Amateur historical analysis of Eden and the Flood

[Shulammite]

Which ones are actually given by God?

How do you know?

How 'bout this, which ones do you question? I like to see who I am dealing with.

 

[vz71]

You made the affirmative statement that all scripture was given by God.
I see no reason to put the focus of that upon myself. Any answer I give would fail to answer how you specifically arrive at the determination of what is or is not provided by God.

I was hoping you could clarify the statement. How exactly do you make the determination of anything given by God?

 

[Shulammite]

I see no reason to put the focus of that upon myself.

Then maybe you should avoid religious discussions.

You made the affirmative statement that all scripture was given by God.

It is.

I was hoping you could clarify the statement. How exactly do you make the determination of anything given by God?

It's that which was not contrived by men but breathed into man to write. Instruments of God do His work. Faith is a knowledge in itself and is only given from God, it is a gift. If you had faith, you would know the answer and need not have it explained to you. The thing I find funny is, why you are engaging me when you claimed in another response you didn't read my lengthy post. Probably shouldn't engage people in dialogue coming from that premise (of not knowing anything about their beliefs). Seems counterproductive. If not interested in what I post, don't address me.

 

[vz71]

It's that which was not contrived by men but breathed into man to write.

But that does not actually answer the question.
How do you make that determination?
I have read many things that contain no error...do these come from God? Should I consider them sacred scripture?
Why? Why not?

Faith is a knowledge in itself and is only given from God, it is a gift. If you had faith, you would know the answer and need not have it explained to you.

So are you now claiming that God simply gives this knowledge to the faithful?
How exactly does that work? What of the Ethiopian eunuch that states he needs someone to explain the scripture to him?
Did God somehow neglect to provide this faithful one with knowledge? Or are we to see him as having no faith?

The thing I find funny is, why you are engaging me when you claimed in another response you didn't read my lengthy post.

There are specific points that need explanation.
Did you already answer my question and I somehow missed it?
Admittedly I did not read a great deal of the treatise in many of your earlier posts.
Perhaps you could point out where my question is answered.

Probably shouldn't engage people in dialogue coming from that premise (of not knowing anything about their beliefs). Seems counterproductive. If not interested in what I post, don't address me.

If I wasn't interested, I wouldn't respond.
If I knew everything about your beliefs, there would be no questions, and again, no response.
Do you simply wish to post your various novellas with no questions asked? A one-sided conversation is not a conversation.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I am letting this discussion go for now, as there is some good to be had from it, but I just remind everyone to be civil, and to keep the focus on the issues, not on personalities. Everyone has an opinion. Just a word to the wise.

 

[Shulammite]

But that does not actually answer the question.
How do you make that determination?
I have read many things that contain no error...do these come from God? Should I consider them sacred scripture?
Why? Why not?

So are you now claiming that God simply gives this knowledge to the faithful?
How exactly does that work? What of the Ethiopian eunuch that states he needs someone to explain the scripture to him?
Did God somehow neglect to provide this faithful one with knowledge? Or are we to see him as having no faith?


There are specific points that need explanation.
Did you already answer my question and I somehow missed it?
Admittedly I did not read a great deal of the treatise in many of your earlier posts.
Perhaps you could point out where my question is answered.

If I wasn't interested, I wouldn't respond.
If I knew everything about your beliefs, there would be no questions, and again, no response.
Do you simply wish to post your various novellas with no questions asked? A one-sided conversation is not a conversation.

All you need do is read what I post. I am not going to be redundant. I also, will not have this childish round about dialogue akin to- what? what? what?, but why,why, why..........
2 Timothy 2:
The Lord's Approved Workman
…22Flee from youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, together with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23But reject foolish and ignorant speculation, for you know that it breeds quarreling. 24And a servant of the Lord must not be quarrelsome, but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, and forbearing.…

If you want to discuss something in my post, great. Otherwise, all you are doing is personally coming at me. I already explained faith. To those with faith, no proof is necessary to those without, no explanation will suffice. If you feel the RC, Orthodox, or Protestant denominations have incorrect bibles then it is imperative that YOU, explain your problems with them. For me to address the issues you have, you must explain them. It is not imperative that I know the operation of your mind.

Clearly, if I post something from the Song of Songs and explain the meaning of a verse, I have validated denominations. That would mean, I believe, as I said before, they each have a form of Canon that does not contradict each other's. It does not mean, each has the same degree of Canon being that one has 73 books, 76, books, 66 books and 81 books. That is why reading rather than coming at someone is important for a healthy productive conversation. It also helps in avoiding redundancy and speaks to one's educational approach to things rather than whiny what-s and whys .