A Historical Dare to Protestants

[CantorRick]

I wonder if I can get all of this thread read before the magic number pops up and it’s closed without benefit of my enlightened (name removed by moderator)ut… ?

 

[catholic_daddy]

**
Hi Allhers,

Yes, Billy Graham passed his Multimillion dollar Business along to his son Franklin! You have to respect Billy Graham. He was a super salesman, he would have even been a super car salesman if that was what was what he choose to sell! **

Stupidest quote on the Internet this week!
**
Hi Prot, So you think Jesus protested against his own church? OK! Does that also make Him His own Anti-Christ? Please go back to your cult leaders and tell them You missed something and need to re re-taught in Lies101! **

Protestants have existed as long as Catholics

**1517AD verses 33AD, Only off by almost 1,500 years! Your delusions are getting worse. Are you also paranoid? Your cult has been aroung since only 1863 right? **

YOU have the cajones to use the word ‘cult’?

 

[catholic_daddy]

**
Hi Allhers,

Yes, Billy Graham passed his Multimillion dollar Business along to his son Franklin! You have to respect Billy Graham. He was a super salesman, he would have even been a super car salesman if that was what was what he choose to sell! **

Stupidest quote on the Internet this week!
**
Hi Prot, So you think Jesus protested against his own church? OK! Does that also make Him His own Anti-Christ? Please go back to your cult leaders and tell them You missed something and need to re re-taught in Lies101! **

Protestants have existed as long as Catholics

**1517AD verses 33AD, Only off by almost 1,500 years! Your delusions are getting worse. Are you also paranoid? Your cult has been aroung since only 1863 right? **

Anyone who would refer to Billy Graham in that way 1.) Has never investigated or even read about the integrity of him and his organization, and 2.) Probably has no experiential knowledge of the gospel he has faithfully proclaimed in the last sixty years. It’s a good thing you don’t have to qualify to utter someone’s name.

 

[Protestant101]

Stupidest quote on the Internet this week!

**Hi Prot, So you think Jesus protested against his own church? OK! Does that also make Him His own Anti-Christ? Please go back to your cult leaders and tell them You missed something and need to re re-taught in Lies101! **

Protestants have existed as long as Catholics

**1517AD verses 33AD, Only off by almost 1,500 years! Your delusions are getting worse. Are you also paranoid? Your cult has been aroung since only 1863 right? **

Yes, I am “paranoid.” Sorry. Forgot to take my Thorazine. I can share some with you, if you like.

 

[Seeking12]

Take your statement to the next logical level: do you honestly believe that Christ would have instituted a “Church” wherein none of the member denominations agree with each other? And when a person disagrees with something a denomination teaches, he/she is able to just start another?

Actually it is quite simple: Matthew 16 - Christ establishes His Church and makes Simon Peter its head (i.e. the first pope). Now historically, the Catholic Church can trace the lineage of Bishops back to the apostles and more specifically, the lineage of the Bishop of Rome (i.e. the pope) all the way back to Peter.

**Would it make sense for Peter to call himself the pope if that were true? Why doesn’t the Bible say anything to this effect?

My understanding is that Peter was given authority to heal the sick, signs and wonders and preach the gospel. To my knowledge, this was specific to the 12 (except the preaching and teaching), and seems that history shows that the only authority that was passed along is the preaching and teaching.

If a true succession occurred, then those that succeeded Peter would have the same Apostolic powers wouldn’t they?**

 

[benedictus2]

I listed a couple dozen powerful teachers here previously. They are just, as you know, a tiny part of the hordes of godly theologians, teachers, pastors and evangelists who teach the exact same thing I am teaching.

And whose understanding of scripture and salvation is deficient to say the least and completely erroneous.

This is what the Holy Spirit reveals to His Churches.

No. That is what the enemy of the Holy Spirit revealed to all these counterfeit churches. Mind you I am not saying that you have “some’ truth. Christ loves us all so much he will not let you go totally astray because of the pride of the so called reformers.

The Holy Spirit UNITES.
The Devil DIVIDES.

And the result is thousands upon thousands of healthy churches around the world, busy evanglelizing the lost, baptising them, and equipping the saints.

And the result is thousands upon thousands of people led astray from their home which Christ in His great love for us has willed into being before He ascended to the Father. Thousands upon thousands separated from the Church that Jesus Christ built.

Christ established only one Church. That which He founded upon Peter. You first have to show that these churches can trace their Church back to Peter and sadly you can’t. Plain and simple you cant’ trace your church back to Peter. That is why in protestant churches you focus heavily on St Paul.

Here’s verse 46-47 of Acts 2,
Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes. They ate their meals with exultation and sincerity of heart, praising God and enjoying favor with all the people. **And every day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. **

Notice: All who were being saved were being added to the Catholic Church.

It did not say all who were being saved were being given the Bible.

As to what I said about the RCC prohibiting Bible reading, you know it is true, and they believed a person with the Holy Spirit inside them was still incapable of interpreting Scripture. The RCC HAD to tell them what it meant. YET John says someone who has Christ HAS “the anointing”.

But the question is how do you know you have Christ?
If every single protestant has Christ, why they would all be guided by the Spirit, right?
Then how come you are all interpreting the Bible differently.

So who is really guiding you?

 

[benedictus2]

He says in I Jn 2, “the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you.”. Maybe that’s one of the vss the RCC didn’t want us pesky Christians reading??

You are assuming that you have the “anointing”. That is your assumption. How is one annointed. Those who John was talking to, how were they annointed. Maybe you should search you history books and find that out.

Now…let’s address your quote that reveals the horrible heart of most of our disagreements…You said that the notion of “Jesus is mine” is a ‘fundamentalist invention’. I am not trying to be mean, but according to what GOD says in His word, you just revealed that you know a lot about history but you don’t know Him. John clearly says this in
I John–

“He who HAS THE SON has LIFE, and he who does not HAVE THE SON does not have life! These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may KNOW that you have eternal life.”

How do you know that you have Christ? How?

See, us Catholics we know. We have the Eucharist. You don’t”.

It is a declaration from the word of God

You need to ask yourself, based on Scripture, if you have life.

And we can answer in the affirmative because we have the Eucharist.

Jesus says whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood will have ETERNAL LIFE.

Bet you can’t say that of yourself.

I’m not talking about knowing the RCC, knowing history or knowing about the Bible. Those who have the Son HAVE LIFE (and KNOW they have eternal life. You don’t even think we can know it for sure!) and those who do not have the Son simply DO NOT HAVE LIFE.

Yes, yes, yes. Now go enroll in RCIA so that you too may HAVE the Son.

They have NEVER been BORN (that’s how you get life on this planet) AGAIN. (They just got wet!)

Nope,they got washed - clean. Were you ever baptized?
Jesus says unless you be born of water and the spirit.
Jesus said to his apostles: Go out to the world … baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Were you baptized in the Name of the Father, and Of the Son and Of the Holy Spirit?

That, my friend, is simply the heart of the matter, and YOU pointed it out.

And that my friend is the heart of the matter and you are right. WE pointed it out.

Ask God to reveal his Son to you so you can receive HIM (not a system, not Mary, not the saints).

He already has in a most wonderful way. He did not only reveal His Son to us. He reveals to us His Son, everyday, in His Church, in the Bible (which we very kindly shared with you ) plus He gave us His Son as our True Food that we may have Eternal Life which we would also like to share with you. As a matter of fact we would so love for you to come home so you can partake of this Wondrous meal.

Then you will be able to sing “Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine. Oh what a foretaste of glory divine!” And you won’t be lying. You will be honestly rejoicing! Please prayerfully consider what I have shared with you.

So we are able to sing:
“The bread that I will give
Is My flesh for the life of the world
And he who eats of this bread
He shall live for ever
He shall live for ever

And I will raise him up
And I will raise him up
And I will raise him up
On the last day."

Here is a youtube link of this beautiful song for your enjoyment.

 

[benedictus2]

One of the truest things you have ever said is that “the Catholic church is not Bible based.” It is the reason you have to make up reasons for your sick obsession with Mary that is foreign to Scripture and prophetically cursed in the OT passage denouncing worship of the Queen of Heaven!!

Wrong again.The Catholic Church is not Bible based because SURPRISE, SURPRISE it came before the BIBLE. The Catholic Church IS JESUS CHRIST BASED. And the Bible is not Jesus Christ. What you don’t know the difference? We do not practice Bibliolatry.

How can something that came before be based on somethign that came after? Logic fails you all the time myfriend.

Did the mother come before the child. How can the mother be based upon the child?

And we do not worship Mary. But that you will not know becuase it seems everytime we explain this to you, you have your fingers plugged into your ears.

You on the other hand deny the THEOTOKOS which really makes you Nestorian.

No amount of copping out by pleading with us to believe that errrrrrrrr…stating that Jesus founded what is now the Roman Catholic Church will let you off the hook.

We do not have to plead. The Truth speaks for itself. Only those who are blind fail to see.

That is why when this Historical Dare was given, not a single one of you have been able to prove your case. You could not provide one single support for your church.

Because as much as you would like to believe otherwise YOUR CHURCH IS MAN MADE BECAUSE YOUR DOCTRINES ARE MAN MADE. AND YOUR DOCTRINES CANNOT EVEN BE SUPPORTED FROM THE BIBLE.

One more thing–I love Roman Catholics.

And we love EVERYONE. That is why we want everyone to be added to the Catholic Church so that everyone may have the fullness of truth.

But I have a mountainous disdain for teaching that prevents souls from knowing true salvation by grace through faith in the FINISHED and all-sufficient work of the cross.

And the TRUE (notice the emphasis) “salvation by grace through faith in the FINISHED and all-sufficient work of the cross” IS the one being taught by the Catholic Church.

The one being taught by other churches is a counterfeit interpretation not inspired by the Holy Spirit because their interpretation derives from SOME verses in Scripture and NOT BASED UPONT the ENTIRE SCRIPTURE.

There, I have been verbose again. There would not have been a need to be if you grasped it the first time we all tried to explain it.

It is a “another gospel”. A gospel of amazingless grace.

No, that is “your” man-made interpretaton of the Gospel. The more I learn about your interpretation, the more I realize how un-amazing grace from your perspective is.

 

[benedictus2]

**Would it make sense for Peter to call himself the pope if that were true? Why doesn’t the Bible say anything to this effect? **

It would help your understanding if you would know what Pope means in the first place. Pope means Papa. The Catholic Church is Christ’s Family here on earth and the Pope is our earthly spiritual father. He is the one that Jesus appointed to “feed” us, his “sheep”.

**My understanding is that Peter was given authority to heal the sick, signs and wonders and preach the gospel. **

That is also true. But first and foremost, Christ built his Church on Peter. See Matthew 16:18.
And that is why from the very beginning Christ has singled him out. Just before His death, Christ said that He prayed particularly for Peter so that when the trial has passed, Peter then can strengthen the others. Notice, he did not say I prayed for all of you. He said He prayed for Peter.
After His resurrection he entrusted His flock to him. He said “feed my lambs, tend me sheep”. We are his sheep.

**

**To my knowledge, this was specific to the 12 (except the preaching and teaching), and seems that history shows that the only authority that was passed along is the preaching and teaching. ****
Wrong. See Acts when they appointed Matthias to replace Judas. There is an office, the office of bishop. Peter is first among the twelve, the Pope is first among bishops.

If a true succession occurred, then those that succeeded Peter would have the same Apostolic powers wouldn’t they?

Yes, they do. But your understanding of Apostolic powers is very limited and very narrow. The power to bind and loose is still there, the power to forgive sins is still there that is why we have confession.

That is much more wonderful than the miracles that you associate with miracles.

Protestants are always after this miracles but the whole point of salvation is not about miracles. The greatest miracle is that we are being saved.

 

[reccanboy]

To all those who deny that the “Roman Catholic Church” (and/or Eastern Orthodox) is the Church founded by Christ, then I have a little dare for you. Prove from Scripture and history that your denomination is the one founded by Christ.

I say use ‘history’ because Scripture is vague enough that anyone, even us evil old Papists (or those in the process of converting to Papism), could claim that their doctrines match Scripture (after all, don’t most of those tens of thousands of Protestant denominations claim that they are each based on Scripture).

For me, it was history that won me over to the Catholic Church. No other group (save the Eastern Orthodox) can trace their history as far as back as the Catholic Church. That is a key point, because unless you can somehow connect your denomination chronologically to the Apostles, then you are claiming that there was a period of time where there was no ‘true Church’ and this sort of violates that whole gates of Hell prevailing against the Church thingy. Yeah, not good.

So, fire away.

History won you over to Rome? I fail to see an Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallible Church etc., in the first 4 centuries of the Church.

 

[benedictus2]

History won you over to Rome? I fail to see an Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallible Church etc., in the first 4 centuries of the Church.

And I fail to see a belief in the Bible that borders on idolatry in the first century of the Church.

As a matter of fact, there was no Bible as such in the first century of the Chruch.

Study history. I mean really study church history. Minus the blinders.

 

[w_stewart]

History won you over to Rome? I fail to see an Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallible Church etc., in the first 4 centuries of the Church.

If the Catholic Church is the only Church that can trace its history back to the apostles, then it is the Church founded by Christ which he guaranteed to be indestructible that even the gates of hell cannot prevail against it, it is the same Church guarded by the Holy Ghost till the consummation of the world as he promised, and it is the same Church which Paul referred to as the pillar and foundation of truths. I suppose you know the implications of this to the doctrines you mentioned.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

History won you over to Rome? I fail to see an Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallible Church etc., in the first 4 centuries of the Church.

**Hi reccan.wave:

I think I understand! Let me ask you something. Do you think that Catholics believe that belief in the Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallibly of the church are “necessary” for our salvation? If so someone has been teaching you lies! Surprise?

However, even if we don’t personally know of or believe them, they are Truths!

Show me where the RCC teaches that if a Catholic doesn’t believe in the Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallibly of the church we can not be saved and I will start conversion classes an d become a devout member of your phony religion! You can’t! Why? Because these things are teachings of Faith, but belief in them are not demanded for us to believe for Salvation! The Catholic chuch never, adds to God’s teachings or word. Ity just provided the correct interpretation.

Want to take my challenge? And if you can’t find proof, will you start RCIA classes? I can tell you if you do, the belief in the Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallibly of the church will just come natually, as you grow in real spirituality with Jesus.

Do you know that most Catholics live and die blissfully unaware that the Church even offers indulgences anymore? This Treasury of Merit works without the individual’s even realizing it! What is “merit”? Well, it isn’t “extra righteousness earned by particularly nice people who pitched in to help our well-meaning but inadequate Savior’s effort at redemption” That is what many people think “merit” means. Rather “merit” is an old-fashioned term whose modern equivalent, according to theologian Hans Urs Von Balthasar, is “fruitfulness.” Our Faith proves fruitful and our works earn us indulgences. We don’t do the works “for” the indulgences that are a gift to us for being fruitful and faithful!

“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church”- ArchBishop Fulton J. Sheen**

 

[benedictus2]

**Want to take my challenge? And if you can’t find proof, will you start RCIA classes? **

That sounds like the reverse of AG-NOT’s challenge last year

 

[nsper7]

History won you over to Rome? I fail to see an Immaculate Conception, Assumption of Mary, Treasury of Merit, Papal Infallibility, and Infallible Church etc., in the first 4 centuries of the Church.

Well, I certainly do not see Reformed theology in the Early Church either. It was basically your man Calvin drastically misinterpreting St. Augustine, which leads to that old quote, “Silly Protestant, Church Fathers are for Catholics.”

Have you ever actually read the explanations for these doctrines? People love to banter about words (oh…Immaculate Conceptions, Papal Infallibility) without ever actually explaining how such doctrines developed, why they developed, etc. So, please, have you read up on any of these doctrines?

 

[Protestant101]

And whose understanding of scripture and salvation is deficient to say the least and completely erroneous.

No. That is what the enemy of the Holy Spirit revealed to all these counterfeit churches. Mind you I am not saying that you have “some’ truth. Christ loves us all so much he will not let you go totally astray because of the pride of the so called reformers.

The Holy Spirit UNITES.
The Devil DIVIDES.

And the result is thousands upon thousands of people led astray from their home which Christ in His great love for us has willed into being before He ascended to the Father. Thousands upon thousands separated from the Church that Jesus Christ built.

Christ established only one Church. That which He founded upon Peter. You first have to show that these churches can trace their Church back to Peter and sadly you can’t. Plain and simple you cant’ trace your church back to Peter. That is why in protestant churches you focus heavily on St Paul.

Here’s verse 46-47 of Acts 2,
Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes. They ate their meals with exultation and sincerity of heart, praising God and enjoying favor with all the people. **And every day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved. **

Notice: All who were being saved were being added to the Catholic Church.

It did not say all who were being saved were being given the Bible.

But the question is how do you know you have Christ?
If every single protestant has Christ, why they would all be guided by the Spirit, right?
Then how come you are all interpreting the Bible differently.

So who is really guiding you?

Interpreting the Bible differently does not mean that one has Christ, or knows Christ; and the other does not. This kind of idea does not follow logically, or scripturally.

Name one Bible text that would prove me wrong!! And don’t forget to smile in advance. Realcatholicgk is sure to comment on that one.

 

[nsper7]

Interpreting the Bible differently does not mean that one has Christ, and the other does not. This kind of idea does not follow logically, or scripturally.

Name one Bible text that would prove me wrong!! And don’t forget to smile in advance. Realcatholicgk is sure to comment on that one.

So, you are saying that it does not matter how I interpret Scripture?

 

[catholic_daddy]

benedictus2:
It would help your understanding if you would know what Pope means in the first place. Pope means Papa. The Catholic Church is Christ’s Family here on earth and the Pope is our earthly spiritual father. He is the one that Jesus appointed to “feed” us, his “sheep”.

That is also true. But first and foremost, Christ built his Church on Peter. See Matthew 16:18.
And that is why from the very beginning Christ has singled him out. Just before His death, Christ said that He prayed particularly for Peter so that when the trial has passed, Peter then can strengthen the others. Notice, he did not say I prayed for all of you. He said He prayed for Peter.
After His resurrection he entrusted His flock to him. He said “feed my lambs, tend me sheep”. We are his sheep.

---

Wrong. See Acts when they appointed Matthias to replace Judas. There is an office, the office of bishop. Peter is first among the twelve, the Pope is first among bishops.

Yes, they do. But your understanding of Apostolic powers is very limited and very narrow. The power to bind and loose is still there, the power to forgive sins is still there that is why we have confession.

That is much more wonderful than the miracles that you associate with miracles.

Protestants are always after this miracles but the whole point of salvation is not about miracles. The greatest miracle is that we are being saved.

Jesus did not say He would build his Church on Peter. He said “You are Peter (literally a small stone), and on this Rock (literally a large rock) I will build my Church.”. The Rock was Christ himself and specifically the confession Peter had just made–“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. God would NEVER build his Church on one human, unless He was the Son of God!! Amazing that Roman Catholics don’t get it errrrrrrrr…not really amazing, since it helps them perpetuate their myth of exclusivity. Just sad, I guess.

 

[nsper7]

Jesus did not say He would build his Church on Peter. He said “You are Peter (literally a small stone), and on this Rock (literally a large rock) I will build my Church.”. The Rock was Christ himself and specifically the confession Peter had just made–“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. God would NEVER build his Church on one human, unless He was the Son of God!! Amazing that Roman Catholics don’t get it errrrrrrrr…not really amazing, since it helps them perpetuate their myth of exclusivity. Just sad, I guess.

In Aramaic, the language Jesus and St. Peter would have spoken, it would be the same word. The only reason it is Petros/Petra (two different words) in Greek, is because it would be incorrect to translate St. Peter’s (new) name in the feminine, but in Aramaic, their lingua franca, it is the SAME WORD.

 

[catholic_daddy]

So, you are saying that it does not matter how I interpret Scripture?

That’s not what he said. How would you think that? Of course it matters. But you may interpret differently. Being different doesn’t in itself mean you are right or wrong, saved or unsaved.