Amen to that.
The point I was trying to make in post 43 was, and apparently didn’t do a very good job, was, per Acts 20:29,30, if men would arise among the church at Ephesus after Paul left them, who would teach things contrary to what Paul taught (”perverse things”), which would likely happen in a relatively short time after he left, what then of the ECF who taught a hundred, two hundred, three hundred years AFTER Paul?
It is folly to put one’s trust anywhere but in the source, Paul and the rest of the New Testament writers. As many do with the ECF, especially the RCC. Why trust in an alleged “succession,” when we have the apostles themselves?
Out of all the threads I have read here on the RF, that deal with the RCC, theirs just dilly dally around, yours really gets to the heart of the matter. The only one to do so, in my opinion.
Christ warned against building your house upon sand and not on the rock . ...the rock of scripture (these sayings of mine, Matt. 7:24). These men coming hundreds of years after the apostles, an alleged “succession,” is that “sand.”
My apologies :)
I am too lazy sometimes to give complete answers, and I am the one who started all these types of threads 15 years ago, maybe 16
I also started the creation/evolution threads, so, I am tired
That is why I dont respond with detail like I used to.
People are going to believe or they arent.
I will let them down, copy and paste, the Bible study.
If they do, they will be blessed if they actually pray, fill it out, and contemplate what it is teaching, with their Bible open at the same time.
That is all I can do, expose people to the truth, I cant make them believe.