I don't play games that is what RCs do ineffectually. You constantly show you cannot defend your faith.
Circular Reasoning
- Thread starter RayneBeau
- Start date
I gave you the verses that show the Way was what the early believers were known as. You keep showing your ignorance of scripture, by these inane comments.
What a load of hogwash, your leaders are the worst of sinners. Just look at their bad fruit out the centuries. Please show where one apostle sexually molested a child, or raped a nun, or prayed to Mary after she died, or had children out of wedlock, or hide sin rather than expose it. The actions of your leaders prove the do not go back to the apostles at all.
Again proving you do not know scripture, others have posted them over and over again.
A new day
Super Member
Deuteronomy 18:10-12
There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, 12 for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord.
The principle of the above passages is that human beings need to respect the limitation God has set, and not try to draw upon other ways and means to get what we humans want. God set the boundaries between humanity and the spirit world. Rather than seeking to get whatever information or results by calling on other things, people or powers. God wants us to live in fellowship with Him, and totally rely only on Him, accepting that what He has for us and is that HE is all we will ever need.
There is NO Scripture in the OT or NT that tells us to talk to or pray to saints and other dead people. There is NO biblical support.
The above is a super poor excuse, to justify praying to the dead.
Peter, James and John simply saw a vision, which did not include any prayers offered to Moses or Elijah in the hope of either one interceding. Note that Scripture tells us Peter addressed Jesus, who was “transfigured before them,” not Moses or Elijah who were physically dead. And neither did Jesus pray to them.
I never said anything about "the way church". I pointed out that this is the term used by the church. It's also the exact same term used by Jesus, e.g. John 14:6 "I am the Way, the truth and the life" The church adopted the EXACT same term due to the fact that just as the Father is in the son, and the son in the father, so too is Christ in the body, and the body in Christ. Christ is the head of the church. He is the head of his corporate body. They are effectively synonymous. Jesus affirms this when he points out that his followers are "the light of the world". How often has anyone ever heard a Christian claim that they are the light of the world?
There is only the Way, and this is the word used by the true church. There is no other word used in scripture to identify the church.
Plenty of people may refer to someone as a Christian, but that should never be conflated with the Way.
i beg to disagree. the bible says the church has 4 marks or qualities:
the church is one (Rom:12: 5, 1Cor10:17, 12: 13)
the church is holy (eph5: 25-27, Rev19: 7-8)
the church is catholic/universal (Matt28: 19-20, Rev5: 9-10)
the church is apostolic (Eph2: 19-20, 2Tim2: 2)
requesting the saints in heaven to pray for us is not necromancy. there is no transmission of the request from the dead to the living. whereas in necromancy, a necromancer or one who inquires for the dead, so that the transmission of the request is from the dead to the living. as a matter of fact, it is opposite in praying to the saints. the living prays (make requests) to the dead (saints in heaven) according to you.
whether a vision or not, jesus was conversing to moses and elijah who were supposed to be dead which according to the definition of necromancy is the living talking to the dead... correct? why will Jesus do this if it is against deut18?
thanks and peace be with you.
despite some sinful clergy, the hierarchy of the catholic church is in the internet. it proves that the lineage goes back to the apostles. what about yours?
i do, not with ad hominems and strawman arguments
A new day
Super Member
What good is it, to belong to "a" church that declares of itself, "were number one, rah, rah, rah" but not know Jesus personally? The bigger issue is that the Rcc itself can NOT impart salvation and eternal life to you or anyone else. Neither can any human deeds or accomplishments. Anything done by man is insufficient. That is why God sent Jesus to die on the cross, because no matter what we do, or for how long, will ever satisfy God's wrath on sin.
There is no way that any mere human can ever satisfy God's wrath. For God's wrath is infinite in nature and quality. Only Jesus could bring a sacrifice of infinite and eternal value to God that he would appease heaven’s wrath. By merit of his divine nature, HE is able to earn for us eternal life and favor with God. The divinity of Christ means that HE is able to be raised from the dead (after conquering it) and therefore apply the benefits HE has earned for us.
A new day
Super Member
The idea of that, does not have a leg to stand on, because there is NO Scripture which teaches us to pray TO the dead period. When the disciples asked for Jesus to teach them a prayer. The prayer was NOT to any dead person.
Prayer is communication, it is also a form of worship. No one prays.... prayers without expecting those prayers to be answered or heard. Otherwise, your just praying to hear yourself talk. Neither does one give praise in a prayer just to hear themselves. They expect the recipient to hear them.
People who pray TO mary, saints, and other dead people are expecting the recipient to provide one of the following; help, salvation or succor. And that is the situation. Priests don't tell the members who enter the confession booth to recite those mary prayers, for the sake of them hearing themselves.
Nah, I think it was in the 1st century.
"She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." (Matt. 1:21)
Jesus did not come to merely push His people in the right direction. He came to save them. That is what the true church teaches.
Well, that is not at all the same as him claiming that he was a priest. If I write that I ate a kingly breakfast, I have not thereby claimed that I am a king. It should be obvious to you that Paul is using figurative language.
He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. (Rom. 15:16)
Paul preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, thereby making the Gentiles an "offering" to God, is comparable to the service of an OT priest. He does not claim to be a literal priest, however. And that office simply does not exist in the NT.
The role of the apostles, bishops, and presbyters was not to stand between God and man as some kind of mediators. Christ is our sole mediator and source of grace, being our High Priest and Substitutionary Sacrifice.
I will not potentially debate Protestant doctrine here. Suffice to say, Evangelicals are united with regard to the essentials: sola gratia, sola fide, solo Christo, soli Deo gloria, sola Scriptura.
You cannot expect me to comment on all that, which you have copied verbatim from Catholic Answers without due attribution, by the way. Yes, Peter was a spokesman for the disciples. But there is no evidence that he was their leader. And there are some blatant factual errors in that text you copied. Peter did not announce the dogmatic decision of the council at Jerusalem. James did. The text of Acts 15 does also not say that Peter led that council. That is a detail that is simply made up. At the very council where Peter would have been expected to show his "popish" authority, his role is merely that of a participant. And Paul received the mission to preach to the Gentiles already in Acts 9:
But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel." (Acts 9:15)
Given that we believe, the answer is a resounding "yes". We are not saved by our accomplishments or condemned by our failures. Our salvation is found only in Christ and Him crucified.
I am implying that we have one Lord only: Christ. No sinful man is our authority.
You're conflating adjectives with identification. A driver's license is the method of identification while the adjectives within the ID e.g. hair color, eye color, height, weight, etc. are used to describe the person.
The "Way" is the church's identity, and identification should never be conflated with identity. Identification is not identity any more than the spirit is conflated with the gifts of the spirit or a photo ID is confused with the person's identity.
are you Jesus? what makes you think you should be able to do what He can do? what's next - you'll be able to die and be resurrected 3 days later? ascend to heaven? be Savior of mankind?
Oh these 4 marks are met in your institution.
Mark 1 we have seen the divisions within the RCC in these threads, by the different RC sects.
Mark 2 well your institution is not holy. You were trying to make us all laugh. Its dirt has been seen for centuries.
Mark 3 again you institution is universal only because it forced conversions, conquered countries and forced its message, killed off those who disagreed with it. That is why it spread, and that is not what God wanted.
Mark 4 Apostolic oh you are kidding. Your institution is not apostolic, it teaches another gospel for a start. Its leaders to not meet the apostolic standards for leaders. Your institution harms the sheep, the apostles never did.
Your institution is not spotless and it does not even meet your marks.
It is your way.
As we gave discussed it is more than some, every leader that knew and did not expose the sin is part of the sin and that shows it is not apostolic. You have no proof of a line going back to the apostles, it is just made up by your leaders. There was even debate about who followed Peter among the efcs. There have been gaps that went on for years. There have been 3 popes claiming the throne at one time.
To be an apostolic successor, they need to meet the standards set by the apostles and yours don't.
in other words, one will not be able to identify what is 'the way'? i
it is not a religious organization where we belongs to?