Pope Leo XIV signaling to Orthobros

3,177 Views | 54 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by CrackerJackAg
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dammit

Voice app

"Commend"
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

This recent discovery is interesting in light of this discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/live/2SYFPf7ai4U?si=bdlhIxZt13BHrahE


Have you asked yourself why Protestants don't find this the least bit disturbing? I mean, it's not like he found a record of Joseph's first marriage that produced those 6 siblings.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

This recent discovery is interesting in light of this discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/live/2SYFPf7ai4U?si=bdlhIxZt13BHrahE


Have you asked yourself why Protestants don't find this the least bit disturbing? I mean, it's not like he found a record of Joseph's first marriage that produced those 6 siblings.


I genuinely don't care what Protestants think about this.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

This recent discovery is interesting in light of this discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/live/2SYFPf7ai4U?si=bdlhIxZt13BHrahE


Have you asked yourself why Protestants don't find this the least bit disturbing? I mean, it's not like he found a record of Joseph's first marriage that produced those 6 siblings.


I genuinely don't care what Protestants think about this.


Fair enough, but that wasn't the tone of the link.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

This recent discovery is interesting in light of this discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/live/2SYFPf7ai4U?si=bdlhIxZt13BHrahE


Have you asked yourself why Protestants don't find this the least bit disturbing? I mean, it's not like he found a record of Joseph's first marriage that produced those 6 siblings.


I genuinely don't care what Protestants think about this.


Fair enough, but that wasn't the tone of the link.


I was directing it more at the Orthodox posters who had posted above.
Maximus of Tejas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

94chem said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

This recent discovery is interesting in light of this discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/live/2SYFPf7ai4U?si=bdlhIxZt13BHrahE


Have you asked yourself why Protestants don't find this the least bit disturbing? I mean, it's not like he found a record of Joseph's first marriage that produced those 6 siblings.


I genuinely don't care what Protestants think about this.


Fair enough, but that wasn't the tone of the link.


I was directing it more at the Orthodox posters who had posted above.
Just another play for ecumenism which is ramping up. None of that gives justification for Vatican I/II. Second half of his video are just quote mines.
Severian the Torturer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Captain Pablo said:

Dammit

Voice app

"Commend"

no problem brother, I tagged it so you'd see it but I've deleted it now.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Severian the Torturer said:

Captain Pablo said:

Dammit

Voice app

"Commend"

no problem brother, I tagged it so you'd see it but I've deleted it now.


Awesome. Thanks!
AgLiving06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Maximus of Tejas said:

10andBOUNCE said:

As a protestant I am completely fine with authority within the Church as what Scripture outlines (Elders, Deacons, Discipline, etc.) in addition to our need to honor secular authority (1 Peter). Protestants were protesting the made up office of Pope and other things the was of "human tradition."

Weird that the Bible was clear on Elders and Deacons but for some reason when mysterious (or at best very convoluted) when it came to the papacy.

If there's one phrase I'm tired of hearing it's "the Bible is clear" lol. Ya I guess that's why the reformers all disagreed with each other pretty much immediately. Luther and Zwingli disagreeing on the Eucharist is pretty much all you need to know for the entire history of Protestantism.


And likewise, I'm so tired of these pretty ill-informed takes from Romanists.

Let's state the obvious. At Marburg, Lutherans and Zwinglians agreed on 14 major points. The one they did disagree with on was the Lord's Supper.

So it's incorrect to make blanket statements that are so easily proven wrong.

Yes, Luther and Zwingli disagreed on a 15th point. History and Scripture show Zwingli was wrong. It's a shame Zwingli let his own views overshadow the history of the church and what Scripture says.

Likewise, I could point out that nobody in the Christian church agrees with the novel view of the Eucharist that Rome created as evidence that eccesialists groups such as Rome don't do much either.
Severian the Torturer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgLiving06 said:

Maximus of Tejas said:

10andBOUNCE said:

As a protestant I am completely fine with authority within the Church as what Scripture outlines (Elders, Deacons, Discipline, etc.) in addition to our need to honor secular authority (1 Peter). Protestants were protesting the made up office of Pope and other things the was of "human tradition."

Weird that the Bible was clear on Elders and Deacons but for some reason when mysterious (or at best very convoluted) when it came to the papacy.

If there's one phrase I'm tired of hearing it's "the Bible is clear" lol. Ya I guess that's why the reformers all disagreed with each other pretty much immediately. Luther and Zwingli disagreeing on the Eucharist is pretty much all you need to know for the entire history of Protestantism.


And likewise, I'm so tired of these pretty ill-informed takes from Romanists.

Let's state the obvious. At Marburg, Lutherans and Zwinglians agreed on 14 major points. The one they did disagree with on was the Lord's Supper.

So it's incorrect to make blanket statements that are so easily proven wrong.

Yes, Luther and Zwingli disagreed on a 15th point. History and Scripture show Zwingli was wrong. It's a shame Zwingli let his own views overshadow the history of the church and what Scripture says.

Likewise, I could point out that nobody in the Christian church agrees with the novel view of the Eucharist that Rome created as evidence that eccesialists groups such as Rome don't do much either.


He's not a romanist, but go off Queen
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Romanists... *sigh*
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

10andBOUNCE said:

As a protestant I am completely fine with authority within the Church as what Scripture outlines (Elders, Deacons, Discipline, etc.) in addition to our need to honor secular authority (1 Peter). Protestants were protesting the made up office of Pope and other things the was of "human tradition."

Weird that the Bible was clear on Elders and Deacons but for some reason when mysterious (or at best very convoluted) when it came to the papacy.


And if the Bible was intended as a rule book for Christian ecclesial governance and praxis then that would be relevant. Thankfully that's not true.


That's a hot take…
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My only issue in this is that he lumped the Orthodox in with Protestants.

The Catholic and the Protestants are much closer in their cultural, church practices and how they view the Cross etc…

Leave us out of any conversation that involves both of you together.

And as always, when the Catholics talk about reunification, they always just mean everybody becoming Catholic.

There is no hope for the protestant world as they have no communion with the Protestant church two minutes up the road.

Hard pass to ever even have a conversation about communion with a Protestant group. If you had a council 4800 representatives would show up. Who do you listen to? The Baptist, the transgendered Methodist, the reasonable enough sounding tradition Anglican, the Mormon or Jehovah's Witness?



10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CrackerJackAg said:

ho do you listen to? The Baptist, the transgendered Methodist, the reasonable enough sounding tradition Anglican, the Mormon or Jehovah's Witness?

Severian the Torturer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

and how they view the Cross etc…


Would you mind expounding on this for me? This piqued my interest.
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

CrackerJackAg said:

ho do you listen to? The Baptist, the transgendered Methodist, the reasonable enough sounding tradition Anglican, the Mormon or Jehovah's Witness?




All Protestant. Or of the Protestant tree if you don't want to outright claim them.

Everyone not Protestant sees them as the same pool you guys are all swimming in.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I can't help other people's misconceptions including yourself (shrug)

My theology is generally informed by the actual protestant reformation OGs so I cannot speak to the further offshoots. I understand your disdain towards them all though.

Maybe the actual reformers should have trademarked "Protestant" to better protect it's usage.
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

I can't help other people's misconceptions including yourself (shrug)

My theology is generally informed by the actual protestant reformation OGs so I cannot speak to the further offshoots. I understand your disdain towards them all though.

Maybe the actual reformers should have trademarked "Protestant" to better protect it's usage.


Yeah, I'm obviously trolling you a bit.

A bit…
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I didn't know EO folk had any sense of humor
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

I didn't know EO folk had any sense of humor


Life of the party


Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.