X
xrc
Guest
I’ll get around to it when it quiets down around here!
In Christ Alone,
**Mike:yup: **
- Status
In Christ Alone,
**Mike:yup: **
X
xrc
Guest
Please read Ozzie’s post!
Scripture interprets Scripture. Here’s an example: Look at Rev. 12:1 and compare it to Gen. 37:9 !
**You still haven’t answered my question: **
**If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say? It seems that Catholics are having a hard time with this one!
**In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
**Thanks for the help! :tiphat: **
In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
Booklover said:**I actually agree with you on this one! The road to Rome is very busy indeed…and so is the road to hell!**
In Christ Alone,
Mike
HEY MIKE, SO NOW YOU’VE BECOME OUR JUDGE AND JURY AND ARE CONDEMNING US TO HELL???
Matthew 7: 13-14 states, " Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."**If you choose to apply this passage to my comment, that’s your choice. I was only making an observation. I can not, nor will not, condemn anyone. Only God can judge your heart. I’m just a poor sinner who needs a Savior, and let me give you a clue, it isn’t Mary, the Church, the Mass or my works!
****If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say?
**In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
Please don’t flatter yourself, my comment wasn’t directed toward you!
X
xrc
Guest
**It appears that all of you Catholics believe (as I once did) that Jesus is physically changed into wafers of bread and cups of wine at the consecration of the Mass, this however is due to your misinterpretation of John chapter 6. **
In John 6, we find the Jews continue to resist Jesus’ claims of being divine. They challenge him to prove who he is by bringing down manna from heaven as Moses had done. Jesus uses their reference to the manna, the food which was essential for their survival and life in the desert and applies it figuratively to himself. He answers, “I am the bread of life.” Jesus uses eating in exchange to represent believing. This is consistent all the way through his illustration.
The day before he fed 5,000 and proclaims that he can give “food which endures to eternal life.”
V:26 Describes those that came after Jesus because their stomachs were filled. Jesus tells them not to labor for the food that perishes but for the food that endures to everlasting life… This resumes a dispute with the Jewish authorities about who Jesus is. They were already plotting to kill him, because he was “making Himself equal with God.”
V.28-29 “What must we do to do the works of God?” Jesus answers: “This is the work of God. That you believe in Him whom He sent.” They insist on a sign (today Catholics ask for the same thing except there is no proof for theirs, they must take it by blind faith)
V.32-33 The bread Moses gave was not the true bread, you don’t eat it.” The bread of God is He Who comes down from Heaven, and gives life to the World.” Did Jesus body come from heaven, or did God who is spirit come?
V.35 “ I am that bread. He who believes in Me will never hunger or thirst.” notice He does not say “He who eats…” will not hunger or thirst. He is speaking to those who reject him as the source of eternal life. He uses bread as an analogy to illustrate mankind’s need to believe in him. Jesus never relates this to wine. The eating of Christ, who is “the living bread which came down from heaven” (V:51), is no more a physical act than the eating of “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. It was offering spiritual truth to the people that did not understand.
V.41-42 The Jews wonder at His statement about coming down from Heaven. Thinking he is speaking of his body.
V.47 “He who believes in Me has everlasting life.” Here Jesus points to himself as the source, by believing not eating.
V.49 “the fathers ate the bread in the wilderness and they all died,” in V.50 he then points to himself as the solution for death.
V.51 “I am the living bread which came from heaven.” He is pointing to himself as the one who is God that has eternal life to give. Jesus then predicts, “The bread also which I shall give for the life of the world is My flesh.” The Catholic Church interprets this as a promise of the Eucharist. Yet the context has nothing to do with the Last Supper or physical bread. He is going to give His flesh for the life of the world. WHEN? At the cross. HOW MANY TIMES? Once. Not over and over on the altars.
Earlier, Jesus had identified himself as the bread of life. Now he says he will give the bread, that is himself, his own flesh, for the life of the world. Many other times near the end of his life he made similar predictions.
V.52-53 unless you are to eat His flesh and drink His blood you have no life in you.” the Jews begin to argue with one another, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” Because of their antagonism for Jesus ,they not only rejected his teaching but lacked discernment to understand when he was using an illustration.
This is not to be mistaken for flesh of a wafer coming from a bakery of mans hands nor grapes squeezed by men. It is his flesh and blood. “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.” Rather than teach the necessity of receiving Holy Communion, it speaks of the necessity of faith in Christ. If you do not trust in his payment for sin on the cross, you will not have eternal life in yourself.
In John 6, we find the Jews continue to resist Jesus’ claims of being divine. They challenge him to prove who he is by bringing down manna from heaven as Moses had done. Jesus uses their reference to the manna, the food which was essential for their survival and life in the desert and applies it figuratively to himself. He answers, “I am the bread of life.” Jesus uses eating in exchange to represent believing. This is consistent all the way through his illustration.
The day before he fed 5,000 and proclaims that he can give “food which endures to eternal life.”
V:26 Describes those that came after Jesus because their stomachs were filled. Jesus tells them not to labor for the food that perishes but for the food that endures to everlasting life… This resumes a dispute with the Jewish authorities about who Jesus is. They were already plotting to kill him, because he was “making Himself equal with God.”
V.28-29 “What must we do to do the works of God?” Jesus answers: “This is the work of God. That you believe in Him whom He sent.” They insist on a sign (today Catholics ask for the same thing except there is no proof for theirs, they must take it by blind faith)
V.32-33 The bread Moses gave was not the true bread, you don’t eat it.” The bread of God is He Who comes down from Heaven, and gives life to the World.” Did Jesus body come from heaven, or did God who is spirit come?
V.35 “ I am that bread. He who believes in Me will never hunger or thirst.” notice He does not say “He who eats…” will not hunger or thirst. He is speaking to those who reject him as the source of eternal life. He uses bread as an analogy to illustrate mankind’s need to believe in him. Jesus never relates this to wine. The eating of Christ, who is “the living bread which came down from heaven” (V:51), is no more a physical act than the eating of “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. It was offering spiritual truth to the people that did not understand.
V.41-42 The Jews wonder at His statement about coming down from Heaven. Thinking he is speaking of his body.
V.47 “He who believes in Me has everlasting life.” Here Jesus points to himself as the source, by believing not eating.
V.49 “the fathers ate the bread in the wilderness and they all died,” in V.50 he then points to himself as the solution for death.
V.51 “I am the living bread which came from heaven.” He is pointing to himself as the one who is God that has eternal life to give. Jesus then predicts, “The bread also which I shall give for the life of the world is My flesh.” The Catholic Church interprets this as a promise of the Eucharist. Yet the context has nothing to do with the Last Supper or physical bread. He is going to give His flesh for the life of the world. WHEN? At the cross. HOW MANY TIMES? Once. Not over and over on the altars.
Earlier, Jesus had identified himself as the bread of life. Now he says he will give the bread, that is himself, his own flesh, for the life of the world. Many other times near the end of his life he made similar predictions.
V.52-53 unless you are to eat His flesh and drink His blood you have no life in you.” the Jews begin to argue with one another, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” Because of their antagonism for Jesus ,they not only rejected his teaching but lacked discernment to understand when he was using an illustration.
This is not to be mistaken for flesh of a wafer coming from a bakery of mans hands nor grapes squeezed by men. It is his flesh and blood. “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.” Rather than teach the necessity of receiving Holy Communion, it speaks of the necessity of faith in Christ. If you do not trust in his payment for sin on the cross, you will not have eternal life in yourself.
X
xrc
Guest
V.54 he says, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” “ Moments earlier he had said, “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life; and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
Notice that the results are identical in both verses: eternal life and resurrection. But although in the one we must eat and drink, in the other we behold and must believe. The results are identically the same, as are the actions to obtain them are also: eating is a substitute for believing. His figurative statements are easily understood when read in the context of the other verses in this teaching.
**V.55, he states, “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.” To make this as a teaching that Christ is bodily present in the host is to change the focus interpreting it out of context . Here again, Jesus is emphasizing that he is the source of real spiritual life and nourishment. **
V.58”…Not as your fathers ate manna and died…” (not physical food but spiritual). Jesus had talked about the manna that fell in the wilderness which fed them physically and they died, but that he was the true bread who came from heaven that if they ate would never die. He was not saying that he would become a communion wafer later on and if this bread was to be taken they would never die. He is explaining to partake of his sacrifice in a spiritual sense that would save the soul from separation, which had occurred 2,000 years ago.
V.63 “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing. The words I speak are Spirit, it is they that are life.” Nothing could be clearer it is not literal but figurative, he used a natural example to illustrate a spiritual truth. We have seen that “to eat” is “to believe,” and that the giving of his flesh refers to his death on the cross. And so, “to eat his flesh” or “to drink his blood” would be to trust in the sacrifice of his life. It is to rely upon his death on the cross as the payment for our sins. This interpretation fits the context of the whole teaching. By the sacrifice of his life, Jesus became the Savior of the world, he is the source of eternal life not by the Eucharist. The Savior is a person, salvation is not a thing that was created. This is the intent of the discourse.
The idea of a wafer that becomes Jesus each time it is baked is refuted by none other than Jesus himself. If we read further in V.57- 58 he states the bread is himself his body not a wafer baked in a bakery that represents him. We must distinguish the difference between the substance (who he was ) and the symbol taken afterwards (the communion that was the Passover).
Kept in the context of Passover service, we know that throughout the ceremony there is a consistent symbolism used to mean, “This represents that.” The salt water represents the salty tears and the Red Sea. The Charoseth represents the brick mortar. The parsley represents Israel in the springtime of her nationhood. The horseradish represents the bitterness of slavery, etc. The middle matzah of the three (unleavened bread) represents His body and the third cup in the service represents His blood as it is the cup of redemption. In the context of the Passover, that is all that was intended, the word we find throughout the Passover observance is “remember.” This is a reference to the Passover that they were celebrating for 1500 years, they remembered this meal as the deliverance from the bondage the slavery of Egypt now Jesus applies this himself in their deliverance from the bondage of sin. Paul later states about the communion 1 Cor.11:24 “and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” in the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” We remember it by what he has done (his death) and we remember by looking forward to his promise of his return.
**In Christ Alone,
**
Mike
**PS. Happy New Year everyone! **
Notice that the results are identical in both verses: eternal life and resurrection. But although in the one we must eat and drink, in the other we behold and must believe. The results are identically the same, as are the actions to obtain them are also: eating is a substitute for believing. His figurative statements are easily understood when read in the context of the other verses in this teaching.
**V.55, he states, “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.” To make this as a teaching that Christ is bodily present in the host is to change the focus interpreting it out of context . Here again, Jesus is emphasizing that he is the source of real spiritual life and nourishment. **
V.58”…Not as your fathers ate manna and died…” (not physical food but spiritual). Jesus had talked about the manna that fell in the wilderness which fed them physically and they died, but that he was the true bread who came from heaven that if they ate would never die. He was not saying that he would become a communion wafer later on and if this bread was to be taken they would never die. He is explaining to partake of his sacrifice in a spiritual sense that would save the soul from separation, which had occurred 2,000 years ago.
V.63 “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing. The words I speak are Spirit, it is they that are life.” Nothing could be clearer it is not literal but figurative, he used a natural example to illustrate a spiritual truth. We have seen that “to eat” is “to believe,” and that the giving of his flesh refers to his death on the cross. And so, “to eat his flesh” or “to drink his blood” would be to trust in the sacrifice of his life. It is to rely upon his death on the cross as the payment for our sins. This interpretation fits the context of the whole teaching. By the sacrifice of his life, Jesus became the Savior of the world, he is the source of eternal life not by the Eucharist. The Savior is a person, salvation is not a thing that was created. This is the intent of the discourse.
The idea of a wafer that becomes Jesus each time it is baked is refuted by none other than Jesus himself. If we read further in V.57- 58 he states the bread is himself his body not a wafer baked in a bakery that represents him. We must distinguish the difference between the substance (who he was ) and the symbol taken afterwards (the communion that was the Passover).
Kept in the context of Passover service, we know that throughout the ceremony there is a consistent symbolism used to mean, “This represents that.” The salt water represents the salty tears and the Red Sea. The Charoseth represents the brick mortar. The parsley represents Israel in the springtime of her nationhood. The horseradish represents the bitterness of slavery, etc. The middle matzah of the three (unleavened bread) represents His body and the third cup in the service represents His blood as it is the cup of redemption. In the context of the Passover, that is all that was intended, the word we find throughout the Passover observance is “remember.” This is a reference to the Passover that they were celebrating for 1500 years, they remembered this meal as the deliverance from the bondage the slavery of Egypt now Jesus applies this himself in their deliverance from the bondage of sin. Paul later states about the communion 1 Cor.11:24 “and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” in the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” We remember it by what he has done (his death) and we remember by looking forward to his promise of his return.
**In Christ Alone,
**Mike
**PS. Happy New Year everyone!
**
B
Booklover
Guest
**It’s your “bible only” theory that is unbiblical! Nobody in the early church taught that! It’s the invention of the so-called reformers and certainly did not come from our Lord Jesus Christ! ****me. But this is typical of someone who cannot defend the unbiblical teachings of the Catholic Church. **
Just where did this come from? Did you consult with the dead to obtain this information? The Roman Catholic Church is wrong because it’s teachings are in opposition to the Word of God!
In Christ Alone,
**Mike**
You know nothing about the Catholic faith! Everything you say is a distortion or misconception. Every time somebody tries to EXPLAIN what the Church really teaches, you come back with the same old attacks!
:banghead:
X
xrc
Guest
Booklover said:
The Lord Jesus Christ, in His great high priestly prayer, declared clearly the truth of God’s Word. He said, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." This was consistent with the declarations right through the Old Testament in which the Holy Spirit continually proclaims that the revelation from God is truth, as for example Psalm 119:142, “thy law is truth.” The Lord Himself therefore identified truth with the written Word. There is no source other than to Scripture alone to which such a statement applies. That source alone, the Holy Scripture, is the believer’s standard of truth.
In the New Testament, it is the written word of God and that alone to which the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles refer as the final authority. In the temptation, the Lord Jesus three times resisted Satan, saying, “It is written” as for example, in Matthew 4:4, “he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” In stating “It is written,” the Lord used the exact same phrase that is used in the Holy Bible forty six times. The persistence of the repeated phrase underlines its importance. The Lord’s total acceptance of the authority of the Old Testament is evident in His words found in Matthew 5:17-18, “Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfil. For verily, I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.”
Furthermore, in refuting the errors of the Sadducees, the Scripture records the Lord saying, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29). Christ Jesus continually castigated and rebuked the Pharisees because they made their tradition on a par with the Word of God. He condemned them because they were attempting to corrupt the very basis of truth by equating their traditions to the Word of God. So He declared to them in Mark 7:13 “[You are] making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such things do ye.” Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the ultimate authority and it alone is the final judge of Tradition. The Word of the Lord says as a commandment in Proverbs 30:5,6 “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” God commands that we are not to add to His Word: this command shows emphatically that it is God’s Word alone that is pure and uncontaminated. Aligned with Proverbs, the Lord’s strong, clear declaration in Isaiah 8:20 is: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” The truth is this: since God’s written word alone is inspired, it and it alone is the sole rule of faith. It cannot be otherwise.
It is the teachings of the "Roman" Catholic Church that are unbiblical. You cannot see it because you are blinded by your indoctrination! :yup:
I pray that the Holy Spirit will unveil your eyes.
In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
Booklover said:
How about answering this question:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say? It seems that Catholics are having a hard time with this one!
In Christ Alone,
**Mike
**
E
embertx
Guest
If you were to die and were standing before God and he asked you, “why should I let you in my heaven” what would you say? “I’m really waiting for someone to answer this one!” It seems catholics are having a hard time with this one.
What I would say to God is between me and God and is nobody’s business. Perhaps other people have a hard time with this. To me is actually simple.
God bless
What I would say to God is between me and God and is nobody’s business. Perhaps other people have a hard time with this. To me is actually simple.
God bless
B
Booklover
Guest
xrc said:
Mike, this is a short statement of what I believe:
ACT OF FAITH
O my God, I firmly believe that you are one God in three divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that your divine Son became man, died for our sins, and he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the holy Catholic Church teaches, because you have revealed them, Who can neither deceive or be deceived.
B
Booklover
Guest
xrc said:How about answering this question:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say? It seems that Catholics are having a hard time with this one!
In Christ Alone,
**Mike
If I am in a state of grace I will go to Heaven.
Now, please answer me, what would you say?
MIKE, HAVE A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR!
X
xrc
Guest
Your answer is nothing more than a cop-out. Can’t you give a real response?
Maybe another question would be helpful:
How do you intend to get into heaven?
Happy New Year!
In Christ Alone,
Mike
O
Ozzie
Guest
xrc said:How about answering this question:
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say? It seems that Catholics are having a hard time with this one!
In Christ Alone,
**Mike
That they have a hard time with this question is most tragic, indeed, since the whole beauty of living this side of the cross is the certainty provided by the written Word of God that all who truly believe in Jesus Christ HAVE eternal life. It’s the very core of the Gospel message (Jn. 3:14-18; 20:31).
1JON 5:9 “If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for the witness of God is this, that He has borne witness concerning His Son.”
1JON 5:10 “The one who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the witness that God has borne concerning His Son.”
1JON 5:11 “And the witness is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.”
1JON 5:12 “He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.”
1JO 5:13 “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.”
The Roman Episcopate through its religious system keeps them in the dark. How sorrowful, how tragic!
X
xrc
Guest
Booklover said:If I am in a state of grace I will go to Heaven.
Now, please answer me, what would you say?
MIKE, HAVE A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR!
**You still haven’t answered the question: **
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? You know, something like "I am a really good person."
**Mike, this is a short statement of what I believe:
ACT OF FAITH**
O my God, I firmly believe that you are one God in three divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that your divine Son became man, died for our sins, and he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the holy Catholic Church teaches, because you have revealed them, Who can neither deceive or be deceived.
**I agree, except for the part I emphasized. The Catholic Church has added man made traditions to the word of God thus nullifying it. **
Happy New Year!
In Christ Alone,
Mike
T
terrcatholic
Guest
Well I am not going to be drawn into any trap about who goes to heaven and Hell, as that is sinful and judgemental, but it is true that the Protestants feel that they do not have to do any Pennance or expiate any of their sins while on earth and we as Catholics truly believe we do. Protestants beliveve that they can reach heaven by scripture alone, do not believe in the sacrements which give us life, and of course we all could go on and on. Martin Luther, John Calvin and the rest who split away from the church as they were devout Catholics from what I read and saw abuses going on, so what was their answer. Well, to throw away everything, and make up their own church as to how they saw fit. Luther left and married a nun and formed the Lutheran church and threw out many principals of Catholicism, a church which was set up by the Apostles (remember.You are Peter the rock and it is on you I shall build by church etc etc) and from that the Catholic Church took off. Can you imagine if Luther went to Rome and saw the Pope with a wife, would he not have posted that as one of his many demands that he hammered up on that church door. So what does he do, he goes ahead and does something worse, throws out celibasy.
There were some good reasons in the early 1500’s for Luther to be upset, but he did not go and form a church which was traditional in nature upholding the sacrements and church dogma which, I must credit some of the Traditional groups have done, and dont know why some consider these groups as heretics or schismatic, because all they are really doing is worshipping as the Church has always done, and not invented a new religion.
What Luther dod was essentially threw out all he did not like (which is so contradictory if you had ever done any readings on him as he was a devout devout catholic up till that point) and out of I think madness made his own church, not one instituted by God. I know selling of indulgences by the Pope was horrible, but to leave the church over that and then form all of these offshoots? But heaven and Hell, no I dont go there.
There were some good reasons in the early 1500’s for Luther to be upset, but he did not go and form a church which was traditional in nature upholding the sacrements and church dogma which, I must credit some of the Traditional groups have done, and dont know why some consider these groups as heretics or schismatic, because all they are really doing is worshipping as the Church has always done, and not invented a new religion.
What Luther dod was essentially threw out all he did not like (which is so contradictory if you had ever done any readings on him as he was a devout devout catholic up till that point) and out of I think madness made his own church, not one instituted by God. I know selling of indulgences by the Pope was horrible, but to leave the church over that and then form all of these offshoots? But heaven and Hell, no I dont go there.
X
xrc
Guest
AMEN MY BROTHER!
X
xrc
Guest
There is no intimation in the Scriptures that the words of our Saviour addressed to Simon Peter made him ruler and head of the church. In the Greek there is a play upon his name -“Thou art Petros (a stone) and upon this petra (a stratum of stone) I will build my church,” I Peter 2:5 says, “Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house.” I Corinthians 3:11 says, "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."
The meaning is self-evident. The foundation, ‘the petra,’ upon which Christ will build His church is His deity, which Simon Peter has just confessed upon a revelation from the Father. The stones out of which Christ will erect His church are believing disciples, one of whom is Peter himself.
The keys of the kingdom here given to Peter as a representative disciple, with the authority of binding and loosing, are given to all the disciples in Matthew 18:18 and in John 20:23.
Are you afraid to answer a simple question?
If you were to die and were standing before God and He asked you, “Why should I let you into My heaven” what would you say?
Happy New Year!
In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
Lets look at 1Timothy 4:1-3 - “The Spirit clearly says that in later times, some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come from hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth”. The last I knew priests and nuns were forbidden to marry and during Lent Catholics are ordered to abstain from eating meat. Therefore, on these issues alone, The Catholic Church is in conflict with the Scriptures.
In Christ Alone,
Mike
- Status