There is only one true church

[Keiw]

Yup.

Now, show me where ANY verse says that ONLY a select few can receive the Eucharist. – and I’ll show you where it is recommended for ALL . . .

Luke 22:29-30-- can you understand English? Are you told you will sit on a throne?

 

[RedFan]

Luke 22:29-30-- can you understand English? Are you told you will sit on a throne?

Jesus told this to the Twelve. What's your point?

 

[BreadOfLife]

I never said that graphé appears in 2 Tess. 2:15, although you accused me of saying so several times. And called me a liar when I denied it! Who is the liar here?

You're just angry that I exposed you.

Again -
From YOUR post #827:
“2 Tim. 3:16, where Paul DOES mention graphē (= Scripture).”

From YOUR post #847:
“The ONLY thing I have been concerned with here -- and the thing you just can't seem to focus on, no matter how hard I try to focus you -- is the meaning of "graphe" in 2 Tim. 3:16.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Luke 22:29-30-- can you understand English? Are you told you will sit on a throne?

And where does Jesus tell the Apostles that NOBODY else can receive the Eucharist except fpr them and the 144,000 from Rev. 7??

 

[RedFan]

You're just angry that I exposed you.

Again -
From YOUR post #827:
“2 Tim. 3:16, where Paul DOES mention graphē (= Scripture).”

From YOUR post #847:
“The ONLY thing I have been concerned with here -- and the thing you just can't seem to focus on, no matter how hard I try to focus you -- is the meaning of "graphe" in 2 Tim. 3:16.

Exposed what? The only thing you've exposed is that you think Second Timothy and Second Thessalonians are the same letter! For the umpteenth time, graphe appears in 2 Tim. 3:16. I have been saying that consistently. It does NOT appear in 2 Thess. 2:15. If had a nickel for every time you falsely accused me of saying otherwise I could retire today.

 

[Keiw]

Jesus told this to the Twelve. What's your point?

yes part of the little flock=144,000---not to the great crowd. Its a major sin for them to partake. The blind guides are killing you.

 

[Keiw]

And where does Jesus tell the Apostles that NOBODY else can receive the Eucharist except fpr them and the 144,000 from Rev. 7??

Only the 144,000 will sit on thrones. Luke22:29-30- a covenant to those who will sit on thrones.

 

[RedFan]

Only the 144,000 will sit on thrones. Luke22:29-30- a covenant to those who will sit on thrones.

I don't see more than 12 thrones in Luke 22:29-30.

 

[Keiw]

I don't see more than 12 thrones in Luke 22:29-30.

each represents a tribe( symbolically)-12,000 from each tribe=144,000

 

[RedFan]

each represents a tribe( symbolically)-12,000 from each tribe=144,000

I don't see 12,000 thrones per tribe in Luke 22:29-30. Not literally. Not symbolically. Not any way.

If the Good Doctor were here chatting with us right now, and we asked him "Luke, did you intend the symbolism of 12,000 thrones per tribe when you wrote these verses?" he would undoubtedly look at us like we were crazy, and reply "I had no reason to say that. I don't even remember thinking that." And if we asked "Do you think Jesus intended that?" he would undoubtedly look at us as if we each had two heads, and reply "I researched my gospel pretty well (Luke 1:3), and I have uncovered zero evidence of such a symbolic meaning. How JWs piece that 144,000 throne thing together is not my concern -- but please don't drag MY gospel into that morass! Spin somebody else's gospel to fit your theories."

 

[Keiw]

I don't see 12,000 thrones per tribe in Luke 22:29-30. Not literally. Not symbolically. Not any way.

If the Good Doctor were here chatting with us right now, and we asked him "Luke, did you intend the symbolism of 12,000 thrones per tribe when you wrote these verses?" he would undoubtedly look at us like we were crazy, and reply "I had no reason to say that. I don't even remember thinking that." And if we asked "Do you think Jesus intended that?" he would undoubtedly look at us as if we each had two heads, and reply "I researched my gospel pretty well (Luke 1:3), and I have uncovered zero evidence of such a symbolic meaning. How JWs piece that 144,000 throne thing together is not my concern -- but please don't drag MY gospel into that morass! Spin somebody else's gospel to fit your theories."

Rev 7:4-8 explains it--Rev 14:3( 144,000 bought from the earth), Rev 1:6, Rev 20:6

 

[RedFan]

Rev 7:4-8 explains it--Rev 14:3( 144,000 bought from the earth), Rev 1:6, Rev 20:6

Revelations does not explain Luke. You are projecting.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Only the 144,000 will sit on thrones. Luke22:29-30- a covenant to those who will sit on thrones.

You’re changing the argument.

Your initial argument was that nobody is to receive the Eucharist EXCEPT for the 144,000 – a claim that Scripture NEVER makes.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Exposed what? The only thing you've exposed is that you think Second Timothy and Second Thessalonians are the same letter! For the umpteenth time, graphe appears in 2 Tim. 3:16. I have been saying that consistently. It does NOT appear in 2 Thess. 2:15. If had a nickel for every time you falsely accused me of saying otherwise I could retire today.

I guess I’m not really sure why you even brought up 2 Tim. 3:16 in the first place.

The debate it about whether Paul was placing Oral Tradition on the same place as that which is written (Scripture). They BOTH amount to the Word of God.
One is spoken – the other is written.

 

[RedFan]

I guess I’m not really sure why you even brought up 2 Tim. 3:16 in the first place.

The debate it about whether Paul was placing Oral Tradition on the same place as that which is written (Scripture). They BOTH amount to the Word of God.
One is spoken – the other is written.

Jude Thaddeus brought it up; I just replied. And I guess you grabbed my reply as if it was intended to disagree with your thesis. I don't disagree with your thesis. You'll get no argument from me on the importance of oral tradition. I've already stated that a few times here.

Where we disagree is on your use of 2 Thess. 2:15 as a proof text for the equivalence of Scripture and oral tradition. We agree that they ARE equivalent. But 2 Thess. 2:15 doesn't say so. It only says that the Thessalonians should treat what they heard verbally from Paul (whatever that was) as of equal authority with what he (and perhaps others) wrote to them. 2 Thess. 2:15 says nothing, indeed it implies nothing, about any other writing penned by Matthew, or by Mark, or by Luke, or by John, or by Peter, or by Jude, or by whoever wrote Hebrews -- or for that matter by Paul in his letters to other churches that he hadn't yet written at the time he wrote Second Thessalonians.

Are all those other writings Scripture? Yes! Does Second Thessalonians say so. No!

 

[Behold]

treat what they heard verbally from Paul (whatever that was) as of equal authority with what he (and perhaps others) wrote to them. 2 Thess. 2:15 says nothing, indeed it implies nothing, about any other writing penned by Matthew, or by Mark, or by Luke, or by John, or by Peter, or by Jude, or by whoever wrote Hebrews

That verse in Thess speaks about "letters" in context with "tradition".

It also says "by OUR"... so that means the verse is talking about the other Apostles.

"our"
"Our Tradition" "Our Letters".. and these LETTERS, became all the Epistles in the NT.


And the most important part, is that the verse says its all for the "Brethren".. so, that is not Jewish Tradition, that is "new covenant", "body of Christ" "Tradition".

Another way Paul explains this is.>>>"Be a FOLLOWER of ME......... as i follow Christ"..

So there is your "tradition".

 

[RedFan]

That verse in Thess speaks about "letters" in context with "tradition".

It also says "by OUR"... so that means the verse is talking about the other Apostles.

It means no such thing. "Our" is a reference to Paul, Silas and Timothy (1 Thess. 1:1, 2 Thess. 1:1).

 

[David in NJ]

There is Only One True Church of the Risen Christ.

And every Holy Spirit filled saint knows it is not the Roman Catholic church, nor any other denomination and/or church building.

 

[Behold]

It means no such thing. "Our" is a reference to Paul, Silas and Timothy (1 Thess. 1:1, 2 Thess. 1:1).

Let me show you something else..

Peter, had Paul's letters.

Peter said that Paul's Letters were "SCRIPTURE"..... and that means that the JEW Peter, the Apostle, was stating spiritual equivalence regarding the TORAH and Paul's Letters.
Later Paul's Letters became most of the NT Epistles.
So, all the early Churches had the letters that the Apostles wrote, as this was "Church Tradition", being created.

This is the real Church Tradition, as you find it only in the NEW TESTAMENT..... and not the "Cult of Mary" man made "Marian" theology, history, Pagan nonsense that is NOT the real "church" Tradition.

 

[RedFan]

Let me show you something else..

Peter, had Paul's letters.

Peter said that Paul's Letters were "SCRIPTURE"..... and that means that the JEW Peter, the Apostle, was stating spiritual equivalence regarding the TORAH and Paul's Letters.

This is a big day for me! I've finally met someone who thinks the Apostle Peter authored Second Peter! Everyone I have ever known or read who weighed in on the subject says it was pseudographical.