Of course it does.
It's the response to an unfortunate number of people who have attempted to engage in conversation here. At a certain point one would think that anyone who had a genuine interest in communicating and/or convincing would have taken note of the precipitous decline in attendance of this site and summed 1 and 1 and come up with 2 ... 2 being the fact that unpleasantness, ugliness and denigration drives people off. The sad truth is that management has encouraged this sort of activity from the beginning and they have now reaped what they have sewn. Perhaps they will reconsider but, after over 20 years of this I wouldn't bet a lot on the proposition. Hope spring eternal nonetheless.
Which links Paul right to John 1:29
"Behold the Lamb of God ... Who takes away the sins of the World."
One Christ, a two-fold purpose.
idk why you would just confirm Catholicism like that, but tyvm for conceding RD. :e4e:
You are childish to say the least.
I'm rubber and you're glue.
And you feel as if him "reappearing" in 1st Peter and in Rome (not Palestine) is irrelevant. One point for us both? or how are we keeping score here?
I already explained it. The Apostles planted churches, they don't stick around interminably, not even for the harvest; they plant, and then they make farmers who supervise the tending of the fields.
I went down this rabbit hole with you plenty of times before RD, there's literally no authoritative source for what you believe, which means it's a pet theory, and so if you cannot demonstrate it is correct from all the way from the ground up, that's all it will ever be, a pet theory.
Par for the course for you.
Peter was AT the counsel of Acts 15 but took a back seat to James (not one of the twelve).
My authoritative source is the BIBLE... i.e., the WORD OF GOD.
I don't have a pet theory. I do have the WORD OF GOD that totally refutes your fake authorities.
Prove it.
Like I said, maybe in another thread, it would help if books like 1st Peter were called something like "7th Palestinians" or something like that so we'd know that when Paul writes to the Corinthians, he's writing to a largely Gentile church so when he talks about the New Covenant ritual of the Lord's Supper that he's talking to Gentiles and not to ethnic Palestinians.
Already explained. There was no new revelation at the First Church Council in Jerusalem, Judea, Palestine, and there was no Apostolic domination of the conference either. All the bishops, who were probably all ethnic Palestinians, discussed all the revelation that they had together, and hashed out everything, and when they convened, they literally all decided that literally nobody needed to be circumcised ever again, it's there in black-and-white, right in the middle of Acts, before Peter disappears from Acts.
Saying it doesn't make it so RD.
I believe the authority of the Bible too. But when I ask you what else you believe, or what you believe about the Bible, the only things you can cosign on as authoritative are things that all Catholics believe as well. And by "you" I mean Dispensationalism.
Yes you do. Dispensationalism.
Saying it doesn't make it so RD.
That's not a theory, It's just what the Bible teaches. Look it up.
Nope.
Seek medical help immediately!
lol what are you? all out of bullets or something?
I'm already guilty, so there's that. But, I was crucified with him and raised up with him. I was baptized by the Holy Spirit into Chirst. When the Father looks down he does not see my no good rotten self, he sees his perfect Son.