Jump to content


How Can Sola Scriptura Be True?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
37 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 November 2009 - 06:00 AM

Claiming that the Bible is the only complete, inspired, innerrant and infallible authority on the Christian faith places the Bible, i.e., something that has been written, compiled, copied and translated with human input, over God because it prevents God from having any direct face-to-face communication with mankind. If the only source of information that Job had about God came from some book (or more likely somebody’s interpretation of what some book says and means) then God could never have approached Job directly.

This does not mean that the Bible isn’t inspired in its original form or in copies and translations thereof; God has the power to overcome and compensate for mankind’s sinful limitations and thus produce a complete, inspired, infallible and inerrant record of His Word and insure that people who are faithful to Him can understand it. But human beings cannot dictate to God by telling Him that He must vest all of His power and authority in that record. Nobody who puts restrictions on God can accept God because their starting premise is that God cannot be supreme, omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent.

If the Bible is the only means by which man can experience God, any man that rejects the Bible or has an erroneous knowledge of it cannot be corrected by God.

If you insist that the Bible explains everything necessar for salvation, you have to address the issue of what happens when people don’t have access to the Bible. We are saved by faith in the divinity, sinlessness, atoning death and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God. The Bible must be secondary to faith since people who do not have access to the Bible can still have faith. And it takes faith for someone to believe that something that cannot be proven about the Bible as true.

The cliam that the Bible explains everythin necessry to attain holiness is waylaid by all of the “Bible believing” church congregations that are full of adultery and lying and thievery and child molestation, et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum.

And at the same time many of these Bible believing congregations nullify their own sola scriptura by not following the Bible’s example of Acts 15 where New Testament congregations submitted to the authority of Paul, the Apostles and the Elders in Jerusalem, i.e., a church-wide hiercharchy, to set the standards for Christian doctrine and behavior. The Bible clearly indicates that church congregations are not independent of each other and even if their leaders come from within their leaders’ authority, i.e., their ordination, comes from the entire church (represented by Paul, the Apostles and their designees and successors).

Furthermore, people that accept sola scriptura deny the ongoing role of the Holy Ghost. Scripture is of no use to anyone who refuses to turn their life over to God and accept His lead through the Holy Ghost. Holiness comes from God; Scripture is merely a conduit.

The Bible itself states that there are other sources of revelation about the nature and power of God apart from the Bible: Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. The Bible clearly says that we can consult God’s very creation to learn about Him.

The verbal inspiration of the Bible that is central to sola scriptura is easily rejected. The Bible never says that everything in it was verbally inspired; very few passages in the Bible begin with God telling someone to write down what God is about to say to them. The Bible, in its entirity, is lacking in too many details and too inconsistent in the details it does give to be entirely inspired in the way that sola scriptura requires it to be.

Furthermore, contrary to what sola scriptura requires, the Bible itself is dependent on human action and church authority. What the Bible is, what it contains and what its purpose is was never so obvious as to make human input and church authority unnecessary. No where in the Bible does the Bible say exactly what books it contians and what books it does not contain. It took some human, lead by the Holy Ghost, to decide and tell us what is supposed to be in the Bible.

The Bible itself says that it is the product of authority outside of itself:

II Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

II Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

Most NT Church congregations received the Gospel through the Church’s oral tradition- not through the written Bible.

Sola scriptura rejects the idea that you need specialized training, education or knowledge to understand the Bible because the Bible is the final authority unto itself and thus it is self-interpreting. But the Bible itself says that God gives us prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers to perfect the saints, do the work of the ministry and edify of the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-12). If everyone can understand the Bible on their own, why are prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers necessary?

Declaring that the Bible is self-interpreting nullifies sola scriptura. Setting up parameters by which the Bible can be interpreted is in itself an act of interpretation- so sola scriptura is set on a foundation that goes outside of Scripture.

Also, if the Bible is self-interpreting, then there is no mechanism by which someone who has a false interpretation can be corrected.

#2 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 08 November 2009 - 06:30 AM

Are you trying to preach that there are many way to get truth through many books because the Bible has many errors because of how man has written it?

And because of that are you also preaching that there are many ways to heaven?

jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

jn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

1jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Your logic does not work with the Word of God.

#3 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 November 2009 - 07:45 AM

Are you trying to preach that there are many way to get truth through many books because the Bible has many errors because of how man has written it?

And because of that are you also preaching that there are many ways to heaven?


No on both counts. I am prima scriptua, not sola scriptura. The Bible, tradition and revelation from sources outside of the Bible must coincide with each other, but neither one can exclude either of the other two.

#4 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 08 November 2009 - 09:41 AM

Claiming that the Bible is the only complete, inspired, innerrant and infallible authority on the Christian faith places the Bible, i.e., something that has been written, compiled, copied and translated with human input, over God because it prevents God from having any direct face-to-face communication with mankind.  If the only source of information that Job had about God came from some book (or more likely somebody’s interpretation of what some book says and means) then God could never have approached Job directly.

This does not mean that the Bible isn’t inspired in its original form or in copies and translations thereof; God has the power to overcome and compensate for mankind’s sinful limitations and thus produce a complete, inspired, infallible and inerrant record of His Word and insure that people who are faithful to Him can understand it.  But human beings cannot dictate to God by telling Him that He must vest all of His power and authority in that record.  Nobody who puts restrictions on God can accept God because their starting premise is that God cannot be supreme, omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent.

If the Bible is the only means by which man can experience God, any man that rejects the Bible or has an erroneous knowledge of it cannot be corrected by God.

If you insist that the Bible explains everything necessar for salvation, you have to address the issue of what happens when people don’t have access to the Bible.  We are saved by faith in the divinity, sinlessness, atoning death and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.  The Bible must be secondary to faith since people who do not have access to the Bible can still have faith.  And it takes faith for someone to believe that something that cannot be proven about the Bible as true.

The cliam that the Bible explains everythin necessry to attain holiness is waylaid by all of the “Bible believing” church congregations that are full of adultery and lying and thievery and child molestation, et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum.

And at the same time many of these Bible believing congregations nullify their own sola scriptura by not following the Bible’s example of Acts 15 where New Testament congregations submitted to the authority of Paul, the Apostles and the Elders in Jerusalem, i.e., a church-wide hiercharchy, to set the standards for Christian doctrine and behavior.  The Bible clearly indicates that church congregations are not independent of each other and even if their leaders come from within their leaders’ authority, i.e., their ordination, comes from the entire church (represented by Paul, the Apostles and their designees and successors).

Furthermore, people that accept sola scriptura deny the ongoing role of the Holy Ghost.  Scripture is of no use to anyone who refuses to turn their life over to God and accept His lead through the Holy Ghost.  Holiness comes from God; Scripture is merely a conduit.

The Bible itself states that there are other sources of revelation about the nature and power of God apart from the Bible: Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.  The Bible clearly says that we can consult God’s very creation to learn about Him. 

The verbal inspiration of the Bible that is central to sola scriptura is easily rejected.  The Bible never says that everything in it was verbally inspired; very few passages in the Bible begin with God telling someone to write down what God is about to say to them.  The Bible, in its entirity, is lacking in too many details and too inconsistent in the details it does give to be entirely inspired in the way that sola scriptura requires it to be.

Furthermore, contrary to what sola scriptura requires, the Bible itself is dependent on human action and church authority.  What the Bible is, what it contains and what its purpose is was never so obvious as to make human input and church authority unnecessary.  No where in the Bible does the Bible say exactly what books it contians and what books it does not contain.  It took some human, lead by the Holy Ghost, to decide and tell us what is supposed to be in the Bible.

The Bible itself says that it is the product of authority outside of itself:

II Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

II Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

Most NT Church congregations received the Gospel through the Church’s oral tradition- not through the written Bible.

Sola scriptura rejects the idea that you need specialized training, education or knowledge to understand the Bible because the Bible is the final authority unto itself and thus it is self-interpreting.  But the Bible itself says that God gives us prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers to perfect the saints, do the work of the ministry and edify of the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-12).  If everyone can understand the Bible on their own, why are prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers necessary?

Declaring that the Bible is self-interpreting nullifies sola scriptura.  Setting up parameters by which the Bible can be interpreted is in itself an act of interpretation- so sola scriptura is set on a foundation that goes outside of Scripture.

Also, if the Bible is self-interpreting, then there is no mechanism by which someone who has a false interpretation can be corrected.

View Post

*
It is God's word that saves~the gospel that we are to believe, The bible is God's word written down. It only becomes the Living word when we believe it and act upon it. What other check do we have against all the mad-brainedness going around today, especially on these glossy vid presentations. What can christians possibly desire that are not offered and set forth in the new testament? We don't need something different than the bible we need more and all of what IS in the bible.

#5 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 November 2009 - 03:43 PM

What other check do we have against all the mad-brainedness going around today, especially on these glossy vid presentations.


What protects you from following a false doctrine that stems from whatever interpretation of Scripture you are willing to put your faith in? If you are sola scriptura, then you have put your faith in somebody’s interpretation of Scripture- so surely this interpretation cannot be wrong because if you concede that this interpretation can be wrong then you have no faith. You cannot have faith without insisting that the interpretation you follow is true which means you can never be told that the interpretation is wrong.

An example: young earth creationists often insist that God created the entire universe and everything it contains in just 6 24-hour solar days. The Bible never point-blank says that the days of the creation week were solar days or that they were 24 hours long. Day length for Genesis Chapter 1 is a matter of interpretation (that stems from tradition, church authority, science and history- all from outside of the Bible). In order for the 24-hour solar day interpretation of the Bible to be legitimate you must conclude that the earth has always had 24 hour solar days. So what happens when you find out that natural events on earth can alter the length of solar days- which happened when the Indian Ocean earthquake that killed so many people with a tsunami a few years ago vibrated the entire earth to the point that the earth was shaken off of its axis of rotation so the length of the solar day was changed.

#6 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 08 November 2009 - 06:32 PM

What protects you from following a false doctrine that stems from whatever interpretation of Scripture you are willing to put your faith in?  If you are sola scriptura, then you have put your faith in somebody’s interpretation of Scripture- so surely this interpretation cannot be wrong because if you concede that this interpretation can be wrong then you have no faith.  You cannot have faith without insisting that the interpretation you follow is true which means you can never be told that the interpretation is wrong.

An example: young earth creationists often insist that God created the entire universe and everything it contains in just 6 24-hour solar days.  The Bible never point-blank says that the days of the creation week were solar days or that they were 24 hours long. Day length for Genesis Chapter 1 is a matter of interpretation (that stems from tradition, church authority, science and history- all from outside of the Bible). In order for the 24-hour solar day interpretation of the Bible to be legitimate you must conclude that the earth has always had 24 hour solar days.  So what happens when you find out that natural events on earth can alter the length of solar days- which happened when the Indian Ocean earthquake that killed so many people with a tsunami a few years ago vibrated the entire earth to the point that the earth was shaken off of its axis of rotation so the length of the solar day was changed.

View Post

*
Hi, by the way, nice to meet you, here's how I see it, the bible teaches me that I am a sinner, the bible teaches also that Jesus hung by nails on the cross to bear my sins.
The bible teaches that to as many as recieve Him gives He power to become the sons of God.
The bible teaches that in order to see the kingdom of heaven I must be born again.
The bible teaches the indwelling life and power of the Holy Spirit.

These are all unmistakable truths in the bible, the only people that dispute any of them are those who have never recieved them. All other doctrine is periphery to these basic facts.

If you have been born again you know it, if you are walking with the Lord you know it, if God has poured His love into our hearts by the holy Spirit we know it. Thus our own experience matches what the bible says.

Further more I meet regularly with others who also have been born again, they also have experienced the joy and peace that comes with forgiveness and fellowship with God. Whatever city I visit I can soon find them out, brothers and sisters who know the Lord and who know His teaching.

If these things be not in accord with the bible I have cause to worry. Then again I read the works of christians in past ages, their stories are the same, Bunyan, Wesley, Spurgeon they relate the self same experiences they tell the same bible truth.

I stay with orthodoxy, what others know and experience, I also know and experience, I am not interested in novelties I want the truths that brings the Holy Spirit into my life, if He is not in it then neither shall I be and He always stays within scripture. What need has He not to? and He is well able to teach, that is what He is given for and He loves to do it. Here is an important point, suppose I come across a teaching [or I think I do] in the bible, I share it with others and I know they are walking with the Lord, together we are able to weigh it up and come to a consensus of whether my understanding is right~I would be foolish to go against good christian counsel.

#7 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 November 2009 - 07:39 PM

If you have been born again you know it, if you are walking with the Lord you know it, if God has poured His love into our hearts by the holy Spirit we know it. Thus our own experience matches what the bible says.


Don’t Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses and Roman Catholics and Christian Scientists all have these same experiences- or at least believe they have them?

Further more I meet regularly with others who also have been born again, they also have experienced the joy and peace that comes with forgiveness and fellowship with God.


What tells you that the doctrine you accept is legitimate in order for you to know when someone else is or is not following legitimate doctrine?

If these things be not in accord with the bible I have cause to worry.


In accord with the Bible based on whose standards?

Then again I read the works of christians in past ages, their stories are the same, Bunyan, Wesley, Spurgeon they relate the self same experiences they tell the same bible truth.


In other words you seek extra-Biblical evidence for what the Bible says (the same way I do); you cannot be sola scriptura.

Here is an important point, suppose I come across a teaching [or I think I do] in the bible, I share it with others and I know they are walking with the Lord, together we are able to weigh it up and come to a consensus of whether my understanding is right~I would be foolish to go against good christian counsel.


But how do you know when these other people are giving you or can give you good Christian counsel? If you give anyone the power to give you Christian counsel, then you are giving them authority that is outside of the Bible and you cannot be sola scriptura.

My biggest problem with sola scriptura is the self-righteous, holier than thou attitude that I have witnessed in the people whom I have encountered that follow it. I have Baptist, Lutheran and Catholic/Atheist/Catholic grandparents. I was not raised in a Christian home and I have never been a member of any church and I have never attended services on any kind of regular basis. I have never asked any church (of any denomination) for help of any kind for either myself or on behalf of anyone else and had any help be forthcoming. A legitimate church must have sound doctrine, must do social welfare work and must be willing to cooperate with other legitimate churches. I have never personally been acquainted with such a church.

#8 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 08 November 2009 - 08:31 PM

Don’t Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses and Roman Catholics and Christian Scientists all have these same experiences- or at least believe they have them?
What tells you that the doctrine you accept is legitimate in order for you to know when someone else is or is not following legitimate doctrine?
In accord with the Bible based on whose standards?
In other words you seek extra-Biblical evidence for what the Bible says (the same way I do); you cannot be sola scriptura.
But how do you know when these other people are giving you or can give you good Christian counsel?  If you give anyone the power to give you Christian counsel, then you are giving them authority that is outside of the Bible and you cannot be sola scriptura.

My biggest problem with sola scriptura is the self-righteous, holier than thou attitude that I have witnessed in the people whom I have encountered that follow it.  I have Baptist, Lutheran and Catholic/Atheist/Catholic grandparents.  I was not raised in a Christian home and I have never been a member of any church and I have never attended services on any kind of regular basis.  I have never asked any church (of any denomination) for help of any kind for either myself or on behalf of anyone else and had any help be forthcoming.  A legitimate church must have sound doctrine, must do social welfare work and must be willing to cooperate with other legitimate churches. I have never personally been acquainted with such a church.

View Post

*
Are you telling me that you only are true? or perfect or what? aren't you saying that YOU are holier than all these other people you mention who simply put their faith in God's word rather than their own ability to be saved or perfect.
If a legitimate church must be sound in doctrine who is to define what is sound?
Listen I'll tell you something, I am not perfect, I am not even good. I don't know anybody else who is but I sure am glad of their fellowship.

#9 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 November 2009 - 08:50 PM

*
Are you telling me that you only are true? or perfect or what? aren't you saying that YOU are holier than all these other people you mention who simply put their faith in God's word rather than their own ability to be saved or perfect.


What I believe I accept as a matter of faith regardless of whether or not what I believe is right or wrong. You cannot have faith if you are unwilling to take the chance that you may be wrong. Neither can you have faith in what you believe if you are unwilling to tell people that they are wrong when they don’t believe as you do. Accepting anyone else’s beliefs is the same as putting their beliefs on an equal par with your own- meaning you have as much faith in what they believe as you have in what you believe.

I am not claiming that I am perfect- right now, but my faith in the Lord God gives me every expectation that through Him I am capable of being perfect and will be perfect eventually.

If a legitimate church must be sound in doctrine who is to define what is sound?


Isn’t this what I have been asking you?

Listen I'll tell you something, I am not perfect, I am not even good. I don't know anybody else who is but I sure am glad of their fellowship.


So you are willing to have fellowship with people whom you admit are sinners?

#10 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 09 November 2009 - 04:47 AM

What I believe I accept as a matter of faith regardless of whether or not what I believe is right or wrong.  You cannot have faith if you are unwilling to take the chance that you may be wrong. Neither can you have faith in what you believe if you are unwilling to tell people that they are wrong when they don’t believe as you do.  Accepting anyone else’s beliefs is the same as putting their beliefs on an equal par with your own- meaning you have as much faith in what they believe as you have in what you believe. 

I am not claiming that I am perfect- right now, but my faith in the Lord God gives me every expectation that through Him I am capable of being perfect and will be perfect eventually.
Isn’t this what I have been asking you?

So you are willing to have fellowship with people whom you admit are sinners?

View Post

*
I doesn't take any chances with my faith, if it does not accord with the scriptures and it does not find agreement with my brothers and sisters who are equally called with me I don't want it.

#11 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 November 2009 - 07:04 AM

*
I doesn't take any chances with my faith, if it does not accord with the scriptures and it does not find agreement with my brothers and sisters who are equally called with me I don't want it.

View Post


Whose interpretation of Scripture do you follow? What tells you that what you believe you know about what Scripture means is really true?

#12 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 09 November 2009 - 10:28 AM

Whose interpretation of Scripture do you follow? What tells you that what you believe you know about what Scripture means is really true?

View Post

*
Paul says "the kingdom of God is not about food and drink but righteousness, peace and joy in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit" if you do have those things then you know~and tell me what more you could desire?

#13 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:31 AM

*
Paul says "the kingdom of God is not about food and drink but righteousness, peace and joy in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit" if you do have those things then you know~and tell me what more you could desire?

View Post


You are not answering my question. There are a lot of people who claim to have the Holy Spirit, but who still follow what I consider to be false doctrine or engage in ungodly behavior. Anyone can claim to have the Holy Ghost even when the Holy Ghost won't have anything to do with them.

#14 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 09 November 2009 - 11:41 AM

You are not answering my question.  There are a lot of people who claim to have the Holy Spirit, but who still follow what I consider to be false doctrine or engage in ungodly behavior.  Anyone can claim to have the Holy Ghost even when the Holy Ghost won't have anything to do with them.

View Post


Anyone can claim to have the Holy Spirit, but the bottom line is this; there will come a day when Jesus may say to them "away from me, I knew you not!" And why is that? Because they stray from the plain meaning of the scripture. Anything that strays from the scripture is (dare I say it?) Non-scriptural!

#15 the totton linnet

the totton linnet

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Location:Winchester
  • Interests:Friends, fellowship, stuff
  • Age: 19
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Winchester, Hampshire

Posted 09 November 2009 - 12:08 PM

Anyone can claim to have the Holy Spirit, but the bottom line is this; there will come a day when Jesus may say to them "away from me, I knew you not!" And why is that? Because they stray from the plain meaning of the scripture. Anything that strays from the scripture is (dare I say it?) Non-scriptural!

View Post

*
Seems simple enough, John gives the mark when he says the true believer loves the brethren, Peter teaches the same, you soon find out who is family.

#16 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 09 November 2009 - 12:41 PM

*
Seems simple enough, John gives the mark when he says the true believer loves the brethren, Peter teaches the same, you soon find out who is family.

View Post


I know its hard for some to grasp, but it is that simple. And, to consternation of some, I like to keep it simple and un-convoluted :lol:

I come from a large family (nothing against small families), and we ALWAYS knew who family was ;)

#17 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 November 2009 - 02:53 PM

Anyone can claim to have the Holy Spirit, but the bottom line is this; there will come a day when Jesus may say to them "away from me, I knew you not!" And why is that? Because they stray from the plain meaning of the scripture. Anything that strays from the scripture is (dare I say it?) Non-scriptural!

View Post


What happens if you don’t try to understand or actually reject the finer points of doctrine- things like the age of the universe and the purpose of baptism or holy communion? What happens when Scripture is not all that simple?

#18 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 09 November 2009 - 03:30 PM

What happens if you don’t try to understand or actually reject the finer points of doctrine- things like the age of the universe and the purpose of baptism or holy communion? What happens when Scripture is not all that simple?

View Post


Actually, scripture is that simple. And the Bible explains itself well. We tend to make it hard with man-made doctrine. The age of the universe only comes in with those who want evolution. Also, all you have to do is ask yourself "What does scripture say about baptism or communion?" Not, "what does the church or man say about baptism or communion!".

Man tends to muck thinks up when he interjects himself into scripture...

#19 Guest_fljea_*

Guest_fljea_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 November 2009 - 04:07 PM

Actually, scripture is that simple. And the Bible explains itself well.


When God told Adam and Eve that they would die if they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, did He mean physical death, spiritual death or is physical death and spiritual death the same thing?

Did Lucifer/Satan/Devil rebel against God before or after God had created Adam and Eve, i.e., did sin already exist in God’s created realm when God created Adam and Eve? And if the fall of Lucifer/Satan/Devil happened before God created Adam and Eve, did any living thing on earth die before God created Adam and Eve, i.e., did He tell them that they were going to die anyway?

#20 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 09 November 2009 - 05:08 PM

When God told Adam and Eve that they would die if they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, did He mean physical death, spiritual death or is physical death and spiritual death the same thing?

Did Lucifer/Satan/Devil rebel against God before or after God had created Adam and Eve, i.e., did sin already exist in God’s created realm when God created Adam and Eve?  And if the fall of Lucifer/Satan/Devil happened before God created Adam and Eve, did any living thing on earth die before God created Adam and Eve, i.e., did He tell them that they were going to die anyway?

View Post


The answer to the question, is a more important question... What does any of that have to do with your salvation and continual spiritual growth? Answer: Nothing.

The fact of the matter is this:

Eve did partake of the fruit, then gave it to Adam. We now die a physical death, but our spiritual future has to do with what we do now. What Adam and Eve did was corrected by Jesus. Therefore that point is moot, and any doctrine built upon it is moot as well.

It doesn't matter when Satan rebelled and fell, and anyone's answer to that is nothing more than opinion and mere speculation. Therefore that point is moot, and any doctrine built upon it is moot as well.

You see, if man spends his time making up doctrine instead of fulfilling the great commission, he is failing to obey Jesus. And Jesus said those who are His, obey His directives. And anyone who gets lost in the tangents and stead of following hard after the Lord, will have to answer to the Lord.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users