Replies

"Well, I don't know what you're doing down on that beach there..."

I would suggest that if you're getting frustrated and can't refrain from making it personal, that you take a break.

The subject of my statement is this:
[MeOnTheBeach quoted by Heart-Rest] Rev 11 is very clear about the two prophets being on the earth just before the second coming of Christ. Therefore, these two prophets have higher authority than the Pope. Therefore, they are not part of the Catholic Church and are rejected outright by Catholics. Catholic Church can not be the true Church of God because it has no provision for succeeding authority of the Pope to these true prophets. And God's house is not divided.

Who do you think is "higher on the totem pole" - the prophet John who wrote "Revelation", or the Apostle John who walked with Jesus Christ? Do you see how absurd that question is if they are in fact the same person?

John, who wrote "Revelation", was also an Apostle. Therefore He and John of the original 12 had the same authority. If John the Revelator saw Jesus in vision there is no reason to conclude that Jesus didn't walk with Him also.

As far as the organization of the Church goes, are you denying that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church He built, as it plainly states in the Bible (Colossians 1:18)?

Jesus Christ is the head of His Church. No one has stated otherwise.

If He is the Head of the Church, would not that make it the best organization in the world?

Best at what? This is very vague and highly subjective.

And since you've left the door open, I'll respond to my own view of this...Best doesn't mean infallible. If it did Paul wouldn't have had to write all those letters trying to correct nearly every corner of the Church.

2 Timothy 1:15 15 This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.

In Paul's own words, the Church in Asia rejects him. This included the Ephesians. At this point, they were no longer part of Christ's Church. This doesn't mean they didn't go through the motions and claim to believe in Jesus.

Do you believe what Jesus Christ solemnly promised, that He would be with that Church till the end of the world, as it plainly says in the Bible?

No I don't. He doesn't say He'll be with the Church. He's talking to individuals.

Gen 6:3
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

"Do you think Jesus meant to say, "lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world, except between 70 A.D., and 325 A.D.", or "but not after the original 12 Apostles I picked die"?

No I'm saying, that he hasn't been with us since 70AD. Especially after 325AD. At 325 it was over en toto.

Your problem is that you cherry pick and jump to conclusions based on preconceived notions. If you want to find truth you have to be objective and accept the negative as well as the positive.

God doesn't come to man, He invites man to come to Him. And when man leaves God, God invites man to come back. That's the promise until the judgement. God kept His promise, but man didn't.

Here is truth, the reason there was no Apostles or Prophets after 70AD is that what became the Catholic church, would have burned them at the stake as heretics.

I urge you to do further studying on Church history, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, and the Bible, relating to the Church that Jesus Christ built.

Stop acting like the middle ages never happened. You can't get around it. It takes more than claims of piousness, it takes walking the walk as well as the talk.

Do you believe Jesus ordered the Inquisition?