Search results

We are slaves to that which controls us. Doing the Will of God is Righteous. Jesus is Lord if the Sabbath, that which exists. Jesus is not lord over that which does not exist not to derail this thread, but Jesus was not the one who gave the commandments at Mount Sinai.

Nah. The cheapness of you asking the question rhetorically has already been revealed. Did you watch my vid on the topic?

Didn’t you refer to finding out on Judgment Day? Given your apparent agreement that there is no Doctrinal Purity test to enter heaven, what else is there to find out on that day?

Well, my wife tells me I’m being a pain in the neck. So, there is that. :p

Well said! Can't see the forest through the trees huh? I've been walking about these tree's for weeks. I don't see no forest! My pastor explicitly and repeatedly affirmed the opposite. Compelling is who God addressed in Exodus 20:2 Eternal One: 2 I am the Eternal your God. I led you out of...

Can you say me it?

Agreed. Do you believe in Prevenient Grace? I was sealed by the Holy Spirit before I believed. Although I was not a believer, I demonstrated what my real faith was by obeying the Holy Spirit. I don't know why he chose to contact me but I thank God I was. It changed my life. Well said. Fact...

And you are construing this to mean that Peter, and only Peter, can feed Jesus' lambs? Woah!

That's not my problem. I am sure that I specifically answered this question for YOU in other threads. You don't want an answer that goes against your trinitarian doctrine. You just want to ask rhetorical questions to derail this thread about the Book of Acts.

Obviously, it is you who has believed the lie hook-line-sinker that there is even a doctrinal purity test to enter heaven.

The Bible most certainly does not declare that an attribute of a being is a being. So indoctrinated in your doctrine you see unicorns everywhere. Make a blessed day.

Just another way of saying one better interpret a sentence that does not actually say anything about Jesus, the Messiah, according to 4th century tradition AS IF it did. Grammatically correct take begins by recognize speaking a word is an attribute of being, not a different being.

ROFLMAO. Protestants at least read the Bible. Catholics generally accept what their superiors tell them the Bible says.

Always on the attack and never on defense. My self-righteousness cannot hold a candle to the Catholics usurping Christ's authority on Earth.

You cannot be serious!! "Anyone who isn’t against us is for us" IS explicitly approving of the only known denomination at the time. Jesus did not speak only about that specific Spirit led person but generally for "Anyone" who does the same. I can hardly imagine a stronger endorsement of...

Which Christ totally rebuked the ignorant disciples thought on the subject. I already provided the Scripture. I guess it means nothing to you.

Why does that "matter?" 1 Corinthians 11:3 informs us Christ is the head of man. That is, it is Christ who leads men. There really is no need for men to lead other men other than for convenience, economies of scale, division of labor, etc.

You are a completely illogical man! The Bible does not say there is one denomination that is correct either. Your position is based on Appeal to Ignorance; there is no evidence to support your position, so it should be accepted by default?!

Oh? How about Paul repenting on the road to Damascus, set apart from those Apostles who walked with Jesus? Sure, he chatted with the old guard here and there but mainly, he was an independent Crusader.

Yabut all these other verses ...