They have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God and are trying to establish their own righteousness, Romans 10:3.
Yep.
They have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God and are trying to establish their own righteousness, Romans 10:3.
When are you going to learn?
It is all about what Jesus says, not about our imperfect faith.
Just because you want to change His teachings you should not change what He commands.
"but Jesus says to obey."
Well, there is, for example, where Peter, as pope, chooses to pronounce infallibly that the epistles of the Apostle Paul are on a level with "the other scriptures" (2P3:16KJV).Slower...Pay attention..
"Infallible when the popes teach from the chair, ex cathedra, and when all the bishops teach what they all agree on, along with the popes' agreement, when he teaches officially; then and only then is it infallible and is the charism employed which preserves the pope from teaching error, in matters of faith, doctrine and morals."-just made up by the religious prostitute, AKA, the Roman Catholic Organization-no scriptural backing-NADA.
Yes.I am part of "the Church"
Well, I just did. And I am part of "the Church" too.-show me where I, other members of the boc/the Church, on TOL, ever taught:
"that anybody whose faith is a burning fire within them, should, rightly and with abandon, try to be a Saint."
Romans 1:7 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 1:2 (KJV)And there is no such thing as "try to be a Saint"-no scripture teaches that. You/the RCO made it up.
No, you lied:Well, there is, for example, where Peter, as pope, chooses to pronounce infallibly that the epistles of the Apostle Paul are on a level with "the other scriptures" (2P3:16KJV).
Yes.
Well, I just did. And I am part of "the Church" too.Romans 1:7 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 1:2 (KJV)
Infallible when the popes teach from the chair, ex cathedra, and when all the bishops teach what they all agree on, along with the popes' agreement, when he teaches officially; then and only then is it infallible and is the charism employed which preserves the pope from teaching error, in matters of faith, doctrine and morals."-just made up by the religious prostitute, AKA, the Roman Catholic Organization-no scriptural backing-NADA.
That weren't a lie.No, you lied:
What I said was that the charism of infallibility, that preserves him from error when teaching on matters of faith, doctrine and morals, is only in effect when the pope teaches from Peter's chair, which popes do not do very frequently, and so far, they have only done so when there already is great agreement among all the bishops of the Church. All such infallible Church teachings are found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which remains free in its entirety online at the Church's own web page at her own web domain, and is also readily available for purchase for about 10 USD in mass-market print form from many book retailers.I, the church, am not infallible, nor are you, or anyone on earth today. You/Rome made that up. No such thing as "pope."
That weren't a lie.
What I said was that the charism of infallibility, that preserves him from error when teaching on matters of faith, doctrine and morals, is only in effect when the pope teaches from Peter's chair, which popes do not do very frequently, and so far, they have only done so when there already is great agreement among all the bishops of the Church. All such infallible Church teachings are found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which remains free in its entirety online at the Church's own web page at her own web domain, and is also readily available for purchase for about 10 USD in mass-market print form from many book retailers.
That weren't a lie.
Those "select few" are the Apostles, and it was with their "power from on high," that they instituted the Church office of bishop/overseer. 2nd Corinthians 10:8 (KJV), speaking of " our authority; " the authority of the Apostles, who created the college of bishops, who presided over the Jerusalem Church council, recorded in Acts, that was an unmitigated success.You/Rome, made that up. No scripture promises, in this dispensation, absolute, "infallible" understanding of scripture, to anyone. That only happened when the Lord Jesus Christ walked this grave yard, and when "the promise" of the Father"(Acts 1:4 KJV, Acts 2:33 KJV), "power from on high"(Luke 24:49 KJV)was given to a select few, for a specific purpose(subject of another thread-discussed on TOL previously).
I'd sooner flee my own family than flee the Church's supreme pastor.This bunch of clowns, in clown hats, in clown outfits, is made up. Those charlatans cannot touch me, or others, on TOL, biblically. They/Rome belongs in a straight jacket-they've put you in one. Flee her....Come out of her...(Rev. 18:4 KJV).
Really? So why can't GM refute it despite the challenge? Well, he sort of chickened out.Why is it that Samie is so mixed up? I think Samie got ahold of some bad "False doctrine", and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
Those "select few" are the Apostles, and it was with their "power from on high," that they instituted the Church office of bishop/overseer. 2nd Corinthians 10:8 (KJV), speaking of " our authority; " the authority of the Apostles, who created the college of bishops, who presided over the Jerusalem Church council, recorded in Acts, that was an unmitigated success.
"Clowns": 1; You: 0
I'd sooner flee my own family than flee the Church's supreme pastor.
Really? So why can't GM refute it despite the challenge? Well, he sort of chickened out.
GM noticed he has false doctrine after comparing his doctrine with Samie's posts.
It was for building the Church, as Paul so frequently says, and among the most significant of their building activities, was the establishment of the hierarchical clergy, with bishops tasked with Church oversight. Also they built the Eucharist into the pinnacle of the Church's mass/corporate prayer to the Lord.No, that power from on high, including the miraculous gifts of healing, speaking in tongues, word of knowledge,............... was for a specific purpose, in the prophetic program(another thread), and has no place in this dispensation. And there is no such thing as "apostolic succession," or "popes"-Rome/you just made it up.
It was for building the Church, as Paul so frequently says, and among the most significant of their building activities, was the establishment of the hierarchical clergy, with bishops tasked with Church oversight. Also they built the Eucharist into the pinnacle of the Church's mass/corporate prayer to the Lord.
And if anybody "just made up" succession, and the papacy, it was the Apostles themselves, including Paul, during the first century. If that's what you mean by "Rome," then OK.
No-another thread....to confirm the word, that they were speaking for the LORD God.No longer applicable, in this dispensation.
You wicked Romanists/most other denominations, since you refuse to rightly divide the word of truth, the most significant division, being between the prophetic program, primarily dealing with the nation Israel, and the heathen nations, on earth, and the mystery program, focused primarily on the boc, in heavenly places, and thus follow the wrong apostle, Peter, and the Lord Jesus Christ in His earthly ministry................................................
One of the nice things about posts is that they are there in perpetuity (as long as not deleted) so that someone can go back again and again and read the details of what was said. It took some time and effort, but I finally went back to the thread where Jerry was going back and forth with AMR. As expected, this is not a case of AMR posting and running, but of putting into detailed posts what he believes in direct response to the questions posed.
For the amount of effort he (always) puts into his responses, it shouldn't be surprising when he simply stops responding. He has often cited "heavy lifting" that needs to be done and if someone really wants to interact with him, he complies. But in this case, the response wasn't something that necessitated any new response - it was answered in one of AMR's previous responses and any further response would require some further interaction with what was said.
Bottom line - I think AMR actually shows Jerry some respect by leaving him to go back and do the investigation himself instead of having to take him by the hand and lead him through the answer step by step. Jerry's no dummy himself...
Who am I kidding. They don't listen to anybody.