Free Will vs Election

[TaylorSexton]

Your quote from the Council of Carthage means nothing.

Of course not, because it's damaging to your views.

We can keep quoting Church Fathers, but in the end it is pointless, because our ultimate authority is Scripture, not the Fathers. This is the entire protest of the Protestants. In the end, it doesn't matter what any Father says; all that matters is what Scripture says, and you have provided nothing from Scripture that proves your case, which is why you have had to argue in circles, finding Rome in every passage when, in reality, it is light years away.

We can both appeal to history all we want, but it is no help, because, despite your deluded assertions that Rome is somehow perfectly unified in doctrine (despite centuries of historical evidence to the contrary), we can both find historic theologians who agree with either position. That should be no surprise. That is why I, once again, appeal ultimately to Scripture, the only true source of unified, infallible doctrine. And, frankly, it pleases me that you have only your tradition to lean on when defending your theology.

Who should we believe, those chosen as successors of the apostles, or you?

Neither, because they are both entirely fallible. We believe the Word which God breathed from his very mouth. You can keep your tradition, I will hold to Scripture.

 

[Thursday]

Of course not, because it's damaging to your views.

You are being very dishonest. I explained why it was irrelevant. The quote was in regards to the African bishops on hand for this council, nothing more. It was in no way relevant to the role of Peter's successor.

I provided other quotes from Cyprian that are explicit regarding his view of the successor of Peter.

 

[TaylorSexton]

You are being very dishonest. I explained why it was irrelevant. The quote was in regards to the African bishops on hand for this council, nothing more. It was in no way relevant to the role of Peter's successor.

I provided other quotes from Cyprian that are explicit regarding his view of the successor of Peter.

And still nothing from Scripture. That would be the "honest" thing to do. This is a living example of why Rome, contrary to your contrived claims of unity, has been in constant unrest almost since its conception. It's thirst for power and its arrogant claims to the sole ownership of God's people have caused it to be what it is today—ignoring its own history, plugging its ears to the reality of its own doctrinal struggles within itself, and brazenly calling others the dissenters.

It is astounding, really.

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON

This thread is closed. There are reports of flaming and SoP violations (debating in an area that's not yours). Please be mindful of how and where you post in the future.


ADMIN HAT OFF