That is not what I said and what not what the Bible says.
You are merely repeating rote answers.
Read the 23rd chapter of Matthew and see what Jesus thought of those law keeping Pharisees.
That is not what I said and what not what the Bible says.
You are merely repeating rote answers.
Read the 23rd chapter of Matthew and see what Jesus thought of those law keeping Pharisees.
I never mentioned education. Highly educated people often believe quite bizarre things. Lon for instance believes he is the smartest person on the planet :kookoo: :chuckle:Education has nothing to do with it.
Yeah, I agree. I think the same thing about christianity too.Some of the smartest people that I know are Mormons. If you can believe in Mormonism, then you probably think that Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is a real life story.
Jesus says the PHARISEES DID NOT OBEY.
LOL
I never mentioned education. Highly educated people often believe quite bizarre things. Lon for instance believes he is the smartest person on the planet :kookoo: :chuckle:
Yeah, I agree. I think the same thing about christianity too.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Not everyone professing to be Christian are Christians. Most don't even know what the Gospel is.
Contrary to what I'm willing to bet you'll say, there are no true Scotsmen when it comes to christianity. This thread, among the thousands of others on TOL just like it, has post after post with alternating accusations that the other has the wrong belief with each having their own bizzare belief backed by "scripture".Not everyone professing to be Christian are Christians.
I doubt you'd be able to conclusively prove this beyond mere assertion. How many post has this thread lasted and how many posts in the thousands of threads prior have failed at that task as well?Most don't even know what the Gospel is.
They tithed right down to the mint in their gardens, Matthew 23:23.
They were super religious, just like you.
Outwardly they appeared to be righteous, but inwardly they were hypocrites, just like you, Matthew 23:28.
Sounds like you do not know you are talking about yourself.Not everyone professing to be Christian are Christians. Most don't even know what the Gospel is.
Post #107 anyone?Sounds like you do not know you are talking about yourself.
Post #107 anyone?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Let me guess, you're going to do that by spouting bible verses at them, right? Tell me, how has that work out for you in the past?Oh please, I would love to have someone know how to know for sure, but they will not listen.
There is? Quoting the bible hasn't been a particularly effective method of convincing anyone your belief is correct, has it? Unless you are like Michael Cadry, who claims to have a direct line to your almighty, I don't foresee anyone accomplishing that goal with anything approaching believability. And even if you were to be privileged to speak to HIM, what would you use as evidence to show that you actually did and what you heard was the actual "truth"?There is a way to know what God's Truth is.
Really? What particular method should they use? If they investigated on their own, what prevents them from arriving at a conclusion different from your own or from whomever else you're in disagreement with here?Anyone can find out for themselves.
And that doesn't apply to you how, exactly?People do not want to give up what some man and or woman taught them.
Let me guess, you're going to do that by spouting bible verses at them, right? Tell me, how has that work out for you in the past?
You would have to find out for yourself. I will tell you how.There is? Quoting the bible hasn't been a particularly effective method of convincing anyone your belief is correct, has it? Unless you are like Michael Cadry, who claims to have a direct line to your almighty, I don't foresee anyone accomplishing that goal with anything approaching believability. And even if you were to be privileged to speak to HIM, what would you use as evidence to show that you actually did and what you heard was the actual "truth"?
Really? What particular method should they use? If they investigated on their own, what prevents them from arriving at a conclusion different from your own or from whomever else you're in disagreement with here?
And that doesn't apply to you how, exactly?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Contrary to what I'm willing to bet you'll say, there are no true Scotsmen when it comes to christianity. This thread, among the thousands of others on TOL just like it, has post after post with alternating accusations that the other has the wrong belief with each having their own bizzare belief backed by "scripture".
I doubt you'd be able to conclusively prove this beyond mere assertion. How many post has this thread lasted and how many posts in the thousands of threads prior have failed at that task as well?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Referring people to the Catholic church for truth, is like asking a blind person for directions.
They demonstrate that the Church which by the close of the 1st century A.D. was already commonly known as as "the Catholic Church" was in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D. Pointing to the personal sins of some Catholics in history no more negates the Christ-endowed status of the Catholic Church than would complaining about the personal sins of the apostles themselves---yes, they were all sinners---somehow be able to negate Christ's one historic Church during the Apostolic Era. The Church is made up of morally fallible human beings; it remains, however, that one historic Church established by Jesus Christ and built up by the apostles and bishops chosen by Christ to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very authority. Sorry for your confusion.
Which of the following statements, then, do you dispute, and why:This post is an apt demonstration why the blood guilt of the RCC will be called to account. Everything you've claimed in this post is an unashamed lie. There's not a shred of evidence scripturally or secularly that supports any of your specious claims.
Which of the following statements, then, do you dispute, and why:
- The Church which by the close of the 1st century A.D. was already commonly known as as "the Catholic Church" was in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D.
- Pointing to the personal sins of some Catholics in history no more negates the Christ-endowed status of the Catholic Church than would complaining about the personal sins of the apostles themselves---yes, they were all sinners---somehow be able to negate Christ's one historic Church during the Apostolic Era.
- The Church is made up of morally fallible human beings.
- The Church remains, however, that one historic Church established by Jesus Christ and built up by the apostles and bishops chosen by Christ to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very authority.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Rather, a very few of the local churches that were founded by Jesus Christ are listed in Revelation 1:11. Try again.The churches that were founded by Jesus Christ are listed in Revelation 1:11.