Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | MARK 16:16: Was it perverted? | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 101929 | ||
Reason this: "One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the analogia scriptura, the analogy of Scripture. In other words, we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. And since the Bible doesn't contradict itself, any interpretation of a specific passage that contradicts the general teaching of the Bible is to be rejected. Since the general teaching of the Bible is, as we have seen, that baptism and other forms of ritual are not necessary for salvation, no individual passage could teach otherwise. Thus we must look for interpretations of those passages that will be in harmony with the general teaching of Scripture." (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/baptism.htm) --Radioman2 |
||||||
2 | MARK 16:16: Was it perverted? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aspiring Overseer | 101969 | ||
Radioman, You quote as doctrine the precepts of MAN! Just because someone told you that baptism is not necessary for salvation does not make it so. You discount the honest observation of Arapqa, offer NO scripture, but instead give him a WEBSITE! AO |
||||||
3 | MARK 16:16: Was it perverted? | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 102009 | ||
This is not rocket science. Go to the website to read the Scriptures and the entire article. Just because someone told you that baptism is necessary for salvation does not make it so. I think you were bluffing when you attempted to answer my previous question about principles of interpretation. I doubt if you have any idea of what is meant by "principles of interpretation." --Radioman2 |
||||||