So, Jesus Christ lied about He needing to leave before the Spirit can appear.
Typical Catholic handling of Scripture. Use what supports your beliefs and ignore what shoots your beliefs down.
You’re not honest with Scripture.
What a shame.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
WHY DID CHRIST SEND HIS DISCIPLES OUT WITH THE GOOD NEWS?
- Thread starter jeremiah1five
- Start date
Typical Catholic handling of Scripture. Use what supports your beliefs and ignore what shoots your beliefs down.
You’re not honest with Scripture.
What a shame.
Nope the church is required to be catholic
All men are welcome on the new covenant not just ethniclly pure
Lk 2:1-11
Jn 3:16
Jn 1:29
All universal catholic
The Jews as a nation opposed Christ and killed Him
Thanks
No but that’s a public manifestation of the spirit
Wordsmith.
Manipulate words to suit your preference.
The Spirit rested on Christ. He didn’t give the Spirit to them in His breath.
If He did then you accept Fillioque.
The Spirit proceeds from the Son!
Good job!
God breathed life into adam
You misread my statement: I said surely we can all agree that Jesus, Paul, and the Twelve Apostle were Jewish Christians, not Protestants or ROMAN Catholics.
*I assume you are well aware that the word "catholic" predates the Roman Catholic Church. The word "catholic" is a Greek word that simply means "on the whole" or "universal." References to the "catholic church" in the second century are NOT references to the Roman Catholic Church (which didn’t exist yet), but simply mean the "universal church" collectively that was comprised of local churches. The term "catholic" was used in the second century to distinguish orthodox Christianity from Gnostic heresies. A local church was part of the "universal [catholic] church" if it could trace its history back to one of the founding apostles and taught orthodox doctrine.
Only one church Jn 10:16 all others are the tradition of men
Thanks
Did He breathe life into the apostles when they were already alive?
No. This breathing was symbolic of what was to come on Pentecost.
The Advent of the Holy Spirit.
And as Promised, Christ was ascended to the Father.
I agree. There is one universal "catholic" church. I disagree that that one universal "Catholic" church is the Roman Catholic Church. And so does the Eastern Orthodox, and the Protestant, and the....
These discussions always end up running into the same dead ends. The same disagreements that have been going on for almost two thousand years now. All Christians believe there is one, universal Church of Christ. But there is no unity on what that means.
It's the same thing with the *primacy of Peter.* Roman Catholics say the primacy of Peter is the "primacy of the bishop of Rome" over all other bishops. Eastern Orthodox believe in the *primacy of Peter* too, but they believe it means something different, "first among equals," and that the "See of Peter" is present in *every* local church, not just Rome.
This debate's been going on for almost two thousand years. I doubt we will settle things here.
Not 2000 years.
Catholicism did not exist until at least the 7th or 8th century.
The beginning of what's known as the Dark Ages.
Care to guess why?
I rounded up. I had a feeling someone would be picky on that. But if you notice my other posts clearly state that the Roman Catholic Church did not exist until later. I wouldn't say as late as the 7th or 8th century. But it certainly did not exist for the first several hundred years or so of the history of Christianity. Agreed.
Last edited:
The audience.
Matt 5 was Jesus' message from the mountain side to the people.
Matt 22 was parables aimed at and decrying the Pharisees.
Every Christian has the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Do you really think the Holy Ghost will allow His children to be fed from a swine's trough?
That is right.
If you want a religion-church founded on a man, that is up to you.
I prefer the original one, founded on the "rock" of Jesus being the Son of God.
"...and the apostles".
This ends your assumption that the church was founded on Peter.
Correct, as there was no catholic "church" to protest.
Agreed.
Plus, Thomas wasn't with the others.
When did he receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?
On Pentecost.
What the person does the Holy Spirit goes along also. Swine are the unsaved.
I’m talking about wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Arminianism is one example.
Christians are taught what sounds orthodox but isn’t.
There are a great deal of heresy in churches out there a baby Christian, even an older one can for a time be deceived.
False teachings that the Church replaced Israel or Peter is the Rock upon which the Church is built, or that there are no more apostles and prophets, or Oneness theology, or Adam was created holy, or that if you don’t speak in tongues you’re not saved, or that Jesus is coming before the tribulation, or that there’s a rapture. All these false teachings come from what seem true church plants but are not.
Just because there is a fellowship with a Christian name doesn't mean God planted that church.
Then there are splits in a fellowship like what happen to the Southern Baptists, or a split in the Reformed church. Every church not planted by God will be rooted up (have problems with dead theology or congregants. If an apostle ("apostolos = sent) or prophet is not involved in the founding of a church fellowship I question that founding.
Last edited:
I "want" Scripture to be accurately exegeted and to stop being misunderstood. How many times must I state that I agree with all of you that, YES, JESUS, IS THE ROCK?!!! Every time you or someone else says it I agree with you! Dare I try it again???
YES, JESUS IS THE ROCK, THE CORNERSTONE ON WHICH THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED. EVEN MORE THAN THAT. IT IS HIS CHURCH. IT IS CHRIST'S CHURCH (NOT Peter's or anyone else's).
Not sure how many times I must keep repeating myself, before someone understands that I AGREE!!!
Surely people understand the difference between JESUS =THE ROCK
uppercase vs Peter=rock lowercase. Surely people understand that the same words can be used to mean different things. When Jesus said in John "you are gods," he didn't mean we're actually gods and that He is not God. When the Bible calls Israel the "son of God" in the Old Testament it doesn't mean Israel is THE SON OF GOD instead of Christ. And when Jesus called Peter "rock" and said on this "rock I will build MY CHURCH" he wasn't saying Peter was THE ROCK OF AGES like Jesus (Jesus still said "MY CHURCH." He didn't say it was Peter's church). Israel was called the "son of God" but Jesus is THE SON OF GOD. Both statements are true.
Peter was called the "rock" on which Jesus would build HIS [CHRIST'S] Church. But Jesus is THE ROCK on which the Church is founded. Both statements are true. They mean different things. But both are stated in Scripture.