What did Jesus teach his Apostles that is not in the Bible?

[changed]

Originally Posted by rameumptom

This is only partially correct.

It is fully correct in the confines of our own personal scripture study. What we learn from the Spirit is meant for us personally, usually not to be shared over the pulpit. Yes, our understanding deepens over time but the Spirit 100% will guide you to understand those principles which are correct and advantageous for our personal growth and development.


9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God - to us personaly, and to the church as a whole.

13 If there is anything hvirtuous, ilovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. - no matter where they come from.

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler asks me to explain and justify the soundness of belief that Scripture is the ultimate authority. The belief in Scripture alone having final authority comes out of the Protestant break from Catholicism. Seeing the corruption that power bread in the Catholic Church, Protestants determined that it would be preferable to rely on the objective truth of Scripture, rather than the whims of men. And indeed, Paul's letter to Timothy informs us that Scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness--the Scriptures proclaim themselves to be authoritative.

While wikipedia is an uneven source, there does seem to be a good overview at the following: Sola scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

Traveler asks me to explain and justify the soundness of belief that Scripture is the ultimate authority. The belief in Scripture alone having final authority comes out of the Protestant break from Catholicism. Seeing the corruption that power bread in the Catholic Church, Protestants determined that it would be preferable to rely on the objective truth of Scripture, rather than the whims of men. And indeed, Paul's letter to Timothy informs us that Scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness--the Scriptures proclaim themselves to be authoritative.

While wikipedia is an uneven source, there does seem to be a good overview at the following: Sola scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In many ways your opinions are helpful and interesting. Without the Protestant efforts to reform there most likely could not have been a "restoration". Thus the LDS believe in the Protestant reformation - we see it as inspired of G-d.

I think the point where we part in doctrine is my personal belief that the scriptures are a means of inspiration and enlightenment but have little if any authority as to the doctrines and ordinances of salvation. That by themselves, scriptures are no more authority now than they were for the Scribes and Pharisees at the time of Jesus; that claimed authority was by scripture and not by someone sent in G-d’s name.

In the parable of the L-rd’s vineyard Jesus tells us that servants sent by the L-rd have authority but ultimate authority is in Jesus Christ. Thus I believe the first authority is Jesus, and the second is those that Jesus has chosen and ordained in a direct line. Then comes scripture.

The problem I have with scripture as the first authority is many fold. But most important is that hand man has had in changing what scripture we have and determining what scripture is canon by tradition.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler, if nothing else, these discussions inform me that LDS spirituality cannot be pigeon-holed. You have Catholic, evangelical, even Baptist elements. At times I hear pentecostal undertones, and, on one thread, we're discussing Gnostic elements. And yet, it is none of these. A colleague of mine (Catholic) describes your theology as "Beautiful." He doesn't agree with it, but he does see the appeal.

[changed]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

Traveler asks me to explain and justify the soundness of belief that Scripture is the ultimate authority. The belief in Scripture alone having final authority comes out of the Protestant break from Catholicism. Seeing the corruption that power bread in the Catholic Church, Protestants determined that it would be preferable to rely on the objective truth of Scripture, rather than the whims of men. And indeed, Paul's letter to Timothy informs us that Scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness--the Scriptures proclaim themselves to be authoritative.

While wikipedia is an uneven source, there does seem to be a good overview at the following: Sola scriptura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I love the scriptures, but they are a means to an end, not the end.

Revelation, guidance by the Spirit, is the only way one can come to a testimony of Jesus...

from the "scriptures" ...
3 ...no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 12:3)

from: LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Prayer and Personal Revelation

God will hear our prayers and speak to us today, just as He spoke to the ancient Saints.
“Seeing that the Lord has never given the world to understand by anything heretofore revealed that he had ceased forever to speak to his creatures when sought unto in a proper manner, why should it be thought a thing incredible that he should be pleased to speak again in these last days for their salvation?

“Perhaps you may be surprised at this assertion, that I should say for the salvation of his creatures in these last days, since we have already in our possession a vast volume of his word which he has previously given. But you will admit that the word spoken to Noah was not sufficient for Abraham, or it was not required of Abraham to leave the land of his nativity and seek an inheritance in a strange country upon the word spoken to Noah, but for himself he obtained promises at the hand of the Lord and walked in that perfection that he was called the friend of God. Isaac, the promised seed, was not required to rest his hope upon the promises made to his father, Abraham, but was privileged with the assurance of his approbation in the sight of heaven by the direct voice of the Lord to him.

“If one man can live upon the revelations given to another, might not I with propriety ask, why the necessity, then, of the Lord speaking to Isaac as he did, as is recorded in the 26th chapter of Genesis? For the Lord there repeats, or rather promises again, to perform the oath which he had previously sworn unto Abraham. And why this repetition to Isaac? Why was not the first promise as sure for Isaac as it was for Abraham? Was not Isaac Abraham’s son? And could he not place implicit confidence in the word of his father as being a man of God? Perhaps you may say that he was a very peculiar man and different from men in these last days; consequently, the Lord favored him with blessings peculiar and different, as he was different from men in this age. I admit that he was a peculiar man and was not only peculiarly blessed, but greatly blessed. But all the peculiarity that I can discover in the man, or all the difference between him and men in this age, is that he was more holy and more perfect before God and came to him with a purer heart and more faith than men in this day.

“The same might be said on the subject of Jacob’s history. Why was it that the Lord spake to him concerning the same promise after he had made it once to Abraham and renewed it to Isaac? Why could not Jacob rest contented upon the word spoken to his fathers?

“When the time of the promise drew nigh for the deliverance of the children of Israel from the land of Egypt, why was it necessary that the Lord should begin to speak to them? The promise or word to Abraham was that his seed should serve in bondage and be afflicted four hundred years, and after that they should come out with great substance. Why did they not rely upon this promise and, when they had remained in Egypt in bondage four hundred years, come out without waiting for further revelation, but act entirely upon the promise given to Abraham that they should come out? …

“… I may believe that Enoch walked with God. I may believe that Abraham communed with God and conversed with angels. I may believe that Isaac obtained a renewal of the covenant made to Abraham by the direct voice of the Lord. I may believe that Jacob conversed with holy angels and heard the word of his Maker, that he wrestled with the angel until he prevailed and obtained a blessing. I may believe that Elijah was taken to heaven in a chariot of fire with fiery horses. I may believe that the saints saw the Lord and conversed with him face to face after his resurrection. I may believe that the Hebrew church came to Mount Zion and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. I may believe that they looked into eternity and saw the Judge of all, and Jesus, the Mediator of the new covenant.

“But will all this purchase an assurance for me, or waft me to the regions of eternal day with my garments spotless, pure, and white? Or, must I not rather obtain for myself, by my own faith and diligence in keeping the commandments of the Lord, an assurance of salvation for myself? And have I not an equal privilege with the ancient saints? And will not the Lord hear my prayers and listen to my cries as soon as he ever did to theirs if I come to him in the manner they did?”5

Can "one man can live upon the revelations given to another"?
I think the answer is clear. No, they can't. No borrowed light, no borrowed testimony.

we must "obtain for ourself, by our own faith and diligence in keeping the commandments of the Lord, an assurance of salvation"

[prisonchaplain]

And yet, all scripture is given by inspiration from God, profitable for instruction, rebuking...and yet we're told to study to show ourselves approved, workers who rightly divide the word of God, and yet the Hebrews were commanded to post scriptures on the doorposts, and to discuss them frequently...and yet the longest chapter in the Bible (Psalm 119) is dedicated to the value of the scriptures. Without insight from the Holy Spirit, scripture is just words...but with that direction...tremendous power!

[changed]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

And yet, all scripture is given by inspiration from God, profitable for instruction, rebuking...and yet we're told to study to show ourselves approved, workers who rightly divide the word of God, and yet the Hebrews were commanded to post scriptures on the doorposts, and to discuss them frequently...and yet the longest chapter in the Bible (Psalm 119) is dedicated to the value of the scriptures. Without insight from the Holy Spirit, scripture is just words...but with that direction...tremendous power!

Yes, tremendous power in the scriptures, but you will never gain a testimony from simply reading scriptures.

As the scriptures tell us, a testimony is only gained through the Holy Ghost.

The Spirit is where you learn the truth of all things.

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my cname, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(New Testament | John 14:26)

The scriptures do not teach all things, all truths. the HG does.

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
(New Testament | John 16:13)

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of bwater and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
(New Testament | John 3:5)

[prisonchaplain]

Changed, I went back and bolded the last sentence of my last post--we do agree on the necessity of the Holy Spirit's direction--after all, He is the inspirer of scripture.

[changed]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

Changed, I went back and bolded the last sentence of my last post--we do agree on the necessity of the Holy Spirit's direction--after all, He is the inspirer of scripture.

I know, wasn't trying to argue, I just love posting scriptures .

[rameumptom]

I think PC's view of scripture isn't far off from LDS view. Scripture is the foundation for our spiritual connection. Yet the Spirit guides us on how to understand the scripture.

The main difference is that LDS also believe in continuing revelation and that the canon is not finished. We have revelation guide us daily, even though most of it does not make it into the official scriptures. But then, PC believes that is true in his life, also.

The issue isn't whether one or the other receives inspiration. Both definitely do. The issue is what level of inspiration each receives.