No. Because it disagrees with the Torah.
Ahh. I see. So Christ nowhere says that “if it’s only in one verse, it doesn’t count”. I suppose that goes for ‘except for in cases of marital infidelity.
Again, Torah, and the example of the Pharisees. Them that do not know history are doomed to repeat it... and repeat it, they do.
You’re making this all up as you go along, aren’t you? What other ‘special rules’ do you have that appear nowhere in scripture?
Nothing really. Just a sure knowledge that the Bible can say anything you want it to, especially if one is free to build it out of a verse here and a verse there.
What locks it down into it's meaning is the law and the prophets. And necessarily, if it destroys the law or the prophets, it cannot be true - 'Every jot and tittle', as it were.
So a literary interpretation must conform to the Torah, and if a prophecy, must be built upon the prophets that have come before. Work with that and see how far your tradition holds up.
Do these ‘special rules’ count as Tradition?
Nope. Torah. You should read it sometime. :)
“No. Because it disagrees with the Torah.”
So the Torah says that if it’s only in one verse, it doesn’t count? Where?
“Nothing really. Just a sure knowledge that the Bible can say anything you want it to, especially if one is free to build it out of a verse here and a verse there.”
So again, you don’t believe you are called to follow scripture then in it’s entirety - only sometimes and in some places. Where do you draw the line? Where are we supposed to say, “thus far and no further”? What makes you different from the Arians per se?
“What locks it down into it’s meaning is the law and the prophets. And necessarily, if it destroys the law or the prophets, it cannot be true - ‘Every jot and tittle’, as it were.”
Which is contrary to what you are teaching here. Christ himself teaches that not the least jot will be struck from the Law - we are called to obey all of it, not just the parts we like.
This is also crucial to Romans, it’s the foundation of the distinction between Law and Grace.
“Work with that and see how far your tradition holds up.”
No, the burden is on you to show why your opinion on these matters should be taken into consideration. You’ve offered nothing except one word. “torah”.
“Nope.”
Yeah, it does. You’re taking a rule that you yourself have devised, which has no connection with scripture, and when challenged haven’t succeeded in citing a passage.
If this is all you’ve got, this matter is pretty much closed. :)