Replies

Then you reject "sola Scriptura" (which is never taught in the Bible, anywhere--go check!)

how silly. The Bible is a series of contracts. In what reality does one not refer primacy to the original contract? And to be more absurd, Man is not even a signor of those contracts, so how is it that Man has the hubris to think that he can amend them?

and "sola fide" (which is not only never taught in the Bible, but the Bible flatly says that it's WRONG... James 2:24)?

LOLWhut? Then y'all better get back to keeping Torah - Every bit of it.

[re: absence of "sola Scriptura" in the Bible]

how silly. The Bible is a series of contracts.

Really? I thought it was a collection of COVENANTS, interspersed with historical accounts, poetry, apocalyptic literature, prophecies, and loads of other things. Are you quite serious, trying to reduce the Bible to nothing more than a "series of contracts"?

In what reality does one not refer primacy to the original contract?

There's a little detail about valid logical arguments, FRiend: you need to have clear definitions, and you need to have true starting assumptions; I'm afraid you've gone off the tracks on both counts, here. Start with false premises, and one ends up in la-la land.

And to be more absurd,

:) You needn't be more absurd... at least, not for my sake. (Yes, I'm teasing.)

Man is not even a signor of those contracts, so how is it that Man has the hubris to think that he can amend them?

Um... FRiend... this is sounding more confused by the minute. A contract, so called, is not binding unless one signs it. Go look up the definition of "contract" (which I think is a silly description of the Bible, regardless...). If we were (hypothetically) "not signers" of the contract, then we would not be bound by it. What, exactly, are you trying to say, here?

[paladinan]
and "sola fide" (which is not only never taught in the Bible, but the Bible flatly says that it's WRONG... James 2:24)?

[roamer_1]
LOLWhut?

:) Now, that there's yer reel good rejoinder, y'all...

Then y'all better get back to keeping Torah - Every bit of it.

Er... could you please explain WHY, given that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant completely and dispensed us from the non--core-moral Mitzvot of the OT (cf. Mark 7:19, Hebrews 8:13, etc.)? Your statement doesn't logically follow from anything I said, at all.