Questions or Comments?
Hi and Jesus said in Matt 23:23 , " and have omitted the weightier matters of the Law , Judgment , mercy and FAITH and it was Jesus that gave them the Law !!
dan p
Questions or Comments?
The very same approach used by the 1st-century Apostolic Church, which simply declared that it was the one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ, that it thus possessed Christ's own truth and authority, and that men were therefore responsible to acknowledge and follow the authoritative teachings of Jesus' Church just as they would follow Jesus Christ himself. The buck stopped with the Church herself. The apostles didn't bother to offer any "independent support" for their teachings and instructions. They simply authoritatively issued them, and men were called upon to hear and obey. You may not like (prefer) that reality, but there it is.It is your conclusion but it is not a valid conclusion. It is your conclusion based on the Magisterium declaring that it must be your conclusion to be Catholic. What kind of logic is that?
Now go ahead and provide such "independent support" for the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect solely from the writings of the Catholic Church. Let's have it, then. Post the "independent support" for your preferred man-made sect. :think:Writings not prepared by the RCC.
The fact that you have adopted an approach contrary to that of the apostles is noted.Urm, you were not chosen by nor educated by Christ as the apostles were. You have hitched your wagon to the RCC star and follow it without question. I threw Catholicism to the wolves where it belongs and embrace Christianity (faith in Christ) fully.
...all according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, which---failing to demonstrate its status as that one historic Church founded by Christ---possesses no doctrinal authority whatsoever. So much, then, for "Post #518." :yawn:Sadly, post 518 has long since been purged. It was a post the addressed the theological errors in the RCC interpretations of scriptures that mention Mary.
Jesus is God Incarnate, and so possessed doctrinal authority as part of his divine Nature. You certainly are not God Incarnate, and so possess no divine authority whatsoever. Try again.What did Jesus do when He found Himself struggling with difficult times? Did He go to His Apostles or did He do something else?
We do. Then we seek God's true doctrine in the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Catholic Church, just as the apostles instruct.If He turned to His Father in prayer, why wouldn't we?
Your ignorant and arrogant judgment of Christ's own Church---which Jesus himself declared is supernaturally endowed with his own power and authority to guide and teach the faithful---is simply pathetic, the epitome of pride and anthrocentricity. Such is the mind and heart of every schismatic.The Magisterium is plagued with such pride.
CM the 1st-cent. skeptic: "Sorry, Peter, but apostolic propaganda is not evidence!"Sorry, Catholic propaganda is not evidence.
Is it your claim, then, that the apostolic band did not possess divinely-endowed authority (1 Jn. 4:6)? :think:Authority, true authority is derived only from God, not from a council of men.
You offered a biblical text to support ("prove") your assertion. That's called a "proof-text."It's not proof texting.
Already addressed in my previous post above.It is simply what Jesus said. If you gather in My name I will be there with you. It is a promise from Jesus.
Since no one here has actually made any such claim, there's no need for me to answer further.Can you show us where Jesus intended that He would only honor that promise in Catholic churches?
They messed up when they chose Matthias as the twelfth apostle.Is it your claim, then, that the apostolic band did not possess divinely-endowed authority (1 Jn. 4:6)? :think:
The very same approach used by the 1st-century Apostolic Church, which simply declared that it was the one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ, that it thus possessed Christ's own truth and authority, and that men were therefore responsible to acknowledge and follow the authoritative teachings of Jesus' Church just as they would follow Jesus Christ himself.
Here you touch on at least three subjects about which you clearly have no real understanding, none of which engages with the actual topic of the thread.Perhaps in its early stage. Later, it be more concerned with Church property than with teaching the Word of God. The rules on celibacy made the clearly attractive to homosexuals, Then the Great Schism tore the Church apart, while the Latin church had it rules against heterosexual men, the Eastern Catholic Churches allow ordination of married men as priests.
Here you touch on at least three subjects about which you clearly have no real understanding, none of which engages with the actual topic of the thread.
What you did say says it all, and has already been addressed in my previous post.You cannot make that judgement, you goof. I do not like writing many words. You know I touched on three issues with few words. That says it all.
Why not Apostles [ones who establish like a missionary] and Prophets [those that speak the Living Word of God]?
What you did say says it all, and has already been addressed in my previous post.
However, the apostles chose and ordained successors (bishops) to their (the apostles') authoritative ministry, and the line of bishops has continued down to our own day. For example, see THIS.
Already answered---and corrected---in my previous post just above.That was during the laying of the foundation. The foundation has been laid.
Already answered---and corrected---in my previous post just above.
As does any Christian.Do you want to obey God?
As does any Christian.
I do. After all, merely disagreeing with the opinions you've been fed by your chosen recently-invented, man-made anti-Catholic sect hardly equates to "disobedience." Try again.Then. why.don't. you . obey?
Again, The opinions you've been fed by your chosen recently-invented, man-made anti-Catholic sect carry no binding doctrinal authority whatsoever. Nice try, though.Cruciform, you are a Catholic, and you do not obey.
All three are entirely biblical, and have been practiced by believers from the beginning of the Christian Church. I could easily provide you with biblical and historical proof of this, but the admins have forbidden me from posting any primary sources or links, so you'll have to do your own homework. The info is out there for those with the intellectual integrity and honesty to seek it out.Do you call your brothers in Christ 'father'? Do you bow to statues? Do you pray to Mary?
Again, The opinions you've been fed by your chosen recently-invented, man-made anti-Catholic sect carry no binding doctrinal authority whatsoever. Nice try, though.
All three are entirely biblical, and have been practiced by believers from the beginning of the Christian Church. I could easily provide you with biblical and historical proof of this, but the admins have forbidden me from posting any primary sources or links, so you'll have to do your own homework. The info is out there for those with the intellectual integrity and honesty to seek it out.
If you message me, I'll be glad to provide you with the sources I have in mind. Just let me know.
My beliefs are those of the Holy Bible, which came before your denomination.
Tell me how you obey the command not to call anyone 'father'.
I obey by not calling any brother in Christ 'father'.
Please tell me how your denomination teaches you to obey that command.