all over the net. And not only do they disagree with the bible, but in most cases, they say the opposite of what the bible says. But do people care? Heavens no! Because of human pride, people will say what itching ears want to hear and make up their own bible. They have contempt for God's word, all in the name of their personal interpretation. They therefore can change God's word into anything they want and claim it's the truth.

Can we stop these people? No, we can't. All we can do is quote scripture & warn these people what God says will happen to false teachers. But I for one am tired of quoting God's word just to see it butchered and turned into the opposite of what it says. I can almost hear Satan going "he-he" in every poster who contradicts God's word. So I sympathize with Av Bunyan and will not be posting here too much because only God can give people the faith to believe the bible and not change it into what itching ears want to hear.

 

[unred typo]

quote by Heidi on Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:57 am
2 Timothy 4:3, Says; "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers who say what their itching ears want to hear."

Well the time has come, folks. Here's what itching ears want to hear that has absolutey nothing whatsoever to do with the sound doctrine of the bible:

1) That salvation is by the works of man, not the blood of Christ, and therefore can be lost by the lack of works of man
2) That salvation is only by man's goodness and intelligence to accept it
3) That monkeys can breed human descendants
4) That the earth wasn't created in 6 days but a gazillion years ago
5) That Mary was the firstborn of the Holy Spirit, not Jesus
6) That Mary remained a virgin throughout her life
7) That we should pray to people, especially dead ones, as well as to God
8) That any interpretation of the bible is correct, so we can make it say anything we want it to say
9) That there are other books that are the inspired Word of God, other than the bible
10)That man can choose not to sin and therefore, we didn't need Christ's atonement on the cross
11) That all men will be saved, including the wicked who will jump out of the fires of hell


Can we stop these people? No, we can't. All we can do is quote scripture & warn these people what God says will happen to false teachers. But I for one am tired of quoting God's word just to see it butchered and turned into the opposite of what it says. I can almost hear Satan going "he-he" in every poster who contradicts God's word. So I sympathize with Av Bunyan and will not be posting here too much because only God can give people the faith to believe the bible and not change it into what itching ears want to hear.
Yours in Christ,
Heidi

You can hear the sound of Satan but the voice of God is not getting through to you. You have a mixed bag of truth and error there, so I will only respond to those that I feel are directed toward me.

1) That salvation is by the works of man, not the blood of Christ, and therefore can be lost by the lack of works of man

We have discussed this at length. You sidestep all my verses and just repeat the same worn out misused scriptures you have clutched since the beginning. When you can’t face the truth of what God has written, you merely cut the last thread off, start another one and continue tangling your lines until you get caught in them again.

Please explain Romans 2:5-11 in light of your assertion that works are not necessary for salvation.

2) That salvation is only by man's goodness and intelligence to accept it

No one has said this. You have made a straw man here. Salvation is by following the way that Christ told us: repentance of sin, whereby the blood of Christ will wash it away, and continued walking in the doctrines of Christ to love one another, have mercy, forgiveness, humility, etc. Even a child understands that if you obey, you won’t be punished, but if you disobey, you will and if you repent of your sin, God will forgive you.

8) That any interpretation of the bible is correct, so we can make it say anything we want it to say

I thought this was your way of reading scripture. I guess it depends on your point of view. :

9) That there are other books that are the inspired Word of God, other than the bible

All scripture is given by inspiration of God. When you write something that is true, it is by inspiration of God. All truth comes from God. You think that the few words written in the Bible are the only words of God? You have go to be kidding. If all the books that could be written about what Jesus said and did, the world could not contain all of them. The Catholic church eliminated several books that were known previously to be scripture. The book of Jasher is one that I particularly like and the Christian church in Ethiopia still uses I have read.

10)That man can choose not to sin and therefore, we didn't need Christ's atonement on the cross

I will answer this one even though it is a distortion of what I said. We can choose not to sin. I choose not to sin many times a day. You do too. You did before you were ‘saved’ I‘m sure. Unfortunately, I choose to sin more often than I even want to think about. Without the blood, how could I be washed and forgiven of these sins, Heidi? You tell me that I am not depending on the blood of Christ to cleanse me from all unrighteousness??? Why would I continue to confess and repent if I didn’t believe in the ability of the blood to take my sin away???

quote by Heidi:
I've heard all of these teachings on this forum and on all Christian forums all over the net. And not only do they disagree with the bible, but in most cases, they say the opposite of what the bible says. But do people care? Heavens no! Because of human pride, people will say what itching ears want to hear and make up their own bible. They have contempt for God's word, all in the name of their personal interpretation. They therefore can change God's word into anything they want and claim it's the truth.

I could say the exact same thing about your very own posts, Heidi. I expect that my words will bring the kind of contempt that you express for anything I write even when they are direct quotes from Jesus Christ himself. Here’s a verse you might like but remember that the sword of the word cuts both ways:

Proverbs 23:9
Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of your words.

 

[Heidi]

Sorry, but that's false. I reconcile the verses you quoted with the verses I quoted and the result is; works come from faith because they are the fruit of the Spirit.

You,on the other hand have contradicted all the verses I quoted and more. So your interpretation is incorrect. Since we can't do any works to be saved, then neither can we lose our salvation by a lack of works.

So if we can choose not to sin, then why did Jesus die for us? :o Do you even have a clue? If not, then read the whole book of Romans and Galatians, particularly Romans 7:13-25. So since you have no clue who takes your sins away,( and it's not you) then you can never be thankful for what Jesus did for you. :

God reveals only what he wants us to know through the bible, no more no less. So by your statement, any Tom, Dick or Harry can claim he is passing along more words of God that aren't in the bible. : And that's precisely how cults are formed. ;-)

So by your own words, you are saying that there are no such thing as false teachers since anyone can claim that God talks to him personally. : You're a very lost soul. :

 

[tim-from-pa]

So, Heidi, what do you think of my avatar? (they are not working right now, but mine is a US/Union Jack flag with the verse Genesis 48:19 under it). What does it say or teach? About Israelites becoming Gentiles, and what is their purpose?

There's more to the bible than basic salvation, repentance, baptisms, etc.

All of these topics that keep coming up is Christianity 101 IMO. The bible teaches us to leave these things and move on. If some people don't get it, then leave them alone and move on. That's what I did.

 

[Heidi]

One cannot go onto solid food unless he has been weaned off milk. My OP shows that people who have adopted unbibilical teachings haven't even been nourished by milk much less have been weaned off milk yet.

The significance of the 2nd born son over the first is evident all over Genesis. God favored the 2nd born sons; Abel over Cain, Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, Ephraim over Manasseh, etc. as a direct reference Jesus over Adam.

 

[unred typo]

quote by Heidi:
Sorry, but that's false. I reconcile the verses you quoted with the verses I quoted and the result is; works come from faith because they are the fruit of the Spirit.

Of course works come from faith. When we believe God, we do what he tells us to and that is exactly what it means to have faith.

quote by Heidi:
You,on the other hand have contradicted all the verses I quoted and more. So your interpretation is incorrect. Since we can't do any works to be saved, then neither can we lose our salvation by a lack of works.

Salvation is by following the way that Christ told us: repentance of sin, whereby the blood of Christ will wash it away, and continued walking in the doctrines of Christ to love one another, have mercy, forgiveness, humility, etc. Even a child understands that if you obey, you won’t be punished, but if you disobey, you will be punished and if you repent of your sin, God will forgive you. If you don’t repent, do you think God will forgive you? If you don’t forgive others, do you think God will forgive you? Do you think you can be saved if you don’t follow Christ?

quote by Heidi:
So if we can choose not to sin, then why did Jesus die for us? Do you even have a clue? If not, then read the whole book of Romans and Galatians, particularly Romans 7:13-25. So since you have no clue who takes your sins away,( and it's not you) then you can never be thankful for what Jesus did for you.

I will answer this one even though it is a distortion of what I said. We can choose not to sin. I choose not to sin many times a day. You do too. You did before you were ‘saved’ I‘m sure. Unfortunately, I choose to sin more often than I even want to think about. Without the blood, how could I be washed and forgiven of these sins, Heidi? You tell me that I am not depending on the blood of Christ to cleanse me from all unrighteousness??? Why would I continue to confess and repent if I didn’t believe in the ability of the blood to take my sin away???

quote by Heidi:
God reveals only what he wants us to know through the bible, no more no less. So by your statement, any Tom, Dick or Harry can claim he is passing along more words of God that aren't in the bible. And that's precisely how cults are formed.

Any Tom, Dick or Heidi can teach the truth if they listen to the Spirit of God who teaches us to love one another. All scripture is given by inspiration of God. When you write something that is true, as if you could, it is by inspiration of God. All truth comes from God. You think that the few words written in the Bible are the only words of God? You have got to be kidding. If all the books that could be written about what Jesus said and did, the world could not contain all of them. The Catholic church eliminated several books that were known previously to be scripture. The book of Jasher is one that I particularly like and I have read that the Christian church in Ethiopia still uses it. I guess they haven’t heard it’s not Heidi approved.

 

[tim-from-pa]

The book of Jasher is one that I particularly like and I have read that the Christian church in Ethiopia still uses it. I guess they haven’t heard it’s not Heidi approved.

You have Jashar, too? Cool. I like that book. It sheds some insights on the Scriptures that otherwise may be misunderstood. Jashar is the "upright record".

 

[unred typo]

The book of Jasher is one that I particularly like and I have read that the Christian church in Ethiopia still uses it. I guess they haven’t heard it’s not Heidi approved.

You have Jashar, too? Cool. I like that book. It sheds some insights on the Scriptures that otherwise may be misunderstood. Jashar is the "upright record".

I agree. I was very leery of it at first so I read it along side my Bible, comparing it as I read. Then I made a time line to see how the details lined up. When I got to Abraham’s birth, I found it was 1948 years after creation. Interesting, huh? Coincidence? Maybe… I think not. There are some places where the translation may be skewed and credibility suffers but all in all, I think it survived as intact as the Bible over the years. Only God is infallible.

 

[tim-from-pa]

I like the story where Abraham was offering meat to his father's gods. There were 12 of them. Then when nothing happened he smashed them all with an ax (because he was angry and knew they were not real gods). He then put the ax in one of the chief god's hands. His father (Terah) heard the commotion, he came running in and asked Abraham what had happened and what he did to his gods? Abraham said when he offered them meat, they all reached out to grab the meat before the chief god had his turn and the chief god got angry and smashed the others with the ax and that's why the ax was still in his hands! Terah doubted the story and Abraham then asked his father the profound question as to why he worshiped just idols if he did not believe they had that sort of power.

I was rolling on the floor laughing the first time I read it. :-D

 

[Heidi]

I like the story where Abraham was offering meat to his father's gods. There were 12 of them. Then when nothing happened he smashed them all with an ax (because he was angry and knew they were not real gods). He then put the ax in one of the chief god's hands. His father (Terah) heard the commotion, he came running in and asked Abraham what had happened and what he did to his gods? Abraham said when he offered them meat, they all reached out to grab the meat before the chief god had his turn and the chief god got angry and smashed the others with the ax and that's why the ax was still in his hands! Terah doubted the story and Abraham then asked his father the profound question as to why he worshiped just idols if he did not believe they had that sort of power.

I was rolling on the floor laughing the first time I read it. :-D

Actually, the book isn't Paul or God approved either or it would have been included in the bible. ;-) But I'm flattered that their opinions didn't seem to matter to you as much as mine does. ;-) But all that does is show how little you care about God's opinions. :x

So you guys prove Paul right once again that you don't put up with sound doctrine but believe anything that your itching ears want to hear.

 

[unred typo]

quote by Heidi on Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:14 am
Actually, the book isn't Paul or God approved either or it would have been included in the bible. But I'm flattered that their opinions didn't seem to matter to you as much as mine does. But all that does is show how little you care about God's opinions.

So you guys prove Paul right once again that you don't put up with sound doctrine but believe anything that your itching ears want to hear.

If all the God or Paul approved letters and writings and everything Jesus said that was ever written down, were put in the Bible, you would need a forklift to bring it to church. These few incidents were written as examples for you to have a general idea of the history of man and what God is like. Jasher was God approved as you can see in these two references in the Bible to this same book:

Joshua 10:13
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

2 Samuel 1:18
(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

Since you are so vehemently anti-catholic, it’s strange that you let the RCC choose what books you would be allowed to read and call scripture. Many were disallowed due to textual problems and other technicalities. If you need perfection, the KJV would be disqualified because the first one had a minor typo in it.

You’re flattered that I find your opinions so damaging to the true gospel that I take the time to dispute them? It’s no less than what God has called me to do when I read your rather blatant errors. Your silly arguments are not particularly challenging but your skirting of the scripture that refutes them is a challenge to all truth lovers on this forum to keep civil when they see how brazenly bankrupt those evasive doctrines are.

 

[Guest]

Just because Jasher is mentioned, doesn't mean that it is Scripture.

 

[unred typo]

quote by aLoneVoice on Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:38 am
Just because Jasher is mentioned, doesn't mean that it is Scripture.

Why was it called Jasher, which means the ‘upright’, ’righteous’ or ‘correct’ version if it was not trusted by the Israelites? Have you read it? A search online will bring you several links where you can read it for free.

I had once been concerned that the Bible was only a witness of itself and there is no other account of Genesis to compare it to. When I found Jasher, it was a confirmation of what I had understood in the Bible and it also cleared up some questions that the Bible had left unanswered. I have little, if any, doubt that it is the missing book of Jasher, preserved for the end times when faith would be waning. You can decide for yourself or let someone tell you what to think of it. Your choice.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Unredtypo:

I always find it amusing that the critics of something did no five minutes of study themselves in what they are criticizing. In this case, you can be rest assured that the book of Jashar was not read by them.

If I do not know about something, I have the smarts to keep my mouth shut instead of claiming that it is not approved by God or whatever when I have no idea what I am talking about.

And yes, you are correct. The book of Jashar is mentioned in the bible. Since the bible states,

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?

the strong implication here is that one must read it to confirm it, therefore the bible does not condemn, but rather approves of the book.

 

[mondar]

snip......

Please explain Romans 2:5-11 in light of your assertion that works are not necessary for salvation.

......snip

Unred, I think Heidi's words apply to you very well. Heidi, I did not read all parts of this thread, but I want to express my support for what I did read.

My purpose in writing here is to address the heresy that Unred wrote above.

THE CONTEXT
Now to set the context, let me remind the reader that the context goes back to 1:18.
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness;

In the rest of chapter 1 Paul took up the topic of the wrath of God being revealed against Gentiles who suppress the truth of God in nature. Now in Chapter 2 he is going to take up the topic of the wrath of God against the Jew who suppresses the truth of God in the Law. The final conclusion of 1:18 to 3:19 is found in 3:19.
Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God:

Now here is where unreds reading of Romans 2:5-11 fails. His understanding just has nothing to do with the context.

Let me paste Romans 2.

Rom 2:1 Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judges another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same things.
Rom 2:2 And we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them that practise such things.
Rom 2:3 And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practise such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
Rom 2:5 but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Rom 2:6 who will render to every man according to his works:

As we look at Chapter 2, and see how the Jew suppresses the word of God in the law, the first five verses speak of the Jew, judging the gentile by the law, and then not living up completely to the standards of God in the law. No at times the Jews lived up to much of the law, but there were never perfect in their obedience. The law demanded perfect obedience in Deuteronomy 27:26.
Deu 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.
Now notice Galatians 3:10 and Pauls understanding of this verse.
Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Paul quotes this very verse because it is impossible to keep the Law of Moses. The law of Moses only brings guilt and condemnation because of failure. So for the Jew under the law, after he failed, he could be saved only by throwing himself upon the mercy of God.

You could ask hypothetically, what if some super jew came alone and kept every law in the OT perfectly. Well, hypothetically, this jew would not need salvation, he would not need the shed blood of Jesus to be saved for he would already be justified. This however, is of course is only hypothetical and not humanly possible, that is why 3:20 says
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
The law brings knowledge of sin, but it never brings justification. So then, works salvation is not possible and only a hypothetical possibility. It would take more then a spiritual superman to accomplish perfect obedience, it would take the perfect, all powerful God/Man to come to earth.

So then, when we read Romans 2:1-6, and then we read verse 6.... verse 6 is talking about Gods condemnation upon the Jew who fails to obey the law perfectly. Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: That rendering, is a curse. Men receive curses from God for their deeds in verse 6. The deeds of these Jewish men, are disobedience to the law.

Rom 2:7 to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life:

Now the patience in well doing, to those who do this perfectly without any error (that is the nature of the Mosaic law, and the jew under the law). If one can accomplish this hypothetical impossibility, there is eternal life.

Rom 2:8 but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation,
Rom 2:9 tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek;
Rom 2:10 but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek:

Again in verse 10 we have this perfect individual, who is without sin. Notice that faith is not even mentioned in Chapter 2. The concept of faith in Christ is totally foreign in Chapter 2. This is simply and totally works salvation. The hypothetical person who is perfect and without any sin, he does not need Christ. How can God judge him if he is without sin?

Rom 2:11 for there is no respect of persons with God.
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;

Notice the negativity here. Paul is talking about each and every Jew. Every and all Jews are in a position of being under the law, and condemned by the law. (later in Romans we see how both jew and gentile be justified by faith, but that is not the topic here in this context.... the context is about how all are guilty.)

Rom 2:13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:

Again, you might ask how can Paul say this in 2:13 and then turn around and what he does in 3:20.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

You might ask, does the law justify or not. The answer is that the law justifies only if you do it with "patient continuance" (verse 7) or perfectly (as the hypothetical super saint). For real people, or the whole human race, we all fall in the category of spiritual failure.

Finally, I want to remind you of Romans 2:4
Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
It is not our works that lead to repentance, but the goodness of God. For those who depend upon their own righteousness, and their own works for justification, there is nothing but damnation.

 

[mondar]

I want to draw a parallel between Romans 2 and Luke 10:25-30.

Both passages are very Jewish, and are about the law. In the very first verse, a scribe or lawyer asks the Master a question.

Luk 10:25 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and made trial of him, saying, Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

Now we all know the answer to this... (cough cough) OK, some have itching ears and may have a different answer.

Lets look at how Christ answer the question of the lawyer, how do you inherit eternal life.

Luk 10:26 And he said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

He asks the lawyers opinion first. The lawyer says....

Luk 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself.

Now there is some technical stuff from the book of Deuteronomy that I am not going to get into, but the essence of what the Lawyer says is that if you do everything in the law, you will inherit eternal life.

Now here comes the surprise. Notice Christs answer.

Luk 10:28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

Christ agrees with the lawyer :crazyeyes: !!! If you never sin against the law, what need have you of a savior. This is again the hypothetically perfect person. If one is without sin, and perfect in works, he has no need of Christ. Now the rest of the scripture makes it clear that the nature of man is only evil. Man's righteousness is as filthy rags. We are sinners by nature and choice. But that answer would not do for the self-righteous lawyer. Notice the lawyers next question.

Luk 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbor?

Here is where Christ lowers the boom. Here is where he brings out how great the sin of self-righteousness is. He demonstrates in the parable of the Good Samaratin that the lawyer is actually a law breaker and sinner. HE shows the lawyer who his neighbor really is! Has the lawyer been loving the Samaratins? Has he been caring for those of Samaria when they are in need?

Yeah right, get a life dude!

Who can righteously do good works? Who can righteously keep the law?

Rom 3:10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one;
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God;
Rom 3:12 They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one:

 

[Guest]

Unredtypo:

I always find it amusing that the critics of something did no five minutes of study themselves in what they are criticizing. In this case, you can be rest assured that the book of Jashar was not read by them.

If I do not know about something, I have the smarts to keep my mouth shut instead of claiming that it is not approved by God or whatever when I have no idea what I am talking about.

And yes, you are correct. The book of Jashar is mentioned in the bible. Since the bible states,

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?

the strong implication here is that one must read it to confirm it, therefore the bible does not condemn, but rather approves of the book.

I am not saying I agree or disagree - however, just because it is mentioned in the Bible does not in and of itself make a case that it should be consider Scripture.

If I am not mistaken, there are about 15 other 'books' mentioned in Scripture that are not contained within the cannons of Scripture. Does that make those books Scripture as well? Paul alludes to the poerty of the time of the "unknown God" - does that make those poetry writtings Scripture?

What I am being critical of, if anything, is the weak arguement that because Scripture mentions it, it must therefore be Scripture.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Unredtypo:

I always find it amusing that the critics of something did no five minutes of study themselves in what they are criticizing. In this case, you can be rest assured that the book of Jashar was not read by them.

If I do not know about something, I have the smarts to keep my mouth shut instead of claiming that it is not approved by God or whatever when I have no idea what I am talking about.

And yes, you are correct. The book of Jashar is mentioned in the bible. Since the bible states,

Is not this written in the book of Jasher?

the strong implication here is that one must read it to confirm it, therefore the bible does not condemn, but rather approves of the book.

I am not saying I agree or disagree - however, just because it is mentioned in the Bible does not in and of itself make a case that it should be consider Scripture.

If I am not mistaken, there are about 15 other 'books' mentioned in Scripture that are not contained within the cannons of Scripture. Does that make those books Scripture as well? Paul alludes to the poerty of the time of the "unknown God" - does that make those poetry writtings Scripture?

What I am being critical of, if anything, is the weak arguement that because Scripture mentions it, it must therefore be Scripture.

Well, your statement shows a slant, because I am not comparing Jashar to an equal authority of scripture. I think some words were put into my mouth here by making the claim that I said I elevated it to the bible---- just read all my posts and find I nowhere said that. However, I do find it profitable for reading.

I do get this intuitive feeling that if "it's not one of the books of the bible" that it must be shunned---- that's how this is coming across to me. I believe that when scripture itself mentions it, it cannot be a bad book.

 

[Guest]

tim: perhaps I misunderstood when you wrote:

the strong implication here is that one must read it to confirm it, therefore the bible does not condemn, but rather approves of the book.

Forgive me, but this sounds like you are elevating to the degree of Scripture.

Nowhere does Scripture "approve of the book" - rather it merely makes mention of it. Making mention of and approval of are two seperate things.

 

[unred typo]

tim: perhaps I misunderstood when you wrote:

the strong implication here is that one must read it to confirm it, therefore the bible does not condemn, but rather approves of the book.

Forgive me, but this sounds like you are elevating to the degree of Scripture.

Nowhere does Scripture "approve of the book" - rather it merely makes mention of it. Making mention of and approval of are two seperate things.

You’re correct. Making mention of and approval of are two separate things. When Paul “alludes to the poetry of the time of the "unknown God" ,†this is making mention of some writing. When Joshua 10:13 says
“And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.†and when 2 Samuel 1:18 says: “(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher. )†they are calling the book of Jasher a worthy witness to the account they are relating. Behold means, Look! The writer is saying “take a look, it’s also recorded in the book of Jasherâ€Â. So I would agree with Tim (as much as I hate to agree with anyone, ) : this is approval for the book of Jasher. You wouldn’t say, “Believe my story here for behold, it i also written in ‘the Enquirer.’â€Â

:-D