President Bush's Skills... \o/

DeletedUser

Correct, and I do belive one of the people working to have this happen is the apostle Paul, whom you previously have quoted on several occations.

The apostle Paul was dead by this time. The Bible tells us of no effort on his part to unite the churches under one denomination.

THey were one before they formally were divided. (Although they were drifting apart for a long time prior to the formal separation, both culturaly and in theological questions.)

You are correct; I just referred to them as Catholics. Sorry. However, I am correct in saying that the majority believed in a works salvation.

The Bible in no place tells us to baptize little children. We can explain the gospel to little children (like Christ was doing in the passage you quoted); however, we are never told to baptize them.

Can you believe it people? Me and John Ross agree on something! Copy these posts and save them, lol.
 

DeletedUser

The apostle Paul was dead by this time. The Bible tells us of no effort on his part to unite the churches under one denomination.

It was my impression he was working to guide them into belive and do what he percieved as right, this can surely be looked upon as building the foundations of a church.

Can you believe it people? Me and John Ross agree on something! Copy these posts and save them, lol.

Well, I will not argue with you when I belive you are talking sensibly. ;)

Atleast we've both learned that we both can admit to beeing wrong, and that we have atleast one viewpoint in common lol.
 

DeletedUser

It was my impression he was working to guide them into belive and do what he percieved as right, this can surely be looked upon as building the foundations of a church.

The church had already been established by Christ; Paul was just a servant of God trying to lead many people in righteousness -- he started a lot of the Churches he ministered to.
 

DeletedUser

The church had already been established by Christ; Paul was just a servant of God trying to lead many people in righteousness -- he started a lot of the Churches he ministered to.

Yes, he founded alot of church, he was the first to really go around preaching and converting all over.

Is it not fair to say that this man helped shape the form of the church and its practices, and christianity itself?
 

DeletedUser

I wouldn't say that -- his teachings were from God. So he didn't shape the church -- God did.
 

DeletedUser

I Timothy 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
 

DeletedUser

Well, is it inspired by the belief in God, or is it the word?

Also, how can you quote the book where it says it is true, and use that as proof on the book beeing true?
 

DeletedUser

with circular reasoning you need to prove or disprove one statement to win the arguement. since neither side can do this you guys will continue to argue
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

with circular reasoning, the logic is faulty and the person making the assertion needs to make a different argument.
 

DeletedUser

O.k. I missed something . . . what is this inspired dream that we are all talking about?
 

DeletedUser

Again, somebody, please, enlighten me as to what we are talking about.
 

DeletedUser

I think we ended it all with saying the discussion was void due to circular reasoning.

So, shall we pick up where we left off?
 

DeletedUser

The Bible establishes itself as the Word of God through Prophesy and historical accuracy. The Bible, unlike other books, such as the Book of Mormon, has never contradicted what we know is fact through archeological finds.

Now for prophesy (obviously this is the part which establishes the Bible as the Word of God). I was going to copy a bunch of stuff from a website for ya'll to read because it would take way to long to write all this, but then I saw that they had a copyright. Please go on this website and read: http://www.100prophecies.org/
 

DeletedUser

You can still quote it, copy right or no, as long as you name the source.
 

DeletedUser

I'm not reading all of it, don't have the time.
So select a few segments you deem the most important, and we can take it from there.
 

DeletedUser

The Bible has never contradicted what we know is fact through archeological finds.

Maybe not Archaeological finds, but it has certainly contradicted what we know is fact based on Paleontological and Geological finds (Creationism and the Young Earth theory).

On top of that, the Bible also contradicts itself very frequently.

And since you discovered that you can copy from other websites, I don't think you have come up with any arguments that you actually thought up yourself.
 
Top