A Biblical Defense of Bible Alone + The Anointing to Understand It

[Bible Highlighter]

Wait....Aren't you automatically appealing to an authority OUTSIDE of Scripture to reveal to you which books, letters, and epistles belong in the Canon and which do not?

Seems to me Sola Scriptura is an oxymoron.

Is an author of a book an outside authority to his own written work?

 

[Monk Brendan]

The quote in Revelation is about taking away from this writing, NOT the Bible as a whole.

The Bible gives NO LIST in its text about what books are scripture.

Finally, ST. Paul also said, "Keep the TRADITIONS you have been taught, whether by our word or our epistle."

 

[Neogaia777]

You think all wisdom is in the bible, and you can't get anymore from God because everything is there? pfft.

I still don't think i fully understand what sola scriptura is, i confess i did not study it well, but at simple eye, there is important stuff, specially regarding what God wants for us to do in our life, we can't get in the bible. Things not related to sins or doctrine, but are very vital for us to know. Gods plan for you etc.

It can be both or either/or, "if it is based on the truth of scripture" though, for that is how it is verified, and known as genuine and/or true or not...

God' plan in general for most lives is to have and keep and maintain and grow our faith, and to Love, the rest is just icing on the cake, so to speak... for our afterlife anyway, or as it applies to our salvation for the afterlife... but for here...? Or what we all must do to try and save "here", for that, there might be additional things and/or stuff, IDK...?

Sin destroys a nation or society or people...

God Bless!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't see how these disparate, disconnected ideas "defend" the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Section I affirms the value of Sacred Scripture (which I don't think anybody is arguing against) and Section II warns against doing a bunch of stuff that generally nobody is doing.

It's interesting because Sola Scriptura is allegedly this bulletproof, unassailably obvious doctrine and yet nobody can find a passage from Sacred Scripture saying words to the effect of "Sacred Scripture is the only source the faithful should use".

Typically, adherents of Sola Scriptura write War & Peace-length posts replete with flow charts and faulty logic arguing in circles about how wonderful Sacred Scripture is (which nobody questions) but never a decisive quote from Sacred Scripture (which the great majority of the Christian world questions).

Your funny. But humor does not chisel away the truth of what is revealed to us in Scripture. God also did not have to provide a lengthy Bible for us, but He did. It contains many truths to guide us into a right relationship with God.

Anyways, the Bible breathes as a whole and not from just a certain verse or two always.

 

[Neogaia777]

Is an author of a book an outside authority to his own written work?

Some might say Jesus was/is...? But did He really "change it"...? Not really, but published a "continuation" of it...

And sometimes it is hard to recognize a continuation of something, from a whole, brand new, and even what may seem to be a "different" something... When it is not, not really, but is a continuation of the original...

Question is, do "we" have the authority to do that, or does only "He" or only the author have the authority to do that...? And what about Him through us, does one have the authority to publish any kind of continuation to scripture if it/he does not in any way "contradict" scripture...?

Good question...?

God Bless!

 

[NBB]

Understanding Sola Scriptura

I have read all that, thanks very much for the link,

Now, i believe there is words of God that God can give today, specially to individuals about personal things, this needs to be in check with scripture of course because God does not contradict himself,

Is this ok with sola scriptura thinking?

Because i believe God saying something to a person, can be described as a word from God, and this not being in the bible, i don't think it aligns with the 'scripture alone is the only infallible source for life'

God can be our source of life. We should seek him a lot. And he is not going to contradict the bible

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The quote in Revelation is about taking away from this writing, NOT the Bible as a whole.

The Bible gives NO LIST in its text about what books are scripture.

Finally, ST. Paul also said, "Keep the TRADITIONS you have been taught, whether by our word or our epistle."

The traditions here are speaking about what would become the written Word of God both their words and the epistles. They would not take the chance on not writing something down that was important. They did not keep an oral tradition in addition to a written tradition. Nothing is mentioned of this oral tradition being passed down. Every knows of the story about the retelling a story by oral means alone. In time, the story becomes slightly different than from what it was before.

The Bible is the only book that confirms itsel as being divine in origin. There are so many evidences for the Bible being divine in origin that if God were to reveal all these evidences to a person, it would no doubt make the average person to drop to their knees immediately and or have them curled up into a ball drooling in some closet for a while.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The quote in Revelation is about taking away from this writing, NOT the Bible as a whole.

The Bible gives NO LIST in its text about what books are scripture.

Finally, ST. Paul also said, "Keep the TRADITIONS you have been taught, whether by our word or our epistle."

Here is a Blogger Article that shows God's Word is divine in origin:

Love Branch: Evidences for the Word of God

No other book is like the Word of God, friend.
Check out the evidences and prepare to have your mind explode.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Some might say Jesus was/is...? But did He really "change it"...? Not really, but published a "continuation" of it...

And sometimes it is hard to recognize a continuation of something, from a whole, brand new, and even what may seem to be a "different" something... When it is not, not really, but is a continuation of the original...

Question is, do "we" have the authority to do that, or does only "He" or only the author have the authority to do that...? And what about Him through us, does one have the authority to publish any kind of continuation to scripture if it/he does not in any way "contradict" scripture...?

Good question...?

God Bless!

Not sure what you are saying here, friend.
Are you saying that you are in support of Sola Scriptura?

 

[thecolorsblend]

But humor does not chisel away the truth of what is revealed to us in Scripture.

Nobody is saying otherwise. But you have not proved or in any way defended the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

God also did not have to provide a lengthy Bible for us, but He did.

Nobody is saying otherwise. But this does not prove or in any way defend the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

It contains many truths to guide us into a right relationship with God.

Nobody is saying otherwise. But this does not prove or in any way defend the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

Anyways, the Bible breathes as a whole and not from just a certain verse or two always.

Nobody is saying otherwise. But this does not prove or in any way defend the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

 

[Neogaia777]

Not sure what you are saying here, friend.
Are you saying that you are in support of Sola Scriptura?

I don't think most people rely on "the Bible alone" for "everything", but I believe the Bible is so very, very important, and that it must be the support or base or foundation, for everything we do, especially for and pertaining to the things of God...

Does that make any sense...?

God Bless!

 

[thecolorsblend]

The traditions here are speaking about what would become the written Word of God both their words and the epistles.

Citation needed.

They would not take the chance on not writing something down that was important.

Um, I don't think you understand what you're saying here.

In the modern world, the printed word carries a certain level of authority with it. But that was not the case with the ancient world. Back then, scholars, intellectuals and even the common man trusted the spoken word more than the printed word. And the rest for that is because a public speaker can be questioned and his credentials can be verified; the same cannot be said of the printed word.

This is one reason why St. Paul took a lot of flack for not being such a talented public speaker. His gift was the written word more than the spoken word.

All of this ignores the obvious. Universal literacy (to the degree that we have it even today) is a fairly recent thing. Before the 20th century, the vast majority of people were illiterate. It would've been self-defeating to rely exclusively on the written word as the single religious authority in a time and place when most people could neither read nor write.

They did not keep an oral tradition in addition to a written tradition. Nothing is mentioned of this oral tradition being passed down.

The Early Church made reference not only to Sacred Tradition in a general sense but also specifically that not every doctrine was codified in Sacred Scripture.

Every knows of the story about the retelling a story by oral means alone. In time, the story becomes slightly different than from what it was before.

That's the game of Telephone... in a day and age when most people can't remember more than 140 characters. It's also played one person at a time.

Oral religious teachings (which were common in ancient judaism and also early Christianity) were given to dozens or even hundreds of people, all of whom were culturally acclimated to listening to long readings and lectures.

The Bible is the only book that confirms itsel as being divine in origin.

As true as that may be, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

There are so many evidences for the Bible being divine in origin that if God were to reveal all these evidences to a person, it would no doubt make the average person to drop to their knees immediately and or have them curled up into a ball drooling in some closet for a while.

As true as that may be, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

 

[Tomm]

A Biblical Defense of Sola Scriptura!

Sola Scriptura is the position that you can trust Scripture and Scripture alone as your sole authority for your faith and life. That the revelation known as the Bible can be trusted as your final word of authority for knowing God, salvation, true love, right living, and truth. Now, while there may be other books, letters, or epistles mentioned in Scripture that we don't have currently, they are not a part of the cannon of God's Word today, for there is no other written texts or revelations that is needed besides the Bible for all spiritual matters. For the Bible is unlike any other book in human history. It is clearly a book that is divine in origin that is backed up by many evidences in Science and History.

Now, some might object and point out that you can't prove Sola Scriptura from Scripture because such a position wouldn't have existed until the close of Revelation because the apostles were still speaking and writing the Word of God. However, that is not Sola Scriptura, though. Sola Scriptura is putting your faith in the written Word of God and believing it is suffient for all matters concerning one's faith in God. But what about the spoken Word of God? Does that not conflict with Sola Scriptura? No. First, the spoken Word of God was confirmed by the written Word of God (Acts 17:11). Second, one truth (the Spoken Word of God) was not in conflict with another truth (i.e. the Written Word of God). They both breathed in harmony until one passed away. In other words, picture it in your mind that there are two branches or sticks. One branch represents the Spoken Word and the other branch represents the Written Word. Now imagine one of those branches starting to vanish away out of thin air until it is gone. Is the one branch that remains any different just because the other branch is gone? Yeah, but wouldn't Sola Scriptura only exist until after the close of Revelation with Revelation 22:18-19 because you can't add anymore words to God's Word? No. This is not an exclusive teaching within Scripture; For the Bible teaches elsewhere that we are not to add to the written Word of God, too (Deuteronomy 4:2) (Deuteronomy 12:32) (Proverbs 30:5-6).

Anyways, the purpose of this study is to provide passages to help the reader in possessing Scripture so that they can trust in one divinely inspired written revelation or book (i.e. the Bible) for all spiritual matters in regards to having love, faith, and salvation in Him.

Also, before we examine this study, it is important to note that there are 3 major Words spoken about within Scripture that are connected to one another. There is the:

(1) Living Word of God (Jesus),
(2) Spoken Word of God (Either from God or His people),
(3) Written Word of God (Scripture).

All three are perfect and will endure for forever.
All three are tied together and are always connected.

The Biblical Case for Sola Scriptura:

I. All Scripture is Profitable for Doctrine, Correction, Righteous Teaching.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

A. All Scripture is profitable:

(a) for doctrine, (because)
~ (1) Scripture is sufficient for eternal life (1 John 5:13).
(b) for correction (and)
(c) for instruction in righteousness,
(It is sufficient in righteous training because):
~ (1) Scripture brings about hope (faith). (Romans 15:4).
~ (2) Scripture can be hid within one's heart so as not to sin against God. (Psalm 119:11)

All Scripture is profitable so that the man of God:
(d) May be perfect.
(e) Completely furnished unto all good works.
~ (1) For speaking Scripture provides spiritual nutrition or life (Matthew 4:4)
~ (2) For Scripture brings about joy (1 John 1:4)
(In fact, one of the fruits of the Spirit is joy) (Galatians 5:22)
All Scripture is profitable so that the man of God may be perfect and complete unto all good works. For Scripture is profitable in (1) doctrine, (2) correction, and (3) training in righteousness. All three of these things are essential to a person's faith in God and will lead the man of God to beperfect and completeunto all good works. Not some good works. But all good works. No oral Words of God alone were ever mentioned to do such a thing for us currently or during the time the "Written Word of God" came into being. No "Spoken Word of God" was ever mentioned to make the man of God perfect and complete unto all good works in addition to Scripture. This shows us that Scripture and Scripture alone is sufficient in and of itself because it will lead the man of God unto perfection and being fully furnished unto every good work.

For man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of his mouth that is from God. This is to live spiritually. For it is how one's faith even begins. So we gain faith and a life with God. We gain spiritual nutrients from speaking God's Word, whereby we can grow spiritually so as to conform to the image of Christ in being perfect and to allow Christ to do every good work within us. For you are what you eat. For the seed of the Word took root within your heart when you first believed and it grows within you to bring forth much fruit. However, how can you believe or grow if there is no "Written Word of God" which is nailed down in written form for all to agree?​

II. Do Not Add or Take Away or Go Beyond What is Written:

A. Do Not Add or Take Away From God's Word:

Revelation 22:18-19
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

Before you say it, yes, I am aware that Revelation 22:18-19 is speaking in context of the book of Revelation. However, we have to think about this logically, though. If you can't add any words to the book of Revelation, then you can't add any words to the Bible, too. Why? Well, the book of Revelation is the end of the Bible. It is the close of the whole book known as the Bible. It is the end. This is why I believe Revelation 22:18-19 is prophetic in the fact that it has a secondary fulfillment of speaking about "this book" in reference to "Revelation" in being a part of the book known as the Bible. How so? Well, there are several passages that have a double fulfillment to them. Here is one them:

Hosea 11:1
"When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt."

First Fulfillment (That was in the Past):
Reference to the exodus of the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.

Secondary Fulfillment (That was in the Future):
Reference to the Love of God calling his Son back to the comparative safety in Egypt so that he might die for his people. Matthew 2:15 - "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son."
Also, in Revelation 2 and Revelation 3, Jesus gives His assessment of various churches. In these chapters, Jesus spoke of real churches that existed at the time when John written the book of Revelation, but also to the spiritual state of churches thru out time and today, too. For one of the churches is told to repent or they will go thru the tribulation. For obviously there has been Luke warm churches thru out history and today like the Laodician church.

Besides, there are hundreds of double fulfillment passages in the Bible. How so? Well, the "Typifications of Christ" in the Old Testament are essentially double fulfillment type passages (See this forum thread here to check them out). In fact, Jesus said, "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." (John 5:39). In other words, the OT Scriptures are a double fulfilment. For the Old Testament Scriptures spoke of the events of it's time and they also spoke about Jesus Christ, too; For Jesus said so Himself.

Also, consider the prophecy in the book of Daniel which was to seal up vision and prophecy versus the prophecy of the book of Revelation which is not sealed.
~ Daniel's End Times prophecy speaks of the events in Revelation. These prophecies of the End Times (that were in a book, i.e. scroll) were to be sealed up and closed (Daniel 12:4) because they were a far way off because Jesus still needed to come to save His people from their sins.

Revelation 22:10 mentions the spirit of prophecy that the book is open.
~ Now, the book is open whereby the things within Revelation (That Daniel also talks about) is exposed so that it will be fulfilled in bringing in the End with Christ's return.
For the entire book of Revelation is about the End Times leading up to Christ's return.
For the end of Revelation closes with Jesus saying,
"Surely I come quickly." (Revelation 22:20).

This means that we should be looking to Jesus return and not some new Revelation.
Paul said if we or an angel from heaven preach to you another gospel, let him be accursed (Galatians 1:8). It is strange that both the Mormon and the Muslim religion are founded on a revelation that comes from angels. Yet the Bible warns against this very thing.

In fact, Jesus Christ commanded that we as believers were to preach this gospel unto all the world (or all nations) until Christ's return.

Matthew 24:14
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

This is also what we see in Revelation. For this same gospel message was still going out to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people (That is still an ongoing process today).

Revelation 14:6
"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,"

In other words, God knew that the book of Revelation was going to be a part of the Bible. For surely God does not want us accepting new revelations or additional written works to add to the Bible like with the book of Mormon, the Koran, the added oral traditions of the RCC (Roman Catholic Church), and or the added writings of the Jehovah's Witnesses. For it is not a coincidence that this warning in Revelation 22 is at the close of our Bibles. In other words, the new reader (Who is unaware that the Bible is made up of 66 books) would understand that you are not to add or subtract from the book (i.e. the Bible) that they were reading. For God obviously intended Scripture to be compiled into one book known as the Bible. For Christians today do regard the Bible as one book, for it is published as one book and it is not generally published into 66 individual books or a 66 book volume set. There are no 66 individual old manuscripts in their original form anymore; And God does not exist in the past abiding with these old manuscripts. These manuscripts are dead and gone. For they were written in a language that is dead. All these things are in the past. However, our God is not a God who just exists in the past. Our God is present and ever active with His people today. For our God is not the God of the dead but of the living. He works with His people who are alive with the written Revelation known as the Bible. Adding any new words to that revelation would be adding to God's Holy written Word as it currently exists with His people who live today.
​

B. Warning Against Altering God's Word is Confirmed in Old Testament:

Forbidding in altering God's Word in Revelation 22:18-19 can also be seen in Deuteronomy 4:2 and Deuteronomy 12:32 which says not to add or take away from the words of God's commands. This was the written Word. The Law. God did not want His words being changed or altered in any way by adding or taking away from His words. In fact, if somebody were to try and destroy God's Word, we see that God would protect or preserve His Word. We see an example of this in Jeremiah 36:22-32where king Jehoiakim burns the scroll in a fire (i.e. to eliminate God's Word) and then later God has Jeremiah re-create another roll that says the same thing. In other words, the written Word could not be destroyed by fire, just as the Living Word cannot be destroyed by fire. For the fourth who was in the fiery furnace with Daniel's friends was the Son of God (Daniel 3:25). For even when Moses had broken or shattered the tablets of stone that had the direct hand written Word of God (i.e. the Ten Commandments) on it (Exodus 32:19), the Lord our God had hand written them down on tablets of stone again (Exodus 34:1). For the Word of God cannot be broken (John 10:35). For Jesus said, "Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35). Meaning, that Christ's words would be memorialized by being written down where they would not pass away (or be deleted by men).
​

C. Do Not Go Above What is Written on how we think about men:

The Bible says we are not to go above that which is written (concerning our thoughts of men). Granted, this verse is not all inclusive to the fact that we are not to go above Scripture on other matters, but what this passage does is show us a pattern that Scripture and Scripture alone is our sole authority on the faith and spiritual matters. It confirms that we are not to add or take away from God's Word.

1 Corinthians 4:6
"And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another."​

Please consider:

• The Bible was not put under one cover until the Councils of Hippo (AD 393) and 3rd Council of Carthage (AD 397) accepted the official list of books.
• Not for over 1000 years after these early Councils was the printing press invented (~1450), so Bible manuscripts were quite rare and costly before the printing press came about.
  Between AD 33 and 1450 then, how did most people learn about the contents of Scripture, and who was the authoritative figure for the early Church during these centuries?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't think most people rely on "the Bible alone" for "everything", but I believe the Bible is so very, very important, and that it must be the support or base or foundation, for everything we do, especially for and pertaining to the things of God...

Does that make any sense...?

God Bless!

Obviously the Bible is not a Toyota manual for a RAV4. It is a book that deals with spiritual matters. This is what I am referring to when I say that gives us everything we need in regards to the faith or in having a relationship with God (or Sola Scriptura).

 

[Neogaia777]

Please consider:

• The Bible was not put under one cover until the Councils of Hippo (AD 393) and 3rd Council of Carthage (AD 397) accepted the official list of books.
• Not for over 1000 years after these early Councils was the printing press invented (~1450), so Bible manuscripts were quite rare and costly before the printing press came about.
  Between 397 and 1450 then, how did most people learn about the contents of Scripture, and who was the authoritative figure for the early Church during these centuries?

Good point...

But maybe they really were not getting the real truth of or about scripture until like, after the printing press was invented, ect, and after that, "it" (truth) began to make leaps and bounds as opposed to before that, when they or it did not so much... Not until many people were able to begin looking into it for and with and by themselves, for themselves...

Revelation of or by any Spirit, must be tested by scripture (now), and must line up with scripture, don't you think...? And if it does not, it is not, right...?

Or are you saying it can be done or known (truth) without the, or any Bible at all...?

Surely your not saying that, right...?

I think God would expect us to check any kind of interpretation or revelation with scripture "now", "now that we (all) have it" and have easy access to it...

"Now" anyway... Don't know so much about back then...?

God Bless!

 

[redleghunter]

Please consider:

• The Bible was not put under one cover until the Councils of Hippo (AD 393) and 3rd Council of Carthage (AD 397) accepted the official list of books.
• Not for over 1000 years after these early Councils was the printing press invented (~1450), so Bible manuscripts were quite rare and costly before the printing press came about.
  Between AD 33 and 1450 then, how did most people learn about the contents of Scripture, and who was the authoritative figure for the early Church during these centuries?

However the Holy Spirit inspired Holy Scriptures existed before all this.

Is it your point the words of Christ and writings of His Apostles needed to be made authoritative by councils?

Or is it these councils recognized their Divine and authoritative nature?

As an example, Leonardo da Vinci created the Mona Lisa. Years down the road the curator committee at the Louvre decided such a piece of art deserved to be in their best gallery. Did this committee decide the Mona Lisa was art of a master or did they recognize the master’s work was art already?

 

[redleghunter]

I don't see how these disparate, disconnected ideas "defend" the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Section I affirms the value of Sacred Scripture (which I don't think anybody is arguing against) and Section II warns against doing a bunch of stuff that generally nobody is doing.

Could it possibly be you did not read his arguments?

Because @Jason0047 did lay out the evidence those who wrote the New Testament Scriptures did indeed prove their truth claims with inspired Holy Scriptures. Which means they demonstrated (acted in word and deed) that the Scriptures alone were the infallible means to test truth claims for matters of salvation and faith.

Jason went to the painful extent to type out many references. However here’s a nice summary of how the NT writers applied the OT Scriptures:

Statistics and Styles of Quotations. The New Testament does not simply express its dependence on the Old Testament by quoting it. The fourth edition of the United Bible Societies' Greek Testament (1993) lists 343 Old Testament quotations in the New Testament, as well as no fewer than 2, 309 allusions and verbal parallels. The books most used are Psalms (79 quotations, 333 allusions), and Isaiah (66 quotations, 348 allusions). In the Book of Revelation, there are no formal quotations at all, but no fewer than 620 allusions.

Old Testament in the New Testament, the - Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology Online​

 

[redleghunter]

Finally, ST. Paul also said, "Keep the TRADITIONS you have been taught, whether by our word or our epistle."

Hello Monk Brendan. My hope you and your brothers are doing well.

On the above two questions:

1. Do you see any difference between what was written and what was taught by word?

2. If there is a difference then what were these differences?

 

[thecolorsblend]

Could it possibly be you did not read his arguments?

Because @Jason0047 did lay out the evidence those who wrote the New Testament Scriptures did indeed prove their truth claims with inspired Holy Scriptures. Which means they demonstrated (acted in word and deed) that the Scriptures alone were the infallible means to test truth claims for matters of salvation and faith.

Jason went to the painful extent to type out many references. However here’s a nice summary of how the NT writers applied the OT Scriptures:

Statistics and Styles of Quotations. The New Testament does not simply express its dependence on the Old Testament by quoting it. The fourth edition of the United Bible Societies' Greek Testament (1993) lists 343 Old Testament quotations in the New Testament, as well as no fewer than 2, 309 allusions and verbal parallels. The books most used are Psalms (79 quotations, 333 allusions), and Isaiah (66 quotations, 348 allusions). In the Book of Revelation, there are no formal quotations at all, but no fewer than 620 allusions.

Old Testament in the New Testament, the - Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology Online

Still not seeing the part that says something along the lines of "Scripture alone is the only authority anybody needs".

 

[Neogaia777]

Obviously the Bible is not a Toyota manual for a RAV4. It is a book that deals with spiritual matters. This is what I am referring to when I say that gives us everything we need in regards to the faith or in having a relationship with God.

Maybe everything we need, but does it have absolutely everything we may want, (that must be based on and line up with it) that is the question...?

God Bless!