Does everyone accept the Catholic Church right to modify the bible?

[Pedro]

This was part of the topic. I cannot continue onto something else until we have an understanding on what you stated plainly about the split in the 11th century. The Orthodox church didn’t break from Rome, the church broke into two separate entities, one of them being Rome and the Roman Catholic church was not and is not the early church, can we agree on that or not?

The church broke up into the different Partriachates, one of them being that of Rome. The Catholic Church today is the only Apostolic Church that is in full communion with the See of Peter. Is that technically accurate enough for you?

Can we now get back to my questions to you about the deuterocanonicals, which BTW, are only my response to your question about them?

 

[colliric]

The church broke up into the different Partriachates, one of them being that of Rome. The Catholic Church today is the only Apostolic Church that is in full communion with the See of Peter. Is that technically accurate enough for you?

yeah that’s what I said…also it was the orthodox that initiated the proceedings.

 

[VoiceofOne]

But if a new text came to light then it would be the sole jurisdiction of her who codified the original to decide whether to include.

Most Protestants whether they accept the Catholic Church or not, accept her codification. Seeings the Catholic Church is the SAME church as it was 1700 years ago, I merely ask would they accept her right to modify or re-codify.

I would guess the ecumenist churches (anglican, lutheran etc) would accept an addition.

God tells us more than once not to add or take away from the Word. Once at the end of Revelation.

A severe punishment would be in store for the church who added.

Moreover the catholic church has not always been the same, once it killed Jews the next it apologized.
Once protestants were heretics, now they are seperated brethren.
Once Mary was a poor girl from Nazereth, now she’s the queen of heaven. (The Queen of Heaven in the bible is Asherah, the Isrealites would make little unleavened cookies in her name.)

 

[VoiceofOne]

The Orthodox church excommunicated Rome, before Rome responded with excommunication. The reason of cause was that the Pope decreed that he was prime, as the bishop of rome, the position that Peter held, he was therefore the earthly head of the church.

The orthodox church split from Rome because of this doctrine clarification, Rome did not initiate the separation proceedings, it simply declared that it was Prime and the bishop of Constantinople didn’t like that and immediately excommunicated Rome first when Rome sent it’s Messenger to deliver the news to him. Rome returned the favor and the church split into two entities, which it sadly remains… However it has become quite clear, the roman assertion is correct, Peter did come to Rome as his tomb was uncovered underneath the Vatican as tradition dictated and he was indeed the first Pope, and he was the lead Apostle. therefore the catholic church remains the true church of god… slowly the gap has reclosed between the two so much so that it may be possible for a reunification within perhaps even our lifetimes.

You’d think since Peter was pope, Paul, being in Rome, writing all those letters would have mentioned him. Weird eh. Paul does mention that Peter had to be chastized for not eating with the gentiles.

 

[Church_Militant]

You’d think since Peter was pope, Paul, being in Rome, writing all those letters would have mentioned him. Weird eh. Paul does mention that Peter had to be chastized for not eating with the gentiles.

…and that negates the truth exactly how?

 

[Church_Militant]

Once Mary was a poor girl from Nazereth, now she’s the queen of heaven. (The Queen of Heaven in the bible is Asherah, the Isrealites would make little unleavened cookies in her name.)

Gosh…so by that logic we had better not call Jesus the King of Kings since it too was used by pagans.

1. Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes king of kings to Esdras the priest, the most learned scribe of the law of the God of heaven, greeting.
2. Ezechiel 26:7 For thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will bring against Tyre Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, the king of kings, from the north, with horses, and chariots, and horsemen, and companies, and much people
   .
3. Daniel 2:37 Thou art a king of kings: and the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, and strength, and power, and glory:
4. 2nd Maccabees 13:4 But the King of kings stirred up the mind of Antiochus against the sinner, and upon Lysias suggesting that he was the cause of all the evils, he commanded (as the custom is with them) that he should be apprehended and put to death in the same place.

Of course you know all about the Giberah in the Old Testament In suppose?

 

[Church_Militant]

Once Mary was a poor girl from Nazereth, now she’s the queen of heaven. (The Queen of Heaven in the bible is Asherah, the Isrealites would make little unleavened cookies in her name.)

Gosh…so by that logic we had better not call Jesus the King of Kings since it too was used by pagans.

1. Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes king of kings to Esdras the priest, the most learned scribe of the law of the God of heaven, greeting.
2. Ezechiel 26:7 For thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will bring against Tyre Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, the king of kings, from the north, with horses, and chariots, and horsemen, and companies, and much people
   .
3. Daniel 2:37 Thou art a king of kings: and the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, and strength, and power, and glory:
4. 2nd Maccabees 13:4 But the King of kings stirred up the mind of Antiochus against the sinner, and upon Lysias suggesting that he was the cause of all the evils, he commanded (as the custom is with them) that he should be apprehended and put to death in the same place.

Of course you know all about the Giberah in the Old Testament In suppose?

What’s the matter? You have yet to respond to the facts stated in any of my posts. Is it hard to respond to facts when you discover that all you have is empty propaganda that you have believed?

 

[VoiceofOne]

…and that negates the truth exactly how?

I wouldn’t want to negate the truth. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth and the light.” But your point of view though shared by a billion catholics isn’t the truth. Jesus said “Narrow is the gate and few are they who find it…” but “Wide is the road and many follow it that leads to destruction.”

I’m just pointing out that there is no proof Peter was the first pope. With Paul writing constantly from Rome (Peter was in Rome?) he never mentioned Peter, or a pope.

Peter wrote extensively on the subject of Christ being the Rock, but never once mentioned himself as the rock, or pope, or bishop.

This is one of those things where you just have to trust men above God to believe in catholicism, and the Holy Spirit which dwells in me forbids it.

 

[VoiceofOne]

Gosh…so by that logic we had better not call Jesus the King of Kings since it too was used by pagans.

1. Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes king of kings to Esdras the priest, the most learned scribe of the law of the God of heaven, greeting.
2. Ezechiel 26:7 For thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will bring against Tyre Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, the king of kings, from the north, with horses, and chariots, and horsemen, and companies, and much people
   .
3. Daniel 2:37 Thou art a king of kings: and the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, and strength, and power, and glory:
4. 2nd Maccabees 13:4 But the King of kings stirred up the mind of Antiochus against the sinner, and upon Lysias suggesting that he was the cause of all the evils, he commanded (as the custom is with them) that he should be apprehended and put to death in the same place.

Of course you know all about the Giberah in the Old Testament In suppose?

What’s the matter? You have yet to respond to the facts stated in any of my posts. Is it hard to respond to facts when you discover that all you have is empty propaganda that you have believed?

The Bible calls Jesus the King of Kings. The bible tells the story of how these other examples were called it by men or themselves, it’s an example of anti-christ.

No where does the queen of heaven in the bible refer to Mary.

Nice try

 

[VoiceofOne]

Gosh…so by that logic we had better not call Jesus the King of Kings since it too was used by pagans.

1. Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes king of kings to Esdras the priest, the most learned scribe of the law of the God of heaven, greeting.
2. Ezechiel 26:7 For thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will bring against Tyre Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, the king of kings, from the north, with horses, and chariots, and horsemen, and companies, and much people
   .
3. Daniel 2:37 Thou art a king of kings: and the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, and strength, and power, and glory:
4. 2nd Maccabees 13:4 But the King of kings stirred up the mind of Antiochus against the sinner, and upon Lysias suggesting that he was the cause of all the evils, he commanded (as the custom is with them) that he should be apprehended and put to death in the same place.

Of course you know all about the Giberah in the Old Testament In suppose?

2Maccabees is an apocryphal book (closed) Jerome was pressured to add it to the Latin vulgate. He did, and stated that it was merely for ecclesial purposes.

 

[Church_Militant]

I wouldn’t want to negate the truth. Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the light

." But your point of view though shared by a billion catholics isn’t the truth. Jesus said “Narrow is the gate and few are they who find it…” but "Wide is the road and many follow it that leads to destruction."Man… I thought you were a Bible only Christian (probably KJV only too) and you can’t even quote the verse right?

It’s John 14:6 and it reads 6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.

As for your other statement, I sure can’t tell from your posts because so far all you have done is offer propaganda without any substantiating proof at all, and I have already shown that at least two of your posts are complete propaganda without basis in fact.

I’m just pointing out that there is no proof Peter was the first pope. With Paul writing constantly from Rome (Peter was in Rome?) he never mentioned Peter, or a pope.

So? Paul never mentions the word trinity either yet we know he taught it…

Peter wrote extensively on the subject of Christ being the Rock, but never once mentioned himself as the rock, or pope, or bishop.

Really? Where did he write all this about the rock? Show me the passages that support your statement.

This is one of those things where you just have to trust men above God to believe in catholicism, and the Holy Spirit which dwells in me forbids it.

That would be your position sir, since you base what you believe about the Christian faith on the unscriptural teachings of men (Mainly Sola Scriptura) as well as their baseless and misleading propaganda about the Catholic Church.

You have yet to make a viable case for anything that you have said, yet I have refuted you with facts.

Now…who does that prove is telling the truth between us?

 

[Caesar]

The Bible calls Jesus the King of Kings. The bible tells the story of how these other examples were called it by men or themselves, it’s an example of anti-christ.

No where does the queen of heaven in the bible refer to Mary.

Nice try

If your looking for simple, nicely layed out passages refering to the Blessed Vrigin as such, then no. However, a little scholarship is in order when it comes to the Scriptures. Afterall, is it not stated in

2 Tim 4:8 - Paul says that there is laid up for him the crown of righteousness. The saints are crowned in heaven, and Mary is the greatest saint of all.

James 1:12 - those who endure will receive the crown of life which God has promised. Mary has received the crown of life by bringing eternal life to the world.

1 Peter 5:4 - when the chief Shepherd is manifested we will receive the unfading crown of glory.

Rev. 2:10 - Jesus will give the faithful unto death the crown of life. Jesus gave Mary His Mother the crown of life.

Rev. 12:1 - Mary, the “woman,” is crowned with twelve stars. She is Queen of heaven and earth and the Mother of the Church.

Wis. 5:16 - we will receive a glorious crown and a beautiful diadem from the hand of the Lord. Mary is with Jesus forever crowned in His glory.

Gen. 5:24, Heb. 11:5 - Enoch was bodily assumed into heaven without dying. Would God do any less for Mary the Ark of the New Covenant?

2 Kings 2:11-12; 1 Mac 2:58 - Elijah was assumed into heaven in fiery chariot. Jesus would not do any less for His Blessed Mother.

Psalm 132:8 - Arise, O Lord, and go to thy resting place, thou and the Ark (Mary) of thy might. Both Jesus and Mary were taken up to their eternal resting place in heaven.

2 Cor. 12:2 - Paul speaks of a man in Christ who was caught up to the third heaven. Mary was also brought up into heaven by God.

Matt. 27:52-53 - when Jesus died and rose, the bodies of the saints were raised. Nothing in Scripture precludes Mary’s assumption into heaven.

1 Thess. 4:17 - we shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Rev. 12:1 - we see Mary, the “woman,” clothed with the sun. While in Rev. 6:9 we only see the souls of the martyrs in heaven, in Rev. 12:1 we see Mary, both body and soul.

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul instructs us to hold fast to oral (not just written) tradition. Apostolic tradition says Mary was assumed into heaven. While claiming the bones of the saints was a common practice during these times (and would have been especially important to obtain Mary’s bones as she was the Mother of God), Mary’s bones were never claimed. This is because they were not available. Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven.

 

[Church_Militant]

The Bible calls Jesus the King of Kings. The bible tells the story of how these other examples were called it by men or themselves, it’s an example of anti-christ.

No where does the queen of heaven in the bible refer to Mary.

Nice try

Yet … the men that claimed those titles were pagans…and according to your logic then a title used by pagans cannot be applied to anything else…

If these men were examples of Anti-Christ, then by your logic that indicts the use of the term for Our Lord.

You can’t justify it, because it irrational bunkum.

 

[Caesar]

I wouldn’t want to negate the truth. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth and the light.” But your point of view though shared by a billion catholics isn’t the truth. Jesus said “Narrow is the gate and few are they who find it…” but “Wide is the road and many follow it that leads to destruction.”

I’m just pointing out that there is no proof Peter was the first pope. With Paul writing constantly from Rome (Peter was in Rome?) he never mentioned Peter, or a pope.

Peter wrote extensively on the subject of Christ being the Rock, but never once mentioned himself as the rock, or pope, or bishop.

This is one of those things where you just have to trust men above God to believe in catholicism, and the Holy Spirit which dwells in me forbids it.

Well, perhaps you should take a look at your Bible…

And by the way, nothing you are saying is by any means new. I see many protestants come onto these forums making false claims and then expecting every Catholic here to have some revelation. These issues have been dealt with before- do a search of the forums.

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ’s representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus’ teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus’ curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the “fisher of men.”

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter’s formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Continued…

 

[Church_Militant]

2Maccabees is an apocryphal book (closed) Jerome was pressured to add it to the Latin vulgate. He did, and stated that it was merely for ecclesial purposes.

Odd but the earliest lists of the inspired canon include those books, and even the Jews to this day celebrate the feast that they tell of beginning in Maccabees.

That certainly has more authority than some Bible society in the 1800s.

Jerome was smart enough to bow to people who knew better than he did. Something many modern people have not had the God given sense to do.

 

[Caesar]

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter’s death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the “barque of Peter”) is a metaphor for the Church.

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus “more than these,” which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep.” Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord’s ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn’t it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter’s shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon’s quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the “whole Church” offered “earnest prayers” for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church’s first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter’s definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter’s definitive teaching. “Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited…”

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn’t want to build on “another man’s foundation” referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.

Continued…

 

[Caesar]

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ’s Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by “exhorting” all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from “Babylon” which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that “Babylon” meant Rome. Rome was the “great city” of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul’s letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

 

[VoiceofOne]

Man… I thought you were a Bible only Christian (probably KJV only too) and you can’t even quote the verse right?

It’s John 14:6 and it reads 6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.

As for your other statement, I sure can’t tell from your posts because so far all you have done is offer propaganda without any substantiating proof at all, and I have already shown that at least two of your posts are complete propaganda without basis in fact.
So? Paul never mentions the word trinity either yet we know he taught it…
Really? Where did he write all this about the rock? Show me the passages that support your statement.
That would be your position sir, since you base what you believe about the Christian faith on the unscriptural teachings of men (Mainly Sola Scriptura) as well as their baseless and misleading propaganda about the Catholic Church.

You have yet to make a viable case for anything that you have said, yet I have refuted you with facts.

Now…who does that prove is telling the truth between us?

OOOH I screwed up one word. Please forgive me.

You keep asking for proof hot shot. I give you verses from the Holy Scriptures. God’s Word is not good enough for you. You get angry, because you want to believe a lie.

“Don’t throw pearls before swine, they’ll trample them under their feet and turn to rend you.”

I don’t tell you where the verses are because it’ll spur you catholics to read a little.

Now here’s the million dollar question… Where is your proof that Peter was pope… from scripture, not your catholic dogma.

Hey hot shot? What’s the matter can’t find it? Cause it isn’t there.

 

[Caesar]

OOOH I screwed up one word. Please forgive me.

You keep asking for proof hot shot. I give you verses from the Holy Scriptures. God’s Word is not good enough for you. You get angry, because you want to believe a lie.

“Don’t throw pearls before swine, they’ll trample them under their feet and turn to rend you.”

I don’t tell you where the verses are because it’ll spur you catholics to read a little.

Now here’s the million dollar question… Where is your proof that Peter was pope… from scripture, not your catholic dogma.

Hey hot shot? What’s the matter can’t find it? Cause it isn’t there.

1. If you want to be insulting go somewhere else.
2. If you want scriptural proof, look above. Also, do a forum search. Nothing you say is new to anyone here, we see the protestants making this false claims all the time. Easily cleared up with some authentic Biblical research.

 

[Church_Militant]

OOOH I screwed up one word. Please forgive me.

James 3:1: Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness.

You keep asking for proof hot shot. I give you verses from the Holy Scriptures. God’s Word is not good enough for you. You get angry, because you want to believe a lie.

I haven’t seen beans for scripture from you so far. And when you are refuted you get angry and call names. (“hot shot”? Please…)

I’m not angry sir, but I don’t brook rhetoric and propaganda that is aimed at our most holy faith. You have made statements and cited sources that are grossly inaccurate and I have responded with factual refutations. If you can’t handle that then maybe you don’t really know what you are talking about.

“Don’t throw pearls before swine, they’ll trample them under their feet and turn to rend you.”

Nice…very charitable of you.

I don’t tell you where the verses are because it’ll spur you catholics to read a little.

So far it looks very much as if my Catholic brothers and sisters and I have buried you in scripture and you have not refuted us. Who does that tell you knows the Word of God.

Hey, I’m not the one who apparently misquoted John 14:6 in the heat of his anger…

Now here’s the million dollar question… Where is your proof that Peter was pope… from scripture, not your catholic dogma.

Matthew 16:16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 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. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ and John 21:15-17
15 When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.

16 He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. 17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

Hey hot shot? What’s the matter can’t find it? Cause it isn’t there.

Really?