Master of Divinity Student

[Lamar]

Huh?

I never said you were not obeying the commandments that Jesus gave us.

I was agreeing with what you wrote.

You are agreeing with what I wrote???

Are you talking about my unending love for Daisy Mae?

 

[Inquisitor]

Nothing Calvin, any priest or pope from the Catholic Church, Ireneaus, Tertullian, Augustine, Origen, etc. or any other characters that showed up after the Bible was completed in the First Century C.E. was written by inspiration of Almighty God. Had that been the case, their writings would have been found in the Judeo-Christian Bible. That's how we end up with all these false doctrines not found in scripture.

Try again, Inquisitor.

The church you attend with only a priest speaking at the front during the service.

Was the traditional church stereotype absorbed by the Reformers and handed on to the Protestants.

That type of church service was a very corrupt form of church.

Here is how a first century church operated.

1 Corinthians 14:26
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching,
has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

The congregation ran the service not some high priest.

Do you understand the scripture or do you follow a tradition?

 

[Inquisitor]

"nature is a supernatural miracle"
Did you really think this out?

If "nature" is supernatural than what is not supernatural?

Your stuck in an old paradigm, a separation between 'the natural and the supernatural'.

That was what some people thought and does that make that idea correct?

Angels are invisible and have always been on the earth and so have the demons.

There is no clear distinction between a natural world and a supernatural world.

Mankind has a limited sensory perception and is blind to the ultimate reality.

 

[Inquisitor]

You are agreeing with what I wrote???

Are you talking about my unending love for Daisy Mae?

I have never seen Daisy Mae?

 

[Lamar]

Your stuck in an old paradigm, a separation between 'the natural and the supernatural'.

That was what some people thought and does that make that idea correct?

Angels are invisible and have always been on the earth and so have the demons.

There is no clear distinction between a natural world and a supernatural world.

Mankind has a limited sensory perception and is blind to the ultimate reality.

I am not even sure how to reply to this tomfoolery.

So angels are invisible naturally?

or

Are angels invisible supernaturally?

How old are you?

 

[NeutralZone]

The Bible was not complete in the first century, far from it.

The New Testament canon, consisting of 27 books, was largely finalized by the end of the 4th century.
While there was no single event that officially canonized it, the process involved a gradual consensus
building among early Christians, with key affirmations coming from councils like Hippo (393 AD)
and Carthage (397 and 419 AD). These councils affirmed the same 27 books that are recognized today.
(Google)

In the first century there were countless letters flowing through the churches in the Roman Empire.

That's why Luke wrote his letter to Theophilus!

Luke 1:1-2
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning...

Luke's letter was only addressed to one person and was not called a gospel in the 1st century.

So there were lots of letters written by many people.

We know from Paul's letters that people were writing letters and signing his name at the end.

How anyone in the 1st century could workout what was an authentic letter and what was not,
I have no idea since most people were not even literate.

I know they developed creeds (1 Corinthians 15) to transfer information.

The idea of a New Testament, a sacred writing, did not exist in the 1st century.

By the end of the second century the apostle's letters had been identified.

The gospels, as part of the New Testament, were gradually affirmed over the first few centuries of Christianity.
While there was debate and some early variations, the major gospels were largely accepted by most Christians
by the middle of the 3rd century. (Google)

What is your source of information?

I stopped reading right after the portion that I bolded in red. And don't expect me to read any more of the tripe you posted above.

The Judeo-Christian is my final authority. Any other writings that come after the Bible was completed in the First Century C.E. is nothing more than human philosophy.

Since you obviously don't view the 66 books of the Bible as the final authority, there's nothing else we can discuss.

 

[Lamar]

Since you obviously don't view the 66 books of the Bible as the final authority, there's nothing else we can discuss.

Well said.

His esoteric knowledge is his final authority.

 

[GWH]

"nature is a supernatural miracle"
Did you really think this out?

If "nature" is supernatural than what is not supernatural?

Indeed I have come to realize that nature was created by God miraculously and it is an ongoing miracle sustained by God's power.

Before that realization I thought supernatural meant only that which contradicted God's natural laws of physics,
which in my experience remains a null set.

What about in yours?

 

[Lamar]

Indeed I have come to realize that nature was created by God miraculously and it is an ongoing miracle sustained by God's power.

Before that realization I thought supernatural meant only that which contradicted God's natural laws of physics,
which in my experience remains a null set.

What about in yours?

I would be happy to answer your question but please answer mine first.

 

[Inquisitor]

I stopped reading right after the portion that I bolded in red. And don't expect me to read any more of the tripe you posted above.

The Judeo-Christian is my final authority. Any other writings that come after the Bible was completed in the First Century C.E. is nothing more than human philosophy.

Since you obviously don't view the 66 books of the Bible as the final authority, there's nothing else we can discuss.

You have no sources to support your claim.

The New Testament was canon in the first century.

 

[Inquisitor]

Indeed I have come to realize that nature was created by God miraculously and it is an ongoing miracle sustained by God's power.

Before that realization I thought supernatural meant only that which contradicted God's natural laws of physics,
which in my experience remains a null set.

What about in yours?

I will give you an example of how much science knows.

We have about 18,000 diseases in play but we have cured only one, that is, Smallpox.

We spend a fortune on medicine but we have made no substantial progress in curing diseases.

Science is powerless against even something as simple as the common cold.

I won't mention Quantum Theory or Cosmology which really amplify how stupid we are.

Physics is struggling, more and more, as time progresses.

Then they say, "natural laws", as if we can understand the universe?

They like to think they are, "Enlightened".

How powerfully deceived mankind has always been!

 

[Inquisitor]

Well said.

His esoteric knowledge is his final authority.

How come in the Old testament the supernatural was considered more in play.

You could probably count more than seventy miracles.

A lot of prophets recorded but how many not recorded?

Did the miracles and prophecy occur only during the age of the apostles?

Not according to the Old Testament.

Here is one example of a supernatural event.

Hebrews 11:29
By faith they passed through the Red Sea as though they were passing through dry land;
and the Egyptians, when they attempted it, were drowned.

Moses had that faith!

Moses probably would not make a distinction between the natural and the supernatural.

The ball is in your court.

 

[NeutralZone]

The church you attend with only a priest speaking at the front during the service.

Was the traditional church stereotype absorbed by the Reformers and handed on to the Protestants.

That type of church service was a very corrupt form of church.

Here is how a first century church operated.

1 Corinthians 14:26
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching,
has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

The congregation ran the service not some high priest.

Do you understand the scripture or do you follow a tradition?

You have the nerve to use the word corrupt while claiming--without one iota of evidence--that the 66 books in the Judeo-Christian Bible are not the complete inspired word of the Abrahamic God?

If you're going to start talking about corrupt, Inquisitor, it would be a good idea if you look in the nearest mirror.

 

[NeutralZone]

The Bible was not complete in the first century, far from it.

The New Testament canon, consisting of 27 books, was largely finalized by the end of the 4th century.
While there was no single event that officially canonized it, the process involved a gradual consensus
building among early Christians, with key affirmations coming from councils like Hippo (393 AD)
and Carthage (397 and 419 AD). These councils affirmed the same 27 books that are recognized today.
(Google)

In the first century there were countless letters flowing through the churches in the Roman Empire.

That's why Luke wrote his letter to Theophilus!

Luke 1:1-2
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning...

Luke's letter was only addressed to one person and was not called a gospel in the 1st century.

So there were lots of letters written by many people.

We know from Paul's letters that people were writing letters and signing his name at the end.

How anyone in the 1st century could workout what was an authentic letter and what was not,
I have no idea since most people were not even literate.

I know they developed creeds (1 Corinthians 15) to transfer information.

The idea of a New Testament, a sacred writing, did not exist in the 1st century.

By the end of the second century the apostle's letters had been identified.

The gospels, as part of the New Testament, were gradually affirmed over the first few centuries of Christianity.
While there was debate and some early variations, the major gospels were largely accepted by most Christians
by the middle of the 3rd century. (Google)

What is your source of information?

I stopped reading right after the portion that I bolded in red. And don't expect me to read any more of the tripe you posted above.

The Judeo-Christian is my final authority. Any other writings that come after the Bible was completed in the First Century C.E. is nothing more than human philosophy.

Since you obviously don't view the 66 books of the Bible as the final authority, there's nothing else we can discuss.

You have no sources to support your claim.

The New Testament was canon in the first century.

The 2,000+ accurately fulfilled prophecies in the Judeo-Christian Bible provide evidence that those 66 books are the inspired word of Jehovah the Father. No other writings provide such evidence. The book of Revelation warned people against inserting and deleting anything from the Bible.

Revelation 22:18
“I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll;

Revelation 22:19
"and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll."

You are trying to dance your way around the command at Revelation 22:18 by arguing that writings done by various individuals after the 66 books within the Bible are the continuation of God's inspired word.

Because your position is that the Bible with its 66 books is not the final authority--which is the exact opposite of what I believe--our differences will never be resolved because we do not rely on the same authority to settle disagreements.


Weymouth New Testament -- 2 Timothy 3:16
"Every Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for convincing, for correction of error, and for instruction in right doing;"


So guess what? Our conversation is over--permanently. You are now being added to my Ignore List so that I won't have to waste my precious time scrolling past the nonsense that you will doubtless continue to post.

 

[NeutralZone]

Well said.

His esoteric knowledge is his final authority.

People like Inquisitor are even worse than the atheists. At least with the atheists you know exactly what you're dealing with. You know they don't believe in the Abrahamic God, so you expect them to attack the Bible. But for someone to show up claiming they believe in the Abrahamic God while at the same time casting doubt on Jehovah's inspired word by claiming it's incomplete, that's akin to attacking Christianity and the Bible as an insider.

If there are any atheists on this website reading the types of comments being made by Inquisitor, they are probably laughing in glee.

 

[Inquisitor]

The 2,000+ accurately fulfilled prophecies in the Judeo-Christian Bible provide evidence that those 66 books are the inspired word of Jehovah the Father. No other writings provide such evidence. The book of Revelation warned people against inserting and deleting anything from the Bible.

Revelation 22:18
“I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll;

Revelation 22:19
"and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll."

You are trying to dance your way around the command at Revelation 22:18 by arguing that writings done by various individuals after the 66 books within the Bible are the continuation of God's inspired word.

Because your position is that the Bible with its 66 books is not the final authority--which is the exact opposite of what I believe--our differences will never be resolved because we do not rely on the same authority to settle disagreements.


Weymouth New Testament -- 2 Timothy 3:16
"Every Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for convincing, for correction of error, and for instruction in right doing;"


So guess what? Our conversation is over--permanently. You are now being added to my Ignore List so that I won't have to waste my precious time scrolling past the nonsense that you will doubtless continue to post.

You have spun off on a tangent.

We were discussing when the canon of the New Testament was formally recognized.

Your talking about the validity of the canon.

 

[Inquisitor]

People like Inquisitor are even worse than the atheists. At least with the atheists you know exactly what you're dealing with. You know they don't believe in the Abrahamic God, so you expect them to attack the Bible. But for someone to show up claiming they believe in the Abrahamic God while at the same time casting doubt on Jehovah's inspired word by claiming it's incomplete, that's akin to attacking Christianity and the Bible as an insider.

If there are any atheists on this website reading the types of comments being made by Inquisitor, they are probably laughing in glee.

I run the Inquisition not you.

You have a lot of demeaning comments.

Try and love your enemies.

 

[Inquisitor]

You have the nerve to use the word corrupt while claiming--without one iota of evidence--that the 66 books in the Judeo-Christian Bible are not the complete inspired word of the Abrahamic God?

If you're going to start talking about corrupt, Inquisitor, it would be a good idea if you look in the nearest mirror.

You can read.

I am definitely hitting a nerve.

You accepted the corrupted Catholic Church Mass, framework and replaced the priest
with a minister.

Don't tell me I am wrong when I directly quoted from the letter to the Corinthians.

Don't tell me I am wrong when the letter to the Corinthians says the following.

1 Corinthians 14:26
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching,
has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

You openly deny what is written and you are contradicting what is written!

 

[Lamar]

How come in the Old testament the supernatural was considered more in play.

You could probably count more than seventy miracles.

A lot of prophets recorded but how many not recorded?

Did the miracles and prophecy occur only during the age of the apostles?

Not according to the Old Testament.

Here is one example of a supernatural event.

Hebrews 11:29
By faith they passed through the Red Sea as though they were passing through dry land;
and the Egyptians, when they attempted it, were drowned.

Moses had that faith!

Moses probably would not make a distinction between the natural and the supernatural.

The ball is in your court.

Miracles happening in the past does not prove that miracles are happening today.

This is the issue that you do not seem to understand. Manna at one time fell from heaven but it stopped.

Yes God did let the manna fall but He also stopped it. He did not give a warning to the people ahead of time, He just stopped the miraculous.

Proclaiming things such as "God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow" is not germane to the subject.

The passing through the Red Sea was a physical supernatural manifestation of God, but what is being called the same today is not.

In other words, current examples of physical supernatural manifestations do not pass the smell test.

The ball is and has always been in the court of those who claim the miraculous.

The miraculous was to prove, not to be proven. This is the simple truth you cannot grasp.

You are defending something that should not need to be defended!

 

[Inquisitor]

Miracles happening in the past does not prove that miracles are happening today.

This is the issue that you do not seem to understand. Manna at one time fell from heaven but it stopped.

Yes God did let the manna fall but He also stopped it. He did not give a warning to the people ahead of time, He just stopped the miraculous.

Proclaiming things such as "God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow" is not germane to the subject.

The passing through the Red Sea was a physical supernatural manifestation of God, but what is being called the same today is not.

In other words, current examples of physical supernatural manifestations do not pass the smell test.

The ball is and has always been in the court of those who claim the miraculous.

The miraculous was to prove, not to be proven. This is the simple truth you cannot grasp.

You are defending something that should not need to be defended!

I am struggling to understand your posts.

Here is what you stated.

This is the issue that you do not seem to understand. Manna at one time fell from heaven but it stopped.

The bread from heaven was a prophecy about the near arrival of the messiah.

John 6:31-34
Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’”
Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven,
but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes
down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”

The manna from heaven never really stopped it would soon become limitless.

Then you stated another bell ringer.

The passing through the Red Sea was a physical supernatural manifestation of God, but what is being called the same today is not.

1 Corinthians 2:1-4
For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed
through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food;
and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them;
and the rock was Christ.

You missed the prophetic and that baptism into Moses was exactly the same today and always spiritual.

I am not claiming that the Holy Spirit and the gifts are continuous, the N.T. is proclaiming that.

You seem to be very confused.

No where in the scripture does it say that the gifts and ministries of the Holy Spirit will cease.