My, my, what a lot of verbiage to get out of giving me a straight answer!But in those verses did you notice that the woman's faith was manifest in her actions. Instead of Jesus saying to the woman 'you don't have to do all that stuff for me'... he said to the Apostles 'look what she has done for me'.
Luke 7 44 Then turning toward the woman, he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has bathed my feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. 45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not stopped kissing my feet. 46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. 47 Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven loves little.” 48 Then he said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” 49 But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?” 50 But he said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”
Why would it be different for us today who want to express our love, repentance, gratitude with acts of faith? The Saints before us were like the woman wanting to act in faith hence the Church providing the place to meet with Christ and showing our faith like the woman.
Faith.My, my, what a lot of verbiage to get out of giving me a straight answer!
I am well aware of what the woman did to show her love for Jesus, but that is not what I asked, is it?
What did Jesus tell the woman ACTUALLY SAVED her? Her weeping? Her washing Jesus' feet with her tears, and drying them with her hair?
What did He say, Stella? One little, but BIG word?
At last! He said her FAITH saved her. Now, did Jesus add anything to that word, as to what saved the woman? Yes or no?Faith.
No.At last! He said her FAITH saved her. Now, did Jesus add anything to that word, as to what saved the woman? Ye or no?
Thank you. So faith in Jesus only is what saved her...didn't it? Nothing else.
Unfortunately he did not as I pointed out. Let's see if he responds.
He definitely read it more carefully than RCs.Unfortunately he did not as I pointed out. Let's see if he responds.
No he didn't and neither did you. Read it again. Especially the part in bold.He definitely read it more carefully than RCs.
Prove you claim?No he didn't and neither did you. Read it again. Especially the part in bold.
“And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
(Genesis 3:7 KJV)
What did the bold part say, in your own words?Prove you claim?
Answer my question first.What did the bold part say, in your own words?
James 5:
19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
and? When I say 'following man from the 16th century', that includes others -- Zwingli, Calvin, etc.I am able to quote Scripture freely, because I read Scripture.
We have gone over this several times -- Luther had NO AUTHORITY to lay hands on men because he wasn't a bishop in communion with Christ's Catholic Church.Luther must have had hands laid on him when he became a priest. And he must have laid hands on men he ordained
We have gone over this several times -- Luther had NO AUTHORITY to lay hands on men because he wasn't a bishop in communion with Christ's Catholic Church.
That would be the 'Church throughout' mentioned in Acts 9.Says who? And could you show where in the bible does it mentions Roman Catholic church? And where it says the Roman Catholic has authority over anyone? Just any verse that mentions Roman Catholic church will do!