Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

[kujo313]

Oh my lands! Now I have heard EVERYTHING!!

Using Scripture, WHAT promises did Mary make? The only one that comes to mind was that she served the Lord. The Bible, or first century teachings for that matter, does not say anything about those who recite a rosary or wear a scapular.
It DOES teach about repenting and being baptized. It also warns about looking out for false gospels, false teachings and deceiving spirits.

 

[guanophore]

Mary was saved from sin just like you and I. Your assumption is man-made, going further and further away from the truth.

Kujo, you are criticizing something that is made up. These things you think Catholics believe and teach are not what is believed and taught! I don’t know where you got your erroneous information. Of course Mary was saved from sin just like you and I! Of course she needed a saviour! She received Him when the angel Gabriel came to her to announce Him, both in her heart, and in her womb.

 

[guanophore]

Actually, I believe in an “age of accountablility” where the parent is accountable for the child and in his/her upbringing.

Really?! Where did you find that in the Bible?

“We believe” (born of a virgin) in something that’s un-Biblical.

The “we believe” is taken from the Nicean creed, kujo. this creed was being used in all the Christian congregations more than a thousand years before your protestant reformers came on the scene. Which do you think is the more authoritative? Closest to the apostles?

IF Mary didn’t sin, then Paul is a liar. Otherwise, you’ve proven my point without a doubt: you have a man-made religion that’s not Biblically based.

kujo, there are many incidences of righteous people in the scriptures. There are also examples of people that were taken up into heaven. Don’t you believe that God is all powerful, and can do whatever He wants? Look at the parents of John the Baptist , for example:

Luke 1:4-6
ormed.

5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari’ah, of the division of Abi’jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Do you think, if they were sinning, the holy scriptures would call them blameless? It is possible to live without sinning.

Paul was using hyperbole to make his point about sin. As was Jesus when He said “if your right hand sins against you, cut it off”. Do you think Jesus meant he wanted a bunch of amputees for followers? Certainly not!

Here is another example of hyperbole:

Matt 3:5-6
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem and** all Judea **and all the region about the Jordan, 6 and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins."

Now we know from taking this scripture in comparison to others that it does not mean literally ALL. We know that there were some people that did not go out, and some that were not baptized by John.

In the same way, when Paul says “all have sinned” he is speaking hyperbolically.

we have a final authority".
Antwill;2196855:

kujo313;2199054:

Your pope once said that the catholic church has the “exclusive on Salvation” I have to strongly disagree. There IS Salvation outside of your religion. Those who follow Scripture and do not follow your traditions are not doomed to Hell.

Clearly you don’t understand the teaching of Jesus, kujo. Jesus only founded one Church. There is only one “Body of Christ”. All who are members of Christ are members of His body. Jesus established the Church as the normative means by which we should know Him and fellowship with Him on earth.

“Chrisianity” has been around longer. I’ve stated in earlier posts the Scriptural reasons why the catholic religion is corrupt.

No, kujo, it has not. Christianity started when Jesus spoke to Peter and told him “on this rock I will build my church”. At Antioch, the disciples were first called Christians. There were no other names for Christians for a thousand years after that. Since the end of the first century, those Christians were called Catholic.

A “Universal Church” HAS been around but it’s not the RCC. Your religious leaders quench the Holy Spirit by making rules and regulations reguarding Penticost. In Brazil, your pope is going there to stop the growing Penticostal Church and the delining of the catholic church. No true “church” would stop the movement of the Holy Spirit.

You are right, there are many rites in the universal church. You are most familiar with the Roman Rite because that is the most common in the United States.

I am not sure what the “delining of the catholic church” means, so I can’t respond to that accusation. But I can say that the Pope, as the successor of Peter, has Christ’s authority to bind and loose (make rules and regulations) regarding any matters of faith and morals. I am not aware of any he has made regarding Pentecost, however.

 

[Techno2000]

Ain’t looking. I’m pretty sure that all denominations are like yours who’d say that their was is THE way. Just like you can mention somebody to agree with you, I can find somebody else who’d agree with me.

You can hold onto the promises that “Mary” made through a rosary which is anti-Scripture and anti-Christ. I’ll just stick with the Salvation through Jesus, the only Way.

All you have to do is PROVE That Fatima and Lourdes are un-True, and I will stop saying my Rosary, can you do it ???

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Fatima
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernadette_Soubirous

 

[Mannyfit75]

kujo,

Most of your remarks are completely bias views that you have of the Catholic Church. I think most of us Catholics have given you our reason why we believe the teachings of the Catholic Church, which is founded by Jesus Christ, and He Jesus built this Church upon Peter (Matthew 16:18).

 

[Greg27]

When I was an atheist my reasons were:

1. There is no evidence God exists
2. Science is sufficient to explain all phenomena
3. The Church seems to force people to accept things on blind belief

My objections were very similar as an atheist to those Richard Dawkins expounds very well in his books and also the tv show he recently made, basically where he contrasts the openness of science to the closedness of religion.

As for when I was Protestant these were:

1. The infallibility of the Pope - I believed a central authority figure was a danger in religion.
2. Veneration of Mary and the Saints - No biblical basis for either, and seemed to rob the Godhead of his majesty
3. Positions on sexual morality and ethics: Seemed to be based on antiquated science and scholastic metaphysics, with no relevance to the real world.

While not all of my issues have been resolved, a lot were to my satisfaction and I do feel the prescence of God - what I was really searching for after a bad encounter with sin in my youth (which destroyed my faith in science as a perfect answer for everything) - in the Church.

 

[Mannyfit75]

When I was an atheist my reasons were:

1. There is no evidence God exists
2. Science is sufficient to explain all phenomena
3. The Church seems to force people to accept things on blind belief

My objections were very similar as an atheist to those Richard Dawkins expounds very well in his books and also the tv show he recently made, basically where he contrasts the openness of science to the closedness of religion.

As for when I was Protestant these were:

1. The infallibility of the Pope - I believed a central authority figure was a danger in religion.

The Pope is only infallible when he speaks Ex-Cathedra, or from the Chair of Peter regarding moral and faith issues. Any other statements or opinions is not infallible. He is not promised the impeccability which many Non-Catholic Christians like yourself seem to missunderstood.

Pope authority is given by God himself. Jesus said in Matthew 16:18. “You are Peter, and Upon this Rock I will built My Church.”

Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, whatever you shall bound on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth shall be loose in heaven.

The Pope since the time of St. Peter has protected the divinity of Jesus Christ. No Pope has ever taught any erroneous doctrine concerning moral and faith.

1. Veneration of Mary and the Saints - No biblical basis for either, and seemed to rob the Godhead of his majesty

The veneration of saints and Mary is giving honor to them. They do not take a place of God. You just have another Protestant bias of what you persume to be a Catholic belief.

scripturecatholic.com/saints.html -Saints Supported by Scripture and Tradition

scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html Mary

1. Positions on sexual morality and ethics: Seemed to be based on antiquated science and scholastic metaphysics, with no relevance to the real world.

While not all of my issues have been resolved, a lot were to my satisfaction and I do feel the prescence of God - what I was really searching for after a bad encounter with sin in my youth (which destroyed my faith in science as a perfect answer for everything) - in the Church.

The teachings of moral teachings of the Church is the basis of binding and loosing things on Earth. The issue of contraception is restricted because contraception promotes fornications. embryonic stem cell is involves the destruction of the fetus. Only God can give and take life away, no human being has authority to take life.

The Church my friend is the pillar and bulwark of truth which is stated in 1 Tim 3:15.

 

[Goth_Catholic]

Using Scripture, WHAT promises did Mary make? The only one that comes to mind was that she served the Lord. The Bible, or first century teachings for that matter, does not say anything about those who recite a rosary or wear a scapular.
It DOES teach about repenting and being baptized. It also warns about looking out for false gospels, false teachings and deceiving spirits.

“Generations shall call me blessed”

 

[guanophore]

“Bible-only faith” cannot be fallible.

This is an absurd assertion, kujo. Of course the scriptures are infallible, but people’s personal understanding of them can be. Scrupture was used to justify slavery, subjugation of women, racism, and all kinds of cults. The JW use it to assert that Jesus is not God!

But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ

So, what are you saying? Have you been caught up in the third heaven like St. Paul, and have visions of things of which you are not allowed to speak?

All throughout the New Testament, the word “Scripture” shows up. Which one? The Old Testament. “Tradition” shows up when the Jewish leader’s traditions nullified the Word of God. Paul says to “keep your traditions” that he taught. Which “traditions”? The fulfillment of Scripture through Jesus Christ: The Gospel.

There are traditions of men, and sacred traditions. It is essential to distinguish them from each other.

He does NOT say to make up more as you go.

No, he says that the HS shall teach us all that we need to know, and he says that Peter has the keys to the kingdom, and that the apostles have the authority to forgive sins, and to bind and loose.

The RCC’s claim that their “traditions” date back to Christ are false because many of today’s traditions were not followed by the Apostles.

Which traditions are those? Do you think the followers of Jesus did not honor His mother? Bet they even put their cloaks down on the dirt for her to sit.

There is no doubt that the Bible was written by God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

How is it that you do not doubt that, kujo?

I don’t see ANY subject that needs to go outside Scripture to get resolved.

The fact that you are unable to see things as a result of being uneducated or narrow minded does not make those things go away! That Bible to which you cling was written and compiled by the Catholic Church. It is the testimony of tradition that makes it valid. But the canon is only one example of tradition at work. Another is the doctrine of the Trinity, found nowhere in the bible, but that comes to us through Sacred Tradition as handed down from the Apostles.

If you want to go through “popes”, “saints” or some other Biblical character besides Jesus, that’s on you. Even if that person had gone through Jesus.

You misunderstand the communion of saints, kujo. If a person is saved, that person is “in Christ”. Such a person cannot be separated from Christ for all eternity. When we asked these prayer warriors to intercede for us, we know their prayers are powerful, because the effectual fervent prayers of the righteous avail much.

Matthew 25:9 The parable of the 10 virgins:

The first five virgins got what they needed. They told the 2nd five “you go where we went.” Those first five can be those “saints” already in Heaven telling you “Don’t come to us. Go to where WE went!”

All of those in Christ point only to Christ, and encourage us in this valley of tears to follow Him, remain in Him, and persevere until the end.

Go fetch to the only One and He’s in the Scriptures.

This is probably the most glaring error of your sola scriptura kujo. Jesus is not “in the Scriptures”. The scriptures point to Him, but it is the person of Jesus, and not the book about Him that is the author and finisher of our faith.

 

[guanophore]

There have been “Infancy Gospels” written in the 2nd century and was not accepted into biblical canon.

Who made that decision, kujo?

Mary's "assumption" didn't really come about until the 1950's.

This absurd assertion reveals a glaring lack of knowledge about Christain History. But don’t take my word for it! Look in the Eastern Orthodox Church!

I believe that investigating what happened to Mary is taking your focus off of where it should be: Being righteous in the eyes of God through Jesus.

This is another absurd statement. Mary the Mother of God NEVER takes anyone’s eyes off Jesus. On the contrary, she is eternally saying to us “do whatever He tells you”. Mary is the perfect example of being righteious in the eyes of God through Jesus. She was full of grace, to receive Him in her womb, and she is also blessed because she heard the word of God, and obeyed.

The people here in these messageboards mention how many thousands of denominations of Protestant churches there are.

There is a second “catholic church” called the “true Catholic Church” or “tCC”. It uses the lower-case “t” so people will not confuse it with the “other” catholic church.
The tCC says that the popes after 1950-something are anti-popes.

Gracious, kujo, now you are grasping at straws!

Mary is buried in Ephesus where John took her. She’s there, somewhere.
The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary had its beginnings in the Byzantine Empire around the 6th Century. An annual feast honoring Mary gradually grew into a commemoration of Mary’s death called the Feast of Dormition (“falling asleep”). As the practice spread to the West, an emphasis was placed on Mary’s resurrection, and the glorification of Mary’s body as well as her soul, and the name of the feast was thereby changed to the Assumption. It is still observed on August 15, as it was in the Middle Ages. The Assumption of Mary was made an official dogma of the Roman Catholic Church in 1950 by Pope Pius XII.

I am curious. What is the citation for your history?

The Bible does record God “assuming” both Enoch and Elijah into Heaven (Genesis 5:24; 2 Kings 2:11). Therefore, it is not impossible that God would have done the same with Mary. It is not wrong to believe that God “assumed” Mary into heaven.

If you really believe this, why are you giving us such a hard time about it?!

The problem is that there is no biblical basis for the Assumption of Mary. The Bible does not record Mary’s death or again mention Mary after Acts chapter 1.

It is only a problem if you are sola scriptura! If you value the Sacred Traditions as well, this is not a problem.

Rather, the doctrine of the Assumption is the result of lifting Mary to a position comparable to that of her Son. Some Roman Catholics go so far as to teach that Mary was resurrected on the third day, just like Jesus, and that Mary ascended into Heaven, just like Jesus.

What you don’t seem to “get” is that Jesus wants to lift ALL of us to a position comparable to that of her son! Mary is one of the firstborn of the Kingdom.

Roman Catholics are not preserved from fallibility, and make mistakes all the time. If there is a Catholic teaching that Mary ascended, then that person is teaching error, and is not teaching what the Church believes. Mary is a creature, she cannot ascend under her own power. She had to be taken up to heaven, just like Elijah and Enoch. (But even those were pretty durn spectacular!)

Jesus was resurrected on the third day (Luke 24:7) and that He ascended bodily into heaven (Acts 1:9). To assume the same thing concerning Mary is to ascribe to her some of the attributes of Christ.

It is wrong to assing to Mary the power of ascension. On the other hand, may we ALL manifiest the attributes of Christ, by which the world will know that we belong to Him!

 

[guanophore]

While the idea of the Assumption of Mary is not heretical in and of itself; in the Roman Catholic Church, the Assumption of Mary is an important step towards why Mary is venerated, worshipped, adored, and prayed to. To teach the Assumption of Mary is a step toward making her equal to Christ, essentially proclaiming Mary’s deity.

I don’t know where you lifted this erroneous accusation. Mary is not worshipped, which only God alone deserves. Mary is not “equal” to Christ in the sense that she does NOT have divine nature. However, Christ has raised her up with Him, and she is seated on His right hand in the heavenly places. She shares in His glory because he has permitted her to do so, just as He has for all of us. If you believe these things, kujo, it is hard to believe that you were ever Catholic!

1. The faithful children of the rosary shall merit a high degree of glory in heaven~Promises of Mary to Christians Who Recite the Rosary

*Un-Biblical.

It is true that you limit your understanding of the Revelation of Christ with your sola scriptura. But in this case, you won’t get far off. If you know what the rosary is about, you know that it is all meditation on scripture itself, and the life of Christ. The reason meditation upon it will bring more glory is that any meditation on th elife of Christ, rosary, or just praying the scripture without the Rosary, will open the soul to sanctifying grace. Can you deny that you were closed to grace before you began to meditate on scripture?

the Catholic Church …goes outside the Bible and centers itself on other matters. It looks too much into the people around Christ instead of Christ, Himself.

I think it only seems this way to you, kujo, because you do not understand what it means to be “in Christ”. Those that surround Christ in the heavenly places are no longer “separated” from Him by the veil as we are.

It stresses too much into what some 2nd or 3rd century “pope” says instead of the Cornerstone (Jesus).

To the extent that anyone, a 2nd century pope, or even you, kujo, bear witness to the cornerstone then he who is not against Christ is for Him. You could be more respected for a good witness if you were not pandering so much misinformation and misdirection here.

If you’re building a house, you’re always going to have the origional blueprint with you as a guide. The Bible IS our blueprint! Yet, instead of looking at the Blueprint or working on the Cornerstone (Christ), the RCC looks at other “stones” too much.

Well, at least you got a part of the plan, there, kujo. Our blueprint is the Holy Spirit, that Christ gives to those who believe in Him. He has expressed Himself in the Scripture, and in Sacred Tradition.

Not only are you on shaky ground but your foundation is wrong. You decorate one of the “stones”:

There is nothing wrong with decorating the stones, kujo. It does not take away from the Prince!

 

[Mannyfit75]

Tell me kujo, is this prayer unbiblical? I think not.

Hail, Mary full of grace the Lord is with you. Blessed you are amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now at the hour of our death. Amen.

Let see where we got Hail Mary from.

Douy Rheim Catholic Bible:

Luke 1:28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Luke 1:41-43

And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And whence is this to me, that the **mother of my Lord **should come to me?

We see Elizabeth called Mary, Mother of My Lord. In the Jewish language, the name Lord is often use to address God. So Mary is the Mother of God.

You call it unbiblical, you really put yourself at false misconception. Second, have you even look what the structure of the rosary is?

You better because the Rosary consist of the Mysteries of Jesus Christ’s Life. It has the Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious, and Luminous Mysteries.

Joyful covers five mysteries, 1 Annunication (Luke 1.28), 2. The Visitation Luke 1:42), 3. Birth of Jesus (Luke 2:7), 4. Presentation (Luke 2:28), and 5. The finding of Our Lord in the Temple (Luke 2:46).

Five Sorrowful has five mysteries, 1. The Agony in the Garden (Mark 14:35), 2. The Scourging at the Pillar (Mark 15:15), 3. Crowning with Thorns (Mark 15:17), 4. The Carrying of the Cross (John 19:17), and 5. The Crucifixion and Death of the Lord (Luke 23:33).

The Glorious Mysteries, 1. The Resurrection, 2. Ascension 3. Descent of the Holy Spirit, 4.The Assumption (also cited in Rev 12:1)and 5. Crowning of the Virgin Mary (Rev. 12:1)

The Luminous Mysteries, 1.The Baptism of Our Lord, 2. The Wedding Feast at Cana, 3. The Proclamation of the Kingdom 4. The Transfiguration of the Lord, and the Instition of the Eucharist (last supper).

It is very Biblical. We also say Our Father Prayer, the Apostles Creed, Glory Be, and Fatima Prayer (Jesus forgive us our sins. Save us from the fires of hell and lead all souls into heaven especially those who need most of your mercy.

 

[Church_Militant]

Actually, I believe in an “age of accountablility” where the parent is accountable for the child and in his/her upbringing.

“We believe” in something that’s un-Biblical. IF Mary didn’t sin, then Paul is a liar. Otherwise, you’ve proven my point without a doubt: you have a man-made religion that’s not Biblically based.

Show me an age of accountability in the word of God.

You can’t do it because it’s not there. That makes it unBiblical…

There is a difference between Original Sin which is what Christ’s sacrifice saved the Blessed Virgin from and actual sins which Paul’s word notwithstanding, she did not commit because she was “full of grace”. Something that [the Greek](Immaculate Conception and Assumption) offers rich insight into.
Mary: Full of Grace.

Immaculate Conception and Assumption

You are good at Romans 3:23, but you ignore other passages.

1st John 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, that you may not sin. But if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just:

1st John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God, committeth not sin: for his seed abideth in him, and he can not sin, because he is born of God.

Is there any question that the Blessed Virgin was “born of God”? No.

Can anyone in all of human history be said to have had a more “personal relationship with Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ”?
No again.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[Randy_Carson]

As i began to understand more of Catholicism, i become less bias against their doctrine/dogma…LOVE IT exactly. I would not say why i have yet to become a catholic since i have not completed my RCIA.

Previously i don’t have many Catholic frez, the couple of them i know are very selfish/self centered Catholic pple. Apart from that, i have never being invited to their CC, never share gospel to me…so how do i have a chance to step into a Catholic church in that case rite!!! Right now, alittle more Catholic Frez, sadly doesn’t seem to see anyone of them carries good fruits, only one of them are quite ok…the rest…sign…no need to talk about it…
So let God’s will be done upon me

Hello, Happygal!

As a former Protestant and Catholic convert myself, I would be happy to chat and answer any questions you may have. Feel free to post or PM, and I’ll try to get back to you ASAP!

BTW, I visited your country in 1990 for three weeks. I enjoyed visiting the Raffles Hotel, the cricket field downtown and seeing many of the sights in the different “quarters”. I’m sure much has changed since then.

I look forward to chatting with you! :tiphat:

 

[guanophore]

And you think she also doesn’t mean that she will do so through Christ??? We all know that we are capable of nothing good except through him.

I think that most people don’t realize (especially protestants) that the statement was made to believers who already knew that.

“I can do all things, through Christ, who strengthens me”.

 

[guanophore]

Well I have been called crazier things… LOL

At least Paul explains it… and he says MIGHT save some and then says that not by himself but through Christ. She just says she WILL save them.

Just saying… the quote made my skin crawl and it continues to do so… I felt sad as soon as I read it…

Mary is on the other side, and she can see that those who place their trust in Christ will be saved. We should be able to see that too, but we do see through a glass darkly.

Even when a lifeguard pulls someone from drowning or a fireman pulls someone from a burning building it is said that “he saved my life”.

God has allowed us, as believers, to participate in His saving mission. For example, the unbelieving spouse is consecrated
through the believing spouse. God sees the two as one…

1 Cor 7:16
16 Wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife? "

1 Cor 7:14
14 For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy."

James 5:19-20

19 My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins."

Who is covering the sins? Is not Jesus the only one that can cover sins? Who is saving the soul? Isn’t it only Jesus who can save souls?

 

[guanophore]

Well, I don’t perscribe to the title of ‘Queen’ when it comes to Mary.

No need, the Holy Spirit already did that!

Rev 12:1-2
12:1 And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; "

If Jesus is king, she is the queen mother. It is all based on who Jesus is. If you don’t believe Jesus is king of the universe, then you can’t call Mary a Queen.

 

[guanophore]

 Those words are fact.  Those words are enough.  Find a denomination that does not go outside those boundries.

If those few words or Peter are sufficient for you, then I hope you find the truth you are seeking. Since Peter knew that he had been given the keys, and that the gospel was spread through preaching (of which these words are only a small sample) then he continued the church as Jesus instructed him.

Have you ever wondered what things Jesus taught them after HIs resurrection

Acts 1:3
3 To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God."

As far as we know, they did not put anything from these 40 days into the writings. What did Jesus talk about ?

I’m looking at it carefully and with an open mind.

That is extrordinary kujo! I wish you had brought that open mind here, instead of that one with all the slander and hostility!

We do not need the “teaching of the ages” (the tradition of men) to understand the Word of God.

Of course not, and the Protestant phenomenon has demonstrated that. Instead, we need Sacred Tradition, handed down to us from the Apostles.

John considered those who did not respect the Apostolic authority to be outside the church.

 

[guanophore]

1. It’s anti-Scriptual. Your denomination’s “rules” say that if your tradition contradicts Scripture then Scripture “rules”.

Can you please show where you found this in the “rules”?

1. It’s anti-Christ. Matthew 4:10

Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”

kujo, Mary worshipped the Lord her God, and Him only did she serve. 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” John 2:4-5

I guess you have not concept of having respect for others…

Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22

For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.

This is very true, which is why the church has a long and careful process of discernment about any apparitions.

What is the Church's warcry?

Matthew 16:16

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Later, Peter DENIED Jesus three times. THAT is not the “rock”. Those who keep Matthew 16:16 in focus IS the rock.

Jesus had great plans for Peter, and allowed Him to be sifted. But he prayed for Peter, that he would not fail, and after he was restored, charged him to strengthen his brethren. This is the Petrine ministry.

Matthew 7:25

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.

The rock is those who hears Jesus’ Words and puts them into practice. The apostles Peter, Paul, James, John, Mark, Matthew, and Luke put their words and the words of Jesus in writing.

Wait, now you are saying that Peter was wise and faithful? Which way is it?

Your “RCC” or so, put them in what is today’s Bible. Every author centers around Jesus being the Christ.
Anything off that focus is the enemy taking you away from the Church’s “warcry” which will deceive you and take you straight to Hell.

Or so!

At least we are making progress on that point. However, I have to point out that, at the time the canon was closed, there was no concept of a “Roman Catholic Church,” per se. there was only one church.

 

[LilyM]

kujo313:

The rock is those who hears Jesus’ Words and puts them into practice. The apostles Peter, Paul, James, John, Mark, Matthew, and Luke put their words and the words of Jesus in writing.

‘There are many other things Jesus said and did that were NOT written down’ - they certainly didn’t put all of Jesus’ words into writing.

How much less so their own! We have a handful of brief letters each from Peter, James and John, and only one from Jude. You seriously think these contain everything they and Jesus said and taught??? What about the other eight Apostles? We have no authentic writings from them AT ALL! How on earth do we know what they taught except by looking at what the earliest generations of Christians believed, since they received it from the Apostles?