Catholic Church & Jesus Christ-Why No One Should Be A Catholic

Apostolic Messianic Fellowship ^ | August 30, 2005 | Why No One Should Be A Catholic

[Salvation]

Believe me, it was an "Uggghgly job", but both of us tried to do it with a good attitude.

This morning I talked with our Maintainence Man at noon. I mentioned that the kitchen had been so trashed and that the other lady and I spent so long before we did our dishes cleaning it up.

It was all worth it when he replied, "I always come in through the kitchen door and do a visual. This morning I saw that it was left clean."

That's all I needed. (But I did let him know how long we worked on cleaning up the other persons' messes.

[Salvation]

Which proves my point when I said to someone on this thread that Jesus extended his ministry to the Gentiles. Thanks.

[Salvation]

**The Church fathers were always in agreement that Babylon was code for Rome.**

And so was John in the writing of Revelation. That's why he refers to Babylon.

Babylon=Rome
Beast= Roman ruler of the day -- was it Diocletian? (spelling? Or someone else?
There are other code parallels that the persecuted Christians understood.

One is the woman clothes by the sun -- many Catholics think of Mary.

But primarily, as I understand it, the woman represented Israel.

I forget what the harlotry in the warnings to some of the cities was a parallel to, but I am thinking, without getting my Bible study book out in the car, that it was idolatry.

[wagglebee]

See 1467.

[Diego1618]

Notice there is NO MENTION of any large population of Jews in Babylon and certainly not the "literally millions" you speak of. Church fathers have always held that Babylon was code for Rome and there is no account in Acts or Paul's letters of anyone going to Babylon, in fact the only references are Peter's and John's in Revelation.

At the beginning of the present era there were many conversions to Judaism all over the Middle East. In about 40 CE, in northern Iraq, the Royal Family and many of the people of Adiabene became Jews. It is estimated that there may have been as many as one million Jews around Babylonia at that time.

The above paragraph is about one third of the way down here.

The Church Fathers were obviously wrong here also as even Josephus says "The Ten Tribes beyond the Euphrates were of such a large number no one could estimate the total". [Antiquities XI, Chapter X, Paragraph 2]

Who do we believe....your guy or mine. The point remains....Our Lord told the Twelve to "Go to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel". He didn't mean Rome.

[Diego1618]

Your entire logic is circular. You start with the assumption that Peter was never in Rome, even though nobody ever suggested otherwise for nearly two thousand years, and then you find anti-Catholic sources to back you up.

I'm not assuming Peter was never in Rome.....I know he wasn't because The Lord told him not to go there! I'm getting my facts from scripture! [Matthew 10:5]

[Diego1618]

And as I said the last time, you have not persuaded me that the instruction to go to the lost sheep of Israel reaches beyond the resurrection.

Who do you think the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel are?

[wagglebee]

This was prior to the Crucifixion, Christ later was quite clear when He said, "all nations" (your dispute of that has NEVER been accepted by the Church) and either way, it is irrelevant as there were Jews in Rome.

[Salvation]

FRI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes

 

List of popes

From 30 to 249

Pontificate	Common English name	Regnal (Latin) name	Personal name	Place of birth	Notes
30 to 67	Peter Saint Peter	Petrus, Head of the Church	Simon Peter שמעון בן יונה (Shimon ben Yona) Shimon Kipha ΣΙΜΗΟΝ ΚΗΦΑΣ (Simeon Kephas)	Bethsaida, Galilea	Disciple of Jesus from whom he received the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, according to Matthew 16:18-19.
post42/ante57 to 64/67(?)		Petrus, Episcopus Romanus			Executed by crucifixion upside-down; feast day (Feast of Saints Peter and Paul) 29 June, (Chair of Peter) 22 February
64/67(?) to 76/79(?)	Linus Saint Linus	Linus, Episcopus Romanus	Linus	Tuscia (Northern Latium)	Traditionally martyred (no evidence); Feast day 23 September
76/79(?) to 88	Anacletus (Cletus) Saint Anacletus	Anacletus, Episcopus Romanus	Anacletus	Probably Greece	Martyred; feast day 26 April
88/92 to 97/101	Clement I Saint Clement	Clemens, Episcopus Romanus		Rome	Martyred; feast day 23 November
97/99 to 105/107	Evaristus (Aristus) Saint Evaristus	Evaristus, Episcopus Romanus	Aristus		Traditionally martyred (no evidence); feast day 26 October
105/107 to 115/116	Alexander I Saint Alexander	Alexander, Episcopus Romanus	Alexander	Rome

[Diego1618]

It's great discussing all this with you folks...I really mean that. I have a ongoing medical situation that requires an early morning hospital procedure...so I'm going to sign off now.....for today....maybe tomorrow also.

God Bless you all.

[Mad Dawg]

Is it important that there is a difference between 'literally millions" and "It is estimated that there may have been as many as one million Jews around Babylonia at that time"?

[Salvation]

Source of this information, please.

[Salvation]

**Do you know who has that code book now? Is that code book part of the canon of scripture? Did they also have a secret decoder ring that came with it?**

Oh, it's a secret code. You have to be Catholic to learn it! <saecasm off/

[Mad Dawg]

As I see it, you are slowly slowly proposing a hypothesis which includes the idea that the Church is deceived and is in fact following Simon Magus or somebody of the kind, rather than Peter.

Let me rephrase what I said. I am not persuaded that the instruction to confine their ministry to the lost sheep of the house of Israel remained in force after the resurrection, whoever the lost sheep of the House of Israel might be.

May the Lord bless whatever medical monkey business you have to endure.

[AnAmericanMother]

I got mine at the ceremony in the crypt!

[reagandemocrat]

God bless you , too, and may your medical condition resolve promptly.

RD

[Salvation]

**Clearly Jesus and his apostles had become a close-knit family. They were all members of the same family --- the family of God.**

So you are saying that the use of the word "brethen" in the scriptures does not necessarily mean blood-brouther and blood-sister. It could be a close - knit group such as the apostles??

I think you finally have it! Glory be! Thanks!

[markomalley]

Actually according to Irenaeus, Peter and Paul founded the church of Rome, not Peter alone. However, if you read the first chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans, neither Peter nor Paul founded the church of Rome. It was functioning just fine without an apostolic visit of any kind when Paul wrote his letter to the Romans in 56 AD.

Actually according to Irenaeus, Peter and Paul founded the church of Rome, not Peter alone. However, if you read the first chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans, neither Peter nor Paul founded the church of Rome. It was functioning just fine without an apostolic visit of any kind when Paul wrote his letter to the Romans in 56 AD.

But also: Do you remember my question: When did Peter become Bishop of Rome as legend has it?

Read your quote from Irenaeus carefully. Irenaeus says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, followed by Clement then Anacletus. So according to Irenaeus Peter was never the Bishop of Rome and there is no indication that he resided there for any period of time.

Well, I did read my extract from Irenaeus carefully. And it said:

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric.

So, according to the extract from Irenaeus, the apostles committed the Church into the hands of Linus, then Anacletus, and then to Clement. So I am not sure where you get from this that Peter was never the bishop of Rome.

Now Irenaeus does not give indications of dates, but Eusebius states:

6. But this did not last long. For immediately, during the reign of Claudius, the all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that strongest and greatest of the apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others, to Rome against this great corrupter of life. He like a noble commander of God, clad in divine armor, carried the costly merchandise of the light of the understanding from the East to those who dwelt in the West, proclaiming the light itself, and the word which brings salvation to souls, and preaching the kingdom of heaven.

Eusebius, Church History, Book II, 14.6

The reign of Claudius was from 41-54 AD, so I'd say that Peter arrived in Rome somewhere in that time frame. (By the way, the Acts of Peter and Paul corroborates the relative time frame). Hippolytus, Refutation of all Heresies, Book VI, Chapter 15, also provides corroboration.

So by all indications, it appears that Peter first arrived there and then was joined by Paul. As we all know, Paul arrived during the reign of Nero.

[BlueNgold]

I understand your position, and while I do not agree - I do not necessarily find praying for intercession blasphemous. Christ provided us a direct conduit to the Godhead, and I find such intercession unnecessary and, in fact, somewhat dangerous.

Why do I say dangerous? Excellent question. I say that because the predictable result of such a practice has come to fruition as the problematic Cult of Mary that the HRCC simply refuses to address publicly. While many, and probably most, practicing Catholics have a reasonable and biblical perspective of the Godhead, and are clear that Mary is not part of it, there are too many within the Catholic community who have essentially deified Mary. Because these people tend to be faithful and even energetic members of the congregation the church has been unwilling to chastise and/or publicly instruct them. Rather the papacy seems to encourage such beliefs with the use of terms such as 'co-redemptrix' in referring to Mary.

[markomalley]

Yeah....it's called "Using Your Head"!

One small correction to your statement.....I will use a reference when it supports scripture. my (Diego1618) opinion.

Fixed it. No charge.