Yes, for you a passage means whatever you'd like it to mean, without recourse to context. Haven't we already established that much?I guess there is many ways to deny God's Word if they do not disagree with you. For me I just believe what the scriptures say and they say the opposite to what you are teaching...
2 TIMOTHY 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Now who should I believe? I know who I believe and it is not you.
I see better where your coming from YAW, but for me the scriptures are still the final authority as they are the test to know if someone has been given a revelation or not.
God bless.
Ok let's prove your claims. Your claiming now I have left out context that changes the meaning of the scriptures to make the scriptures say something that they do not correct? Your claims is that scripture is not the inspired Word of God. I posted to you that the scriptures teach the opposite of what your teachings and posted 2 TIMOTHY 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD AND IS PROFITABLE FOR DOCTRINE, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION, FOR INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.Yes, for you a passage means whatever you'd like it to mean, without recourse to context. Haven't we already established that much?
Generally speaking, I can't debate with a moving target. It's pointless to try.Nonsense. Please stop making things up. Hears an idea how about you address the OP the refutes your teachings. If you cannot why do you follow the teachings and traditions of men over the Word of God? JESUS warned us not to do this in MATTHEW 15:2-9
It is not a tough question at all. I did ask you a question first however and have not forgotten. I posted earlier that the scriptures teach, Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God *ROMANS 10:17. If we are only saved by GRACE THROUGH FAITH which comes by the Word of God *EPHESIANS 2:8, how can you have faith that is a requirement for salvation when there is no Word when it is written whatsoever is not of faith is sin *ROMANS 14:23?A tough question for you: How do we go about establishing authority if there is no bible? (e.g. China and the muslims in many different locations).
Indeed. For some if scripture is provided that shows why their claims are not true, it is easier to run away then address the scriptures provided that show why their claims are not true. This is in fulfillment of JOHN 3:16-21. Do you know what these scriptures mean?Generally speaking, I can't debate with a moving target. It's pointless to try.
What do those scriptures say or mean to you that are in the post you are quoting from. I am only asking to see how you understand them before I reply. I thought it was a straight forward question asked of you based on the scriptures.
If the scriptures teach that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God {Jesus speaking to our hearts} *ROMANS 10:17 and we are only saved by GRACE THROUGH FAITH which comes by the Word of God {Jesus} *EPHESIANS 2:8, how can you have faith that is a requirement for salvation when there is no Word {but He is there saving people, what do you mean "when there is no word?"} when it is written whatsoever is not of faith is sin *ROMANS 14:23?
Then I suggest that you learn what an ad hominem argument actually is.Sounds pretty personal to me.
It was proven by your own posts. You did the work for me.Empty claim you cannot prove...
See, you just did it again....while not addressing the post content provided to you. The rest of my post that you left out said what you fail to see in your posts is that God is in control of His Word.
Then I suggest that you learn what an ad hominem argument actually is.
It was proven by your own posts. You did the work for me.
See, you just did it again.
Unless you begin to respond to what I'm saying rather than your straw man, I'm done.
Come on YAW you can do better than that. You cannot answer that question can you. What you have provided here does not make any sense to the scriptures provided. Do you want to have another go?
I don't follow. What is the question you are asking? I thought I already answered it ??
Really? Exegesis is the test, huh? Funny Paul never mentions exegesis as the test.
Ok no problem. Read the question slowly and take your time. It is based on the scriptures from ROMANS 10:17; and EPHESIANS 2:8 and ROMANS 14:23
Now if FAITH comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD OF GOD *ROMANS 10:17. If we are only saved by GRACE THROUGH FAITH which comes by the Word of God *EPHESIANS 2:8, how can you have faith that is a requirement for salvation when there is NO WORD (Faith comes by the Word of God) when it is written whatsoever is not of faith is sin *ROMANS 14:23?
So NO WORD = NO FAITH and NO FAITH = SIN and NO SALVATION
Hope that is more helpful.
YAW you just hand waived the answer to the question I provied and asked of you. There was a reason why I asked it, Do you know what it means? Only asking this as this will help the discussion. For example as sumarized earlier what do you think NO WORD = NO FAITH and NO FAITH = SIN and NO SALVATION means? Do you think there can be salvation without the Word of God?Right, but when you say NO WORD=NO FAITH you must be referring to the word in Romans 10:17. The Word in Romans 10:17 is the Word of Christ, that is, the good news of the gospel. It is good news because Jesus has come to us to bring us salvation. And now taking this back to where we began, the church in China and many Muslims around the world were saved by Jesus bringing them salvation. The gospel came to them. And this is how all salvation occurs but not always so clearly. Jesus comes to save a person because He is the highest authority. No bible needed. Just the Living Word.
It accepts the books of the Bible that have been the common possession of all Christians since the time of the councils that you go on and on about.Sola Scriptura cannot be true, because with it you can't even detemine what books belong in the canon.
Which is exactly my point. We accept as a given that the identified books really are Apostolic only because the early Church recognized them as such - not because of anything in the documents themselves.It accepts the books of the Bible that have been the common possession of all Christians since the time of the councils that you go on and on about.
I'm not aware that anyone has made that argument. I certainly have not.The notion that "Sola Scriptura cannot be true"...because it holds that we should be guided by the Bible rather than by legend, custom, folklore, or speculation and opinion (of "Early Church Fathers" or anyone else) doesn't even make sense as an argument.
You must have misunderstood some of my posts.Your claims is that scripture is not the inspired Word of God.
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?