Featured considering starting my own website

As I mentioned...other than from the corrupt church....this was his scholarly source.

sigh......but he had no access to a true Bible until he became a monk and had his own. So whatever he was teaching before this was not Scripture.
As for Calvin, priests were instructed to carry out the Words of the Pope as authoritative and were restricted access to Bibles.

 

Try me. Let's go back to Augustine, Borgias, Alexander, How about how the Phoenicians were the people introducing the alphabet around 1000 BC-500 BC and heavily influenced the Greek alphabet, which would become the beginnings of the current English alphabet. How about how early Christian gravestones utilized phoenixes instead of crosses as a sign of rebirth. How about languages? Did you know the Japanese word for king looks similar to the English letter I, upside down, with a line through it...literally translated when it is written the proper way, it means "The mediator between Heaven and Earth."
Do you really, really want to go there with me? I actually have a PHD in the history of languages sir.
Besides, we should not argue about church history. We should be exacting the truth of Scripture...which was, from the beginning, my intent. I like, Tyndale, know 8 languages.
How about the historical fact that Luther would fart to drive out demons?
This is why my authority is Scripture, not Calvin or Luther.

 

And as for John Calvin, my hometown's namesake is named after one of Calvin's teachers, Seneca...this would be the teacher that led him to oppose Catholicism...His studies were largely Catholic-influenced...Seneca was a heavily devout Catholic man, virtually all collegiate teaching to this point would have been of the Catholic influence.

 

Your attitude is completely disrespectful and not exemplary of a believer.
I very clearly stated our goal should be exacting truth of Scripture but you are too focused on arguing and prove yourself right that you would rather maintain you cannot possibly be wrong rather than engage in actual discussion. That is, by definition, the sin of Satan...thinking he was equal with God and had all knowledge.

 

And yet, when refuting me, you have provided no counterpoint, no source material, no information as to correction, but only engaged in insults.

 

Well you took one verse that you did not cite: Here's the full passage:

Bible Gateway passage: James 3 - English Standard Version

Is it not said that we should be open to reason?

 

In terms of the theological part...I had started it prior to being a part of a Reformed church a few years ago..I think maybe last posted a year or more ago...basically in essence I would have been re-starting it, and continued posts after having asked the question and receiving a few comments.

 

Well, look at the surrounding words, and also look at the Greek:
who is considered wise? Those of good conduct; do not be false to the truth, in terms of your heart--as the Bible says our hearts are deceitful above all things; the Holy spirit searches our hearts to convict us; Wisdom is pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits/works (as a byproduct, not requirement of salvation), and this is key here: And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.
Do we disagree? It appears that way. Should we really let that get in the way of our call to love one another? No...Unless i have a seriously false version of the Gospel or am committing sexual immorality or am going around hating other believers.
I do not believe a blog of devotionals is the same thing as leading a church...I believe they are separate things.
As for the Greek, it is the word eupeithes, which means open to persuasion or willing to yield.

 

I did answer it--open to persuasion or willing to yield.
Also....wouldn't just having a personal journal actually be more dangerous then? Because if my information is public, I can be corrected...if my journal/blog is personal...then nobody will see it, and I run the risk of deceiving myself forever, as nobody will correct me if my reflection was misguided.

 

So you support Reformed theology then, I'm guessing Calvinist? Do you support Allie Stuckey, prominent female Calvinist theologian? By your definition, she would be a teacher, and the Bible says God does not permit a woman to teach.