I state something, and then you say I need to support it with the bible. Why? Because the bible is God's word that he handed down to humanity as a guide? No, it's not. But you all say it is huh? So I'm going to make it real easy for you to prove your point and ask you where in the bible does it say God gave Christians the bible as a guide for life and that's it? I'm going to put a few refutations for common misquotations below
1. All scripture is God breathed but that verse does not state anything about scriptures existence only being in the bible
2.The end of revelations only applies to the book of revelations, not this culmination you guys concocted.
The only thing God ever sent down was His Spirit. He sent the Spirit to guide Christians, not this culmination of writing (most of which is unreliable anyways). You may say," but it's all reliable." I'm going to ask you why is that? The only reason to believe something is true is God, so in order for the writings of a person to be held as scripture that person needs to say what God says. None of the apostles fit the bill, so you can't go believing what they say to be true because they said it. The words of Jesus are different as he was wholly in line with God, but since the apostles weren't, you can't go believing what they said just because they said it. This goes for all the other writers too. Anyways, I don't expect anyone to understand this. However, consider this a call to those who do.
i guess Paul wrote "all
writings are God~breathed," graphe v gramme, so i think i'm agreeing there
seems like the Apostles played the straight man to Jesus' Court Jester most often? But imo that is intentional, and Paul seems to be an exception? Anyway i would accept the Bible as a perspective on truth--tho not actually the Book of Truth Itself, as mentioned in...Daniel?--and i would also accept that anyone insisting you must believe their interpretation of it or else a liar, as is outlined in "I would rather never eat meat again, than offend a bro" so i think i'm sort of agreeing with you there too.
i think the apostles were made to not see in the NT while ol' Josh was with them on purpose, bc they in fact did not see until later, right? Even entering Jerusalem they thought the kingdom was about to manifest? So i agree there to a point, but imo we also have to give them credit for accurately portraying
themselves in that manner, as they are the NT authors, more or less, right?
so fwiw--nothing--i do read the lines of the apostles differently in the gospels than in later books, as in the gospels they seem deliberately obtuse imo
but far as im concerned
test everything, and keep what is good but i personally do still hold to "The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible," mostly bc our Mithraist rather than Christian "beliefs" are plainly--well, in code, symbolism, but still very obvious imo--delineated in the Bible,
Apollos waters, but also not in code at all, very plainly,
No son of man may die for another's sins; No one has ever gone up to heaven, etc.
Death, More Abundantly sucks so really i dont blame you a bit
Understand why the pimps and hos are beating you in
:)