Search results

kepha 31 Concerning your post #1754 When Paul wrote Romans their faith was already known throughout the whole world. (Rom. 1:8). Thus by 57-58 they had been in existance quite a while. No one knows who started the church at Rome. But it certainly wasn't Peter or Paul. Peter's ministry was...

In your post #1742 you stated that I dismissed the early church fathers as uninspired. Which I do. Which means you see them as inspired. Read again what you wrote. The reformers left the Roman church. Not everything in the Roman church was to be rejected. In fact many held on to things...

Paul and his companions did not return to Jerusalem to give report of their missionary journey's. They always returned back to the Church at Antioch, from which they were sent, from which God called them. (Acts 13:1-2), (Acts 14:26), (Acts 18:22) Paul's missionary journeys were not directed...

There is the Catholic Church which I am a part of. There is the Roman Church or the Church at Rome which you are part of. If you are born-again, then you are also part of the Catholic Church. If not, then you are just a thief who has stolen the true meaning of the Catholic Church. Which is...

So, you said all that to say you did not consider the Scriptures I gave you. You simply ramble on about growing spiritually as if that should be opposed to having a sound doctrine. And why do you believe Lincoln was a Christian...cause he freed the slaves? Stranger

I have showed where Scripture says Jesus Christ had a doctrine. Are you denying that? Stranger

What a load of bs. (1 Peter 3:15) says nothing about Peter being in Rome. I never said Paul didn't go to Rome. He did. But the Church was already started. (Rome. 1:8,13). Pretty simple. Stranger

I have showed you already that Peter was never in Rome. That he did not establish the Roman Church. Thus your claim to trace your church back to the apostles is a lie. You, my friend, are part of the Roman Church. Not the Catholic Church. Unless you have been born-again. Have you...

Roman. I did pay attention. All is Roman. Not Catholic. Roman. Stranger

Well, are you saying then that you have a 'doctrine'? No, I never said whatever you believe is a right and good doctrine. Because one can have a false doctrine. (Matt. 16:12) But just because the Pharisees had a false doctrine, did not mean that Jesus didn't have a doctrine. As I showed...

Sorry, but you haven't provided anything scriptural to prove your point. Stranger

You're welcome. Stranger

Indeed. If they are part of the Roman church then then they are Roman. See post #1706 again. Pay attention. Stranger

Those in the Roman Church who are born-again believers are part of the Catholic Church. Just like all born-again believers are. The Roman Church has those in it who are part of the Catholic Church, universal Church, just like all other denominations do. The Roman Church, however, is not...

No, I only read the lie you presented. Peter was never in Rome and never started the Roman Church. Nor did Paul. As I have showed. Stranger

Why am I defeated. You and your like are Romanist's, not Catholic. As I showed. The Catholic Church is not Catholic. It is Roman. Stranger

Did you consider the Scriptures I gave concerning 'doctrine'? Which do you prefer, the words of a president or the words of God. Was Lincoln even a Christian? But, what does that matter....right? Stranger

There is always a mixed multitude within every group or denomination of believers. You always have those who are not real. (Ex.12:38) (Nu. 11:4) (John 6:70) That doesn't mean you shouldn't have a doctrine or creed or statement of faith. Stranger

Yet everything within it is labeled as 'Roman'. From "The Documents of Vatican II" , Walter M. Abbott, S.J. General Editor, Very Rev. MSGR. Joseph Gallagher Translation editor. Page 151---"Provide that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is maintained...." Page 159---"...the instructions...

BreadOfLife I see you continue with your manipulation of my post to misrepresent in your post #866. It is a sign of desperation. You have nothing else to offer. (1Peter 5:13) says nothing about Peter being in Rome or starting the Roman Church. No, as far as I can see, Irenaeus lied...