Split! MyFavoriteMartin's "One True Church" Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter myfavoritmartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh almost forgot, revelation has to go as a false testimony of Christ. In it he promises the 12 seats to the apostles and as you have stated they apostasized. Therefore it must be spurious, Paul would make 13 apostles. Sinse the Apocalypse was written by John, an apostate, it is spurious.

addendum, it also means we have to edit the prayer of Jesus in Johns Gospel as it must have been added by the apostate later. You know the part when Christ prays for the apostles that none of them fall away. Christs promises all come true, therefore it must have been added later as it is untrue.

And we all know that What Christ says always comes true.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
Act 19:11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
Click to expand...
Act 19:12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.
Click to expand...
Also forgot to add (time ran out for edit) this goes against the first commandment, worship of something other than God. Idolatry. The other Protestant churches would never stand for idolatry, it’s what they accuse catholics of, but remember they call it veneration, however that would never pass for the true church. It’s still worship of something other than God.

While we are at it we may want to drop protestant as a identifier. We don’t want people coming up and saying:

"What faith are you?
“Protestant”
“Oh your not Christian?”

Besides we couldn’t uphold it from scripture, we would have to copy the false catholics and say well tradition. Which we know is unbiblical.

Eagerly awaiting your responses as we are off to a good start editing and removing all that spurious stuff from scripture.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
The more I think about it the clearer it becomes. You are absolutely correct. Paul did have primacy. The other apostles did apostasize. Therefore the only Gospel that is tennable is Luke. The others were written by the apostates or they followers. and are unreliable: for example. Though art Peter; the stuff about works in chapter 25; The malarky about the church, when it should read church(es), How it’s Lords prayer differs from that of Lukes. Just to name a few.

Luke being the only follower of Paul makes his the only reliable gospel.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
valient Lucy:
The Catholic Church does not call itself the Roman Catholic Church. Other Christians use the term the Roman Catholic Church. Actually, the church of Rome refers to the diocese of Rome.
Click to expand...
AND ALL of its followers. 1.1 billion of us, worldwide.
 
40.png
Nicene:
The more I think about it the clearer it becomes. You are absolutely correct. Paul did have primacy. The other apostles did apostasize. Therefore the only Gospel that is tennable is Luke. The others were written by the apostates or they followers. and are unreliable: for example. Though art Peter; the stuff about works in chapter 25; The malarky about the church, when it should read church(es), How it’s Lords prayer differs from that of Lukes. Just to name a few.

Luke being the only follower of Paul makes his the only reliable gospel.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Click to expand...
Gosh, would’ve saved us a lot of paper. The Bible could become a leaflet!
 
Is MyFavoriteMartin really worth the time and energy ? Seems to be a case of :banghead: and :yawn:
 
First of 9:
Is MyFavoriteMartin really worth the time and energy ? Seems to be a case of :banghead: and :yawn:
Click to expand...
Maybe not, but there are 488 viewings of this thread, and still counting. That’s what makes Nicene’s and others efforts worth it. Good work, people!

Notworthy
 
First of 9:
Is MyFavoriteMartin really worth the time and energy ? Seems to be a case of :banghead: and :yawn:
Click to expand...
What-so-ever you do, to the least of my brothers.

THAT you do unto me.

In Christ.

Andre.
 
Martin,

I’m still waiting for a yes/no response to my three questions (and the fourth, if you want - and I don’t blame you for dropping this one like a hot potato - which is, “Are you claiming to believe what the Waldenses believe and/or that they are the ‘true Christians’?”). :whistle:

Patiently,
RyanL
 
The posts here that discuss pitting Peter against Paul are quite eye-opening too…

Authority against Paul and his difficult writings.

No wonder protestants always quote Paul first… anybody second, and usually the Lord last.

They love their choice, because with sola scriptura and self interpretation they can feed confusion among themselves. This gives them lots of denominations and the ability to say
“they are all wrong”…
which is always true… they are all wrong.
 
40.png
MrS:
The posts here that discuss pitting Peter against Paul are quite eye-opening too…

Authority against Paul and his difficult writings.

No wonder protestants always quote Paul first… anybody second, and usually the Lord last.

They love their choice, because with sola scriptura and self interpretation they can feed confusion among themselves. This gives them lots of denominations and the ability to say
“they are all wrong”…
which is always true… they are all wrong.
Click to expand...
If you look back to early threads I am making no claim that paul was the head of the early church rather, based on scripture, the same argument could be made for paul or peter, therefore in a sense negated the Catholic stand behind Peter or at least giving it less credibility.
 
40.png
RyanL:
Martin,

I’m still waiting for a yes/no response to my three questions (and the fourth, if you want - and I don’t blame you for dropping this one like a hot potato - which is, “Are you claiming to believe what the Waldenses believe and/or that they are the ‘true Christians’?”). :whistle:

Patiently,
RyanL
Click to expand...
Ryan this isn’t a court of law, I could probably think of a 1/2 dozen doctrinal questions that would give the appearance of a yes or no yet you wouldn’t be able to answer them that way.

I answered all three of your questions quite positively.
 
Ryan I know there was a Catholic church prior to the 3rd century,
catholic =universal. in the first chapter of romans and 36 other places in the NT paul calls them Christ’s churches, so once again I say to you the term catholic church means the universal church of believers.
 
40.png
MrS:
T

No wonder protestants **always **quote Paul first… anybody second, and usually the Lord last.

“they are all wrong”…
which is always true… they are all wrong.
Click to expand...
S, always really takes away credibility in your statement, and S quoting apostles is really quoting the holy spirit,isn’t it. The reason paul get’s quoted more is because he wrote more scriptures, and as far as quoting the Lord last this is so far from true, please don’t quote with blanket statements such as these.
 
40.png
myfavoritmartin:
in the NT paul calls them Christ’s churches
Click to expand...
Which is why we have Latin Catholics, Ruthenian Catholics, Maronite Catholics, Melkite Catholics, Ukranian Catholics, Chaldean Catholics, etc, etc, etc----The universal Church! 😉
 
40.png
myfavoritmartin:
S, always really takes away credibility in your statement, and S quoting apostles is really quoting the holy spirit,isn’t it. The reason paul get’s quoted more is because he wrote more scriptures, and as far as quoting the Lord last this is so far from true, please don’t quote with blanket statements such as these.
Click to expand...
I will restate it thus:

IMHO, the more avid the “bible only” a christian purports to be… the less likely he is to quote Jesus, and the more like to say “…as Paul says in…”

IMHO, the more spiritual and/or devotional a christian purports to be, the more likely he is to quote Jesus, and refer to Paul as St. Paul.

In words, Luke wrote the most, not Paul (actually the Holy Spirit is the author:D )
 
40.png
Mickey:
Which is why we have Latin Catholics, Ruthenian Catholics, Maronite Catholics, Melkite Catholics, Ukranian Catholics, Chaldean Catholics, etc, etc, etc----The universal Church! 😉
Click to expand...
In my bible, Jesus calls it church… only one… the one he built.

Perhaps St. Paul should have used today’s words, and called them dioceses.😉
 
40.png
MrS:
In my bible, Jesus calls it church… only one… the one he built.
Click to expand...
Yes. Many protestants, (and some Catholics), don’t realize that there are 23 other Churches (formerly called “rites”) besides the Latin Church. Many think that the “Roman” Catholic Church is the only Church. But we are all the “Catholic” Church. It is **one **Church united with the see of St Peter. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top