Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: "Therefore, it is not far-fetched at all to assume that while there was no developed, grown plants of the field, that vegetative life existed prior to this point." I don't think I am taking this out of context. It does show my point very clearly though. It is not far-fetched to assume? Good way to study the Bible I'd say. Don't worry what it says, just assume. we can make it be anything we want it to. Actually it is my respect for the scriptures that causes me to continue to ask the question. You assume that which is a direct contradiction to what the scripture says, and then say I have no regard for the scripture. I demand for myself the truth of what the scripture says. There are plenty of ambiguities and dificult issues to resolve in the scriptures whithout adding our own assumptions. Sola Scriptura is an assumption because the Bible teaches it nowhere. While you say that you have provided plenty of evidence, all you have really given me is opinion and assumption. I am simply asking for some scripture that bears witness to this doctrine that seems so indefensible. And you have provided none of that. Book, chapter, verse? Telling us what the Bible is to be, and how it is exclusive and sufficient? That's all. And as for my knowledge of Catholic belief.. try again. I got it right from the horses mouth so to speak. You have demonstrated that you are willing to make assumptions to make your case. |