Right Divider
Body part
I do. :Shimei:
the church
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
HisServant
New member
Nope... the Holy Spirit living inside of me. If you had him, you would know.
Most early Christians had no bible or 'interpretations' to guide them... FYI.
The RCC came on the scene late.. and was unneeded then and still is.
so why don't I have him?
recently means reformed. living God reforms, not the RCC denomination
show us where jesus used the extras
there are no proof of apostlic sucessions.
the elders watches over the flock
who gave them the authority?
HisServant
New member
Because you are being deceived.. and probably are not one of God's children... but there is still time.
God can overcome anything... even your self deception.
how do you know you are not deceived?
Right Divider
Body part
Now that's a good post! :thumb:
Right Divider
Body part
Yes, there is. In Acts 1 they replaced Judas.
But in Acts 12, they did not replace James.
Cruciform
New member
You failed to provide the biblical proof that would support your claim that "protestants roots back to the beginning." Try again.
Cruciform
New member
...according to a Protestant sectarian shill. :yawn:
so did you
Cruciform
New member
- First of all, they were in the "Bible" that Jesus used (the Septuagint), and which was used by the apostles and early Church as well. Why, then, did Protestants remove them from their Bibles in the 16th century?
- Second, Jesus doesn't have to have directly quoted the Deuterocanical books for them to be inspired Scripture. For example, Jesus doesn't directly quote from Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Ezra,
Nehemiah, Lamentations and Nahum either. Not one of these Old Testament books is ever
quoted or alluded to by Christ or the Apostles in the New Testament. Yet all Christians accept these Old Testament books as fully inspired Scripture. According to your logic, however, we would supposedly need to remove them from the Bible (!). - Third, just because Jesus did not directly quote from the Deuterocanonicals, that does not mean that he did not indirectly refer to or reference them. For example, see THIS.
So much, then, for your false assumptions and excuses for rejecting the Old Testament Deuterocanonical books.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Last edited:
Cruciform
New member
Your public admission that you have utterly failed to demonstrate your claim that "protestants roots go back to the beginning" is noted. Your assertion is therefore rendered false.
Back to Post #3814.
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
Thanks RCC troll.
Cruciform
New member
Post #3815