Replies

I notice you also dodged the other part of my post

I didn't dodge it: I ignored it. I consider it on par with "trutherism."

I just read Luke 2 and failed to see what you could possibly be saying, or even arguing for. I don’t like it when other people make me do work to figure out their own arguments, so please quote the scripture and explain what you mean, thoroughly, so I don’t argue against phantoms.

Simeon testifies, under the sway of the Holy Spirit (according to Holy Writ itself), his knowledge he would see the Christ before death was according to God's Word. Unless one can cite the OT prophesy informing him of same, "The Word of God" is comprised of MORE than that which is contained in "The Bible." Therefore, the doctrine of discounting the authority of anything NOT contained in the Bible is falsified.

“I didn’t dodge it: I ignored it. I consider it on par with “trutherism.””

IOW, you take it on faith that those quotes are wrong. But, don’t expect me to take your faith seriously when the evidence is against it.

“Simeon testifies, under the sway of the Holy Spirit (according to Holy Writ itself), his knowledge he would see the Christ before death was according to God’s Word. Unless one can cite the OT prophesy informing him of same, “The Word of God” is comprised of MORE than that which is contained in “The Bible.” Therefore, the doctrine of discounting the authority of anything NOT contained in the Bible is falsified.”

2Ti 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (17) That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

The scripture states that it is profitable for doctrine... that the man of God may be perfect. Just because someone receives a word from the Holy Spirit, or some other miracle from the power of God, does not mean that the scripture isn’t really profitable for doctrine and incapable of making a man perfect. I’ve certainly heard many prophecies or words people have claimed to receive from God, and yet none of them were capable of adding to the scripture or taking away from it. A girl I knew was on her way to becoming a Muslim, as she was under the mistaken opinion that it was a beautiful religion (she’s European, unfortunately). One day, as she was about to begin this unholy journey, she suddenly received a vision that told her that Islam was a false religion, and Jesus Christ is the one true God, complete with the usual bright lights and all that jazz. Is this the word of God? Well, MAYBE. If the vision is true, it was indeed the word of God. But am I unable to find out that Islam is a false religion and that Christ is the one true God from the scripture? On top of this, though, I have also seen many false prophecies, all throughout history, and how are we to judge these alleged “words of God?” We try the Spirits using the only sure scripture in existence, which is the Bible. No oral tradition is immune from this necessary test.

What you are apparently arguing is that Roman tradition, which you’ve given us no reason to accept in the first place, is needed to make us “more perfect.” You deny that the scripture is sufficient for this purpose. Ergo, I deny your religion entirely, and I’ll point to Gregory and a dozen other early Church Fathers who don’t agree with what Rome agrees with today, despite their claiming to be the inheritors of an infallible tradition.