I find systematic theology is NOT biblical.
We are meant to prove everything from the scriptures, not a book (or books) written by man.
So, by definition, any structural framework of bible understanding must therefore be at least a little wrong, if not badly wrong.
Sola Scriptura.
Any other gospel is accursed.
Be like the Bereans and prove all things (searching day and night) from the scriptures.
Most seminaries have been taken over by axe grinders of one ilk or another.
None of the apostles or early church fathers went to seminary.
It does this to the biblical books chosen to be in canon.
It does this to the biblical books chosen to be in canon.
Furthermore, I gave you clear information from the Bible - do you disagree with these?
14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.
and As Paul wrote "theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises; theirs are the fathers and from them is the Christ according to the flesh" (Rom. 9:4-5). -- I suppose you disagree with all of the Pauline epistles, then?"
Or let's take The Church rejects the idea that the covenant with Israel has been nullified or revoked. The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked. -- do you disagree with that statement?
So, were both correct?