CloakedInTradition

Follow and join the mission—spreading truth, correcting error, and leading souls to God. Ave Maria Gratia Plena 🙏🏻 Submitte Romae 🇻🇦

@LizzieMarbach Click bait . Com over here; Catholics oppose the Democratic Party Some Catholics vote for them but I pray it’s due to ignorance The Democratic Party is incoherent Catholicism The issue of abortion alone makes it impossible to vote for them

lol this is what I’ve been saying. The Catholic Church has been one of the largest facilitators of mass immigration since our country’s founding.

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 Today I won’t I’m busy all day tomorrow I can find some time

@Defendthesee @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 We can just talk over this app. I don’t need your number. Will you be available today?

I can't believe that he actually said this. Every Christian knows that John MacArthur was a great man of God, whether or not they agreed entirely with all of his theology.

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 Gladly I’ll dm you my number and we can set a time

@Defendthesee @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 Nobody believe they can interpret however they want. It’s a stupid claim that isn’t what I hold to. I keep pointing out that you’re adding to the text and I’m not. What’s your defense against that claim. Let’s me call you so we can do this over the phone.

Idioms communicate truth indirectly; so you have to use interpretation That’s why it’s your interpretation vs 2000 years of CONSISTENT church interpretation Sorry 1500 before personal interpretation of scripture came along claiming anyone can believe what they want Can even agree on baptism one of the core topics of the gospels

@Defendthesee @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 It’s not my authority. Laying out a passage and going over its content isn’t based upon my authority.

Yes it is you’re basing everything on your metaphorical interpretation of said passage. And want to force that.. that’s why you keep pushing the point because I don’t agree with I already explained the fire and suffering and attachment to the person you just don’t like that interpretation and like I said since the beginning that’s okay you don’t have to like doesn’t make it a lie; if you’re saying the passage is a metaphor, idiom, figurative; that requires interpretation; and you’re relying on your interpretation. This is the last I’m talking on this passage after this if you say anything in regards to this passage I’m not going to waste my time responding; because this is exactly what I wanted to avoid going in circles So unless you want to discuss something you’re even open to discussing lmk if not don’t waste my time

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 According to YOUR authority and your authority is meaningless when it’s comes to interpretation of scripture or is Peter wrong?

I read it. It’s not a case for why you believe. You don’t explain your logic you don’t show consistency you don’t explain why you pick and chose in the passage and then you don’t address my point about it being the works that are burned up and the person that enters into heaven is like a person entering into heaven without anything because it has been burned in fire. I give a reason as to what I say and I show my logic. You don’t, in this we are not the same. I have broken down every section and showed its consistency. You haven’t done that at all and then you go and make it a case against me. That’s weak.

The reason I’m so eager is because we aren’t going to agree you move goal post say my explanations aren’t sufficient lol 🤣🤣 so what’s the point you’re too stuck in your system to even have a fruitful discussion I can admit the short coming of the members of the church but you can’t even see past your nose. The reason I bring up the verse is because you either have to accept it for what it is at face value or show your double standards Like I said I ain’t play this circle game with you you just want to twist scripture go read what Jesus says about twisting scripture

This verse isn't hard for any protestant. We just haven't finished up with our first point of contention. The reason you're so eager to go to this is because you think its a "gotcha" but I currently have you all twisted up with 1 Corinthians so why would I move away from that passage unless you give a positive case for what you believe instead of running away and having absolutely no reason for your conclusions in the passage. Explain your logic for your interpretation, Do that and stop running. Once we get through this I will be more than happy to move to this next verse. I don't fear that verse at all.

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 I made the case for what I believe in my previous posts go back and read

You actually didn't explain. What you did was say that I need my interpretation to be my way in order to reject purgatory. You didn't make a case for what you believe you only tried to rebuke my belief by saying "that's personal interpretation" you don't give positives for your argument but run away and try and bring negatives against me. You don't address my points, but you make it a case against me. This is extremely low-level tactics; you should be embarrassed. Go on now and learn to debate. It would actually be best for you to go and read your bible. You clearly don't know what it says.

@carolanna448749 @CharlesRCherry @GigaBasedDad Through whose interpretation? Yours?

@Defendthesee @CharlesRCherry @GigaBasedDad The Rock Jesus spoke of to Peter was Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God. That is what the church is built in. Leave it to men to muck that up and confuse it.

Which denomination are you?

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 Here lies the Protestant argument born in the 1500’s died as soon as they read this verse Only way to answer is to draw conclusions that aren’t there RIP

Keyboard warrior? 😂 I’m not the one that runs away and can’t break down scripture. Again in your long post you don’t give a reason. You say that I need it to read this way. I simply lay out the text. I don’t put forth my opinion about it I’m just laying it out. You really don’t see that you’re eisegeting things that aren’t in the text. I’ve already answered why he says “as if going through fire” the as if part also makes it figurative. And the reason he says that is because the works burn up. It’s a comparison of works that last and works that don’t. The Protestant view holds consistent to the text and lays out what’s clearly there. The RCC view has to add to the text and then goes full idiot mode when laying the the text because it clearly doesn’t teach why thy need it to teach lol

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 You’re just running from truth

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 I’m don’t have a good day

@LoganRamseySDG That is such a false statement it’s actually laughable 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Doug got told to sit down and roll over

If you listened to the Joe Heschmyer/Doug Wilson debate, Heschmyer's argument is basically "If Sola Scriptura is true, why do people disagree about things?" Like most RCs, he fails to recognize that Sola Scriptura is a statement of authority, not a hermeneutic. The debate was very sidetracked then, focused on things like different interpretations of baptism, canon issues, etc. while never really focusing on the issue of authority

@BethChepil @Taylor_A_Eaton lol once upon a time I used to look to Protestants thinking they actually had a one up on us Catholics because their faithfulness to scripture; then I started talking to Protestants online and personally… and oh boy did I realize I was wrong.

@Defendthesee @Taylor_A_Eaton Because it pains us to see so many people misled. Read the Bible. Not much semblance to catholicism legalism and hierarchy. You and Jesus. That’s all you need. It’s SO FREEING

Roman Catholics are a mission field. They desperately need the gospel.

@SC_LakeShow_Ram @zacharyhunt90 @Truth_matters20 Keep the keyboard warrior comments to yourself lol you’re only making yourself look more demeaned

You’re avoiding the text non stop. Answer the questions. Why is it that you reject this as an idiom? I’m talking about the “as if passing through fire” why is that literal. Answer that question and then answer why it is that you accept the other sections in this passage as idioms but not that one. Com in big boy let’s give some answers instead of running around like a coward all day.

I’m gonna answer one more time so you can see you’re going to move the goal post and I’m going to go as far as explain in a way you agree let’s use “figurative” language Calling it an idiom doesn’t solve your problem. I don’t need the text to be literal, the issue you have is what metaphor DO YOU UNDERSTAND We see idioms all through out the Bible doesn’t mean they immediately don’t qualify as something real or is that your stance? last I checked Christ isn’t a literal rock. The phrase the phrase of debate is attached to works or the person… if you say works you aren’t reading you’re stretching Your system needs this passage to read less than what it is and what it means because if it means anything outside of the construct you’re trying to force on me it doesn’t work and your whole entire sola falls apart. If Paul meant just rewards he wouldn’t have attached as through fire to the person It can be an idiom or not you’re the one saying if it doesn’t mean literal flames you’re wrong no it works if it’s figurative flames The question is Why does Paul use painful imagery to describe the person passing through the flames for someone who is saved… what’s the point of the suffering it makes sense if it’s purification So again I ask use your system to explain away that verse ^

You don’t see the error lies in your pride all I read is I this I that I’m not engaging in circular argument. I sent an entire explanation and you dismissed it because YOU said so While again I’m backed by church fathers, grammar, scripture has other areas that support this claim also Revelation 21: 27 2 Maccabees 12: 45 Matthew 12: 32 And 1 Corinthians You just want to engage in circular argument and I’m not here for that

Explain your reasoning as to why you 1) take this as the person going through fire and not just the works. 2) why you ignore this as an idiom while not ignoring any of the previous idioms held within the same passage. See how I actually stick to the text and actually think through all of these things and read the passage and keep it within its context. Meanwhile you don’t give any reasoning. You haven’t thought through this. You don’t care because you don’t actually care about the Bible you only care about the magisterium. I guarantee you actually haven’t thought through anything biblical. This is why you stopped trying to give any reasoning. Your default is “church history” even though this wasn’t clear until later church history.

Dude we aren’t going to agree on 1 Corinthians I explained and my explanation is supported by Grammar Church Interpretation Early Church Father Interpretation You want to make me listen to YOUR interpretation and that’s not going to happen I already pointed out your error obviously you don’t accept it. “Through fire” You disagree I don’t. Simple.

I will absolutely get to that one. I have no problem with that verse at all. It’s not a gotcha but I’m not letting you run away. I have asked you 5 times now what my error was and you keep insulting me instead of answering the question. I promise I will exegete that passage once you answer my question that keeps getting passed over. I need you to tell me what my error was in exegeting the 1 Corinthians passage.

@CharlesRCherry @GigaBasedDad Even early church fathers pre-schism agreed and looked towards the Church of Rome as the one that presides

@CharlesRCherry @GigaBasedDad If that’s true Charles who is your visible head? Aren’t you guys jurisdictionally split? The keys of Peter are traced to the pope or do you argue you have a spiritual head? A visible head? To fill that role?