Search results

Yes, your concerns are valid. What country to move to is the challenge?

Agreed but no point turning this thread into another Roman Catholic bashing thread. IMO, no denomination is as far from the Spirit of God as the power hungry RCC. Half a Millenia after the Protestant Reformation and they STILL don't get it. Their theological claim to legitimacy is specious.

Too bad this thread was not a poll. IMO, the question pivots on 'Soul Sleep' compared to 'absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.'

Agh, catechumens. Still using your new word. It's so funny how you frequently you invoke a verse of Scripture that does not support your claim in any way. NOTE Mark 16:16 says nothing of the requirements to be a "Christian." Mark 16:16 New Living Translation 16 Anyone who believes and is...

He also does well until he confuses his denomination with the entirety of the body of Christ.

Going strong? Not what I'd call an obsolete translation. If you want to accept half millennia old translation errors as "Gospel" I can't stop you. Make a blessed day!

Ahem. You do know this is the KJV most famous error, right?

Do you not see how Jude 1:3 takes about Apostolic writing, which became the NT? No one is buying your rationalization of the usurpation of the RCC authority, including ‘succession’ of Apostles!

Just because s matter of faith has been revealed to us does not mean it has been revealed to our family.

I struggle with this because it implies it is pointless to raise children in the faith.

Once again, you reference verses that do not support your claim. Make a Blessed Day

@Truman, welcome!

It's amazing how far apart we are on religious but on politics, we are one (to coin a phrase).

How many centuries after Christ died did this man-made Creed invented?

Where is this in the Bible?

I thought only recently you stated your understanding of 1 John 5:7 changed (improved) as a result of this thread? I’d think that is profitable. Some things are objective, like the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine. Just because some things are...

My path is the explicit Word of God. And I will not stand for it to be cut across. See Mark 7:13.

Obviously, any interpretation that does not support the trinity has to be attacked. We agree about the meaning of John 20:31 - for there is no other take of these explicit words. I think you have to admit it puts trinitarian misuse of John 1:1 on display as they try to use it to support a...

Right is exceedingly narrow compared to wrong. And yes, another declaration. What do you think the strongest anti-trinitarian book of the Bible is?

With God’s blessing & curse. Without writing a treatise, many theologians say God’s plan was established before Creation. His plan never changed but was revealed to us in His good time. And that plan accounted for our sinning.