TheMatrixHasU71 Posted February 3, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,573 Content Per Day: 0.51 Reputation: 723 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 3, 2017 7 minutes ago, Yowm said: No, I'll not be like the charismatics and put the bible down, neither will I rely heavily on the Fathers who often contradicted each other; no, I'd rather be like the Reformers and pick up the Bible with the conviction of Sola Scriptura. So Scripture please!. I have already given it to you and I have got more coming......I only rely on Scripture and the wisdom of our elders which you do not dare reject and rarely contradict themselves. I have read tons of them and see little difference of opinions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Rabbitt Posted February 3, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 219 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 190 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/28/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/31/1950 Share Posted February 3, 2017 17 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said: People often do have a problem understanding 1 Cor 13:8 but when you look at WHY the gift was needed, and the fact that it DID disappear after the first century (the claims that some churches have made over the centuries about supposedly speaking in tongues were either outright lies or demonism) only sows the real truth; the gift no longer legitimately exists. You seem to have great knowledge in this. I was prayed over in church but did not receive the gift of tongues. Then, in the middle of the night as I slept, I started speaking in tongues and woke up my wife. She told me about it in the morning as I prayed in tongues all night. I've been doing it ever since. 18 years now. If the gift is dead, then what am I doing and where did it come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran C Posted February 3, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 337 Content Per Day: 0.13 Reputation: 214 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/11/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 3, 2017 2 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said: People often do have a problem understanding 1 Cor 13:8 but when you look at WHY the gift was needed, and the fact that it DID disappear after the first century (the claims that some churches have made over the centuries about supposedly speaking in tongues were either outright lies or demonism) only sows the real truth; the gift no longer legitimately exists. Yes. I know the reason tongues was necessary when Christanity was new. The Apostles had to travel and preach and they didn't know all the languages. Acts 2:6 says that everyone heard the Apostles preaching in their own Language (the new converts). But how do you explain Mark 16:17? Written about 30 or 40 years after Jesus died... JESUS says, before the ascension, "...these signs will accompany those who believe in My name, they will drive out demons, they will speak in new tongues..." We must all know someone who does indeed speak in tongues. I've seen a service where someone stood up and spoke, and someone else translated into English. Fran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkins Posted February 8, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 289 Content Per Day: 0.05 Reputation: 45 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/25/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted February 8, 2017 The Bible is perfect in God's terms, not human terms. The Bible as a true account of human witnessing terms of how it is written, how it is conserved and how it is conveyed. It's a true account of human witnessing under the inspiration of God even when standing the court of Heaven. It is a true account of human witnessing for God to convey His intact message of salvation. Theologically we read the same Bible today as humans read it 2000 years ago. Contextually consistency is actually a defect as it's not how humans can keep their 2000 year old documents. You won't be able to find a single human document which can be kept contextually consistent today and 2000 years ago. As a matter of fact, you won't be able to find any human document with its original writings exist for you to do the reconciliation. In a sense Bible is the only human document which is reconcilable for us to tell that the Bible we read today is the same Bible humans read some 2000 years ago, theologically speaking. That's how perfect the Bible is. The Bible serves precisely the purpose of allowing His Elect to read to be saved, and those out of His Elect to read to be condemned. There's not a single one of His Elect will fall short His Grace this way. And there's not a single one out of His Elect can benefit from His Grace this way. That's how perfect the Bible is! Canonization is a process of how God authenticates the books through His authorized entity on earth. As a result, the Jews as the first authority only made the OT Canon authenticated, but not the NT Canon. The Catholics as the consecutive authority can only made the NT Canon authenticated, but not the OT Canon. Only the Protestants now can have both an authenticated OT and NT. This is the end result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BacKaran Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 The word tongues means the known languages of the day. An unknown language would be called barbarian. I would not far venture to say where tongues come from today but the Bible does tell us the devil will do amazing things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted March 13, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted March 13, 2017 On 12/3/2016 at 5:56 PM, Hoddie said: A question from the Catholics here on Worthy Christian..... Can you tell/show us where you got your Canon of Scripture? I'm talking about the Canonical books that are those books which have been acknowledged as belonging to the list of books considerd to be inspired and to contain a rule of faith and morals. This question has been asked on numerous occasions in the past, and more recently in the now closed Lourdes thread. Many have claimed to have answered this question, but have failed to show any historical or Scriptural evidence to back it up. Back on the last page (pg.8) Hazard made an intersting comment coming from someone that adheres to the sola scriptura doctrine. as Follows. Now if the bible does not give a list if the books that belong in the bible as Hazard states, how do Sola Scripturists determine that the books that are in the bible truly belong there? From a Protestant/nondenominational perspective, and if its not in the bible, by who's or what authority determined it? Do those of you that beleive the bible alone holds all truth, and is sufficient as a sole rule of faith agree with Hazard? If so, doesn't this contradict the premise of Sola Scriptura? Peace This may help. Biblical Canon The Protestant Reformation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No124get1952 Posted March 14, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 159 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/31/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/17/1952 Share Posted March 14, 2017 Since the discussion up to this point has been the justification of the Protestant canon of Scripture, how about we apply the same standards to the Catholic canon of scripture? I submit that there is knowledge to be gained by learning how the Catholic Bible came into existence. I am curious. Because I find the topic to diffuse the primary focus of the Bible, which is the redemptive work of Christ on the cross, his subsequent burial and resurrection. It smacks of the effort to prove one group of Christians wrong and another group of Christians right. When considered in the eternal perspective, both Catholics and Protestants have largely spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world....as Jesus commanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted March 14, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 0 Topic Count: 905 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 9,644 Content Per Day: 2.02 Reputation: 5,831 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/07/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted March 14, 2017 I would only add that this was accomplished despite the traditions of mankind in both . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genesisjks Posted March 18, 2017 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 22 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/25/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 18, 2017 (edited) Edited March 20, 2017 by genesisjks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limey_Bob Posted April 5, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 327 Content Per Day: 0.13 Reputation: 172 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/30/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted April 5, 2017 On 12/3/2016 at 10:56 PM, Hoddie said: A question from the Catholics here on Worthy Christian..... Can you tell/show us where you got your Canon of Scripture? I'm talking about the Canonical books that are those books which have been acknowledged as belonging to the list of books considerd to be inspired and to contain a rule of faith and morals. This question has been asked on numerous occasions in the past, and more recently in the now closed Lourdes thread. Many have claimed to have answered this question, but have failed to show any historical or Scriptural evidence to back it up. Back on the last page (pg.8) Hazard made an intersting comment coming from someone that adheres to the sola scriptura doctrine. as Follows. Now if the bible does not give a list if the books that belong in the bible as Hazard states, how do Sola Scripturists determine that the books that are in the bible truly belong there? From a Protestant/nondenominational perspective, and if its not in the bible, by who's or what authority determined it? Do those of you that beleive the bible alone holds all truth, and is sufficient as a sole rule of faith agree with Hazard? If so, doesn't this contradict the premise of Sola Scriptura? Peace With regard to the New Testament, the 27 books were all written by men who were both chosen by Christ himself and were eyewitnesses of his resurrection from the dead, or else men such as Mark and Luke who accompanied such men. Thus the New Testament is an eyewitness record of Christ and his resurection by first hand witnesses or men who accompanied them and wrote on their behalf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts