Returning to Biblical Authority

Amen Gup! God help us!

But why is it that most denominations are considered protestants which means they agreed with Luther about Faith Alone, but now many of those same protestant groups want to add things to Faith once again?

God Bless!

 

"Alone" is a meaningless advertising slogan.

 

Why? Because as soon as one adds a creed or a theology then the Bible isn't "alone." If I need someone else to tell me what the Bible "means" then it is the Bible + the someone else.

 

Billwald,

Where does the bible say only use the bible? How did people only use the bible before the printing press when the bibles had to be hand written? How did people use only the bible when they couldn't even read? Mass education in the western world is only a hundred or so years old.


Ref.
Acts 8:27
So he got up and set out. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, that is, the queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury, who had come to Jerusalem to worship,
28 and was returning home. Seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah.
29 The Spirit said to Philip, "Go and join up with that chariot."
30 Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?"
31 He replied, " How can I, unless someone instructs me? " So he invited Philip to get in and sit with him.


2 Tim 2:2
And what you heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will have the ability to teach others as well.


2 Timoty 3:14
But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it ,
15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,


If all we needed was the Bible, why don't we all have the same interpretation of it, many of us have contradicting intrepretations.


Your Servant in Christ,
Sirach

 

Interssting article; Ken Ham and AIG are becoming more subtle in their fingerpointing.

You must understand that the group AIG stands for one particular interpretation of Genesis to fully recognise that the article asserts that those that believe otherwise are in need of true salvation.

Within this article those that do not agree with AIG's INTERPRETATION of Genesis are called re-interpreters, deniers of the authority and trustworthinss of the Word of God, neglecters of the vital truths, weak and ineffective supporters of the immoral, and that every single doctrine they believe is wrong.

Ken Ham and AIG have closed their eyes to the truth. There are effective OEC groups that stand firmly upon the Word of Truth, even more strongly supporting proper interpretive techiques than the fallible AIG.

Rob

 

What is interesting is that, while people forgive Luther his "warts," those who have "warts" today are flailed...

 

TP, I gotta tell ya, your comments are getting better all the time!!

Peace,

Tam

 

Ken Ham is right to observe that failure to recognize the real, actual, literal work of the Creator in Gen 1-2:3 will result in a flawed Gospel being preached. And a world that is only confronted by an inconsistent - conflicted Gospel will be a world in turmoil, darkness and confusion.

Worse - we will see the abortion agenda and the gay rights agenda promoted in the churches that have embraced a compromised Gospel - compromised from book-1 chapter-1 page-1 on.

No wonder John begins HIS gospel with the RIGHT - literal, emphatic statement about Christ the Creator as the BASIS for the Gospel.

No wonder Paul establishes that same fact in chapter 1 of his book of Romans.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Amen!

 

So if we don't endorse the literal six-day creation, we're immediately on the path to abortion and gay marriage?

I guess I don't see the connection. God creating and creating is not the same thing as saying God created in six days, did it six thousand-and-change years ago, and that's it. Is there no room for the former without a lockstep adherence to the latter?

 

The Bible says "God SPOKE and it was He COMMANDED and it was established" - but some say "no it EVOLVED!".

The Bible says that we are to WORSHIP HIM who MADE the heavens the earth the seas AND ALL (life) that is in them - but evolution says "NO Life was not MADE like that -- it EVOLVED from non-living elements".

The Bible says that Christ IS the Creator - literally and actually such that He commanded "and it was" - such that "NOTHING that is come into being has done so without being MADE by Christ". John 1:1-4 but evolutionism says "NO! Life EVOLVED by death, disease, starvation, carnage and extinction with survival of the fittest providing the result".

GIVEN then that man was not directly created BY God in the image of God NOR did life come about on earth AS GOD stated it - THEN man is merely "an evolved species" produced from atheist-evolutionism's death, disease, starvation, extinction and carnage "god".

So who is to say that abortion rights or gay rights "violates the image of God" since the IMAGE we are made in - is the IMAGE of carnage and destruction.

OF course that is one way to rationalize it - but the TEST is to OBSERVE those Christian groups that DO promote the abortion and gay rights agenda. Did they not FIRST buckle under to atheism's evolutionism instead of the Bible's Creationism? Can you find ONE case where that sequence was not followed?

Is there ANY literal creation group that ALSO promotes the gay rights and abortion rights agendss?

Even ONE?

In Christ,

Bob

 

So when I share the Gospel, should I start in Genesis? Or do you think Ham (and those of his ilk) would "allow" me to jump right to John 3:16-17?

 

I don't see what value there is on accepting anyones views on the Bible when there are so many interpretations. No 2 people agree on anything in the Bible. I sometimes try to go at a section with all preconceived notions set aside. Very difficult.

 

Quoting Gup20,
Here in the former Protectorate of the Republic of South Africa, nowadays Namibia, stands a steam locomotive a few kilometers I believe in-land from the coast shore. It was brought there by the Germans who occupied the terrotory for some time before world war 2. It was off-loaded by crane onto the coastal sands, from where it started its journey towards the capital, Windhoek, on own steam, literally, and on big iron rimmed wheels. But the desert sand was too much for it, and it came to a standstill not far from where it started.
There it stood, and it was immediately christianed, Luther, after Luther's historical act referred to in this topic.

Now what's the relevancy?
I ask myself, did not Christianity - Protestantism - come to a halt, after Luther, just like Luther of the Namibian desert?

 

Just said on another thread (Gal.4:10 in context) there's no such things as the Bible and the Bible only because it will always in that case be the Bible and my own ideas only!

 

The Word of God is heard only in the Church where obedience means that we listen to one another! (Karl Barth)

 

Gup20,
You speak of the OT - you must see what's going on in the NT! Or rather what's going on WITH it!

Stood I the other day in a bookshop browsing through the Bible. NO older ones among quite a number of new Versions, and without exception, each in every instance of a 'Sabbath'-implicating verse corrupted! Scandalously corrupted, perverted, in service of no-god-Sunday.
Shame on Christianity, preaching plain honesty and claiming proclaiming straight-forward: Thus saith the Lord, yet putting lie upon lie in the mouth of each 'prophet-translator'!
And I must keep quiet?
Who in any case will pay attention to what this nondescript nonconformist has to say? He's not even an irritation so wee his desert squeek, not even laughable, just ignorable.

 

Start where John starts John 1:1-5 which which takes you directly to the Details of Gen 1-3.

John thinks it is "the basis for the Gospel" - and so do I.

Other like to go straight to John 3 and skip what JOHN considered to be the BASIS for the Gospel.

I have a little problem with that kind of Bible slicing. But more importantly it misses the foundation for the Messiah, the gospel, the need of salvation etc.

Evolutionism is "a "cancer" in the church today erroding truth and evolving a moral decay chain that has lead to the abortion rights agenda and the gay rights agenda in many of the pro-evolutionism churches.

In Christ,

Bob