We all know that the Jewish Temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD, and that this was foretold by Jesus? Right? Christians, we all agree on this?
Okay: Here is my question: Where is the destruction of the Temple by the Romans recorded in the Bible?
Oooh oooh, Mr. Kotter, can I answer? The answer is: ITS NOT !!
Why? Because NOT EVERYTHING PERTAINING TO THE CHRISTIANS FAITH IS FOUNF IN THE BIBLE. "Sola Scriptura" is a false tradition of MEN which nullifies the word of God.
(Pretty good, eh?)
.
2007-12-18 08:16:18 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
TO "Averell A": Ahh, but you believe it, right? Even though its not in the Bible, right? Get my drift?
2007-12-18 08:21:50 · update #1
The doctrine of "sola scriptura" is not found in the bible.
Ironic, no? :)
2007-12-18 08:19:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Not really...that takes Sola Scriptura out of context...besides, history records the destruction of the Temple by Rome...the Jewish Historian Josephus recorded.
If you understand the time line of when the books (or letters) of the bible was written, then only Revelation was written after the destruction of the Temple, and John wrote that on the island of Patmos somewhere between 90-95 ad...Did he know about the destruction of the temple? Maybe, but that was not his focus...so the destruction of the Temple not recorded in the Bible is of no consequence.
Then again...The Trojan wars were not recorded there either...and they are just as much a part of the historical record as what the Romans did in 70ad.
Where you tripped up is assuming that the destruction of the Temple is a prophetic event and that everyone agrees....most of us do not agree.
2007-12-18 16:37:33 · answer #2 · answered by Mikey ~ The Defender of Myrth 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are correct. Jesus even told the disciples that there were many things he needed to teach them, but that they couldn't bear them at that time, so Jesus would send the Holy Spirit to speak the words of Jesus to them.
The "Wesleyan Quadrilateral" (not really invented by John Wesley, but made famous by him) states that we know God through Scripture, Reason, Tradition, and Experience.
To those stating that the Bible was written before the destruction of the Temple in 70CE: not quite. Apart from the letters of Paul, and probably the Gospel of Mark, much of the New Testament could possibly have been written after 70. No one knows exactly when any of the books of the Bible were written, but it is generally agreed that the New Testament books (apart from those mentioned) were written between 60 and 95CE.
.
2007-12-19 10:13:51 · answer #3 · answered by Stranger In The Night 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is silly. You make it sound as thought the teaching of 'sola Scriptura' means that Christians who hold to it believe only information found in the bible, as though we disbelieve every bit of information (including historical events not mentioned in the bible) that isn't recorded in scripture.
This is, however, not what the teaching of 'sola scriptura' was intended to mean. Those who formulated this teaching argued that Scripture alone has FINAL authority in matters of faith and life. This does not mean the scripture becomes the 'truth book' that contains all truths in it in a simplistic fashion.
Moreover, for Anabaptists, 'sola scriptura' came to mean that only scripture would organize and configure the reformation of the Church; not the insights of princes and the powerful, nor the man-made traditions that have no basis in scripture. Scripture alone, as interpreted by the believing community under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is that transforming agent that continues to reform the Church so that it bears closer witness to Christ who is its head.
2007-12-18 16:36:10 · answer #4 · answered by christian_mennonite_pacifist 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No record because the Bible was written BEFORE the destruction of 70 AD .
How could this be King James wasn't around till the 1500's
2007-12-18 16:22:56 · answer #5 · answered by King James 33 1/3% 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not bad.
But, many of the "Sola Scriptura" crowd would acknowledge that there are historical and scientific support for a lot of what we read in scripture. Indeed, the scripture has everything God wants us to know, but support and proof does come from other sources.
Your statement comes across as harsh and judgemental. One can make their point without all the "roughness".
Enjoy your day.
2007-12-18 16:23:21 · answer #6 · answered by TroothBTold 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No record because the Bible was written BEFORE the destruction of 70 AD.
The Bible alone is our standard for faith and practice. Any teaching that does not go against the Bible is OK. Not all unbiblical is anti-biblical.
I can't believe some people still believe the KJV is the original Bible.
2007-12-18 16:20:31 · answer #7 · answered by Averell A 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Uh, would it be because all the letters (except Revelation) were written before 70 AD?
Scripture is the word of God, therefore it cannot nullify itself.
Jesus said it well in Matt. 15:6, you annulled the command of God on account of your tradition.
2007-12-18 16:32:07 · answer #8 · answered by BrotherMichael 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Christian apex; text of Col. 3:17.
Pattern; word presides deed. (Starting in Genesis 1.
Catholics have an advantage here; Sirach 37:16.
2007-12-18 16:46:13 · answer #9 · answered by jefferyspringer57@sbcglobal.net 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretty good. After all, after the Bible is no longer reliable as a source of truth, after its validity has been crushed, where else can one turn but the real world? Even in the real world, truth can be manipulated.
2007-12-18 16:29:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋