Alexandre Cesar

@GuinterTex @JOOPEDRO20091 Então Jesus abandonou os questionadores, mesmo eles não estando em erro algum? Isso pra mim é impossível de aceitar, me desculpe

@AlexLimosk @JOOPEDRO20091 Quem corrigiu a literalidade foi Jesus por isso mencionei que ele a corrigiu.

O paxtô tá confundindo igreja com padaria kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

@GuinterTex @JOOPEDRO20091 que Jesus faltou à caridade*

@GuinterTex @JOOPEDRO20091 Interpretar a literalidade como contradição de 63 é pior ainda. É basicamente afirmar que Jesus à caridade de quem estava apenas desentendido, e não em erro

@GuinterTex @JOOPEDRO20091 Não amigo, em Jo 6:51, é phage em 52, ele é questionado, em 53, phage, e em 54, Jesus afirma aos questionadores que quem mastiga da sua carne tem a vida eterna. Qual a outra posição que não a literal? Pra mim a tua é como afirmar que Jesus não ensinou de forma suficiente

@AlexLimosk @JOOPEDRO20091 Além disso, em João 6:35, Jesus define que 'comer' é VIR a Ele e 'beber' é CRER nEle. O escândalo dos discípulos não foi por causa de uma aula de biologia sobre o pão, mas porque não aceitavam um Messias que precisava morrer (dar a carne) para dar vida ao mundo.

@GuinterTex @JOOPEDRO20091 Exceto que Jesus gerou escândalo quando falou isso. Os discípulos interpretaram literalmente, questionaram Jesus, e foram embora. E quando questionado, Jesus intensifica. O verbo usado inicialmente é phage, 'comer', depois vai pra trogo, 'mastigar'

@JOOPEDRO20091 Você acha engraçado, mas o 'paxtô' só está usando a mesma lógica de Jesus. Quando Jesus disse 'Eu sou a porta' (João 10:9), você acha que ele se transformou em madeira e dobradiça? O pão REPRESENTA o corpo, assim como Cristo REPRESENTA a porta. É uma metáfora, não uma padaria.

@dadof4princeses @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate bruh, they're the foundation of Christ's revelation. the Son himself wrote no books to say further revelation happened is to claim there's been a new apostle which again, if the apostles were insufficient, then God's work was insufficient and we circle back to the previous post

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate So I guess Peter and Paul’s revelation is null and void?

When you corner a Mormon with scripture they run away. Weakness.

@dadof4princeses @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate bruh, they're the foundation of Christ's revelation. the Son himself wrote no books to say further revelation happened is to claim there's been a new apostle which again, if the apostles were insufficient, then God's work was insufficient and we circle back to the previous post

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate By that logic, all the revelation given through Peter and Paul is null and void. Because they have new revelation AFTER the resurrection. You just invalidated half the New Testament

@nikiped1aV2 @dadof4princeses @DavoustBaldPate To say further revelation is possible, you must claim either: Jesus did not reveal all that was needed to be revealed OR The Holy Spirit failed to preserve what was revealed Both of these options are anti-biblical and inconceivable to any Christian of any denomination

@AlexLimosk @dadof4princeses @DavoustBaldPate You’re rambling now and have no idea what you’re talking about 😂😂

@dadof4princeses @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate Except that Jesus is God, the Word, the communication of the Father to mankind. There cannot be newer revelation because God himself revealed all that was to be revealed. The OT is the promise, and the NT is the fulfillment. You can't fulfill what has already been fulfilled

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate Claiming that God closed the heavens for future revelation was same argument that the philistines made to Jesus. News flash: you are both wrong

@nikiped1aV2 @dadof4princeses @DavoustBaldPate Again, substantiate Smith's revelation without relying on him alone and we can talk. You're obviously unable to do so. Your entire theology relies on the writings of a single man Then you turn around and claim so of mine; you're deluded, and I pity you

@AlexLimosk @dadof4princeses @DavoustBaldPate You believe in a fake, man made version of God bro …nothing you try and attack us with has any meaning until you can dig yourself out of that nonsense trinity hole 😂😂

@dadof4princeses @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate And by which authority do you claim higher understanding of Galatians? Ours is apostolic. Which is yours? Joseph Smiths? Do you not see the circular logic?

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate Tell me you don’t understand Galatians without telling me you don’t understand Galatians

@nikiped1aV2 @nw10knee @DavoustBaldPate 2 Tes 2:15 I have no belief that everything must be written in the Bible alone. The word trinity came later, true, but even by Ignatius' time (40 years after Christ, taught by Peter himself) the theology of the trinity was already orthodox and clearly expressed in his letters.

@AlexLimosk @nw10knee @DavoustBaldPate lol, like I said, you're an idiot-- a guy named Tertullian coined the term trinity (your fake belief of who God is) ...around 200 years after the Bible was written, a very different gospel than what is taught in the Bible 😂😂. . Sorry bud, gotta do better than that, haha

@dadof4princeses @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate There's no more stories as such to be had. That's the entire point of the NT. As expressed by Paul in Galatians. There is no evidence of anything Smith preached. Thus no one following the Bible can take him at his word alone, thus YOU must substantiate his claim. Which you cant

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate Evidently you haven’t read any of the stories of the Israelites in the Old Testament…

@nikiped1aV2 @nw10knee @DavoustBaldPate "But even if we or an angel from heaven preach a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be anathema" If you're going to claim restoration of the gospel, you must prove they're real texts. If you can do so without relying on Smith, we can talk.

@AlexLimosk @nw10knee @DavoustBaldPate ...you make zero sense and I can tell you're not prepared for an actual theological debate. Go learn more about your false religion, and then maybe we can debate

@nw10knee @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate Except that since Christ is the revelation, there cannot be newer. This is why you MUST paint Smith's work as restorative, despite the fact there is no evidence whatsoever Its you, thus, who must prove they're real. Which you cant, because angels "took" the plates away to heaven

@AlexLimosk @nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate On par with Moses talking to a burning bush.

@nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate "So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter" Straight from the NT. Is that man-made nonsense? Why isn't Joseph Smith's delusions also man made? Do you denounce his "translations"?

@AlexLimosk @DavoustBaldPate Lol, maybe you should get the story straight first before you try and attack it… then you might need to explain why you believe in ridiculous man made nonsense found nowhere in the bible

@nikiped1aV2 @DavoustBaldPate rich coming from a dude who got his theology from someone who "translated" ancient israelite plates found in New York by staring at seer stones inside a dark bag 💀

@DavoustBaldPate What about when we corner you about believing made up nonsense not in the scriptures anywhere (aka, the trinity) ...lol 🦗🦗🦗

@LicVidriera_Arg @ArmandoEn_Zo @FiftyThirdSt @Sachinettiyil nah oriental orthodoxy and the assyrian church of the east do as well

@ArmandoEn_Zo @FiftyThirdSt @Sachinettiyil Only Roman and Orthodox catholics have valid apostolic succesion.

Catholics will soon surpass evangelicals in number in the United States, becoming the largest Christian denomination, according to a new report. Info: COPE

@dmsevoac @GrantGooch @TomorrowsWar "My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader but Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this I know, is the rock on which the church is built" Jerome's words btw

@AlexLimosk @GrantGooch @TomorrowsWar If Jerome had failed to include the Apocrypha, he would have likely faced official censure, accusations of heresy, and potentially being cast out of communion by the Western Church. He later admitted that he was "compelled" by the Church to include them.

Protestants: "We follow the Jews on the canon!" Said no faithful Christian ever… until Protestants.

@GrantGooch @dmsevoac @TomorrowsWar Jerome literally recants his position (most clearly in the Judith preface). He even explicitly says it was deemed by the Church to be declared inspired at Nicea We know it wasn't orthodox thinking too, since the "scandal" it generated prompted S Augustine to write him.

@AlexLimosk @dmsevoac @TomorrowsWar In his Prologue and Commentary on Daniel, and also in Against Rufinus, Jerome wonders why people preferred Theodotion's edition of Daniel when it was written by a heretic and of inferior quality. Jerome translated it because it was what they read but included text critical marks