Cruciform
New member
All are indeed "children of God" in the sense that He is our Creator. If you disagree, then you deny the Christian doctrine of creation. Sorry for your confusion.
ECT THE ARROGANCE & BLINDNESS OF THE PROTESTANT HERESY
- Thread starter Cruciform
- Start date
Cruciform
New member
Straw Man Fallacy. Try again.
Cruciform
New member
Straw Man Fallacy. Try again.
Cruciform
New member
Post your proof. (Note: he never does.)
Cruciform
New member
Already answered (Post #24).
Cruciform
New member
Already answered (Post #24).
Questions or Comments?
Just one: they didn't write the Bible, God did. They were naught but scribes.
So who was Jesus talking to when He told them to be the best slaves they can be?
Yea, according to the Cruciform the pope is not infallible.
:ha: A straw man answer.
musterion
Well-known member
That does not save or justify anyone.
When the pope started selling forgiveness....
That's a big one. The Vatican was financially corrupt.
Don't forget about---by virtue of the above---the special moment when you have greater spiritual insight than 1) our Lord Jesus Christ Himself does, Who set all of the above in motion, 2) the Holy Spirit, Whose work it's been, and 3) the Father Whose will it is that's been done.Questions or Comments?
Interplanner
Well-known member
Every organization on earth is going to have a human element that blemishes it. That's why the basic organization of the church is not on earth. Each believer can access Christ and be a priest.
The RCC had the Great Schism in the medieval period, and other groups split off. It had theocratic status through Constantine. It had reformers like Francis.
There is a sense in which the various post Reformation sects share something unwittingly with what the Reformation was protesting: that the grace of God in a person's life (transformation through steps, practices, sacraments) is identical enough to be managed by human institutions, and that it justifies. In one of the most backwardly expressed outcomes, we have almost all evangelicals referring to accepting Christ when the very issue that justification deals with is how God may accept us, if at all. Yes, when the sects name themselves after their 'steps' or 'practices' then it is pretty annoying. They often do so to put others down as incomplete or inferior. I don't see where the RCC is above that.
The observation that the Protestant sects actually re-cycle the RCC concept of grace is found in a church history essay called "Ecumenical Developments in the Christian Religion" and in another called "Protestant Revivalism, Pentecostalism and the Drift Back to Rome" both from a journal called PRESENT TRUTH in the 70s.
It has been shown that the Brethren movement in eschatology recycled Ribera's Judaistic eschatology so that the Pope would not be the target of Protestant criticism. The Brethren used it to resolve the ongoing friction in the UK, and that is how we got futurist Dispensational eschatology.
The RCC had the Great Schism in the medieval period, and other groups split off. It had theocratic status through Constantine. It had reformers like Francis.
There is a sense in which the various post Reformation sects share something unwittingly with what the Reformation was protesting: that the grace of God in a person's life (transformation through steps, practices, sacraments) is identical enough to be managed by human institutions, and that it justifies. In one of the most backwardly expressed outcomes, we have almost all evangelicals referring to accepting Christ when the very issue that justification deals with is how God may accept us, if at all. Yes, when the sects name themselves after their 'steps' or 'practices' then it is pretty annoying. They often do so to put others down as incomplete or inferior. I don't see where the RCC is above that.
The observation that the Protestant sects actually re-cycle the RCC concept of grace is found in a church history essay called "Ecumenical Developments in the Christian Religion" and in another called "Protestant Revivalism, Pentecostalism and the Drift Back to Rome" both from a journal called PRESENT TRUTH in the 70s.
It has been shown that the Brethren movement in eschatology recycled Ribera's Judaistic eschatology so that the Pope would not be the target of Protestant criticism. The Brethren used it to resolve the ongoing friction in the UK, and that is how we got futurist Dispensational eschatology.
brewmama
New member
He didn't say it did.
Cruciform
New member
Here you merely parrot the patently heterodox notion of "biblical inspiration" (that is, the Dictation Theory) fed to you by your favored recently-invented, man-made Protestant sect, whose doctrinal opinions carry no inherent doctrinal authority whatsoever---unless you can demonstrate that your preferred sect is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D...? No? That's what I thought.
Cruciform
New member
Merely another Straw Man Fallacy on your part. It's evident that you have no idea what the Christian doctrine of papal infallibility actually teaches.
Cruciform
New member
In addition, you apparently have no idea what a Straw Man Fallacy is either.