I have to say you're ignorant of what a discussion entails. It isn't just each person presenting their argument, and a rebuttal to the other's once, or even a few times. Obviously, a debate has to die eventually, but you barely allow one to live.Chapabel wrote:Against my better judgment I decided to engage with you one more time. Unfortunately the results have been the same. You continue to post the same questions I have answered previously, you dismiss or ignore evidence I present, and you reveal how incredibly ignorant you are in basic Biblical doctrines. You make up stuff as you go along and I can’t tell if you’re being deceitful or you’re just plain stupid. I’m sorry but corresponding with you is a massive waste of time. Go pound sand.
Next, you say I "make up stuff" as I go along. What are you referring to?
In regards to me posting questions you say you've answered previously, are you referring to this: "So, why do you trust the negative reviews by Catholics?". If so, you haven't explained why, rather repeatedly denied trusting. But, you've been shown why you do, hence the reasking of the question.
As for your evidence, they were verses taken out of context, and you cited a source who did the same, as well as naturally concluded, based on nothing, that the book of Revelation is God's final word. That's why I dismiss them, but haven't ignored. Below I re-posted my rebuttals to your evidence that you haven't responded to. So, who's REALLY ignoring here?
In regards to Deut. 4:2, Prov. 30:6, and Rev. 22:18-19 you described: "Jesus personally is telling mankind to not add anything new to His word". So, do you acknowledge He's not forbidding Himself from adding?
Next, I noticed your source acknowledges, just as I have, that Rev. 22:18-19 refers to the book of Revelation: "These two warnings against additions and subtractions in their context are concerned specifically with the book of Revelation, and the primary emphasis is not on the Bible as a whole".
He or she went on to say the principal of the warning can be applied to the Bible as a whole, because the book of Revelation is the final revelation of God's word. But, that's a statement they just assume as fact. Just because it's the final book in the Bible, after being chosen by those who compiled the Bible centuries later, it does not mean God would not speak to humanity further after the book of Revelation was written.
In addition, they argued since further revelation is not intimated at the end of the NT, the "natural conclusion" is there's to be "no further voice speaking from heaven" until Jesus's return. Also, according to them: "God is surely capable of speaking plain words''. Even you've said: "When God has something to say to man, He does not imply what He means, He comes right out and says it". So, why is it we have to search some hidden message, or implied meaning in God's word, to tell us that Revelation completes the Bible in away that doesn't allow for further communication, or prophecy from God?
From the beginning of Matt. 24 until verse 35, Jesus was describing what will occur prior to His return, so ''my words shall not pass away'' was referring to what He had just spoken to them. And, 2 Timothy 3:16 ACTUALLY says: "All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable...", not that the Bible as we know it today is sufficient, and there's no need for further dictation from Jesus.Chapabel wrote:How? In the same way Jesus said Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. The words of Christ had not been written down when He made that statement. So you study on that and you will discover for yourself how 2 Tim.3:16-17 was referring the the Bible we have today.Claire wrote:You cited 2 Timothy 3:16-17 saying it meant the Bible, as a whole, is sufficient to make mankind perfect or complete, and that no further dictation is needed. If that were true, how could the aforementioned verses at the time be referring to completion during incompletion of the Bible?Chapabel wrote:It is my belief that even though the Bible was not complete when Paul wrote to Timothy, it is complete today. It has been complete for over 1900 years and nothing else is needed to make a man complete in Christ.
You've now not only misidentified the word "scripture" as "the Bible", added the word "sufficient", and thus new meanings where they don't belong in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, but have taken the verse Matt. 24:35 out of context. I've corrected these errors, and have to say 2 Tim.3:16-17 does not refer to the Bible as we know it today.
You're essentially saying all we need to know is what pertains to our salvation. What evidence is there for this? And, if it were true, why does the Bible consist of text that doesn't pertain to salvation?Chapabel wrote:You admit there is nothing missing in the Bible in regards to salvation. Therefore, there are no gaps that need to be filled in.
If there are no gaps to be filled, why preach or give sermons to explain and provide context, or give commentary for verses, if the Bible is sufficient as is?
Maria Valtorta is not teaching. What is the Holy Spirit teaching believers today if everything that's needed to be said ended with the book of Revelation?Chapabel wrote:Jesus said believers are indwelt with the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit would teach believers all things they need to know (John 14). That’s why believers do not need the writings of MV.
You've described the Catholic Church as the "world's largest cult", and therefore "couldn't care less what the Catholics believe", yet the multiple bad reviews by Catholics are partially why you reject Poem of the Man-God, and refuse to read it and discern for yourself:Chapabel wrote:I don't.Claire wrote:So, why do you trust the negative reviews by Catholics?
So, you do trust the negative reviews by Catholics. Why?Chapabel wrote:I don't need to. I've read the reviews. If a movie gets multiple bad reviews I won't waste time or money to see it. The Poem gets multiple bad reviews from the very church MV was part of. And besides, I have the Bible. I need nothing else.Claire wrote:Why not read the Work and discern for yourself?