Jim Lincoln wrote:
Luke 12
16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:
17 and he reasoned within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have not where to bestow my fruits?
18 And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my grain and my goods.
19 And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry.
20 But God said unto him, Thou foolish one, this night is thy soul required of thee; and the things which thou hast prepared, whose shall they be?
21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.
Tony Snow had time to decide where to lay up his treasure, let's hope that he made the right decision.

Bernard wrote:
Is that your entire Muslim engagement and evangelism strategy, or just the first stage?

enough already wrote:
GG, Why do you keep on insisting your sin-riddled 'church' is that of Christ's? Do you think Christ is the head over a denomination which tolerates sodomy & idolatry, just to mention a few?

R. K. Borill wrote:
First, the question must be asked, "Which Jesus does Burke believe in?" If he does not believe in the Jesus of scripture, if he does not have the doctrine of Christ, then he does not have God. (2 Jn. 9) Therefore, because this Burke bows before the one who calls himself Christ's Vicar, who exalts himself and all that is called God, he is in communion with Antichrist who opposes God. And for that matter, since you defend Antichrist, you are also in communion with him, and while you think you do God service, you actually oppose him and are under the wrath of God. If you loved Jesus Christ, you would believe his word. But you neither know him, nor the one who sent him.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Your comment reveals that you have abandoned him too, because you believe in "another Jesus" - one which is not the Word.

R. K. Borill wrote:
No Lance "Ecclessia",
He is a fool, because he believes in the one who opposes God. 2 Thess. 2:4

Dr. Phil wrote:
John,
You have answered you own question "since when is the Pope against Christ?". Also, since you defend the Pope, have you really dispensed with uscriptural doctrines and unscriptural "parts" of the Mass?
2 Jn. 9

Biblical Doctrine wrote:
John
The truth is that you can't serve the (papal) antichrist and Christ at the same time.
God teaches
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
AND
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
AND
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So the true Christian must standfast for God and His Son Jesus - rejecting all cults and heresy.
That is Witness IN Truth.
Remember John; Bible commands
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY.

Mic wrote:
Bush is a born-again Christian. God does not sway with the wind when He saves someone. Bush is saved. Bush will not become a Catholic.

bernie wrote:
Is this the kind of President Christians want, one who is for the murder of innocent unborn babies? Unfortunately, this man will probably gain the presidency, because he is exactly the kind of leader America deserves.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Ah, I'm going to have to point this one out to Lance, on the Shroud of Turin article! While many can point out that faith is a belief in things unseen, this is like having a faith in things seen.
I would also have to recommend, [URL=http://www.catholicconcerns.com/Idolatry.html]]]What Is Idolatry?[/URL]

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Tony, the KKK, never bothered the Roman Catholic Church in the South -- they were whites like us, types. [URL=http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=gore]]]Lincoln's prophetic warning[/URL] shows that the Roman Church was very sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and to slavery. Norther n Abolitionists, while to politically active, were all Protestant. The return to Biblical Christianity with the aid of such people as C.I. Scofield,[URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=5504173329]]]Dispensations[/URL] was a great benefit to Southern --and Northern--Christians alike.

PILUT wrote:
What's bad is, his recanting of his statements is probably a lie. He still believes that Rome is the whore of Babylon, but is "to entangled with the affairs of this life" to stand strong.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Right action, wrong reason, and wrong church--[URL=http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/roman-catholicism/RC0200W2.htm]]]Come out of the Catholic Church.[/URL]
Since the Anglican Church isn't Christian, [URL=http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/episcopal_church_exposed.htm]]]The Episcopal Church Exposed![/URL], a rather agitated piece of commentary, and there was some Christians in the Anglican Church at least in the last century, but for the modern day Anglican Church, this article does a good job of describing it.

savedbygrace wrote:
R.K.Borill,
Amen!
John Yurich,
I don't know where you have obtained your definition of a cult but you happen to leave out the most distinguishing feature.
The Roman cult has a hierarchical cult-belief system. By agreeing to not attempt to privately interpret Holy Scripture a Roman adherent has his mind controlled by the Magisterium.
The cult-belief system is perpetrated throughout the organization by a special group and their writings(encyclicals, councils, etc.)are authoritative that must be accepted. Adherents are held in check by the fear of excommunication and the venture of hell awaiting as they are brainwashed into believing that salvation is only through the false church and its doctrines.
Similar to other cults(ie., Jehovah Witnesses-The Watchtower; Mormons-The Pearl of Great Price) not only is private interpretation forbidden but the use of extra-Biblical books is outstanding.
JOHN 3:36