The Theological Unity of All Christians?

[Lloren]

Fortunately what you and I see doesn't really matter. It's what God sees as truly the Catholic (invisible and universal) Church. Division and divisiveness roots itself in the pride and sin of our humanity. When one group (Catholic or Protestant) props itself up as the "right" way... they are wrong.

2 If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know 1 Cor 8:2

When we start setting up that "we know" we immediately don't know. God in his infinite wisdom doesn't see a broken and diverging stream in Protestantism or in Catholicism, but His Body. The weakness of us magnified in the Power and Holiness of Himself.

There will be a Day when people from all tribes and ethne (people) will be worshiping the Father in the Kingdom. And I'm convinced that those tribes and people will not all worship the same, in the same tongue, with the same dance, or the same rituals. God is not a Catholic. God is not a Protestant. God is God. And our joy will be that at the end of His command make disciples worship will continue on for all eternity. Our mandate to spread the gospel will end. Worship will not. And this worship will be as unique as all the people of the world whom God created.

Let's not devolve this thread into a "X denomination is this so therefore Y denomination is wrong". If the finger pointing continues the thread will close.

If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. - Gal 5:15

Romans 14:19 - Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another

 

[GenghisKhan44]

Not even Catholics who are Christians.

Perhaps I am reading into this, but... what makes Catholic unChristian?

We are completely Trinitarian, believing Christ, God, and the Holy Ghost to be the very same God and yet different figures. We believe Christ, by His grace, through faith and good works, saves us (not that faith and good works save us; without Christ's grace, neither faith nor good works can save us). And while we revere the Pope, Christ is, now and forever, the head and King of the Church and all the universe. The Pope is at best his second-in-command. But all the bishops surrender to Christ. We take Scripture very seriously - we believe it to be a Catholic book - but we also place great faith in the teachings of the Apostles, just as the Bereans placed faith in Paul's words when they were reading Scripture, and just as all ears who heard Paul and the Apostles did. And just as the Apostles heard and believed when Christ first spoke to them.

So, perhaps I am reading into your comment, but what makes Catholics unChristian in the eyes of Protestants?

 

[ewoksrule]

I posted my thoughts on that question above with the CARM quote. Roman Catholicism is a works-righteousness religion.

Those who are justified are saved and salvation is a free gift (Rom. 6:23), something we cannot earn (Eph. 2:1-10). However, Roman Catholic doctrine denies justification by faith alone and says:

• "If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema" (Council of Trent, Canons on Justification, Canon 9).
• "If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema." (Canon 14).

taken from http://carm.org/roman-catholic-view-justification

 

[ewoksrule]

Some good articles on this.
http://carm.org/roman-catholicism

 

[Abba San]

GenghissKhan, yes - you are reading into it. I never said Catholic was unchristian.

The phrase, "Not even Catholics who are Christians," was the followup to the statement about not trying to convert Christians to my way of thinking...not even Christians who happen to be Catholic. I never questioned the Christianity of the Catholic faith.

 

[GenghisKhan44]

Yes - it sounds very condescending, with a slanted view of both Catholicism and Protestantism.

Just as with Protestantism, there are conservative and liberal wings of the Catholic Church.

But there is a limit. One cannot actively support pure capitalism and remain a Catholic (unless you are ignorant of her teachings, which can be found in Rerum Novarum and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church - paragraph 2425 to be exact. By the way, the CCC and RN aren't Scripture; only the Bible is Scripture.)

Similarly, advocating for gay marriage or supporting it is sinful and thus outside of the Catholic Church. There is no such thing as gay marriage, as it in no way imitates God's generosity or life-giving towards His people. You don't have to understand why the Church holds its positions. You can try to understand; the Church has no qualms about seeking to understand. But if you know the Church teaches something as true without question and you deny them the authority to declare this true, one way or another, you are outside of the Catholic Church. To be in the church, you must accept her authority.

Just as with Protestantism, there are Catholic politicians who defy their church on major moral issues - abortion, poverty, war, et al.

And we excommunicate Catholics who rebel against the Church. Or rather, by virtue of their defiance, they excommunicate themselves. It is a pity our bishops are not brave enough to publicly condemn these politicians. But defiant Catholics separate themselves from the Body of Christ when they disobey Christ in His Church.

Just as Protestants kick out dissenters within their congregations, tamp down on the rebellion, or risk congregational chaos.

Just as with Protestantism, there are Catholics who have a real faith in Christ and those who only play at faith.

Absolutely. There will be many Protestants who make it to Heaven - completely by God's saving grace - and many Catholics who will burn in Hell - completely by their own fault.

But that says nothing about the correct teaching of Protestantism or Catholicism. Only that God saves those who seek Him with an open heart.

While the church polity and structures are very different - there are many similarities in the ways individuals express their faith, well or poorly.

There is some similarity. There is also plenty of difference, not only in practise, but also in the meaning behind the practises. For example, generally speaking, the Catholic Mass is a celebration of the sacrifice of Our Lord on the Cross and at the Last Supper. From what I have heard, in many evangelical circles the central theme of their service is the fellowship of the Christian community.

On a slightly unrelated to the quote note, in one way, the Catholic Church sees itself as a hospital for sinners. By God's grace, our souls, broken by sin, are put back together and made new, surely. And we take part in this healing by believing and listening to Our Lord when He tells us what to do.

What do you guys believe about recovering from sin, and the church's place in salvation?

I have Catholic friends and we have great times of fellowship, serve side by side, even minister on boards together - and it has never been a problem as long as we love the same Lord and serve him the best we can.

That's good. I am glad of that. Protestants and Catholics should have great fellowship. And we should also try to understand each other, and work towards knowing Christ's commands so we may follow them, as He asked us to. We need both of these things if we are to be truly following Christ.

I'm not sure why you are so uncomfortable with various faith expressions having the same Lord - why you feel the need to convince us that we should adhere to the teachings of your church. That is the way you are coming across.

Teachings and expressions are different things. You can believe much the same thing as everyone else without being the same as everyone else. In our Church we have not only the Roman Catholics. We have Byzantine and Oriental Catholics, who are like the Orthodox. We have Charismatic Catholics, who are very visibly spiritual, as evangelicals and some of the less traditional Protestants are. The latter especially believe in a deeply personal relationship with the Lord, and in charisms. They are Pentecostal - in that they feel a renewed sense of the Holy Spirit, as the Apostles first felt 2000 years ago. And of course, individual parishes can very from being very traditional to being more contemporary.

You don't have to give up all or even most Protestant forms of worship to be Catholic. You can still have fellowships, Bible studies, gospel music, Christian Rock and Roll, long sermons, and lay congregations led by a priest or a layman. We've got all of those things, in fact, and much more besides.

But if we are to believe Christ, we must believe Him completely. It doesn't make for everyone to first say "I believe Christ" and then to say you believe He taught different things. That is what I am trying to sort out and combat. There's nothing inherently wrong with Protestant services, Bible studies, or the rest.

So to put it, that Billy Graham is a charismatic speaker is not wrong. That Protestants read Scripture and study it is not wrong. That they sing hymns and do so with much gusto is not wrong.

But the incorrect teachings within Billy Graham's sermons, or Protestant varieties of Scripture, or Protestant Bible studies, or Protestant hymns, or their enthusiastic singing (even that) are wrong. The things that are good and true and from Christ ought to be lauded and praised. But whatever is not from Christ ought not.

I want to make it clear: I am not, nor is the Catholic Church, condemning Protestant styles of worship. But we do condemn error, most especially that one-word error Luther added so many centuries ago: sola. (Or in the English, "only".)

 

[GenghisKhan44]

GenghissKhan, yes - you are reading into it. I never said Catholic was unchristian.

The phrase, "Not even Catholics who are Christians," was the followup to the statement about not trying to convert Christians to my way of thinking...not even Christians who happen to be Catholic. I never questioned the Christianity of the Catholic faith.

My apologies.

 

[GenghisKhan44]

I posted my thoughts on that question above with the CARM quote. Roman Catholicism is a works-righteousness religion.

Ewoks, you have been sorely misinformed. Catholics do not profess belief in saving by works alone. We profess the belief that we are saved not by works alone, nor by faith and works. We are saved by the grace of God, through first faith, then works, which are a response to our justification.

Here is an official source for what Catholics actually believe on justification: the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you feel it will scorch your eyes to read this, then feel free not to. But if you wish to learn what the RCC really teaches about jusitifcation, this is one place to look.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm

From the top:

1987 The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34

But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. For we know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. The death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus....
1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God's righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or "justice") here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.

1999 The grace of Christ is the gratuitous gift that God makes to us of his own life, infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism. It is in us the source of the work of sanctification:

Therefore if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself.

2000 Sanctifying grace is an habitual gift, a stable and supernatural disposition that perfects the soul itself to enable it to live with God, to act by his love. Habitual grace, the permanent disposition to live and act in keeping with God's call, is distinguished from actual graces which refer to God's interventions, whether at the beginning of conversion or in the course of the work of sanctification.

2005 Since it belongs to the supernatural order, grace escapes our experience and cannot be known except by faith. We cannot therefore rely on our feelings or our works to conclude that we are justified and saved. However, according to the Lord's words "Thus you will know them by their fruits" - reflection on God's blessings in our life and in the lives of the saints offers us a guarantee that grace is at work in us and spurs us on to an ever greater faith and an attitude of trustful poverty.

A pleasing illustration of this attitude is found in the reply of St. Joan of Arc to a question posed as a trap by her ecclesiastical judges: "Asked if she knew that she was in God's grace, she replied: 'If I am not, may it please God to put me in it; if I am, may it please God to keep me there.'"

And so on...

The key problem with your quotes, ewoks, is that word "only". We don't believe faith is the only component in salvation. Protestants do, and that is the snag. Also, for the second quote, you can believe you are in the graces of God and be completely dead wrong. That kind of assumption is what has sent and will send many souls to Hell. And it's the job of the person in question AND the Church (that is, the clergy and every layman) to know whether he truly is justified or not, and to seek justification if he is not.

 

[Patriot]

Okay, I guess you were talking about the Bible when you said the "teachings of Christ" I thought you were referencing something Jesus specifically said himself. No harm done, I just wasn't following you correctly.

For example, in Ephesians 4:5, Saint Paul speaks of there being one baptism among all Christians. Anabaptists, however, believe that rebaptism of converts baptised as infants is needed. That is, they don't believe that infant baptism is valid, and therefore there are millions and millions of uninitiated Christians roaming the Earth. Naturally, other Protestants believe that if they were baptised as infants, they were baptised validly. It seems strange that other Protestants will tolerate this belief of Anabaptism.

First off, baptism is not a requirement to be saved (the thief on the cross was not baptized), therefore I do not make a big deal about it. Second, are we talking about historic Anabaptists with whom I have no fellowship (since they are all dead) or are we talking about the Amish and Mennonites with whom I also have no fellowship since they generally withdraw from the world?

Or take the Eucharist. In Matthew 26:26-29, Christ and His Apostles celebrate the Paschal meal. Now of course you know Catholics (and Orthodox) take this to mean He sacrificed His literal Body and Blood. And most Protestants take it as only a symbolic, communal meal. But Lutherans are an odd case; they believe that, somehow, in some way, that they cannot explain, Christ's spirit comes down onto the bread and wine, and in receiving their bread and wine they somehow receive Christ.

I don't understand how other Protestants can receive the Lutheran communion (some do) if they do not profess to believe that Christ's spirit is in it. I don't understand why some Protestants take the Body and Blood of Christ at the Catholic Mass or the Orthodox Liturgy if they don't believe it is what the priest says it is. By taking it, they're pretty much saying they agree with what the priest said, whether they mean to or not.

Also a non-salvation issue (the thief is yet again a good example). I think you are mistaken in assuming one must necessarily agree in order to participate. I could participate in communion with my own understanding of the sacrament while remembering Christ and His sacrifice in any church that is offering it.

Perhaps you do not see such things as barriers to Christian unity. But I don't see how a Protestant can say that for a Catholic the Body and Blood is the Body and Blood while for himself it's just a cracker and some juice. He is describing two very different realities. In one, if you eat Christ's body and drink His blood when you don't believe it is really Him, you are making a mockery of Him. In another, if you think a wafer and wine are really Christ's body and blood, you are committing idolatry, or at least you are deluding yourself.

Now you have crossed from internal protestant differences into protestant/RCC differences. If you wish to cross this line let me know, but based on how your conversation with others is going I think it would be best to avoid such a contentious issue as I have many problems with the RCC teachings (vastly more so than any protestant teachings).

Or how a Calvinist can say that one baptism is enough and also say his Anabaptist friend is right to re-baptise converts. Once again, he is saying his own infant baptism is valid and invalid.

It is called grace. He may not believe it is necessary to re-baptize (not too sure how many calvinists actually have anabaptist friends) but he is showing grace by not interfering with it.

It may not be a game-breaker to you, but it makes no sense to say "let's just agree to disagree" on two opposite realities each with their own sets of consequences. Unless, of course, you are weary of arguing - which, believe me, I understand. Perhaps you might say "oh, this doctrine is not so much a fact as a matter of opinion", but then who decides what is important and what is not?

Important - required for salvation
debatable and requiring grace - not required for salvation

You keep bringing up baptism and communion. Please show me, from Scripture, how these things are specified that they are to be practiced in one particular form. I think you may find considerably less information on these subjects from the Bible alone than the RCC gives you.

When I see the Catholic Church, including the Eastern Catholics, I see a Church that has one teaching of truth that is undivided, uncontested, which everyone agrees to.

Appeal to popularity? Many false religions can claim the same level of support within their singular structure.

And we all believe that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth

The Church? I believe that Christ is the truth.

This is what I see as a Catholic. I'm sorry if I came off as condescending, but I just don't get the great variance of truth and authority within Protestantism.

How many protestant churches have you attended? Or is your information gleaned from the news? Because if we are going strictly from the news I would have the impression that the Catholic church is overrun with child molesters posing as priests. Not that I do believe that, but just saying that we need to be careful where our source of information comes from.

 

[Patriot]

Ewoks, you have been sorely misinformed. Catholics do not profess belief in saving by works alone. We profess the belief that we are saved not by works alone, nor by faith and works. We are saved by the grace of God, through first faith, then works, which are a response to our justification.

Just curious on how you deal with:

Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

 

[GenghisKhan44]

First off, baptism is not a requirement to be saved (the thief on the cross was not baptized), therefore I do not make a big deal about it. Second, are we talking about historic Anabaptists with whom I have no fellowship (since they are all dead) or are we talking about the Amish and Mennonites with whom I also have no fellowship since they generally withdraw from the world?

First of all, most people are not thieves on crosses. Most of us are perfectly capable of learning about the church and perfectly capable of being baptised. Perhaps those who live in countries that censor Christianity, or who would be putting their lives in mortal danger in getting baptised, or who would be dead within a short amount of time after choosing Christ would be excused if they died without receiving a baptism.

But in the Western World, for the most part, if you know Christ to be the Truth, you will also know that He had the disciples baptise in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and that to be born again in Him, baptism is a necessity. There's almost no excuse. If you refuse to be baptised, you refuse to obey Christ even in the smallest of things.

Nonetheless, if someone dies before they can be baptised, and they die or would have died wanting a baptism, they die baptised with a "baptism of desire", and their souls may yet be cleansed in Heaven. Note that the Good Thief died before Christ instituted baptism as a Christian sacrament.

(I've provided Scripture relating to the necessity of baptism below; read it before commenting.)

As for the Mennonites, don't be so sure they are secluded. On the Catholic Answers forums, I've seen at least two Mennonites. Somehow they're getting an Internet hookup. So you never know who you are called to be a brother and a witness to.

Also a non-salvation issue (the thief is yet again a good example). I think you are mistaken in assuming one must necessarily agree in order to participate. I could participate in communion with my own understanding of the sacrament while remembering Christ and His sacrifice in any church that is offering it.

For your own sake and ours, and out of respect for us and yourself, don't receive the Body and Blood at a Catholic altar if you don't believe it really is Him. Please don't. When you go up there, by your actions you agree that that is Christ's Body and Blood and that you are supposed to eat and drink Him. Since you don't believe that, you would be lying both to God and to yourself. Lying, as you know, and taking false oaths, are sins.

It is called grace. He may not believe it is necessary to re-baptize (not too sure how many calvinists actually have anabaptist friends) but he is showing grace by not interfering with it.

That is not the theological definition of grace. Perhaps it is polite by worldly standards. But how is withholding the truth from someone else doing them any good? Or, how is believing something that may not be true doing you any good?

It's your and every Christian's job, as commissioned by Christ, to preach the Gospel. And while you don't need to start a war with every Christian at variance with you (that's so incredibly wearying), it's uncharitable to keep the Gospel to yourself, however fine the differences between his and yours. Somehow we must make an effort to teach others the Gospel, even to those who are already a lot like you (or so it seems).

Important - required for salvation
debatable and requiring grace - not required for salvation

That's fine and all; how do you determine what is required and what is debatable?

You keep bringing up baptism and communion. Please show me, from Scripture, how these things are specified that they are to be practiced in one particular form. I think you may find considerably less information on these subjects from the Bible alone than the RCC gives you.

I chose them probably because I am more familiar with them than with most other issues. But really I have no idea.

As for Scripture, I would like you to meet a fellow called the Scripture Catholic.

He has a vast list of passages that deal with the context and purpose of baptism, and of the Eucharist, along with many other things.

And this passage of the Catechism of the Catholic Church details how the Church views Sacred Scripture, and how it is to be interpreted.

Appeal to popularity? Many false religions can claim the same level of support within their singular structure.

It's not so much an appeal to popularity as it is an appeal to diversity. The Catholic Church, in all its forms, has the sort of theological unity and cultural diversity that is rarely found in Protestant churches. And not just token diversity. We've got thousands of Christians - if not millions - from every single country and culture around the world. They all accept the teachings of the Catholic Church, even though they may practise the faith in many differing but complimentary ways.

You can find Protestant communities in almost every country around the globe, too. But divisive issues like the sacraments, interpretations of some things in Scripture, or more controversially like birth control (none vs. some vs. all), abortion (none vs. rape, genetic defect, and life-of-the-mother vs. more liberal views), economics (communist vs. capitalist vs. third-way) separate and divide even congregations within a country, never mind communities around the world.

The Church? I believe that Christ is the truth.

I once again defer you to the Scripture Catholic.
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html

I do not deny that Christ is the foundation of the Church (1 Cor 3:11). However, as Paul writes in Ephesians 2:20, God's house is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone."

Christ teaches us in the Bible. However, He also taught His disciples so they could teach others long before the Bible was even began. Unlike Islam or Mormonism, Christianity is not a religion built on a book. It is built on Christ, who built it on Peter and the other Apostles. He built it on their ability to preach, even without a book.

And according to Saint Paul in his first letter to Timothy, "...God’s household... is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth. " (3:15).

But again, that Scripture Catholic site can tell you more about the Church in relation to Scripture than I can. And that section from the Catechism - paragraphs 101 to 141 - can further elucidate how we interpret Scripture.

How many protestant churches have you attended? Or is your information gleaned from the news? Because if we are going strictly from the news I would have the impression that the Catholic church is overrun with child molesters posing as priests. Not that I do believe that, but just saying that we need to be careful where our source of information comes from.

Division between Protestants is not the kind of news that the world finds particularly relevant. Modern secular news would much rather scandalise Protestants by making us think they all think like Jeremiah Wright, or like Westboro Baptist (who I heard, once, maybe getting paid by the gay "rights" movement to look like jackasses).

I learned about the contradictions in the various forms of Protestantism by various means. First, I've heard the arguments of some Christians. My uncle is a non-denom, and he has a friend who I believe is a Pentecostal. I have a friend who is a Lutheran, and a couple of Protestant friends of unknown convictions. I've talked with all of them on matters of faith.

Second, I've looked at Wikipedia and gotten the general gist of what makes certain denominations within Protestantism unique. The Calvinists (including the Reformed and Presbyterian churches) have TULIP. The Arminians (who are can be found throughout the rest of Protestantism) are the exact opposite of Calvinists in terms of justification theory and in that respect are very Catholic. The Baptists do not believe infants should be baptised. The Pentecostals believe that you ought to have charisms such as being able to speak in tongues (or at least that these charisms, including miraculous healings, exist). The Anglicans have the Monarch of England as their head, and are generally the most Catholic-like Protestants. Methodists are a break-off of Anglicanism. Lutherans follow Martin Luther of course, and are sort of proto-Protestants. JWs believe Christ is not the son of God. Mormons believe Jesus is one of many gods. Swedenborgians (of whom Johnny Appleseed is best known) believe only Christ exists as God. And of course, all Protestants believe in the five solas (sola fide, sola scriptura, soli deo gloria, solo Christo, sola gratia).

Remove the "sola", however, and you find that not one of these teachings is at deference with the Catholic Church. In fact, if you remove the "sola" part of all five of the "solas", you get some very basic and embedded Catholic theology.

I realise, of course, it being Wikipedia and me only skimming over the text, there is far more to Protestantism than the things I have listed here. These are just the differences I have noticed that they have between each other, that either are not reconcilable, or make them very distinct from each other. There are other contradictions within Protestantism, and there are other distinctive characteristics between different Protestants. But this is just my general understanding.

Just curious on how you deal with:

Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

This would have been much harder without my new go-to site for Biblical apologetics, the Scripture Catholic.

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/justification.html#justification-V

Happy Christmas! I've got to go and wrap up some gifts before morning comes!

 

[Abba San]

It is Christmas morning. Today we celebrate the birth of Jesus - the Christ - our Savior and Lord.

Protestant or Catholic - in this we are united.

We are not here to proselytize from one Christian faith to another. This is contrary to the CGA terms of service and the What Does God Say About... thread. Most of what can be said about Catholic vs. Protestant without getting more personal or critical has been said. Based on the direction of this thread and the intent of our fellowship I am closing this thread later today. If anyone has a question or concern - feel free to PM me.

Have a Merry Christmas. Praise the Lord today.

 

[Lloren]

Yes, We have veered away from a path of "What God Says About..." to a "What does a denomination say about...". Closing thread. If anyone has a further question about this they can message Abba San, Durruck, or Lloren. Merry Christmas!