Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: "Mathison, while not being infallible (which as I had previously stated, for those with reading comprehension disabilities, is characteristic of the Bible alone), has documented himself superbly and is very persuasive and well-reasoned." So let's tie this together. If Mathison, being persuasive and well reasoned, and having documented his work superbly, began to teach that the doctrine of the trinity was a fabrication and can't be proved historically or in scripture, would you believe him? You see the early church, you know, the guys that actually wrote the NT, didn't teach the doctrine of the trinity. This was developed by the church later on. Yes, they can point to scripture that eludes to it, but it apparently isn't as obvious as you seem to think it is. Or they were just really stupid back then. I am not saying that I don't believe in the trinity. I think I have to spell that out for you. You apparently have trouble with hypothetical stuff. You say the Bible is the only reliable source of truth, but what do you do if two people disagree about what it says, or what it means? How do you resolve this? Do you appeal to a person, like Mathison? |