Posted on 10/21/2006 4:52:03 AM PDT by NYer
Get behind me Satan...
What does Matt 16:19 have to do with the confession of sins?
I told you, hours ago, that she's a troll and a timesink, didn't I?
Have a good night.
It speaks precisely and directly to that point.
Explain it for me.
I can't make it any simpler. When all those desciples were wandering around following Jesus, how did they know He was the real deal? How did they know they weren't following a fake? How did the converts know after His ascension that the Apostles were telling them the truth? How do we, today, know that the Jesus of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John is really THE Jesus?
When you say "the day", to what time period are you referring? Without knowing that, I cannot know exactly what you are asking.
Alright, what did the One Holy Apostolic Church that was set up by God in Exodus, and was in full effect during Jesus' earthly ministry want to do to their Messiah?
You asked some good questions about discerning prophets under the old covenant.
I cannot find a verse that indicates the manner in which prophets are discerned changing with the New Covenant. The questions remain. How were those OT prophets identified as true prophets? How was/is Jesus identified as the Messiah? Was it through a church or through other means?
If a person claiming to be a prophet were to arise today, and were to reject what the Catholic Church teaches and has always taught, we would know him to be false prophet.
That is not how the Bible says to identify prophets.
Regarding Luke 10:16 - Jesus appears to be talking to the 70, not the 12. That may or may not matter, but in my search of the context, I discovered this little gem:
Luk 9:49 John answered and said, "Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name; and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow along with us."Luk 9:50 But Jesus said to him, "Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you."
If that were true, then all 20,000+ Protestant sects are dividing the body of Christ over petty issues.
You ought to give them respect and call them Protestant Churches, because that is what they are. I, personally, cannot figure out why there are so many different Protestant Churches. I suspect they all have issues with governance. I do know that I don't agree with them, either.
If you want to learn about the relation between the moral state of the bishop and the efficacy of the sacraments he administers, study the Donatist controversy.
I have no need to learn such things. The church that teaches their followers must confess their sins to a priest prior to receiving communion, even though the very priest administering both sacraments is living in hidden sin, is hypocrisy enough for me.
I don’t know exactly what you mean by “delegate my salvation”. But everything I know about Jesus I have learned through fallible men. If you have a direct pipeline to heaven, good for you.
By "delegate my salvation" I mean that when one participates in a top-down, hierarchal system of religion, one is essentially shifting the responsibility for one's salvation to the church. Swallowing the jagged "doctrines of men" pill without putting it to the utmost scriptural test and sitting in that pew consuming whatever comes off the pulpit en total is delegating ones salvation.
Catholics believe and practice all those things too, so that isn’t the issue that separates Protestants and Catholics. The fundamental issue on which all the other issues depend, is whether Christ gave authority to a living Magesterium or not. The answer to that question can be found both by studying Scripture and the Church fathers.
Those outside Catholicism have far more issues than just the keys. I am no defender of Protestantism, but they are spot on when it comes to salvation through grace alone. Adult Baptism, confessing ones sins to Jesus rather than men, not praying to dead people, a priesthood versus what Paul lays out in 1 Timothy, the state of the dead, man, I could go on and on. The key to understanding the "keys" is Mat 16:17. Christ's identity was revealed to Peter by God, Peter didn't figure it out. Therefore, the rock is not a man, but rather divine intervention - the Holy Spirit. Those outside of Rome see far too much "doctrine of men" in Rome and far too little Commandments of God for us to accept that the "keys" reside there.
Get thee behind me.
"I am surprised that our Catholic brethren have entertained them with replies for as long as they have."
And if you are a Protestant would the Cathoic brethren on this thread consider a brother?
Gladly.
"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you."
That's out of the KJV, Hebrews 13:17 and the Catholic Douay Rheims version that I read says Obey your Prelates.
Then why did the Apostles appoint bishops in every city?
-A8
"Cathoic"
Sorry. = Catholic
Don't forget these churches:
Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia:
None of which were named Rome or Catholic.
The Catholic Church states in our Catechism today that Protestants are our seperated brethren. That aside, if anyone comes in the peace of Christ, I am willing to treat them with the respect I would afford any Christian. If someone wants to tear down the Catholic Church, then I am ready to go do battle to protect it. That simple.
Me too.
Was Barnabas an apostle? Because Barnabas appointed leaders in the early church.
So what? I'm GLAD the Roman Church wasn't named. Man, Jesus was royally torqued at them. Threatening with coming and taking their candlesticks away.
Nah! I like better how St. Paul addressed the Roman Church.
To all that are at Rome, the beloved of God, called to be saints. Grace to you, and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
First I give thanks to my God, through Jesus Christ, for you all, because your faith is spoken of in the whole world.
"The Catholic Church states in our Catechism today that Protestants are our seperated brethren."
What does that mean? Seperated from what?
Sorry.....but you're wrong again. Sometimes it just doesn't pay to deal with folks who understand scripture better than you!
Let's look again:
1Ti 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
1Ti 2:2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Paul says to pray for "all men". He then singles out "kings and those in authority". He sure is singling them out because they are certainly included in the group "all men". Then one sentence later he mentions that only one MAN, Jesus Christ who is a "mediator". There's a very good reason for it...and that is to reinforce the idea that we don't need "kings" or other authorities, or "high priests", to come between us and God anymore. W
Who cares who Matthew was referencing. Is not Matthew the inspired Word of God?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.