The UFO Deception Explosion of December 2023—Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, David Grusch, & Much More
(www.youtube.com)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (151)
sorted by:
Acts 2:38. No cathedrals, no infant baptisms, popes, nuns, monks. Just Christians.
The pope is and always will be a flawed man who pretends to be God. If he is so ordained then how in the world did Galileo get put on house arrest for saying our solar system is Heliocentric?
Where is your counterargument?
It gets really tiring posing a very specific argument and just receiving a "verse battle" in response, or whatever other manner of completely unrelated response.
Why should I respond to your argument when you categorically ignore mine?
Hey! I thought I did? My counter argument is that the true church and the catholic church are different because the church was established on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 but doesn't show any resemblance to the catholic church and at the helm of the catholic church is the Pope who is supposed to be God's voice on Earth and yet God would know where the sun is located in the solar system so the pope is pretending.
This guy named Don Blackwell talks about church history from a secular and spiritual standpoint pretty well at this website.
Www.whyaretheresomanychurches.com
Admittedly, I made two claims. My quite abrasive reply, apologies for that, was me kind not considering the first claim (RCC is the True Church and all Christians believed this for 1500 years), but instead only thinking of my second claim (doctrinal authority).
Now, the reason I focus in so much on the argument about doctrinal authority is because I think it's one of the better arguments for the Catholic Church. I see no other Church that can make a reasonable claim to be the authority on scripture, and I find the idea that everyone is their own authority lacking, since no one agrees hence there is no apparent authority. I also think the idea of apostolic succession is important, as the Bible was compiled long after the creation of God's Church. The teachings being passed down matter.
As for your argument, I suppose I'd first say that just because the cathedrals and the infant baptisms aren't in the Bible, doesn't mean they are bad. The big beautiful buildings are a testament to people's faith in God, which is evident in our godless culture where ugly architecture reigns supreme. That, nor the other things you mentioned, are by no means explicitly against the Bible. Every Church doctrine has Biblical support, whether you agree with the Church's interpretation of the verses or not.
Secondly, the Pope is not infallible at all times. He is infallible only under very specific criteria. It's not like if he declares that his favorite color is blue that we are forced to now believe that blue is the greatest color in all of Creation and that God's favorite color is blue. The dude just likes blue.
And it was never Church doctrine to say that heliocentrism was wrong. Just like it's not now Church doctrine to say that geocentrism is wrong. Doctrine is focused on theology, not science.
To be clear, Church doctrine is infallible, not everything an individual member says. That gets right back to authority. The Church, and Pope under certain conditions, hold authority. That doesn't mean that everything a priest says is true, nor does it mean everything the Pope says is true.
One more thing I'd say is that, since the Bible is not exhaustive, I find it in no way unreasonable to expect that the Church would evolve over the years. The view of the Church we get in the Bible is quite small at the time. There are no cathedrals because there was no one to build them, nor did they have the means. But if the Holy Spirit indeed guided Christ's Church in truth, then we'd expect things to evolve as time goes on. Not change or flip-flop, but progress as time progresses, the Church grows, and doctrines need to be made clear. I mean, if upon converting a large portion of a newly discovered country they all are wondering about some specific case that no one had considered before, it makes sense that the Church would need to lay down an authoritative doctrine regarding it.
There's a lot and I'll go with this one for the reply. I mentioned Cathedrals specifically because in Acts 2 they met in each other's houses but for no other reason than to show the roots of the foundation of the church was not this grand unveiling of physical things but was spiritual.
As for infant baptisms, this was something that came about later which I do believe is a contradiction against scripture as everyone in scripture who is baptized is cognizant. They have committed sin, they want to pledge their lives to God and receive forgiveness of their sins. Then they are baptized and receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. An infant does not have the capability nor the understanding or even the vocabulary to confess Jesus as the Son of God, repent of their sins, or sin to begin with. Then also the sprinkling of water is never authorized in scripture. Baptism is defined as immersion. Hence all of the bodies of water used in the scripture to baptize people. Never a cup or glass of water to pour it.
I know the catholic church believes all babies are born with sin and call it "original sin" I do not understand what scripture is used to say this is true. However if it were, would not Jesus have a hard time telling his disciples to "be like these little children or you will by no means enter the kingdom of Heaven."?
As for heliocentrism and the pope. It very much was wrong in the eyes of the pope to say that heliocentrism was right. And it was considered doctrinally wrong. To the extent of them banning books and arresting people with them to include Copernicus. Galileo used scripture to prove he was not wrong but the pope would not listen to him. This is why I say...this should flag the pope as a fraud. Please see below. https://web.archive.org/web/20070930013053/http://astro.wcupa.edu/mgagne/ess362/resources/finocchiaro.html#conreport
I have no doubt in my mind that Jesus set up his church. I have no doubt that it started on the day of Pentecost. But where I disagree is the order of the catholic church which came about after the council of Nicea. A group of honest people seeking God in truth, a house, a bible, wine/grape juice and unleavened bread are truly all God needs for his church for this is how it existed for many years after its founding. The writer of Hebrews attests to those who lived in caves and the wilderness due to persecution who the world was not worthy of.