Are you saved now?

[theefaith]

Paul & John, yes, absolutely! But, all those that came after them, don't even try to tell me that they are acting under the auspices of God.

Bible says obey rom 1:5 and submit heb 13:17 who do you obey and submit to?
Even a wife is called to obey and submit to her husband as the representative of the Lord, and that is a type of Christ and His church

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 eph 2:20

 

[DNB]

Tradition and dogma are biblical and revealed by Christ Jude 1:3

So then, let Christ speak through the Bible, not through Augustine, Aquinas, Tetzel or the Borgias.

 

[DNB]

Bible says obey rom 1:5 and submit heb 13:17 who do you obey and submit to?
Even a wife is called to obey and submit to her husband as the representative of the Lord, and that is a type of Christ and His church

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 eph 2:20

My point is that you have absolutely no idea who the successors are, if any. But, you should, as I do (at least who they are not), judging by their doctrine and works.

 

[Marymog]

non-sequitur. Someone has to come to the truth, by whatever means God has made available to man. Therefore, not everyone's opinions are derived from man, or their own concoction, sometimes it's just a comprehension of what God is intending to convey. Yes, everyone is subject to this scrutiny, and I highly endorse that everyone be skeptical about everything. So then, what we are looking for are doctrines that have profound wisdom and glorifies God. And this, which is what I have been protesting the whole time, is devoid in almost all of Catholic, and most Protestant dogma.

Ummmm......OK?

Soooooo you just made my point. YOU have decided what is "devoid in almost all of Catholic, and most Protestant dogma."

Soooooo how is my previous statement a "non-sequitur"??????????

I'm sorry....I just can't do this anymore with you. You make zero sense to me. You don't need to answer my questions. If you want to respond to this post that's fine, if not that's fine...I will let you have the last word.

Thank you for your time.....Mary

 

[Marymog]

My theology is not man-made, that was your conclusion, you did not define it correctly. An opinion does not mean that it's wrong, does it. What determines orthodoxy is Biblical correspondence, wisdom and glory to God. So, yes, I feel that I have met that criteria whether I'm wrong or right, and I feel that demonstrably so, your and BOL's theology is not in accord with the parameters of divine doctrine.

Hi DNB,

Your theology is not man made?????? Soooo what are you??? An alien from another planet? An animal??

You "feel that (you) have met that criteria whether (your) wrong or right"?????

Mine and @BreadOfLife theology "is not in accord with the parameters of divine doctrine." According to who? YOU?????

What you say makes no sense and I can't do this anymore.....Thank you for your time....Mary

 

[Marymog]

That doesn't make ANY sense at all.
I was responding to YOUR statement that:
"I am just saying that no matter what you call it, which you addressed in your previous post, it is not authoritative nor even Christian."

WHAT were you talking about in my "previous post"?

Lol....I just responded to two post from @DNB where I told him/her that he is making no sense at all. Now I see you are saying the same thing having the same experience. I thought it was just me..... but apparently its not.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Yes, me too, I'm indiscriminate where I get my learning from. I know that there will never be a church that I totally agree with, so even just a partial learning while weeding out the rest, can be sufficient. One person put it well, when I eat fish, I know when to spit out the bones.

There has never be a church YOU totally agree with?? Why do you think that YOU are right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to scripture interpretation, doctrine, dogma etc????? That makes no sense. What you are practicing is OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches....Can't you see that?

 

[theefaith]

So then, let Christ speak through the Bible, not through Augustine, Aquinas, Tetzel or the Borgias.

Why?

Peter, and the apostles, and their successors sent by Christ!

Lk 10:16 He who hears you hears me, he who rejects you rejects me!

Jn 5:23
That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

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.

Jn 20:21-22
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:


Matt 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Disciples must be taught:

The apostles cannot teach error:

Jn 8:32

Jn 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Must receive the apostles and their successors

Jn 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.

 

[theefaith]

My point is that you have absolutely no idea who the successors are, if any. But, you should, as I do (at least who they are not), judging by their doctrine and works.

The successors of Peter and the apostles

 

[DNB]

Ummmm......OK?

Soooooo you just made my point. YOU have decided what is "devoid in almost all of Catholic, and most Protestant dogma."

Soooooo how is my previous statement a "non-sequitur"??????????

I'm sorry....I just can't do this anymore with you. You make zero sense to me. You don't need to answer my questions. If you want to respond to this post that's fine, if not that's fine...I will let you have the last word.

Thank you for your time.....Mary

Yes, it will be me alone before God on Judgment Day. I will have to substantiate all my beliefs before Him, I will not be able to make an appeal to apostolic succession, and then blame them for their dogma - that they 'forced' me to believe.
So Mary, let's see if these men who have been handed down the keys from Peter, will come to your defense at the Great White Throne, if by chance they got anything wrong...?
You're on your own Mary, just like I am, this is why I make all conclusions pertaining to Scripture, on my own - just like all should.

 

[DNB]

Hi DNB,

Your theology is not man made?????? Soooo what are you??? An alien from another planet? An animal??

You "feel that (you) have met that criteria whether (your) wrong or right"?????

Mine and @BreadOfLife theology "is not in accord with the parameters of divine doctrine." According to who? YOU?????

What you say makes no sense and I can't do this anymore.....Thank you for your time....Mary

You said that you can't do this anymore two posts ago, who are you trying to kid?

 

[DNB]

Lol....I just responded to two post from @DNB where I told him/her that he is making no sense at all. Now I see you are saying the same thing having the same experience. I thought it was just me..... but apparently its not.

Mary

No, it's not just you Mary, it's both you & BOL together, and that's it.

 

[DNB]

There has never be a church YOU totally agree with?? Why do you think that YOU are right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to scripture interpretation, doctrine, dogma etc????? That makes no sense. What you are practicing is OPPOSITE of what Scripture teaches....Can't you see that?

Every man will stand before God solo. You need to understand this Mary. Make sure that you comprehend all that you are taught, and that you can explain it in a glorifying manner to God on that decisive Day. No one who claims apostolic succession will be able to, nor be willing to, come to your defense. Make all your conclusions from Scripture on your own, Mary, trust no man. Get their advice and opinions, but always weigh it in your own mind, whether it is sound and corresponds 100% with Scripture.

 

[DNB]

The successors of Peter and the apostles

a monkey knows that, I meant after those mentioned in the Bible.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Tetzel was raising money to build St Peters Cathedral, so stop the lies and nonsense - you're desperate and you know it.
It was your leaders for several centuries that were corrupt - those who established tradition and dogma. Get serious, and quit evading the issue at hand. When the leaders are corrupt, how much more the children (Matthew 10:25)

I never said that he wasn't.
I said that he wasn't SANCTIONED to do that. Big difference, son.

Tetzel used whatever means he could to raise money including the selling of Indulgences - which was an ABUSE of the teaching.
The ONLY way to shut you up is to demand that you show me the document, declaration or decree that promulgated the SELLING of Indulgences. In other words - put you money where your mouth is.
As I stated earlier - the church documents EVERYTHING.

This should be easy for you if it's true . . .

 

[DNB]

I never said that he wasn't.
I said that he wasn't SANCTIONED to do that. Big difference, son.

Tetzel used whatever means he could to raise money including the selling of Indulgences - which was an ABUSE of the teaching.
The ONLY way to shut you up is to demand that you show me the document, declaration or decree that promulgated the SELLING of Indulgences. In other words - put you money where your mouth is.
As I stated earlier - the church documents EVERYTHING.

This should be easy for you if it's true . . .

So, simpleton, the Church did not accept what lucre that he accrued? St Peters was not effectively built on the finances from Tetzel? Was this not tacit approval, if not by decree? Are you playing a game, you want proof just to play difficult, and yet history has without reservation documented the Church's acceptance of Tetzel's booty. St Peters is not document enough, ...you're sly BOL, and that's not complimentary.

 

[theefaith]

Yes, it will be me alone before God on Judgment Day. I will have to substantiate all my beliefs before Him, I will not be able to make an appeal to apostolic succession, and then blame them for their dogma - that they 'forced' me to believe.
So Mary, let's see if these men who have been handed down the keys from Peter, will come to your defense at the Great White Throne, if by chance they got anything wrong...?
You're on your own Mary, just like I am, this is why I make all conclusions pertaining to Scripture, on my own - just like all should.

Where does scripture give you this authority? There is only one faith eph 4:5 Jude 1:3
And we have intercessors, a cloud of witnesses

 

[BreadOfLife]

So, simpleton, the Church did not accept what lucre that he accrued? St Peters was not effectively built on the finances from Tetzel? Was this not tacit approval, if not by decree? Are you playing a game, you want proof just to play difficult, and yet history has without reservation documented the Church's acceptance of Tetzel's booty. St Peters is not document enough, ...you're sly BOL, and that's not complimentary.

If some bishop in Rome turned a blind eye to Tetzel's ill-gotten gains - that's on HIM - the individual Bishop.
The false historical charge has always been - especially here on this forum - that the Catholic Church sold Indulgences - which is patently FALSE.

That's like blaming ALL of Protestant Pastor Ted Haggard's congregations for smoking crack and having sex with homosexuals just because HE did it.
That's like blaming ALL of the Assemblies of God Churches for Jimmy Swaggart's penchant for hookers.
That's like blaming EVERY Protestant denomination for the child molestation that is going on by a few in your churches.

And YOU don't see your hypocrisy here??

 

[DNB]

Where does scripture give you this authority? There is only one faith eph 4:5 Jude 1:3
And we have intercessors, a cloud of witnesses

Just between God & I, ...same with you.
You have to stop relying on men, you've already seen their error so you have no excuse to claim that the truth has been handed down faithfully, to the one Church who once had three popes all vying/fighting to prove who was the God-ordained.
You are without excuse theefaith.

 

[DNB]

If some bishop in Rome turned a blind eye to Tetzel's ill-gotten gains - that's on HIM - the individual Bishop.
The false historical charge has always been - especially here on this forum - that the Catholic Church sold Indulgences - which is patently FALSE.

That's like blaming ALL of Protestant Pastor Ted Haggard's congregations for smoking crack and having sex with homosexuals just because HE did it.
That's like blaming ALL of the Assemblies of God Churches for Jimmy Swaggart's penchant for hookers.
That's like blaming EVERY Protestant denomination for the child molestation that is going on by a few in your churches.

And YOU don't see your hypocrisy here??

You're trying to equate isolated circumstances, with something of the magnitude of papal infallibility, of apostolic succession, of building the greatest church of its time that had to be approved by a rather large committee and ratified by decree.
Again BOL, out of your own mouth, you have no ide of what you are talking about, ...and your sly, horrible dialectics and rationale