francis
ECT WHO IS THE HEAD OF THE EKKLESIA TODAY ??
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
revpete
New member
Thanks,
In regard to your first statement, you should recite that looking in a mirror!
Your rather Misinformed assertion that the RCC is the one true historic church is so ludicrous it's laughable! Anyway after what the guy in the silly uniform arrogantly said recently concerning The Lord's death on the cross, it's a loud and clear statement to all: that the RCC was not founded by our Lord but comes from the pit and that is where all her adherents (except The Lord give them grace to repent) are headed.
Please don't take this personally, I'm sure you are nice enough as a person and I do not mean to offend you. If I have I apologise sincerely.
Pete
lifeisgood
New member
All you have to do is read your own current 'infallible' pope words and you will figure it out if you so desire.
The ellipsis is from the approved Vatican script itself.
One of the reasons why I provided where you can read the approved Vatican script in its totality, for whoever wants to verify the 'infallible' pope's words:
https://heiscomingblog.wordpress.com...-at-the-cross/
I provided you with the URL. You've taught me that.
Cruciform
New member
Already answered---and corrected---in Post #46 above. :yawn:
Cruciform
New member
As has already been observed:
"...unless the Catholic Church is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, and against which he declared that the gates of Hades would never---NEVER---prevail (Mt. 16:18-19; 1 Tim. 3:15), which it most certainly is."
It's a straightforward historical fact. If you disagree, then go ahead and name your proposed alternative from among the some 50,000+ recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sects in existence today. Which one, in your opinion, qualifies as that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself in 33 A.D.? :think:
Which was, exactly...?
Likewise.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
So, then, no actual proof for your anti-Catholic claims whatsoever. Noted.
Go ahead and quote the qualifying statement that appears there in the original document.
Your link doesn't work.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
“And if at times our efforts and works SEEM to fail and produce no fruit, we need to remember that we are followers of Jesus… and his life, HUMANLY SPEAKING, ended in failure, the failure of the cross.”
Your source needs to learn how to read the English language.
Hi and the bible says to FOLLOW Paul as Paul follows Christ , 1 Cor 11:1 !! You have it wrong , don't you see !!
dan p
Cruciform
New member
Yes, the New Testament teaches that believers are to follow the teaching and example of ALL the apostles, not only of Paul. Nice try, though.
revpete
New member
The one true Church was born on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2. There is no other. We could argue back and forth about the historicity of it but that is old ground here at TOL.
The pope is on record as describing the death of Christ on the cross as a failure. That alone should be ample proof for anyone that his doctrine and view of Christology and of Christ Himself is erroneous and heretical.
Pete
lifeisgood
New member
No, the source simply STATED the APPROVED Vatican words of the 'infallible' current pope of the RCC, which said that Jesus and what He did is a failure.
The 'infallible' current pope of the RCC did not explain his statement did he? No, he did not.
Did the next statement of the 'infallible' current RCC pope was, e.g., 'however, WE IN THE RCC believe that that Jesus Christ and what He did on the Cross of Calvary was the most incredible thing that has ever happened FOR the human race --- the fact that, THERE IS NO SALVATION IN NO OTHER NAME but the name of Jesus and what He did at the Cross of Calvary'?
No, the 'infallible' current pope of the RCC did not say that. He simply preached that Jesus Christ and what He did at the Cross of Calvary was a failure.
How sad that a man with so much power in his hands to point people going directly to hell TO the ONLY way of Salvation, the 'infallible' current pope chooses to say that Jesus Christ and what He did at the Cross of Calvary is a failure. How sad indeed.
Cruciform
New member
Yes, and by the end of the 1st century, that one historic Church was already commonly known as "the Catholic Church."
Merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part, as has already been demonstrated in Post #89 above. Time to stop deliberately misrepresenting what the Pope said.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Already answered---and corrected---in Post #94 above.
Wick Stick
Well-known member
I honestly don't understand this phenomenon. Why do Protestants feel that it is okay to cheat their arguments with Catholics?
There are plenty of legitimate arguments against Catholicism without resorting to this kind of crap.
Jarrod
Cedarbay
New member
As Roman Catholic apologist, H. Burn-Murdock admits:
“None of the writings of the first two centuries describe St. Peter as a bishop of Rome.”[6] In fact, no one before Callistus (A.D. 223) used Matthew 16:18 to support the primacy of the Roman bishop (i.e., “Pope” as Rome call it)—no one.
[6] H. Burn-Murdock, The Development of the Papacy (1954), 130f.
Cedarbay
New member
Do you and heir coordinate when to change up your avatar pictures?
Cruciform
New member
Where did you get the idea that Burn-Murdock was a "Catholic apologist"?
I recommend a careful and thorough reading of the following well-documented texts:
S. Ray, UPON THIS ROCK: St. Peter & the Primacy of Rome in Scripture and the Early Church (Ignatius Press, 1999)
A. Fortescue, THE EARLY PAPACY: To the Synod of Chalcedon in 451 (Ignatius Press, 2008)
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cedarbay
New member
Would you provide valid proof that he is not? If you are proven correct, I'll eat my words.
Last edited: