Quote
hisalone said:
I have never acted in an arrogant manner. I have responded by continually saying that each must be convinced in their own heart. Arrogance is when the response implies they are right and the opposer is wrong, I never did that as others have to me, so where is my arrogance? Because I look at things differently, does that make me arrogant? Because I see things differently than those from the past, does that mean I'm arrogant? In the same sense, I don't accept something just because of a person's reputation or the number holding to a view, that is foolishness. I bow to the word of God alone.
I certainly have never accused you of having an arrogant "manner", but rather it is arrogance to dismiss all those who are far superior in holiness and/or knowledge and claim that God has revealed to YOU (implied) something which no others have found. What you claim is reminiscent of what Keith Mathison has rightly criticized here: A Critique of the Evangelical Doctrine of "Solo" Scriptura.

What I wrote before and iterate in part is that we should COMPARE our understanding of Scripture with those who have gone before. There is a "line" of understanding that prevails throughout the history of the Church, as one would expect since there is only one truth; propositional truth due to the fact that Scripture is divinely inspired. (Jude 1:3; Rom 16:17; Eph 4:14; 1Tim 1:3) When we posit something which reputable men have rejected and/or not found before over many centuries, then one should question the verity of themselves, NOT all others . . . that is sheer arrogance.

FYI, Christ is "subordinate" to the Father!; functionally subordinate which even He Himself stated myriad times. He only said and did that which the Father gave Him. This is Christology 101.

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]