[wagglebee]

I use the First Century for interpretation. I consider nothing after the book of Revelation.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that a single person had even seen the totality of what we know as the New Testament in the first century and it is certain that many in the first century would have been reading what the Church later rejected from the canon of Scripture.

[Uri’el-2012]

U-2012>I use the First Century for interpretation.
I consider nothing after the book of Revelation.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that a single person had even seen the totality of what we know as the New Testament in the first century and it is certain that many in the first century would have been reading what the Church later rejected from the canon of Scripture.

What they were reading in the first century was the Holy Word of G-d.

The Tanach, Yah'shua preached from Deuteronomy and Isaiah and ....

Paul and Peter and Jude and James all preached from the Tanach !

You are right that the Roman "church" rejected
the Holy Word of G-d: the Tanach and Yah'shua the Jewish Messiah
and soon returning King, the living Word of G-d.

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach

[Cronos]

I use the First Century for interpretation. I consider nothing after the book of Revelation.

He means that he is wise enough to understand all the words in the Bible all by himself.