Featured Is It Humbleness First & Grace Second?

Let's cut to the chase, are David's writings inspired?

Yes?

or

No?

 

Your personal opinion about me cannot be supported with scripture.

But do try and provide the scriptural principles
which the UNINSPIRED early church FATHERS used
in their compilation of the Roman Canon.

 

Were David's writings inspired?

Yes?

or

No?

 

You say yes, but cannot support that with the word of God.

I prefer not to follow the tradition of men.

 

Is that a no?

 

I encourage people to seek the revelation of the Father
rather than offer opinion about the Roman Canon.

 

There's an old saying, give a man enough rope...




...all I am doing is feeding you the rope necessary to do it. You won't finish the day here...

 

I don't accept old wives' tales about hanging myself either (Isaiah 54:17)

You haven't been able to substantiate
Christendom's dependence on the Roman Canon with apostolic scripture.

 

And here we have it folks. This guy has gotten it (finally) right. After centuries of ppl holding to all 66 books of what is called the bible, he has figured out which books are inspired and which are diaries.

Forget the Council of Nicaea and those ~300 leaders who worked diligently to give us the 66 books which we now have in our possession(s).

 

The blueprint for the Apostolic Canon is ordered by God
and contains only the prophets and apostles
who are foundational to the household of God (Ephesians 2:20).

If that is objectionable then a pure mind is maintained
by recalling those foundational prophets and apostles (2 Peter 3:1-2).

Adding to the word of God was done by Adam and Eve,
who digested knowledge from a forbidden source (Genesis 2:17, Genesis 3:22).

The Israelites, like Adam transgressed the covenant;
There they dealt treacherously with Me (Hosea 6:7).

Christendom however relies on the uninspired
early church FATHERS' compilation of the Roman Canon
and believe firmly that satan didn't deceive the whole world (Revelation 17:2).

but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares
among the wheat (word of God) and went his way (Matthew 13:25).

 

Again, you have unilaterally deemed what is holy writ and what is not. You have become your own final authority.

Trust me, you won't be missed around here...TROLL!!!

 

I welcome being abused and ridiculed - 2 Timothy 3:12
and promise that I will continue to uphold the Christian principle of love.

My obedience to Peter's commandment to recall
only those prophets ad apostles to maintain a pure mind (2 Peter 3:1-2),
will also not be compromised
as no one can enter heaven with an impure mind (Romans 12:2).

However none of Christendom's opinions in regard
to the Roman Canon being without poisonous darnel
can be supported with the apostolic word of God.

 

Please just state plainly what writings you believe are inspired by God. Surely the books, letters, diaries have names. Just give the list so we know where you stand.

 

Any book not written by an OT prophet or NT apostle isn't inspired by God.

e.g. just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses
and ministers of the word delivered them to us (Luke 1:2).

Compare that with Isaiah's instructed tongue (Isaiah 50:4)
and how Paul's gospel wasn't received from man, nor was he taught it,
but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:12).

I suggest that rather looking for a list,
that you turn to Jesus for clarification !!!!

 

You are assuming I haven't turn to Jesus Christ for clarification.

Based on what you said so far, you don't believe the following are scripture: The Gospel of Luke, the Book of Acts (written by non-apostle Luke), the Gospel of Mark (written by non-apostle Mark), Hebrews (We don't know who wrote it), as well as Psalms (diary of David).

Holy Spirit indwelling has clarified to me that all of these are scripture.

I have stated my position plainly. Are you able to plainly state what you believe? Do you believe these writings are scripture?

 

Since you claim that the Spirit clarified things for you,
then you will be able to quote scripture to support that wonderful experience.

Just provide apostolic evidence which specifically states,
that Jesus choose Luke in addition to the Twelve (John 6:70).

I cannot go BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN (1 Corinthians 4:6)
by the foundational prophets and apostles (Ephesians 2:20)
in order to to maintain a pure mind (2 Peter 3:1-2).

 

I urge you to let our Lord Jesus Christ clarify for it for you. He told us to let our yes be yes and our no be no.

If you cannot speak plainly, yes or no, on whether or not you consider those writings to be scripture, then you are not demonstrating a pure mind but rather a mind of confusion.

I have stated my position plainly. I am not ashamed of the Gospel, and not ashamed of what I believe.

If you are not ashamed of what you believe, state it plainly. Are these writings scripture or not?

 

I have been clear enough and awaiting your evidence
that all the works in Christendom's Roman Canon are written
by inspired and foundational prophets and apostles (Ephesians 2:20).

 

I see you refuse the command of our Lord Jesus Christ to let your yes be yes and your no be no. Instead of yes or no, you say "I've been clear enough".

The Lord Jesus did not say, "be clear enough". The Apostle Paul stated plainly, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel". Paul did not say, "when you discuss what you believe, just be clear enough"

You claim to have a pure mind. But your mind is not producing pure speech. Is it yes or no. Are the writings mentioned above scripture? How can a pure mind ignore the command of our Lord Jesus Christ to let your yes be yes and your no be no, and give us "I've been clear enough"?

John 16:13 Holy Spirit guides me, and all He indwells, in determining the truth.

 

John 16:13 I believe Holy Spirit inspired the writings that we call scripture and preserved those writings throughout history.

As the Apostolic Fathers began to pass, the early church collected their writings to preserve them. In the case of Luke, Acts, Mark, these writings were very early accepted as scripture because of the close affiliation between Luke and Paul on the one hand and Mark and Peter on the other.
The Jewish scriptures (Old Testament for us) had long been debated and established within the Jewish community and was accepted by the early church as scripture, including David's "diary" as you call it.

Everything we have as scripture was collected and preserved by early churches by the end of the first century.

When new writings began to appear in the second century and beyond, the churches looked to the writings already preserved to be the measuring rod "canon" by which to judge those new writings as authentic or discard them as not scripture.

I have stated clearly what I believe. I have not held back claiming to have a "pure mind" one the one hand but only being "clear enough" on the other. I am not ashamed of what I believe.

Our Lord Jesus Christ has clarified these issues for me, through indwelling Holy Spirit, who leads me and all He indwells to an understanding of the truth of all issues.

Not that I have already become perfect in my understanding, but I work out my salvation in fear and trembling as should we all.

I am always ready to learn from a brother or sister in Christ who can speak plainly, showing me by scripture how I have misunderstood God's Word.

Are you able to let your yes be yes and your no be no? Do you believe Luke, Acts, Mark are scripture?