yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Totally opposed to Scripture. Sorry - multitudes have been duped.
Upvote
0
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.
Totally opposed to Scripture. Sorry - multitudes have been duped.No, but the saint whom they represent in heaven does, and if God is performing a miracle through that saint, it's perfectly reasonable for it to manifest through their icon.
Could you explain how that is opposed to Scripture?Totally opposed to Scripture. Sorry - multitudes have been duped.
Because you keep saying in error that so-called holy traditions are Christ's teachings.Then why do you keep saying Holy Tradition (Christ's teachings) opposes Scripture?
You must believe they are too, since you know Christ didn't write down his teachings, he passed them by tradition, the tradition he passed down is called Holy Tradition. The only point of contention here is whether or not Holy Scripture is an exhaustive record of Holy Tradition.Because you keep saying in error that so-called holy traditions are Christ's teachings.
That is totally contrary to Scripture. The source and the perpetrators of those errors you appear from your posts to trust are condemned in Scripture by Christ, not at all acceptable to Him.
Was Jesus able to explain it to the religious leaders ?Could you explain how that is opposed to Scripture?
The Pharisees were pro-iconography?Was Jesus able to explain it to the religious leaders ?
https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/ivp-nt/Jesus-Rebukes-Pharisees-Scribes
Not at all. You were told that, or for some reason believe it.You must believe they are too, since you know Christ didn't write down his teachings, he passed them by tradition, the tradition he passed down is called Holy Tradition. The only point of contention here is whether or not Holy Scripture is an exhaustive record of Holy Tradition.
Jesus pronounced WOES on the pharisees - Yhwh's Judgment,The Pharisees were pro-iconography?
Jesus certainly passed his teachings through tradition, he didn't write them down. The only question is whether or not the New Testament is intended to be an exhaustive catalogue of all the oral teachings he passed on.Not at all. You were told that, or for some reason believe it.
Jesus never said the Scripture was passed by tradition.
He rebuked those who opposed Scripture and taught traditions in error.
So-called 'holy tradition' is contrary to Scripture, so Jesus rebukes it also.
If you believe this, then no one I know of in this world or the next can help.Jesus certainly passed his teachings through tradition, he didn't write them down.
According to Mark 7:19 (especially in the text used for modern translations), this was about Christ completely changing the rules and saying dietary issues were done altogether.Jesus pronounced WOES on the pharisees - Yhwh's Judgment,
because they rejected Him and
promoted "holy traditions" over Yhwh's Word.
Which books of the New Testament did Christ write?If you believe this, then no one I know of in this world or the next can help.
Imagery of angels was used in the First Temple and even on top of the Ark of the Covenant.
Which books of the New Testament did Christ write?
SO what are God's words and how do you know they are God's words?
God's Word is not a book, dude. God's Word is the Son of God Himself. There is no substitute.
As to the Scripture, unless you have God saying that the canon made by Christ-hating Jews of the 6th century is better than the one made by those looking forward to Christ and used by those who died in the name of Christ, I'll stick with the men who died for Christ in the first 5 centuries over the Jews which hated Him.
So again, what makes your canon better than mine? I didn't load the question. You did. You have no authority in your scriptures because you can't even say for certain why they are Scripture.
Look, the Bible itself makes those statements. So for you to continue to push this point amounts to denying the Bible, not just saying that it's inadequate.You just admitted that Scripture can't cover all of his teachings, but you said that it doesn't matter, so long as it is sufficient. I'm asking you, what is the bear-bones teachings of Christ that would be sufficient?
You must believe they are too, since you know Christ didn't write down his teachings, he passed them by tradition, the tradition he passed down is called Holy Tradition.
Learn the truth. The church did not author scripture. The church is not the authority behind the words of scripture. The Bible is known as God's word, not the church's word. All the church did was to through away trash and say it was not to be included as God's word. From this you claim a continued authority above God's word.Therefore, since the Church is the definer of the Scriptures, the Church is of a high enough authority to be the final grounds to which we look for the meaning thereof.
Then we are all in agreement on that particular point.Learn the truth. The church did not author scripture.
I have no idea where you got that notion from. Maybe you didn't read through the existing posts before writing your own or are confusing me with some other poster??Let me point out how absurd your logic is. I read Jesus' words as recorded by the apostles. I then declare them to be true. Therefore I am now a higher authority. You would think me a fool for making such a claim. I think the same for your proof to having higher authority than God's word.
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?