Not exact matches
Considering that it took the Church about 300 years, long after they had made up their minds about theology, to start picking
scripture to
match that doctrine, and that the oldest known copt of the bible has over 27,000 «corrections» written all over it, how can you be sure that the New Testament isn't full of false doctrine to begin
with?
When my tradition doesn't
match up
with what I find in
Scripture, I fear that I'm settling.
Teachers of biblical studies can
match these examples of mangled
scripture with our own private stashes of things discovered in exams and papers.
When a passage of
Scripture does not
match up
with Jesus of the Gospels, Jesus trumps what we read in other passages.
But it doesn't
match up
with what is in that particular piece of
scripture.
Most Relevant to Recent Conversations: Daniel Kirk
with «On Trusting the Bible» «Ironically, the conservative rejection of Neo-Orthodoxy in the name of a «high» view of
scripture, at least in the case of Barth, ends up as a rejection of the Bible we actually have in favor of a man - made construct that does not
match up
with it.»
Using examples from mythology,
Scripture, theology, and philosophy, Rollins shows how mankind has long been interested in speaking of God in these terms, to the point that «instead of thinking about our understanding of God as a poetic utterance arising from an encounter
with God, it was thought that our understanding of God directly
matched up
with the very nature of God.