What Is the Authority For a Disciple of Christ?

[Paidion]

What Is the Authority For a Disciple of Christ?

The word “μαθητης” translated as “disciple” comes from the verb “μανθανω“ which means “learn.” Here are a few verses from the gospels which contain this verb. In the first three, Jesus Himself uses the word:

1. But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance. (Matthew 9:13)

2.Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. (Matthew 11:29)

3.It is written in the prophets, ‘... and they shall all be taught by God.’ Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. (John 6:45)

4. About the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and taught. The Jews marveled at it, saying, "How is it that this man knows writings, when he has never learned?" (John 7:14,15)

Jesus said that in order to become His disciple, a person had to forsake all and follow Him (Luke 14:33). In other words, to take Christ's yoke upon one and learn from Him is a full time occupation. But one must first enter the Kingdom of God. A Kingdom consists of a king and his subjects. In the Kingdom of God, Christ is the King and His disciples are the subjects. To qualify, one must repent and be baptized according to John the Baptizer (Matt 3:11) and Peter (Acts 2:28). Jesus also preached repentance to qualify (Matt 4:17) as did Paul (Acts 17:30).

When we repent and have been baptized we enter the door of salvation. After that, as disciples of Christ, we learn from Him — learn what He taught about His Father, and learn what He taught about living righteously. He said that in order to enter the Kingdom one's righteousness had to exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt 5:20)

The Primary Sources of Knowledge of Christ's Life and Teachings
We learn from Christ primarily, by learning what He said from the primary documents of the Christian faith, the writings which the early Christians called “the memoirs of Christ” and which later became known as “the gospels.” To be a learner of Christ, one must not only learn what Christ told his disciples to do, but also to do them.
Jesus concluded his teachings on living righteously in Matthew 5,6, and 7 with these words:

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my father in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name, cast out demons in your name, and done many wonders in your name?’

And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock, but everyone who hears these sayings of mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand, and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. and great was its fall." (Matthew 7:21-17)

People who claim to learn from Christ directly, without needing to read the primary documents are on dangerous ground. For how do they know it is Christ from whom they are learning? How do they know it is not demons influencing them, or even their own thoughts. Some say, “Nothing but Christ could give make me feel like this!” Maybe not. But most likely the same or similar feelings could be evoked by beautiful music, beautiful scenery, or a first love. I am not denying direct, personal experience with Christ, but there must be some objective verification or we cannot be certain of the source. That verification is found in primary, secondary, and tertiary historical sources.


The accounts of the life and teachings of Christ found in the memoirs of Christ (the "gospels"), that is, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are the primary sources of information concerning the details of Christ's life, teachings, and death. Matthew and John were written by two of Christ's disciples (learners); Mark received his information from Peter, and Luke received his from Paul.

The Secondary Sources of Knowledge of Christ's Life and Teachings
The secondary sources of learning from Christ are the other writings of His apostles. Caution must be taken in our attempt to determine which writings actually are apostolic. For second century gnostics wrote documents to which they attached apostolic names. Examples of such forgeries are the gospel of Peter, the apocalypse of Peter, the gospel of Philip, and the gospel of Thomas. The early church made judgments as to which writings were apostolic. Some writings which are presently in our New Testament were debated as to their authenticity.
The Muratorian fragment (170 A.D.) does not mention James, 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.
Irenaeus (b.130 A.D.) did not mention or expressed doubt about Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation.
Origen (b185 A.D.) classed the following as disputed books: James, 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, and Jude
Eusebius of Caesaria (324 A.D.) classed the following as disputed books: James, 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.
Amphilocious of Iconium (380 A.D.) classed the following as disputed books: James, 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.
Even as late as 550 A.D., the report of Junilius did not mention 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.

So, as we see, it is perhaps impossible, or at least difficult to determine which New Testament writings are apostolic. But perhaps we can confidently affirm the following to be genuine apostolic writings, for they were considered apostolic beyond dispute in the early church: The gospel of Matthew, the gospel of John, I Peter, I John, and the 13 letters of Paul. One may also trust the gospels of Mark and Luke, and the Acts of the apostles, even though they are non-apostolic, for they were written by men who were instructed by the apostles. Peter instructed Mark, and Paul instructed Luke.

The Tertiary Sources of Knowledge of Christ's Life and Teachings
The tertiary sources of learning from Christ are the writings of those who learned from the apostles, including some who were established as overseers by the apostles. It is also difficult to establish which are genuine writings of these first overseers or persons who learned from the apostles, perhaps even more so than to establish which writings are apostolic.

An Alternative Authority For Faith and Conduct —The Bible
Many people accept the Bible as the authority in their life. They say that one can rely on this authority because it is the infallible Word of God. God dictated this Word, or at least inspired it so as to preserve it free from error. So it can be relied upon for all matters of faith and conduct. Many churches make some statement about acceptance of the Bible in their creeds or statements of faith.

The Problems With the Bible as the Authority
Which Bible? Which writings should be included in this infallible book? Whom can we trust to have made the correct decisions as to what should be included? If the Bible exclusively is inspired, how can we trust the church councils or whoever came up with the final list of writings to be included, to have made the correct choice?

Interestingly enough Athanasius (b 296 A.D.) came up with a list of writings for the New Testament which are identical to that which we have today in our Catholic and Protestant Bibles! He called his list “wells of salvation” and applied the words of Revelation 22:18,19 to his list, that if any one added to that list God would add to him the plagues described in Revelation, and that if any one took away any books from his list, God would take away his share in the tree of life and of the holy city.

So could we say that God inspired Athanasius to select the correct list of inspired writings?
If so, we will have to include Baruch in the Old Testament as Athanasius did. We will also have to agree that there is inspiration outside the Bible — for how else could Athanasius choose exactly the inspired books to comprise his list.

The Bible Contains Errors
Let's face it. The Bible is not free from error. For example, the author of the book of Jude wrote, "It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” (Jude 14,15)

This is clearly a quote from the Book of Enoch 1:9

And behold! He comes with ten thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all,
and to destroy all the ungodly, and to convict all flesh all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

It is certain that the historic Enoch, the seventh from Adam, did not write the Book of Enoch from which the author of Jude quotes. Of course it is always possible for those who hold to an infallible Bible, to explain away every apparent contradiction. One attempt was to say that the historic Enoch said these things in prophecy rather than writing them, and that it was not Jude who took the quote from the Book of Enoch, but the writer of the Book of Enoch who took the quote from Jude. But that argument has disappeared with the discovery of the Book of Enoch dating from about 300 B.C. Another attempt is to say that Jude quoted what the historic Enoch said, not from what is written in the Book of Enoch — that this was made known to Jude by revelation. However, it was usual in recording a direct quote from the writing of a prophet to say that the prophet "spoke" the words. (Matthew 3:3; John 1:23; Acts 3:22; Acts 8:34). Indeed, I cannot find a single direct quote in which the NT writer affirmed that the author "wrote" the words. There is one incident recorded in which the Sadducees spoke of Moses writing something for them (an indirect quote, Mark 12:19; Luke 30:28).

The position of placing one's whole trust in the Bible for the basis of one's conduct and hope of life, and holding that it is inerrant has been called “bibliolatry”. In this system, the Bible takes the place of Jesus Christ as one's authority in matters of faith and conduct. Anything that takes the place of Christ is antichrist (lit. “instead of Christ”).

Even Jesus addressed the matter of the Jews looking to the Scriptures as the source of lasting life instead of to Him. He said to them:

You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have lasting life, and it is they which bear witness concerning me, and you don't want to come to me in order to have life. (John 5:39,40)

What about the "Old Testament"?
Because the disciple accepts the teachings of Christ, His apostles, and those whom His apostles taught, he also accepts their interpretation and/or application of the Old Testament writings, even if they don't appear to be the original intent.

In summary, the Lord, Jesus Christ, is the sole authority for His disciples in all matters. However, one should not rely only on one's personal experience with Christ. For one may at times be hearing voices other than that of Christ, or one may only be thinking one's own thoughts while imagining them to be Christ speaking to one.

The objective sources for knowledge of the life and teachings of Christ are:

1. First, the memoirs of Christ (or the four “gospels”) — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
2. Secondly, the writings of Christ's apostles.
3. Thirdly, the writings of those who were taught by the apostles.

I see the primary sources as having precedence, the secondary next in line, and the tertiary last. My reason for making this distinction is the uncertainty connected with the secondary and tertiary sources.

The above is not intended as a comprehensive explanation of my position, but it will perhaps serve as an introduction of my belief as to the Christian's authority for his life of discipleship — his master, Jesus Christ.

[steve]

Which Bible? Which writings should be included in this infallible book? Whom can we trust to have made the correct decisions as to what should be included? If the Bible exclusively is inspired, how can we trust the church councils or whoever came up with the final list of writings to be included, to have made the correct choice?

There is no need to rely on inspired "lists" of books. The books written by inspired prophets and chosen apostles carry divine authority, due to their authorship—not due to any later person's recognizing them.

The prophetic books are no problem to identify. Moses and David were both recognized as prophets, and their writings, along with the writings of the other canonical prophets, were endorsed by Jesus Himself and His apostles. The historical books and Solomon's wisdom literature were apparently also viewed as reliable by Jesus and the apostles, whether inspired or not. If any of the latter were not "inspired" it would change little, in terms of their usefulness, so long as they are truthful.

The New Testament books were all (with the possible exception of Hebrews and Jude) written either by apostles or by those so regularly associated with them so closely as to carry apostolic approval. As for Hebrews and Jude, the former was very Pauline in cast, and was written by an associate of Timothy's (13:23)—and was thus within Paul's "circle." Its acceptance in the Pauline community (even, at one time, being thought to have been one of his own epistles) suggests that it did not stray in its teaching far from things they thought he might have taught himself. Jude's canonicity was long disputed, and (in my judgment) that dispute should not be considered t be decisively settled.

So could we say that God inspired Athanasius to select the correct list of inspired writings?

I certainly would not! I do not recognize the a priori inspiration of any man or council—unless he is a genuine prophet. If I were to disagree with any or all of the canonical councils, I could still, upon my own research and judgment, recognize the divine authority of all but a handful of disputed books. My convictions about no significant theological question rests upon the contents of any such books.

The Bible Contains Errors
Let's face it. The Bible is not free from error. For example, the author of the book of Jude wrote, "It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” (Jude 14,15)

Two responses:

First, the defending the canonicity of Jude is not a matter of great importance. Its canonicity was doubted by the earliest church fathers, and the book contains nothing, of significance, that is unique to it (that is, nothing which could not be established by appeal to undisputed books)—unless it be its endorsement of the Book of Enoch!

Second, I am not sure that Jude contains a mistake. While I do not accept the canonicity of Enoch, there is no reason to insist that Jude did either. You gave a couple of proffered explanations that fundamentalists could present to vindicate Jude's us of Enoch, but you left out the most important and obvious one: Jude didn't believe that Enoch wrote the book bearing his name any more than his readers did (or than we do—I have to except Ken Huffman, a.k.a. "priestly1", who does, I think, accept the inspiration of Enoch, and who may chime in here in its defense, if I do not misjudge the man).

Jude did cite "Enoch, the seventh from Adam," which might indicate that he was referring to the historical Enoch. However, this appellation is exactly the self-designation used by the author of the book, and, not knowing the real author's name, Jude may have used his "assumed" name—possibly with a wink and a nod.

If this is so, then neither Jude, nor his readers, believed that the historical Enoch wrote the words he quotes. Rather, as I might, in preaching a sermon, mention how Christian and Hopeful, when in doubting castle, used the key of promise to escape, this would not mean that I believed The Pilgrim's Progress to be a true and historical account, nor that I expect my listeners to think so. Paul quoted Greek philosophers and ancient hymns to make his theological points, without suggesting that he believed them to be inspired. Jude could do the same without opening himself to the charge that he was making a mistake.

[verbatim]

What Is the Authority For a Disciple of Christ?
Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Amo 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Isa 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Isa 48:17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.

There are no contradiction in the doctrine of God. If God contradicts Himself, He's not no more than I am or no more than you are, for He can contradict Himself. The Word's there, but It's hid from the eyes of the wise and prudent.
That's why someone says that Matthew 28:19, where: "Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost"; Acts 2:38 said, "Repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus."...?... they're contradictory... It isn't a contradictory

Before one can teach or baptized you must able to know if who is Lord Jesus that you preached because he says in John 8 :19 I don’t know you , if you know me you will know my Father also because I come from my Father's name John 5:43. You must know if what name excellent Jesus hath by inheritance obtained. Hebrew 1:4 and teach it to them.
Everybody that's ever baptized has to be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost. And if you're not baptized using the Name of Jesus Christ, you're not baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost. You're baptized in some titles that pertains to a Name. If that is--isn't the right revelation, then the Bible would be wrong when It went ahead, and everybody baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ. But if the Bible baptized, every one of the apostles all down through the age baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ after Jesus commissioned them to baptize them in the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Ghost, then the Bible absolutely contradicts Itself. But if you look at it, it isn't. They did just what He said: Not titles, but name. So there's no contradiction.
Jesus said in Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.So, when he say, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6 it means that Jesus is the life that dwelt in you so, He is the king and your soul is the follower. He also teaches us; While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. John 12:36 and In him was life; and the life was the light of men. John 1:4

When we repent and have been baptized we enter the door of salvation. After that, as disciples of Christ, we learn from Him — learn what He taught about His Father, and learn what He taught about living righteously. He said that in order to enter the Kingdom one's righteousness had to exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt 5:20)

The Primary Sources of Knowledge of Christ's Life and Teachings

Joshua 1:8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

The Bible Contains Errors
Let's face it. The Bible is not free from error.

I did not consider the Scripture as erroneous but like in God’s creation he created darkness and light, different kind of beast and subtle beast yet when He saw it He said; very good and it may be even comparable to the parable of the Sower and the good seed Mat 13:24-28 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have lasting life, and it is they which bear witness concerning me, and you don't want to come to me in order to have life. (John 5:39,40)

1Jn 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

The above is not intended to criticize or as dissension of Paidion position but an explanation of my knowledge and statement of belief to Lord Jesus Christ.

[Paidion]

The prophetic books are no problem to identify. Moses and David were both recognized as prophets, and their writings, along with the writings of the other canonical prophets, were endorsed by Jesus Himself and His apostles. The historical books and Solomon's wisdom literature were apparently also viewed as reliable by Jesus and the apostles, whether inspired or not.

Was it the WRITINGS of Moses, David, and the other prophets which Jesus and the apostles endorsed? Or was it Moses, David, and the other prophets THEMSELVES, whom Jesus and the apostles recognized as men of God? Yes, Jesus and the apostles QUOTED from the books of Moses and the psalms of David, but that doesn't necessarily imply that they endorsed all that was written there.

Perhaps the essential question is not whether or not Jesus endorsed the aforementioned writings but rather “Did Jesus endorse all the LAWS recorded in the books of Moses?”

I discuss further the matter of the Laws of the Israelites in the following thread:

http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=4105