Can I get some help with these questions

[Marsha_Adams]

From what I have read the SDA have not renounced the false prophesies of Ms White because after the second prediction of Christ’s coming failed to come to pass ( in the 1840’s) one of her followers had a 'revelation" that Christ did indeed return, but it was a secret, spiritual return where some cleansing of some kind of temple took place.

Greg:

Not exactly. The reason the SDAs expected the physical second coming in October 1844 was because according to their math that was when the sanctuary would be cleansed. They believed that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the second coming. When the second coming did not occur on the expected day they were very perplexed and disheartened. That was when Hiram Edson (I think) had a revelation that the sanctuary to be cleansed on that day was not the earth (hence the expected second coming) but the heavenly sanctuary and on that day Jesus had entered the Heavenly Holy of Holies to begin the cleansing of the sanctuary, just as the Jewish High Priest would have done on that date every year before the destruction of the temple on earth.

 

[placido]

Greg:
Not exactly. The reason the SDAs expected the physical second coming in October 1844was because according to their math that was when the sanctuary would be cleansed. They believed that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the second coming. When the second coming did not occur on the expected day they were very perplexed and disheartened.

The SDA’s calculation of the date of the second coming is utterly ludicrous because they do so using years AD as calculated by Pope Gregory, whom they consider to be the anti-christ. Yet they are afraid to start their own calender because they may end up being accused of “thinking to change time and laws”.

placido

 

[jmcrae]

The SDA’s calculation of the date of the second coming is utterly ludicrous because they do so using years AD as calculated by Pope Gregory, whom they consider to be the anti-christ. Yet they are afraid to start their own calender because they may end up being accused of “thinking to change time and laws”.

placido

One wonders why they don’t just go with the Hebrew calendar.

 

[placido]

Ouch!!! I wonder, “Is it still possible to misinterpret “the future” in the bible?” :yup:

It is possible to misinterpret the future and it is happening right here. Dnelson is telling us his bible predicts that the Catholic shall one good day gain political power and control over the whole world. But for him to keep us guessing, or maybe to avoid a second Great Disappointment, he won’t commit himself to a speciffic date, but he (like Miller) is sure that that is what his bible predicts.

placido

 

[placido]

One wonders why they don’t just go with the Hebrew calendar.

That would mess up their false predictions even further. Another issue is that the monk/mathematician Dionysis Exeguus who calculated the AD years in the 6th century, made a mistake, and when the SDA’s predict “the future” don’t take that mistake into account. Their predictions are therefore destined to fail - every time.

placido

 

[po18guy]

The CC does not base its authority on a book, but on a Person. The book - or the second division of it - witnesses to that Person, & to the results of that Person’s actions. It is a witness to “what Jesus said and did”, & to what the Apostles “said and did”. It is a witness - not an authority, except for those who came after the Apostles. The Mass is “in the Bible” - but the Mass is not based on the Bible; it is witnessed to by the Bible: specifically, by parts of the NT. If not a line of the NT had been written, we would still have the Mass. So we could (in principle) have the Mass without the Bible - just as, in fact, we do have the canon of the NT without the Bible; and the written NT of 27 inspired books. The only NT the NT mentions, is that in the Blood of Christ - but the NT says nothing whatever about an inspired canon of written books comprising an NT: that, is as post-Biblical a development as devotion to the BVM. By having a written NT of inspired books, those who do so are using against the CC what God has given to the CC for His Glory & its good; & in quoting the NT against the CC, they are relying on the very Tradition which they repudiate in theory.​

The CC’s use of the the Bible is both principled & consistent - it can look unprincipled, & inconsistent, if one does not know what principles govern the way in which the Church uses it.

It’s very important to realise that though the canon of the NT was settled by the CC, this did not amount to conferring inspiration on the books; that is not something the Church can do - what it did, was to discern the reality of an inspiration that was already a quality of those books by the action of God, Who is Alone the Primary Author of all the Books. An OT parallel: when Hilkiah the priest read the Law to King Josiah, the Law was not being given anything by either of them: they were recognising a Divine Power that came through it. In that sense, the Books are “self-evidencing” - but unless this evidencing is received as what it is, the Word of God written, the evidencing is without fruit: the evidencing needs witnessing - which is where the Church comes in: it canonised the Books because they impressed it as inspired. The Church’s authority is engaged in the handing on of its witness to the inspiration of the books, & in its using them: but not in inspiring them.

Michael, this is about as well said as it can be.

 

[dnelson001]

Well, sorry friends.
i have been very busy these few days. have a lot of things to do. did not have time to visite the site. but wow, you gues been busy.
well lets get to it. i will try to answer as much as i can.
it is going to take a little time to go read all of them.
but it is good to know that i was missed.

Gos bless you all

 

[Philthy]

Well, sorry friends.
i have been very busy these few days. have a lot of things to do. did not have time to visite the site. but wow, you gues been busy.
well lets get to it. i will try to answer as much as i can.
it is going to take a little time to go read all of them.
but it is good to know that i was missed.

Gos bless you all

Hi dnelson! Good to see you back. Why dont you focus on the very basics rather than in interpretations involving deep, complicated, ambiguous, and controversial stuff? The core of your faith in Christ is the Bible. To have any credibility whatsoever we need to be able to articulate our reason for believing the Bible to be the word of God, and why we believe other writings to not be the Word of God. So before you get into complicated interpretations of the Bible and false allegations regarding the Catholic Church, please focus on answering what you called “good questions”:

What is the Bible (basically)?
Who called for its formation?
By whom was it compiled and initially translated as the Bible?
Who determined the canons?
What was the intended use of the Bible?
Why was the Bible introduced?

If you prefer my shorter list, here it is again:
**Who - exactly - compiled the bible?
When-exactly- did they do it?
How-exactly- do you know? **

Until we can get past these very basic issues, there really is no point in discussing the contents of the bible…

Yours in Christ

 

[dnelson001]

My Brothers and Sisters(excluding Dnelson for you are no Brother)

all of this is meaningless. Dnelson is a Deciver and a Divider. He is trying to come in here and rattle and shake our faiths with his lies and blasphemy. He is trying burn down our homes of faith and we should not let him. Do not fan the fire that he is trying to set. Instead walk away.

Well Mr. Dchsknight; if lies and blasphemy can shack your faith i would i would take a better look at what kind of faith you have.
you ar intimidated for the same reason the Church was intimidated when it met with Luther.
you are intemidaed because you cant answer the simples question of your faith. yu say that the CC is the right church and has all this knowledge and infalibility and yet you can ansswer what the moon means. you say that the church s Mary, but you also say that the woman od Revelation 12 is the church as well. so now here you step into symbolism. i explain every simbol from the bible clearly. but you cannot explain anything.
you cant explain it because you are wrong. you would not venture to try because then we will have something to compere with and ooofffff. we don’t want that do we?
tell me what the Symbols are in revelation 12, that should be easy. you claim that church is infallible don’t you. she ca never be wrong. the church claims that she is the woman of revelation 12. so you cant tell me that they dont have an explanation for that chapter.
it is easy for me to be right when you are wrong.
honestly i don’t think you will answer the question because you or the CC does not have an answer. isn’t that a shame? and you cant think aor belive anything for yourself, that would be heresy and we dont want that ether.

We do not have to prove anything to him. For he is an unbeliever. the bible specficly says, to an unbeliever no explanation can be given. there is nothing we can say that will convince him that he si wrong and Christ is right and Christ is in the Catholic Church. Since he wont hear, the bible says do not cast your pearls before swine.

why would you want to talk to me. you cant prove what you believe. everything is well they tell me. i have to belive what the tell me. whether it is wrong or right.

We have such an amazing treasure and pearl in the heart of Jesus and in the church. do not throw it around like trash.

one would assume you know what you mean when you say that, but we both know you don’t. every thing is from what they have though you. you cant get the word of God to say what you want it to say so there is no other choice but to make your own and call it the word of God. 95% of what you tech is contrary to scriptures or is blatantly condemned by scripture. you don’t have any excuse. you don’t have any excuse of reasonable response so i guess you will just look for some meaningless sentence on this post and go with hat can avoid my question.
it must be frustrating for you i know. the church teaches that she is the woman but yet after almost 2000 years cant explain the symbol in revelation 12. what a shame and embarrassment.

I would say the best weapon against a person like this is to walk away and let Jesus deal with him. Jesus does not need us to defend him or his mother or his Bride, Dnelson will simply die out into the shadows were he can yell at the walls and the wind. The bible also states to stay away from these kinds of people. My brother and sisters, Stay away from this thread. Stay away from Dnelson, let this thread die. do not post no matter how maddening he maybe. let him think he is right and that he has won. because all he will hear from our lord is, “I never knew you”. And his justice is far better then any one else’s.

well i guess that is the best road you can see right now. you or your church can answer the questions, so just try to brush it off and stop any one from seeing how poor your knowledge is of your own belief much less the scriptures.
im yelling at the walls huh? your ears must have splinters because i have your full attention.
“let the thread die” now this sounds more like what you really want. i ask you a question and you dont answer, and is you try to answer you don’t have any reasonable explanation that can stand up a simple questions. most of the time you don’t understand the answer that you give to all you can do is copy past it.
just think about how brain wash you would have to be to believe this. and this is a common teaching of the CC i hear:
the pagans that were converted was serving the true God and did not know it. if i recall correctly that explanation came up in this thread as well. "THE DEVIL WAS SECRETLY BREADING CHRISTIAN WITH OUT THEM KNOWING IT. now who you have though that? this is just hilarious.

OK, God bless you friend

 

[greggy53]

Well Mr. Dchsknight; if lies and blasphemy can shack your faith i would i would take a better look at what kind of faith you have.
you ar intimidated for the same reason the Church was intimidated when it met with Luther.

The Church didn’t meet Luther. Luther came out from the Church, and his heresy with him.

you are intemidaed because you cant answer the simples question of your faith. yu say that the CC is the right church and has all this knowledge and infalibility and yet you can ansswer what the moon means. you say that the church s Mary, but you also say that the woman od Revelation 12 is the church as well. so now here you step into symbolism. i explain every simbol from the bible clearly. but you cannot explain anything. you cant explain it because you are wrong. you would not venture to try because then we will have something to compere with and ooofffff. we don’t want that do we?
tell me what the Symbols are in revelation 12, that should be easy. you claim that church is infallible don’t you. she ca never be wrong. the church claims that she is the woman of revelation 12. so you cant tell me that they dont have an explanation for that chapter.
it is easy for me to be right when you are wrong.
honestly i don’t think you will answer the question because you or the CC does not have an answer. isn’t that a shame? and you cant think aor belive anything for yourself, that would be heresy and we dont want that ether.

Like we tried to explain to you before . If the woman in Rev with the crown of stars and moon under feet is strictly a representation of the Church then you are telling us that the Church gave birth to Jesus. Explain how that can be? It can’t, and neither you nor any other Protestant on the face of the earth can give any logical explanation of how the Church could give birth to our Lord. Therefore the woman in REV 12 who is seen in the vision giving birth to Jesus must be the virgin Mary. The moon under feet tells us she is above the changing things of this world.

 

[dnelson001]

What is the Bible (basically)?

it is a compilation of different writing from many different inspired writers. it is the inspired word of God.

Who called for its formation?

Christians called for its formation after the disciples died for proof of what they believe.
2 timoty 3:14-17
14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

tell me? where does it say we get our doctrine from?does it say from the pope or from the church?
and please dont show your ignorane and try to separate the 2. because you cannot have the church with out a pope and you cant have a pope without a church. so if you try to answer with that just know that it is ignorance that is talking.

By whom was it compiled and initially translated as the Bible?

by King James of England. He had the manuscripts. they translated the bible we use today. well, the credible ones anyway.
we know that it was not the CC because she was trying to destroy all the bibles. isn’t that right. but how could you know that. they did not tell you that right? If they don’t tell you, you are not going to know, and you dear not look into it. oh my, that is ground for excommunication. that is live forever burning in hell, God said that the sinner will die but the church say God is a Lear. the sinner will never die, he will live forever in hell.
well if the church say that she must be right; right? we can’t put Gods word above the church, ho no, no, no, no, no, not. if anyone is wrong it is God.

Who determined the canons?

well it was King James again. God inspired his translators to know what books did not contradict his word.
you see what could not find in the word of God you would have to make up or just to just get somene ot make it up for you.
eg 2 macabees 15:37-39
37: Thus went it with Nicanor: and from that time forth the Hebrews had the city in their power. And here will I make an end.
38: And if I have done well, and as is fitting the story, it is that which I desired: but if slenderly and meanly, it is that which I could attain unto.
39: For as it is hurtful to drink wine or water alone; and as wine mingled with water is pleasant, and delighteth the taste: even so speech finely framed delighteth the ears of them that read the story. And here shall be an end.

i know you dont understand what it say so i will not ask you. what this writer is saying is that he dont know what he is writing, he is definitely not inspired, i dont thing i have to point that out. well maybe i do. he said: if it is correct what he wrote that is what he was trying to do, but if it is not it is the best he could do. he himself did not even know it he was right. but you base your teaching on these books that are not inspired. if it was inspired you would not find contradiction with the rest of the bible.

the canon was determine by sensible God fairing Christians. in other words God decided what was going to be in the cannon.
God said. heaven and earth shall pass away but his word shall not pass away. if the CC could have destroyed every bible in existence she would have. or at least keep it out of the hands of you and me would have done just as well.

What was the intended use of the Bible?

2 timoty 3:14-17
14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

you see what you are trying to do is separate God from his word. something that is not possible.

Why was the Bible introduced?

because Gods people needed to know the truth for themselves, were there is no knowledge the people perish.
once again you are trying to seperate God from his word as thou he has nothing to do with it. but this is what you believe. Gods word is not trust worthy.

If you prefer my shorter list, here it is again:
**Who - exactly - compiled the bible?
When-exactly- did they do it?
How-exactly- do you know? **

done that.

Until we can get past these very basic issues, there really is no point in discussing the contents of the bible…

now if you don’t believe what i said then prove me wrong. lets see what you come up with?
so, here is your answers, hope you are satisfied.
i bet you though i was going to give some bogus replay din’t you? it seams i’m a lot smarter than you

Yours in Christ

Yours in Christ also

OK i’m ready for this one.

 

[greggy53]

we know that it was not the CC because she was trying to destroy all the bibles. isn’t that right. but how could you know that. they did not tell you that right? If they don’t tell you, you are not going to know, and you dear not look into it. oh my, that is ground for excommunication. that is live forever burning in hell, God said that the sinner will die but the church say God is a Lear. the sinner will never die, he will live forever in hell.
well if the church say that she must be right; right? we can’t put Gods word above the church, ho no, no, no, no, no, not. if anyone is wrong it is God…

I asked you once before for evidence that the Church tried to destroy all the bibles, and you never responded. I know you are fielding a lot of questions from a number of people, but if you want me to consider this then you must supply the evidence. Written evidence. Surely the so-called real Christians who were being persecuted for well over 1000 years would have documented this. Where are their writings?? Please don’t tell me they were suppressed by the Church otherwise how would you know about it???

 

[Dchsknight]

Dnelson, you are very ignorant person. Everything you said about the bible is false. You need to retake history. King James, Raped the bible. this debate and conversation can not continue until you know what the TRUE history of the word of God is…

 

[zach_dunn]

it is a compilation of different writing from many different inspired writers. it is the inspired word of God.

No argument here.

Christians called for its formation after the disciples died for proof of what they believe.
2 timoty 3:14-17
14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

I believe verse 14 is actually an appeal to Sacred Tradition. How else would Timothy have learned the doctrines of Christianity? The Bible? Nope, wasn’t around yet. It was from the preaching of the Apostles, which is Sacred Tradition.

tell me? where does it say we get our doctrine from?does it say from the pope or from the church?
and please dont show your ignorane and try to separate the 2. because you cannot have the church with out a pope and you cant have a pope without a church. so if you try to answer with that just know that it is ignorance that is talking.

We get our doctrine from the Word of God (Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition) as interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church. Passages that illustrate this are Matthew 16:18-19; 18:18; 28:19-20, and Luke 10:16.

by King James of England. He had the manuscripts. they translated the bible we use today. well, the credible ones anyway.
we know that it was not the CC because she was trying to destroy all the bibles. isn’t that right. but how could you know that. they did not tell you that right? If they don’t tell you, you are not going to know, and you dear not look into it. oh my, that is ground for excommunication. that is live forever burning in hell, God said that the sinner will die but the church say God is a Lear. the sinner will never die, he will live forever in hell.
well if the church say that she must be right; right? we can’t put Gods word above the church, ho no, no, no, no, no, not. if anyone is wrong it is God.

You’re not serious are you? You can’t possibly mean King James I of England? Whose reign started in 1603? That’s the only King James I can think of at the moment. That’s so astonishing because the Bible had already been in print for almost 200 years…You completely ignore the councils of Carthage and Hippo that determined the canon of the Bible in the late fourth century. I think you need to take another look at history.

well it was King James again. God inspired his translators to know what books did not contradict his word.
you see what could not find in the word of God you would have to make up or just to just get somene ot make it up for you.
eg 2 macabees 15:37-39
37: Thus went it with Nicanor: and from that time forth the Hebrews had the city in their power. And here will I make an end.
38: And if I have done well, and as is fitting the story, it is that which I desired: but if slenderly and meanly, it is that which I could attain unto.
39: For as it is hurtful to drink wine or water alone; and as wine mingled with water is pleasant, and delighteth the taste: even so speech finely framed delighteth the ears of them that read the story. And here shall be an end.

i know you dont understand what it say so i will not ask you. what this writer is saying is that he dont know what he is writing, he is definitely not inspired, i dont thing i have to point that out. well maybe i do. he said: if it is correct what he wrote that is what he was trying to do, but if it is not it is the best he could do. he himself did not even know it he was right. but you base your teaching on these books that are not inspired. if it was inspired you would not find contradiction with the rest of the bible.

It sounds like you don’t understand how the writers were inspired. I’m not an expert either but it sounds like you think the writers were put in a trance and wrote whatever God wanted them to write, this isn’t so. Take, for example, 1 Corinthians 1:14-16

“14 I give God thanks, that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Caius; 15 Lest any should say that you were baptized in my name. 16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanus; besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.”

By your idea of inspiration we’d have to say that 1 Corinthians cannot be inspired, because by your theory God would have forgotten who Paul baptized.

the canon was determine by sensible God fairing Christians. in other words God decided what was going to be in the cannon.
God said. heaven and earth shall pass away but his word shall not pass away. if the CC could have destroyed every bible in existence she would have. or at least keep it out of the hands of you and me would have done just as well.

This doesn’t make sense, Christians determined the canon and in other words God did? Christians aren’t God themselves…The Catholic Church never claimed to have made the works of the Biblical authors inspired, that’s just stupid. The Church claims to use her authority, which was given to her by Christ, to point out which books were in fact inspired by God. Catholics believe that God inspired the Bible not that the Catholic Church did.

What kind of evidence do you have to back up your hollow claim that the Catholic Church tried to destroy the Bible? That’s just a ridiculous claim, if the Church really wanted to destroy the Bible is had about 1600 years to do so. I’ve heard this claim so many times without any evidence to back it up, will you be the first? I doubt it. Where do you get this information from anyway? Your ideas about the Catholic Church are so off the mark it makes me question whether you care more about converting Catholics or just flat out destroying the Catholic Church.

<–continued in next post–>

 

[zach_dunn]

2 timoty 3:14-17
14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

you see what you are trying to do is separate God from his word. something that is not possible.

Where do you get the idea that we are trying to seperate God from His Word? That’s just ridiculous.

BTW, this passage is refering to the Old Testament scriptures which is made obvious by Timothy knowing these scriptures from a child. Most of the New Testament writings weren’t even written yet, and according to you we didn’t have a Bible until after 1603. You have actually seperated yourself from God’s word when you reject Tradition. It’s kinda funny though, considering that Scripture came out of Tradition, you should be rejecting the Scriptures as well!!

I think John 20:31 sums up why the scriptures were written:

“31 But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name.”

because Gods people needed to know the truth for themselves, were there is no knowledge the people perish.
once again you are trying to seperate God from his word as thou he has nothing to do with it. but this is what you believe. Gods word is not trust worthy.

Will you please explain how you come to this conclusion that we are trying to seperate God from His word? It doesn’t make any sense to me! And who says that we believe God’s word is trustworthy? Doesn’t it bother you that you give a false impression of the Catholic Church without any sound reasoning or evidence to back up your accusations? I don’t know how you can take it.

now if you don’t believe what i said then prove me wrong. lets see what you come up with?
so, here is your answers, hope you are satisfied.
i bet you though i was going to give some bogus replay din’t you? it seams i’m a lot smarter than you.

1. I came up with something
2. It was a bogus answer
3. That’s rude

Pax,
Zach

 

[Dchsknight]

Dnelson you should look at codexsinaiticus.org/en/ Written WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY… WAY before King James, Explain that…

 

[greggy53]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

*I copied this from a secular source. Our SDA friends not trusting Catholic ones.*The Damasine list, 382 AD
The “Damasine list”, issued by Pope Damasus I at the council is as follows:
It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book;Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;
Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book.

Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, one to the Corinthians [2 Corinthians is not mentioned], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians [First Epistle to the Thessalonians and Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy [First Epistle to Timothy and Second Epistle to Timothy], one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book.

Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles [First Epistle of Peter and Second Epistle of Peter]; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles [Second Epistle of John and Third Epistle of John]; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.

Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Please note the inclusion of the books you call the Apocrapha.
This is what we mean when we talk of evidence. The SDA evidently has no evidence to back any of their claims

 

[dnelson001]

John 21:15-19 - Jesus establishes Simon Peter as Pope (chief shepherd) of His Church. (Only one Church has a Pope.)

can you tell me were did you find the word pope in the bible? ok lets say he did. were in the bible did jesus say that when he died you needed a new one?
any answers. i rest my case.

God bless

 

[Dchsknight]

can you tell me were did you find the word pope in the bible? ok lets say he did. were in the bible did jesus say that when he died you needed a new one?
any answers. i rest my case.

God bless

Wow… Christ did say he would never Leave us and since he gave us his Authority through the apostles Logic and intelligence would state that, that authority would not leave, it had to be given to some one…

 

[zach_dunn]

can you tell me were did you find the word pope in the bible?

Where do you find the words, Trinity, Incarnation, Hypostatic Union, and Bible in the Bible?

ok lets say he did. were in the bible did jesus say that when he died you needed a new one?
any answers. i rest my case.

God bless

Don’t be so quick to think that you’re smarter than everyone, I have an answer. Matthew 16:19

“19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

You’re a Protestant and I’m sure you believe that Scripture “hangs together” right? Well, this Scripture hangs together with Isaiah 22:22

“22 And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open.”

The key goes to the king’s steward. The steward carried out the daily tasks of the king and so carried the key to the castle, this role was, by necessity, succesive. The Papacy takes after the stewardship. The pope, like the steward, is second to the king (Christ), but carries out His mission on earth through the ages by succesors.

Pax,
Zach