Contradictions: NT V NT

[Invernessian]

So that leaves us in a position of clarifying what we mean by ‘God’s word’, and it is a leap of faith to say: that word is our Bible, and not just the book, each verse and story in it. A claim like that is something that has to be shown, not just stated.

Dave, you know by now that I don’t always agree with your pontifications (maybe that is too strong a word to use); however, I tend to sympathise with your view on how the Bible should be read and understood. It wasn’t long ago that I would strongly argue that every word and, therefore, every instruction set forth was to be obeyed irrespective of its intended audience and the times in which it was written. I have since modified that position.

One teaching of the church which I have attended now for the last 12 years is that the only songs that may be sung in worship services are the Psalms. When I pointed out that Paul twice wrote that the church should sing “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (Eph 5:19 and Col. 3:16), I was advised that the correct translation of the original was “psalms, psalms and more psalms”. It’s hard to argue against that so I gave up arguing.

Much of our bible is valid for all time. Some of its instructions apply in the context of the times when it was written. I am inclined to place the words spoken by Jesus on a higher plane than those by one or other of the apostles.

Matthew 17:5 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)
5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud shadowed them: and behold, there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear him.

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

One teaching of the church which I have attended now for the last 12 years is that the only songs that may be sung in worship services are the Psalms. When I pointed out that Paul twice wrote that the church should sing “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (Eph 5:19 and Col. 3:16), I was advised that the correct translation of the original was “psalms, psalms and more psalms”. It’s hard to argue against that so I gave up arguing.

Well, everyone sees theology and philosophy - through a particular lens. Whether it is through the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Baptist, Lutheran, etc. - lens. Or one a person has, here on the forum. And definitely God, is aware of it. And would DEFINITELY, take that into consideration.

I probably became “corrupted”, by becoming a lifetime member - of the Theosophical Society - chiefly for their extensive, library collection. And I was introduced to contemplative, healing and medicine traditions, in Native American spirituality, Japanese light modalities, Zen; Indian and Tibetan yoga. And I shouldn’t be doing this and call myself a Christian - folks might tell me. But it’s probably much better, than joining the Outlaws or Hell’s Angels - and calling myself a Christian

And I’m sure folks, will give me static - for my views on Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)…as the most probable, endtimes tribulation scenerio.

[DaveB2.0]

pontifications (maybe that is too strong a word to use)

Ya think?

[maintenanceman]

It wasn’t long ago that I would strongly argue that every word and, therefore, every instruction set forth was to be obeyed irrespective of its intended audience and the times in which it was written. I have since modified that position.

[maintenanceman]

By itself this is not a contradiction. If no was born of God, then no would be without sin. But most Christians would say some people are born of God.

No brother. There is no sin of God today… Christ has elevated that place were man somehow man was/is not perfected in God’s eyes.

[steve7150]

In your post in OT V NT, I was looking at some NT texts and thought this was a bit weird.

In Matthew 22:36-40 It says, “36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbour as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.””

But in Galatians 5:14 it says, “14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.””

Is this a contradiction?

I think it’s safe to say Paul was familiar with Jesus statements so i believe he was applying a particular point to his “brethren” that was meant to counter their penchant for legalism. They did love God but they thought they needed to express it through ritualism and that was what Paul was addressing, so that’s the context of this.