I fell away in confusion years ago. Then I heard Dr NTW give a talk at Calvin College in Grand Rapids and the way he could sight read his Greek New Testament to explain Paul’s letter to the Galatians was so authoritative that the Holy Spirit moved me to church where I was catechized and confirmed in 2022 and me in my 50’s! I’ve been reading NTW and the Bible ever since that Damascus road experience. Tomorrow my wife and I are coming to Canterbury for my 56th birthday where I can finally worship in person after listening to their wonderful evensongs broadcast every day on TH-cam. Signed, Steve in Grand Rapids PS: Jesus is Lord!
Thank you for your wise insight. I was a junior officer in the RAF, and now regularly preach with a firm conviction that each individual story needs to be grounded in the big story arc of scripture. Reflecting on your video, I feel like I should have started each day in the RAF by retelling the story of the Battle of Britain to my flight, and just telling them to go do likewise.
Thank you for sharing your reflections. There’s something powerful in how stories connect us emotionally and help us live out the principles they convey. What a blessing your preaching must be! --NTW Online Team
@@Folkstone1957Suppose we accept the statements of God to be truths about our universe, although they may not be self evident. Let’s take this statement about a kingdom divided: “And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.” (Mark 3:23-26, KJV) Now it may be the case that Satan’s kingdom is undivided, but in Revelation we notice Satan is a seven headed dragon, whereas Christ Jesus is a seven eyed one headed lamb. Now see 2nd Corinthians 11, regarding the headship principle. Although there are many heads, one head is over them all, creating an undivided group with a well defined hierarchy. If the dragon has seven heads, he is divided and doomed to fall. Now let’s revisit the headship principle, if a wife believes she has equal authority with her husband, that family will fall apart! If a husband is not submissive to the leadership of his head Christ, he will fall away from the Church. Now there are other leadership roles within the body of Christ, which we must also take seriously, stated elsewhere in the epistles, but I think this example is sufficient in getting my point across.
If we don’t meet the Bible on its own terms and get the authority from it in the proper way it can quickly become a tool of the enemy. Thank you for helping us look at it through the proper lens and focus on the proper narrative
That was well constructed and covered things well in a really good order . It's not easy to do, for most people. Thanks for the video Tom Wright. God bless.
David, we are grateful for your encouragement. We are grateful for our TH-cam community and the sponsers who make it possible for us to be so accessible. --NTW Online Team
3 cheers and more for Bishop NT Wright! Bibkical inerrancy shouts John McArthur while silencing the voice of women. Must always read Scripture through the lens of Christ.
Provenance of the canon of scripture is important, and it was determined by the Church’s leaders, heirs to the apostolic commission. God lives, and continues to reveal, unlimited by the human bounds. The slavery to biblical literalism arises from the worship of the words rather than the Word.
Thank you for the many beautiful and enlightening theological distinctions you make for us. How the authority of Scripture is rooted in the person of Jesus instead of the literal authors. This is such a keen insight.
And we are grateful for your keen insights, Pat. We appreciate our TH-cam community and the donors and supporters who make it possible! --NTW Online Team
When we are assured of God's acceptance, security, and significance we can reflect his love in ways that change the world. Blessings to you as you overcome "in the power of his might." --NTW Online Team
If we are images of God, our greatest need would be to know who He is. How else could we change the noun 'image' into a verb? God reveals Himself in and through the text. In a sense He has embodied Himself in its pages. If that's true there is and can be no conflict between the authority of scripture and the authority of God Himself.
Perhaps Dr Wright the most appropriate term for the scriptures is not authority, but witness of the Son of God. Because of what Jesus Christ said that the scriptures bear witness to his person. Sometimes I claim that the Bible is not the Word of God, and they tear their clothes. But logic tells me that the Word of God is Jesus Christ, and that the surface where the Bible is written is matter and therefore creation. How then can books be God? It seems nonsense to me. We can affirm without a doubt that the scripture testifies of the Lord, and that the appropriate term is witness.
Another irony which comes to mind is this: appeals to Sola Scriptura such as calling the Bible the word of God and saying that it is the final and complete authority are also appeals to Church authority. The canonization process, which was accomplished over a rather long period of time, proves that the same Holy Spirit who was at work in the apostles was at work in the Church fathers who compiled, selected and promulgated the New Testament. Even more, the Old Testament canon might not have been perfected until the Christian era. For these and other reasons I don't affirm Sola Scriptura. Instead I like to say the Bible is inspired, inerrant, authoritative, and sufficient, but not plenary. That is --the Bible is entirely comprised of the word of God and we cannot do away with it in the slightest measure, but the word of God is not entirely contained in the Bible! Thanks to a great man of God, N T Wright for articulating these truths.
NTW only vaguely referenced scripture to make his point. In other words he could have said whatever he wanted. That's why the word has to be authoritative. Jesus said, "have you not read" Mt 12:3; 19:4; 21:42; 22:31. Genesis, Satan told Eve, "has God really said". (Genesis 3.1-6) Satan's goal is to bring doubt into what God has said. To properly understand scripture, it requires work. Proper interpretation is needed for a Christian life. The Catholics believe you need a magistrate to properly interpret/understand. Protestants often refer to Creeds and use that to interpret scripture.(Notice a pattern of redefining what is required to understand scripture). Simply read the Bible, it can be understood. the Bible interprets itself, and reading one part of the Bible can help you understand another part. The nature of the Bible is that it is the word of God, but it is both divine and human. As a human book, it is written for a specific audience by a specific person. There are language, time, geographical and culture gaps that must be bridged. However as a divine book, it is without error, because God is also the author. 2 Peter 1.21 "For no prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men being moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." This also makes the Bible authoritative as John Calvin and Martin Luther understood. Not only do we have to bridge the gap to the original author, but we also have to be mindful of our own problems. We have a Natural Blindness (Romans 8.7-8), a Satanic Blindness (II Corinthians 4.3-4 and Ephesians 2.2), and a Fleshly Blindness (II Corinthians 2.14-16, I Corinthians 3.1). It's a good question to ask that authority is found in God alone so why is the Bible authoritative? The answer is simple. The Bible is "God's word." Matthew 7:24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and does them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock." To anyone who reads these messages, I feal compelled to pull in one last piece of information to help those who believe understand. My mission here was to spread the truth, because this video was full of half-truths. The first two references that the first reply to this message gave shows in the Bible Jesus explaining parables and scriptures to his disciples. It was then concluded that because Jesus had to explain, then the Bible cannot possibly have authority over the Church. This is utterly incorrect. Christ was the word of God. He was both the “Son of God” and the “son of man”. Likewise, the Bible is both divine and human. [Jhn 1:14 LSB] 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. We know Christ by knowing the Bible because the Bible reflects the image of Christ. If I bear witness of myself my testimony is not true, but I have not rather I have testified of the word of God.[Luk 21:17 LSB] 17 and you will be hated by all because of My name. I previously quoted and explained 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, and John 3:3 which clearly says that, until we are born again, we cannot see the kingdom of God and we cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. If Christ work had not yet been finished on the Cross, then His disciples were still unbelievers. Everyone was an unbeliever in some area of their life. Some believed more than others but nonetheless everyone fell under Romans 3:23 and still do. [Rom 3:23 LSB] 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. It was necessary for Jesus to explain, because no one understood. It wasn’t until He was resurrected that they understood. [Jhn 2:19, 21-22 LSB] 19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this sanctuary, and in three days I will raise it up." ... 21 But He was speaking about the sanctuary of His body. 22 So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken. The last reference on the first reply really shows a lack of a willingness to understand. The reference was Acts 8:30-31 which had the eunuch answer Philip. He answered with how could he understand scripture unless someone guides him. Even reading this plainly anyone could catch how this was misused. [Act 8:35 LSB] 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he proclaimed the good news about Jesus to him. This means that 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, and John 3:3 still apply. The eunuch had not yet heard the good news of the gospel and was still in unbelief. The worst part is that @NTW Online liked the comment. Make no mistake, these people are like Nicodemus, a pharisee who was a teacher yet did not understand the very basic things proclaimed in scripture. [Jhn 3:9-12 LSB] 9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, "How can these things be?" 10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things? 11 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and bear witness of what we have seen, and you do not accept our witness. 12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? These people need our prayers, not our listening. They will bring you to destruction. I pray that you will listen and believe, so that you may be saved.
I am not a Christian but have read most of the Bible. Your claim that "the Bible interprets itself" is not only unbiblical but incoherent. Someone interprets the Bible. They may interpret it well or poorly, but the text doesn't interpret itself. We see this in action within the Bible. Jesus tells the parable of the wheat and the weeds (Matt. 13:24-30). At St. Peter's request, he then interpreted (explained) the parable's meaning (vv. 36-43). The parable didn't interpret itself; Jesus interpreted it. Similarly, on the road to Emmaus, Jesus walks with two of his disciples and, "beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27). St. Luke doesn't say the Old Testament interpreted itself to the disciples. Jesus interpreted it. Likewise, St. Philip was led by the Holy Spirit to an Ethiopian eunuch. "So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, 'Do you understand what you are reading?' And he said, 'How can I, unless someone guides me?' And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him" (Acts 8:30-31). Notably, the man didn't reply, "Of course I understand it! The book of Isaiah is self-interpreting." Instead, someone (this time, Philip) interpreted its meaning.
@@truthseeker5489 Its encouraging to hear that you have been reading the Bible, and I hope you continue. However you must understand that you must be born again.(2 Corinthians 4:3-4 LSB) [3] And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, [4] in whose case the god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. Jesus said, you must be born again. (John 3:3 LSB) [3] Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” until then we are born again, we are at enmity against Him and cannot understand. Such was the nature of his disciples before the finished work of Christ on the cross. Because we have a Natural and Satanic Blindness. Those who have born again and have not yet seen Christ still have a Fleshly Blindness. That is why it requires work to understand. You must recognize that you are a sinner and repent, turn from sin and follow Christ.
@@truthseeker5489TH-cam's algorithm is making it impossible for me to give you a complete answer. The statement the Bible interprets itself is in reference to the fact that one can read scripture and understand through careful study. That he doesn't need a magistrate, creeds or commentaries to understand. I hope that clarifies. If you remove the statement from the context of the comment it's no longer clear in that regard.
@@noahfeltenberger6930 I do not intend to be snarky or puffed up with pride, but the proposition you have set forth is patently absurd. Christians worldwide read and carefully study the Bible, yet disagree on its meaning. Let’s take a real-life situation involving two Christians (i.e., Ones Pentecostal and a Southern Baptist). They both believe that the Bible is God’s inspired word. They both carefully study the Bible daily. Before reading the Bible, they both pray to the Holy Spirit. They both believe the Holy Spirit leads them to a proper interpretation. After they read the Bible, they come to opposing points of view. The Ones Pentecostal Christian determines that in order to be saved, a person must receive the Holy Spirit, and the way a person knows they have received the Holy Spirit is if they can speak in tongues. If a person is unable to speak in tongues, they cannot be saved. Also, there is no trinity. People who have been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not validly baptized. They have only gotten wet. When a person is baptized, they must be baptized in Jesus’ name only. The Southern Baptist Christian believes a person is saved by professing faith in Jesus Christ. This is accomplished when a person recites the “Sinner’s Prayer” with a sincere heart. After doing so, they are eternally secure, and it is impossible for them to forfeit their salvation regardless of how sinful they are. They can commit grave sins and still go to heaven because they have a one-way ticket. Regarding baptism, it is a good ordinance to follow but unnecessary because it is only symbolic. A person does it publicly to profess that they have already been saved (i.e., believer’s baptism). Only people that have reached the age of reason can be baptized. If a person decides to be baptized, it must be done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (because God is a trinity of persons). My questions for you are as follows: Do you personally agree with the beliefs of either of these two Christians? Is it acceptable for these Christians to believe radically different doctrines as long as they have used the Bible as their only source of faith and practice? Can either of these Christians accuse the other of having incorrect biblical interpretations? Can either of these Christians impose their interpretation(s) as superior to the other?
"As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him."
Much as he makes his argument his failure to engage the texts that equate the authority of scripture with the authority of God but brashes them aside keeps me in my conviction that scripture is inerrant, infallible, sufficient thus authoritative.
OK, this may or may not get an answer from Dr. N. T. Wright.... but in discussions on manuscripts... I can accept and do the fact and idea of older may be better and more right! However in making Bibles, WHY are we tied to the Greek New Testament that was created by Wescott & Hort? I can accept a Bible that uses "older" manuscripts, bun NOT any that use that Greek New Testament.... In all that I know, at age 81, is that THEIR WORK is not a TRUE or RIGHT work!! WHY did? WHY do? theologians since then put so much faith into THEIR WORK, and over the number of Greek manuscripts that we NOW HAVE!! A BIBLE that does NOT have their GREEK in it would BE a better, more right, and perhaps a more true Bible!!
@@truthseeker5489 The devil is always in the details, and people love to argue. But try reading the bible from cover to cover for yourself, if you haven't already, you might be pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to understand, for the most part.
@@2Snakes If the Bible is easy to understand, why are there so many different Christian denominations that disagree about its meaning? Where I live, we have Church Street. It got that name because that street has close to a dozen different Christian churches. Each says it believes in the Bible but disagrees on Christian belief and practice. The people who attend these churches do not worship together or have any perceptible interaction with one another. Something is obviously wrong.
@@truthseeker5489you hit the nail on the head. We are human and don't humble ourselves before God, but rather bend God into who we want Him to be. As a Christian it seems odd to think that Jesus established so many churches, the one thing that is comforting, that Jesus is the way, truth and the life, if people truly seek him out they will decrease and he will increase in them
You have to read and understand the Bibel as an epic, philosophical construct going back as far as mankind can remember (Giglamesch - epos) teaching you ethics through parables ! You must not see and use it as a history book (take for example the birthdate of Jesus)
If the king sends a scribe to write a decree for him, who has the authority? The letter or the king? The king and the letter, there is no contradiction. And as for the stories, they also teach you what to do and what not to do. So I don't see the point.
The issue is that reduces the histories (and stories) to mere allegories. This paves the way for superficial interpretations that are primarily about getting people to do one thing or another rather than fundamentally changing what they believe about God, what they believe about themselves, and how they view Creation. It, also, tends to overlook their historical and cultural contexts resulting in a text meaning whatever it is that the reader wants.
There is no complication to the authority of the Bible. The Church (Body of Christ) which was responsible for compiling the Sacred Books, is the authority.
The Bible is definitely from God. However, Jesus did not say at His Ascension, "Remember to read the book I'm leaving you." He did say, that the Church would be his authority on earth (Matthew). Books don't have authority; people do. "You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church." There's the authority. It's really quite simple and straightforward.
This is absurd, a man made problem. This is intellectual childishness. There is no controversy, and it is not complicated. There is an authoritative God that rules and regulates His people through His written word. Those stories that do not seem authoritative to you find their authority in their validity. When you or anyone else questions the historical accuracy of the text , the authority of the scripture is the bible is right and you are wrong.
@@byrondickens 2 Corinthians 11:3 KJV But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the SIMPLICITY that is in Christ.
I fell away in confusion years ago. Then I heard Dr NTW give a talk at Calvin College in Grand Rapids and the way he could sight read his Greek New Testament to explain Paul’s letter to the Galatians was so authoritative that the Holy Spirit moved me to church where I was catechized and confirmed in 2022 and me in my 50’s! I’ve been reading NTW and the Bible ever since that Damascus road experience. Tomorrow my wife and I are coming to Canterbury for my 56th birthday where I can finally worship in person after listening to their wonderful evensongs broadcast every day on TH-cam. Signed, Steve in Grand Rapids PS: Jesus is Lord!
What a journey and a beautiful way to celebrate your special day. Happy Birthday to you, Steve!
--NTW Online Team
Thank you for your wise insight. I was a junior officer in the RAF, and now regularly preach with a firm conviction that each individual story needs to be grounded in the big story arc of scripture. Reflecting on your video, I feel like I should have started each day in the RAF by retelling the story of the Battle of Britain to my flight, and just telling them to go do likewise.
Thank you for sharing your reflections. There’s something powerful in how stories connect us emotionally and help us live out the principles they convey. What a blessing your preaching must be!
--NTW Online Team
Another wonderful teaching session that is of immense value to today’s church. ✔️
Thank you, Tom.
I would encourage people to simply read it from cover-to-cover. You can get a pretty good handle on it.
I view Holy Scripture as Truth in the Mathematical axiomatic sense from where deeper truths about it and the creation can be discovered.
Yes! A library of truth.
What is “Mathematical axiomatic” mean ?
@@Folkstone1957Suppose we accept the statements of God to be truths about our universe, although they may not be self evident. Let’s take this statement about a kingdom divided:
“And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.” (Mark 3:23-26, KJV)
Now it may be the case that Satan’s kingdom is undivided, but in Revelation we notice Satan is a seven headed dragon, whereas Christ Jesus is a seven eyed one headed lamb. Now see 2nd Corinthians 11, regarding the headship principle. Although there are many heads, one head is over them all, creating an undivided group with a well defined hierarchy. If the dragon has seven heads, he is divided and doomed to fall. Now let’s revisit the headship principle, if a wife believes she has equal authority with her husband, that family will fall apart! If a husband is not submissive to the leadership of his head Christ, he will fall away from the Church. Now there are other leadership roles within the body of Christ, which we must also take seriously, stated elsewhere in the epistles, but I think this example is sufficient in getting my point across.
If we don’t meet the Bible on its own terms and get the authority from it in the proper way it can quickly become a tool of the enemy. Thank you for helping us look at it through the proper lens and focus on the proper narrative
Thank you for the work you are doing to do the same!
--NTW Online Team
That was well constructed and covered things well in a really good order . It's not easy to do, for most people. Thanks for the video Tom Wright. God bless.
David, we are grateful for your encouragement. We are grateful for our TH-cam community and the sponsers who make it possible for us to be so accessible.
--NTW Online Team
3 cheers and more for Bishop NT Wright! Bibkical inerrancy shouts John McArthur while silencing the voice of women. Must always read Scripture through the lens of Christ.
@@Bible33AD What do you mean ?
Provenance of the canon of scripture is important, and it was determined by the Church’s leaders, heirs to the apostolic commission. God lives, and continues to reveal, unlimited by the human bounds. The slavery to biblical literalism arises from the worship of the words rather than the Word.
Very profound teaching, thank you🕊🙏🏻🫶
Thank you for your comment. We are grateful for our supporters who keep our channel on and freely accessible to our community!
--NTW Online Team
Boa tarde! na paz do senhor
eu gostei muito do esclarescimento
muito obrigada Deus contimue abencoando sua vida.
We're grateful to hear this! Thank you for your encouragement!
--NTW Online Team
Thank you for the many beautiful and enlightening theological distinctions you make for us. How the authority of Scripture is rooted in the person of Jesus instead of the literal authors. This is such a keen insight.
And we are grateful for your keen insights, Pat. We appreciate our TH-cam community and the donors and supporters who make it possible!
--NTW Online Team
Authority redefined. To me it all seems to be about love and forgiveness. Extremely challenging- lifelong wrestling guaranteed
When we are assured of God's acceptance, security, and significance we can reflect his love in ways that change the world. Blessings to you as you overcome "in the power of his might."
--NTW Online Team
If we are images of God, our greatest need would be to know who He is. How else could we change the noun 'image' into a verb? God reveals Himself in and through the text. In a sense He has embodied Himself in its pages. If that's true there is and can be no conflict between the authority of scripture and the authority of God Himself.
Great thoughts, Michael! We appreciate your reflections.
--NTW Online Team
Perhaps Dr Wright the most appropriate term for the scriptures is not authority, but witness of the Son of God. Because of what Jesus Christ said that the scriptures bear witness to his person. Sometimes I claim that the Bible is not the Word of God, and they tear their clothes. But logic tells me that the Word of God is Jesus Christ, and that the surface where the Bible is written is matter and therefore creation. How then can books be God? It seems nonsense to me. We can affirm without a doubt that the scripture testifies of the Lord, and that the appropriate term is witness.
I think you’re on the right track. It also reads; ‘It’s suitable for reading, teaching, studying’ etc
Are you referring to the entire Bible or the NT ?
Another irony which comes to mind is this: appeals to Sola Scriptura such as calling the Bible the word of God and saying that it is the final and complete authority are also appeals to Church authority. The canonization process, which was accomplished over a rather long period of time, proves that the same Holy Spirit who was at work in the apostles was at work in the Church fathers who compiled, selected and promulgated the New Testament. Even more, the Old Testament canon might not have been perfected until the Christian era.
For these and other reasons I don't affirm Sola Scriptura. Instead I like to say the Bible is inspired, inerrant, authoritative, and sufficient, but not plenary. That is --the Bible is entirely comprised of the word of God and we cannot do away with it in the slightest measure, but the word of God is not entirely contained in the Bible!
Thanks to a great man of God, N T Wright for articulating these truths.
NTW only vaguely referenced scripture to make his point. In other words he could have said whatever he wanted. That's why the word has to be authoritative. Jesus said, "have you not read" Mt 12:3; 19:4; 21:42; 22:31. Genesis, Satan told Eve, "has God really said". (Genesis 3.1-6) Satan's goal is to bring doubt into what God has said. To properly understand scripture, it requires work. Proper interpretation is needed for a Christian life. The Catholics believe you need a magistrate to properly interpret/understand. Protestants often refer to Creeds and use that to interpret scripture.(Notice a pattern of redefining what is required to understand scripture). Simply read the Bible, it can be understood. the Bible interprets itself, and reading one part of the Bible can help you understand another part. The nature of the Bible is that it is the word of God, but it is both divine and human. As a human book, it is written for a specific audience by a specific person. There are language, time, geographical and culture gaps that must be bridged. However as a divine book, it is without error, because God is also the author. 2 Peter 1.21 "For no prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men being moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." This also makes the Bible authoritative as John Calvin and Martin Luther understood. Not only do we have to bridge the gap to the original author, but we also have to be mindful of our own problems. We have a Natural Blindness (Romans 8.7-8), a Satanic Blindness (II Corinthians 4.3-4 and Ephesians 2.2), and a Fleshly Blindness (II Corinthians 2.14-16, I Corinthians 3.1). It's a good question to ask that authority is found in God alone so why is the Bible authoritative? The answer is simple. The Bible is "God's word." Matthew 7:24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and does them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock."
To anyone who reads these messages, I feal compelled to pull in one last piece of information to help those who believe understand. My mission here was to spread the truth, because this video was full of half-truths. The first two references that the first reply to this message gave shows in the Bible Jesus explaining parables and scriptures to his disciples. It was then concluded that because Jesus had to explain, then the Bible cannot possibly have authority over the Church. This is utterly incorrect. Christ was the word of God. He was both the “Son of God” and the “son of man”. Likewise, the Bible is both divine and human. [Jhn 1:14 LSB] 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
We know Christ by knowing the Bible because the Bible reflects the image of Christ. If I bear witness of myself my testimony is not true, but I have not rather I have testified of the word of God.[Luk 21:17 LSB] 17 and you will be hated by all because of My name.
I previously quoted and explained 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, and John 3:3 which clearly says that, until we are born again, we cannot see the kingdom of God and we cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. If Christ work had not yet been finished on the Cross, then His disciples were still unbelievers. Everyone was an unbeliever in some area of their life. Some believed more than others but nonetheless everyone fell under Romans 3:23 and still do. [Rom 3:23 LSB] 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. It was necessary for Jesus to explain, because no one understood. It wasn’t until He was resurrected that they understood. [Jhn 2:19, 21-22 LSB] 19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this sanctuary, and in three days I will raise it up." ... 21 But He was speaking about the sanctuary of His body. 22 So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.
The last reference on the first reply really shows a lack of a willingness to understand. The reference was Acts 8:30-31 which had the eunuch answer Philip. He answered with how could he understand scripture unless someone guides him. Even reading this plainly anyone could catch how this was misused. [Act 8:35 LSB] 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he proclaimed the good news about Jesus to him. This means that 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, and John 3:3 still apply. The eunuch had not yet heard the good news of the gospel and was still in unbelief.
The worst part is that @NTW Online liked the comment. Make no mistake, these people are like Nicodemus, a pharisee who was a teacher yet did not understand the very basic things proclaimed in scripture. [Jhn 3:9-12 LSB] 9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, "How can these things be?" 10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things? 11 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and bear witness of what we have seen, and you do not accept our witness. 12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
These people need our prayers, not our listening.
They will bring you to destruction. I pray that you will listen and believe, so that you may be saved.
I am not a Christian but have read most of the Bible. Your claim that "the Bible interprets itself" is not only unbiblical but incoherent. Someone interprets the Bible. They may interpret it well or poorly, but the text doesn't interpret itself.
We see this in action within the Bible.
Jesus tells the parable of the wheat and the weeds (Matt. 13:24-30). At St. Peter's request, he then interpreted (explained) the parable's meaning (vv. 36-43). The parable didn't interpret itself; Jesus interpreted it.
Similarly, on the road to Emmaus, Jesus walks with two of his disciples and, "beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27). St. Luke doesn't say the Old Testament interpreted itself to the disciples. Jesus interpreted it.
Likewise, St. Philip was led by the Holy Spirit to an Ethiopian eunuch. "So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, 'Do you understand what you are reading?' And he said, 'How can I, unless someone guides me?' And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him" (Acts 8:30-31). Notably, the man didn't reply, "Of course I understand it! The book of Isaiah is self-interpreting." Instead, someone (this time, Philip) interpreted its meaning.
@@truthseeker5489 Its encouraging to hear that you have been reading the Bible, and I hope you continue. However you must understand that you must be born again.(2 Corinthians 4:3-4 LSB) [3] And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, [4] in whose case the god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. Jesus said, you must be born again. (John 3:3 LSB) [3] Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
until then we are born again, we are at enmity against Him and cannot understand. Such was the nature of his disciples before the finished work of Christ on the cross. Because we have a Natural and Satanic Blindness. Those who have born again and have not yet seen Christ still have a Fleshly Blindness. That is why it requires work to understand. You must recognize that you are a sinner and repent, turn from sin and follow Christ.
@@noahfeltenberger6930 What does any of that have to do with your unbiblical and incoherent claim that the Bible interprets itself?
@@truthseeker5489TH-cam's algorithm is making it impossible for me to give you a complete answer. The statement the Bible interprets itself is in reference to the fact that one can read scripture and understand through careful study. That he doesn't need a magistrate, creeds or commentaries to understand. I hope that clarifies. If you remove the statement from the context of the comment it's no longer clear in that regard.
@@noahfeltenberger6930 I do not intend to be snarky or puffed up with pride, but the proposition you have set forth is patently absurd. Christians worldwide read and carefully study the Bible, yet disagree on its meaning.
Let’s take a real-life situation involving two Christians (i.e., Ones Pentecostal and a Southern Baptist). They both believe that the Bible is God’s inspired word. They both carefully study the Bible daily. Before reading the Bible, they both pray to the Holy Spirit. They both believe the Holy Spirit leads them to a proper interpretation. After they read the Bible, they come to opposing points of view.
The Ones Pentecostal Christian determines that in order to be saved, a person must receive the Holy Spirit, and the way a person knows they have received the Holy Spirit is if they can speak in tongues. If a person is unable to speak in tongues, they cannot be saved. Also, there is no trinity. People who have been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not validly baptized. They have only gotten wet. When a person is baptized, they must be baptized in Jesus’ name only.
The Southern Baptist Christian believes a person is saved by professing faith in Jesus Christ. This is accomplished when a person recites the “Sinner’s Prayer” with a sincere heart. After doing so, they are eternally secure, and it is impossible for them to forfeit their salvation regardless of how sinful they are. They can commit grave sins and still go to heaven because they have a one-way ticket. Regarding baptism, it is a good ordinance to follow but unnecessary because it is only symbolic. A person does it publicly to profess that they have already been saved (i.e., believer’s baptism). Only people that have reached the age of reason can be baptized. If a person decides to be baptized, it must be done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (because God is a trinity of persons).
My questions for you are as follows:
Do you personally agree with the beliefs of either of these two Christians?
Is it acceptable for these Christians to believe radically different doctrines as long as they have used the Bible as their only source of faith and practice?
Can either of these Christians accuse the other of having incorrect biblical interpretations?
Can either of these Christians impose their interpretation(s) as superior to the other?
Is there a book Wright has written that covers this topic?
He has a book “Scripture and the authority of God”
Yes! www.harpercollins.com/products/scripture-and-the-authority-of-god-n-t-wright?variant=32122567229474
--NTW Online Team
"As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him."
So enriching, thank You, prof. Wright. Blessings from South Africa in Spring.
And to you in South Africa, blessings! We're glad you're here.
--NTW Online Team
God in Christ reconciled the world unto himself. God incarnate. That is how Jesus has all authority.
Jesus… the Word made flesh.
Much as he makes his argument his failure to engage the texts that equate the authority of scripture with the authority of God but brashes them aside keeps me in my conviction that scripture is inerrant, infallible, sufficient thus authoritative.
@@ThembaMaselane This is encouraging. Thank you 🙏
OK, this may or may not get an answer from Dr. N. T. Wright.... but in discussions on manuscripts... I can accept and do the fact and idea of older may be better and more right! However in making Bibles, WHY are we tied to the Greek New Testament that was created by Wescott & Hort? I can accept a Bible that uses "older" manuscripts, bun NOT any that use that Greek New Testament.... In all that I know, at age 81, is that THEIR WORK is not a TRUE or RIGHT work!! WHY did? WHY do? theologians since then put so much faith into THEIR WORK, and over the number of Greek manuscripts that we NOW HAVE!! A BIBLE that does NOT have their GREEK in it would BE a better, more right, and perhaps a more true Bible!!
Bible is clear not complicated.
If the Bible is clear, why are Christians divided on its meaning?
@@truthseeker5489 The devil is always in the details, and people love to argue. But try reading the bible from cover to cover for yourself, if you haven't already, you might be pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to understand, for the most part.
@@2Snakes If the Bible is easy to understand, why are there so many different Christian denominations that disagree about its meaning? Where I live, we have Church Street. It got that name because that street has close to a dozen different Christian churches. Each says it believes in the Bible but disagrees on Christian belief and practice. The people who attend these churches do not worship together or have any perceptible interaction with one another. Something is obviously wrong.
@@truthseeker5489you hit the nail on the head. We are human and don't humble ourselves before God, but rather bend God into who we want Him to be. As a Christian it seems odd to think that Jesus established so many churches, the one thing that is comforting, that Jesus is the way, truth and the life, if people truly seek him out they will decrease and he will increase in them
You have to read and understand the Bibel as an epic, philosophical construct going back as far as mankind can remember (Giglamesch - epos)
teaching you ethics through parables ! You must not see and use it as a history book (take for example the birthdate of Jesus)
The Word of God (capital W) is Christ himself, paradoxically because the Bible says so!
If the king sends a scribe to write a decree for him, who has the authority? The letter or the king? The king and the letter, there is no contradiction. And as for the stories, they also teach you what to do and what not to do. So I don't see the point.
What would happen if the King sent a servant with an oral decree?
The issue is that reduces the histories (and stories) to mere allegories. This paves the way for superficial interpretations that are primarily about getting people to do one thing or another rather than fundamentally changing what they believe about God, what they believe about themselves, and how they view Creation. It, also, tends to overlook their historical and cultural contexts resulting in a text meaning whatever it is that the reader wants.
There is no complication to the authority of the Bible. The Church (Body of Christ) which was responsible for compiling the Sacred Books, is the authority.
The Bible is definitely from God. However, Jesus did not say at His Ascension, "Remember to read the book I'm leaving you." He did say, that the Church would be his authority on earth (Matthew). Books don't have authority; people do. "You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church." There's the authority. It's really quite simple and straightforward.
This is absurd, a man made problem. This is intellectual childishness. There is no controversy, and it is not complicated. There is an authoritative God that rules and regulates His people through His written word. Those stories that do not seem authoritative to you find their authority in their validity. When you or anyone else questions the historical accuracy of the text , the authority of the scripture is the bible is right and you are wrong.
Simple minds looking for simple answers....
@@byrondickens 2 Corinthians 11:3 KJV
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the SIMPLICITY that is in Christ.
Slippin' Tom...