All Religions (From Catholicism to Buddhism) either Change the Bible or are Iliogical

In the same way God also works through people by word of mouth or oral teaching. I would add that the bible hasn't always existed. In the early church Christians had to learn their faith via oral teaching, The bible came as a complement to this teaching later on. I would disagree. The Bible has existed since Moses (well, The Book of Job was written about a century after the Flood before Abraham) who wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. As far as the New Testament is concerned, The oldest manuscript, Which is the Book of John, Is dated at A. D. 150 which is 50 years after John died. Also the Gospels were written at the most 40 years after the Resurrection and Paul's letters were written between 40 and 67. The book of Luke mentions that he got his information from eyewitnesses. You state that the bible is the supreme authority of Christianity, My question is how do you know this The apostles many times said that their words they were writing were from God and had to be obeyed. Paul and other apostles said not to base their beliefs on tradition, Such as 1 Corinthians 4:6. Paul claims divine authority for his words in other letters as well. 1 Thessalonians 2:13 says, "And we also thank God constantly for this, That when you received the word of God, Which you heard from us, You accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, The word of God, Which is at work in you believers. " Christ is the only mediator? I would agree that Christ mediates, But through his Church. If your stance is that Christ"s Church has no purpose, Then that would make all Christian churches illogical and unnecessary, But of course this is absurd. Christ isn"t here to personally mediate for you. Christ said he was the the only mediator by saying, "I am the way, The truth, And the life. No man comes to the Father, But by me. " Also, "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, He shall be saved, And shall go in and out, And find pasture. " "For there is one God, And one mediator between God and men, The man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). The Church's purpose was never to mediate, You will not find it in the Bible. It's purpose is to give the gospel of Jesus and to encourage one another. But by the Biblically Christian way: Baptism. Throughout scripture we see references to baptism, For example: In Acts 22, 16 we see this clearly referenced; "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, Be baptized and wash your sins away, Calling on his name. " Baptism is the washing of one"s sins and starting anew to indeed be "born again. " Actually, That is the only verse in the Bible that would make it seem that you must be baptized to be saved, But before I explain the verse let me ask you some questions. I one must need be baptized for salvation, What happened to the thief on the cross? He sure wasn't able to be baptized. I notice that Jesus never mentioned the need to be baptized in His ministry. To the paralytic man He said, "Son, Thy sins be forgiven thee. " To Mary Magdalene He said, "Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace. " Here are other verses showing salvation by faith alone: John 3:16; Romans 1:16; Romans 5:1, 2; Ephesians 2:8. Also, Before the Ethiopian Eunuch could get baptized he had to accept Jesus as his Savior. So does Acts 22:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? " As with any single verse or passage, We discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, The Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, Not by works of any kind, Including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, Any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, Or any other act, Is necessary for salvation, Is a faulty interpretation. For more information, Please visit our webpage on "Is salvation by faith alone, Or by faith plus works? " Acts 22:16, "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, Be baptized and wash your sins away, Calling on his name. " The first question that must be answered is "when was Paul saved? " 1. Paul tells that he did not receive or hear the Gospel from Ananias, But rather he heard it directly from Christ. Galatians 1:11-12 says, "For I would have you know, Brethren, That the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, Nor was I taught it, But I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. " So, Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus. Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). 2. It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, He also received the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was before he was baptized (Acts 9:18). Acts presents a transition period where God's focus turns from Israel to the Church. The events recorded in Acts are not always normative. With regard to receiving the Holy Spirit, The norm is that a person receives and is permanently indwelt by the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation. 3. The Greek aorist participle, Epikalesamenos, Translated "calling on His name" refers either to action that is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb, "be baptized. " Here Paul"s calling on Christ"s name for salvation preceded his water baptism. The participle may be translated "having called on His name" which makes more sense, As it would clearly indicate the order of the events. 4. Concerning the words, "be baptized, And wash away your sins, " because Paul was already cleansed spiritually at the time Christ appeared to him, These words must refer to the symbolism of baptism. Baptism is a picture of God"s inner work of washing away sin (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 Peter 3:21). 5. It is also interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), He did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him. In other words there has to be one solid truth, Christ"s one true Church that he established with his exact teachings. I agree. The true church is the one who follows His Word and whose head is Christ. Christ is actually the rock, The foundation. Not Peter, Not the Pope, But Christ only. As long as you are saved by faith through the blood of Jesus and repentance of sin can you be a part of Christ's Church. Also who can authoritatively interpret scripture, As Apostle Peter in 2 Peter 1:20 states: "know this first of all, That there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation" Actually, 2 Peter 1:20 emphasizes the source of Old Testament prophecies, Not who has the right to interpret the Bible today. Some Bible versions do not make this clear. The NAS, For example, Says that prophecy is not "a matter of one"s own interpretation, " and the KJV says Scripture is not "of any private interpretation. " However, Peter was not writing about how we should read or interpret God"s Word; he was writing about how God gave us His Word in the first place. In order to persuade his readers to pay attention to the gospel, Peter affirmed that his words were God"s words"just as much as the Old Testament prophecies were. Peter"s meaning in verse 20 is further explained by the context: "We did not follow cleverly devised stories. . . But we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. . . . We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven. . . . We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable. . . . No prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet"s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will" (2 Peter 1:16"21). Notice that Peter"s main point is not how to read and understand God"s messages. Instead, He explains the authoritative origin and source of those prophecies. It was God Himself who communicated them through His chosen spokesmen. The prophets (and Peter) did not write thoughts that they cooked up out of their own minds, But they passed on truth that came directly from God. As Peter puts it, They "spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (verse 21). Peter"s intent was to urge his readers to take his message about Jesus seriously, As he says in verse 19, "You [therefore] will do well to pay attention to [God"s message through me], As to a light shining in a dark place. " Peter"s account of Jesus was straight from God. Since the Bible"s words express God"s thoughts, Not man"s, It is important that we respect them enough to study them and grasp what He wants us to understand as we are interpreting Scripture. The apostles knew that they were going to be the last ones to write Scripture and they made it clear that whoever came after them and added to it or took away from it would be condemned to eternal punishment.