Doctrine that Adds to Scripture

Major1 said:

Theologically speaking, there is some question as to whether these verses were originally part of the Gospel of Mark or whether they were added later by a scribe. As a result, it is best not to base a key doctrine on anything from Mark 16:9-20, such as baptism and snake handling, unless it is also supported by other passages of Scripture.

Click to expand...

kepha31 said:

Francis Beckwith former President of the Evangelical Theological Society: Interview

"...Then I read the Council of Trent, which some Protestant friends had suggested I do. What I found was shocking. I found a document that had been nearly universally misrepresented by many Protestants, including some friends.

I do not believe, however, that the misrepresentation is the result of purposeful deception. But rather, it is the result of reading Trent with Protestant assumptions and without a charitable disposition.

For example, Trent talks about the four causes of justification, which correspond somewhat to Aristotle’s four causes. None of these causes is the work of the individual Christian. For, according to Trent, God’s grace does all the work. However, Trent does condemn “faith alone,” but what it means is mere intellectual assent without allowing God’s grace to be manifested in one’s actions and communion with the Church. This is why Trent also condemns justification by works.

I am convinced that the typical “Council of Trent” rant found on anti-Catholic websites is the Protestant equivalent of the secular urban legend that everyone prior to Columbus believed in a flat earth.
Francis Beckwith Interview

Click to expand...

concretecamper said:

@Wolf_Says

Look what was just said



A protestant, a sola scripturist, questioning whether we should believe part of the Bible. You can't make these things up

Click to expand...

concretecamper said:

Thank you my friend for displaying your error for the rest of us to see. You are backed into a corner and as a result call into question the Bible. You are the first protestant I have ever seen do this. Congrats!!!!!

Click to expand...

concretecamper said:

It was 1,600, then they added an essay which made it 2,400 for bit and now it is back to 1,600. I'm not even sure what Harvard's requirements are, it is for example purposes.

Now, are you going to bother to give us an example?

Click to expand...

Major1 said:

YOU are the one who made the comment not me. You just were caught in another mistake and can not accept it!!!!!
IT is your example not mine and in fact allow me to say this to you...............I am done with speaking with YOU.

I can not discuss the important things of Scripture and even life with anyone who is so flippant and childish in their comments. Maybe you can find another teenager who you can talk with but I can not do this anymore with you.

It is fortunate is it not that people like you can have the anonymity of hiding behind a computer screen and not fear the repercussions of a face to face conversation with others.

Click to expand...

Major1 said:

I did not make that up.

If you would apply yourself to theological study you would find out that many Bible scholars believe that verses 9-20 were added to Mark 16 by a scribe.

And then IF you would actually READ what I said, I did NOT say I accepted that theology did I????

Click to expand...