Who founded your church?

[Marymog]

The church isnt invisible, they are walking outside you church everyday, you are just to blind to see.

I know The Church isn't invisible. That's what I have been saying all along. Just before church services and just after church services when everyone is leaving I do see them 'walking outside my church everyday'. I am glad we can finally agree on something kiddo.

Keeping it real....Mary

 

[Marymog]

The invisible church.
The invisible church is the true church, which only God can see: born-again believers, past, present, and future. Because not everyone who attends church or performs religious deeds is saved, the visible church includes unbelievers. The invisible church is comprised of the redeemed and sealed by God.

Now you want to claim everyone in your church is a true believer? You can not be that naive.

Still stumped(?) and still no explanation on how Matthew 18:17 is fulfilled using your invisible church theory.

Scripture destroys what the men of your sect has taught you.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Marymog]

You obviously don't know what I mean by the invisible church.

Oh, trust me Renniks, I do and it's not biblical.

 

[Marymog]

You read what I mean by invisible, right? I don't know what scripture you are referring to... but Corinthians 6 says to go to Christians and not non Christian court to settle differences among believers. Pretty much common sense. Doesn't mean there aren't fake Christians in the mix.

I did read what you wrote. I completely understand what you believe about the "invisible church".

Go back and read what I wrote so that you will 'know what scripture I am referring to'. I have made it VERY clear MULTIPLE times.

Soooooo you finally acknowledge that we are to go to other Christians to settle our differences...which is what I have been saying all along!!!

Soooooooooooooo when you Renniks go to your Christian brother @mjrhealth to settle your difference...... but you still disagree with each other....... according to Scripture what are you and mjrhealth to do next?????????

Patient Mary

 

[Marymog]

Not surprised you think NOT answering a




church of God which is at Corinth
church of the Laodiceans;
church of the Thessalonians
church of Ephesus
churches of numerous cities and country sides around the world called by names they have chosen...as Catholics have chosen their names.

Do you think that A Theory? LOL
Sheltered much?

I get it. You think your clever or witty or cute etc. etc
However I'm not into game playing.

Your stumped because the theory your sect has taught you is not biblical and your way of handling being challenged about your theory is to be clever or witty or cute...I get it. Thank you for your time.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Seventh Day Adventist

Hi Backlit. Thanks for joining the convo. At least you gave a heartfelt answer unlike @Taken who likes to play games. I appreciate your answer.

Mary

 

[Renniks]

then explain Jn 20:21-23???

21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

That was the diciples and I'm not sure what you are implying?
Are we to apply this to every believer? Did Jesus breath on your priest?

 

[Renniks]

then pray tell me why Peter is added???

Added to what?
Instead of pulling out one verse:
"After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”

25 “Yes, he does,” he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?”

26 “From others,” Peter answered.

“Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. 27 “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

What's this have to do with Peter and Jesus being one? What nonsense! If this is official doctrine of the Catholic Church, whoever came up with that must have been really drunk.

 

[Renniks]

Soooooooooooooo when you Renniks go to your Christian brother @mjrhealth to settle your difference...... but you still disagree with each other....... according to Scripture what are you and mjrhealth to do next?????????

Go to my church leaders.. I already responded to all this. It doesn't effect the fact of tares in the church at all. I still don't think you have any idea what I'm talking about.

 

[Renniks]

Your stumped because the theory your sect has taught you is not biblical and your way of handling being challenged about your theory is to be clever or witty or cute...I get it. Thank you for your time.

And you have no explanation as to how you can belong to the true church, when your church has many fake priests and members who are not really believers at all...

 

[Truther]

Don’t agree
In order for a sacrament to be valid it must have
Correct intent: to do what the church of Jesus has always done
Correct matter: in baptism it is plain water
And the correct form: the words of the sacrament
Baptism it MUST be I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the Holy Spirit!

or it is not valid

What is the name of the son?

 

[theefaith]

21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

That was the diciples and I'm not sure what you are implying?
Are we to apply this to every believer? Did Jesus breath on your priest?

yes upon the apostles and their successors and they laid hands on every other bishop and ordained priest

 

[theefaith]

Added to what?
Instead of pulling out one verse:
"After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”

25 “Yes, he does,” he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?”

26 “From others,” Peter answered.

“Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. 27 “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

What's this have to do with Peter and Jesus being one? What nonsense! If this is official doctrine of the Catholic Church, whoever came up with that must have been really drunk.

why do they ask peter? And why does Jesus unite ONLY Peter to Himself half for you half for me?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Okay, so the RCC teaches the name of the son is "son".

I get that...which is why instead of baptizing in the name of the son by obeying the son's cpmmand per Matt 28:19, you guys instead PARROT his command.

I can just imagine what it would be like to hire a Catholic and order him to do something, as he barks that order back instead of doing it.

Yikes!

So, you didn't actually READ post #1169 - did you?
I suggest you read it thoroughly and S*L*O*W*L*Y so you understand.

I'm embarrassed for you . . .

 

[theefaith]

What is the name of the son?

Jesus but the one true church does not baptize nor has ever baptized in the name of Jesus

 

[jaybird]

Jesus but the one true church does not baptize nor has ever baptized in the name of Jesus

the 12 Apostles, the ones trained by Jesus did.

 

[theefaith]

What is the name of the son?

didache early teaching of the apostles with the authority of Christ

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism
And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptizeinto the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptismlet the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

 

[theefaith]

the 12 Apostles, the ones trained by Jesus did.

how are you?

You have scripture for that

 

[jaybird]

how are you?

You have scripture for that

i am well hope you are doing good.

Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Illuminator]

This is a good example of what I'm saying actually. It's the person's heart condition, not the wine and bread,

a false dichotomy

that brings him closer or takes him further from to Christ while taking Communion. Seeing the act of Communion as giving us anything by itself is the danger. People who understand it as helping to save them will merely go through the motions, because they think the act is what is important.

You recklessly assume we all lack the proper disposition just by going through the motions. You are not even aware of how insulting you are.
Once again, The sacramental principle flows from the Incarnation itself. If matter had nothing to do with grace, then God wouldn't have had to become man. You don't get it. Ritual and “physicality” were not abolished by the coming of Christ. Quite the contrary: it was the Incarnation that fully established sacramentalism as a principle in the Christian religion. The latter may be defined as the belief that matter can convey grace. It’s really that simple, at bottom, or in essence. God uses matter both to help us live better lives (sanctification) and to ultimately save us (regeneration and justification), starting with baptism itself.
So it is curious that many appear to possess a pronounced hostility to the sacramental belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, seeing that it flows so straightforwardly from the Incarnation and the Crucifixion itself. This brings to mind an analogy to the Jewish and Muslim disdain for the Incarnation as an unthinkable (impossible?) task for God to undertake. They view the Incarnation in the same way a majority of Protestants regard the Eucharist.

For them, God wouldn’t or couldn’t or shouldn’t become a man (such a thought is blasphemous; unthinkable!). For many (not all) Protestants, God wouldn’t or couldn’t or shouldn’t become substantially, physically, sacramentally present under the outward forms of bread and wine. The dynamic or underlying premise is the same. If Christ could become man, He can surely will to be actually and truly present in what was formerly (and still looks like) bread and wine, once consecrated.
Again, The sacramental principle flows from the Incarnation itself.
Christ didn’t abolish ritual — He perfected it
Your "faith alone" doctrine cancels out physicality. It's clearly all over the Bible but you don't get it. Your apparent hostility to physicality is closer to Gnosticism than Christianity. You flatly reject the simplest definition of the incarnation principle without thinking about what you are saying.