• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Question for the 'non-bible alone' Christians

Gharib

I want Khilafah back
in i conversation i had with someone, he said that he is not a 'bible alone' christian, which i assume most christians are of that category unless my assumption is wrong.

so i want to ask, if you are not a 'bible alone' christian and you follow other teaching aside the ones of the bible, did christians record the teachings/sayings of Jesus (as) as muslims did with Muhammed (sa). can someone post any relevant material concerning this?
 

Renji

Well-Known Member
Actually the majority of Christians on the planet are like this, they are called Catholics.

And you assume that you are a bible based christian?
Jesus said: “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn others, or it will all come back against you." Luke 6:37


As a Christian, you should not be judgmental to other people. That includes what they believe in. In my own point of view, there negative kinds of Christian people:

1) Those that are non bible alone christians
2) Close minded christians- Those christians who do not accept facts though these are proven already(that may include the theory of evolution).
3) Judgmental christians- Those who judge others not only through appearance but also judge an individual or a group because they do not belong to their sect.
4) Greedy Christians- Those christians who say that their religion is the only way to salvation and that the other sects teach false doctrines.
5) Materialistic christians
6) "Words only " christians- those christians who do worship and prays a lot, but lacks "christianity" in action.

Now, where are you from those group of christians?


A true, genuine christian should not fall under those groups.
 
Last edited:

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Nowhere in the bible is the assertion that the only truth is to be found in the Bible. In other words, Sola Scriptura is not biblical.

There is truth outside the bible. This does not invalidate the truth WITHIN the bible.

God didn't stop speaking to people after the canon of the bible was determined. He still speaks, still reveals truths to us.
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
eselam,

Originally, Christians accepted only the collection of Jewish books that they refer to as Torah and Christians refer to as the Old Testament. However, the original apostles (the eleven men who were faithful to Jesus throughout his ministry) taught people orally about Jesus. The apostles trained faithful men to lead the churches and preserve their teaching. Some of these men or their direct disciples wrote books and letters to the new communities as a way of preserving their teaching. The churches kept these books and letters, and some of them came to be recognized as scripture with the same authority as Torah. There was some debate among the churches about exactly which of these letters and books carried that authority, but after a few hundred years of debate, they settled on a collection of 27 that we now call the New Testament.

In other words, Christianity didn't start with these books (NT). They developed over time. We take them as authoritative because of their connection to Jesus' apostles and the apostles' disciples.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
in i conversation i had with someone, he said that he is not a 'bible alone' christian, which i assume most christians are of that category unless my assumption is wrong.

so i want to ask, if you are not a 'bible alone' christian and you follow other teaching aside the ones of the bible, did christians record the teachings/sayings of Jesus (as) as muslims did with Muhammed (sa). can someone post any relevant material concerning this?
Thomas is a great place to begin.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
in i conversation i had with someone, he said that he is not a 'bible alone' christian, which i assume most christians are of that category unless my assumption is wrong.

so i want to ask, if you are not a 'bible alone' christian and you follow other teaching aside the ones of the bible, did christians record the teachings/sayings of Jesus (as) as muslims did with Muhammed (sa). can someone post any relevant material concerning this?

According to some (most?) widely-accepted theories of the origins of the Bible, the Gospel authors partly drew on a collection of the sayings of Jesus that has since been lost, referred to as "Q" by scholars.

There are other sources that purport to record the sayings of Jesus. For instance, there's the non-canonical "Gospel of Thomas", which is a collection of sayings and proverbs attributed to Jesus. However, I don't believe that any Christian denomination considers it to be authoritative. Many would probably consider it to be heretical.
 

Perfect Circle

Just Browsing
in i conversation i had with someone, he said that he is not a 'bible alone' christian, which i assume most christians are of that category unless my assumption is wrong.

so i want to ask, if you are not a 'bible alone' christian and you follow other teaching aside the ones of the bible, did christians record the teachings/sayings of Jesus (as) as muslims did with Muhammed (sa). can someone post any relevant material concerning this?

The teachings and sayings weren't recorded in exactly the same way as Muhammed's were. There was no body of men who recollected what Jesus said then voted on it (which is how I understand the Qu'ran was written). Instead, individual men (none of which were likely a primary source) wrote histories about his life and teachings. These are recorded in the first four books of the new testament.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Do you know what the Orthodox or Catholic Church positions are on Thomas?
I absolutely do. However, they're not sola scritpura churches, are they! for the sola scriptura churches, Thomas is clearly outside the canon. (In fact, it lies outside the Roman canon, too).
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The teachings and sayings weren't recorded in exactly the same way as Muhammed's were. There was no body of men who recollected what Jesus said then voted on it (which is how I understand the Qu'ran was written). Instead, individual men (none of which were likely a primary source) wrote histories about his life and teachings. These are recorded in the first four books of the new testament.
Given the fact that the Jesus Event took place long before Mohammed, it's not surprising at all that no one wrote down what Jesus said. It was a largely illiterate and oral culture.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I absolutely do. However, they're not sola scritpura churches, are they! for the sola scriptura churches, Thomas is clearly outside the canon. (In fact, it lies outside the Roman canon, too).
Sure - I realize that Thomas is outside the canon. I just wondered whether any of them have given guidance about whether it's doctrinally correct vs. heretical, or whether they consider it to be likely genuine (even if not canonical) or a forgery.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Sure - I realize that Thomas is outside the canon. I just wondered whether any of them have given guidance about whether it's doctrinally correct vs. heretical, or whether they consider it to be likely genuine (even if not canonical) or a forgery.
Wow. I don't know. There are a lot of multiple attestations between Thomas and the other gospels. I should think that, while not canon, it would not be heretical. But I really don't know. I know that the Anglicans don't consider it "heretical." It's obviously "genuine."
 

Perfect Circle

Just Browsing
Given the fact that the Jesus Event took place long before Mohammed, it's not surprising at all that no one wrote down what Jesus said. It was a largely illiterate and oral culture.

Really? Were literacy rates higher in 7th-8th century rural Arabia than they were in 1st century Palestine? I would think that Roman controlled metropolitan region would have been the more literate of the two.

Btw, I'm not contesting your point, I just honestly don't know.
 

Rain Drops

Member
And you assume that you are a bible based christian?
Jesus said: “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn others, or it will all come back against you." Luke 6:37


As a Christian, you should not be judgmental to other people. That includes what they believe in. In my own point of view, there negative kinds of Christian people:

1) Those that are non bible alone christians
2) Close minded christians- Those christians who do not accept facts though these are proven already(that may include the theory of evolution).
3) Judgmental christians- Those who judge others not only through appearance but also judge an individual or a group because they do not belong to their sect.
4) Greedy Christians- Those christians who say that their religion is the only way to salvation and that the other sects teach false doctrines.
5) Materialistic christians
6) "Words only " christians- those christians who do worship and prays a lot, but lacks "christianity" in action.

Now, where are you from those group of christians?


A true, genuine christian should not fall under those groups.

Hi Lawrence, what happens when you ASSUME? You make an *** out of You and me.

For one you assume I called myself a bible based christian? Wrong

You assume I think non-bible based strict christians are bad? Wrong

Then you call me judgemental - wrong.

I actually think it's a positive thing that the Catholic Church does not rely solely on the bible.

I think you jumped to conclusions mate.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Really? Were literacy rates higher in 7th-8th century rural Arabia than they were in 1st century Palestine? I would think that Roman controlled metropolitan region would have been the more literate of the two.

Btw, I'm not contesting your point, I just honestly don't know.
Actually, I imagine that they were higher 500 years later. We do know that 1st century Palestine was mostly illiterate. When they did write, they did so on wax tablets.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And you assume that you are a bible based christian?
Jesus said: “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn others, or it will all come back against you." Luke 6:37


As a Christian, you should not be judgmental to other people. That includes what they believe in. In my own point of view, there negative kinds of Christian people:

1) Those that are non bible alone christians
2) Close minded christians- Those christians who do not accept facts though these are proven already(that may include the theory of evolution).
3) Judgmental christians- Those who judge others not only through appearance but also judge an individual or a group because they do not belong to their sect.
4) Greedy Christians- Those christians who say that their religion is the only way to salvation and that the other sects teach false doctrines.
5) Materialistic christians
6) "Words only " christians- those christians who do worship and prays a lot, but lacks "christianity" in action.

Now, where are you from those group of christians?


A true, genuine christian should not fall under those groups.
Sooo... let me get this straight. The majority of Christians, including the Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans, as well as some others, are negative Christians? And you know this simply because they do not subscribe to sola scriptura???

And, worse, a "real" Christian wouldn't be one of these? But you're not under 3, yourself???

:facepalm:
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Most Christians I know believe in a direct, personal relationship with God. The Bible is not particularly important to that relationship, except in terms of understanding the history and moral teachings of their church.

I would guess that where there is disagreement between the "voice of god" as it speaks to / through one's heart and the "voice of god" as allegedly recorded in the texts that make up the Bible, the majority of Christians I know would consider their own heart to be a clearer, more reliable communicator of God's will.

Granted, there's a very noisy contingent of idolators of the Bible south of the border who would happily disagree with everything I just said. I don't know any of those ones though.
 

Renji

Well-Known Member
Sooo... let me get this straight. The majority of Christians, including the Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans, as well as some others, are negative Christians? And you know this simply because they do not subscribe to sola scriptura???

And, worse, a "real" Christian wouldn't be one of these? But you're not under 3, yourself???

:facepalm:

That's funny, I didn't say something about the believers of sola s., whatever.:jester5: I just say that we should not judge people especially about his/ her religion. Reread the post! I didn't even mention anything that is connected with the RC, anglicans, etc, etc. And also, those things that I've mentioned pertains to an INDIVIDUAL or SMALL GROUPS of PEOPLE, not on a whole sect. For example, you say that I'm a judgmental christian,and it so happen that I'm a christian myself, it doesn't mean that all christians are like that. People have different attitudes even if they belong on the same group of faith.
 
Last edited:
Top