Do you have questions about Catholic beliefs & Practices

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
benhur said:
Ok thanks. Actually, I would think the apostles may have had an inkling of things to come (death, resurrection , and maybe even departure) for Jesus certainly alluded to them early on or in middles of the three years ministry. Of course they also did not want to face that, or were hopeful to the contrary, and their understanding was limited. I mean even when they saw eminent death of Jesus , Peter still fought and used the sword. But thank you for saying the apostles bickered over something in the near future.

Blessings
Click to expand...
Yeah, it seems funny, as much as He did reveal to them His death, they still seamed to want to ignore it. I thought there was some reference to this somewhere in the gospels. That is, that they didn’t understand it until it actually happened.

So this may have been their mindset about this dispute. Who would be His right hand man WHILE He was enjoying His earthly rule. And the hard reality when He was gone made them realize it wasn’t necessarily a “nice thing” to be the greatest!

And that is why Peter was chosen and gifted supernaturally. It wasn’t because Peter was already suited for the office, but that Jesus had to prepare and pray for him.

But an important distinction here, is that there are two aspects of greatness. One being ordination to a great position, which is not merited. The other is the greatness that one performs their duties and how much they serve others.

But thanks for assuring us that you believe in leaders who govern in the church. I do know there can be some compelling arguments for not assent in to the office of Pope. However, I do believe… and with a conviction that there is more of many aspects in the faith that compels me to hold to it.

Thanks for your fellowship ben!
 
Here my friend is why:

History of Oriental Orthodoxy - Wikipedia

In the years following Chalcedon the patriarchs of Constantinople remained in communion with the non-Chalcedonian patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, while Rome remained out of communion with them, and in unstable communion with Constantinople. It was not until 518 that the new Byzantine Emperor, Justin I (who accepted Chalcedon), demanded that the Church in the Roman Empire accept the Council’s decisions. Justin ordered the replacement of all non-Chalcedonian bishops, including the patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria. The extent of the influence of the Bishop of Rome in this has been a matter of debate.

The Oriental Orthodox communion comprises six groups: Coptic Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox, Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (India) and Armenian Apostolic churches. These six churches, while being in communion with each other are completely independent hierarchically and have no equivalent of the Bishop of Rome or Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, [5] with no concepts of supremacy or precedence respectively.

By the 20th century the Chalcedonian schism was not seen with the same relevance, and from several meetings between the authorities of Roman Catholicism and the Oriental Orthodoxy, reconciling declarations emerged in the common statement of the Oriental Patriarch (Mar Ignatius Zakka I Iwas) and the Pope (John Paul II) in 1984.
“
The confusions and schisms that occurred between their Churches in the later centuries, they realize today, in no way affect or touch the substance of their faith, since these arose only because of differences in terminology and culture and in the various formulae adopted by different theological schools to express the same matter. Accordingly, we find today no real basis for the sad divisions and schisms that subsequently arose between us concerning the doctrine of Incarnation. In words and life we confess the true doctrine concerning Christ our Lord, notwithstanding the differences in interpretation of such a doctrine which arose at the time of the Council of Chalcedon.”

God Bless you,

Patrick
 
benhur said:
There is no evidence that Peter called the meeting. Peter was not the first to speak , nor the last , nor did he make the ruling, nor the method of proclamation. He definitely spoke authoritatively, as he should have, for God gave him the command/vision much earlier, as he did to Paul. These are the reasons many say Peter was first amongst equals , but not over the others.

Blessings
Click to expand...
In addition to this information; you ought to check out this site:

biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/a87.htm

50 NEW TESTAMENT PROOFS FOR PETRINE PRIMACY AND THE PAPACY

The Catholic doctrine of the papacy is biblically-based, and is derived from the evident primacy of St. Peter among the apostles. Like all Christian doctrines, it has undergone development through the centuries, but it hasn’t departed from the essential components already existing in the leadership and prerogatives of St. Peter. These were given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ, acknowledged by his contemporaries, and accepted by the early Church. The biblical Petrine data is quite strong, and is inescapably compelling by virtue of its cumulative weight. This is especially made clear with the assistance of biblical commentaries. The evidence of Holy Scripture (RSV) follows:
  1. Matthew 16:18: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”
The rock (Greek, petra) referred to here is St. Peter himself, not his faith or Jesus Christ. Christ appears here not as the foundation, but as the architect who “builds.” The Church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men (see, e.g., 1 Pet 2:5). Today, the overwhelming consensus of the great majority of all biblical scholars and commentators is in favor of the traditional Catholic understanding. Here St. Peter is spoken of as the foundation-stone of the Church, making him head and superior of the family of God (i.e., the seed of the doctrine of the papacy). Moreover, Rock embodies a metaphor applied to him by Christ in a sense analogous to the suffering and despised Messiah (1 Pet 2:4-8; cf. Mt 21:42).Without a solid foundation a house falls. St. Peter is the foundation, but not founder of the Church, administrator, but not Lord of the Church. The Good Shepherd (John 10:11) gives us other shepherds as well (Eph 4:11).
  1. Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .”
The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is “over a house” (Gen 41:40; 43:19; 44:4; 1 Ki 4:6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Ki 10:5; 15:5; 18:18; Is 22:15,20-21).
3. Matthew 16:19 “. . . whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

“Binding” and “loosing” were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to “forbid” and “permit” with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to “condemn” or “place under the ban” or “acquit.” Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit’s leading (Jn 16:13), and to demand obedience from the Church. “Binding and loosing” represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops (Mt 18:17-18; Jn 20:23). St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent.
  1. Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the “first” (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.
  2. Peter is almost without exception named first whenever he appears with anyone else. In one (only?) example to the contrary, Galatians 2:9, where he (“Cephas”) is listed after James and before John, he is clearly preeminent in the entire context (e.g., 1:18-19; 2:7-8).
  3. Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42; Mt 16:18).
  4. Likewise, Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2).
  5. Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32).
  6. Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” (Lk 22:32).
  7. Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity (Mt 16:16).
  8. Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Mt 16:17).
  9. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.
  10. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).
  11. Jesus Christ uniquely associates Himself and Peter in the miracle of the tribute-money (Mt 17:24-27).
  12. Christ teaches from Peter’s boat, and the miraculous catch of fish follows (Lk 5:1-11): perhaps a metaphor for the pope as a “fisher of men” (cf. Mt 4:19).
  13. Peter was the first apostle to set out for, and enter the empty tomb (Lk 24:12; Jn 20:6).
  14. Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mk 16:7).
  15. Peter leads the apostles in fishing (Jn 21:2-3,11). The “bark” (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.
  16. Peter alone casts himself into the sea to come to Jesus (Jn 21:7).
  17. Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).
 
Continued FROM above:D
  1. Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).
  2. Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).
  3. Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to “preach the gospel” in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).
  4. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).
  5. Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!
  6. Peter’s shadow works miracles (Acts 5:15).
  7. Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).
  8. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).
  9. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).
  10. Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).
  11. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison - Acts 12:1-17).
  12. The whole Church (strongly implied) offers “earnest prayer” for Peter when he is imprisoned (Acts 12:5).
  13. Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).
  14. Paul distinguishes the Lord’s post-Resurrection appearances to Peter from those to other apostles (1 Cor 15:4-8). The two disciples on the road to Emmaus make the same distinction (Lk 24:34), in this instance mentioning only Peter (“Simon”), even though they themselves had just seen the risen Jesus within the previous hour (Lk 24:33).
  15. Peter is often spoken of as distinct among apostles (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:28,32; Acts 2:37; 5:29; 1 Cor 9:5).
  16. Peter is often spokesman for the other apostles, especially at climactic moments (Mk 8:29; Mt 18:21; Lk 9:5; 12:41; Jn 6:67 ff.).
  17. Peter’s name is always the first listed of the “inner circle” of the disciples (Peter, James and John - Mt 17:1; 26:37,40; Mk 5:37; 14:37).
  18. Peter is often the central figure relating to Jesus in dramatic gospel scenes such as walking on the water (Mt 14:28-32; Lk 5:1 ff., Mk 10:28; Mt 17:24 ff.).
  19. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).
  20. Peter’s name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon, and 6 as Cephas). John is next in frequency with only 48 appearances, and Peter is present 50% of the time we find John in the Bible! Archbishop Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples combined were mentioned 130 times. If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable 60% of the time any disciple is referred to!
  21. Peter’s proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the “House of Israel” (2:36) - an example of “binding and loosing.”
  22. Peter was the first “charismatic”, having judged authoritatively the first instance of the gift of tongues as genuine (Acts 2:14-21).
  23. Peter is the first to preach Christian repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).
  24. Peter (presumably) takes the lead in the first recorded mass baptism (Acts 2:41).
  25. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).
  26. Peter was the first traveling missionary, and first exercised what would now be called “visitation of the churches” (Acts 9:32-38,43). Paul preached at Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20), but hadn’t traveled there for that purpose (God changed his plans!). His missionary journeys begin in Acts 13:2.
  27. Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal 1:18), and was commissioned by Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.
  28. Peter acts, by strong implication, as the chief bishop/shepherd of the Church (1 Pet
    5:1), since he exhorts all the other bishops, or “elders.”
  29. Peter interprets prophecy (2 Pet 1:16-21).
  30. Peter corrects those who misuse Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16).
  31. Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome, according to most scholars, as its bishop, and as the universal bishop (or, pope) of the early Church. “Babylon” (1 Pet 5:13) is regarded as code for Rome.
In conclusion, it strains credulity to think that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Christian history; in particular, Church government. The papacy is the most plausible (we believe actual) fulfillment of this

God Bless you,
 
benhur said:
OK.Agree.Then to me the “Church” is all of us, the called out ones,the "chosen’’, and not any particular "fragment’’ . I see it as the same context. Catholicism ,and Orthodoxy and Protestantism all developed and would be fragments within the whole.

But I understand your context, that Roman Catholicism = Judaism as far as conceived, and desired, and established by God per each testament, and O’s and P’s are fragments deriving from but still under the umbrella of Roman Catholicism, and not desirous, established, or conceived of God.

Blessings
Click to expand...
EXCEPT THAT OUR GOD DOES NOT AGREE WITH YOU🤷

One God

One [and only one Faith]

One Chosen People that JESUS called 'MY CHURCH" [singular] some 1,500 years BEFORE the reformation Mt 16:18
 
benhur said:
ok.agree.then to me the “church” is all of us, the called out ones,the "chosen’’, and not any particular "fragment’’ . I see it as the same context. Catholicism ,and orthodoxy and protestantism all developed and would be fragments within the whole.

But i understand your context, that roman catholicism = judaism as far as conceived, and desired, and established by god per each testament, and o’s and p’s are fragments deriving from but still under the umbrella of roman catholicism, and not desirous, established, or conceived of god.

Blessings
Click to expand...
there can be no true unity of “churches” without a single unity of faith-believfs:)
 
PJM said:
there can be no true unity of “churches” without a single unity of faith-believfs:)
Click to expand...
Of course.

Thank God “church’ is more than hierarchy/governance, or a explicit set of beliefs a to z. It is also a “people”. Last I heard Catholics, and Orthodox, and Protestants all consider themselves to be that people, as in “Christians”. But feel free to put an asterisk on that fact. Just like the OT “people” were ''Jews”, but the Pharisees would nudge and say they were better than the Sadducees, and the Essenes say they were better than the two former, etc., etc… Asterisks. They were all “Jews”, God’s chosen. Not three “people” but one chosen, called out, ecclesia. Ditto on NT.

Blessings
 
Benhur #538
Thank God "church’ is more than hierarchy/governance, or a explicit set of beliefs a to z.
Click to expand...
What one chooses to consider is ‘church’ will be right or wrong.
Thank God, truthfully, when He declared unequivocally for what He called “MY CHURCH” which is explicit in His teaching.

**“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18) **
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later to the Twelve, also].

**Sole authority: **
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

So when “church” is felt to mean – whatever I choose to believe or disbelieve against the authority of Christ’s Church is O.K. – the dissent and confusion and thousands of differing sects become the reality.
It is also a “people”. Last I heard Catholics, and Orthodox, and Protestants all consider themselves to be that people, as in “Christians”
Click to expand...
That is the error – what some “consider themselves to be” without assenting to what Christ has in reality given us all in HIS CHURCH.

**DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH - LUMEN GENTIUM **
12. The holy People of God shares also in Christ’s prophetic office: it spreads abroad a living witness to him, especially by a life of faith and love and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the fruit of lips praising his name (cf. Heb. 13:15). The whole body of the faithful who have an anointing that comes from the holy one (cf. 1 Jn. 2:20 and 27) cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of the faith (sensus fidei) of the whole people, **when, “from the bishops to the last of the faithful”[8] they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals. By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (magisterium), and obeying it, receives not the mere word of men, but truly the word of God (cf. 1 Th. 2:13), the faith once for all delivered to the saints (cf. Jude 3). The People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life.

So, without this guidance and obedience to the Magisterium you have the unfortunate lack of so much of what Christ has provided to enable our salvation.**
 
benhur said:
Of course.

Thank God “church’ is more than hierarchy/governance, or a explicit set of beliefs a to z. It is also a “people”. Last I heard Catholics, and Orthodox, and Protestants all consider themselves to be that people, as in “Christians”. But feel free to put an asterisk on that fact. Just like the OT “people” were ''Jews”, but the Pharisees would nudge and say they were better than the Sadducees, and the Essenes say they were better than the two former, etc., etc… Asterisks. They were all “Jews”, God’s chosen. Not three “people” but one chosen, called out, ecclesia. Ditto on NT.

Blessings
Click to expand...
Hey ben,

The thing that strikes me in your thoughts, is that you seem to try to use “unfortunate division” in O.T. times, to justify or even promote division in the New Covenant. Yet we are now provided enough safeguards from Christ to avoid division.
 
PJM said:
That my friend needs to be placed into a more correcting:

[1] In the entirety of the OT: GOD never appeared in a PHYSICAL form.

The “face to face” references are thought ti be angels representing God; NOT God “in Person”

[2] This is attested to by** St John 4:23-24**

“[23] But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also seeketh such to adore him. [24] God is a spirit; and they that adore him, must adore him in spirit and in truth.”

Whether Jesus is with the Father in His “natural sate” [SPIRIT] or with the manifestations of BOTH His human nature and Divine Nature is beyond my competence:shrug: Either is of course possible for GOD. 🙂

So this passage ought t be taken from a metaphysical perspective.

[3] Humanity is destined upon death to decompose:

Genesis 3:19
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return

Man in emulation of God: Genesis 1:26-27 does so by being gifted with a connected-package of a mind, intellect, freewill & soul; ALL similar to God in that they too are SPIRITUAL REALITIES; & immortal. And it this * that is destined to spend Eternity in Heaven or Hell [OUR choice].

So Is Jesus UNITED tot the Father? ABSOLUTELY. Exactly how is not yet revealed to us.👍

Blessings,

Patrick*

Your first statement is not correct. In Gen 18:3 Abraham called one of the three men Lord( Strongs number 136; a nome of God). If he was an angel the angel would have corrected him. This is just one of many times that He appears in the OT.
The point of my question is that in the creed it states He is seated at the right hand of the Father. Do you believe this?
Click to expand...
 
blanchardman said:
Your first statement is not correct. In Gen 18:3 Abraham called one of the three men Lord( Strongs number 136; a nome of God). If he was an angel the angel would have corrected him. This is just one of many times that He appears in the OT.
Click to expand...
What about when Jacob wrestled with God? 😉 Or whom did he wrestle with?
 
In post #514 you are attempting to respond to my question about 1 Cor 3:11-15. The point of my question is how does “the day of the Lord” relate to these verses if they are about purgatory? You did not address this in your reply.
 
blanchardman said:
In post #514 you are attempting to respond to my question about 1 Cor 3:11-15. The point of my question is how does “the day of the Lord” relate to these verses if they are about purgatory? You did not address this in your reply.
Click to expand...
From the RSVCE notes…

3.13 the Day: i.e., the day of the Lord: God’s searching judgment.
 
benhur said:
Of course.

Thank God “church’ is more than hierarchy/governance, or a explicit set of beliefs a to z. It is also a “people”. Last I heard Catholics, and Orthodox, and Protestants all consider themselves to be that people, as in “Christians”. But feel free to put an asterisk on that fact. Just like the OT “people” were ''Jews”, but the Pharisees would nudge and say they were better than the Sadducees, and the Essenes say they were better than the two former, etc., etc… Asterisks. They were all “Jews”, God’s chosen. Not three “people” but one chosen, called out, ecclesia. Ditto on NT.

Blessings
Click to expand...
1 Kings 22:17

And he said, “I sawallIsraelscatteredupon the mountains,as sheep that have no shepherd;and theLordsaid, ‘These have no master; let each return to his home in peace.’”

Jeremiah 23:2

Therefore thus says theLord, the God ofIsrael, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: “You havescatteredmy flock,and have driven themaway,and you have notattended to them. Behold, I willattend to you for your evil doings, says theLord.

Jeremiah 31:10

“Hear the word of theLord, O nations,and declare it in the coastlandsafar off; say, ‘He whoscatteredIsraelwill gather him,and will keep himasashepherd keeps his flock.’

Ezekiel 28:25

“Thus says the LordGod: When I gather the house ofIsraelfrom the peoplesamong whom theyarescattered,*and manifest my holiness in them in the sight of the nations, then they shall dwell in their own land which I gave to my servant Jacob.

Joel 3:2

I will gatherall the nationsand bring them down to the valley of Jehosh′aphat,and I will enter into judgment with them there, onaccount of my peopleand my heritageIsrael, because they havescatteredthemamong the nations,*and have divided up my land,

Zechariah 1:19

And I said to theangel who talked with me, “Whatare these?”And heanswered me, “Theseare the horns which havescatteredJudah,*Israel,*and Jerusalem.”

Now look at the New Covenant made through Jesus…

Matthew 26:31

Then Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away because of me this night; for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be*scattered.’

Luke 22:31-32

31*“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,that he might sift youlike wheat,32but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.”

John 21

15*When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.”16A second time he said to him, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.”17He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” And he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep".
 
rcwitness said:
From the RSVCE notes…

3.13 the Day: i.e., the day of the Lord: God’s searching judgment.
Click to expand...
1Cor1:8
1Thes 5:2
2Thes 2:2-3
2Peter 3:10
All use this to refer to a future event as does 1Cor 3:13
 
benhur said:
Of course.

Thank God “church’ is more than hierarchy/governance, or a explicit set of beliefs a to z. It is also a “people”. Last I heard Catholics, and Orthodox, and Protestants all consider themselves to be that people, as in “Christians”. But feel free to put an asterisk on that fact. Just like the OT “people” were ''Jews”, but the Pharisees would nudge and say they were better than the Sadducees, and the Essenes say they were better than the two former, etc., etc… Asterisks. They were all “Jews”, God’s chosen. Not three “people” but one chosen, called out, ecclesia. Ditto on NT.

Blessings
Click to expand...
OK BUT:D

What does GOD THINK about it:shrug:

Is the Bible a reliable source for one to learn “the faith” & practice it; or is it just another book? [2nd Tim. :16-17]

we Catholics don’t claim to be “better.” We ARE however the ONT True Faith and Church established by Christ. Provable by the bible and historically as well.👍

Unless you can factually /objectively disprove that claim; then friend you might consider praying about it.:gopray2:

Blessings,
Patrick
 
blanchardman said:
Your first statement is not correct. In Gen 18:3 Abraham called one of the three men Lord( Strongs number 136; a nome of God). If he was an angel the angel would have corrected him. This is just one of many times that He appears in the OT.
The point of my question is that in the creed it states He is seated at the right hand of the Father. Do you believe this?
Click to expand...
I responded and you could not grasp the rality of my reply:shrug:

God Bless you,

Patrick
 
PJM said:
I responded and you could not grasp the rality of my reply:shrug:

God Bless you,

Patrick
Click to expand...
You did NOT answer my question. It required a yes or no answer. Do you believe Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top