RT

"Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion" F A Hayek

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

https://t.co/a0pMb2oHiQ

[Lawyerforlaws @lawyer4laws]

Milton Friedman
Where are the Angels ..?

Now Think about Today's U.S. Government, and Ideological push in 2022~

Must Listen til End ...

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

lol. You clearly are using AI and using it to speak for you. God bless.

You do know what the Bible teaches about slander, no?

Proverbs 26:19, this you?

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

I am sorry be the statement "The encyclopaedia cannot redefine a Biblical term" is false.

lol...did you actually read this before you posted?

"Kione Greek is a "dead language," meaning it does not change"- correct.

You are getting there.

"One cannot "etymological" a dead language to fit some new uninspired definition." This is wrong.

If it is "dead" it cannot change. See your response just above this one.

Here is the historical chain: Koine Greek: πρεσβύτερος (presbyteros) — “elder” Latin: presbyter → later also prester Old English: preost / preost Middle English: prest / preest Modern English: priest

Oh my goodness. Please read before you post:

presbyter → later also prester Old English:

Exactly. The meaning was changed AFTER THE FACT. As I stated prior: Uninspired men do not get to change the meaning of God's word. If they do then it is not from God. That is why the NT was written in a dead language. Goodness.

The simple fact is that there is no New Testament office of 'priest' given in the Greek. Facts are stubborn things.

This conversation is over- I don't appreciate your tone towards me. Its certainly does not feel very Christian. Good day.

Can I get you a tissue? Grow up. Stop believing what someone else tells you to believe. Pick up the Bible and read for yourself.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

If you have a point, please make it. Nowhere in Acts are the Apostles engaging in the type worship you claim.

Acts 2:46 is pretty clear.

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts,

Again, there is nothing in the two verses you quote that states that the Apostles or others offered incense, a "Catholic" liturgy, or worship images.

Still waiting for evidence.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

You’re treating your private interpretation as the final authority.

No, mine is from Scripture. Yours private interpretation is not even from Scripture.

You’re using a Descartes method, start with the self and build everything from personal judgment.

No, and again, I started from Scripture.

You make inferences not explicitly stated in Scripture, then reject Catholic inferences because they’re Catholic. That’s a double standard, not an argument.

I mad no "inference." The fact is that there is no leadership office of 'priest' given in the New Testament Greek. That is Scripturally factual. Facts are stubborn things.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

my point is prots hates bot the garments of priest simply claiming its of old covenant when there is nowhere written it to be stopped,

Again, I am not a "prots." So not only would I not know, I do not care. However, there is no church leadership office of 'priest' given under the New Covenant. Facts are stubborn things.

but they will hypocritically impose tithing and follow 10 commandments of the old testament .

Again, I am not a 'prots.' I would not know nor do I care.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

Lord have mercy. St Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John, and gave his life in the coliseum for Christ.

Maybe he was maybe he wasn't. You do not know any of that to be fact. Matters not anyway as he was not inspired. This is a point made initially. You might want to go back and read the beginning of the thread.

Again, Jesus was taught by Jesus. Not sure what you are not getting here.

You say his words have no more value than yours, even less than yours, as you called them ramblings.

They don't. My words have no value. That is why I go by Scripture. This is not hard.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

protestant do tithing and idk why you commented then.

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. Since "protestant[s]" are just pseudo-"Catholics," you would probably know better than me.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

You’re proving my point. You don’t follow a “show me the verse” standard either.

Strange since my argument is based off of Scripture itself. The Greek word for 'priest' is hiereus which is never used to represent elder/bishop in the New Testament Greek. So there is that. This was the original point made.

Women receiving communion isn’t explicitly commanded or exemplified in the NT, yet you accept it.

The is such a silly argument. There is no example of Matthew taking the Lord's Supper either.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:28 is not gender restrictive. Galatians 3:28 implies both genders are part of the "body," etc. etc.

By what authority do you make that inference while rejecting Catholic ones?

I can read the text. For example, there is no church leadership office given outside of elder/bishop/shephard/overseer/pastor. Those are all one office. There is no other leadership office even implied outside of what "Catholics" make up.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

You are your own Pope then, you interpret scriptures yourself if you do not belong to a denomination, and Prots will just change to find one that matches their own view.

lol..there is no office of 'pope' given in Scripture.

Scripture does not dictate behavior for Prots, their behavior dictates scripture's meaning.

What does this even mean?

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

@FrCyril_ The Bible. This has already been answered for you. This you?

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

Its from the encyclopaedia Britannica. The word etymologically means historically linked.

The encyclopaedia cannot redefine a Biblical term. Good grief. Kione Greek is a "dead language," meaning it does not change. One cannot "etymological" a dead language to fit some new uninspired definition. Goodness.

The simple fact of the matter is that you are wrong. Facts are stubborn things.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

We recognize what is already in Scripture: a visible body with apostles, bishops/elders, sacraments, discipline, councils, and real teaching authority.

It is not Scripture that "Catholics" recognize. There is no difference in Scripture between a bishop and elder. Yet, you have "archbishop," "cardinals," "priests," "popes," etc. None of which are given as church leadership offices in Scripture. You have added things to God's word that were never given. You value the traditions of men more than God's word.

Additionally, the office of Apostle was clearly of a limited duration (cf. Acts 1:20-22).

As for councils: not every meeting of bishops is ecumenical. Ariminum, Seleucia, and the Robber Council failed because they were not ultimately received by the Church as authoritative. Catholics judge councils by apostolic continuity, communion with Peter, and reception by the Church.

Council meetings of uninspired men don't get to decide God's word. None were given such authority; even the Apostles were not given the authority to change God's word. The power to bind and loose was only that which was already decided in heaven (cf. Matthew 18:18). The council argument is moot.

And your “infallible validation method” challenge cuts both ways. What infallible method gave you the biblical canon, orthodox Christology, and which councils to accept or reject?

Good grief. God gave us the canon, not a council of uninspired men. Do you hear your own logic? How is it that God required inspired men to write and deliver His word, yet He allows a council of uninspired men to decide what the final version is?

It is clear reading the Scripture that the recorded traditions of Christ and the Apostles was written and was being read in the first century (cf. 2 Peter 3:15-17; Ephesians 3:4; etc. etc.).

Catholics have an answer: Christ founded a Church, gave it authority, and promised the Spirit would guide it. What’s yours?

It is evident that the "Catholic" church can be found nowhere in Scripture.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

Funny, I am not interested in the thousands of Protestants denominations, and so Is America as Protestantism has shrunk from 75% in 1950 to 43% today.

I am not a "Protestant." As stated in the prior post I am really not interested in your own private interpretation, especially of data of any kind.

A denomination can be defined as an organization whose religious practices deviate from Scripture. Using this simple definition, it is clear that "Catholicism" was the first denomination and "protestants" are just the first derivative. Afterall, Martin Luther was "Catholic."

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

Holy copy and paste did you just took what I wrote and pasted into chat GPT thinking this was a good response?

Do you need me to copy and paste what Scripture states about those who slander others?

Obviously if the former priesthood used incense and incense is being offered by every nation then it’s a formal priesthood. you are prot so you’d till reject it’s purpose

And another example of a "Catholic" that cannot justify their org structure from Scripture.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

@mikeyli83196874 @TheStaad I really am not interested in your own private interpretation.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

if you look up the etymology of the word ‘priest’, you will find that i’m right to say “priest = presbyter”.

Ah, and another dishonest post. The "etymology"??? 🤣

So, some uninspired "Catholic" later on decided to invent a new church office should be sufficient evidence and "derive" the name of that office from a Greek word that was always used to mean elder and I am supposed to take you seriously? This is realy easy: Why don't you simply look at God's word, you know, the primary source. Good grief the lengths people in this world will go to just to protect their grifts.

it’s true. Catholic priests are called that because they are presbyters. it is also true that Catholic priests are ‘hiereus’ in that they offer the sacrifice of the Mass.

The "Catholic" denomination can call whomever what ever they want. It is still false.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

Great! Your evidence states exactly what I state earlier. However, the last sentence is wrong. Again, nowhere in the New Testament are elder and 'priest' used to imply the same office--the distinction was added later by uninspired men. It is not Scriptual. Not sure why you go to an uninspired source instead of simply looking at God's word. Strange.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

@itsyoboinarza @brycejofficial I am not a "protestant" so I don't know what to tell you.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

@electoralgarb @TheStaad That is your own private interpretation.

[RT @CorgiSquirrel]

the line from the first century to today is called ‘apostolic succession’. this is a biblical concept.

Again, this org structure and it authorization cannot be found in Scripture. It if could you would have cited as much. Simply claiming that something is a "biblical concept" does not make it true. You continue to demonstrate a lack of probity.

clutching one’s pearls at such simple administrative expedients is a choice, but it’s odd to act like the Church invented a new doctrine.

Because "Catholics" did invent a new doctrine, as shown already. Not sure what else to tell you.