Paul,talking about people that never hear the gospel not muslim.
Muslim that hear about Jesus not worship Christian God.
Christian God is Jesus so not worship Jesus mean not worship Christian god
Is Catholicism the Oldest Christian Faith?
- Thread starter Searcher92
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Paul,talking about people that never hear the gospel not muslim.
Muslim that hear about Jesus not worship Christian God.
Christian God is Jesus so not worship Jesus mean not worship Christian god
Our common ground is the same between Muslims and Jews. They both reject Jesus as God but not as messiah. Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Jesus and that Jesus will return again to judge the world. The Jewish people seem further away from Jesus than the Muslims.
Unbelief, no faith coming from scripture alone is unbelief. No variables. They like Catholics reject the Father and the Son holding on the a law of the fathers.
It is impossible to have one without the other. Earthly fathers replace our one father in heaven not seen.
One is our Holy Father not a legion. The commandment is to call no man father our unseen teacher on earth.
1 John 2:22Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
The real oath is not secret. The one that you quoted unfortunately is a well known fabrication. Here is the text and citation of the real oath:
[527] 3. 1 I, N., make profession, and I promise to Almighty God, in the presence of his Virgin Mother, the whole heavenly court, and all those here present, 2 and to you, Reverend Father N., superior general of the Society of Jesus and the one holding the place of God, and to your successors (or, to you, Reverend Father N., representing the superior general of the Society of Jesus and his successors and holding the place of God), 3 perpetual poverty, chastity, and obedience; and, in conformity with it, special care for the instruction of children according to the manner of living contained in the apostolic letters of the Society of Jesus and in its Constitutions. 4 I further promise a special obedience to the sovereign pontiff in regard to the missions [C], according to the same apostolic letters and the Constitutions. 5 Rome, or elsewhere, on such a day, month, or year, and in such a church.
-
- Padberg, John, ed. (1996), The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus and their Complementary Norms: A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts, St. Louis: The Institute of Jesuit Sources p. 205-206.
In the presence of his Virgin Mother, should raise a red flag . The same with the phrase. . Jesus and his successors and holding the place of God.
I don't think the church let the regular member know about the sucret oath. I post about what president Lincoln say, it is a clue that the real,oath is the one that I post. Google from former insider.
I never said I agreed with the oath or any of the Roman distinctives. I believe in telling the truth all the time. I happen to know the oath that was linked to earlier is a fabrication so I quoted the real oath above. It's not secret and it's not nearly as awful sounding as the fabricated one. If we want to reach RCC's and witness to them effectively we should avoid such hoaxes. Besides the whole breaking the 9th commandment and all. I have studied church history extensively so when something like this comes up its easily debunked.
There is no secret oath. That's it. There's no secret doctrine, there's no conspiracy to rule the world. there's no boogey man in your closet or under your bed. Having read a goodly amount of Lincoln I doubt you will find anything that was actually said or written by Lincoln. But you are free to post it here. Please link to the source material or give a proper citation so we can verify it ourselves.
Yeah, that's not a reliable source. The source of the text can be found here:
https://tinyurl.com/y32f5gkb
The relevant passage begins on pg 692.
Fr. Chiniquy, or whatever he was going by in his later years is a well known fraud. He had gotten himself excommunicated from the Roman church but still needed to make a buck. Which he did by publishing this drivel. The recounting of his conversation with Lincoln is so far from the character we know of Lincoln that not one, even one Lincoln scholar thinks his recounting of a conversation is truthful. Chiniquy's book along with Alexander Hislop's works are the absolute worst in apologetics works ever produced. They are full of straight up falsehoods and lies and should be avoided. cf the work of Joseph George:
George, Joseph. “The Lincoln Writings of Charles P. T. Chiniquy,” Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, vol. 69, no. 1, 1976, pp. 17–25. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40191689.
From the article you posted. Excommunicated from the Roman church?
Today we have the same one source of faith (Sola scriptura). With it the measure of Christ's faith we can measure history and those who had no faith coming from all things written in the law and the prophets. The one perfect witness. . .revealing God has spoken .
The legion of fathers are not a authority as it is written . Its Satan casting out Satan for the increase of a false government. A law of a legion of fathers that lord it over the pew sitters. . A false zeal for knowing God. The Pagan foundation "out of sight out of mind" .No faith that comes alone as all things written in the law of the prophets (sola scriptura).
When a person sees the word Pope as Holy Father, Holy See plus many more .it described as a daysman in the Bible. A red flag should go up.
Murdering the misperceived competition "Christians" is not the power of the gospel .
Acts 22 exposes the law of the father called Daysman.
Acts 22:3- 5 I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.
Paul became # 1 on most wanted dead or alive being part of another sect.
They tried to prove sola scriptura was a heresy and their law of the fathers ,oral traditions of "I heard it through the grape vine" was the true source of faith they walked a way in belief (no faith) just as the disciples in John 6 . Not mixing faith the unseen will of God in what was see or heard.
The gospel (all things written in the law and the prophets) turned it right side up. Inspired from heaven, falling like rain on the hearts of each born again believer. Not earthly inspired of the devil as mere traditions of men .
The Catholic law of their fathers requires the non venerable pew sitters according to their book of the law (CCC) to call those oral tradition . "Sacred Traditions" as if they were of Devine origin. Law #80 in their book of law (CCC)
But sacred to who is the question.?
Acts 24:13-14 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
What we believe is determined by how we hear Him who has no form. Things eternal of God or those of men the temporal . No man can serve two teaching masters .
Worshiping the fathers (the Legion) as if they seen was our one Holy Father in heaven not seen . It simply repeats the fall in the garden . You shall surely not die look at my beauty and live. Why worship a unseen God.???. . And the glory of God departed.
Again why glory in the corrupted flesh of mankind?
Today we have the same one source of faith (Sola scriptura). With it the measure of Christ's faith we can measure history and those who had no faith coming from all things written in the law and the prophets. The one perfect witness. . .revealing God has spoken .
The legion of fathers are not a authority as it is written . Its Satan casting out Satan for the increase of a false government. A law of a legion of fathers that lord it over the pew sitters. . A false zeal for knowing God. The Pagan foundation "out of sight out of mind" .No faith that comes alone as all things written in the law of the prophets (sola scriptura).
When a person sees the word Pope as Holy Father, Holy See plus many more .it described as a daysman in the Bible. A red flag should go up.
Murdering the misperceived competition "Christians" is not the power of the gospel .
Acts 22 exposes the law of the father called Daysman.
Acts 22:3- 5 I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.
Paul became # 1 on most wanted dead or alive being part of another sect.
They tried to prove sola scriptura was a heresy and their law of the fathers ,oral traditions of "I heard it through the grape vine" was the true source of faith they walked a way in belief (no faith) just as the disciples in John 6 . Not mixing faith the unseen will of God in what was see or heard.
The gospel (all things written in the law and the prophets) turned it right side up. Inspired from heaven, falling like rain on the hearts of each born again believer. Not earthly inspired of the devil as mere traditions of men .
The Catholic law of their fathers requires the non venerable pew sitters according to their book of the law (CCC) to call those oral tradition . "Sacred Traditions" as if they were of Devine origin. Law #80 in their book of law (CCC)
But sacred to who is the question.?
Acts 24:13-14 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
What we believe is determined by how we hear Him who has no form. Things eternal of God or those of men the temporal . No man can serve two teaching masters .
Worshiping the fathers (the Legion) as if they seen was our one Holy Father in heaven not seen . It simply repeats the fall in the garden . You shall surely not die look at my beauty and live. Why worship a unseen God.???. . And the glory of God departed.
Again why glory in the corrupted flesh of mankind?
The Muslim people have a false God, one that has no attributes in common with the real God, and no way of salvation. The Jewish people worship the real God and believe in God's grace through blood. They believe in a Messiah, they just do not believe Christ is the Messiah. The real God blessed them and blinded them for our sakes, but the real God does not know the Muslims.
B
Blackpowderduelist
Guest
I think that it is the Roman version that strayed from what was know as the way.
For the first 300 years after Christ there was only one church, some called it the Way, and others simply called it the church. We read of these churches called by the town they were in, such as the Corinthian church. They made up the age of the apostles, as they were taught and led by the men Christ chose, the apostles. If they had a problem with differences in understanding or did not understand something they took it to the church closest to the teaching of the original apostles.
Constantine changed all this. Problems were solved by a council, and the reasoning of men solved the problem instead of going to the authority that the church felt was closest to the apostles. The Catholic church evolved from the rule of Constantine.
The churches of the first 300 years were very careful that they neither added to or changed doctrines of the church. They carefully saw that there were no changes. Constantine changed this at the council of Nausea, giving men authority to add to the church doctrine, so even language was used that was not from scripture. That was never so in the first churches.
Man keeps adding to church doctrine little by little, so by the age of the reformation the church was almost spiritually dead. A major symptom of this was the sale of indulgences. Luther changed this to a certain degree. For the next several hundred years different men tried to take the church back to its beginning, like the Anabaptist and John Westley.
Constantine changed all this. Problems were solved by a council, and the reasoning of men solved the problem instead of going to the authority that the church felt was closest to the apostles. The Catholic church evolved from the rule of Constantine.
The churches of the first 300 years were very careful that they neither added to or changed doctrines of the church. They carefully saw that there were no changes. Constantine changed this at the council of Nausea, giving men authority to add to the church doctrine, so even language was used that was not from scripture. That was never so in the first churches.
Man keeps adding to church doctrine little by little, so by the age of the reformation the church was almost spiritually dead. A major symptom of this was the sale of indulgences. Luther changed this to a certain degree. For the next several hundred years different men tried to take the church back to its beginning, like the Anabaptist and John Westley.
Do you know the difference between a deeper understanding of doctrine and a new doctrine?
It's funny how many paint Constantine like some kind of archvillain, and it's rather surprising to see someone speaking poorly of Nicea when all it really did was state that denying Jesus' deity was heresy. Do you deny Jesus' deity?
Look we have to get a few things strait before we can even discuss these matters. I see you obviously came with an agenda, and man the ranks have already fallen in to devour you. Before it gets too deep and you see us all as enemies, we have to establish who has the authority in your religion to tell to what His word means. You make all these assertions and accusations but first and foremost who is the authority you appeal to? Where do I go for truth? I am asking this sincerely with the upmost respect truly hoping for a meaningful dialog. Who is the authority in your view?