Andy @CredoAndCode

Joined September 2022

Tweets

88
Followers

14
Following

217
Likes

11K

Andy @CredoAndCode

2 weeks ago

@C2Antiquity Slick edit, but Wes still clears 🤷🏻

0 0 0 8 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

3 weeks ago

So why was the Cavs’ late 4th quarter/OT game plan to put the ball in James Harden’s hands?

0 0 0 57 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

3 weeks ago

@swankywolverine Fun fact: around 153 of Michigan’s total wins came before the forward pass was legalized.

0 0 1 59 0

View Details

@beckevangelista @Acts17David “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” - Ephesians 4:29

0 0 0 20 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@JayDyer @AmoasahPat84067 Answer the question

0 0 0 7 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@JayDyer Jay to literally anyone with a pulse:

0 0 0 17 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@JayDyer Truly find something better to do with your life Jay.

0 0 0 8 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@C2Antiquity @ApostateProphet @GodLogic_GL @Acts17David Dude get over it.

0 0 0 44 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@mackel_spencer @Catholic_bro You’re still importing “from sin” into the text though. Being uniquely described a certain way doesn’t automatically prove the specific doctrine you’re attaching to it. That conclusion still has to be demonstrated from the text itself, which so far you have failed to show.

0 0 0 17 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers Because accepting ecumenical councils is not the same thing as accepting later Vatican I claims about papal supremacy/infallibility. The Orthodox accept the first 7 councils while still rejecting those doctrines.

1 0 0 19 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers Apostolic succession existing does not automatically prove Vatican I style papal supremacy/infallibility though. Orthodox Christians also believe in apostolic succession while rejecting those later Roman claims.

1 0 0 18 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers You’ve argued for Peter having authority, which most Christians already agree with. What you haven’t demonstrated is how this becomes a perpetual office of universal infallible jurisdiction, uniquely tied to every future bishop of Rome.

1 0 0 14 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers You’re subtly changing the claim though. Early Christians recognizing Rome as important is not the same thing as proving later Vatican I style papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction.

1 0 0 12 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers That’s a non sequitur. “Peter died in Rome” does not logically lead to “therefore every future bishop of Rome has universal infallible authority.”

1 0 0 29 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@mackel_spencer @Catholic_bro But Ephesians 2:8 says grace saves believers too, and believers still sin. So you still haven’t shown where “full of grace” specifically means “sinless from conception” rather than uniquely favored and redeemed by God.

1 0 0 23 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers The logical jump is from “Peter had authority” to “every future bishop of Rome inherits universal infallible supremacy.” And Ignatius succeeding Peter in Antioch actually cuts against the argument, because Peter wasn’t only associated with Rome.

1 0 0 27 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers Nobody denies the keys symbolize authority. The debate is whether that authority was unique to Peter alone and passed down as universal papal supremacy. Matthew 16 never explicitly says that part.

1 0 0 32 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers And Protestants/Orthodox would say Matthew 16 still doesn’t prove later papal supremacy or infallibility. You’re reading centuries of later Roman doctrine back into a text that never explicitly lays all that out.

1 0 0 17 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers Luke 22 says Peter should strengthen his brothers after falling himself, not that every future bishop of Rome gets universal infallible authority over the entire Church. That’s a massive jump from the actual text.

1 0 0 29 0

View Details

Andy @CredoAndCode

4 weeks ago

@DanielBast67996 @Verlustt11 @JarrodPChambers Okay, but that still doesn’t solve the problem lol. If Carthage already settled the canon universally, then Rome’s confirmation is irrelevant. And if Rome’s confirmation mattered, then you’re back to assuming Rome had special authority in the first place.