Protestantism on its face is correct, however. Because catholicism is nothing but another demonination filled with heresies, but compounded over thousands of years with a central controlling organization of heretical fanfiction writers and corrupt power seeking bureaucrats.
Sedevacantist though I may be, I don't buy that. Protestantism brought us the incalculable heresy of "thou shalt not kill", the implications of which are largely responsible for the cuckolding of the faith as a whole.
The core of protestantism is not one particular incorrect interpretation of the bible, but a rejection of a centralized authority and the false idol of the pope. It acts in a similar way to the intended design of the US states system, in that it protects one church from the bad actors of its neighbors and prevents power seeking corrupt figures from having massive reach.
I did say I was a sedevacantist, so no I didn't miss that Bergoglio is a heretic. I've called him one outright many times on this forum.
rejection of a centralized authority
And therefore rejection of the words of Christ himself, who named a vicar of the church in the form of Peter the Apostle.
As for protecting against bad actors, I'd point you to the present state of Methodism, which actually acts like a democracy and holds a fucking vote on whether or not something is a sin anymore. There is nothing Christian about crass mob rule. I'm fact there's decidedly something satanic about it.
The structure of one enormous ruling body is not outlined in the bible. Peter was a leader, but the existence of the pope is a grand fiction that attempts to usurp the authority of god.
The convenience of separate denominations means that the methodists, for example, have no actual power. You can go to a church a mile away and find sanity, instead of everyone being under a boot. So some methodists are clearly heretics attempting to commit the same mistakes that caused protestantism to exist. Reject them and they have no power, unlike the catholic structure.
I don't aay any one denomination is actually correct, but that rejecting false ruling bodies filled with power seeking clowns is correct.
Any of these human denominations is fallible. Most of their good people have been replaced by those who wear the skin suit and hold the title of these organizations. Much like our own country where we have these evil doers claiming to be "americans". It's all perversion
Protestantism on its face is correct, however. Because catholicism is nothing but another demonination filled with heresies, but compounded over thousands of years with a central controlling organization of heretical fanfiction writers and corrupt power seeking bureaucrats.
Sedevacantist though I may be, I don't buy that. Protestantism brought us the incalculable heresy of "thou shalt not kill", the implications of which are largely responsible for the cuckolding of the faith as a whole.
Did you miss the pope being a heretic?
The core of protestantism is not one particular incorrect interpretation of the bible, but a rejection of a centralized authority and the false idol of the pope. It acts in a similar way to the intended design of the US states system, in that it protects one church from the bad actors of its neighbors and prevents power seeking corrupt figures from having massive reach.
I did say I was a sedevacantist, so no I didn't miss that Bergoglio is a heretic. I've called him one outright many times on this forum.
And therefore rejection of the words of Christ himself, who named a vicar of the church in the form of Peter the Apostle.
As for protecting against bad actors, I'd point you to the present state of Methodism, which actually acts like a democracy and holds a fucking vote on whether or not something is a sin anymore. There is nothing Christian about crass mob rule. I'm fact there's decidedly something satanic about it.
The structure of one enormous ruling body is not outlined in the bible. Peter was a leader, but the existence of the pope is a grand fiction that attempts to usurp the authority of god.
The convenience of separate denominations means that the methodists, for example, have no actual power. You can go to a church a mile away and find sanity, instead of everyone being under a boot. So some methodists are clearly heretics attempting to commit the same mistakes that caused protestantism to exist. Reject them and they have no power, unlike the catholic structure.
I don't aay any one denomination is actually correct, but that rejecting false ruling bodies filled with power seeking clowns is correct.
So did Peter and Christ ever meet? Remind me.
Unless Christ was a GamerGator with keys to our time machine.
Any of these human denominations is fallible. Most of their good people have been replaced by those who wear the skin suit and hold the title of these organizations. Much like our own country where we have these evil doers claiming to be "americans". It's all perversion