Replies

You were the one that claimed to be done with the conversation.

I told you previously, that I was done with this -- and with you -- for the time being. That was an added qualifier. Sorry you missed it...

Many hours later, the better part of a day later, after I saw that you had sent the spitwad sort of

"You would have been

beater off..."

I chose to reply to that empty insult, and did, showing you that those words were better (beater?) applicable to yourself, though possibly should have accepted that lame comment that you made as equivalent to being your own virtual resignation, for when that (spitwads) is all which is left, that means the one whom forms the spitwad has nothing else left, and on some level knows it, too (even if they won't admit it to themselves enough to set aside their own errors, bigotries, and personal 'pride', etc.)

You replied to me first, the ball is in YOUR court.

First you try to make it out to be that I shouldn't be saying anything --- then tell me "the ball is in my court" sort of thing --- as in demanding further reply?

Yet all the same, the 'ball' as it were, is not in my court.

Every single thing you've said, every accusation, has previously been provided answers for.

To repeat the same accusations as you have been, while seeming to ignore the substance of the previous replies, is just so much shallow, childish trolling.

But it seems to me, that's all you've got.

False accusations, spitwards, irritating forum discussion tactic, and worse.

Obviously, you've lost this argument. Repeating what has been reasonably enough dealt with, and shown to be false, doesn't go anywhere...

Again, it's just trolling, and apparently stubbornness too, on your own part, in what appears to me continuing effort to place blame for sin, and even the sin nature of mankind, perhaps (when the fruits of those are visibly in evidence, and are being discussed) on those who hold a high view of Scripture.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is? It stinks to high heaven, in more than just one single way, and on more than only one single level.

The stench of that precise argumentative reaches all the way to the skies, for it makes it out to be that following the Holy Writ would inevitably produce sin.

Are you sure you want to keep going there?

Whatever. It's your funeral, as that saying goes. Let's hope it would not earn yourself one that would reach into eternity (for reason of despising the Scriptures so, along with despising those who would desire to adhere to that form of the Word of God).

Must you be such an enemy of those who; do put their faith in God, while trusting in the Scriptures themselves to have supplied accurate descriptions of Him --- who He is, what pleases Him and best aligns with His utter holiness, compared to what does not, but goes against Himself, and His own best & preferred desires for us all?

Statements that you continue to make, such as;

It is just that simple the fruit of Sola Scriptura is: abortion, homosexual "marriage", etc...

are woefully misplaced.

None of the above listed errors come from following the written Word, but instead come from departing from that same. How many times must this be pointed out to you?

Any who subscribe to and indulge in those things which you briefly listed, would be sola scripturists (if at all) --- in name only, at best.

I would be willing to wager that the people pictured at the heading of this article are not the type of individuals who take the Holy Writ to be infallibly inspired, and that it be God's own Word to us ---but instead take and view Scripture more from perspective of humanist philosophy.

Thus holding any of those persons up as example of what the fruit of belief systems which incorporate having high view of Scripture are likely to produce, is false representation of what "fruit of sola scriptura' could ever truly be, for these individuals whom you point towards as example, are not 'sola scripturists' even if in the vanity of their own imaginations they thought themselves as such.

In the instance which is under discussion, it is being merely assumed that they are (since they should be but are woefully failing!), while the face value evidence that they are not 'sola scripturists' is still being studiously neglected, and set apart from rational contemplation & discussion.

We know those items which you listed; abortion, homosexual "marriage", are error -- because the Scripture itself is plain enough concerning those things, as I have already pointed out to you. Without the Scripture, this entire discussion either wouldn't be taking place, or if it did, you'd have nothing other than some system of philosophy (even if it were a 'religious' philosophy) to stand upon, yourself.

In fact, ultimately, from Scripture itself is where the Roman Catholic Church derives whatever measures of actual authority they may have --- and as I have already mentioned (but that you have apparently failed to acknowledge, and take into account) does well when it's own positions as it were, are ultimately based on the authority of the Holy Writ, conforming and comporting well to Word, yet does less well whenever it attempts to proclaim and stand upon it's own alleged authority, in the place of the Word itself, and ends up in positions which in some aspect conflict with what is plainly enough revealed within the Holy Writ.

To state this more unmistakably --- it is by the written Word that we know that these particular United Methodist and Episcopalian Church Clergy are in error when praying "blessing" over an abortion facility.

By that same measure, (the Holy Writ) all either stand, or else fall aside. It by the Scriptures too, that we can know, and just precisely how and why such religious belief systems such as Hinduism (and many others) are in error (are less than fully inspired, to say the least) and thus will always by their own inherent nature mislead those who adhere to those religions.

Try to wrap your mind around that --- even if it costs the precious accusations you've been repeating, which are being hurled towards all "protestants" rather indiscriminately, like some deadly weapon of utter condemnation for them all, while serving as self-justification for Romanists, at the same time.

All together, it's quite nasty and foul accusation which you continue to assert and insist upon.

Those who condemn holding a high view of Scripture, really have no place here on this forum --- or even within Christianity itself.

You're accusations are misplaced, while the juxtaposition of the alternative, the sola ecclesia of the RCC as being final 'arbiter' of even what the Holy Writ itself holds as meaning --- does not, and cannot bring true conversion to a single soul.

As it is written (John 6:44);

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

That was Christ Himself who is attributed to having said that. Is there any like Him? Is there anyone comparable?

I do realize that those of the Roman Catholic Church have been taught that their own ecclesiastical organization is Christ upon earth.

Yet recent discussion threads here on FR in just the last day or so, in regards to the latest RCC synod, would indicate that God would be in dispute and conflict with Himself, if that were entirely true, this betraying (once again) that the concept is not true -- not unless quite carefully qualified and limited.

Archbishop Cupich is a HERETIC: he stands condemned by St. Pope John Paul II's Veritatis Splendor

US Bishop [Chaput] Warns of 'Anxiety' at Pope's Family Summit posted by marshmallow

The CORRUPT Bishop of Rome and HIS Problematic Synod posted by BlatherNaut

Archbishop Cupich lays out pathway for gay couples to receive Communion at Vatican press scrum posted by BlatherNaut

Synod Fathers Discuss Homosexuality. What about Necrophilia and Bestiality? posted by markomalley

Time To End The SinNod Charade posted BlatherNaut

Kim Davis Bleeding in the Rearview Mirror posted by marshmallow

Further investigation could lead one to those RC bishops who are opposed to the change of language away from singling out homosexuality as being intrinsically disordered. Those individuals, when the church traditions which they stand upon are examined, it will be found that those originated from and were derived ---ultimately--- from the Holy Writ, itself.

This is the principle of sola scriptura in action, for when the Lord speaks, His words ring forever.

Everyone else, not so much.

Along with all ecclesiastical organizations, including the one which is headquartered in the Vatican, the principle of sola scriptura by itself alone, doesn't draw a person to Christ, yet it does require that one submit themselves to what is written, while taking the promises which the Lord makes there, as matter of faith.

It would stand to recall also that as outlined, the solas are not singular and alone, but there are five, of which all are interdependent and interlocking. They simply cannot be singled out one by one, with no consideration given for how they are interrelated, and interdependent.

One simply must be born by again.

Without conversion, the sin nature remains, and remains unchanged within.

Christ Himself is recorded as saying that one must be born anew, born of the spirit. It is safe to assume that He meant being born of His own, Holy Spirit.

All the head knowledge in the world does not and cannot defeat sin.

There is only one known cure.

It is not joining the Roman Catholic Church, or joining any other ecclesiastical organization that is what delivers a person from evil, although victory over sin itself can occur while one a member of/participant within that particular, first mentioned ecclesiastical organization... yet occurs elsewhere also, as the 'Magesterium' of the Latin Church itself, provides generalized acknowledgement for.

Christ Himself is the true Vine. It is not the various gatherings of ecclesia which are the Vine itself...for those are merely branches.

It is either Christ Himself, and none other ----who is 'head'---- of the Church.

Anything else is something of a two-headed (or multiply headed) monster.

Sola Christus...

Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”): The Bible alone is our highest authority.
Sola Fide (“faith alone”): We are saved through faith alone in Jesus Christ.
Sola Gratia (“grace alone”): We are saved by the grace of God alone.
Solus Christus (“Christ alone”): Jesus Christ alone is our Lord, Savior, and King.
Soli Deo Gloria (“to the glory of God alone”): We live for the glory of God alone.

Whenever the above are not adhered to in principle, and more importantly, in effect, then there is trouble --- bad fruit, if you will. It doesn't matter who, or where, including within the Church of Rome.

When the above is adhered to, even if it not consciously following the five solas of the Reformation (but yet still those same principles, even if going rather unstated, put into effect more organically, as was the case within the earliest centuries Church, upon occasion) they not need be openly & succinctly summarized as in the above, as long as the effect itself is still there. When doing so, then any who do has solid foundation in Christ to stand upon.

Deuteronomy 29:29

“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

This holds true for wherever within Christianity, applying to one and all, similar to how the very written Word of God --- none, no one, is above and beyond, not even the Lord Himself in one sense (the word became flesh and dwelt among us)--- for He does not contradict Himself, nor stands in opposition to Himself in any way, despite human's (when lacking His own more direct guidance) often not being able to grasp the more Mysterious aspects of his Spirit.

He promises not to necessarily tell us all things, but does promise to tell us that which He (Christ) heard from the Father;

John 15

15 No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.

I have heard the voice of the Lord, speak to me directly.

In that way He has continually affirmed that He is who the Scriptures (which were inspired under His own direct guidance) say that He is.

Have you ever heard Him speak?

I don't mean just having 'feelings' but have experienced His true presence, and have heard His voice.

I have heard that voice.

There is none like it to compare.

But go ahead.

Keep up the vicious attacks on bible believing Christians, on this forum.

Zots-ville will quite likely be in your future, if you do so.

At least ---it should be.