Search results

Whatever.

The subject is whether or not the RCC is the pillar and ground of truth. Do the called out of Yeshua lie through their teeth to cover their sins?

Any answer I give will just be opposed with the RCC belief that they have taught the truth since Yeshua ascended. Most likely some time after Constantine rose to power and Roman paganism entered in.

You didn't ask me a question. You asked Nancy.

That verse is referring to the church in apostolic times, not the organization that deviated from the true church to become the pillar and ground of lies. Even today they lie through their teeth to cover up their rampant sexual immorality.

I have no problem with confident women. Its arrogance that both I and God hate.

You are so full of pride and arrogance. How dare you exalt your supposed maturity over SG's. We need a vomiting emoji on this forum.

I know it teaches idolatry. I know it murdered many people during the inquisitions. I know sexual immorality runs rampant throughout the ENTIRE organization even today.

I have no problem with the next 17 verses. I know full well the word became flesh/the Son. You choose to destroy the order of the Greek words of John 1:1 to come up with "the Word was God". I choose to retain the word order and not capitalize "Word" to make it seem like the name of a living...

I am suggesting she can. Why do you limit how and through whom YHWH reveals truth? He also taught me certain truths about Revelation that no one else was teaching at that time.

Deemed false and heretical by a heretical "church". BTW, since you brought up something you hate, one of the things I hate is a proud, know-it-all, woman. No, it just the RCC POV that I am not interested in.

Are you suggesting she won't?

I knew exactly why I came out of the RCC. I know exactly what her false doctrines are. She is an organization pregnant with idolatry, murders, and sexual immorality among the clergy and the laity. If I was ignorant of all that I would never have come out just like you.

You break a basic rule of Biblical interpretation by reading the Son into John 1:1-4. Something Tyndale and other translators refused to do in versions preceding the KJV. Your eisegesis creates major confusion and false teachings about the Son. I refuse to use that method.

No thanks. I am not interested in any RCC POV. I came out of that organization a long time ago.

LOL! And I would have thought you would at least TRY to refute my view.

Wake up BOL! They are addressing "the Word was a God"! I teach the "logos" was not a person, but a thing until it was made flesh. Their commentaries have NOTHING to do with my view and you have offered NOTHING yet to refute my view. The Scriptures declare that everything was created by YHWH as...

You think I lack knowledge on the subject because I disagree with your false teaching. That is not ignorance on my part, but on yours. If you even bothered to understand my view, you would not have posted against the JW's view thinking their view was my view as well. If you are going to argue...

Since it was and is venerated to the degree of idolatry as was the brazen serpent (2 Kings 18:4), then yes, it violates Biblical teachings. The shroud should be destroyed just as the brazen serpent was in order to prevent further idolatry. If it is a true image of Yeshua, then it will continue...

This last statement is true, but the opposite answers Andrew's question better. He asked, "However another factor to consider is this there is no mention of a linen cloth with the image of Jesus ANYWHERE in the bible, so the question I have is, if the shroud of turin is the burial cloth of...