Well, here's my point - the Bible, as we know it, didn't even exist until 387 AD. There were several other writings that were excluded from the canon, so, when you're saying "Believe all of the Bible or none of it", you are relying on a man's interpretation of what "holy writ" even is.
That's where I have an issue. What about the writings of Josephus? The Macabbees? And the list goes on.......
What you are saying is "Either you believe everything in the 66 books canonized by a carnal pope, or you believe none of it".
I'm not quite sure the scriptures are that broad brushed...........
Paul told Timothy (2 Tim 3:16) all scripture, and he meant all!
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Well, here's my point - the Bible, as we know it, didn't even exist until 387 AD. There were several other writings that were excluded from the canon, so, when you're saying "Believe all of the Bible or none of it", you are relying on a man's interpretation of what "holy writ" even is.
That's where I have an issue. What about the writings of Josephus? The Macabbees? And the list goes on.......
What you are saying is "Either you believe everything in the 66 books canonized by a carnal pope, or you believe none of it".
I'm not quite sure the scriptures are that broad brushed...........
However, you make good points here; I have never relied on the Romish version of Scripture, personally, but note that those who do, that I know personally anyway, seem to be genuine.
However, you make good points here; I have never relied on the Romish version of Scripture, personally, but note that those who do, that I know personally anyway, seem to be genuine.
Where did your canon come from?
__________________
You better watch out before I blitzkrieg your thread cause I'm the Thread Nazi now!
I'd say my canon comes from "discernment" now.
It either agrees with Spirit in me, or it doesn't.
I don't look for universal acceptance and application
of what might no longer agree with Spirit in another,
as we should surely have plenty to agree on?
So I look for where I agree with someone now,
as it seems to me that as for the rest,
no one knows, anyway.
Original sin is disobedience to the will of God--He said DO NOT and they did. It's the only sin of mankind. It was the first sin and will be the last sin. This is why all sin is the same in the eyes of God. He says that He knows best and only He is good and when we are disobedient we have called Him a liar. He doesn't do well with being called a liar. Thousands of years of punishment so far and still we can't seem to learn---me neither--I try and correct myself all the time.
This is my understanding of "Original Sin" - it is the same sin that was committed in the spiritual as it was in the temporal. My understanding of this is that disobedience came as a result of the Original Sin.
Ezekiel 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
Here is the Original Sin -> Ezekiel 28:17a Thine heart was lifted up...
Genesis 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Genesis 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
I think the "Original Sin" is the root of just about every other sin (maybe not all, but most).
Linear Mode
