“You do not believe the Bible is the sole unique righteous authority?”
I have no clue what your definition of “sole unique righteous authority” encompasses. Your use of “righteous” gives you away. I bet anything you think you are going to sneak that in and try to trap me with something.
Being a Christian, I believe that the Bible is inspired of God, and that it is the only volume inspsired by God. That is, he has not inspired other books purporting to show the way to salvation, etc.
As such, it is a very tiny spectrum of what can be considered “righteous authority.” A history book written by Winston Churchill, for example, could very well be considered a righteous authority, since he was honest, knowledgable, did his research, and was brilliant.
Luke, in writing his account in the New Testament, said he used and compared manuscripts to arrive at accuracy. He obviously considered those manuscripts “righteous authority” and we don’t have them now.
“I have no clue what your definition of “sole unique righteous authority” encompasses. Your use of “righteous” gives you away. I bet anything you think you are going to sneak that in and try to trap me with something.”
Absolutely not, not sneaking anything. Just assuming that every faith has it’s own written doctrine that they consider the righteous authoritative word without question. “Righteousness” is a simple and universal concept. And Christians like any other faith believe their book and written doctrine is absolutely righteous literally word for word without question. Which is absolutely normal and justified for any faith. It wouldn’t be a true devoted faith if they didn’t.
Are not God’s words authoritative and righteous? Is not the written account of God’s words then also authoritative and righteous? It would be hypocritical for the truly faithful to think any different...
Is there some other definition of Righteousness? Is Righteousness an opinionated compromise of some sort? Is there a gray area? As far as I understand it, righteousness just means righteousness.