Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The only revelation I have had is that the Gospel of the Kingdom trumps anything the religion has come up with.If any man says he saw the lord or had a dream we are to believe not. In that way the true believer (the elect) it would be impossible to be led astray by another gospel
Oh I see. By questioning the scholarly integrity of all the Sola Scriptura parties, you can thereby maintain that biblical scholarship is a valid epistemology. Unfortunately Christ disagrees with your assessment:The Pharisees with Sadducees. called all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura) a heresy so that they could serve the oral traditions of the fathers. They hated the word of God and did not bless it by obeying it .
Born again Paul declared under the influence or inspiration of God who worked in Paul. By that which they call heresy so he worships the God of the fathers and not the legion of Father as one God. There showing they worshiped a legion of gods in the likeness of sinful men.They walked away in unbelief. No faith. Not little . . none.
The same Scripture can be seen two ways... through the eyes of man or through the eyes of those of the Kingdom.A babe operates out of confidence in his father's voice, not out of a scholarly ability to "check it out with Scripture."
"New revelations" is an oxymoron, it is a propaganda term fabricated by the Sola Scriptura party to incite unrealistic paranoia of enlarging the canon, as a tactic leveraged to discourage Direct Revelation. How sad - and what a nightmare for men like Paul. The ONE THING the Galatians needed to mature, argued Paul, was the pursuit of Direct Revelation (the "hearing of faith") - the whole point of chapter 3.
"New revelation" is an oxymoron because the Bible is concerned with planet earth and thus everything under the sun. Direct Revelation does not and cannot introduce anything new - it can only clarify existing realities. Even Paul didn't see his writings as teaching "new revelation" - he was simply clarifying existing revelations.
Oh I see. By questioning the scholarly integrity of all the Sola Scriptura parties, you can thereby maintain that biblical scholarship is a valid epistemology. Unfortunately Christ disagrees with your assessment:
"I praise you Father because you have hidden these things from the wise and the learned [the scholars] but have revealed [Direct Revelation] them unto babes"
A babe operates out of confidence in his father's voice, not out of a scholarly ability to "check it out with Scripture."
Then you'd better reject the writings of both Calvin and Gordon Fee (see for example 2 Cor 3:18) who rightly defined the new birth as a God-given vision of the Lord (otherwise you'd worship a conceptual idol). Calvin called it a "secret beholding of Christ".If any man says he saw the lord or had a dream we are to believe not.
You are building much of your case on a strawman. Relevance? Where did I say that we are supposed to believe anyone who claims to have a revelation?Any prophet after the apostle John that says thus says the lord, I had a dream of out of the body vision (experience) we are to believe not. In that way it is impossible to deceive the born again believers.
Um..no. Scripture is not Direct Revelation. Jesus spoke with the Father face to face just like Moses did, and therefore pitied those who lacked this privilege:Yes he hides his understanding in the revealed parables/prophecy , direct revelation from God according to his poetic tongue.
Thanks for sharing your man-made opinion. Next you might want to take a look at the Bible verses discussed in those links.The only vision of Jesus I have had or need is understanding what he represents.
And why are you focused exclusively on visions? Is this a strawman tactic? Direct Revelation is largely about information - in order to evangelize most effectively we must know God's intent, that is, we must know WHEN to preach, WHERE to preach, and WHAT to preach (see Acts 16:6-10).The only vision of Jesus I have had or need is understanding what he represents.
Mark 1: 14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.Thanks for sharing your man-made opinion.
None of these verses establish sanctification/maturity sans visons.Mark 1: 14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Matthew 4: 23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom...
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.
Matthew 9: 35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom
Luke 8: 1 And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him,
Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
etc etc etc
Man-made definitions of evangelism. How sad.See my verses above. We are to scatter seeds. It is not up to us if they grow or how they grow, That is God's domain.
You're dead wrong. In Israel there was such a thing as unauthorized military initiatives. You weren't supposed to march into battle without a "loud and clear" heavenly sign from Yahweh, and waiting upon the Lord for such a sign was referred to as "inquiring of the Lord". You were supposed to await Direct Revelation. Num 9:16-23 is an incredibly redundant passage to this effect - it is LITERALLY the Lord repeating Himself to the effect of:See my verses above. We are to scatter seeds. It is not up to us if they grow or how they grow, That is God's domain.
That parable doesn't provide clear instructions on evangelism. That is why we need Direct Revelation in hopes of clear, infallible instructions.So you deny what Jesus said in His parable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?