Why does the Bible have authority?

[MaxGrit]

I would like to ask you a Simple question, maybe you've heard it before. The Bible is the primary source of Christian knowledge, some Christians take it literally, others don't, some pick and choose.
But what gives it its authority?
It seems to me that the authority of the Bible is given by itself, which makes no sense to me. It says it's the word of God, therefore it is? I don't understand how it is given more weight than other religious texts from other religions.
Does Bible have a weight in our life?

It's probably one of the biggest scandals in the history of Christianity, the lie that the Bible is a rule book and a source of authority. Not only does the Bible never give itself this role, but historically, sola scripture proves itself a product of authority, not an authority itself. Jesus said he would build a Church, not a book. Jesus invested his authority in a living church, full of fallible people, not in a book. It's by this authority that the Catholic Church determined what the Bible is, what books would be included or excluded from the official Christian canon in the councils of Rome and Hippo late in the 4th century.

Sola Scripture was a lie, formed by a mentally ill renegade from Christianity named Martin Luther. He is proof that errors in doctrine are not harmless, but create reverberating consequences that afflict humanity for generations to come. In Christianity, there is no higher authority than the Apostolic Synods of the Catholic and Orthodox Church.

RCC doctrines doesn't lead to salvation.

 

[g5000]

The Bible was the basis for monarchs in Europe to claim absolute authority as their divine right.

Who decided God was wrong about that?

NYC shows up again to prove what an ignoramus he is.

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

But that's okay. Nobody expects more from you.

I take it you have never heard of the Holy Roman Empire. Or of that little dispute between King Henry VIII and the Roman Catholic Church...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

dear, its called the Theory of 2 Swords. Jesus challenged the power of the liberal Roman State and forever weakened the power of govt in favor of the individual.

He did no such, which is why nearly all Jews rejected him.

so Jesus supported the size and policies of Rome?? See why we say a liberal will be slow?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The Bible is God's word, He is the authority

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

dear, its called the Theory of 2 Swords. Jesus challenged the power of the liberal Roman State and forever weakened the power of govt in favor of the individual.

He did no such, which is why nearly all Jews rejected him.

so Jesus supported the size and policies of Rome?? See why we say a liberal will be slow?

Jesus told the Jews to serve what mattered, the Kingdom of God.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Her level of ignorance simply amazes me.

so without Jesus, Rome would have preached the 10 Commandments anyway? Dear, they count civilization from the birth of Christ for a reason. the liberal is 100% stupid

 

[TheOldSchool]

Nothing like America exists in Biblical teachings

too stupid as always. The Bible established the notion of individual liberty at a time when humanity was enslaved by liberal govt. Today America represents individual liberty more than any other significant place in human history.

The notion of individual liberty was around looooong before the bible.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The Bible is God's word, He is the authority

No, the Bible is man saying this is what God said, which he did not.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

dear, its called the Theory of 2 Swords. Jesus challenged the power of the liberal Roman State and forever weakened the power of govt in favor of the individual.

He did no such, which is why nearly all Jews rejected him.

so Jesus supported the size and policies of Rome?? See why we say a liberal will be slow?

Jesus told the Jews to serve what mattered, the Kingdom of God.

so Jesus supported the size and policies of Rome?? See why we say a liberal will be slow?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nothing like America exists in Biblical teachings

too stupid as always. The Bible established the notion of individual liberty at a time when humanity was enslaved by liberal govt. Today America represents individual liberty more than any other significant place in human history.

The notion of individual liberty was around looooong before the bible.

too stupid, of course it was but it was not the basis of western civilization until Jesus. Catch on??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Bible is God's word, He is the authority

No, the Bible is man saying this is what God said, which he did not.

logicially it might appear that way but the world is not logical to man's goldfish sized brain. Your role is to thank God for the Western Civilization that Jesus created.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Her level of ignorance simply amazes me.

so without Jesus, Rome would have preached the 10 Commandments anyway? Dear, they count civilization from the birth of Christ for a reason. the liberal is 100% stupid

Rome didn't need the Ten Commandments, there are three versions BTW, and used Christians covered in pitch as human torches.

 

[koshergrl]

The

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

"After King John of England violated a number of ancient laws and customs, the country’s barons forced him to sign the Magna Carta (Great Charter) in 1215 at the small picturesque village of Runnymeade alongside the River Thames west of London.
"The document enumerates the church’s right to appoint its own clergy, bishops and archbishops following a bitter church-state row about who should be archbishop of Canterbury — the man appointed by King John or Pope Innocent III’s appointee, Stephen Langton."

British churches to celebrate Magna Carta s 800th birthday by reasserting its Christian heritage - Religion News Service

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

dear, its called the Theory of 2 Swords. Jesus challenged the power of the liberal Roman State and forever weakened the power of govt in favor of the individual.

He did no such, which is why nearly all Jews rejected him.

so Jesus supported the size and policies of Rome?? See why we say a liberal will be slow?

Jesus told the Jews to serve what mattered, the Kingdom of God.

dear we are not changing the subject to Jews

 

[Mr.Right]

Gods word has never been successfully discredited. It's historacal accuracy is 100% as well as its prophecies.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Rome didn't need the Ten Commandments.

no but humanity did and Jesus created civilization on earth by teaching them

 

[koshergrl]

though I know the know-nothing progressives that troll this site have no concept even of what the Magna Carta is, nor of it's significance, I feel compelled to share the information:

"The historical truth is that Magna Carta was not drafted by the barons, the barons didn’t initiate it at all, and that the Carta had a completely different ideological origin and political and legal intent than what our modern historians presume. Far from being a generally political or legal document, the Carta was a Christian document first, and then everything else.
"The falsity of the above historical narrative is revealed by a simple reading of the opening lines of the Carta itself:
"John, by the grace of God King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou, to his archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, foresters, sheriffs, stewards, servants, and to all his officials and loyal subjects, greeting.
"Know that before God, for the health of our soul and those of our ancestors and heirs, to the honour of God, the exaltation of the holy Church, and the better ordering of our kingdom, at the advice of our reverend fathers Stephen, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and cardinal of the holy Roman Church, Henry archbishop of Dublin, William bishop of London, Peter bishop of Winchester, Jocelin bishop of Bath and Glastonbury, Hugh bishop of Lincoln, Walter Bishop of Worcester, William bishop of Coventry, Benedict bishop of Rochester, Master Pandulf subdeacon and member of the papal household, Brother Aymeric. . . .
"Note carefully: The Magna Carta doesn’t start with barons, and doesn’t start with individual liberties. It doesn’t start with political considerations, and it doesn’t start with the issue of who holds what power. Magna Carta starts as a religious document, concerned with the “health of the soul” of the King, and with the “honour of God,” and with the “exaltation of the Holy Church.” In addition to that, the King acknowledges that the “advice” for signing the Carta comes from the bishops first, and then from the barons."

The Forgotten Clauses of the Magna Carta - The American Vision

 

[g5000]

The settlers who established themselves on the shores of New England all belonged to the more independent classes of their native country. Their union on the soil of America at once presented the singular phenomenon of a society containing neither lords nor common people, and we may almost say neither rich nor poor. These men possessed, in proportion to their number, a greater mass of intelligence than is to be found in any European nation of our own time. All, perhaps without a single exception, had received a good education, and many of them were known in Europe for their talents and their acquirements. The other colonies had been founded by adventurers without families; the immigrants of New England brought with them the best elements of order and morality; they landed on the desert coast accompanied by their wives and children. But what especially distinguished them from all others was the aim of their undertaking. They had not been obliged by necessity to leave their country; the social position they abandoned was one to be regretted, and their means of subsistence were certain. Nor did they cross the Atlantic to improve their situation or to increase their wealth; it was a purely intellectual craving that called them from the comforts of their former homes; and in facing the inevitable sufferings of exile their object was the triumph of an idea.

The immigrants, or, as they deservedly styled themselves, the Pilgrims, belonged to that English sect the austerity of whose principles had acquired for them the name of Puritans. Puritanism was not merely a religious doctrine, but corresponded in many points with the most absolute democratic and republican theories. It was this tendency that had aroused its most dangerous adversaries. Persecuted by the government of the mother country, and disgusted by the habits of a society which the rigor of their own principles condemned, the Puritans went forth to seek some rude and unfrequented part of the world where they could live according to their own opinions and worship God in freedom.

Tocqueville Book I Chapter 2


The South on the other hand...

The idea that mines of gold and silver are the sources of national wealth was at that time singularly prevalent in Europe; a fatal delusion, which has done more to impoverish the European nations who adopted it, and has cost more lives in America than the united influence of war and bad laws. The men sent to Virginia were seekers of gold, adventurers without resources and without character, whose turbulent and restless spirit endangered the infant colony and rendered its progress uncertain. Artisans and agriculturists arrived afterwards; and, although they were a more moral and orderly race of men, they were hardly in any respect above the level of the inferior classes in England. No lofty views, no spiritual conception, presided over the foundation of these new settlements. The colony was scarcely established when slavery was introduced; this was the capital fact which was to exercise an immense influence on the character, the laws, and the whole future of the South. Slavery, as I shall afterwards show, dishonors labor; it introduces idleness into society, and with idleness, ignorance and pride, luxury and distress. It enervates the powers of the mind and benumbs the activity of man. The influence of slavery, united to the English character, explains the manners and the social condition of the Southern states.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The

The Bible was the justification for LIMITING the absolute authority of the monarchy, and the eventual establishment of democracy.

Really?

Let's see your "credible source".

"After King John of England violated a number of ancient laws and customs, the country’s barons forced him to sign the Magna Carta (Great Charter) in 1215 at the small picturesque village of Runnymeade alongside the River Thames west of London.
"The document enumerates the church’s right to appoint its own clergy, bishops and archbishops following a bitter church-state row about who should be archbishop of Canterbury — the man appointed by King John or Pope Innocent III’s appointee, Stephen Langton."

British churches to celebrate Magna Carta s 800th birthday by reasserting its Christian heritage - Religion News Service

The Magna Carta OVERTURNED your Bible's "divine right of kings".

That is the exact opposite of what you claimed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't understand how it is given more weight than other religious texts from other religions.

thank God it is since the Bible is the basis of Western Civilization without which you would have Hitler Stalin Mao and ISIS.

Do you understand?

Do you understand the Bible is a significant portion of Western Civilization along with Judaism and Greco-Roman culturalism?

If you answer no, then you are too stupid to be commenting on message boards