|
|
Post by whathell on Jun 30, 2008 14:09:28 GMT -5
Where does bible (non-Catholic) scripture alone support ONE Pope and ONE Physical Church? You can NOT go back to bible scriptures prior to Catholicism and support what exist today or started back then. It is totally made-man and NOT of God. I can not think of a single scripture to support Catholicism's early claims to its first Pope (of which there is only one) over one physical church. The Catholic religion's beginnings are no more creditable than that of Islam's. Our God scripturally supports ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura) salvation NOT religion. Think about it! Readers: All link(s) are clickable reference www.wayofthemaster.com/ Peace in knowing Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 30, 2008 14:24:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 30, 2008 14:26:31 GMT -5
Our God scripturally supports salvation NOT religion. So was Jesus wrong to be a religious God on earth? Jesus supported religion. Why would His Father "not" support religion devoted to Him?  |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 30, 2008 14:34:41 GMT -5
This one is way too easy.
Matthew 16 (NIV)17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[d] will not overcome it.[e] 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[f] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[g] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.
John 1 Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas" (which, when translated, is Peter[j]).
These verses are important. Notice how Jesus(who is God) changes Simon's name to Peter.
The only other instances I can think of in the Bible where God changes someone's name is first, Abram to Abraham. He gave him a promise and made him the father of many nations. Very significant. Next, Jacob to whom God gives the name "Israel" and he becomes the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Now, back to Peter, Jesus changes his name and he becomes the "father" of the church and the "elder brother" of the 12 apostles. That fact was recognized by ALL of the early church fathers (that weren't heretics).
Some people think St. Paul's name was changed by God, however there is nothing in Scripture that says this was so. Most Bible scholars (protestant too) say that he simply began using the name Paul instead of Saul because he became the Apostle to the Gentiles. Paul is the Greek version of Saul.
I will leave you with those scriptural agruments to see what you say. I do have more verses though.
Teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 30, 2008 14:48:27 GMT -5
Well, they have a completely different interpretation of that verse. Depending on which Protestant you ask, it could mean that Jesus built His Church upon Peter's words (confession) which is a ridiculous belief because those words were never Peter's but God's words placed "in" Peter. Or, they could be Jesus Himself which would make Jesus illiterate. The funniest thing they believe is that Peter (which is not a name, but a description, literally meaning "rock") doesn't mean rock in that sentence. I think it was Knuckles who told me that Simon was only called Peter once by Jesus or something like that (at this very instance) and after that, He only referred to him as Simon. However, the rest of The Apostles would refer to him as "rock" or Peter...literally "Cephas" in Aramaic. |
|
|
|
Post by whathell on Jul 1, 2008 6:23:10 GMT -5
My Q: [Where does bible (non-Catholic) scripture alone support ONE Pope and ONE Physical Church?] Ur A: [Your first question: The office of one leader (Pope) and one physical Church is based on Jesus' example of His being a physical leader on earth and on His having one religious group following Him.] Firstly, I did NOT ask this question of you: [Where is there (non-Catholic) scripture EXAMPLE(S) of ONE Pope and ONE Physical Church?] Now did I? I asked a specific question: [Where does bible (non-Catholic) scripture alone support ONE Pope and ONE Physical Church?] Secondly, what you just did was to self ascribed the name Pope to “A LEADER” who YOU choose (without scriptural basis btw) to be Yeshua/Jesus. Yeshua/Jesus was NOT a Pope of a PHYSICAL church. That is YOUR religion speaking and NOT the Word of God (bible scripture). Thirdly, Yeshua is NOT a religion and those who followed him soon found this out and became born-again (not into a religion but into the family of God) …crying Abby Father an not Abby Religious/Rituals. LOL You wrote: [What's your understanding of what The Church claims? And please cite where you get these beleifs from so that we can either confirm or refute these beliefs.] Does not matter what I think or my understanding …what matters is what the Word of God has stated about HIS church (the BODY of Christ) which HE (Yeshua/Jesus) is the HEAD of. [Proof?] Now that is strange. There is NO biblical evidence for Catholicism’s claim of first Pope and/or its Physical church , just MEN (like yourself) sayings there is. You know …this is exactly what the Muslims says …show us the proof! First things first …if you make up something …the onus is on YOU to show the evidence, since you are the one making contrary claims to what bible scriptures clearly show. Readers: All link(s) are clickable reference www.wayofthemaster.comPeace in knowing Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 7:48:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by whathell on Jul 1, 2008 10:59:17 GMT -5
*SMH* You have already changed what I and you said ...lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 11:29:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 16:57:50 GMT -5
Excellent question! We see this succession of Apostles (or the highest of The Church's Leaders) with the appointment of Matthias to replace Judas in Acts one who was chosen by lot (this is the way Popes are chosen today under prayer for discersion from God and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; by lot). Here, The Apostle's Leader speaks on "how" a replacement for Judas is to be elected and based that decision on scripture: Acts 1 15 And in these days Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren, and said (and there was a multitude of persons gathered together, about a hundred and twenty),
16 Brethren, it was needful that the Scripture should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was guide to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered among us, and received his portion in this ministry.
18 (Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it became known to all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch that in their language that field was called Akeldama, that is, The field of blood.)
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take.
21 Of the men therefore that have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us,
22 beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show of these two the one whom thou hast chosen,
25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas fell away, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they gave lots for them; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. Because The Church was being persecuted, it was difficult for them to keep records much less establish any kind of order. This is one of the reasons that no actual Bible appeared until "after" their persecution was lifted in the 4th century. But how do we know what? By the historical writings of The Early Church Fathers (those Christian leaders from the time of Christ until the formal formation of The Church in the 4th century when they were [again] able to hold councils and meetings without the fear of being killed). It is from The ECF's that we get the Doctrines of Salvation & Justification. It is from The ECF's that we have the Bible. It is from the ECF's that we have the Doctrine of The Holy Trinity. They are the foundation for those teachings that we cannot fine specified in The Bible and the only reason we can look at The Bible now and see The Holy Trinity is because these men got together and went through the process of weeding out what was a believable Christian belief and what wasn't to be believed. There's a rich history of The ECF's fighting off heresies (Christians who believed all sorts of non-Christian beliefs and that were misleading other Christians into error). The quick list, just in the 1st century alone: First Century St. Peter (c.33-67AD) Linus (? 67-76) Anacletus (? 76-88) Clement I (? 88-97) Evaristus (? 97-105) Here is a historical list of Popes from a non-Catholic source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popeswww.britannia.com/history/resource/popes.htmlwww.trivialworld.info/religion/list-of-popes/(As usual, some may vary, but these are after all non-Catholic sources. However, it cannot be denied that there is a succession of Popes all the way from Benedict to Peter that can be traced by this lineage) This is how a new Pope is chosen (basically, it is reflective of how Matthias [not a Pope, but roughly the same manner is chosen] was chosen): abcnews.go.com/Health/Pope/story?id=462794Don't I always show sources CrispySombrero? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 16:59:27 GMT -5
Annnnnnnd as far as sources go, dont put up those phony baloney sites like you do too, lol I want websites and documentation, lol Get it Got it Good!!! LOL! Look at that! I did exactly what you wanted without even having read this post! God is my witness! Do you want something to drink with those proofs? |
|
|
|
Post by righteousone on Jul 1, 2008 18:14:14 GMT -5
I think it's truly sad how these non-Catholics are getting their information all wrong. Are they listening to their pastors? To ex-Catholics who left the church? Or are they just ignorant of Scripture. It so clearly states how Jesus made Peter head of his church, the Catholic church when he gave him the keys to the Kingdom and told him "WHAT YOU LOOSE ON EARTH WILL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN, AND WHAT YOU BIND ON EARTH WILL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN". This is the papacy.
This is clearly leadership of Jesus's church. I'd rather have a leader than to have 30,000 denominations in confusion and disarray.
Every other religion was either started through a fight or an argument, an off-shoot of Catholicism. And since St. Ignatius used the term as early as 107 A.D. referring to the church as the "Catholic church", then everything was Catholic in belief back then...hello people wake up.
|
|
|
|
Post by whathell on Jul 1, 2008 19:06:35 GMT -5
Excellent question! We see this succession of Apostles (or the highest of The Church's Leaders) with the appointment of Matthias to replace Judas in Acts one who was chosen by lot (this is the way Popes are chosen today under prayer for discersion from God and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; by lot). Here, The Apostle's Leader speaks on "how" a replacement for Judas is to be elected and based that decision on scripture: Acts 1 15 And in these days Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren, and said (and there was a multitude of persons gathered together, about a hundred and twenty),
16 Brethren, it was needful that the Scripture should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was guide to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered among us, and received his portion in this ministry.
18 (Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it became known to all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch that in their language that field was called Akeldama, that is, The field of blood.)
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take.
21 Of the men therefore that have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us,
22 beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show of these two the one whom thou hast chosen,
25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas fell away, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they gave lots for them; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. Because The Church was being persecuted, it was difficult for them to keep records much less establish any kind of order. This is one of the reasons that no actual Bible appeared until "after" their persecution was lifted in the 4th century. But how do we know what? By the historical writings of The Early Church Fathers (those Christian leaders from the time of Christ until the formal formation of The Church in the 4th century when they were [again] able to hold councils and meetings without the fear of being killed). It is from The ECF's that we get the Doctrines of Salvation & Justification. It is from The ECF's that we have the Bible. It is from the ECF's that we have the Doctrine of The Holy Trinity. They are the foundation for those teachings that we cannot fine specified in The Bible and the only reason we can look at The Bible now and see The Holy Trinity is because these men got together and went through the process of weeding out what was a believable Christian belief and what wasn't to be believed. There's a rich history of The ECF's fighting off heresies (Christians who believed all sorts of non-Christian beliefs and that were misleading other Christians into error). The quick list, just in the 1st century alone: First Century St. Peter (c.33-67AD) Linus (? 67-76) Anacletus (? 76-88) Clement I (? 88-97) Evaristus (? 97-105) Here is a historical list of Popes from a non-Catholic source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popeswww.britannia.com/history/resource/popes.htmlwww.trivialworld.info/religion/list-of-popes/(As usual, some may vary, but these are after all non-Catholic sources. However, it cannot be denied that there is a succession of Popes all the way from Benedict to Peter that can be traced by this lineage) This is how a new Pope is chosen (basically, it is reflective of how Matthias [not a Pope, but roughly the same manner is chosen] was chosen): abcnews.go.com/Health/Pope/story?id=462794Don't I always show sources CrispySombrero? You wrote: [Here is a historical list of Popes from a non-Catholic source] Stating it this way, one could assume you mean there is no bias. Catholic power is a reality and their word is accept as fact by many secular sources or at least very creditable. However, since when has a secular source been able to discern bible scriptures? They only record what is given to them that seems reasonably accurate. Nevertheless, as a Christian we are responsible for correctly discerning the Word of God. You wrote: [St. Peter (c.33-67AD) Linus (? 67-76)...] 1. First question ...where and who gave this information? 2. How did this person quote "take over" Peter's supposed position? 3. Your statement was that the Apostle Peter taught us that to select an Apostle by lot (like how they choose Matthias). (((Playing along with this))) So going by this we see that Peter replaced Judas who was certainly NOT the leader of the Apostles, correct? Acts 1:16 (New International Version) 16. and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus.... Now though I have played along with your SUPPOSE CORRECT INFORMATION ...it is time we revisited the scripture and read it carefully. Peter’s reason is very different then what you have stated as a reason for choosing Matthias ...he say it was in order "...to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas." Nowhere was is it mentioned that it was to replace a leader (and especially Judas). Nor after this replacement were any Apostles ever replaced even though they were known to number less than 12. This was a one-time event to fulfill scriptures prophecy and that is all. It is Catholicism and NOT scripture teaching this doctrine of ONE leader and falsely pointing out Peter as a leader of the Apostles when it was no more than his God given personality. If someone has the same personality in a class room setting ...does that make him the classes leader? THINK don’t just repeat what you have heard. Readers: All link(s) are clickable reference href=http://www.wayofthemaster.comPeace in knowing Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 20:47:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 1, 2008 20:49:35 GMT -5
I think it's truly sad how these non-Catholics are getting their information all wrong. Are they listening to their pastors? To ex-Catholics who left the church? Or are they just ignorant of Scripture. It so clearly states how Jesus made Peter head of his church, the Catholic church when he gave him the keys to the Kingdom and told him "WHAT YOU LOOSE ON EARTH WILL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN, AND WHAT YOU BIND ON EARTH WILL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN". This is the papacy. This is clearly leadership of Jesus's church. I'd rather have a leader than to have 30,000 denominations in confusion and disarray. Every other religion was either started through a fight or an argument, an off-shoot of Catholicism. And since St. Ignatius used the term as early as 107 A.D. referring to the church as the "Catholic church", then everything was Catholic in belief back then...hello people wake up. Matthew 7:24-27 R1...Matthew 7. It was prophecized by Jesus Christ Himself. |
|
|
|
Post by righteousone on Jul 2, 2008 7:38:21 GMT -5
I can hardly make out WH's sentences. Try speaking in laymen's terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 2, 2008 8:02:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by whathell on Jul 2, 2008 10:51:22 GMT -5
This one is way too easy. Matthew 16 (NIV)17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[d] will not overcome it.[e] 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[f] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[g] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ. John 1 Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas" (which, when translated, is Peter[j]). These verses are important. Notice how Jesus(who is God) changes Simon's name to Peter. The only other instances I can think of in the Bible where God changes someone's name is first, Abram to Abraham. He gave him a promise and made him the father of many nations. Very significant. Next, Jacob to whom God gives the name "Israel" and he becomes the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Now, back to Peter, Jesus changes his name and he becomes the "father" of the church and the "elder brother" of the 12 apostles. That fact was recognized by ALL of the early church fathers (that weren't heretics). Some people think St. Paul's name was changed by God, however there is nothing in Scripture that says this was so. Most Bible scholars (protestant too) say that he simply began using the name Paul instead of Saul because he became the Apostle to the Gentiles. Paul is the Greek version of Saul. I will leave you with those scriptural agruments to see what you say. I do have more verses though. Teresa I am not ignoring you. Just do not have much time on hand these days. You wrote: [This one is way too easy. Matthew 16 (NIV) 17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[d] will not overcome it.[e] 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[f] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[g] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.] LOL …this scripture is cited so much OUT OF CONTEXT Maybe you should read from the 20th verse backwards to get the point ;^) You wrote: [John 1 Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas" (which, when translated, is Peter[j]). These verses are important. Notice how Jesus(who is God) changes Simon's name to Peter. The only other instances I can think of in the Bible where God changes someone's name is first, Abram to Abraham. He gave him a promise and made him the father of many nations. Very significant. Next, Jacob to whom God gives the name "Israel" and he becomes the father of the 12 tribes of Israel.] You are comparing apples and oranges here. Scripture is very clear (from God, as you notably pointed out) that Abraham who be the father of many nations in a promise from God. However, it is YOU who have decided from a religious doctrine that Peter is the father of the church AND elder brother of ALL the apostles and it is NOT recorded as such in any bible scripture. Nor is there scripture(s) where Peter said he was a leader rather than and equal with all the other 11 apostles. You wrote: [Now, back to Peter, Jesus changes his name and he becomes the "father" of the church and the "elder brother" of the 12 apostles. That fact was recognized by ALL of the early church fathers (that weren't heretics).] Yeah (biased I see) they were heretics for following scripture …lol. If scripture stated what you just wrote we would have no reason to debate it. Fact is, Catholicism and NOT the Word of God is stating that Peter is the FATHER OF THE CHURCH when the body of Christ (the true church) has a Father already and in which Peter is in perfect harmony with. You wrote: [Some people think St. Paul's name was changed by God, however there is nothing in Scripture that says this was so. Most Bible scholars (protestant too) say that he simply began using the name Paul instead of Saul because he became the Apostle to the Gentiles. Paul is the Greek version of Saul.] Let’s stick with scripture. We do not know who called Saul, Paul. Nor do we have evidence it was by his design to be called Paul. It could of verily well been of the Christian brethren to do so to calm fear due to his earlier attacks against the same, but we honestly do no know. You wrote: [I will leave you with those scriptural agruments to see what you say. I do have more verses though. Teresa] God bless you Teresa and thanks for the response. Readers: All link(s) are clickable reference www.wayofthemaster.com/Peace in knowing Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jul 2, 2008 11:34:15 GMT -5
So, you mean to say that Abraham is the "pope" of many nations? Because that's what "pope" means..."father". Either way, when God changed their names, both had the same consaquences. Both would go on to lead multitudes. As for the scriptures, here are some. We can go over them one by one. If only one of them prove your doctrine wrong, then it's all wrong: Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).
Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.
Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.
Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.
Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.
Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.
Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus' tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.
Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ's representative on earth.
Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus' teachings.
Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.
Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.
Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus' curse on the fig tree.
Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.
Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.
Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.
Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the "fisher of men."
Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.
Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.
Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.
Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.
Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter's formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.
Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.
Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.
Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.
John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.
John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.
John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter's death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.
John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the "barque of Peter") is a metaphor for the Church.
John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.
John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.
John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Sheep means all people, even the apostles.
Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord's ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.
Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn't it need one to Peter? Of course.
Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.
Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.
Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.
Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.
Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.
Acts 5:15 - Peter's shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.
Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.
Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon's quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.
Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.
Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.
Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.
Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).
Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the "whole Church" offered "earnest prayers" for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.
Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.
Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church's first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.
Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter's definitive teaching.
Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter's definitive teaching. "Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited..."
Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn't want to build on "another man's foundation" referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.
1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.
1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”
Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ's Revelation to Paul.
1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by "exhorting" all the other bishops and elders of the Church.
1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from "Babylon" which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that "Babylon" meant Rome. Rome was the "great city" of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.
2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus' prediction of Peter's death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.
2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul's letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.
Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants. The "if it ain't in The Bible" theory doesn't work since The Bible "ain't in The Bible". And yes, Catholicism reveals what Peter's place was because God chose Catholicism to reveal "what" was to be considered His Word and so, she has the authority to reveal "what" it means. A person who "really" follows The Word of God doesn't deny that Jesus sent out men and that they had all His authority. If that person believes that this stopped, they must provide their proof in scripture (not in their own conjecture or lack of answers). That's what I'm talking about WH. Well put. That's how we learn from each other...in an orderly exchange. By the way, to quote a member here you are responding to, you highlight their words and click on the button on top of your Post Reply Message Box that is at the bottom row, the 3rd button from the left of the YouTube button. That will put their words in a Quote Box, making it easier for your words and their words to be distinguishable. Pax |
|
|
|
Post by whathell on Jul 3, 2008 3:51:12 GMT -5
I think it's truly sad how these non-Catholics are getting their information all wrong. Are they listening to their pastors? To ex-Catholics who left the church? Or are they just ignorant of Scripture. It so clearly states how Jesus made Peter head of his church, the Catholic church when he gave him the keys to the Kingdom and told him "WHAT YOU LOOSE ON EARTH WILL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN, AND WHAT YOU BIND ON EARTH WILL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN". This is the papacy. This is clearly leadership of Jesus's church. I'd rather have a leader than to have 30,000 denominations in confusion and disarray. Every other religion was either started through a fight or an argument, an off-shoot of Catholicism. And since St. Ignatius used the term as early as 107 A.D. referring to the church as the "Catholic church", then everything was Catholic in belief back then...hello people wake up. You wrote:
There is one other possibility …you are just dead wrong ;D
You wrote:
[It so clearly states how Jesus made Peter head of his church…]
This is your RELIGION speaking and NOT bible scriptures
You wrote:
[…the Catholic church when he gave him the keys to the Kingdom and told him "WHAT YOU LOOSE ON EARTH WILL BE LOOSED IN HEAVEN, AND WHAT YOU BIND ON EARTH WILL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN". This is the papacy.]
Then I guess we all are Popes because Yeshua/Jesus also said in the same book:
Matthew 18:18-20 (New International Version)
18. "I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
19. "Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20. For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."
LOL
You wrote:
[This is clearly leadership of Jesus's church.]
Ephesians 1:22-23 (New International Version)
22. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23. which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.
Colossians 1:18 (New International Version)
18. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.
Darn …and I was thinking that Yeshua/Jesus was running things.
You wrote:
[I'd rather have a leader than to have 30,000 denominations in confusion and disarray.]
Catholicism IS confusion ...lol
But then again any cult seems harmonious when you accept its teachings.
You wrote:
[Every other religion was either started through a fight or an argument, an off-shoot of Catholicism.]
Guess you be
You wrote:
[And since St. Ignatius used the term as early as 107 A.D. referring to the church as the "Catholic church", then everything was Catholic in belief back then...hello people wake up.]
People have the right to leave this falsehood and confusion and become indwelt with the Holy Spirit.
Readers: All link(s) are clickable reference
href=http://www.wayofthemaster.com
Peace in knowing Jesus.
|
|
