An article of faith

[BreadOfLife]

What church are you referring to? God does not have a church in the Vatican
Great is not referring to size in the passage silly, it is referring to power.
There is one church. It is neither early nor late. It is the church of God.

I was referring to the "Early Church" - as in the Church of the first few centuries, Einstein . . .

Jerusalem is a desolate city in the eyes of God now, not a great city.
Jeremiah 44:6
Wherefore my fury and mine anger was poured forth, and was kindled in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem; and they are wasted and desolate, as at this day.
Ezekiel 12:19
And say unto the people of the land, Thus saith the Lord God of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and of the land of Israel; They shall eat their bread with carefulness, and drink their water with astonishment, that her land may be desolate from all that is therein, because of the violence of all them that dwell therein.

The Vatican is an independent state. It has great power... The city of Jerusalem was burnt to the ground. Just as Jesus prophesied. It is not the great city spoken of in Rev 17. Do world leaders bow to the leader of Jerusalem? yes or No? Do world leaders bow to the leader of the Vatican? Yes or No?

Complete nonsense.
Do world leaders bow to the Queen of England because they fear her "great power" - ir because it is a sigh of respect? What an idiotic claim..

The Vatican has NO power and NOBODY listens to the Pope except for Catolics.
To claim that the Vatican wields "great power" or that it is the "Great City" is as stupiud and clueless as it is dishonest.

The first century Church to whom this Letter was written knew EXACTLY what the "Great City" was (Rev. 17:18, Rev. 11:8) that had become a HARLOT (Isaiah 1:21). - even if YOU don't . . .

You are a liar. Where did I deny that Jerusalem was the BIBLICAL "Great City. I said it is not the great city in Rev 17. Rev 17 showed things of the future. We are living in the times that was spoken about back then. If you are saying Jerusalem is that Great city you have to back your claim by showing world leaders bowing to the leader of Jerusalem. World leaders bow to the pope.

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
All the RCC churches are those peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues... Show me Jerusalem having power over peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues. That little Vatican city has control over peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues as we speak. Vatican is the whore.

Thanks for illustrating your Biblical ignorance.

Revelation is NOT all about the future - NOR is it all about the past.
It is about BOTH - and the symbolism is intertwined. That's why it is so confusing to people like YOU.

Good grief - DO your homework . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

And none of those were followers of Jesus. You are both cut from the same cloth...

Really?
So, a group of Jesus' ENEMIES declared the Canon of Scripture?

So - WHAT Canon of Scripture do YOU adhere to - and WHO told you WHICH Books belong in the Bible?
Can you give me a honest answer - UNLIKE your fellow anti-Catholics?

I'll wait right here for your answer . . .

 

[Saint of God]

View attachment 23112

The Vatican is still the whore in Revelation

 

[Brakelite]

It says "seek their God" not "seek God through the meditation of the dead"

Sorry... Google flop. The word was intended to be mediation. Mediation of the dead.

 

[Saint of God]

I was referring to the "Early Church" - as in the Church of the first few centuries, Einstein . . .

What you are referring to is your own ignorance of the scripture. There is one church, it is not early or late. Any early church would be when the apostles were alive.

Complete nonsense.
Do world leaders bow to the Queen of England because they fear her "great power" - ir because it is a sigh of respect? What an idiotic claim..

I never said anything about fear, did I?

The Vatican has NO power and NOBODY listens to the Pope except for Catolics.
To claim that the Vatican wields "great power" or that it is the "Great City" is as stupiud and clueless as it is dishonest.

You are yet to show how the Vatican an independent state, has no power. How did it become an independent state, without power?

The first century Church to whom this Letter was written knew EXACTLY what the "Great City" was (Rev. 17:18, Rev. 11:8) that had become a HARLOT (Isaiah 1:21). - even if YOU don't . . .

That is rubbish...It is clear that the passage is referring to another city.15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Jerusalem does not sit over peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. The Vatican does. There are catholics in almost every country in the world. The pope is the leader of peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues

Thanks for illustrating your Biblical ignorance.

Revelation is NOT all about the future - NOR is it all about the past.
It is about BOTH - and the symbolism is intertwined. That's why it is so confusing to people like YOU.

Good grief - DO your homework . . .

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
That looks like the future to me. So for you to bring up OT passages about things that happened before Jesus came on the scene is evidence of your ignorance... Jerusalem was destroyed and held no power after Jesus death and resurrection, so Jerusalem cannot be the whore that sits over peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

 

[Saint of God]

Sorry... Google flop. The word was intended to be mediation. Mediation of the dead.

That does not help your position either...

 

[Saint of God]

Really?
So, a group of Jesus' ENEMIES declared the Canon of Scripture?

Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

So - WHAT Canon of Scripture do YOU adhere to - and WHO told you WHICH Books belong in the Bible?
Can you give me a honest answer - UNLIKE your fellow anti-Catholics?

I'll wait right here for your answer . . .

The OT existed before what you call the Bible was compiled. It is the same scripture used by the Jews. The NT is a collection of letters (epistles) written by the apostles and the gospels apart from Luke, the authors are anonymous. So to ask me...WHO told you WHICH Books belong in the Bible... is a silly question.
Colossians 4:16
And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
1 Thessalonians 5:27
I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.

 

[Brakelite]

That does not help your position either...

Please clarify how Catholic mediation through dead saints, Mary, Joseph and even angels, cannot be included and akin to the following quote...
KJV Isaiah 8:19-20
19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? (No! Not from the living to the dead. But...)
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

This the scriptures are the only arbiter and foundation of truth in faith and practise.

 

[Illuminator]

Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

The OT existed before what you call the Bible was compiled. It is the same scripture used by the Jews. The NT is a collection of letters (epistles) written by the apostles and the gospels apart from Luke, the authors are anonymous. So to ask me...WHO told you WHICH Books belong in the Bible... is a silly question.

It's not a silly question. The Bible does not give a list of books that belong in it. You have to go outside of the Bible to find out how the books of the Bible got there. Inventing Bible origin fantasies and denial of the facts of history is your only option. There was no "bible" as we know it for 3+ centuries. This too, you arrogantly deny.

Colossians 4:16
And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.

Col. 4:16 – this verse shows that a prior letter written to Laodicea is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul once again appeals to a source outside of the Bible to teach about the Word of God.

1 Thess. 2:13 – Paul says, “when you received the word of God, which you heard from us..” How can the Bible be teaching first century Christians that only the Bible is their infallible source of teaching if, at the same time, oral revelation was being given to them as well? SofG can’t claim that there is one authority (Bible) while allowing two sources of authority (Bible and oral revelation).

1 Thessalonians 5:27
I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.

1 Thess. 3:10 – Paul wants to see the Thessalonians face to face and supply what is lacking. His letter is not enough.

 

[Illuminator]

Please clarify how Catholic mediation through dead saints, Mary, Joseph and even angels, cannot be included and akin to the following quote...
KJV Isaiah 8:19-20
19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? (No! Not from the living to the dead. But...)
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Isaiah 8:19-20 condemns necromancy, which is completely at odds with the Communion of Saints. Isaiah condemns necromancy in particular, and the occult in general. Channeling is of the occult, practiced by your founder Ellen G. White, so what business do you have quoting this verse???

Furthermore, the law has been fulfilled, and testimony is delivered orally, which you reject. This is the second time you have abused verse 20, trying to demonize an authentic Christian practice.

The doctrine of the Communion of Saints predates the canon of the Bible, is part of the deposit of faith from the Apostles, is an authentic practice, and the biblical and historical evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it. You are trying to demonize what is holy, a standard false tradition of the SDA.

This the scriptures are the only arbiter and foundation of truth in faith and practise.

That's not found anywhere in scripture. The BIBLICAL rule of faith is Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, all working in harmony. Without that, there would be no Bible in the first place.

 

[Brakelite]

Isaiah 8:19-20 condemns necromancy, which is completely at odds with the Communion of Saints. Isaiah condemns necromancy in particular, and the occult in general. Channeling is of the occult, practiced by your founder Ellen G. White, so what business do you have quoting this verse???

Furthermore, the law has been fulfilled, and testimony is delivered orally, which you reject. This is the second time you have abused verse 20, trying to demonize an authentic Christian practice.

The doctrine of the Communion of Saints predates the canon of the Bible, is part of the deposit of faith from the Apostles, is an authentic practice, and the biblical and historical evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it. You are trying to demonize what is holy, a standard false tradition of the SDA.
That's not found anywhere in scripture. The BIBLICAL rule of faith is Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, all working in harmony. Without that, there would be no Bible in the first place.

View attachment 23152

You would have me and others here to believe that we must surrender to the Catholic magisterium in order to accept unconditionally that they, and they only must tell us what is truth and what isn't.
You understand what that means right? That you want us to place the magisterium above scripture. Sorry. But that isn't happening.
EDIT. not sorry.

 

[Saint of God]

Please clarify how Catholic mediation through dead saints, Mary, Joseph and even angels, cannot be included and akin to the following quote...
KJV Isaiah 8:19-20
19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? (No! Not from the living to the dead. But...)
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

This the scriptures are the only arbiter and foundation of truth in faith and practise.

Are you that blind? It is asking: should not a people seek unto their God?...what part of should not a people seek unto their God? do you not understand? They should seek God for the living. That has nothing to do with praying to dead saints. There is one mediator between God and men...1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

 

[Brakelite]

Are you that blind? It is asking: should not a people seek unto their God?...what part of should not a people seek unto their God? do you not understand? They should seek God for the living. That has nothing to do with praying to dead saints. There is one mediator between God and men...1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Yep. That's exactly what it's saying. So it seems you agree with me then... That the Catholic tradition of seeking God through other mediators... Such as the dead... Is a vain pastime, and they li ought to be seeking God through the law and the testimony instead right? So your problem is...???

 

[BreadOfLife]

What you are referring to is your own ignorance of the scripture. There is one church, it is not early or late. Any early church would be when the apostles were alive.

It doesn't surprise me that in the depths of your ignorance - you don't understand the term. "Early Church".
Here's a hint, Einstein - the historical term, the "Middle Ages" are defined as the period of time between the 5th century and the 15th century. It is called, "Middle" Ages" in reference to the CHURCH.
The era of time PRIOR to this is called, the "Early Church" Pperiod.

As for there being ONE Church - you're absolutely right. There is only ONE Church - not tens of thousands of perpetually-splintering sects that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretations of the HUMAN founders of each sect - starting from the 16th century on.

Sooooo - which one of THOSSE do you think is the "ONE Church"?

I never said anything about fear, did I?

Antoher LIE.

Thank GOD for forums like thius that record everything you write . . .

The Vatican is an independent state. It has great power...

The city of Jerusalem was burnt to the ground. Just as Jesus prophesied. It is not the great city spoken of in Rev 17. Do world leaders bow to the leader of Jerusalem? yes or No? Do world leaders bow to the leader of the Vatican? Yes or No?

These are YOUR words, implying that the leaders of the world "bow" to the Vatican.
More of your manure that I debunked in my LAST post . . .

You are yet to show how the Vatican an independent state, has no power. How did it become an independent state, without power?

YOU have yet to show that the Vatican has "Great power" - which is an idiotic claim YOU keep making.
What "Great power" does the Pope wield over ANYBODY who is NOT Catholic??

Absolutely NONE.

That is rubbish...It is clear that the passage is referring to another city.15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Jerusalem does not sit over peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. The Vatican does. There are catholics in almost every country in the world. The pope is the leader of peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues

There goes that FOOT in your mouth again . . .
Acts 2:7-11
Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews fFROM EVERY NATION UNDER HEAVEN. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
That looks like the future to me. So for you to bring up OT passages about things that happened before Jesus came on the scene is evidence of your ignorance... Jerusalem was destroyed and held no power after Jesus death and resurrection, so Jerusalem cannot be the whore that sits over peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

That's because YOU don't understand that things past and present to the original readers of Revelation were used to convey the future. And MANY things ALREADY Happened BEFORE Revvelation was written, Einstein.

For example, in Rev. 12:5, we see the birth of the Savior - a PAST event to the readers of Revelation.

This Book is confusing enough for the educated.
It's a powder keg for ignorant and unstablie readers like YOU . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

And, as usual - you post a completely irrelevant verse instead of an answer.

The passage in Jude leads to a WARKING about those who would usurp Church Authority by assuming the ministerial priesthood without the Church’s consent (Jude 1:11). People like YOU and your sect.
In this passage he compares them to the rebellion of Korah and their subsequent punishment (Numbers 16:1-35; 31:16).

Now - I asked you a simple question based on YOUR idiotic charge about the Catholic Church:
Are YOU saying that a group of Jesus' ENEMIES declared the Canon of Scripture?
Just give me a straight answer.

The OT existed before what you call the Bible was compiled. It is the same scripture used by the Jews. The NT is a collection of letters (epistles) written by the apostles and the gospels apart from Luke, the authors are anonymous. So to ask me...WHO told you WHICH Books belong in the Bible... is a silly question.
Colossians 4:16
And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
1 Thessalonians 5:27
I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.

It's only a "silly" question because YOU DON'T KNOW.

No, back in post #141 and #149 - I have YOU and your buddies a primer on the Canono of Scripture - and HOW and WHEN it wa0s declared - OT and NT.
You are MORE than welcome to debunk anything I wrote - but don't come here with your pathetic denials about "silly questions" unless you have evidence.

Here it is again for your edification . . .
The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified – ALL 73 (not 66) Books.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

Contimued on the next page . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Here is the info from #149 with regards to when the Old Testament was closed.

Not long after the destruction of Jerusalem, of Christ, a group of Rabbis established a rabbinical school in the Jewish city of at Jabneh (or Jamnia). This location became center for Jewish political and religious political thought. Because the Temple had been destroyed in 70 AD – this school led by Akiva redefined certain aspects of Judaism until the Temple could be restored.

One of the things discussed was use of the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) by early Christians. The name, “Septuagint", comes from the number of scholars (70) who translated the Hebrew texts into Greek.

Still with me?
Good – because here is where it gets REALLY interesting . . .

At this gathering, they decided to eject 7 Books (and portions of Esther and Daniel) that they felt were “uninspired”. They provided a new Greek translation because the early Christians were converting the Jews using the Septuagint, which was compiled about 200 years before the birth of Christ. According to historical sources, the rabbinical gathering at Jabneh was not even an "official" council with binding authority to make such a decision. It can be clearly shown that Jesus and the Apostles studied and quoted from these 7 Books. In the New Testament, we see almost 200 references to them.

The main advocate for removing the 7 Deuterocanonical Books was Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (A.D. 37-137), who was also known for proclaiming that a man named Simon Bar Kokhba was the “real” Messiah during the 2nd Jewish Revolt (circa 132 AD). It was during THIS time that the Jewish Canon was closed. It had still been an OPEN Canon during the life of Christ.

So, YOUR Protestant Father, Luther, chose to go with a POST-Christ, POST-Temple Canon of Scripture that was declared by a FALSE Prophet (Akiva) who proclaimed a FALSE “Christ” (Kokhba). Good job.

This is who YOU have chosen to follow instead of Christ’s Church, on whom He bestowed supreme earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

YOUR turn . . .

 

[Illuminator]

You would have me and others here to believe that we must surrender to the Catholic magisterium in order to accept unconditionally that they, and they only must tell us what is truth and what isn't.
You understand what that means right? That you want us to place the magisterium above scripture. Sorry. But that isn't happening.
EDIT. not sorry.

Another fear mongering anti-Catholic LIE. The BIBLICAL rule of faith is Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, all working in harmony. One is not above the other. Without that, there would be no Bible in the first place. If sola scriptura actually worked, there would be only ONE Protestant denomination, not thousands.
The Catholic magisterium cannot impose truth on anyone. She can only propose truth to those who are disposed to receive it. Brokelite's Catholic bashing is pathetic.

 

[Illuminator]

Here is the info from #149 with regards to when the Old Testament was closed.

Not long after the destruction of Jerusalem, of Christ, a group of Rabbis established a rabbinical school in the Jewish city of at Jabneh (or Jamnia). This location became center for Jewish political and religious political thought. Because the Temple had been destroyed in 70 AD – this school led by Akiva redefined certain aspects of Judaism until the Temple could be restored.

One of the things discussed was use of the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) by early Christians. The name, “Septuagint", comes from the number of scholars (70) who translated the Hebrew texts into Greek.

Still with me?
Good – because here is where it gets REALLY interesting . . .

At this gathering, they decided to eject 7 Books (and portions of Esther and Daniel) that they felt were “uninspired”. They provided a new Greek translation because the early Christians were converting the Jews using the Septuagint, which was compiled about 200 years before the birth of Christ. According to historical sources, the rabbinical gathering at Jabneh was not even an "official" council with binding authority to make such a decision. It can be clearly shown that Jesus and the Apostles studied and quoted from these 7 Books. In the New Testament, we see almost 200 references to them.

The main advocate for removing the 7 Deuterocanonical Books was Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (A.D. 37-137), who was also known for proclaiming that a man named Simon Bar Kokhba was the “real” Messiah during the 2nd Jewish Revolt (circa 132 AD). It was during THIS time that the Jewish Canon was closed. It had still been an OPEN Canon during the life of Christ.

So, YOUR Protestant Father, Luther, chose to go with a POST-Christ, POST-Temple Canon of Scripture that was declared by a FALSE Prophet (Akiva) who proclaimed a FALSE “Christ” (Kokhba). Good job.

This is who YOU have chosen to follow instead of Christ’s Church, on whom He bestowed supreme earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

YOUR turn . . .

I'll take a turn. A 66 book canon did not exist before the 14th century. It's a man made tradition. SofG is at a loss to provide historical primary source documentation to the contrary.

The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., School of Javneh (also called “Jamnia” in 90 – 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testament canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council that rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.
DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT - Scripture Catholic

 

[Saint of God]

It's not a silly question. The Bible does not give a list of books that belong in it. You have to go outside of the Bible to find out how the books of the Bible got there. Inventing Bible origin fantasies and denial of the facts of history is your only option. There was no "bible" as we know it for 3+ centuries. This too, you arrogantly deny.

Bible means book. Are you saying there was no book for 3+ centuries? How silly can you be? If there were no book for 3+ centuries wouldn't any complication of the said book naturally be outside said book?

Col. 4:16 – this verse shows that a prior letter written to Laodicea is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul once again appeals to a source outside of the Bible to teach about the Word of God.

Of course he did. There was no bible as we know it back then. There was the book of the law and the book of the prophets...
Luke 4:
16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
Notice the word biblion in the link, that is where the word bible comes from... That is for all the ignorants who claim the word bible is not in the scripture.

1 Thess. 2:13 – Paul says, “when you received the word of God, which you heard from us..” How can the Bible be teaching first century Christians that only the Bible is their infallible source of teaching if, at the same time, oral revelation was being given to them as well? SofG can’t claim that there is one authority (Bible) while allowing two sources of authority (Bible and oral revelation).

never made the claim that only the Bible is their infallible source of teaching. This is why I made an argument for the book of Enoch elsewhere. However, I would question anyone who claims to be an apostle after the original apostles passed away. I contend that there could be many letters written by the apostles that may have been destroyed. The letters we have should be enough for us. Lost letters believers did without and people are still being saved so what is your argument about?

1 Thess. 3:10 – Paul wants to see the Thessalonians face to face and supply what is lacking. His letter is not enough.

There is nothing lacking you are saying that God left us ill equipt... the problem was the people lacking understanding... 1 Cor 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.

 

[Saint of God]

It doesn't surprise me that in the depths of your ignorance - you don't understand the term. "Early Church".

Here's a hint, Einstein - the historical term, the "Middle Ages" are defined as the period of time between the 5th century and the 15th century. It is called, "Middle" Ages" in reference to the CHURCH.
The era of time PRIOR to this is called, the "Early Church" Pperiod.

Not by God or the apostles...You must be referring to what it is called by the RCC

As for there being ONE Church - you're absolutely right. There is only ONE Church - not tens of thousands of perpetually-splintering sects that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretations of the HUMAN founders of each sect - starting from the 16th century on.

Sooooo - which one of THOSSE do you think is the "ONE Church"?

First, you call me ignorant, then you say I am absolutely correct... Something is wrong with your reasoning... None of those including the RCC, is God's church. God's church is made up of people who obey and follow Jesus...Jesus knew that the time would come when...his words will come to pass.
Matthew 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Antoher LIE.


Thank GOD for forums like thius that record everything you write . . .

These are YOUR words, implying that the leaders of the world "bow" to the Vatican.
More of your manure that I debunked in my LAST post . . .

So where is the word fear? You are claiming that I mentioned fear... Seems like you cannot find that post.

YOU have yet to show that the Vatican has "Great power" - which is an idiotic claim YOU keep making.
What "Great power" does the Pope wield over ANYBODY who is NOT Catholic??

Absolutely NONE.

He has 1.3 billion registered catholics, are you living under a rock? Also all those who believe in the trinity are catholics according to the Athanasian creed.

There goes that FOOT in your mouth again . . .
Acts 2:7-11
Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews fFROM EVERY NATION UNDER HEAVEN. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!

That's because YOU don't understand that things past and present to the original readers of Revelation were used to convey the future. And MANY things ALREADY Happened BEFORE Revvelation was written, Einstein.

For example, in Rev. 12:5, we see the birth of the Savior - a PAST event to the readers of Revelation.

You are a dunce. That Rev 12 is the whole story in a nutshell, John was alive so it is not as though a thousand years had passed... The things to come are a continuation from the birth of Christ,,, It started as sort of a recap...

This Book is confusing enough for the educated.

Then to you it is confusing, you can only speak for yourself... Here is why it is confusing to you... You seek to glorify yourself in the presence of God
1 Corinthians 1:26
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

It's a powder keg for ignorant and unstablie readers like YOU . . .

You have already spoken for yourself, Mr Educated...
1 Cor 1:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.