Yes but those early groups differ more on specific definitions of the Trinity, the nature of Christ, etc, rather than claim Scripture Alone as the basis of their disagreement, unlike Protestantism. Remember that the canon of Scripture wasn't defined until later, so which Scripture Alone to base on?

This post has been edited by yeeck: Feb 13 2019, 05:17 PM

Here's an open question to all Christians, irregardless of which denomination.

1. How many of you here sincerely believe that the Pope, of the Roman Catholic Church is the ONLY person in the world, who is allowed to be born again.

2. How many of you here sincerely believe that our God is so generous, that He desires not only the Pope but everyone else to be born again.

3. How many of you here sincerely believe that being born again is an exclusive right for our Lord Jesus Christ only.

This post has been edited by Roman Catholic: Feb 13 2019, 05:15 PM

Nobody claimed she has powers of her own, other than that which pleases God to grant miracles through her intercession. See miracle of of the wedding banquet at Cana.

Note that the angel's salutation preceded Mary's acquiescence. Mary was already highly favored. God's grace was not given in time after Mary accepted the angel's word. The Church believes that this grace was given from the very beginning of Mary's life. It is clearly grace because at the time of Mary's conception she could have done nothing to earn it.

This post has been edited by yeeck: Feb 13 2019, 05:15 PM

Don't be silly. Being born again in Catholic teaching is being regenerated by water and Spirit. And this is via the Sacrament of Baptism. Peter mentioned this transformation from sin to grace when he exhorted people to "be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).

Another thing. Truth is not determined by the number of people believing in something, so asking how many here believe in so and so I feel is rather pointless.

This post has been edited by yeeck: Feb 13 2019, 05:27 PM

Perhaps there was something wrong with your catechism/catechist.

You define born again=infallibility, which is not true according to Catholic teaching.

So born again i.e. with the Spirit of God = fallible. Is this the Roman Catholic Church's teaching ?

To Yeeck & all,

I apologize if the recent postings sounds like a renegade Roman Catholic, 😂 but it is not. I am a Roman Catholic has been and always will be.

My wish is for everyone means all Christians, is to be born again in accordance with Sacred Scriptures.

It doesn't matter whichever denomination one may belongs to, but I know for certain led by the Spirit of God one is infallible because everything that proceeds from ones mouth 👄 or actions will be inline with Sacred Scriptures.

God bless everyone.

P/S : I don't know why this thoughts keeps appearing in the visions of the night i.e. "The heart ❤️ is capable for such profound immensity to LOVE but only when God changes one's heart of stone to a heart of flesh."

This post has been edited by Roman Catholic: Feb 13 2019, 07:10 PM

Where in scripture?

Hi Thomas Thai,

It's meant figuratively speaking & not literally because it's in-between the lines. The post right at the top of this page # 721 shows a simple connection from my limited understanding as a Roman Catholic.

This post has been edited by Roman Catholic: Feb 13 2019, 08:24 PM

I feel there is a need to defend the credibility of Wescott and Hort.

The KJV Onlyist are pretty good in manufacturing lies of their own in slandering others, especially opponents of the Byzantine text.



There is a 4000 page document somewhere inside to examine the orthodoxy of Dr Wescott, if anyone is interested.

https://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2013/08/3...state-heretics/

Since the TS has requested to not argue about this subject anymore, I will respect that request. I will only lay out evidence to counter any lies and not respond to any attacks.

This post has been edited by thomasthai: Feb 13 2019, 08:29 PM

Let's do a simple exercise in comparing Alexandrian texts and Byzantine texts.

Take Mark 16:9-20. This is called the long ending of Mark.

Throughout history, there has been many different endings to this portion of Mark. You will find the long ending in the KJV bible, in the other english bibles you may see this portion in brackets of some explanation in the footnote.

Quite simply, internal and external evidences suggest that Mark ended his gospel at 16:8. All other endings were added by scribes who thought that Mark ended his gospel too abruptly.



Internal evidence 1: Mark ends his chapters the same way throughout the whole book.

Read through the book, you will find "they were amazed" "they were astonished" "they were frightened".

Internal evidence 2: Verses 9-20 were plucked from the rest of the bible:



External evidence: Both codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus ends at verse 8.

I really wanted to ignore this when I saw it yesterday because I know I would look like a turncoat a pirate a renegade but after my dream, now I can't, so now, it will to be addressed.

"Being born again is Catholic teaching is that Sacrament of Baptism regenerated by water & Spirit. ..."

You cannot possibly imagine how much I want that, like in the fairy tale, that sounds so simple & true but is it really true ? If it was true like all 2 in 1 solutions, then I ask, why are so many of my Catholic brethren laities having trouble with faith etc ?

My Teacher Jesus Christ says, John is greater than any man who has ever lived. But he who is the least in the Kingdom of God is greater than John.

John says, I baptize you with water to show that you've repented, but the One who come after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire 🔥.

My Teacher also says, No one can enter the Kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

It's all too clear that these actions of being born of water and the Spirit are mutually exclusive of each other.

Finally St Peter also says, We must obey a God, not men.

I've restraint myself from adding "self-made teaching" because there is much I have to say, but my Teacher says, Let it be so for now, For in this way, we shall do all that God requires.

If anyone so much as thinks that I am planning of setting a new Roman Catholic Church within the existing Roman Catholic Church. Rest assured I have no interest at all or any other church for that matter.

Just in case if anyone thinks that I have an axe to grind with the Roman Catholic Church. It's an absolute rubbish !

This post has been edited by Roman Catholic: Feb 14 2019, 07:41 AM

I think you misunderstand what I'm trying say. My contention is that full grace here equates to divine person of Christ being sinless and also being God. Mary is a normal person who has sin. Catholics doctrine see's otherwise.

IN that interpretation we disagree.

*Not arguing when she's given grace.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Feb 14 2019, 09:13 AM

Again...justifying the traditions of your worship which are obviously against God's will......sigh*

Does not mean the apostles are infallible. Peter demonstrated that clearly.

There are only TWO passages in the NT which uses this phrase "full of grace".
NONE applied to Mary.

Nope, being sinless doesn't mean she is divine. The Church still teaches that she is a created being. No where does the Church teaches that she is equal to Christ or equal to God. I guess most Protestants have issue with the title Mother of God, which is also an issue with Nestorius.

As if you know God's will and not the rest? Hehe

They are when they intend to definitively teach the faithful. And you brought up the clear example of Peter that he was given the authority, but also as human he can fail/fall personally.