Cruciform
New member
Because the Lord Jesus Christ said so (Lk. 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15).
the church
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
Cruciform
New member
Straw Man Fallacy. Try again.
I've been studying Medieval History for decades. What would you like to discuss?
Cruciform
New member
Example, please.
DavidK
New member
Ah, I see. It's impossible.
But, purely in the form of a thought experiment, if it did happen, you'd comply?
Cruciform
New member
And yet, that's what it all amounts to for non-Catholics as well: "My preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect has told me this or that!" Each individual is simply appealing to what he has been taught by his particular doctrinal tradition---including you.
Cruciform
New member
Wow, a whole two centuries? Why would we take your word for something that happened two millennia ago? No thanks, I'll take the apostolic testimony of the early Church Fathers over the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect any day.
Cruciform
New member
The same way that believers have always known the authentic meaning of the Scriptures---because it comports with the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Catholic Church (Lk. 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6).
Cruciform
New member
In the language in which Jesus originally spoke those words (Aramaic), the two terms were indentical: kepha and kepha.
Cruciform
New member
Actually, Jesus' promise that the Holy Spirit would "guide them into all truth" was issued directly to the apostles, that is, to the ordained apostolic leaders of Christ's one historic Catholic Church. Thus, the place to find "all truth" is in the teachings of Christ's Church, not in the personal opinions of each individual believer.
Because it is folly to assume that Christ's one historic Church could ever teach formal doctrinal error, any more than Jesus himself could ever do so (Mt. 16:18; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 1 Tim. 3:16).
Last edited:
Cruciform
New member
You're a fanatic- you can't discuss much with fanatics.
You see- the 16th Century Reformists called your church out on what you pretend to be all lies.
But they aren't lies, and we both know that
Cruciform
New member
You can go ahead and just apply that statement to yourself.
Who cares what "the 16th-century Reformists" said about anything whatsoever? After all, they possessed no more ecclesiastical or doctrinal authority than any other heretic who had ever troubled Christ's one historic Catholic Church during her history---for example: Arius, Pelagius, Sabellius, Nestorius, Apollinarius, etc., etc., etc...
I don't even comply now with all the stuff they have put out -
I make it a point to not read it all -
I don't want to know it all -
it is not for us -
it is for you guys who are forever wondering how many angels can dance on the head of a needle -
even though they now deny it - there was a time when they sold indulgences -
if they ever do it again and you have the money, go ahead and buy one, I am sure it would work
The Bible contains several passages where the office of Pope ought to be mentioned, if it existed. Ephesians 4:11,12 and 1 Corinthians 12:28 list various officers and workers in the church, but the office of Pope is not mentioned. Why not?..
Paul wrote several letters to and from Rome, naming many people there (Rom. 16; Col. 4:7-14; 2 Tim. 4:9-22; Philem. 23,24). If Peter was Pope in Rome, surely Paul would have mentioned him. But Paul mentions neither Peter nor anyone else as being Pope...
Who can imagine someone today writing official letters to or from the church in Rome, listing the officers of the Catholic Church, giving all this information about the work and qualifications of lesser officers, but never mentioning the Pope? If the office of Pope was established by Jesus, why does the New Testament fail to mention it?
Paul wrote several letters to and from Rome, naming many people there (Rom. 16; Col. 4:7-14; 2 Tim. 4:9-22; Philem. 23,24). If Peter was Pope in Rome, surely Paul would have mentioned him. But Paul mentions neither Peter nor anyone else as being Pope...
Who can imagine someone today writing official letters to or from the church in Rome, listing the officers of the Catholic Church, giving all this information about the work and qualifications of lesser officers, but never mentioning the Pope? If the office of Pope was established by Jesus, why does the New Testament fail to mention it?
where did tulip come from?
Right Divider
Body part
From misunderstanding scripture, much like RCC doctrines of the same type.
Notice they aren't around anymore
In fact, the Reformists deemed them heretics as well.