Vile

The title pretty much sums up this unscripted and raw video!

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Sin

[gbonbon452]

Thanks for this video!

[nvwriter]

@excatholics Please, I did not state Clement of Rome made this statement. It was made by Peter, which is in 1 of his epistles, 1 of 3 that were included in The Clementine Homilies. The specific epistle is from Peter to Apostle James, whom I'm sure you know was Jesus' brother. Nice bow out :), but you are the person whom needs direction, so that you may redirect your followers. God Bless.

[excatholics]

@nvwriter

Friend, you're on dangerous ground and the follwing verse comes to mind:

"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his." (2 Timothy 2:16-19.

[excatholics]

@nvwriter

I will allow others, should they wish, to go back and forth with you on this flawed subject, for time doesn't allow me, but I'll just leave you with this: If Clement had been "ordained" by Peter, how could he then say Peter's writings/teachings were corrupted. Surely, Clement would just "repeat word for word all that Peter told him." Sorry, but this makes no sense whatsoever.

[nvwriter]

@excatholics A Continuation: For such an one has believed not by judgment, but by prejudice, resting his own hope on the opinion of those who have lived before him on a mere peradventure. And it is not easy to cast off the ancestral garment, though it be shown to himself to be wholly foolish and ridiculous.” If you allowed video response, I could answer in detail, all of your objections.

[nvwriter]

@excatholics Well then, Clement of Rome, appointed Church Father by his friend, Apostle Peter, wrote, “There is a certain great difference between truth and custom. For truth is found when it is honestly sought; but custom, whatsoever be the character of the custom received, whether true or false, is strengthen by itself without the exercise of judgment; and he who has received it is neither pleased with it as being true, nor grieved with it as false. CONT

[excatholics]

@nvwriter

And there's your problem my friend. You quote an atheist that mocked the Bible, whereas I give you a saved man, who has blessed many believers in Christ and His word! Enough said.

[nvwriter]

@excatholics Ah, that is the problem YOU"RE dealing with, you're reading someone else's work, Mark Twain said it well in his autobiography, "“In religion and politics, people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.” God Bless.

[excatholics]

@nvwriter

You're failing to get your dispensations in the right place and to distinguish the First and Second Coming.

First Coming-Son of Joseph-suffers for mankind.

Second Coming-Son of David-reigns and conquers His enemies.

You may wish to get hold of Clarence Larkin's excellent book "Dispensational Truth."

[nvwriter]

@excatholics Friend, I am correct & I know it to be fact & not supposition. All the books of the NT may line up, but they are corrupt. OT Prophesies, which address the Messiah, Jesus, attest to that fact. These prophecies tell us Jesus came to end the blood sacrifice, which Apostle Paul attested to in his translated epistles, but that teaching is not found in the NT. Jeremiah 31:31 told us Jesus would bring a new covenant, but neither is it found in those books. Why, if the NT is not corrupted?