Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
In other words YOU couldn't provide me with an example of "Remembrannce" being defined as "merely symbolic", either.
What God commands absolutley matters - YOUR disapproval, notwithstanding . . .
Like I said before - because you ignorantly isolate Acts 2:38, like most Scripturally-bankrupt people - you don't understand the rest of the verses pertaining to Baptism.
Its the same names as on your list. But they don't start with James, nor even second, and they don't have Symeon. Those are provided by the RCC of its so called lineage of popes.
Nice try. Now read verse 27. "behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet....
Mary, I suggested you read Romans chapter 6. You clearly didn't, believing your knowledge of you own church's false theories would suffice.
Oh the irony. You refuse to acknowledge even the possibility that anyone has a personal relationship with God, you belittle and sarcastically ascribe learning from others who also have such a relationship and the combined wisdom becoming effectual to understanding the scripture, then you hypocritically go to other men yourself without any reference to scripture as you demonstrated above!!
That is absolutely what the scripture tells us. Not my theory at all. The Bible clearly reveals who Antichrist is. The reformers all agreed on at least that one thing and got it right. The Bible however doesn't present todays Protestant churches in any better light as they are now returning to their Antichrist Mother of Harlots and are thus demonstrating the same character...like mother like daughter. You wouldn't know or understand this however because you don't use the Bible to discover truth...you only use it as a magic talisman to make you "holy". Like I said previously, the reformers didn't go far enough in their reforms. As they left the CC, or as they were excommunicated from it for teaching scripture instead of tradition, they were on a learning curve to "come out" completely. Sadly, they didn't. But today, there are some believers who have, they are todays only true Protestants, and they hold no part in any of the beliefs and dogmas of Catholicism.
You see, I told you, Apostolic succession ceased to propagate shortly after the death of the 1st century Church. Your heretic mentor, Ignatius, clearly demonstrates that. Jesus said that 'once in heaven, we will be like the angels' , or when Paul said '...the stomach for food, and food for the stomach, but God will do away with both'. There will be no sewage system or excrement in heaven, so where in the world do you get the idea that Christ currently inhabits a corporeal body, ....that his elect can feed off of?
No, as there are many individual Catholics living up to the best light they have and are sincere Christians who love Jesus. So while the denomination as a whole isn't of Antichrist, the system of sacramentalism and ritualism, her history and dogmas, her roots and ambitions, and the prophetic record all reveal her as meeting all the criteria. In fact no other institution can, nor any individual can meet those criteria as they are now historically impossible. For example, it is impossible for an individual to grow from pagan Rome and still be here to be judged at the second coming of Christ. The 'beast' of Revelation 13 does not depict an individual. Beasts throughout scripture, without exception, depict political institutions, governments or nations/empires. And in the case of Antichrist, a religio/political union. I have written several threads previously proving from scripture that the Catholic Church system...the Papacy itself...is the Antichrist. As did the reformers...all of them...before me. Later history revealed since the time of the reformers hasn't lessened that truth, but rather enhanced it. It is undeniable except one has been deluded by Antichrist itself into accepting her own false deceptions...that of a future individual, or of a past individual...futurism or preterism. Bot inventions of Jesuits to redirect the fingers away from identifying their own beloved institution as the only viable verifiable candidate.
The Catholic Church meets all the criteria, yes.
It is impossible for Protestant churches to meet all the criteria. Some of the criteria go back nearly 2000 years...as you say, Protestantism as an institution is a relatively recent phenomenon. They do meet some of the criteria, some more so than others maybe, but there is only one true Antichrist that prophecy speaks of as the opposer and counterfeit to the true Christ. BTW. the 'many' antichrists the apostle John spoke of were not the same is the one overarching singular entity against which prophecy speaks so clearly and repeatedly warns through Daniel, John the Revelator, and Paul, among others.
You need to dig a lot deeper rather than superficially scratching the surface and coming to a conclusion based on hope rather than truth. Did not Papal Rome inherit its seat, its power, and great authority from pagan Rome?
Indeed He did. A holy church. A church with only one Master... One head, even Christ Himself. Sadly, one small branch of that holy church divorced itself from her Husband by making another... The emperor and other kings of the earth in unholy relationships which resulted in the wicked use of their armies and arms, such as Clovis, Charlemagne and many others to rule the world politically in the name of Christ. But Christ Himself said His kingdom is not of this world. The gospel was never intended to be spread by force and coercion.
No, the pagan empire was not conquered. It was adopted. Pontifex Maximus, a partial title, is Roman. Placing a cross at the top of the obelisk in front of St Peters is not a sign of conquering, it's a sign of compromise and assimilation.
Hey Lady,
LOL.....so let me see if I have got your theory (that you were taught by other men) correct with just one simple example from Scripture.
Hold on, hold on....Your theory is that Protestant Churches meet 'some of the criteria' sooooo that means they are not a "true Antichrist" church just because they teach SOME things that are Antichrist????? That my friend is an interesting theory.
