|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 20, 2021 1:27:35 GMT -6
My brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ,
My Holy spirit has led me on a learning journey through history and Christianity. From the "old Testament", through the "new Testament".
Since Jesus gave us a "new" law, of salvation and forgiveness, over the old law of sacrifice and subjugation, I am above all a follower of Jesus and his messages and promises. I believe all "Christians" would consider that the foundation and "core" of their religious beliefs. Since the "New Testament" is the only "teachings and message Jesus has given, I study that and follow it above all else. So as a matter of reason, I consider the apostles writings and letters valuable to learning Jesus teachings and ways and all I can know about him. Only those closest to Jesus can give an accurate representation of his life and teachings that would rationally be considered trustworthy. But after studying the New Testament for some time now, I'm 53, I only in the last period of my study, realized that all the other apostles wrote "books" and "gospels" and epistles and letters to the churches etc. At this juncture in my study of Jesus, I had to decide wether to give any creedence to a writing that was not included in the "compiled texts" of the New Testament. I chose to allow my "advocate" help me decide, and laid out some ground rules for what I would be willing to trust scripturally. Really only one rule, it can't be in any meaningful/message way opposing the teachings and parables and message/gospel that is already in our present bible. Simple reason tells me that since the bible itself extolls the apostles with being the "messengers" of Jesus message, any writing or teaching by any of them is worthy of study and can be trusted, as they all died for their beliefs in Jesus messages and promises. What I was not prepared to find out, was that all the apostles have "books", gospels, or letters to the churches etc. So, there is more outside the "New Testament", but authenticated by the apostles themselves, than is actually contained within the "Bible". Now I'm not even talking about people who were friends of the apostles and knew them well enough to write of them, there is plenty of that as well, but just the writings and texts of the apostles themselves is enough to write another "New Testament" full of Jesus words and teachings. Each of these apostles also recount the same stories, which are not included in the official texts as well. So they actually verify each other and quote Jesus teachings that are already existing in our text. Now Since my Advocate has always led me to seek truth in what ever I do, I realized I didn't know enough about the assembling of the bible, both old and new testaments. So I studied the ancient writings and accounts and history of the times and people whom ultimately decided on what was released as "official" and what was not, and who decided what was kept of all the ancient text that were circulated and taught on in the ancient churches. Since whole books are written on that topic alone, I'll just say that it was an extremely enlightening and learning experience that any serious bible student should undertake. As what we accept as "the truth" according to God's word, has evolved and changed over time. What we now call the "Old Testament" is only a peice of all the textual literature that was actually taught in the ancient churches. The old bible, or "Old Testament" bible, was called before that, the "Hebrew" bible. Named so because it was the teachings of the "Hebrew" God. After Judaism arose from the "Hebrew" religion, we received the "Jewish" bible, or the "Old Testament". however, Not all the books and writings of the "Hebrew" religion are represented in the "Jewish" bible either. As with the new testaments, the Hebrew Bible got a pairing down into the "Jewish" bible, and was separated into cannon books and the testimony books (equivalent to our gospels of the new testament). The Hebrew God's bible had many books that were circulated and taught from that were either dropped altogether or edited down and put inside. You see, as with all things, as a thing becomes accepted, it becomes dominant and corners the market on what ever commodity your talking of. In this instance, we are talking about God's word. Now as it applies to both old and new and present, I will say that it should be an obvious conclusion that any texts that were taught at places of worship for God, should be considered important, as if they were unimportant or not necessary to the belief and furtherance of, they would never be accepted to be taught, by those fellows teaching, or being taught. Since I am a reasonable man, I believe it prudent, for me to actually learn the words and the teachings of the God in whom I entrust my immortal soul. Since Jesus is my compass for all things spiritual, I read a considerable amount of Hebrew ancient scripture, which filled in all the gaps in the "Old Testament", but shifted my focus to the study of Jesus, since his covenant is the new one and the everlasting promise of life after death. I have now, a far better and immensely deeper understanding of Jesus and his teaching than I did before. I will leave my personal and circumstantial reasoning of why the bulk of Jesus is not in the bible to any who wish to debate such issues, but I'd be a poor representative of my Savior, Jesus the Christ, if I didn't pass along this information for at least my fellow followers of Jesus to consider. As He says, let those who have ears to hear ......
God Bless!
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 20, 2021 7:37:28 GMT -6
lionofgod I came across an interesting teaching a few days ago and thought of you and the conversation we had a few weeks ago. Mike Winger is an apologist and from what Ive seen so far he does a great job examining scriptures. I dont always see what he does 100% but then maybe the issue is with me and not him. In any event I stumbled on this and thought you may enjoy it. there are a few parts to it too  (I watched 1 & 2 but see in the series "part 19", perhaps theres more)
|
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 1:00:56 GMT -6
This is a transcribed text of the letters to the churches of the North, south, East and West. From all the apostles. It has provenance, biblical credibility and it is confirmed independantly in the writing of each apostle! Jesus words in italic and red. (you'll notice that most all the letter are in red!) Prophesy of end days explained better and a lot more. I left all translators notes and added info as well as the intro and documentation, for any that would want it. Epistle of the Apostles-Jesus teachings.pdf (201.41 KB) |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 21, 2021 7:03:57 GMT -6
This is a transcribed text of the letters to the churches of the North, south, East and West. From all the apostles. It has provenance, biblical credibility and it is confirmed independantly in the writing of each apostle! Jesus words in italic and red. (you'll notice that most all the letter are in red!) Prophesy of end days explained better and a lot more. I left all translators notes and added info as well as the intro and documentation, for any that would want it. View Attachment As a commentary? Maybe. To understand writing style? Sure. To see how others may have interpreted events? ok. For Doctrine? Nope, not for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Apr 21, 2021 8:08:58 GMT -6
I agree with Mike.
The Bible is complete and sufficient.
|
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 8:37:40 GMT -6
I guess i'm a bit confused by the thinking of those that despite evidence to the contrary, will not examine the realities of history. Jesus himself said he came "first" for the jew, then the gentile. That was to fulfill scripture. He then also made it clear, He had a NEW covenant, the Jews rejected it, as for the most part did the Romans. The original "Christians", were followers of Christ, not the Hebrew religion. They fought, agreed in very little. The Romans and the Jews, murdered Him. Then the Romans began the "Catholic" church. These are established fact. Then those same two groups are the ones who's bible, is the sole word on Jesus. Despite all evidence and Jesus own words to the contrary. I don't trust completely anyone but Jesus. He said to trust the disciples, they all say to trust John. But the world says, no, only trust the Jews and the Catholics? This is 2021, we have proof of date and correlating evidence from other independently proven witnesses and documents. But the position held, is that we believe, in spite of Jesus saying otherwise, that the Catholic and Jewish religions are the only teachings of Jesus. And that even though he was here for 30 years, all he taught was in those few books that were chosen? God's complete truth, in a hand full of scripts? We don't even consider or read the writings of his own family. One testament of James, none of his mother or father whom raised him? None of the other 12 apostles are worthy? God gave me a brain, and it wasn't so I could follow the pack. It was to seek truth. Jesus gives that. To ignore that because it is not in your accepted readings, is to cheat yourself out of all Jesus offered. I'm not going into "doctrine", because I can't find anywhere that Jesus said it was a part of his message of salvation. It's a construct of religion, not of Jesus. The Kings wanted an accurate documenting of the Jewish faith, and that is where the bible came from. The Jews thought it sacred and wouldn't write it out, they still had not accepted Jesus as the son of God. The bible says that. I seek to educate on Jesus, not divide on labels. But if Jesus taught anything that was contrary to the Hebrew religion, whom do you choose? That choice decides your eternal souls final destination. Jesus said HE is the ONLY way. I trust and have faith in Him. If the "Christians" of today wish to put their faith in ANYTHING other than him, they are not followers of Christ. That simple. Salvation is not a team sport. We were never expected to just blindly follow. Jesus uses blind parables a lot to show how ignorant of his truth were the religious leaders of that time. But 2000 tears later, we are smarter/more reasonable than those that murdered our savior, right? We learn and seek out the truth, we don't rely on the assembled works of the Pharasees, Saducees, and Catholic church do we? Enormous amounts of scrolls and artifacts and all manner of proof has been found in the last 2000 yrs.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 21, 2021 9:06:01 GMT -6
I guess i'm a bit confused by the thinking of those that despite evidence to the contrary, will not examine the realities of history. What is your basis for this being evident? Much, most if not all of the other writings have been proven to be written at later dates, forgeries and such. Jesus himself said he came "first" for the jew, then the gentile. That was to fulfill scripture. He then also made it clear, He had a NEW covenant, the Jews rejected it, as for the most part did the Romans. The original "Christians", were followers of Christ, not the Hebrew religion. There were some followers of the Hebrew tradition that followed Christ (Nicodemus for example). They fought, agreed in very little. The Romans and the Jews, murdered Him. Then the Romans began the "Catholic" church. The Catholic church began hundreds of years later. These are established fact. Then those same two groups are the ones who's bible, is the sole word on Jesus. I think this is where your research is askew. As Ive said in other posts today, the TORAH was given to the Jews. The Talmud is what you may be referring to. The OT is the Hebrew bible, but it sounds to me you have an altered view of these texts. Despite all evidence and Jesus own words to the contrary. I don't trust completely anyone but Jesus. How do you know who He is if you do not trust the writings He spoke of? Again see John 5:46. He said to trust the disciples, they all say to trust John. But the world says, no, only trust the Jews and the Catholics? No one here is saying that. You are mistaken. This is 2021, we have proof of date and correlating evidence from other independently proven witnesses and documents. But the position held, is that we believe, in spite of Jesus saying otherwise, that the Catholic and Jewish religions are the only teachings of Jesus. And that even though he was here for 30 years, all he taught was in those few books that were chosen? Um you say to trust John, have you read John 21:25? God's complete truth, in a hand full of scripts? We don't even consider or read the writings of his own family. One testament of James, none of his mother or father whom raised him? None of the other 12 apostles are worthy? God gave me a brain, and it wasn't so I could follow the pack. It was to seek truth. Jesus gives that. To ignore that because it is not in your accepted readings, is to cheat yourself out of all Jesus offered. I'm not going into "doctrine", because I can't find anywhere that Jesus said it was a part of his message of salvation. It's a construct of religion, not of Jesus. The Kings wanted an accurate documenting of the Jewish faith, and that is where the bible came from. The Jews thought it sacred and wouldn't write it out, they still had not accepted Jesus as the son of God. The bible says that. I seek to educate on Jesus, not divide on labels. But if Jesus taught anything that was contrary to the Hebrew religion, whom do you choose? That choice decides your eternal souls final destination. Jesus said HE is the ONLY way. I trust and have faith in Him. If the "Christians" of today wish to put their faith in ANYTHING other than him, they are not followers of Christ. That simple. Salvation is not a team sport. We were never expected to just blindly follow. Jesus uses blind parables a lot to show how ignorant of his truth were the religious leaders of that time. But 2000 tears later, we are smarter/more reasonable than those that murdered our savior, right? We learn and seek out the truth, we don't rely on the assembled works of the Pharasees, Saducees, and Catholic church do we? Enormous amounts of scrolls and artifacts and all manner of proof has been found in the last 2000 yrs. |
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 9:28:38 GMT -6
mike,It's not MY evidence brother, carbon dating and ink dyes and all that wonderful modern science we use says this, not me. You do realize that hundreds of scrolls if not thousands worldwide have been unearthed over the past 1000 years. If science proves a text in the museum is from AD 100 to 150, that is just that. As these scrolls are being translated and verified vis other existing texts which were already authenticated, by actual historical figures and people that we know factually knew the apostles. As well as the fact that the same texts were found in Hebrew, Coptic, Latin, Greek, Aramaic and often even Ethiopian languages. So, your view is that without any mass media, a worldwide conspiracy to tell the same teachings of the same man, attributed to the apostles, his personal messengers, is going on before technology allowed such things? Were you to compile a stack of all the supposed forgeries, pre 500 AD and stack them next to the total of the writings that all agree, it would be a laughable thought to think you should ignore the 80 % for the 20%, right? I all these transcribed scrolls were teaching different things and etc. I could understand that viewpoint. The problem is, out of the 20 plus gospels of the apostles and epistles, and letters to the actual churches, as well as those attributed to His father and Mother, all seem to agree, with select exceptions, as is always the case when you get 12 separate people telling a story of an event. So if all the apostles agree and Joseph and Mary's attributed writings agree as well. Who exactly knows better than they do of Jesus?
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 21, 2021 9:43:58 GMT -6
mike ,It's not MY evidence brother, carbon dating and ink dyes and all that wonderful modern science we use says this, not me. You do realize that hundreds of scrolls if not thousands worldwide have been unearthed over the past 1000 years. If science proves a text in the museum is from AD 100 to 150, that is just that. As these scrolls are being translated and verified vis other existing texts which were already authenticated, by actual historical figures and people that we know factually knew the apostles. As well as the fact that the same texts were found in Hebrew, Coptic, Latin, Greek, Aramaic and often even Ethiopian languages. So, your view is that without any mass media, a worldwide conspiracy to tell the same teachings of the same man, attributed to the apostles, his personal messengers, is going on before technology allowed such things? Were you to compile a stack of all the supposed forgeries, pre 500 AD and stack them next to the total of the writings that all agree, it would be a laughable thought to think you should ignore the 80 % for the 20%, right? I all these transcribed scrolls were teaching different things and etc. I could understand that viewpoint. The problem is, out of the 20 plus gospels of the apostles and epistles, and letters to the actual churches, as well as those attributed to His father and Mother, all seem to agree, with select exceptions, as is always the case when you get 12 separate people telling a story of an event. So if all the apostles agree and Joseph and Mary's attributed writings agree as well. Who exactly knows better than they do of Jesus? Not that wikipedia is a highly accurate or trustworthy site, but just in brief review here is what I am talking about. Which of these is correct as they conflict? In your writing both are correct because of the reasons you cite. Obviously both things contradicting cannot be true. One is the other isnt or both are not true, but both cannot be true. Do I realize that other documents have been unearthed? yes I am. Does that make all of them fit for doctrine? Nope not in the slightest. If you are here to discuss the extra biblical writings in light of the bible, using the bible as the foundation for doctrine, then OK. If you want to insert these other writings into conversations as foundational, then I suggest you find another cite to do that as the intent here is to discuss the bible as the foundation as doctrine. I also suggest you take great caution with these other documents as foundations to your faith. the bible itself has enough to study to last a lifetime and we wont even scratch the surface. EDIT - this topic of the Bible as the source for doctrine isnt open for debate. We have 3 rules on the forum and you as a member or guest are expected to respect these rules. |
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 10:46:23 GMT -6
DOCTRINE, noun [Latin , to teach.]
1. In a general sense, whatever is taught. Hence, a principle or position in any science; whatever is laid down as true by an instructor or master. The doctrines of the gospel are the principles or truths taught by Christ and his apostles. The doctrines of Plato are the principles which he taught. Hence a doctrine may be true or false; it may be a mere tenet or opinion.
I don't teach doctrine, I learn Jesus, and share his words. You ascribe to the point of view that the only people credited with the ability of discerning truth were the very people that murdered Jesus. Or so you seem to assert. I am merely saying that if you used the "rules" used to compile the bible, to apply to all the texts available to us with Jesus teachings, which would then be inline with the intent of the bible, correct? That you would yourself come up with a great deal more truth than is in the books you read. If you wish to rely on 2000 yr. old opinions and what was considered fact before they could access worldwide information and compile proof, that is your privilege. That is a doctrine of your choosing. I don't judge anyones personal beliefs, I also know that Jesus didn't teach "group think". He taught individual relationships with him. But mass acceptance is the truth of the modern times. I don't expect anyone to actually read and educate themselves of all the actual writings first. Someone else did that 1500 years ago, so we just accept that opinion, rather than decide for each individual, through reading and historical discovery and fact. I simply realized that criticizing a group of writings that I had never read and have never tried to verify, may be a tad hypocritical of me. So, I explored the museums and the vaults of documented scriptures and availed myself of the Wisdom of Jesus. I simply wish to put it out there so any Truthful and Honest "follower of Jesus", knows that his 30 years of life actually were better chronicled than the few books in the modern "bible". But if Jesus words are not acceptable to any here, I will follow what ever "rule" excludes His Word, when here.
|
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 11:05:51 GMT -6
We want this forum to be a place of freedom and graciousness and so in the spirit of open discourse we only have three rules:
1. No debating core doctrines of the Christian faith. The Christian faith is the teachings of Christ, that's actually the definition of the word.(faith in Christ, ie-Christian faith) If you are participating here you should be a committed Believer. I absolutely believe without reservation in the teachings of Jesus Christ. Period. Seekers and non-Christians are more than welcome also, but this is a forum that honors God's Word and therefore arguments against His Word aren't for this forum... questions are welcome though! For purposes of this forum, "core doctrines" are considered to be the historic tenets of Christianity: One self-existent God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the virgin birth, the full deity of Christ, the substitutionary atonement, the literal and physical resurrection of Christ, salvation through faith alone in Christ alone, a literal and future bodily resurrection of the dead, and a historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture. Premillennialism, a literal rapture of the Church to Heaven, and a literal/historical interpretation of Genesis 1-11 are also considered core doctrines.
Ok, not breaking any of these stated rules.
2. No obscenity or racism of any kind.
I don't curse.
3. Don't invalidate a fellow member's thoughts. It is ok to express a disagreement, but this shouldn't be done along the lines of "you're just wrong" or "if you believed the Bible then you would agree with me", etc.
I very specifically say that every person must decide their personal beliefs individually and that I further make no judgements on the validity of their opinion, whether I personally agree or not.
So, as far as I read english, I'm staying well within the bounds of the rules set forth by this site to control content therein. If my above statement is not factual, I am always open to honest rebuke for my own personal spiritual growth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Apr 21, 2021 11:25:52 GMT -6
Reading the Gospels, Jesus' disciples were Jews. They would have been followers of the Hebrew religion and waiting for their Messiah. But, it's true, not all Jews recognized Him as the Messiah or accepted Him as such. The leaders found the things He did and said blasphemous. Our ladies' Bible study has been studying the book of 1 Peter. It is very Jewish and full of references and allusions to the OT. The book of James was written to the Twelve Tribes. Jews raised with the Law but now following the Messiah.
I'm also not sure where you are getting the idea that they fought and agreed on very little. Can you point that out from Scripture?
Yes, they did. But only because they were fulfilling what needed to be done. Sinful man offered up the Lamb of God as a sacrifice so that all men might be saved. The OT sacrificial system pointed to the one Perfect Sacrifice. It doesn't matter what group of people murdered Him; Jesus said, "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:18) and "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life." (John 3:14) The Son of Man was to be crucified. Pictured in the OT and fulfilled during the times of the Romans when crucifixion was the means of execution. It was all part of the plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by lionofgod on Apr 21, 2021 11:37:46 GMT -6
Just a few biblical points further.
Paul, whom wrote most of the "new Testament" which all here have already accepted as a credible, honest trustworthy and personal witness, has also written confirming the other texts and accounting of Jesus post resurrection teachings. So, if your own bible authors confirm the texts and all relay the same messages, how can they be deemed other than true? I would assert that most have never heard of or even know of the existence of all the documented writings of Paul alone, never the less the remaining apostles. Having no knowledge of the facts, we still my a decision to account credit to the man only in the writings that are chosen, regardless of their authenticity? That is the formal opinion of "Christians"? I know that is the position of the Catholic church, as they refused to even provide the texts the priests used to teach from to the parishioners, till the late 1500's. It is also the opinion of the Jewish community. The reason there is such a thing as "Christians" is that the followers of Jesus Christ, held different beliefs than the Romans and the Jews and all the other religions. It is considered a religion of it's own. The "Christian" bible, consists of Christs teachings, period. This is all just undisputed fact. Now if the "modern" belief is that we are better off ignoring most of Jesus life and teachings, even though they are available to those that seek and study. I would submit, that the people that follow that mark of thinking, are not carrying Jesus mark, not His teachings, but rather a belief system that was here previous to Him, one He openly said the believers of which, were not doing God's will. But if anyone can show me where he praised said people for their understanding of His word, please do post it. I have looked and have yet to find such evidence. He does praise John, for being the only one of the 12 that actually understood. But John's writings post resurrection are not included in the bible, save for one of his books of revelation. All the apostles obeyed Jesus. They all wrote accounts of the same story and teachings. But none of those, is within the modern bible text. The knowledge of that alone, should scare the pants off of any reasonable follower of Jesus. But as stated, each must choose the wide road with thew masses or the narrow one of Jesus. It's a one on one issue, I hold no animosity towards any that make decisions based on truth and factual evidence and testimony. no matter what they believe, for I won't be judged by their decisions, but by my own.
It is also well documented that some of the existing books within the bible had multiple contributors and even a couple that are disputed as to whom wrote them at all. There is also proof that some excerpts of text were removed and even whole pages of text skipped. If that is what is considered the "perfect" work of God, be happy we have higher standards for the food we eat than the religious teaching we lay our faith in. The idea that human non beliebers are capable of documenting ALL 30 plus years of Jesus teaching into that small book, is ridiculous at the face value. I don't dispute the truth of the writings of Jesus that are already within the bible, I just point out the obvious. That ALL His teaching is not represented within. It is simply not possible. So as a follower of Jesus, and a seeker of Truth, I actually researched, downloaded, compared texts and authenticated dates and places of authorship, as well as correlated scripture from within and without the known bible writings. Only then can any reasonable Truth seeking individual make a intelligent choice as to the validity of Jesus teachings. Obviously, I expect no person to blindly trust my personal judgements, rather I encourage all to use the tools you have at you finger tips, invest some of you worldly time in research and study into Jesus, beyond what is easily available, already edited and chosen for you. Or they may choose, to remain ignorant of the whole of Jesus teachings, and put faith in the fact that someone before them did all the work of deciding their salvation for them. Then pray they got it all right. Many will fall, few will rise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Apr 21, 2021 11:40:34 GMT -6
We want this forum to be a place of freedom and graciousness and so in the spirit of open discourse we only have three rules: 1. No debating core doctrines of the Christian faith. The Christian faith is the teachings of Christ, that's actually the definition of the word.(faith in Christ, ie-Christian faith) If you are participating here you should be a committed Believer. I absolutely believe without reservation in the teachings of Jesus Christ. Period. Seekers and non-Christians are more than welcome also, but this is a forum that honors God's Word and therefore arguments against His Word aren't for this forum... questions are welcome though! For purposes of this forum, "core doctrines" are considered to be the historic tenets of Christianity: One self-existent God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the virgin birth, the full deity of Christ, the substitutionary atonement, the literal and physical resurrection of Christ, salvation through faith alone in Christ alone, a literal and future bodily resurrection of the dead, and a historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture. Premillennialism, a literal rapture of the Church to Heaven, and a literal/historical interpretation of Genesis 1-11 are also considered core doctrines. Ok, not breaking any of these stated rules.2. No obscenity or racism of any kind. I don't curse.3. Don't invalidate a fellow member's thoughts. It is ok to express a disagreement, but this shouldn't be done along the lines of "you're just wrong" or "if you believed the Bible then you would agree with me", etc. I very specifically say that every person must decide their personal beliefs individually and that I further make no judgements on the validity of their opinion, whether I personally agree or not.So, as far as I read english, I'm staying well within the bounds of the rules set forth by this site to control content therein. If my above statement is not factual, I am always open to honest rebuke for my own personal spiritual growth.The rules define what the core doctrines are: For purposes of this forum, "core doctrines" are considered to be the historic tenets of Christianity: One self-existent God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the virgin birth, the full deity of Christ, the substitutionary atonement, the literal and physical resurrection of Christ, salvation through faith alone in Christ alone, a literal and future bodily resurrection of the dead, and a historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture. Premillennialism, a literal rapture of the Church to Heaven, and a literal/historical interpretation of Genesis 1-11 are also considered core doctrines. You said the core doctrines are "The Christian faith is the teachings of Christ, that's actually the definition of the word.(faith in Christ, ie-Christian faith)" The teachings of Christ give us our core doctrines. But they must come from the Bible, not outside the canon sources. arguments against His Word aren't for this forum - This is the part we see you violating. Your posts seem to say that the Bible is not enough, not complete, has contradictions or errors. To the comment about being a committed believer, you stated: I absolutely believe without reservation in the teachings of Jesus Christ. Period. Just believing His teachings won't save you. (Just to make that clear to anyone reading along that might not be a believer. Jesus died to pay for your sins and His resurrection proved He was an acceptable offering/sacrifice. Faith in Him, not just His words, is what saves) |
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Apr 21, 2021 11:47:26 GMT -6
If God wanted us to have all the other letters that were written included in the Bible, then I am sure that He would have gotten them in there. But what we have is enough for salvation, for understanding who God is, for living holy lives. You are free to read them and have your thoughts on them. You may even share from them on this board (siting where your information comes from, please) But for our defense of what we believe, the Bible is all we need. Arguing otherwise breaks rule 1.
|
|
(I watched 1 & 2 but see in the series "part 19", perhaps theres more)
