Looking at the two covenants...

[Avonia]

I'm suggesting that you could entertain a more systemic question.

No.

OK.

 

[VictorC]

OK.

The manner in which you truncated my post and omitted my question leads me to believe you have no intent to respond to it.

 

[StormyOne]

No.
You asked a direct question, and I provided a direct answer by quoting Malachi 3:6 for you.
Now you appear to reject what God spoke concerning Himself, and I am waiting for you to explain why.

God said that about himself? So in this case are you saying that God dictated to Malachi the words to write? Before you suggest that I am rejecting what God spoke, let me say that what I am rejecting is the idea that God said what Malachi says He said.... In fact there is no proof that Malachi even wrote Malachi.... but that's a different thread....

 

[VictorC]

God said that about himself?

God stated in the first Person "I am the LORD, I do not change", and this is what God spoke concerning His nature.

So in this case are you saying that God dictated to Malachi the words to write? Before you suggest that I am rejecting what God spoke, let me say that what I am rejecting is the idea that God said what Malachi says He said.... In fact there is no proof that Malachi even wrote Malachi.... but that's a different thread....

Hence you don't have an authority to appeal to to determine God's nature. If we are not able to accept what He states about Himself, the nature of God becomes replaced with imagination, and anything from the Heresy of Arius to a pantheon of idols stacked in the Kabah have equal authority, and a philosophy of many paths to "god" become acceptable.

This view includes a mutable god that can't be trusted.
But I can't find any Scripture that tells us that God evolved or changed.
Can you?

 

[StormyOne]

God stated in the first Person "I am the LORD, I do not change", and this is what God spoke concerning His nature.

Hence you don't have an authority to appeal to to determine God's nature. If we are not able to accept what He states about Himself, the nature of God becomes replaced with imagination, and anything from the Heresy of Arius to a pantheon of idols stacked in the Kabah have equal authority, and a philosophy of many paths to "god" become acceptable.

This view includes a mutable god that can't be trusted.
But I can't find any Scripture that tells us that God evolved or changed.
Can you?

Since there is no proof (to me) that God wrote nor dictated any of what you have submitted, I cannot agree to the claim that "God said it." I understand you view, thanks for sharing it... What's with this "authority" thing? You have used the term twice and I am still waiting for a clarification why you believe someone have "authority" for something.... care to clarify?

 

[VictorC]

Since there is no proof (to me) that God wrote nor dictated any of what you have submitted, I cannot agree to the claim that "God said it." I understand you view, thanks for sharing it... What's with this "authority" thing? You have used the term twice and I am still waiting for a clarification why you believe someone have "authority" for something.... care to clarify?

Since there is ample proof (to me) that Hebrew canon describes the nature of God as immutable, His promises are also immutable and can be trusted. 2 Timothy 3 has this to say:

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

It is to Scripture that I turn to determine doctrine, and no where else. That is the authority of sola Scriptura, that displaces creeds and is used to judge the authenticity of external claims to inspiration, and we are commanded to "test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). If there is no Standard to perform this task, it becomes impossible.

This particular deviation from the thread's topic was introduced by Avonia, and I'm still waiting for her to explain what she uses to determine doctrine in lieu of the Bible.

 

[StormyOne]

Since there is ample proof (to me) that Hebrew canon describes the nature of God as immutable, His promises are also immutable and can be trusted. 2 Timothy 3 has this to say:

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

It is to Scripture that I turn to determine doctrine, and no where else. That is the authority of sola Scriptura, that displaces creeds and is used to judge the authenticity of external claims to inspiration, and we are commanded to "test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). If there is no Standard to perform this task, it becomes impossible.

This particular deviation from the thread's topic was introduced by Avonia, and I'm still waiting for her to explain what she uses to determine doctrine in lieu of the Bible.

cool beans... thanks for clarifying...

 

[Avonia]

This particular deviation from the thread's topic was introduced by Avonia, and I'm still waiting for her to explain what she uses to determine doctrine in lieu of the Bible.

Victor, given my perception of your tone, I don't have a lot of interest in pursing this conversation with you.

I am, however, happy to have other proactive, pleasant conversations with you.

 

[VictorC]

Victor, given my perception of your tone, I don't have a lot of interest in pursing this conversation with you.

Why did you initiate it?

I am, however, happy to have other proactive, pleasant conversations with you.