@JamesEwen0407@ShamelessPopery No. Trying understand if you mean formally sufficient from that point on, 67 AD (Paul’s letter) even though the 27 book NT was not put forward in a canon list until 200 yrs.
@JamesEwen0407@ShamelessPopery Is that the formally sufficient understanding from the 1520s or the materially sufficient understanding at time of Timothy’s letters being written around 67AD?
@BeSaintly Note the graphic of bishop hats going to Nicea - the one from Rome was missing. The Legates representing Sylvester’s hat weren’t included even though the seat of Peter, was to ratify the outcomes of the Council. Wes washing history.
@MrCasey62 Annals of Ulster entry U441.2: “Probatus est in fide Catolica Patricius’ - the Bishop Patrick was approved in the Catholic faith.
Dated 441 or 442 AD.
@SocialNomadRach Semantic/caricature word games for clicks….The priest was correct: (1) on sanctification (referring to Gods moral law and the core of JC’s teachings); and (2) mental ascent/declaration of faith without the life long process of (1) is not enough - its semi pelagian
@madmandrils@uncreated_light@needGod_net Ryan didn’t produce a transcript of the conversation or a recording. So it also possible that the Priest was politely back handing Ryan’s style of word/image clip farming for Catholic mockery - OSAS, doesn’t doesn’t exculpate memory loss of Matthew 5:11/bearing false witness.
@DocDutcher@StunProdStud@ElijahElishaRap@needGod_net Sorry Cody the catechism doesn’t actually say what you and Ryan think it says, atheists still have to seek God even if invincibly ignorant. Conflating baptism with atheism in this scenario, is like two straw-men straw manning each other because strawman Ryan said so
@Pro_Truth_Only@Burgess7281975 I think it is part that says : ἐκκλησίαι καθ' ὅλης (ekklesiai kath‘oles) - by 1611 the Protestants translated it differently for obvious reasons