the law of faith?

[prism]

go with that then, and elsewhere describe how those with Torah could not have been saved if you like, neverminding that you are assuming here that Z even went to temple. See, you are studiously deflecting away from the point, that being that Z did not become saved in the manner that you previously inferred.

Are you playing 'Gotcha' lol?
By Word, I mean verbal or written. Especially for us today, what we hear verbally must accord with what is written, whether by dream, vision, or spoken word.
Here is an example...
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
(Gal 1:8-9)

Yes Paul used the word 'preached' but they had Apostolic authority, there are no apostles today with that type of inerrant authority. But even back then, this was the practice...

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
(Act 17:11)

 

[bbyrd009]

By Word, I mean verbal or written

Well as I already offered, bam Quote where Bible conflates Itself with Word and we can move on then

 

[gadar perets]

Sure, what they heard verbally then, is what we now have written.

1 John 1:1-3 NKJV
[1] That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life- [2] the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us- [3] that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.

John 20:30-31 NKJV
[30] And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; [31] but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

I totally agree, but at the time those people were witnessed to they were NOT written. That refutes your point "that there is no believing in Jesus without believing the Scriptures".

 

[prism]

I totally agree, but at the time those people were witnessed to they were NOT written. That refutes your point "that there is no believing in Jesus without believing the Scriptures".

If that is what you have been quibbling about all this time fine. My point is that even what they proclaimed verbally and others believed (I never directly refuted that), had to be grounded in Scripture. Even Jesus appealed to the Scriptures by saying "It is written" time and time again.
I already gave you ths passage but it is a propos to the discussion...

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
(Act 17:11)

So even the Apostles words were subject to the Scriptures as exemplified by the 'noble' Bereans.

 

[gadar perets]

If that is what you have been quibbling about all this time fine. My point is that even what they proclaimed verbally and others believed (I never directly refuted that), had to be grounded in Scripture. Even Jesus appealed to the Scriptures by saying "It is written" time and time again.
I already gave you ths passage but it is a propos to the discussion...

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
(Act 17:11)

So even the Apostles words were subject to the Scriptures as exemplified by the 'noble' Bereans.

Praise YHWH for the Scriptures and for the Living Word!