• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Nicene Creed

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
"Make it up as you go along " christianity, is what you're presenting. Contradictions, random inference that matches nothing.

Hey, are you going to explain
Exodus 3:2-14

As compared to to John 5:37?



Oy vey
 
Last edited:

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
"Make it up as you go along " christianity, is what you're presenting. Contradictions, random inference that matches nothing.

Hey, are you going to explain
Exodus 3:2-14

As compared to to John 5:37?



Oy vey

I believe I have answered that previously. Please refer to:

Post #77

So what is to explain in?

Exodus 3:2-14 New International Version (NIV)

There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!”

And Moses said, “Here I am.”

“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

The Lord said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey—the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them. So now, go. I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.”

But Moses said to God, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?”

And God said, “I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain.”

Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

DimpledInexperiencedErne-max-1mb.gif


Did the Trinity said to Moses, “We are who We are. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘We have sent me to you.’”?

NO. Every word is a singular pronoun.

God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I believe I have answered that previously. Please refer to:

Post #77

So what is to explain in?

Exodus 3:2-14 New International Version (NIV)

There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!”

And Moses said, “Here I am.”

“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

The Lord said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey—the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them. So now, go. I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.”

But Moses said to God, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?”

And God said, “I will be with you. And this will be the sign to you that it is I who have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain.”

Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”



Did the Trinity said to Moses, “We are who We are. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘We have sent me to you.’”?

NO. Every word is a singular pronoun.

God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”
Are you saying that is an angel talking, or God?
 
Last edited:

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
Are you saying that is an angel talking, or God?

I'm sure I did not say that, I just showed you the verse.

Now what are the functions of angels?
Aren't they are the ones who deliver the messages from God to Man?
Aren't the angels the ones who execute God's orders to them?

Sometimes, we think we know all things but we still have a lot of things to read, understand and know.

What are the instances where God sends his angels?
Numbers 20:16, [URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Chronicles+21:15&version=NIV']1 Chronicles 21:15; [URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Chronicles+32:21&version=NIV']2 Chronicles 32:21; [URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+3:28&version=NIV']Daniel 3:28; [URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+1:19&version=NIV']Luke 1:19; [URL='https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+12:11&version=NIV']Acts 12:11[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]


Hebrews 1:14 Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)

All the angels are spirits who serve God and are sent to help those who will receive salvation.

Now who spoke to Moses?

There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

DimpledInexperiencedErne-max-1mb.gif



God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”


If you still cant get it - who is speaking here?

NecessaryAdeptAmazondolphin-size_restricted.gif


The man or the cell phone? Oy vey!!!
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
I was naïve enough to think you were actually evaluating the Trinity by some honest biblical searching. When in actuality your biblical study stoops to the trolling of anti Catholic sites.

THE PRISTINE TRUTH: ANSWERING CATHOLIC DEFENDERS part 1

the trinity tale and the proofs against it is as old than you and me

anything new that one person would present are just feeble desperation to defend the biggest lie ever told

and that site is one of the site developed by one member of the Church isn't it?

if the contents are true, then it is true - i cannot change that.

were the books proving the absurdity of the Trinity, written by Catholic priests, bishops and cardinals?

ImmaculateCarelessJackal-size_restricted.gif
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
if the contents are true, then it is true - i cannot change that.

What you do is to deliberately misrepresent by using only the excerpts you think makes your point, you couldn't be more wrong and it is flat out dishonest.
The Church has never presented the doctrine of the Trinity, nor the word 'Trinity' is found in the NT.
The Church has never stated that the word Trinity is in the Creed.

Here's one for you to sharpen your skills of deception on, from a Catholic theology professor.
' I think I can say, without too great an exaggeration that the entire doctrine of the Trinity is an enormous gloss on that phrase in the First Letter of John that
God is self-gift. From that metaphor spins out the whole of Trinitarian theology.
Unfortunately, most of us don't take the Trinity terribly seriously. For most Christians, including most Catholics, the doctrine of the Trinity functions as a sort of divine, test of faith, as though God were saying. "I'll tell them I'm one God in three Persons, and if they can believe that, they can believe anything." Unfortunately, most of us don't take the Trinity terribly seriously. The Trinity doesn't make much difference to people. I have often remarked to students that if I and my fellow preachers mounted our pulpits some Sunday and announced that we had a letter from the Vatican saying that there are not three Persons but four, most people in the pews would simply groan. "Oh, when will these changes stop?" But to most of them it would cause no problem other than having to think about how to fit the fourth one in when making the sign of the cross. And that is a tragedy, for we are dealing with the deepest claim that Christianity offers about the Mystery that undergirds our existence.
The Trinity is not an item in the creed but rather the basic form of the creed. We do not say that we believe in the Trinity along with a number of other doctrines. Instead, we say that we believe in the doctrines of Christianity in terms of the Trinity: "We believe in or God the Father who . . ." and then we profess faith in the doctrines of creation and providence, "and in the Son who . . ." and then we proclaim the incarnation and redemption, "and in the Holy Spirit who..." and then we affirm the Church, the sacraments and the eschatological doctrines. We never actually say that we believe in the Trinity. The Trinity is not a doctrine next to other doctrines of the faith; it is the only doctrine, and all the others are expansions and explanations of it.'
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
What you do is to deliberately misrepresent by using only the excerpts you think makes your point, you couldn't be more wrong and it is flat out dishonest.
The Church has never presented the doctrine of the Trinity, nor the word 'Trinity' is found in the NT.
The Church has never stated that the word Trinity is in the Creed
.

vatiniti.jpg

tenor.gif


Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Father

235 This paragraph expounds briefly (I) how the mystery of the Blessed Trinity was revealed, (II) how the Church has articulated the doctrine of the faith regarding this mystery, and (III) how, by the divine missions of the Son and the Holy Spirit, God the Father fulfills the "plan of his loving goodness" of creation, redemption and sanctification.

246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)". The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75

o2mzf.jpg
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
were the books proving the absurdity of the Trinity, written by Catholic priests, bishops and cardinals?

Too many people the belief that we are created and sustained by a loving God is an absurdity to human logic. Absurdity and denial are not the same thing.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
MJFlores

And now you are trying to make the CCC say what you want with the same tactic.

The Father revealed by the Son

The Father and the Son revealed by the Spirit

Now tell me the NT does not reveal the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.

251 In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: "substance", "person" or "hypostasis", "relation" and so on. In doing this, she did not submit the faith to human wisdom, but gave a new and unprecedented meaning to these terms, which from then on would be used to signify an ineffable mystery, "infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand".

Nowhere does the Church, in any statement, state that the word trinity or the later formulation of it is to be found in Scripture.
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
MJFlores

And now you are trying to make the CCC say what you want with the same tactic.

The Father revealed by the Son

The Father and the Son revealed by the Spirit

Now tell me the NT does not reveal the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.

251 In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: "substance", "person" or "hypostasis", "relation" and so on. In doing this, she did not submit the faith to human wisdom, but gave a new and unprecedented meaning to these terms, which from then on would be used to signify an ineffable mystery, "infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand".

Nowhere does the Church, in any statement, state that the word trinity or the later formulation of it is to be found in Scripture.

Told ya the trinity was invented and developed.
Man made, not in the bible.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Told ya the trinity was invented and developed.
Man made, not in the bible.

You are only arguing against yourself. NO ONE EVER STATED THE TRINITARIAN FORMULA AS TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH IS FOUND IN THE BIBLE!!!!!!
Not the CCC not the popes not the bishops, priests, nor catechists who alone have the authority to present official Catholic teaching.
Only your own personal opinion which is found to be baseless.


 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
You are only arguing against yourself. NO ONE EVER STATED THE TRINITARIAN FORMULA AS TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH IS FOUND IN THE BIBLE!!!!!!
Not the CCC not the popes not the bishops, priests, nor catechists who alone have the authority to present official Catholic teaching.
Only your own personal opinion which is found to be baseless.

source.gif


AND THAT MAKES THE TRINITY AN UNGODLY AND MAN MADE RELIGION

This is what I have found in the encyclopedia Britannica
Trinity | Definition, Theology, & History

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Hebrew Scriptures and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman religions seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpreted as subordinate to the Supreme Being. An alternative solution was to interpret Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three modes of the self-disclosure of the one God but not as distinct within the being of God itself. The first tendency recognized the distinctness among the three, but at the cost of their equality and hence of their unity (subordinationism). The second came to terms with their unity, but at the cost of their distinctness as “persons” (modalism). The high point of these conflicts was the so-called Arian controversy in the early 4th century. In his interpretation of the idea of God, Arius sought to maintain a formal understanding of the oneness of God. In defense of that oneness, he was obliged to dispute the sameness of essence of the Son and the Holy Spirit with God the Father. It was not until later in the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.

The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same substance [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, St. Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of St. Basil of Caesarea, St. Gregory of Nyssa, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since. It is accepted in all of the historic confessions of Christianity, even though the impact of the Enlightenment decreased its importance in some traditions.

Matthew 15:9 Amplified Bible (AMP)

‘But in vain do they worship Me,
For they teach as doctrines the precepts of men.’”
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
You are only arguing against yourself. NO ONE EVER STATED THE TRINITARIAN FORMULA AS TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH IS FOUND IN THE BIBLE!!!!!!
Not the CCC not the popes not the bishops, priests, nor catechists who alone have the authority to present official Catholic teaching.
Only your own personal opinion which is found to be baseless.

source.gif


You must be living in an alternate reality.

The CCC [what is this abbreviation by the way] - NOT the Catechism of the Catholic Church have the authority to present official Catholic teaching?

not the bishops, priests, nor catechists have the authority to present official Catholic teaching?

So who could? You?

1 John 2:20 Amplified Bible (AMP)
But you have an anointing from the Holy One [you have been set apart, specially gifted and prepared by the Holy Spirit], and all of you know [the truth because He teaches us, illuminates our minds, and guards us from error].

apparently you are not guarded from error

1 John 4:6 Amplified Bible (AMP)
We [who teach God’s word] are from God [energized by the Holy Spirit], and whoever knows God [through personal experience] listens to us [and has a deeper understanding of Him]. Whoever is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know [without any doubt] the spirit of truth [motivated by God] and the spirit of error [motivated by Satan].
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
If the Pope is infallible, then obviously his farts just spoke to you, plus, Queen Elizabeth was never queen of England or obeyed by any Christian subject, and she's a Calvinist. The Most High Has Spoken! If he's infallible then hope he doesn't speak too much?

What exactly is MJFlores position on Clergy? Can people be in a Biblical Clergy Class? I even like the position that God does not need further speaking past the Bible, which is nice, because the Pope guy. Most people believe that there are Clergy who can use the Bible to create positions in an authoritative position?
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
What exactly is MJFlores position on Clergy? Can people be in a Biblical Clergy Class? I even like the position that God does not need further speaking past the Bible, which is nice, because the Pope guy. Most people believe that there are Clergy who can use the Bible to create positions in an authoritative position?

giphy.gif


Clergy? We do not use that in the Church of Christ.
I believe the the word applies to Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Churches
To wit:
clergy (n.)
c. 1200, clergie "office or dignity of a clergyman," from two Old French words: 1. clergié "clerics, learned men," from Medieval Latin clericatus, from Late Latin clericus (see clerk (n.)); 2. clergie "learning, knowledge, erudition," from clerc, also from Late Latin clericus.

The Bible does not mention the position of POPE.
God did not establish or appoint such office in the true Church.

1 Corinthians 12:28 Amplified Bible (AMP)
So God has appointed and placed in the church [for His own use]: first apostles [chosen by Christ], second prophets [those who foretell the future, those who speak a new message from God to the people], third teachers, then those who work miracles, then those with the gifts of healings, the helpers, the administrators, and speakers in various kinds of [unknown] tongues.

------------------------
The bottom line is - No pope mentioned in the Bible.
Peter was never pope.

IT IS CLEAR from the Bible that the first century Church of Christ was led by the apostles and assisted by other ministers of the Gospel. Local churches were led by bishops, deacons and even deaconesses. However, nowhere in the Bible we can read that the whole Church was led by a “pope.”

In fact, the Lord Jesus Christ will never establish an office having a title of a “pope” and will never call any of His apostles and disciples as “pope” because He Himself said:

“But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:8-9 NKJV)

Christ explicitly said, “Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.” The word "pope" means "father." Thus, it is only right to conclude that the Lord Jesus Christ never called and made Apostle Peter as “pope.”

When Apostle Paul mentioned the “offices” that the Lord God appointed inside the Church, he never mentioned the “office of the pope”:

“Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?” (I Corinthians 12:27-29 NKJV)

In Ephesians 4:11-12, Apostle Paul mentioned again the primary offices appointed inside the Church, but still, no “pope”:

“And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.” (Ephesians 4:11-12 NKJV)

In the leadership of the local churches, Apostle Paul mentioned the office of the “bishops” and “deacons,” still no “pope”:

“This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach;
“Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience.” (I Timothy 3:1-2, 8-9 NKJV)

Thus, it is a fact that nowhere in the Bible we can read that the whole Church is led by a “pope,” It is very unlikely that the “office” which is very important and significant to the Roman Catholic Church will never be mentioned in the New Testament, the book containing the history of the first century Church of Christ, while the Roman Catholic Church claims that they are the one true Church, the true Church of Christ.

The “office of the pope” is the most important office inside the Roman Catholic Church because for them the “pope” is the head of their church.The Bible never mentioned the “office of the pope” because the head of the one true Church or the Church of the Bible is not the pope but the Lord Jesus Christ:

“For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.” (Ephesians 5:23 NKJV)

The fact that the “office of the pope” doesn’t exist in the first century and never mentioned by the Bible clearly proves that the Roman Catholic Church is not the Church of the Bible but a different institution. Actually, the “office of the pope” came a little later:

upload_2019-8-19_10-45-40.jpeg


“The title pope (papa) was, as has been stated, at one time employed with far more latitude. In the East, it has always been used to designate simple priests. The Western Church, however, it seems from the beginning to have been restricted to bishops (Tertullian, ‘De Pud’ xiii). It was apparently in the fourth century that it began to become a distinctive title of the Roman pontiff...Gregory VIII finally prescribed that it should be confined to the successors of Peter.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913, vol. xii, p. 272.)

At first, the title “pope” was employed with a far more latitude, that it was used to designate simple priests. In seems in the Western Church that from the beginning, the title “pope” has been restricted to bishops. It was apparently in the fourth century that it began to become a distinctive title of the Roman pontiff.

Truly, the Church of the Bible has no “pope” and this proves that the Roman Catholic Church is a different institution from the first century Church of Christ, from the Church of Christ of the Bible.
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
Is there anything as selfish as the newly religious who burn hot and go nowhere? It must be addictive. Its all over the place . I used to like reading internet articles or whatever. 2 Billion Christians are your target audience. 1.2 Billion catholics, I'm obsessed over in 2010 lee myung bak oh look 9 million Presbyterians in korea where's my suit and tie. See this is such a simple transition you could unite so much Christianity without a Pope, there are Bishops that would need ot still be in the college like the Orthodox Synod, the Pope never recognizes ecumenicism, ecumenical is greek, ecumenical councils recognizes Another Church. Then there's America, its totally impossible to explain that There Is No Other Distinction Before A Church being a Geographical-Region. It looks like African Baptist Church? No that's the American Baptist Church, they made one for themselves, I think its religious crazy talk. There's an Armenian Orthodox Church in Georgia for 2000 years. People you read are not even part of Christendom, never will be. JFK said be a citizen of the world or whatever.
 

MJFlores

Well-Known Member
Is there anything as selfish as the newly religious who burn hot and go nowhere? It must be addictive. Its all over the place . I used to like reading internet articles or whatever. 2 Billion Christians are your target audience. 1.2 Billion catholics, I'm obsessed over in 2010 lee myung bak oh look 9 million Presbyterians in korea where's my suit and tie. See this is such a simple transition you could unite so much Christianity without a Pope, there are Bishops that would need ot still be in the college like the Orthodox Synod, the Pope never recognizes ecumenicism, ecumenical is greek, ecumenical councils recognizes Another Church. Then there's America, its totally impossible to explain that There Is No Other Distinction Before A Church being a Geographical-Region. It looks like African Baptist Church? No that's the American Baptist Church, they made one for themselves, I think its religious crazy talk. There's an Armenian Orthodox Church in Georgia for 2000 years. People you read are not even part of Christendom, never will be. JFK said be a citizen of the world or whatever.

tenor.gif


It is not important to be "not even part of Christendom, never will be" or "be a citizen of the world or whatever"

Because the true Christians are hated by this world for what the believe and express - and they are not citizens of this world.

As the Bible says:

John 15:18-19 Amplified Bible (AMP)
“If the world hates you [and it does], know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you belonged to the world, the world would love [you as] its own and would treat you with affection. But you are not of the world [you no longer belong to it], but I have chosen you out of the world. And because of this the world hates you.

1 John 3:13 Amplified Bible (AMP)
Do not be surprised, believers, if the world hates you.

Philippians 3:20 Amplified Bible (AMP)
But [we are different, because] our citizenship is in heaven. And from there we eagerly await [the coming of] the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ;
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
I'm a little concerned for the Reconquista then, the good crusades, the winning of the Vikings Baltics and Russia. When do we retake Greek Byzantium? Oh wait the Venetians made a Latin empire out of it, ya make them speak Catholic.
Well OK some Bible quote to just sort of, knock aside 2 billion humans thinking on religion harder than you for over 2000 years. whatever. Well, I like the Horace Underwood mission, Galatians 3:28 (LEB) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Slopey forehead Korean women like it with the ministry women if we could get more to my parish.
What they can't censor your internet bible like theyd have burned it in the day? The first and last existence of the truth only Exists by lucky force of arms, from france 800 ad, to Austria 1800 ad.

I mean Flores is posting interesting stuff. The office of Pope is clearly Divinely Documented in London with the Divines in the Westminster Abbey of 1648, the Pope is a central role of the end of days of Revelation! Have you heard? He leads kings as a false antichrist, that will deceive the world for some time.
 
Last edited:
Top