When Scripture Ends

  1. jacharless profile image82
    jacharlessposted 4 years ago

    After a recent conversation, it occurred to me many people -believer and post~believing have made quite a fuss about the term and encompassed ideology regarding this thing called Scripture. Be it text used to defend, negate the other -else taunt both sides in mockery or ridicule.

    Sure, there have been centuries of doctrinal conditioning, unprecedented willing or forceful acceptance of the 'need' of scripture, to maintain self discipline or social order, legal development, and the making of scripture as the end-all be-all of unity with the universe, the things within and above them all direct communication with Creator.

    So, reflecting on this lead me -a former scripture thumper- but never a unbeliever- if anyone realized When (or if) Scripture Ends?

    First, what is scripture actually? Well, it has been given many terms and titles, but bottom of the barrel definition is this: scripture is textual or verbal reference, in the form of command, prophecy, story or song (poems too) - the keynotes necessary- to understand the reason, purpose and activation of 'salvation'. [I know that is a bit winded, so my apologies to the reader].
    In essence: scripture is a prelude to the fulfillment of what is written in those lines from Genesis to John the Baptist, and perhaps a little more.

    Scripture would then be the Prelude to the Testimony of Y`shua Moshiach. And we know all Testimony must have at least two or more witnesses to be considered genuine. Then proved valid or invalid by the work/result/outcome of the Testimony itself.

    In actuality, scripture would not include the work itself, as the work proves the Testimony and cannot be the testimony itself. In short, Y`shua cannot be scripture nor a witness confirming that scripture. He would be the Work, proved by two or three witnesses.

    It is interesting to note, the 1st Testimony was proved and witnessed by many, and one especially, the Spirit. Thus beginning a new or 2nd Testimony, but much different than the first. The 1st Testimony was written on paper, spoken of by the prophets, sung by the Psalmist, mused by the poet, contemplated by the wise and enforced by the law -and certainly the law makers.

    This first Testimony is agreed upon by most to have finished. Meaning completed and proved beyond a reason-able doubt. This then would mean the scripture is fulfilled, yes? If Yes, then in fact, all scripture regarding the first Testimony has ended.

    Point being [yup, finally got to it & hey, thanks for enjoying the ramble and noticing, grumbling about getting to the point already...] the last few thousand years has been nothing short of an unnecessary ritual of remember the past and attempting to recreate that past, today. It means, all the pro-con, i do, i did, i dont, i might, i could -has also been in vane.

    If in fact scripture has ended why won't folks move on to the 2nd Testimony?


  2. SandyMcCollum profile image87
    SandyMcCollumposted 4 years ago

    This is food for a great hub. Just sayin... wink

  3. jacharless profile image82
    jacharlessposted 4 years ago

    Hi Sandy,
    Have at it!
    I thought of pubbing this a while back, but got waylaid into working on something else. Jolted back to it, after engaging another topic. Much like HADD - Hubpages Article Deflection Disorder.