Is it possible to lose salvation?

[BreadOfLife]

Since infant Baptism was mentioned in this thread I thought would give some history on it.

There is no mention of infant baptism in the scriptures. But from the 2nd and 3rd centuries on early church fathers, such as Origen and Tertullian and others provide insights into the evolving practices of baptism within the early Christian community. While their views on infant baptism varied fore and against, their writings indicate that the practice was being discussed and implemented within certain Christian circles.

How common was it up to the 4rd century is hard to tell. But once Augustine came up with the false doctrine of Original Sin, around the 5th century people became concerned that babies would go to Hell if they were not baptized. After which infant Baptism became common place. And eventually a sacrament in the Catholic Church and some Protestants practice infant baptism but mostly as a christening.

Sprinkle Baptism for the elderly and ill was occurring very early in the church.

NOT every Christian doctrine is explicitly taught in Scripture. For example – the Trinity is implicitly taught but is not explicitly mentioned.
Infant Baptism is also implicitly taught in Scripture.

When Peter baptized Cornelius the Centurion, he baptized his entire household including children and servants (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14).
We see the same thing in Acts 16:23-33 with the household of the Philippian jailer and 1 Cor. 1:16 with the household of Stephanas.

We read in Acts:
Acts 2:38-39
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

The plain fact is that households include children of ALL ages – and that includes infants.

 

[Grailhunter]

NOT every Christian doctrine is explicitly taught in Scripture. For example – the Trinity is implicitly taught but is not explicitly mentioned.
Infant Baptism is also implicitly taught in Scripture.

When Peter baptized Cornelius the Centurion, he baptized his entire household including children and servants (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14).
We see the same thing in Acts 16:23-33 with the household of the Philippian jailer and 1 Cor. 1:16 with the household of Stephanas.

We read in Acts:
Acts 2:38-39
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

The plain fact is that households include children of ALL ages – and that includes infants.

What I said was…..There is no mention of infant baptism in the scriptures. And in fact the words “infant baptism” do not appear in the scriptures. Interpreting scriptures based on assumptions leads to false beliefs. If you are going to just add what you want it is wrong, just admit you are writing your own Bible.

Now did they submerge their infants in the river….they could have, it just does not say that.

The scriptures do not describe baptism by the sprinkling of water? But you can take your pencil and just add what you want.

On the other hand….I am not against infant baptism or sprinkling of water and calling it baptism….they had their reasons.

Then again I see it more as a christening and they should do an immersive baptism when they are older and choose to be a Christian. No where in the scriptures does it say that someone else can choose for you to be a Christian.

And I am not saying that just because something is or is not in the scriptures means that it is set in stone. We do not practice polygamy, concubinage, or slavery and we require a church wedding to be married.

 

[BreadOfLife]

What I said was…..There is no mention of infant baptism in the scriptures. And in fact the words “infant baptism” do not appear in the scriptures.

I ALREADY made this argument.

I stated clearly that t is not explicitly mentioned. It IS, however, implicitly mentioned (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16).

And, while we’re at it – the word “Trinity” doesn’t appear either, yet it is the basic tenet of the Christian faith.
Umm, “Bible” isn’t in there, either . . .

Interpreting scriptures based on assumptions leads to false beliefs. If you are going to just add what you want it is wrong, just admit you are writing your own Bible.

And I’m not “adding” anything.

It plainly says on at least THREEE occasions that entire households were Baptized (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16). Do YOU know of a Biblical household that excludes children?? I don’t . . .

Now did they submerge their infants in the river….they could have, it just does not say that.

The scriptures do not describe baptism by the sprinkling of water? But you can take your pencil and just add what you want.

Wanna bet??
This is a CLEAR prophecy of Baptism:

Ezek. 36:25-28
I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanness from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. Then you shall live in the land that I gave to your ancestors; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.

On the other hand….I am not against infant baptism or sprinkling of water and calling it baptism….they had their reasons.

Then again I see it more as a christening and they should do an immersive baptism when they are older and choose to be a Christian. No where in the scriptures does it say that someone else can choose for you to be a Christian.

And NOWHERE in the Scriptures does is EVER say that we need to be “Re-Baptized”:

Eph. 4:4-6
There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; ONE Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM; ONE God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

And while we’re on the subject – in the Old Covenant, the parents of a child made the decision on the boy’s behalf to have him enter into the Covenant with God by circumcision. The child didn’t make that decision.

In the New Covenant, the parents also decide to have the child enter the New Covenant with God. Everything in the Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New . . .

 

[Grailhunter]

I ALREADY made this argument.

I stated clearly that t is not explicitly mentioned. It IS, however, implicitly mentioned (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16).

And, while we’re at it – the word “Trinity” doesn’t appear either, yet it is the basic tenet of the Christian faith.
Umm, “Bible” isn’t in there, either . . .

And I’m not “adding” anything.

It plainly says on at least THREEE occasions that entire households were Baptized (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14, Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16). Do YOU know of a Biblical household that excludes children?? I don’t . . .

Wanna bet??
This is a CLEAR prophecy of Baptism:

Ezek. 36:25-28
I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanness from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. Then you shall live in the land that I gave to your ancestors; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.


And NOWHERE in the Scriptures does is EVER say that we need to be “Re-Baptized”:

Eph. 4:4-6
There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; ONE Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM; ONE God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

And while we’re on the subject – in the Old Covenant, the parents of a child made the decision on the boy’s behalf to have him enter into the Covenant with God by circumcision. The child didn’t make that decision.

In the New Covenant, the parents also decide to have the child enter the New Covenant with God. Everything in the Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New . . .

Waiting for the words....infant baptism.
I would not mind if you could find them, but you cannot.
I deal with facts....

 

[BreadOfLife]

Waiting for the words....infant baptism.
I would not mind if you could find them, but you cannot.
I deal with facts....

So, you have NO argument.
That’s pretty much what I figured . . .

As I reminded you before – the core doctrine of Christianity, the Trinity is NOT mentioned in Scripture. Does that make it “untrue” – OR is it implicitly taught?

Now – why don’t YOU show me where Sola Scriptura is mentioned in the Bible . . .

 

[Grailhunter]

So, you have NO argument.
That’s pretty much what I figured . . .

As I reminded you before – the core doctrine of Christianity, the Trinity is NOT mentioned in Scripture. Does that make it “untrue” – OR is it implicitly taught?

Now – why don’t YOU show me where Sola Scriptura is mentioned in the Bible . . .

As far as the Trinity...
Yahweh God Almighty creator of Heaven and Earth.
Yeshua God the Son Messiah Savior
Holy Spirit God guide helper

I have over a hundred scriptures that prove the one God formula wrong

And I am still waiting for you to produce the words infant baptism in the scriptures. Whether they did or not is speculation but not specifically in the scriptures.

And when you can find the scripture that says that some one can choose for some one else to be a Christian that would be good also.

 

[BreadOfLife]

As far as the Trinity...
Yahweh God Almighty creator of Heaven and Earth.
Yeshua God the Son Messiah Savior
Holy Spirit God guide helper

I have over a hundred scriptures that prove the one God formula wrong

Ahh – so you don’t even believe in the Triune Godhead?? That explains a LOT . . .
Ther is ONE God manifested in TREE distinct Persons.

I have DOZENS of verses that PROVE the Triune Godhead (Trinity).
I’ll take it easy on you and provide you with just THREE . . .

The Father is God
Ephesians 4:6
One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Jesus is God
Titus 2:13
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

The Holy Spirit is God
Acts 5:3-4
But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? "While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to GOD."

Ummmm, explain how the Bible says that they are ALL God . . .

And I am still waiting for you to produce the words infant baptism in the scriptures. Whether they did or not is speculation but not specifically in the scriptures.

Just as soon as YOU produce a verse of Scripture showing that an entire household does NOT include children of all ages. CAN you do that??

Finally – WHY do you keep dodging the Sola Scriptura question?? You adhere to a FALSE doctrine that is NOT taught in the Scriptures. What are you going to tell God when He asks you why you practiced such a falsehood??

You can run – but you can‘t hide . . .

And when you can find the scripture that says that some one can choose for some one else to be a Christian that would be good also.

Ummm, I already did . . .
Gen. 17:10-13
This is my COVENANT with you and your descendants after you, the COVENANT you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

A “Covenant” by definition is a binding agreement made between TWO or more parties.
WHO do you think made the choice – the baby or the parent??

The SAME is true in the case of the COVENANT of Baptism. The parent will choose for the child:
Acts 2:38-29
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your CHILDREN and for all who are far off—for ALL whom the Lord our God will call.”

 

[Grailhunter]

Ahh – so you don’t even believe in the Triune Godhead?? That explains a LOT . . .
Ther is ONE God manifested in TREE distinct Persons.

I have DOZENS of verses that PROVE the Triune Godhead (Trinity).
I’ll take it easy on you and provide you with just THREE . . .

The Father is God
Ephesians 4:6
One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Jesus is God
Titus 2:13
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

The Holy Spirit is God
Acts 5:3-4
But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? "While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to GOD."

Ummmm, explain how the Bible says that they are ALL God . . .

Just as soon as YOU produce a verse of Scripture showing that an entire household does NOT include children of all ages. CAN you do that??

Finally – WHY do you keep dodging the Sola Scriptura question?? You adhere to a FALSE doctrine that is NOT taught in the Scriptures. What are you going to tell God when He asks you why you practiced such a falsehood??

You can run – but you can‘t hide . . .

Ummm, I already did . . .
Gen. 17:10-13
This is my COVENANT with you and your descendants after you, the COVENANT you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old +`--must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

A “Covenant” by definition is a binding agreement made between TWO or more parties.
WHO do you think made the choice – the baby or the parent??

The SAME is true in the case of the COVENANT of Baptism. The parent will choose for the child:
Acts 2:38-29
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your CHILDREN and for all who are far off—for ALL whom the Lord our God will call.”

For their children when they grow up.....
Salvation is about faith and babies do not have faith and no one can choose salvation for another.
And again I am OK if they were baptizing babies but it was not for salvation, it was for christening.

 

[BreadOfLife]

For their children when they grow up.....
Salvation is about faith and babies do not have faith and no one can choose salvation for another.

WRING.
Peter said it was also for their children - period (Acts 2:39).

And 8-day-old babies didn't have the faith OR the menta capacity to enter into a Covenant with God through curcumcision. GOD made an allowance for the parents to speak for their children to enter the Covenant.

If YOU have a pronlrm with God's will - then you should pray about, it not fight it . . .

And again I am OK if they were baptizing babies but it was not for salvation, it was for christening.

Once again - "Christening" is just another word for Baptizing. There is NO difference.
Ir's when we enter into the Nre Covenant with God.

Finally - are you EVER going to address the fact that you practice Sola Scriptura - even though it is an unbiblical, man-made 16th century invention?? It's a FRAUD . . .

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The Ark of the Covenant carried symbols of God’s power – Aaron’s Rod, the Tablets containing God’s Word, a jar of Manna.

The Ark of the NEW Covenant (Mary) carried GOD Himself in the person of Jesus, who IS the Word.

Your failure to understand this is your folly . . .

Now let us look at the faults in your false hypothesis.

The ark was placed in the holy of holies and veiled- Mary was not hidden
The Ark could only be viewed once a year- Mary was visible to all.
Only the High priest could enter to view the Ark- No restriction for Mary.
The priest had to cleanse himself before approaching the ark- not so with Mary.
The priest could only see the ark once a year- no such restriction with Mary.
The Ark was in the OT temple of God. Mary is not in the NT temple of God- individual believers.
No person could touch the ark- all sorts of people touched Mary.

There are more things that disprove your metaphor about Mary than prove it.

1.Nowhow about her being sinless?

2. How about her being titled the Queen of Heaven?

3. Co-mediatrix- and co-redemptrix?

If you would , please answer these in order.

 

[Grailhunter]

WRING.
Peter said it was also for their children - period (Acts 2:39).

And 8-day-old babies didn't have the faith OR the menta capacity to enter into a Covenant with God through curcumcision. GOD made an allowance for the parents to speak for their children to enter the Covenant.

If YOU have a pronlrm with God's will - then you should pray about, it not fight it . . .

Once again - "Christening" is just another word for Baptizing. There is NO difference.
Ir's when we enter into the Nre Covenant with God.

Finally - are you EVER going to address the fact that you practice Sola Scriptura - even though it is an unbiblical, man-made 16th century invention?? It's a FRAUD . . .

Not exactly Sola Scriptura, things change but I do not try to add to the scriptures that are there….It would be easier for you to write your own Bible.

As far as 8 month old babies and circumcision. LOL We are not Jewish. God commanded them to circumcise their babies….Christ did not command us to Baptize our infants.

Christening is not another word for Baptism. Christening is a dedication.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Now let us look at the faults in your false hypothesis.

The ark was placed in the holy of holies and veiled- Mary was not hidden
The Ark could only be viewed once a year- Mary was visible to all.
Only the High priest could enter to view the Ark- No restriction for Mary.
The priest had to cleanse himself before approaching the ark- not so with Mary.
The priest could only see the ark once a year- no such restriction with Mary.
The Ark was in the OT temple of God. Mary is not in the NT temple of God- individual believers.
No person could touch the ark- all sorts of people touched Mary.

There are more things that disprove your metaphor about Mary than prove it.

NOT every aspect of an OT Type needs to be followed to the letter in its NT Fulfillment.

Moses is an OT type of Jesus.
- Was Moses’ mother a virgin??
- When was Moses executed?
- When did Moses Resurrect from the dead?
There are similarities between the two – but not EVERY aspect.

Mary was the Ark who carried GOD Himself in her womb. As for the similarities between her and the old Ark – I already posted them for you which you have FAILED to refute . . .

1.Nowhow about her being sinless?

2. How about her being titled the Queen of Heaven?

3. Co-mediatrix- and co-redemptrix?

If you would , please answer these in order.

We are ALL summoned in the Scriptures to Pray for each other (James 5:16, 1 John 5:16) as intercessors and mediators. Why should Mary be excluded from this

1 Cor.12 tells us that as the parts of Body of Christ – we ALL need each other. Paul asks his readers to pray for him on multiple occasions (Rom 15:30-32, 2 Cor 1:10-11, Eph 6:18-20, Phil 1:19, Col 4:2-4, 1 Th 5:25, 2 Th 3:1-2). Why should Mary be excluded from this?

This is the very definition of intercession and mediation . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not exactly Sola Scriptura, things change but I do not try to add to the scriptures that are there….It would be easier for you to write your own Bible.

No – you ARE as Sola Scripturist who demands explicit Scriptural proof for everything. You believe that Scripture is our SOLE Authority.

Now – why do you keep RUNNING from this question?? Is is that your entire theology collapses with this false doctrine?

As far as 8 month old babies and circumcision. LOL We are not Jewish. God commanded them to circumcise their babies….Christ did not command us to Baptize our infants.

That’s a foolish response.

We’re not Jewish but we come form the Jews. The SAME God of the Jews is OUR God – and He doesn’t change.
- Our Easter is similar to their Passover because that’s when we were delivered from death.
- We BOTH adhere to the Commandments.
- We BOTH adhere to the Golden Rule.
- We BOTH have our roots in Abraham.

Don’t be so quick to divorce yourself from the Jews . . .

Christening is not another word for Baptism. Christening is a dedication.

WRONG.

Why do you have to keep LYING??
I already posted this definition:

christening /krĭs′ə-nĭng/
noun

1. The Christian sacrament of baptizing and naming an infant.
2. An inaugural ceremony in which something is declared ready for use, as when a newly built ship is named and launched.
3. The Christian sacrament at which someone, usually a child, is baptized and given a Christian name

Besides, “Infant Dedications” are an unbiblical Protestant invention . . .

 

[Grailhunter]

No – you ARE as Sola Scripturist who demands explicit Scriptural proof for everything. You believe that Scripture is our SOLE Authority.

Now – why do you keep RUNNING from this question?? Is is that your entire theology collapses with this false doctrine?

That’s a foolish response.

We’re not Jewish but we come form the Jews. The SAME God of the Jews is OUR God – and He doesn’t change.
- Our Easter is similar to their Passover because that’s when we were delivered from death.
- We BOTH adhere to the Commandments.
- We BOTH adhere to the Golden Rule.
- We BOTH have our roots in Abraham.

Don’t be so quick to divorce yourself from the Jews . . .

WRONG.

Why do you have to keep LYING??
I already posted this definition:

christening /krĭs′ə-nĭng/
noun

1. The Christian sacrament of baptizing and naming an infant.
2. An inaugural ceremony in which something is declared ready for use, as when a newly built ship is named and launched.
3. The Christian sacrament at which someone, usually a child, is baptized and given a Christian name

Besides, “Infant Dedications” are an unbiblical Protestant invention . . .

Once you get stupid and rude I quit talking to you.....good bye.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Once you get stupid and rude I quit talking to you.....good bye.

Since when is asking at theological question "stupid and rude"??
YOU'RE the one who refuses to answer it.

You simply have NO Scriptural proof for your false doctrine.
That's what I thought . . .

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Moses is an OT type of Jesus.
- Was Moses’ mother a virgin??
- When was Moses executed?
- When did Moses Resurrect from the dead?
There are similarities between the two – but not EVERY aspect.

Well as the bible tells us that God would raise up a prophet like Moses (Jesus) we know there is a direct comparison. show me the direct comparison between the ark and Mary7? Or even a direct metaphor or symbol

Mary was the Ark who carried GOD Himself in her womb. As for the similarities between her and the old Ark – I already posted them for you which you have FAILED to refute . . .

The Ark did not carry God in it! So that comparison is a FAIL

We are ALL summoned in the Scriptures to Pray for each other (James 5:16, 1 John 5:16) as intercessors and mediators. Why should Mary be excluded from this

So show me an even implied mention that saints in heaven pray for us. Every Scripture exhorting to intercede is between humans on earth! Nowhere in the bible do we see anyone pleading with dead saints to pray for them.

1 Cor.12 tells us that as the parts of Body of Christ – we ALL need each other. Paul asks his readers to pray for him on multiple occasions (Rom 15:30-32, 2 Cor 1:10-11, Eph 6:18-20, Phil 1:19, Col 4:2-4, 1 Th 5:25, 2 Th 3:1-2). Why should Mary be excluded from this?

Paul was alive and weell on planet earth and was asking saints alive and well on planet earth, not even an allegorical mention of praying to saints in heaven to intercede for us. As Scripture says there is only one mediator b etween god and man-the man christ Jesus. We have NO co-mediatrix we need to plead to to stay trhe hand of an angry god as is or was at least taught when I was a good little catholic boy and is in my Catholic Family bible with teh Nihil Obstat and Impramatur.

This is the very definition of intercession and mediation .

But we see necromancy expressly forbidden in Scripture and praying to the dead an evil abomination. there is not even a hint of a call to pray to Jude or Michael or Mother Mary for anything.

We have but one mediator to God- Jesus. And Jesus ever liveth to make intercession for us. Once again the Scriptures which even the romanists agree is gods Infallible Word, shows th living interceding for the living.

All the saints are busy with divine chores to pray for us. It is not even hinted at in Gods word. Only in Catholic Dogma. the living pray for the living. Your vain human reasoning does not change the Scriptures.

Proverbs 14:12
There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Proverbs 3:5-6

King James Version

​

5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.(reasonings)
6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
.

 

[Marymog]

I don't see any hypocrisy on my part, but I can see how arrogant, judgmental and rude you can be, and I can also see how you like to play the strawman card. So, you are also calling me a charlatan? Really?

Yes!

charlatan: one making usually showy pretenses to knowledge or ability

................... I'm neither a Roman Catholic nor a Calvinist, which both have some major doctrinal flaws.

YOU don't have any "major doctrinal flaws" but The Catholic Church and Calvin and the students of the Apostles do?.........that is YOU showing pretenses to knowledge; knowledge they don't have but YOU do!

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Well aside from your not so subtle ad-hominen about me, you couldn't be more wrong. If you would bother to ask, you would find I do have a rather large knowledge of early church history.

And I follow biblical teachers be they protestant or Catholic. I know you are mired and chained to Romanist theology.

I know you are mired and chained to YOUR theology.

 

[Marymog]

Moreover, I test MY OWN words and thoughts against the scriptures!

You test your own words and thoughts against YOUR interpretation of Scripture which means you will never tell yourself that you are wrong.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

I test MY OWN words and thoughts against the scriptures!

You test your own words and thoughts against YOUR interpretation of Scripture

“interpretation.”

Some people like throwing that word around to make people stumble in the word of God.

God gives instructions in his holy word, both with plain commands and with multiple examples throughout time. No “interpretation” is required for these things.

“Interpretation” merely involves an explanation of meanings of words. In scripture it also involved explaining of dreams (which interpretations only belonged to God)

“…And Joseph said… Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Gen 40:8, KJV)

Any “interpretation” is solved by utilizing a dictionary. Also, knowledge of the entire Holy Bible is crucial because the Bible often explains itself in multiple places.

Your “interpretation” argument is vanity and a smokescreen.