Sola Scriptura being: Scripture as the only
judge of spiritual (of the Holy Spirit ) truth.
And it is the judge of spiritual truth in that it is the
measure of spiritual truth.
If what is presented is not in agreement with Scripture, it is not spiritual truth.
As in the doctrine of the Trinity, not presented in Scripture as a doctrine, but when measured by Scripture, it is
in absolute agreement with what Scripture presents,
does not go outside the boundaries of what Scripture presents, and
does not subtract from what Scripture presents.
The "doctrine" of dual ransoms by Christ does not
measure up.
Everywhere Scripture presents Christ's expiatory sacrifice under
God's judgment upon sin as the provision of a ransom (Mt 20:28, Mk 1:45, 1 Ti 26),
whereby those who
receive him
as the sacrifice for their sin obtain
deliverance from the
penalty due to sin.
Nothing is ransomed that does not accept the ransom by faith.
To posit that the purpose of Christ's brutal atoning death included anything
less,
that anything
less would apply to
all without exception,
contrary to the Biblical testimony of the meaning of blood sacrifice as presented in the OT sacrifices and in
authoritative NT
apostolic teaching,
is to alter the terms of his sacrifice, both in meaning (expiation) and application (by belief in him), which is
as grievous a misrepresentation of this sacred reality as were the false charges against him.
To attempt to manipulate such a staggering Christian foundational reality, all for the sake of one's own personal theology,
betrays an insufficient apprehension of the cross.
Relevance?
Are you saying that because one is a teacher, what one presents will necessarily be sound doctrine?
And "the rest of the story:" Scripture likewise warns against false teachers; i.e., those teaching false doctrine.
Is this what
@makesends means when he refers to "sloughing" terminology?
It is not taught in a Creed, it is simply stated in a Creed as belief of one of the basics of Christianity using a repetition of the words from Scripture.
The title of a teaching is not necessarily connected to the spiritual gift of teaching.
Your hermeneutic has the appearance of the SDA hermeneutic, of what I call a boot-strapping hermeneutic; i.e., an irrelevant connection of facts, supposedly related, to arrive at one's desired conclusion.
