Where Did This Belief Come From?

[PureX]

There are people who like certain media (nowadays often films) and can quote every single line of it. So, what if the medium concerned is not just a movie but an authoritative text? And what if reciting this text by heart gives you high regard from your fellow believers? Wouldn't you strive for it even if it's not "mandatory"?

Yes, but the word "fan" comes from the word "fanatic".

It's common and normal that when we appreciate and identify with some form of artifice (text, film, song, theater, etc.) that we want to pursue and experience it in depth. And we may also tend to speak of it with others more than they are actually interested in hearing. But most of us understand the line between our enthusiasms and the interests and needs of others. And we would never pass judgment on them for not sharing in our enthusiasm.

Unless we become "fanatics".

 

[URAVIP2ME]

In the beginning of the chapter, we see that the context there was that Paul was coming into the synagogues to proselytize and attempting to make arguments from Jewish Scripture regarding Jesus:
"After Paul and Silas had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three sabbath days argued with them from the scriptures,"............. JWs are just one Christian group where this kind of thinking is common.............

Yes, ' fact checking ' as did the people of Acts of the Apostles 17:11.
When Jesus often said, " It is written..." Jesus was referring back to the old Hebrew Scriptures.
Jesus used logical reasoning on the OT as the basis for his teachings as do Jehovah's Witnesses - www.jw.org

 

[Left Coast]

Yes, ' fact checking ' as did the people of Acts of the Apostles 17:11.
When Jesus often said, " It is written..." Jesus was referring back to the old Hebrew Scriptures.
Jesus used logical reasoning on the OT as the basis for his teachings as do Jehovah's Witnesses - www.jw.org

But none of those passages indicate that this is required or that any belief we have must be written explicitly somewhere in the Bible.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

1) "Scripture" at that time was the Tanakh. There was no New Testament. 2) That something is useful does not make it mandatory.

Yes, and the Tanakh was useful to Jesus.
Jesus did Not make the old Constitution of the Mosaic Law mandatory starting with Pentecost.
The Tanakh was useful to Jesus because Jesus based his teachings by his logical reasoning on the old Hebrew Scriptures explaining and expounding them for us.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

But none of those passages indicate that this is required or that any belief we have must be written explicitly somewhere in the Bible.

I understand at John 17:17 that Jesus regarded Scripture as religious truth. ( thy Word is truth )
What Jesus taught has corresponding or parallel cross-reference verses or passages to the old Hebrew Scriptures.
Jesus did Not go beyond what is written.
On the other hand, (on purpose or by mistake ) some things got twisted.
For example: KJV, etc. translated the word Gehenna into English as: hell fire.
That wrongly put the flames in 'biblical hell'. Biblical hell is the temporary stone-cold grave for the sleeping dead.
Jesus and the OT agree ' sleep in death ' - John 11:14; Psalms 115:17; Isaiah 38:18; Ecclesiastes 9:5
Gehenna was just a garbage pit outside of Jerusalem where things were destroyed.
What the Bible really teaches is 'destruction for the wicked' (No roasting involved) Psalms 92:7; Psalms 104:35; Proverbs 2:21-22
This is why we are asked to ' repent ' or we could ' perish ' (be destroyed) - 2 Peter 3:9.

 

[Sirona]

I’m not sure in which direction this thread is supposed to go. Is this really about where the belief in “citing chapter and verse” came from or whether it is reasonable?

Where it came from: historically, when Protestants rejected the authority of the pope and considered the Bible as the only source of faith (sola scriptura)

Psychologically: attitude towards fathers / authority figures. Some dads are cordial and to others you are not allowed until you have completed all the chores that are on the chore list.

Religiously: Although Christianity is a scriptural religion, I don't think you're likely to find any explicit instruction anywhere to be able to cite a scripture for every little thing. Christianity (usually) is not a religion of law (God's punishment for breaking religious laws), but considers itself a religion of "love" for Jesus Christ. However, this is the twist, the expression of this love is the keeping of the commandments. So I think there’s a spectrum from legalistic to universalist depending on what the church is like.

Is this rule reasonable. No, but it is meant to give authority to the speaker, and in context, power.

I’m sure, there are even more aspects to consider. Can’t look into the OP’s mind but it would be regrettable if this thread had been solely started for the sake of Bible bashing.

 

[Left Coast]

I understand at John 17:17 that Jesus regarded Scripture as religious truth. ( thy Word is truth )

You're making an assumption that "God's Word" = "The Bible." Which the Bible does not say. And that passage does not say. That's a preconceived idea you're bringing to the passage when you read it.

Jesus did Not go beyond what is written.

That is manifestly not true. Read Matthew 5, "You have heard it said...but I say..." The whole reason there is a New Testament is because Christians felt more needed to be written beyond what was written already.

 

[Left Coast]

I’m not sure in which direction this thread is supposed to go. Is this really about where the belief in “citing chapter and verse” came from or whether it is reasonable?

Both.

I’m sure, there are even more aspects to consider. Can’t look into the OP’s mind but it would be regrettable if this thread had been solely started for the sake of Bible bashing.

If you consider any criticism of a viewpoint "bashing," I'm not sure what to say to you.

In reality, this thread isn't even a criticism of the Bible, it's a criticism of one form of epistemology that has emerged in some Christian circles, which I'm explicitly arguing is not in the Bible.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You're making an assumption that "God's Word" = "The Bible." Which the Bible does not say. And that passage does not say. That's a preconceived idea you're bringing to the passage when you read it.
That is manifestly not true. Read Matthew 5, "You have heard it said...but I say..." The whole reason there is a New Testament is because Christians felt more needed to be written beyond what was written already.

I was Not speaking about what was falsely 'rumored' at Matthew 5:43-44.
The people 'heard' hate your enemies, but that saying was never part of the OT. - Leviticus 19:18
The people ' heard ' wrongly from their false religious Pharisees, Not from Scripture.
Those false religious teachers went beyond what was written and Jesus was pointing that out.
Jesus could refer to what was written at Proverbs 25:21 to be good to your enemy. - Luke 6:27-28
So, yes, Jesus believed that God's Word (Scripture) is religious truth as Jesus said at John 17:17.

 

[Left Coast]

I was Not speaking about what was falsely 'rumored' at Matthew 5:43-44.
The people 'heard' hate your enemies, but that saying was never part of the OT. - Leviticus 19:18
The people ' heard ' wrongly from their false religious Pharisees, Not from Scripture.
Those false religious teachers went beyond what was written and Jesus was pointing that out.

Read earlier in the chapter. Jesus quotes commandments from the Torah, and expands them (ie goes beyond them).

Again, this is the entire point of the New Testament. Christians by definition went beyond what was written in the Tanakh.

Jesus could refer to what was written at Proverbs 25:21 to be good to your enemy. - Luke 6:27-28
So, yes, Jesus believed that God's Word (Scripture) is religious truth as Jesus said at John 17:17.

God's Word in John's Gospel is Jesus (John 1). Again, you are reading an interpetation into the text that it does not actually state.

 

[Mister Emu]

Does the Bible ever say that our beliefs must be written in the Bible? Must we be able to cite chapter and verse that explicitly says what we believe in order to justify that belief?

If you think so, please cite chapter and verse stating this.

There are no such verses. To the opposite, there are verses that say to hold on to what we have been taught whether it is by mouth or written word. We are told that it is the Church, not scripture, which is the pillar and foundation of the Truth. We are told that the works of Jesus Christ would fill more books than the world would hold.

 

[Vee]

Does the Bible ever say that our beliefs must be written in the Bible? Must we be able to cite chapter and verse that explicitly says what we believe in order to justify that belief?

If you think so, please cite chapter and verse stating this.

The bible says that “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3: 16-17).
I don't think it's necessary to memorize and quote every belief by heart. If I'm looking for a subject and I can't remember where it is I can always check the glossary.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Read earlier in the chapter. Jesus quotes commandments from the Torah, and expands them (ie goes beyond them).
Again, this is the entire point of the New Testament. Christians by definition went beyond what was written in the Tanakh.
God's Word in John's Gospel is Jesus (John 1). Again, you are reading an interpetation into the text that it does not actually state.

I find there is a difference between Jesus being 'God's Word '( spokesman) and the 'Word of God' aka Scripture.
Beyond the Torah or in harmony with it.

 

[Left Coast]

The bible says that “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3: 16-17).
I don't think it's necessary to memorize and quote every belief by heart. If I'm looking for a subject and I can't remember where it is I can always check the glossary.

Although it's true this passage says Scripture (which again, contextually meant the Tanakh) is beneficial for these things, it does not indicate it is exclusive in these tasks or that one's beliefs must be contained in their pages.

 

[Left Coast]

I find there is a difference between Jesus being 'God's Word '( spokesman) and the 'Word of God' aka Scripture.
Beyond the Torah or in harmony with it.

Again, the Gospel of John does not say that "the Word of God" = the Bible. That's something you're reading into the text that it never says.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Does the Bible ever say that our beliefs must be written in the Bible? Must we be able to cite chapter and verse that explicitly says what we believe in order to justify that belief?

If you think so, please cite chapter and verse stating this.

Well, Jesus quoted scripture to Satan. I think that that sets a pretty good precedent of where truth comes from. If not for scripture, most of us would know little about who Jesus was. Where else are we supposed to get this information?

 

[InChrist]

Does the Bible ever say that our beliefs must be written in the Bible? Must we be able to cite chapter and verse that explicitly says what we believe in order to justify that belief?

If you think so, please cite chapter and verse stating this.

When you say “our beliefs” , whose beliefs are you referring to? Do you mean the beliefs of Christians or anyones?

 

[Left Coast]

When you say “our beliefs” , whose beliefs are you referring to? Do you mean the beliefs of Christians or anyones?

Either/or.

 

[firedragon]

Does the Bible ever say that our beliefs must be written in the Bible? Must we be able to cite chapter and verse that explicitly says what we believe in order to justify that belief?

If you think so, please cite chapter and verse stating this.

So what you are informally saying is that since the Bible doesnt say the faith is based on scripture our faith can be not based on scripture?

 

[Left Coast]

So what you are informally saying is that since the Bible doesnt say the faith is based on scripture our faith can be not based on scripture?

No. What I'm saying is that the belief that our beliefs must be found in the Bible is not a belief that's in the Bible.