Since they (Protestants) take everything else, why not the Pope? (Article our Sunday Visitor 1950, says you don't keep Bible Sabbath, you keep her day)

Our Sunday Visitor (Catholic Publication) ^ | Feb. 5, 1950 | Unknown

[Elsie]

The bible that gets overlooked by all the smells and bells?

[Elsie]

From Vatican II
Lumen Gentium; Chap. II: 14;

 This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful.
Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation.
Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation.
In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism(124) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church,
for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church.
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ,
would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

[Elsie]

Yeah - that Peter...

---

Galatians 2:11
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”

King James Version (KJV)

[Elsie]

Now what did Christ say would happen to the Temple in Jerusalem?

Darned good question!

---

---

John 6:25-40

²⁵ When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?”

²⁶ Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. ²⁷ Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”

 

²⁸ Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”   (direct question)

²⁹ Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”   (direct answer)

 

³⁰ So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? ³¹ Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’^[c]”

³² Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. ³³ For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

³⁴ “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.”

³⁵ Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. ³⁶ But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. ³⁷ All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. ³⁸ For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. ³⁹ And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. ⁴⁰ For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

 

[Big Red Badger]

‘Embarrassment to Catholicism’

[Big Red Badger]

Peter was her first Pope...
Correct?

[Big Red Badger]

These RCC Jihads are indicative of a
Lack of knowing Christ and hatred for
Fellow Pilgrims.

[BipolarBob]

Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.

Ceremonial laws were abolished on the cross. You need to know the difference between temporary and permanent.

[BipolarBob]

It’s really very EASY to understand if a person does not have a hard, rebellious, wandering, unbelieving, and stubborn heart. If a person is not spiritually blind and deaf, he can easily see and hear this. The Sabbath and circumcision are alike. Both were signs to God’s earthly people. Since the Gospel came to Gentiles, Gentiles can come to Christ without becoming Jews. We can be spiritual Jews and spiritual Israelites. Our circumcision is not in the flesh but in the heart. Our Sabbath rest is not the physical rest God gave Israelites for a sign but a spiritual rest of accepting the completed work of Christ for salvation.
I heartily agree with the first statement. The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. Note it says man(kind) and not Israelites. Jesus kept the Sabbath. Is He your leader and example or not?

[Texas_Guy]

Matthew 16:18: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church.”

https://www.catholic.com/tract/peter-the-rock

[Texas_Guy]

That is read every day (3 readings per Mass) at Mass, which is celebrated every day with the entirety of it being fully read in a 3 year cycle?
And not just the passages that the pastor picks?

Yes, that bible.

[Texas_Guy]

Read more history. You’ll see how the Catholic Church existed from the beginning and Protestantism didn’t begin until Luther’s rebellion produced the tens of thousands of denominations that we have today such as:

Mormon
Jehovah’s Witness
Baptist
Methodist
Episcopalian
Church of Christ
Presbyterian
Pentacostal
Evangelical
Assemblies of God
AME
And the list goes on and on and on.....

[BipolarBob]

Yeah, the Catholics hang everything on this verse being interpreted in their own very strict viewpoint with no corroboration or evidence elsewhere in the Bible. In fact the evidence in other texts show Peter is not the supreme leader of the church. 2 Corr. 11:5 For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles. This is Paul talking. And Gal. 2:11- 11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him in public, because he was clearly wrong. 12 Before some men who had been sent by James arrived there, Peter had been eating with the Gentile believers. But after these men arrived, he drew back and would not eat with the Gentiles, because he was afraid of those who were in favor of circumcising them. 13 The other Jewish believers also started acting like cowards along with Peter; and even Barnabas was swept along by their cowardly action.

[daniel1212]

Dang, that is pretty thorough.

Glory to God for what is good. More argumentation at the source page, but I tend to be too prolix.

[daniel1212]

How did you know what books make up the bible?

As I am quite sure has been told you in response to your repeated posting or refuted parroted polemics, by the same way the common held John the Baptizer to be "a prophet indeed," (Mark 11:32) even though he was rejected by the historical magisterium - which, under the Catholic model for of Truth, is how one assuredly knows what is of God. And indeed, the NT church itself began contrary to Catholicism.

For church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, to whom conditional obedience was enjoined, (Mt. 23:2; cf. Dt. 17:8-13) which judgments included which men and writings were of God and which were not, (Mk. 11:27-33) as the historical magisterial head over Israel which was the historical instrument and steward of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2, 3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33, 34; Jer. 7:23)

And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27, 44; Jn. 5:36, 39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and which the Messiah reproved, based upon Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27, 44; Jn. 5:36, 39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

For an authoritative body of wholly God-inspired writings had been manifestly established by the time of Christ as being "Scripture, ("in all the Scriptures") "even the tripartite canon of the Law, the Prophets and The Writings, by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same . (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 18:28, etc.) For the Hebrew Scriptures testify to Jesus being the promised scapegoat and perfect atonement, (https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2022/05/why-should-of-jewish-faith-believe-in.html) And thus Scripture provided the doctrinal and prophetic epistemological foundation for the NT church.

For God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15, 18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44, 45; John 5:46, 47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2, 11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15

And thus as abundantly evidenced , as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture. (Acts 17:11) .

Moreover, men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public revelation thereby (in conflation with what had been written), neither of popes and councils claim to do. Thus the written word is the assured infallible word of God.

And the establishment of an authoritative body of wholly God-inspired writings by the time of Christ also shows that both men and writings of God could be recognized without an infallible magisterium - contrary to the premise of Catholicism. Which, establishment, as with men of God, was essentially due to the uniquely Divine qualities and attestation, and the consensus of the people who were regenerated by faith in its gospel, with freedom to read it, contrary to much of Rome's history.

Once again everything true you got from us, the Catholic Church. Protestants didn’t exist until 1500 years later.

Once again, that is simply absurd, and repeating this mantra will not make it any more true that before. For as said and ignored, per usual, distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).

However, no more should really be needed to be said since you have been reproved abundantly already, by the grace of God.:

To: To Texas_Guy

75 of 116 70 of 116 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=68#68
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=67#67
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3868037/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3867413/posts?page=78#78
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=50#50
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=49#49
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=48#48
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=47#47
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=60#60
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=46#46
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=97#97
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=93#93
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=92#92
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=506#506
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3877970/posts?page=138#138
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=89#89
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=88#88
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=87#87
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=86#86
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4044225/posts?page=29#29
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4064985/posts?page=35#35
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=22#22
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4102860/posts?page=142#142
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4119008/posts?page=55#55

[Maris Crane]

Something like “take my wife,...Please”

I can live with that...”take my pope...Please, PLEASE.

[Elsie]

Let me help you try to get your point across.

---

As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the following Early Church Fathers promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:

 

 

 • Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:

'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.

 

• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:

You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].

 

• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:

'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455

 

• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:

Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)

 

• Cyril of Alexandria:

When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.

 

• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):

“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'

“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)

 

• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II):

Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.

[Tell It Right]

Did anyone say The Jerusalem Council wasn't held in Jerusalem? You're straw-manning that to deny the infant Church.

What Campion posted, which I quoted and you apparently ignored, was a quote by Irenaeus of Lyons saying (bold-faced mine)"...the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul"

I pointed out that, according to Scripture, God's church was already going strong in Jerusalem before it was in Rome, and before Paul's conversion. Thus, logic dictates, Captain, that Campion's quote, though from Irenaeus, was incorrect information. This undermines Campion's point that the Roman see was always the top-dog see in God's church. Evidently the church didn't start out like that. The Roman authority over the church happened later.

Now you and I could quote ad nauseum different people from the 1st century to the 4th century debating back and forth over the political power struggle within the church about how much Rome's influence should have over the rest of the church. But none of those people have the authority of Scripture. It wasn't until the 4th century that enough people were convinced in some imagined Roman authority in the church that most of the others gave up arguing over it. Call it the "settled science" of their day, settled by the people with the most political and economic power (Rome) as though that should have any bearing on spiritual authority. It was at that point in the late 4th century that we start seeing papal authority like we know it today.

Again, to my earlier point. If you want to find post-Biblical church history where both Protestants and Catholics have common beliefs (when we quote the early church fathers) you almost always have to go back to the early 4th century or before.

[Elsie]

...with the entirety of it being fully read...

You don't take correction worth a DARN; do you?

How many times does it take for this stuff to stick to the wall?

https://www.catholic.com/qa/percentage-of-the-bible-in-the-lectionary

[Elsie]

I’m glad that the RCC presents a solid, unified front to the world. No schisms in OUR house!!

—Wannabe_Catholkic_Dude(Hail Mary!!)