But when you all are in a hole, you start the hand wringing and what not. And how does it not matter if a word is used in scripture or not? Hmm? 'Throw yourself off the cliff and the angels will surely catch you - who cares what's in scripture and what isn't...' Jesus said "it is written", not 'I believe' or 'I think'. You don't care what is "written" (the scriptures) because you aren't defending scriptures, you're defending your philosophies - they aren't scripture nor are they supported in scripture. You have to defend your philosophy with logic, reason and other philosophy. Your chief problem is in selling your version of how things work over Jesus' version of how things work. Jesus is one heck of a lot more believeable, pal. And He speaks from authority. You speak from claims.
Havoc - You may want to look at the context of this statement by Dave before you rip into him with such anger. The person he was debating was arguing that the term Theotokos does not mean "Birthgiver of God," as has been maintained at least since 431 and the council of Ephesus, but rather "God of Usury." The debate got rather silly, and many - including very knowledgeble NC's like angelo and bassman - tried to get him to see his mistake. But he continued to claim that the only valid meaning for the term was the one that he could construct out of the appearance of its root components, The- and tokos, in Scripture via Strong's. This is why Dave was telling him that Scripture didn't matter in this case.