that doesn't stop them
ECT WHO HAS AUTHORITY TO APPOINT ELDERS ?
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
that doesn't stop them
No where like the Bible said. Somebody mentioned the first pope after peter and I looked him up and guess what I read, I read "thought to be" or "might be" or "could be". Theres the raw root of the broken apostolic succession. My friends were right and the the guesses of RCC historians became a tradition cause a pope said so. Popery doesn't exist.
Last edited:
Yeh right Dan.
Hi and I use my own words and will reveal who I quote from , what do you do !!
Did you quote from the OP ?
DAN P
Cruciform
New member
No, it certainly doesn't. In fact, DAN has thus far refused to even try to provide the requested information (Post #113). Very telling.
Hi and I am not the ine who claims to have a POPE or a PURGATORY since they are not in the bible !!
I quote bible and do not have to SNOLLYGOSTER like you all do !!:darwinsm::darwinsm:
dan p
A very big denomination ! And the pope is the moderator.
Cruciform
New member
You're the one who insists that words like "purgatory" and "pope" must appear explicitly in the Bible in order for Christians to use them to explain and express their beliefs. But you have yet to actually demonstrate this from Scripture itself. Again:
Now post a biblical text which states that "Only words that specifically appear in the Bible may be used by Christians to express their beliefs."
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Hi , and you are the one's who have ADDED non-bibical words to the bible , so the PROOF lies with YOU !!
So , will you begin?
dan p
Cruciform
New member
Note, then, that DAN is utterly unable to cite a single verse of Scripture which actually states that "Only words that specifically appear in the Bible may be used by Christians to express their beliefs." Therefore, he has no basis whatsoever for suggesting that terms such as "purgatory" or "pope" should not be used by Catholics. Case closed.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
The authority that DID and DOES exist is who Paul addresses. Titus was one of the leaders of the NT church, and recognized as such. Paul was also recognized as the Apostle to the Gentiles. There was no doubt in those days, except for the false teachers that Paul and all the writers of the NT warned about.
Ephesians was addressed to the SAINTS in Ephesus, and as such to the leadership that already existed. There wasn't a problem for Titus nor the Ephesians to follow his instructions. They developed a system based on Paul's instruction, and his pastoral epistles to Timothy and Titus. Ephesians is not considered on of these.
If anyone wants to get a good understanding of this issue, get the following; https://www.logos.com/product/2307/word-biblical-commentary-volume-46-pastoral-epistles ...it's a very good book by one of the preeminent Greek scholars of our day.
For some reason the OP confuses the RCC with the Pentecostal experience, which I have no idea why, but it is a very evident bias in a lot of his posts.
Regardless of the short falls of ANY denomination, leaderships is establish by those that are already there, based on the NT instructions. Obviously some of those instructions over the centuries have been ignored or misunderstood, but that can only change WITHIN those denominations.
Many denominations call their clergy pastor or reverend, when in fact the word pastors is only used ONCE in the entire Bible, with no qualifications, and reverend I not used at all. The office is clear, regardless of the disparity in title.
Hi , and 2 Tim 3:16 says , God breathed all Scripture and does not say He breathed all NON-BIBICAL RCC JUNK !!
That is it is easy to defeat the Pentecostals and RCC THEOLOGY !!:rotfl::rotfl:
DAN P
Hi and I know exacty , and it is Titus 1:5 and you can not refute it !!:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
DAN P
This one has to be the most silly!How did they miss scripture on baptism by fire and how did they miss what Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
In the later medieval period, some theologians continued to hold Augustine's view. In the 12th century, Peter Abelard (1079–1142) said that these infants suffered no material torment or positive punishment, just the pain of loss at being denied the beatific vision. Others held that unbaptized infants suffered no pain at all: unaware of being deprived of the beatific vision, they enjoyed a state of natural, not supernatural happiness. This theory was associated with but independent of the term "Limbo of Infants", which was forged about the year 1300.[17]
If heaven is a state of supernatural happiness and union with God, and hell is understood as a state of torture and separation from God then, in this view, the Limbo of Infants, although technically part of hell (the outermost part, "limbo" meaning "outer edge" or "hem") is seen as a sort of intermediate state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo#Limbo_of_Infants
This is strange comment coming from trinity believers. The word trinity is not in the Bible either yet you believe.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Because it is implied.....very simply
Catholics can say the same thing about purgatory and others which you guys vehemently disagree.
very logical.
You guys are inconsistent.
drbrumley
Well-known member
“Try to explain the Trinity, and you may lose your mind; Deny it, and you may lose your soul.”