• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.

Rome's tactics.

You still fail to answer why you provably disagree with all the early church.
Maybe if you read some of my posts you will see how I agree with many ECF's and how they disagree with your RCC theology. But don't bother checking into these things, ignorance is bliss.
And why you trust calvin who wasn’t sent , and doesn’t agree with any of his contemporaries let alone the historic church.
Why do you claim I trust Calvin? Did I say that? Show me where?

He is the one who apostasized. Turned his back on Jesus’ church. As an academic he was a modern Pharisee. Legal twisting of words, losing the meaning entirely. But then he wasn’t part of the succession so his opinions are irrelevant.
Really? Friend, this thread isn't about Calvin. But you are free to start a thread about Calvin. Ill post a reply about your traditions shortly.
All the rest of your posts are so much smoke and mirrors. Nothing to do with the doctrine of Jesus church.
Your opinion. Are you afraid of the truth?
You will find it in the historic writings, of the first generations.
A physical church with Succession with power to hand down doctrine and arbitrate disputes, the power Jesus gave His church.
You should be glad for them, their decisions gave you your New Testament.
Stay tuned friend, Ill show you more history.
Read them. The early church taught by them is Catholic , certainly not Calvinist, or sola scriptura.
Keep reading and following along. And by all means, post away.
 
No you don’t.
Haha.
The physical church. Power to bind and loose. The succession. Eucharist of real flesh valid only if presided by bishop in succession. You have none of the early church faith, appointed by Jesus,
I agree with the ECF's and I will post a few to show you that you do not understand what they believe according to your reply here. But please consider what they teach and I pray you will leave that aspostate church.
Like scripture , you cherry pick a single father out of context, to try to support your false faith.
Yet all of the early fathers support the succession of bishops, who are the sole channel of true faith, and Jesus appointedarbiters of truth.
You do not know what the early father taught? Wow. You just know what your pope and priests tell you they teach. Good grief friend, look for yourself.
You then claim a single random non entity called calvin somehow has the truth, and that all before him were wrong!!
Your version of Jesus is seemingly too weak to do what he promised to keep the gates of hell from his church.
Haha, again, this is not about Calvin. You don't see that? ;)

Yet RCC has outlasted the longest empires , still with all the essential doctrines unchanged, longevity and standing firm is a mark of the true church.
The rest fragment as giant egos and pride like Calvin’s rip them apart. Again. Again.again. Calvinism had fractured into many pieces. Are their many holly spirits in Calvinism guiding you in many directions?
Ha, all about nothing.
But Nobody appointed calvin foretold him in scripture and he failed to do a miracle to show his bona fides
Wow, your really into Calvin huh?
Spare me the dime shop insults of Catholicism .
Haha. Come, prove me wrong, it should be so simple, right?
I'm waiting.
They may work against the ill informed, but none who have studied the history.
Read Francis de sales - catholic controversy, or Newman , the essay. See just how wrong you are.
It's obvious you haven't read the history.

But you have your chance now to defend your religion.
 
You still fail to answer why you provably disagree with all the early church.
I find it funny that what I post makes it obvious that I agree with most of the ECF's, and posted a few things to even show why, yet you don't acknowledge that. So, I wonder, is there a Roman Catholic out there who knows his or her religion and is not afraid to look into it and discuss it?
I have been on a few forums before where the RC's have done a number of some protestants on certain subjects. I also seen proof where it is very important for a protestant to know what he is talking about concerning Catholicism because if they didn't, they were no match for a Catholic who knew their stuff.

But so far, I haven't seen that here. Especially not in you.

So @Mikeuk , bring it. and stand up for your religion. We can discuss this in a charitable way.
All the rest of your posts are so much smoke and mirrors. Nothing to do with the doctrine of Jesus church.
I'm posting accurate facts and situations. Deal with it or prove it wrong?
 
I invite anyone to check whether these are facts or not.

Palladius of Helenopolis (363-431 A.D.)
You, however, who do you say I am? Not all responded, but Peter only, interpreting the mind of all: You are Christ, Son of the living God. The Saviour, approving the correctness of this response, spoke, saying, "You are Peter and upon this rock" - that is, upon this confession - I shall build My church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

A Catholic teaching that it was Peter's confession, not Peter himself whom Jesus would build his church on.

Oh, @Mikeuk, though this thread is not about Calvin or Calvinism It is pretty plain to see Reformed theology in this passage of scripture. If you would like, Ill make a special occasion to explain it for you.
 
Like scripture , you cherry pick a single father out of context, to try to support your false faith.
Cherry pick a certain Father?

I don't have to cherry-pick, most don't agree with you.

Basil of Seleucia 468
You are Christ, Son of the living God.
Jesus confirmed this statement with his approbation, thereby instructing all: "Blessed are you Simon Bar-Jona, for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in Heaven"
He called Peter blessed so that Peter might join faith to his statement, just as he praised the response because of its meaning ... Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it "Peter", perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of his confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this is the basis of salvation, this is the wall of faith and the foundation of truth:
"For no other foundation can anyone lay than which is laid, which is Christ Jesus. To whom be the glory and power forever."
 
A physical church with Succession with power to hand down doctrine and arbitrate disputes, the power Jesus gave His church.
You should be glad for them, their decisions gave you your New Testament.
They did not say it was the RCC so where do you get the idea that it is? If the RCC did not exist in the first century with its popes and priests, and traditions and antichrist doctrine, how and why do you say the RCC is even what they were talking about or meant? Did they venerate Mary, teach purgatory, praying to the dead. Did they teach succession through Peter or did they teach what the Bible teaches on that subject. Order and supervision by proven men as to character and doctrine, so that order and so that no one was without accountability as to teaching and morality and consistency was maintained in all the various gatherings. And the teaching that was to be taught, as Paul instructed Timothy was to be no other gospel than the one Paul and the other apostles taught.

We have all that teaching in the Scriptures. We can make up our own minds as God gave each of us one of our own. Christianity is not a dictatorship and the New Covenant is not a covenant of laws, as the RCC has made it to be, with the Pope as the dictator.
 
Yet RCC has outlasted the longest empires , still with all the essential doctrines unchanged, longevity and standing firm is a mark of the true church.
Then I guess what Jesus really meant by "Wide is the gate that leads to destruction and many are there that go through it. Narrow is the gate that leads to life and few there be that find it." is the opposite of what He said?

No, that is not the mark of a true church. The mark of a true church is in whether it teaches what Scripture teaches. The fact that true Christianity, the true church of Christ has withstood all attacks against it and always will is that the gates of hell, the blasphemy against the sufficiency of Christ and the sufficiency of His word, found in the RCC cannot destroy His church. You teach that Jesus cannot and did not save anyone without the ministering of self appointed or tradition appointed men. The gates of hell cannot prevail against Christ's church because not a single person that God elects to give to Christ can be kept out or taken out of His church.
 
They did not say it was the RCC so where do you get the idea that it is? If the RCC did not exist in the first century with its popes and priests, and traditions and antichrist doctrine, how and why do you say the RCC is even what they were talking about or meant? Did they venerate Mary, teach purgatory, praying to the dead. Did they teach succession through Peter or did they teach what the Bible teaches on that subject. Order and supervision by proven men as to character and doctrine, so that order and so that no one was without accountability as to teaching and morality and consistency was maintained in all the various gatherings. And the teaching that was to be taught, as Paul instructed Timothy was to be no other gospel than the one Paul and the other apostles taught.

We have all that teaching in the Scriptures. We can make up our own minds as God gave each of us one of our own. Christianity is not a dictatorship and the New Covenant is not a covenant of laws, as the RCC has made it to be, with the Pope as the dictator.
Director pope. :ROFLMAO:😂😅🤣
 
Then I guess what Jesus really meant by "Wide is the gate that leads to destruction and many are there that go through it. Narrow is the gate that leads to life and few there be that find it." is the opposite of what He said?

No, that is not the mark of a true church. The mark of a true church is in whether it teaches what Scripture teaches. The fact that true Christianity, the true church of Christ has withstood all attacks against it and always will is that the gates of hell, the blasphemy against the sufficiency of Christ and the sufficiency of His word, found in the RCC cannot destroy His church. You teach that Jesus cannot and did not save anyone without the ministering of self appointed or tradition appointed men. The gates of hell cannot prevail against Christ's church because not a single person that God elects to give to Christ can be kept out or taken out of His church.
Amen!
 
It doesn’t matter whether you agree with me or not.
It matters you disagree with all the first Christian’s as witness by the early fathers one generation after apostles.
Who ALL believed a physical church, a succession of bishops given power to hand on doctrine, and power to resolve disputes.
They believed ( as scripture says) Only those sent can ( be relied) to preach the truth.


And on doctrine
Take they all believed a Eucharist of the real flesh valid only if presided by a bishop in succession , provable in records decades after Christ.
So who it you suppose apostasized? Jesus? John? Or johns first disciples?( since all succession after that agree with the first)
And how does that square with scripture when Jesus says hell would not prevail against his chuch?

So It matters you disagree with everyone in the first Millenium, and the man you believe - calvin was not sent, he was not prophesied, nor did he perform any miracle to prove his bona fides, all we know for sure is he even disagreed with most other reformers even. , and he uses exactly the same concept the Mormons do for knowing what is scripture.
Not exactly a good imprimateur for you or him.

We must careful how we hear who we say we do. It's what does he say to the churches, sects, families not what the one dying church say.

Revelation 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches;(plural) He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

EFC??? sinners dying mankind?

Where did the idea of a succession of dying mankind as sinners come from?

Where do you find the foundation of that supposed doctrine of God in the Bible?

EFC false authority (dying mankind) false apostles bringing false prophecy as the oral traditions of dying mankind. A living hope at making sola scriptura (all things written by the finger of God) without effect, giving it over to dying mankind.

In that way no man can serve two good teaching master's as one Lord of lords.(1#) All things written in the law and prophets (sola scriptura ) and (2#) the oral tradition of dying sinners called a law of the fathers?

At least the Son of man, Jessus who would not dare blaspheme the name of our Holy Father, Holy See in heaven.

Jesus the Son of man as the chief apostle gave glory to the Holy Father, Holy See. our invisible head

One good teaching master as it is written.

Mark 10:16-18King James Version17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Why do you think the Son of Man Jesus refused to be called the venerable good master? what would the Pope say? two masters?

One God not a legion of fathers as dying mankind. Under the authority of The, "I heard it through the legion of fathers' grapevine", whisper it pass it around the table.

I would think the CCC is not reliable infallible source. No sword of the Spirit or armor of our Holy Father not seen needed to protect the integrity of the one author and perfecter of our newborn again faith. He calls of little faith giving us of his faith just enough to please him He is the storeroom of that power need to raise the dead and rebuke the father of lies.
 
I think I understand what you are saying. But as far as the impression he (antichrist) is for Christ is, well look at the pope in the RCC. He acts as if he represents Christ. He is in the place of God, many are deceived.
Definitely. Agreed
Let me think on this. Thanks :)
 
You have not proven that the RCC is the one true church.
It was/is the only Church from the foundation of Christ through today. Everything you have, came to you from Christ's Catholic Church -- the NT, the Bible bound for you, the ECF's writings, etc.
I have news for you. No denominational or non-denominational church organization is the one true church.
True -- Christ's Catholic Church is pre-denominational. You follow man.
FYI I am not trusting any ecclesiastical community or any man, or man made traditions. I am trusting the word of God
Your personal, fallible, interpretations of scripture.
You brought up a while ago that the disciples were having difficulty with Jesus saying to eat His flesh and then Jesus asked them if they wanted to leave Him too. You neglected to give their answer. "Where else is there to go?"
I was referring to Jn 6:66 not Peter and the faithful apostles.
 
It was/is the only Church from the foundation of Christ through today. Everything you have, came to you from Christ's Catholic Church -- the NT, the Bible bound for you, the ECF's writings, etc.
Every word and the whole complete bible were written by the finger of God ,

Why would you teach it comes from those who oppose sola scriptura?

Sounds quite prideful (false) giving the power of our unseen Holy Father over to dying mankind that puffs themselves up above all things writen in the law and prophets (sola scriptura)

Scripture teaches against that kind of upside down inspiration that comes earthly of dying sinners.?

The question I would ask . . what do you have that was not freely given from the hand of God ?. And why in the world as not receiving it freely but rather you must do the will of dying mankind that we must believe as if they were the one God our Holy Father and not a legion of fathers dying mankind

The teaching of Christ the invisible head of the Church against puffing up dying mankind (apostles) above sola scriptura 1 Corinthians 4:5-7King James Version5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

Did the apostles that protected sola scripture say it is the Pope that makes men differ from another like patron saints? (3500 and rising) many gods in the likeness of dying mankind .

Clearly not a biblical principle

The same upside down foundation that teaches a "queen mother of heaven" some named after our blessed by the grace, sister in the Lord, Mary . Teaching she alone received the fullness of grace "the complete price of salivation" while the rest of the world a unknown remnant and they must somehow or other without a body that has returned to dust and suffer and wonder, suffer and wonder with no salvation in sight After one is dead taking thier last breath of oxygen

The problem the non-venerable or what Paul called the venerable puffed up ones .The non venerable Catholics are required by the CCC (their bible) A law of dying mankind who say sola scriptura is the heresy and the law of dying mankind the true authority

They teach the opposite and say there no heresies all other sects are bastards not having the a queen mother named after our sister in the Lord Mary the dying fathers as the law They could not prove that sola scriptura is a heresy (Acts 24)

1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord (the fullness of Christ's faith or labor of His eternal love as the grace of God the whole cost of salvation ) that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

As many oral traditions as wanted except for one (a queen Mother in heaven) that some call the mother of mercy as if mercy had a mother dying mankind.

In that way we are informed thier must be heresies as differences of opinion as long as they do not do despite to the fullness of grace the whole cost of salvation . The believers receive the end of their new born again faith from the beginning. (1Peter 1 )

No need to trust the oral traditions of dying mankind . Simply another teaching authority other than all things writen in the law and prophets (sola scriptura )

It would seem no salvation to those who trust in some kind of Queen Mother. Female and male gods, hers and his gods, it was passed down from the unbelieving Jews to catholiscim same principle. "We refuse to hear sola scriptura , we will do whatsoever of own mouth comes up with as oral traditions' of dying mankind. . . law of the legion of fathers and a not a law of our One Holy Father in heaven

Jerimiah 44:15-19 Then all the men which knew that their wives had burned incense unto other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great multitude, even all the people that dwelt in the land of Egypt, in Pathros, answered Jeremiah, saying, As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men

There will be no battle of queens same queen different name
 
Can a person who follows R.C. theology per the R.C. church be saved assuming he does not change?
I tend to say No ... what's your opinion and why?
Since Salvation (being Born again) is the RESULT of God convicting the person of their SIN, And Bringing them to repentance, and calling on God in FAITH for salvation.

The pagan foolishness of the Roman Catholic system doesn't really enter into it, since it's a personal transaction between the person and God as a result of the action of the HOLY SPIRIT on the person. So YES Roman Catholics ARE saved IN SPITE OF (and not because of) the Catholic foolishness that they're taught by the Roman Catholic system.
 
through His Catholic Church [NT]
Through the bible God living abiding word after the invisible head Our Holy Father in heaven aour comfort guide He is the one that brings to our memory the previous things not the Poe a daysman

why try an usurp his eternal unsen authority ? What's the goal?

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he (Not Peter our brother in the Lord or what you call must Pope) shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Who teaches you and bring to your memory the previous things taught? He makes himself known through sola scriptura

Who is the invisible head of the Catholic church.? I am sure he is not hiding
 
The pagan foolishness of the Roman Catholic system doesn't really enter into it, since it's a personal transaction between the person and God as a result of the action of the HOLY SPIRIT on the person. So YES Roman Catholics ARE saved IN SPITE OF (and not because of) the Catholic foolishness that they're taught by the Roman Catholic system.
You're circumventing the question IMO by going on a tangent.
We'll do it your way.
By their works we will know them (Mat 7:20). If a person continues in works per the Roman Catholic theology (idol worship (transubstantiation), asking saints to forgive them, doing works for salvation, etc.) ... is this not evidence they have not be regenerated.?
 
It was/is the only Church from the foundation of Christ through today. Everything you have, came to you from Christ's Catholic Church
You are confusing one catholic church with the RCC and no matter how many times you use the ECF (without actually presenting anything they said) as your crutch, the fact that you have not yet proven that the RCC is the one true church of Christ, the necessity still stands that you do so before you say it is.
True -- Christ's Catholic Church is pre-denominational. You follow man.
Christ's catholic church is, always was, and always will be non-denominational. The RCC is a denomination.

I follow man? I have said nothing of a man or men in all my posts. You on the other hand have used nothing but men, the ECF, the pope the Catholic religion and tradition as your source.
Your personal, fallible, interpretations of scripture.
Yes those. I do have a mind and a brain however, and the indwelling Holy Spirit who shines a light on His word. And I do not claim to be infallible or the sole authorized interpreter of scripture.
 
Back
Top