Christianity without the Bible

Would it exist?

Originally posted by @velns
Would it exist?

People meet the Lord having never read scripture so yes.

Originally posted by @velns
Would it exist?

Yes. It's called Catholicism.

Originally posted by @vivify
Yes. It's called Catholicism.

Being born again, anything short of that is just between the ears, it is a must!

Originally posted by @velns
Would it exist?

It already does. We have plenty here who claim the Bible should not be defined by the words within it.

It seems to be broadly suggested (so far) that the Bible is superfluous as an engine for Christian salvation.

Originally posted by @velns
It seems to be broadly suggested (so far) that the Bible is superfluous as an engine for Christian salvation.

No, the written Word is very important to us sharing with us God’s interaction with mankind. The point of it is to let us know we can have a right relationship with God in Christ, to be in Christ.

We can through the Word grasp that God loves us and is reaching out to us. He has made Himself available offering His Spirit to us, which is the point because His Spirit gives us life.

If all we have are words in a book that gets us nothing, for the letter kills but the Spirit gives us life.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
.... for the letter kills but the Spirit gives us life.

Doesn’t this statement by you confirm the premise in my previous post?

Originally posted by @eladar
It already does. We have plenty here who claim the Bible should not be defined by the words within it.

No, the Bible should not be defined by what YOU claim the words mean. You never fail to put your sick twist on what the Bible is saying.

Why do you ignore this every single time I've told you this?

Originally posted by @velns
It seems to be broadly suggested (so far) that the Bible is superfluous as an engine for Christian salvation.

By whom?

Those who are not Christian?

Yeah, that's valid. (No, it's not.)

Now before some grognard like FMF decides to jump in here with his 'special' way of ignoring people's points, in answer to your OP, I say No, it would not. It would have died stillborn in the first, or more probably second, century. Without scripture, it could not have been disseminated to the masses. Christianity would have remained a small group, only those who could learn of it through word of mouth, and once those people were killed off, the movement would have died.

By the way, you have moved the goalposts a bit since your OP. The OP never mentions the Bible "as an engine for Christian salvation". What the Bible is, is a method of conveying the Gospel, or the Good News, about the Christ. The Bible doesn't save people on its own. It's only a beacon, an instruction for finding the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Originally posted by @velns
Doesn’t this statement by you confirm the premise in my previous post?

The Bible points us to God, it is God who saves us.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
The Bible points us to God, it is God who saves us.

Yes, exactly!

Originally posted by @kellyjay
The Bible points us to God, it is God who saves us.

I’m not sure then what you meant by this in the context of you saying that the bible is not necessary of salvation?

Originally posted by @kellyjay
.... for the letter kills but the Spirit gives us life.

Originally posted by @suzianne
By whom?

Those who are not Christian?

No, KellyJay who I believe is a Christian. Did you see his post above?

Originally posted by @suzianne
I say No, it would not. [Christianity] would have died stillborn in the first, or more probably second, century. Without scripture, it could not have been disseminated to the masses. Christianity would have remained a small group, only those who could learn of it through word of mouth, and once those people were killed off, the movement would have died.

Agreed.