Hey Protestant Bros!

[Norseman82]

The initial DELEGATION of power to Peter, seems to have occurred, NOT as it is REVISED, but for his life and times.

Please back that statement up with a reliable source and not just personal opinion.

[Norseman82]

Truth its only common sense to know somebody has to be in charge, and keep everybody headed in the same direction.

Exactly.

There is an old saying along the lines of "a committee can't run a war". Truth, do you or have you worked in the corporate world? I do, and can personally attest that unless someone is in charge, meetings could go on forever without resolution.

[Paladin D]

We can give all the proof that the Bible and History can provide and still hit the wall with the Catholics.

We few Christians, understand the Holy Spirit. The Catholic don't understand the Holy Spirit.

We understand that The Cc transformed from the Roman empire.

We understand that oral tradition is a means of false trace back to Peter.

We further understand that if that trace is broken the back of the Cc is broken.

We know that Christ didn't set up this hiarchy of the Cc, because he gave us equal powers. The apostle shared equal power in the will of God.

We know that Mary was a vessal, not a God.

We know that Scripture trumps scare tradition.

We know that the Cc frist move to lead the Church from Christ was the sabbath.

We know that the Cc second move to lead the Church from Christ was Mary & saints.

We know that the Cc third move to lead the church from Christ was the pope.

We know that the Cc forth move to lead the church from Christ was the baptism.

We know that the Cc fifth move to lead the church from Christ was it us of the Lords Last supper.

We know that Rev 17-19 talk about the Woman and the Dragon the Cc call her The Holy Mother Church. Babylon is Rome, Draqon is the Anti-christ, The woman is Cc.

Mystery Babylon the Great, The Mother of Prostitutes and of the Abominations of the Earth. Very interchangable. "if it walk like a duck"

We know that saved by faith, but lead by the Holy Spirit.

We know that you can't be lead by the Holy Spirit is you have not received it.

We know that God didn't leave anything to chance so he reveal it by Prophecy and had them write it down. Rev 1:1-3.

Satan on the other hand used oral tradition because it had no trace to him.

Where is common sense?

You don't know jack.

[Circle_Master]

How many did it have when Peter was still alive? A few thousand? Ten thousand?

Is it fair to compare the administrative structure as used today as that used with Peter when it simply was not NEEDED at the time? Is it not possible to have developed as the Holy Spirit foresaw and foreordained simply because we're looking at a smaller "world" in Biblical times, much less a smaller Christian world?

Actually the first day of the church was 3000 and so when you are saying Peter was in Rome which would be around the 7th or 8th decade, you would have a church of ... probably around a million people. So if Papal authority was necessary, it would have been there.

Laudate_Dominum, you quoted lots of commentaries about the keys of Peter and I agree with most of them. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. You do know that protestants don't hold Peter as 'primacy', just as one of the leaders of the early church. If you notice it was Peter who inaugurated the church at pentecost, and it was Peter who brought in the first gentiles, and Peter who brought in the Samaritans. He provided the cohesive effort and what he bound on earth there - was bound in heaven.

Having founded the Church by his blood, Christ strengthened it on Pentecost and inspired it with its sense of mission to preach the Good News to ALL nations. "He wished to make known and proclaim his spouse through the visible coming of the Holy Spirit with the sound of a mighty wind and tongues of fire. For just as he himself, when he began to preach, was made known by his eternal Father through the Holy Spirit decending and remaining on him in the form of a dove, so likewise, as the apostles were about to enter on their ministry of preaching, Christ our Lord sent the Holy Spirit down from heaven, to touch them with tongues of fire and to point out, as by the finger of God, the supernatural mission and office of the CHURCH...

How do you figure Christ founded the Church by his blood? I suggest you check out things such as Matthew 3:11 where it was future to Christ during his ministry (along with Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33) and also Acts 1:5 which shows it future to Christ's ascensions and Acts 11:15-16 which shows it as prior. Acts 11:15-16 also refers to it at 'in the beginning' and so thus the Church started at pentecost, not Christ's death.

You make a parallel between Jesus receiving the Holy Spirit (a theocratic anointing) and the members of the Church receiving the Holy Spirit (indwelling spoken of in John 7:37; Acts 11:16-17; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 5:5) and say it must mean the apostles have a supernatural office and position. You may be reading Acts incorrectly there, every believer received that tongue of fire - not just apostles. and every believer has the Holy Spirit, check those verses. Your logic there would mean that every Christian has apostolic authority and a supernatural mission filled with mighty works and wonders to proclaim the gospel. Or you mean some other definition of supernatural, or some other analogy here?

[Don John of Austria]

Papalism is DESIRED BY GOD, he would have protected it, guided it, and made sure it was not. The string of KIDS, CORRUPTION, TEMPORAL POWER GRABS, and WORSE, would NOT be allowed by God. The Holy Spirit to me is alive, He watches over His church. I know you don't understand the HS in the same way as I do, but this is what I have come to believe.

Bruce -you sound like a Mohammedian saying that God would never let Christ be Crucified because he was so holy a man, Have you actually read the Bible which you qoute so much. Lets see David sinned tremendously even causeiing the death of a just man to gain his wife and yet God forgave David not jus tpersonally but in a real temporal sense, God did not take the Kingdom away or destroy it on the contrary it continued grow with Gods blessing. The first Pope, Peter, was rebuked by Jesus personally but was still in Charge, The first Pope, Peter, denied Christ and yet Paul still recognized him as Kephas, the Rock, the Leader and foundation of the Church. .

Truth

This is from another thread but you braught up Enoch here and it is so seriously flawed and shows your complete lack of understanding of the the most basic Truths of Christianity I simply had to quote it. Now I want to note I am not even argueing the merits of intent just the merits of what you say--

The Book of Enoch was approved by God and Jesus read it but the some Cc's pope and Father rejected it as inspired by God, even banned it. Jesus, Moses, Jews, and God himself approved of it since God gave it to him.

Okay look truth Jesus and God are one and the same, not seperate so if God approved then Jesus by definition would, please try getting down the basic teachings of Christianity before being critical of others who do.

[Brother Adam]

You don't know jack.

But your the one without a response?

[Don John of Austria]

WellI had a response but as usual it seems that the Protestants onthis board are unable to respond to agruements accept by throughing aout new ones. Thats not debate that is desperation.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Laudate_Dominum, you quoted lots of commentaries about the keys of Peter and I agree with most of them. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. You do know that protestants don't hold Peter as 'primacy', just as one of the leaders of the early church. If you notice it was Peter who inaugurated the church at pentecost, and it was Peter who brought in the first gentiles, and Peter who brought in the Samaritans. He provided the cohesive effort and what he bound on earth there - was bound in heaven.

I'm glad we're getting somewhere! I actually knew that was what you were going to say. The point I'm trying to make is that the keys represent the office of steward, which is basically what the Papacy is. Peter doing those things is part of that office, but it's not the full story. Read the Isa 22 verses where it describes the authority of the steward in the house of David. You have no basic for asserting that Peter's role was merely that which you suggest. A kind of Petrine minimalism. And in fact the Fathers of the Church and the history of Christianity until the protestant revolt disagree with you. It's a pretty safe bet that I'm right and your wrong. And in fact John Calvin would disagree with you (at least early Calvin) and many protestant scholars who aren't as bent out of shape about Catholicism.

I'll write more later when I can. Peace

[Paladin D]

But your the one without a response?

His post is full of errors, it isn't even funny. I'm not in the mood to refute them all, mainly because...

1. Many of them have already been refuted.

2. He thinks he knows more about Catholic doctrine and history, so when we explain our own beliefs, he'll just brush it off to the side.

...I'm just tired of the same old Disco Dancing tactics.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Circle Master,

As I promised I have given a fuller reply to your statements, however I somehow managed to post it in a different, though similar thread in my haste.

http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=6552&hl=

[Laudate_Dominum]

If you notice it was Peter who inaugurated the church at pentecost, and it was Peter who brought in the first gentiles, and Peter who brought in the Samaritans. He provided the cohesive effort and what he bound on earth there - was bound in heaven.

I would still direct you to my other posts, but I will at least say very briefly that these events you mentioned are among the many indications of the primacy of Peter, thanks. Your idea of what binding and loosing is all about it false. Read real biblical scholarship, it doesn't matter if it's protestant. "Binding and loosing" and "the keys of the Kingdom" in biblical and Rabbinical language indicate a real office of authority and the power to legislate, teach, rule, judge, etc. That interpretation is just a speculation that conviently fits the protestant agenda, it is not however, faithful to the texts themselves.

Peace.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I'm just sick of the guy's one liners that he thinks are so pithy and all. Give me a break, please.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I'm just sick of the guy's one liners that he thinks are so pithy and all. Give me a break, please.

Hehehe, I know what you mean. But actually, I think some of his pithy statements have been thought provoking. PM wouldn't be as interesting a place without them.

[Laudate_Dominum]

You do know that protestants don't hold Peter as 'primacy', just as one of the leaders of the early church.

Not all protestants! I was just reading a protestant commentary (The New Interpreter's Commentary) which affirmed the primacy of Peter in the Catholic sense and indicated Apostolic Succession. Granted it didn't conclude one should repent and submit to the Roman Pontiff, but I am curious to know how the authors of that commentary deal with this fact.

And be sure you don't miss my other post for ya! I spent a good while composing it, just for you!

http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=6552&hl=

Edited January 26, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[CatholicAndFanatical]

Truth,

We can give all the proof that the Bible and History can provide and still hit the wall with the Catholics.

We few Christians, understand the Holy Spirit. The Catholic don't understand the Holy Spirit.

Who are you to know who has the Holy Spirit and who doesnt? Your self righteousness is sickening kid. You better check yourself. If I had to guess I would think you was 12..am I right? You havent a clue on History or anything about the Catholic Church. You seem to me like a 'Chick' baby. Get off the nipple and learn something for yourself instead of re-gergitating what other anti-Catholics have already said

We understand that The Cc transformed from the Roman empire.

Who is we? And where is your source to this? It would be funny to see this considering it was the Roman Empire that martyrd Popes and Laymen just because they followed Christ and forced them underground. If we were the Roman Empire we would be killing and forcing ourselves into secrecy..

We understand that oral tradition is a means of false trace back to Peter.

We further understand that if that trace is broken the back of the Cc is broken.

Wishful thinking, the mere fact that we CAN and DO trace every Pope back to Peter should get you thinking. Its not only a Catholic Fact, its a Historical Fact. Any historian Catholic or not can see this.

We know that Christ didn't set up this hiarchy of the Cc, because he gave us equal powers. The apostle shared equal power in the will of God.

And you know this why? Oh, because your so darn filled with the Holy Spirit thats why huh. Having a heirarchy is not anything new to God, even the Jewish religion has its heirarchy. Read Isa 22, 22nd Chapter and you will see OT proof of this.

We know that Mary was a vessal, not a God.

I agree with you here, Catholics dont make her out to be God either. This is your misconception about Catholicism, this ignorant thinking of yours is why you need to check yourself and actually LEARN about our Faith before you come in here busting on it. We HONOR Mary, for many reasons:

1: She said YES to giving birth to GOD

2: She Magnifies the Lord, showing Christ to us in a Greater way

3: Jesus gave us Mary before He died on the Cross, She is our Mother who brings us to Christ.

Jesus gave us Mary as His LAST Gift before dying. All you prots cast her off, throwing that gift back at Jesus saying "Take your gift Jesus I dont need her, its just you and me Jesus"...uh huh..its your lose.

We know that Scripture trumps scare tradition.

Uh huh, and before the 4th century how did people hear the scriptures? Oh wait, you must be one of those prots that believe the Bible just fell from the sky with a binder and all huh? Or you think the Holy Spirit set in the corner and wrote it out for us.

Before the Bible was compiled and approved by the Catholic CHurch in the 4th Century, it was taught by Oral Tradition. Not all the Scriptures were available to every Church, so they taught what they were taught by the Apostles and their successors. There's even Scriptures that was used back then that didnt even make the Bible as we know it today. This is why we use Sacred Scriptures AND Sacred Tradition as a whole, not seperate. Geesh, something as simple as this neither you, bruce, or Circle can grasp this. No wonder your protestant.

We know that the Cc frist move to lead the Church from Christ was the sabbath.

I have no idea what you mean by this. The Sabbath was created by GOD. Its a Commandment "Keep Holy The SAABAATH"..so thats nothing new.

We know that the Cc second move to lead the Church from Christ was Mary & saints.

The Saints do not take anything away from God. Prots have a commen misconception about this and they always, ALWAYS, use this scripture to back it up..."THere is only ONE mediator between God and Man - Jesus"

And you are correct in saying this, even when you do say it a billion times for no reason at all. But the Saints and Mary dont go to God, they go to Jesus and Jesus goes to God. See how simple that is. funny how you cant even grasp this simple form of prayer. Just like I pray to Jesus for you, to soften your hardend heart and even harder head.

We know that the Cc third move to lead the church from Christ was the pope.

hmm. interesting how we would use the exact same thing that Christ gave us to move away from Christ. Its nerve racking how you cant put two and two together in Scriptures.

1: Peter told by Christ that He will build His Church upon him.

2: Peter given the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.

3: Peter given Authority over Christ Church until Christ returns. This is when Christ says "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in HEaven..."

4: After Christs Resurrection Christ asked Peter - Do you love me more than these? - Peter saying Yes Lord you know I do - Jesus Saying Feed My Sheep. Doing this three times.

5: Peter was the first to excommunicate.

6: Peter's first dogma was about the dispute Paul had about circumcism.

7: Peters name appears 195 times. More than all the Apostles put together.

We know that the Cc forth move to lead the church from Christ was the baptism.

And you claim you know Sacred Scriptures? Im sorry but you MUST be baptised in order to share in Christ.

The OT had a convenant, it was circumsism. When Christ came into the world the convenant was no longer to be circumsized but it was through Baptism.

Read John 3:5; Mark 16:16 and Col 2:11-12

We know that the Cc fifth move to lead the church from Christ was it us of the Lords Last supper.

I still have no clue on what you mean by the Churchs 'moves' as you call it. The Last Supper was not made up by the Catholic Church. I would think you didnt mean it that way and for some odd reason i'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

There is a direct link between John 6:51 - 66 and the Last Supper. In John 6 Jesus says "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal Life" - "My Flesh is REAL FOOD, my blood is REAL DRINK"

and the Last Supper before He dies "THIS IS MY BODY, which will be given up for you" - "THIS IS MY BLOOD, of the new and everlasting covenant.."

We know that Rev 17-19 talk about the Woman and the Dragon the Cc call her The Holy Mother Church. Babylon is Rome, Draqon is the Anti-christ, The woman is Cc.

Mystery Babylon the Great, The Mother of Prostitutes and of the Abominations of the Earth. Very interchangable. "if it walk like a duck"

Again who is 'We'? You cant even get the simplest Scripture right. Why on earth would you try to interpret something as complex as Revelations. Stick to the easy stuff first grasshopper like John 1 and go from there.

We know that saved by faith, but lead by the Holy Spirit.

Do you also know that Faith without works is dead? Do you also know that you cannot have one without the other? You cant set on your duff and have faith and not going out and doing works. Its not the works themselves that save you, nor is it faith alone that saves you. But faith and works together that will save you.

Read James 2:14-24 "A man is justified by works and not faith alone"

Also on the Last day Jesus will put the goats on his left and the Sheep on the Right and to the Sheep He will Say "Enter the Kingdom of Heaven, for I was hungry and you gave me eat, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was naked and you clothed me, I was in prisoned and you visited me" To the Goats He casted into Hell for not doing these WORKS.

We know that you can't be lead by the Holy Spirit is you have not received it.

Again, how self righteous you are. Who are you to say who has recieved the Holy Spirit and who hasnt? You are a blaspemour. All you do is write hateful things and spread lies about the Church. Your actions are far from Christ like. You need to find Jesus. The real one, not the one you limit to the Bible. The one that is Living and didnt stop saying and doing things when Revelations was finished.

We know that God didn't leave anything to chance so he reveal it by Prophecy and had them write it down. Rev 1:1-3.

Ah, but written down for who? Read by who? When the Scriptures were written very few people could read and write. They relied on the CHURCH to hear Sacred Scriptures and the Teachings of the Church. what a novel idea huh, to rely on the Church for something.

Satan on the other hand used oral tradition because it had no trace to him.

From the sounds of your posts you and satan know alot about each other. You both hate Christs Church and you both pass lies in order to take people away from it.

Where is common sense?

obviously somewhere where your not. Learn your history, stop reading Chick, start learning the REAL Teachings of Catholicism. If you dont care to learn then dont post. No one takes you seriously and were getting fed up with your hateful posts. Always bashing and never talking.

CatholicAndFanatical