I don't know but he's a proponent of the Vatican's "Ecumenical Movement" and has tons of influence within Christendom. Books, sermons, etc. highly promulgated
Ecumenical doesn’t sound bad at face value, unless he’s trying to build the one world religion under an/the antichrist, or even this pope (same thing), but I’m not familiar with it.
If we were doing it right there would only be one body of Christians, per Matthew 12:25. Very narrow road to that end, though. It wouldn’t be 1.2 billion of us ending there, and it would be a bottom up hierarchy, not top down one.
Those are definitely the Hegelian endpoints, and i agree even the likely outcomes even if we were to just get everyone to accept each other without fixing at least some of the underlying doctrinal issues we currently have. I do still think that ideally, the body of Christ would not be divided.
The other day someone on here taught me a new term: "The Invisible Church" and said it came from Luther. Idk about that but from what I can tell from the Bible the true church IS technically invisible. It is the collective body of all who believe in Jesus for their salvation, worldwide. I contended with them that it is not, never has been, and cannot be contained within any institution on earth, and that doing so has always resulted in corruption of Christ's teachings followed by persecution of true believers and agnostics / those with questions, and also those who reject it. But Christ didn't pursue the unbelievers with a drawn sword!
I also contended that there are topics of disagreement which aren't crucial for salvation and so are not worth dividing over and I believe the true church IS unified if you can look beyond these issues.
I don't understand how people can't see this stuff. Maybe I need to do a better job of laying out my points, idk. What are your thoughts on this? I still need to reply to your other post lmao
I don't know but he's a proponent of the Vatican's "Ecumenical Movement" and has tons of influence within Christendom. Books, sermons, etc. highly promulgated
Ecumenical doesn’t sound bad at face value, unless he’s trying to build the one world religion under an/the antichrist, or even this pope (same thing), but I’m not familiar with it.
If we were doing it right there would only be one body of Christians, per Matthew 12:25. Very narrow road to that end, though. It wouldn’t be 1.2 billion of us ending there, and it would be a bottom up hierarchy, not top down one.
Ecumenical as I understand it is meant to unify the religions under the anti-christ (papacy, as I understand it)
The "goyim" see: oh great we can be frens
The esoterics see: oh great we can make them all frens under our rule
Those are definitely the Hegelian endpoints, and i agree even the likely outcomes even if we were to just get everyone to accept each other without fixing at least some of the underlying doctrinal issues we currently have. I do still think that ideally, the body of Christ would not be divided.
The other day someone on here taught me a new term: "The Invisible Church" and said it came from Luther. Idk about that but from what I can tell from the Bible the true church IS technically invisible. It is the collective body of all who believe in Jesus for their salvation, worldwide. I contended with them that it is not, never has been, and cannot be contained within any institution on earth, and that doing so has always resulted in corruption of Christ's teachings followed by persecution of true believers and agnostics / those with questions, and also those who reject it. But Christ didn't pursue the unbelievers with a drawn sword!
I also contended that there are topics of disagreement which aren't crucial for salvation and so are not worth dividing over and I believe the true church IS unified if you can look beyond these issues.
I don't understand how people can't see this stuff. Maybe I need to do a better job of laying out my points, idk. What are your thoughts on this? I still need to reply to your other post lmao
I haven't forgotten, just been busy as can be!