No authority!

[Wrangler]

the thief? Baptism was not required until the death of the savior

you need to read your bible more

Putting aside how theefaith made the point, his reference to the thief on the cross is proof baptism is not required for salvation.

Just because X is not required, does not mean it is not a powerful expression of faith.

X = Communion and baptism

 

[BreadOfLife]

The only thing you have exposed is that you are the victim of a water cult, and that you present your deception in a very rude manner.
That's what you've continued to prove, and nothing more.

And you were asked to explain why, if Noah was saved by water as you and all water cultists teach.....Why is it that God would not let them get out of the boat and into the water?
Keep on thinking about that one, because as soon as you try to answer it with water cult water obsession IMMERSION theology, its going to fail again.

I suggest you read Exod 20:16, 1 Cor. 6:9 and Rev. 21:8 to see how God disapproves of lies. and condemns those who lie.

That being sais - the Church has NEVER taught that Noah was saved BY water. The Church has ALWAYS taught - as we read in Scripture (1 Pet. 3:20) - that Noah and his family were saved THROUGH water. They were saved BY God.

Time to STOP LYING to repent of that practice . . .

 

[Ronald Nolette]

no but his father according to the law

Yes, that is well known so what is the point?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Putting aside how theefaith made the point, his reference to the thief on the cross is proof baptism is not required for salvation.

Just because X is not required, does not mean it is not a powerful expression of faith.

X = Communion and baptism

I Agree. I would suspect a persons salvation if they refused to undego water baptism afterwards. It is a command of the Lord for one who has believed.

Sadly today it has lost its importance with baby baptisms, and people being baptized without being taught teh commitment they are publicly avowing to!

 

[theefaith]

Putting aside how theefaith made the point, his reference to the thief on the cross is proof baptism is not required for salvation.

Just because X is not required, does not mean it is not a powerful expression of faith.

X = Communion and baptism

it is now

 

[theefaith]

Or are you smarter than saint Augustine?


St. AUGUSTINE
“There are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance; yet God does not forgive sins except to the baptized” (Sermons to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15 [A.D. 395]).

 

[theefaith]

Yes, that is well known so what is the point?

Scripture uses words like brother that are interpreted as cousin

sister as sister in law

father as foster father

Nowhere does scripture violate the perpetual virginity of Mary mother of God and our spiritual mother

 

[Paul Christensen]

the Vatican is not the church
The church is founded on Peter and His valid successors, not anti-pope and false prophets
And on the apostles in union with Peter and their valid successors

they is the great apostasy

Sooo... The Pope isn't the head of the true church then, seeing that He is the Vatican head of state?

 

[Paul Christensen]

The only thinkg I am grateful for is that despite all teh problems, the gospel is still heard in Catholic Churches and millions of Catholics are saved because they have trusted Christ.

I a saddened that they are saddled with the burden of enormous amounts of heresy that stunts their growth, but I would rather one enter heaven a huncback than walk into hell straight!

When I read your post I immediately thought of this Scripture:

"To the angel of the church in Pergamum write: ‘I know your works, and where you dwell... where Satan’s throne is. And you hold fast to my name, and did not deny my faith even in the days in which Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.'" Revelation 2:12

So, there is good Scriptural support for having faithful genuine believers within a heretical, false religious organisation. I found a website called, "Mormons for Christ" in which genuine believers in Christ within that organisation decided to stay within so that they could win others to Christ.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Oh.....You follow the teachings of the man Dave Hunt.....Now I see where your confusion comes in.

Thanks for your time!!!

The answer for you is to put your faith in Christ alone for your salvation and to allow the Holy Spirit to assist you to pick the meat from the bones in your RCC. Because when Jesus comes again, all religious organisations will be burned up and will no longer exist, and you will be standing alone before the Judgment Seat of Christ to give your own account of your life. You won't be able to trust the Church to support you because it will no longer exist, and all the Popes who claimed the chair of Peter will have to individually stand before Christ and give their own account for their lives.

You might say to the Lord, "I did belong to the true Church founded by Peter and the Apostles". The Lord will say to you, "So what? Did you follow Me, or the Church?" I wonder what will be your answer to that.

 

[theefaith]

Sooo... The Pope isn't the head of the true church then, seeing that He is the Vatican head of state?

only if he is validly elected and coronation takes place

doubts and questions since the great apostasy last valid pope was Pius 12 far as I can tell

 

[justbyfaith]

Tell that to all the denominations.

You are not refuting his point; you are only substantiating it.

I've exposed you MANY time in our discussions

Certainly not as a false teacher, as you have claimed above. You have never shown that any of my teachings are unbiblical and neither would you ever be able to do so; because I make it a point to study to shew myself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. I study to make certain that what I believe is biblical and so that my teachings will therefore be biblical.

I suggest you read Exod 20:16, 1 Cor. 6:9 and Rev. 21:8 to see how God disapproves of lies. and condemns those who lie.

That being sais - the Church has NEVER taught that Noah was saved BY water. The Church has ALWAYS taught - as we read in Scripture (1 Pet. 3:20) - that Noah and his family were saved THROUGH water. They were saved BY God.

Time to STOP LYING to repent of that practice . . .

Just goes to show that you accuse everyone of being a liar;

And while I disagree with almost all of what is written by @Behold, your post above does show forth that reality.

 

[Taken]

No one has authority to read or study scripture for himself

Nonsense.

and form his own doctrine!

Many Churches have Their own church doctrines, beyond the Scope of Jesus' Doctrine.

 

[theefaith]

Nonsense.



Many Churches have Their own church doctrines, beyond the Scope of Jesus' Doctrine.

forbidden

nations must be taught

Divine revelation from Christ to His apostles with the guarantee of the Holy Spirit teach all
Lk 1:4 matt 16:18 and 18:18 Matt 28:19
One faith eph 4:5 Jude 1:3

jn 8:32 16:13


Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Acts 1:17 acts 8:31 & 35 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-22 acts 9 eph 2:20

Lk 10:16
He who hears you hears me...

John 13:20
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Jesus Christ does not abandon His holy bride! Matt 28:19-20

 

[BreadOfLife]

Certainly not as a false teacher, as you have claimed above. You have never shown that any of my teachings are unbiblical and neither would you ever be able to do so; because I make it a point to study to shew myself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. I study to make certain that what I believe is biblical and so that my teachings will therefore be biblical.

I've repeatedly exposed you of lying - period.
Almost EVERYTHING you post about what Catholics allegedly believe and teach is patently FALSE.

It's fine with me if you ewant to continue this little game - because I'll always be here toi expose you.
It's your soul - not mine . . .

Just goes to show that you accuse everyone of being a liar;
And while I disagree with almost all of what is written by @Behold, your post above does show forth that reality.

Welll, whatt'dya know - another LIE.

I accuse some people of lying when they lie - like YOU.
But, I don't accuse "everybody" of ANYTHING.

Try being honest - for a change . . .

 

[justbyfaith]

Almost EVERYTHING you post about what Catholics allegedly believe and teach is patently FALSE.

I have not posted anything about what Catholics believe for quite some time.

What makes you think that I have continued to post what you previously said I was lying about?

I believe that you corrected what was a mistake in understanding...

But you kind of went overboard in that correction in that you accused me of lying when in all reality I was only mistaken on the information that I had received.

Because lying is a strong word....it implies a deliberate intention to deceive a person.

I know that the Lord has shed abroad His love in my heart via the Holy Ghost...so it is never my intention to deceive a person...for a lying tongue hates those who are afflicted by it (Proverbs 26:28).

Welll, whatt'dya know - another LIE.

No...an exaggeration and a generalization!

 

[Wrangler]

it is now

What has changed on the topic since the thief on the cross?

 

[Brakelite]

While I agree with you that the Roman system is filled with all sorts of heresy and apostasy and the like, I disagree that the Church is the Antichrist. The antichrists' is a person and not an entity. And unless the Pope once again gains the massive political and military power it once had in the dark ages, the best a pope can become is the false prophet.

A. Hislop wrote an excellent TOME called the Two Babylons, and while I agree with much of what He says, I have to disagree with his conclusion, which is th esame you draw.

An individual cannot fulfill the tile of the Antichrist, as that particular entity has to meet criteria that can only be meet by an institution that
a. Grows out of the 4th beast of Daniel... Pagan Rome and
b. Is still here at the second coming.
There are other criteria also, but that time thingy...

 

[BreadOfLife]

I have not posted anything about what Catholics believe for quite some time.
What makes you think that I have continued to post what you previously said I was lying about?

I believe that you corrected what was a mistake in understanding...
But you kind of went overboard in that correction in that you accused me of lying when in all reality I was only mistaken on the information that I had received.

Because lying is a strong word....it implies a deliberate intention to deceive a person.

I know that the Lord has shed abroad His love in my heart via the Holy Ghost...so it is never my intention to deceive a person...for a lying tongue hates those who are afflicted by it (Proverbs 26:28).

No - you don't get to skate that easily.
You didn't make any "mistakes" - you LIED.

A mistake is 1+1=3. That's NOTwhat you did.
YOU lied about Catholic teaching - even AFTER I corrected you and showed you the documennted PROOF that you wre wrong.

As far as not having posted anything lately - you picked a fight with me for no reason a few posts back - so I simply warned you not to LIE again.

No...an exaggeration and a generalization!

Just be HONEST already.
God comannds it of you (Exod. 20:16).

 

[BreadOfLife]

A. Hislop wrote an excellent TOME called the Two Babylons, and while I agree with much of what He says, I have to disagree with his conclusion, which is th esame you draw.

Don't be so easily-fooled by counterfeits.

Alexander Hislop was nothing more than an anti-Catholic huckster who made up almost everything in his book.
One of his most ardent adherents was a Protestant minister named Ralph Woodrow, who was so taken with Hislop's manure that he wrote his own book on the subject called, "Babylon Mystery Religion".

HOWEVER, when he was preparing a follow-up book, he did some actual research on his literary hero, Hislop and his findings.
To his horror - he discovred that Hislop had invented much of it on his own and the rest was unsubstantiated hearsay, myth and outright falsehood. Instead, he wrote "The Babylon Connection?", in which he DEBUNKS all of Hislop's garbage. He also runs a website apologizing for his own book which he took OUT of print, for obvious reasons.