Prodigal's Isle

[michaelsmth626]

You are falsely interpreting scripture, giving it meaning that was never intended, and then claiming that we Catholics don’t understand scripture. Remember, The bible is a Catholic Book, written to teach the Catholic Faith. It is ridiculous for you to usurp it, misinterpret it, and then call those by which and for which it was written to in error.

In the Old Testament, the prophets spoke through the Holy Spirit. Where else could they get their insight? In the Nicene Creed, we say :
We believe in the Holy spirit, the Lord and giver of life. who proceeded from the Father and the Son and together with the Father and Son is worshipped and gorified. He spoke through the prophets.

The Spirit was only sent to a few a very few and threw them the word of God and the will of God was know. Like wise the people communicated to God in the same manner. Your church by its nature still teaches this same concept.

You say that telling people that they are recieving the Holy Spirit through baptism is a disservice. Well, what did St. Peter Say in Acts 2:38-39:
38 Peter (said) to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.
39 For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call.”

If you would compare what Peter said with what is written about John TB you would see that it is not speaking of water baptisum but of the Spirit.

1. Repent = Johns TB ministry I baptize you in water unto repentance.
2. But He “Jesus” will baptize you with the HS.

Repent (turn away from the old and receive Jesus) and be baptized (In the HS)

You see by using the proper definition and paying attention to scripture we can see exactly what it means.John was preparing the way for Jesus and the out pouring of the HS. People repented and accepted Jesus when the HS was sent these people were ready to receive it.

 

[Andy_III]

Okay, I had a thought about how to proceed. Let’s build a wooden bridge that leads from the island where you are to the place where we are. I’ll list several “planks” in the bridge. You can read about the planks and tell us the first one you are unwilling to step on. The planks are in order, so take only the steps you are comfortable with. If you don’t want to step on one, perhaps we can describe it more fully, or tell you about a plank that is closer to you.

Since we don’t know how many planks you’ll need to step on or where we might need to place them, I’d like to number them with decimals. That way we can insert new planks wherever we need them. I trust no one will stick a plank in behind you without giving you the opportunity to jump back to the last plank you stepped on.

I hope this process makes sense. I doubt that I can list all the steps you might need, so I ask for everyone’s help to build this bridge. Please let us build this bridge for you, don’t try to add planks yourself. Just tell us whether you’d be willing to put your whole weight on each plank.

Plank 0.0: Welcome to Prodigal’s Isle
Plank 0.01: God exists
Plank 0.02: God created humans (through some process irrelevant to this discussion)
Plank 0.03: God loves all humans and desires them to be with Him
Plank 0.1: God is in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (quibbles over names irrelevant, but we’ll call the Son Jesus from now on)
Plank 0.2: Jesus became flesh and lived in this world
Plank 0.3: Jesus allowed himself to die as an offering for the sins of everyone
Plank 0.4: Before He died, He taught many, but selected 12 men to be his closest followers
Plank 0.41: One of the 12 (Judas) betrayed Him and subsequently killed himself
Plank 0.5: Jesus started a Church and said that he would be with the Church until the end of time
Plank 0.51: Jesus said that the Church would be built on a foundation of rock
Plank 0.52: Jesus commissioned the 11 to teach all nations, providing a mission for the Church
Plank 0.53: Jesus granted Peter special authority over the other 10 remaining by giving him the additional gift of keys, calling him Rock, and praying for him specifically
Plank 0.6: Peter could make rules for the Church that would be enforced in Heaven
Plank 0.61: Peter, when making rules, could not be in error, simply because Jesus said that Peter had the authority to do so
Plank 0.7: Peter used this authority to help the Church grow and work toward its mission
Plank 0.71: The Church grew and flourished, despite tremendous persecution
Plank 0.72: Several of the early Church fathers wrote letters, but most teaching was done in person
Plank 0.75: Peter provided a means by which the high offices of the Church (including his) could be filled
Plank 0.8: Any person taking Peter’s office would inherit his authority
Plank 0.83: Peter’s office must include the prevention of error because of the authority it has
Plank 0.84: The Church has the authority to decide which historical documents faithfully present the teachings of the Church (it can and did compile the Bible)
Plank 0.85: The Church has the authority to make up names for things, although the name does not change the thing itself
Plank 0.86: The Church calls the person occupying Peter’s office the Pope
Plank 0.87: The Church can list all the Popes from today back to Peter
Plank 0.88: People inside or outside the Church do not have the authority to make their own church and claim that it is the Church, even if they think the Pope has done something wrong
Plank 0.89: All denominations that exist today were not started by Jesus, only the Roman Catholic Church still retains Peter’s authority (although some denominations have or had validly ordained priests and bishops who can perform certain rites)
Plank 0.9: It is time for Socrates4Jesus to find a local Catholic parish and ask the priest what the requirements are for joining the Church (RCIA, etc.)
Plank 1.0: Welcome to the Catholic Church

That took longer than I thought and I wrote more planks than I intended to. So, Socrates4Jesus, will you take any steps on this bridge I started? All I ask is that if you don’t want to step on one, tell us why or ask a question that would help you be more sure in your step.

If anyone else sees a problem in the bridge I have built, please help me fix it before Soc gets there! We don’t want Soc to get wet!

I’m praying for you Soc4J!

 

[Andy_III]

Andy, i was referring to your comment:

I said in the first post that i in no way like being on Prodigal’s Island–a Christian without a religion. You said you believed i in fact do like being where i am. So i assumed you had some insight into my thought processes to which i was not privy. But it’s now apparent that you are accusing me of deliberate deceit!

Sorry, I just meant that your behavior on this thread seemed to indicate that you like it on the island. I was not claiming to be privy to your thoughts. Hope the bridge I started helps you get off the island.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Sorry, I just meant that your behavior on this thread seemed to indicate that you like it on the island. I was not claiming to be privy to your thoughts. Hope the bridge I started helps you get off the island.

No problem! Sorry for being so–Socratic!

 

[michaelsmth626]

You analogy is an interesting one. Of course, while the mother was WITH the pups she fed them upon the very essence of herself, her milk. She also taught them all they needed to know and (in the case o Christ and the Apostles) placed one of the pups in Charge while she was gone. The “Pups” did not leave, or scatter, but remained as instructed and did as the “Master” prescribed. They prayed. They also acted upon the inspeiration of that prayer to name Mathias to their group of twelve.

You might have some sort of case here if it could be shown that Peter acted incorrectly or made a poor decision. I know of no evidence, biblical or otherwise, that indicates that the selection of Mathias was frowned upon by Christ.

Peace
James

So we have raised some questions and placed it in context. Yours and other saving grace for your position is standing on the presumption that God protected and inspired Peter with out receiving the HS. You have to apply a lot of faith to that. Even the OT prophets never spoke without its presences. Or you have to claim the HS is not entirely necessary.

But lets look at another factor, this is the key element. Jesus chose the 12 in the first place. Then there were 11 the Catholics chair and power rest on the claim that Peter has the right not only to just appoint but somehow this power [to establish doctrine] is transferred to the next in line.

Paul was chosen and is recorded as saying he layed the foundation that others could build on.

10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it. 11** For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.**

Those last words say alot Jesus called 12 the 11 and Paul. These 12 layed the foundation, that was there mission, on those 12 others can build but [no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.] Jesus called 12 but the CC wants me to believe that threw Peter this foundation or better said the Gospel doctrine can be added to, that the predecessors of Peter inherited the right add to what Peter and the others had layed. I dont believe that. If that is true then the Apostles failed to take the message to the world, it also indicates that the New Covenant was not complete. Jesus finished it and the 12 layed its foundation that others build on in the HS. Now I fully believe that the HS teaches and calls teaches and priest and all such things but the power to lay the foundation was never passed. John seen the 12 names on the foundation in Rev. Twelve is a number that links the NT with the OT in many ways. These 12 testified to Jesus, laying that foundation, we all are grafted into threw Jesus with their testimony. The scriptures say that praise comes from another mans mouth and not his own. Jesus said If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. The 12 were the chosen ones to testify. Chosen by Jesus, not appointed by Peter. All we have to do is listen to the testimony of Matthias, ,I dont hear a thing.

31 “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. 32 There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true. 33 You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. 34 Yet I do not receive testimony from man, but I say these things that you may be saved. 35 He was the burning and shining lamp, and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light. 36 But I have a greater witness than John’s; for the works which the Father has given Me to finish—the very works that I do—bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me. 37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. 38 But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. 39 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. 40 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

If I believe that all the Popes in history all defining what is and what is not then Jesus and the 12 failed. It was completed not needing additional amendments. If it did then I must question the very work of Jesus The Father and the Holy Spirit.

30 So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

 

[michaelsmth626]

Okay, I had a thought about how to proceed. Let’s build a wooden bridge that leads from the island where you are to the place where we are. I’ll list several “planks” in the bridge. You can read about the planks and tell us the first one you are unwilling to step on. The planks are in order, so take only the steps you are comfortable with. If you don’t want to step on one, perhaps we can describe it more fully, or tell you about a plank that is closer to you.

Since we don’t know how many planks you’ll need to step on or where we might need to place them, I’d like to number them with decimals. That way we can insert new planks wherever we need them. I trust no one will stick a plank in behind you without giving you the opportunity to jump back to the last plank you stepped on.

I hope this process makes sense. I doubt that I can list all the steps you might need, so I ask for everyone’s help to build this bridge. Please let us build this bridge for you, don’t try to add planks yourself. Just tell us whether you’d be willing to put your whole weight on each plank.

Plank 0.0: Welcome to Prodigal’s Isle
Plank 0.01: God exists
Plank 0.02: God created humans (through some process irrelevant to this discussion)
Plank 0.03: God loves all humans and desires them to be with Him
Plank 0.1: God is in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (quibbles over names irrelevant, but we’ll call the Son Jesus from now on)
Plank 0.2: Jesus became flesh and lived in this world
Plank 0.3: Jesus allowed himself to die as an offering for the sins of everyone
Plank 0.4: Before He died, He taught many, but selected 12 men to be his closest followers
Plank 0.41: One of the 12 (Judas) betrayed Him and subsequently killed himself
Plank 0.5: Jesus started a Church and said that he would be with the Church until the end of time
Plank 0.51: Jesus said that the Church would be built on a foundation of rock
Plank 0.52: Jesus commissioned the 11 to teach all nations, providing a mission for the Church
Plank 0.53: Jesus granted Peter special authority over the other 10 remaining by giving him the additional gift of keys, calling him Rock, and praying for him specifically
Plank 0.6: Peter could make rules for the Church that would be enforced in Heaven
Plank 0.61: Peter, when making rules, could not be in error, simply because Jesus said that Peter had the authority to do so
Plank 0.7: Peter used this authority to help the Church grow and work toward its mission
Plank 0.71: The Church grew and flourished, despite tremendous persecution
Plank 0.72: Several of the early Church fathers wrote letters, but most teaching was done in person
Plank 0.75: Peter provided a means by which the high offices of the Church (including his) could be filled
Plank 0.8: Any person taking Peter’s office would inherit his authority
Plank 0.83: Peter’s office must include the prevention of error because of the authority it has
Plank 0.84: The Church has the authority to decide which historical documents faithfully present the teachings of the Church (it can and did compile the Bible)
Plank 0.85: The Church has the authority to make up names for things, although the name does not change the thing itself
Plank 0.86: The Church calls the person occupying Peter’s office the Pope
Plank 0.87: The Church can list all the Popes from today back to Peter
Plank 0.88: People inside or outside the Church do not have the authority to make their own church and claim that it is the Church, even if they think the Pope has done something wrong
Plank 0.89: All denominations that exist today were not started by Jesus, only the Roman Catholic Church still retains Peter’s authority (although some denominations have or had validly ordained priests and bishops who can perform certain rites)
Plank 0.9: It is time for Socrates4Jesus to find a local Catholic parish and ask the priest what the requirements are for joining the Church (RCIA, etc.)
Plank 1.0: Welcome to the Catholic Church

That took longer than I thought and I wrote more planks than I intended to. So, Socrates4Jesus, will you take any steps on this bridge I started? All I ask is that if you don’t want to step on one, tell us why or ask a question that would help you be more sure in your step.

If anyone else sees a problem in the bridge I have built, please help me fix it before Soc gets there! We don’t want Soc to get wet!

I’m praying for you Soc4J!

Plank ---------10 Jesus answered and said to her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water.”

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Okay, I had a thought about how to proceed. Let’s build a wooden bridge that leads from the island where you are to the place where we are. I’ll list several “planks” in the bridge. You can read about the planks and tell us the first one you are unwilling to step on. The planks are in order, so take only the steps you are comfortable with. If you don’t want to step on one, perhaps we can describe it more fully, or tell you about a plank that is closer to you.

Since we don’t know how many planks you’ll need to step on or where we might need to place them, I’d like to number them with decimals. That way we can insert new planks wherever we need them. I trust no one will stick a plank in behind you without giving you the opportunity to jump back to the last plank you stepped on.

I hope this process makes sense. I doubt that I can list all the steps you might need, so I ask for everyone’s help to build this bridge. Please let us build this bridge for you, don’t try to add planks yourself. Just tell us whether you’d be willing to put your whole weight on each plank.

Plank 0.0: Welcome to Prodigal’s Isle
Plank 0.01: God exists
Plank 0.02: God created humans (through some process irrelevant to this discussion)
Plank 0.03: God loves all humans and desires them to be with Him
Plank 0.1: God is in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (quibbles over names irrelevant, but we’ll call the Son Jesus from now on)
Plank 0.2: Jesus became flesh and lived in this world
Plank 0.3: Jesus allowed himself to die as an offering for the sins of everyone
Plank 0.4: Before He died, He taught many, but selected 12 men to be his closest followers
Plank 0.41: One of the 12 (Judas) betrayed Him and subsequently killed himself
Plank 0.5: Jesus started a Church and said that he would be with the Church until the end of time
Plank 0.51: Jesus said that the Church would be built on a foundation of rock
Plank 0.52: Jesus commissioned the 11 to teach all nations, providing a mission for the Church
Plank 0.53: Jesus granted Peter special authority over the other 10 remaining by giving him the additional gift of keys, calling him Rock, and praying for him specifically

I’m right there with you Andy. Yes, sir. We protectors of the faith stick together.

Plank 0.6: Peter could make rules for the Church that would be enforced in Heaven
Plank 0.61: Peter, when making rules, could not be in error, simply because Jesus said that Peter had the authority to do so

You just HAD to do it, didn’t you! You just had to ruin everything!

Plank 0.7: Peter used this authority to help the Church grow and work toward its mission
Plank 0.71: The Church grew and flourished, despite tremendous persecution
Plank 0.72: Several of the early Church fathers wrote letters, but most teaching was done in person
Plank 0.75: Peter provided a means by which the high offices of the Church (including his) could be filled
Plank 0.8: Any person taking Peter’s office would inherit his authority
Plank 0.83: Peter’s office must include the prevention of error because of the authority it has

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...om/albums/a366/byf43/DonKnotts-BarneyFife.jpg

Now stop right there before you take this thing too far! I’m getting out my bullet, Andy! I just want you to know that. I’m not fooling around!

Plank 0.84: The Church has the authority to decide which historical documents faithfully present the teachings of the Church (it can and did compile the Bible)
Plank 0.85: The Church has the authority to make up names for things, although the name does not change the thing itself
Plank 0.86: The Church calls the person occupying Peter’s office the Pope
Plank 0.87: The Church can list all the Popes from today back to Peter
Plank 0.88: People inside or outside the Church do not have the authority to make their own church and claim that it is the Church, even if they think the Pope has done something wrong
Plank 0.89: All denominations that exist today were not started by Jesus, only the Roman Catholic Church still retains Peter’s authority (although some denominations have or had validly ordained priests and bishops who can perform certain rites)

THAT’S IT! I’ve heard all i can stand, Andy! I’m going to nip this in the bud, RIGHT NOW!

Plank 0.9: It is time for Socrates4Jesus to find a local Catholic parish and ask the priest what the requirements are for joining the Church (RCIA, etc.)
Plank 1.0: Welcome to the Catholic Church

That took longer than I thought and I wrote more planks than I intended to. So, Socrates4Jesus, will you take any steps on this bridge I started? All I ask is that if you don’t want to step on one, tell us why or ask a question that would help you be more sure in your step.

If anyone else sees a problem in the bridge I have built, please help me fix it before Soc gets there! We don’t want Soc to get wet!

I’m praying for you Soc4J!

I can see we’ve still got a lot of bridge work ahead of us.

 

[LionHeart777]

Sorry gang, small detour.

Michael Smith;

Baptismal Regeneration was taught by the ECF’s. These quotes I cite as hostile witnesses as they are Protestants who reject it:

"’…As a matter of historical fact, there was a general consensus among the Fathers that baptism was the instrument of regeneration and washing away of sin.’ (justforcatholics.org/a116.htm) (accessed [8]/ 25/ 09)

‘…The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers.’ (the-highway.com/sacramental_Webster.html) ([8]/ 25/ 09)"

I’m hoping that you will agree that the ECF’s taught Baptismal Regeneration so that I don’t need to drop 2 full posts worth of citations (non-exhaustive) form the first 3 centuries A.D.

If they did teach this, is it possible that your interpretation of Scripture regarding Baptism is wrong if you are at odds w/ the “unanimous consent” of the Fathers?

Then possibly, we can conclude that your interpretation is in error and also perhaps we could suspect other areas where you feel that Catholics “misinterpret” Scripture.

 

[JRKH]

But i thought you said a wise person is one who imitates God. Can’t you see that this man does not?

Please lay your cards on the table here.
I recommended a book. Did you look into it?

It appears you have some concern about the author.
What is it? Please Be clear and complete

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Ahhh, i see! So you are saying that when Jesus gave Peter the authority to bind and loose, He also gave Him the protection from any deception. Am i understanding you, OK?

Shouldn’t that be obvious? Yes - Such power must have the protection of God since nothing can be “Bound in Heaven” without God’s foreknowledge and consent.

Peace
James

 

[paul_c]

The Spirit was only sent to a few a very few and threw them the word of God and the will of God was know. Like wise the people communicated to God in the same manner. Your church by its nature still teaches this same concept.

If you would compare what Peter said with what is written about John TB you would see that it is not speaking of water baptisum but of the Spirit.

1. Repent = Johns TB ministry I baptize you in water unto repentance.
2. But He “Jesus” will baptize you with the HS.

Repent (turn away from the old and receive Jesus) and be baptized (In the HS)

You see by using the proper definition and paying attention to scripture we can see exactly what it means.John was preparing the way for Jesus and the out pouring of the HS. People repented and accepted Jesus when the HS was sent these people were ready to receive it.

Yes, the Holy Spirit is recieved upon Water Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. A Baptism that John did not offer. You really need to understand scripture in the way it was written, no in the way you would like it to have been written

 

[SteveGC]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...cket.com/albums/rr328/benjomean/DonKnotts.jpg

I’m right there with you Andy. Yes, sir. We protectors of the faith stick together.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:sIYQ5dnYjcX1fM:http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/fife.jpg

You just HAD to do it, didn’t you! You just had to ruin everything!

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...om/albums/a366/byf43/DonKnotts-BarneyFife.jpg

Now stop right there before you take this thing too far! I’m getting out my bullet, Andy! I just want you to know that. I’m not fooling around!

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...an/andy_griffith/andy-griffith-don_knotts.jpg

THAT’S IT! I’ve heard all i can stand, Andy! I’m going to nip this in the bud, RIGHT NOW!

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...ews/images/2006/feb/25/getty/donknotts200.jpg

I can see we’ve still got a lot of bridge work ahead of us.

funniest thing I’ve read in a long time. Thanks, soc. That made my day. I’m a huge Barney Fife fan.

And Andy III, I really like the bridge concept you’ve got going. Great imagination. Good luck with it, I’ll help anyway I can. Looks like Soc is stuck at the infallible and binding/loosing planks

 

[paul_c]

So we have raised some questions and placed it in context. Yours and other saving grace for your position is standing on the presumption that God protected and inspired Peter with out receiving the HS. You have to apply a lot of faith to that. Even the OT prophets never spoke without its presences. Or you have to claim the HS is not entirely necessary.

Just because it was before Pentacost, doesn’t mean that Peter wasn’t inspired by the Holy Spirit. Afterall, the Prophets before Jesus were inspired by the Holy spirit prior to pentacost.

But lets look at another factor, this is the key element. Jesus chose the 12 in the first place. Then there were 11 the Catholics chair and power rest on the claim that Peter has the right not only to just appoint but somehow this power [to establish doctrine] is transferred to the next in line.

Peter was given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 16) so he had the power to appoint other apostles and also to create a succession plan.

Paul was chosen and is recorded as saying he layed the foundation that others could build on.

Paul is talking about the local church he founded. This has nothing to do with the foundation in Revelations.

Those last words say alot Jesus called 12 the 11 and Paul. These 12 layed the foundation, that was there mission, on those 12 others can build but [no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.] Jesus called 12 but the CC wants me to believe that threw Peter this foundation or better said the Gospel doctrine can be added to, that the predecessors of Peter inherited the right add to what Peter and the others had layed. I dont believe that. If that is true then the Apostles failed to take the message to the world, it also indicates that the New Covenant was not complete. Jesus finished it and the 12 layed its foundation that others build on in the HS. Now I fully believe that the HS teaches and calls teaches and priest and all such things but the power to lay the foundation was never passed. John seen the 12 names on the foundation in Rev. Twelve is a number that links the NT with the OT in many ways. These 12 testified to Jesus, laying that foundation, we all are grafted into threw Jesus with their testimony. The scriptures say that praise comes from another mans mouth and not his own. Jesus said If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. The 12 were the chosen ones to testify. Chosen by Jesus, not appointed by Peter. All we have to do is listen to the testimony of Matthias, ,I dont hear a thing. {/quote] Why do you repeat the same arguments that we have already discredited? Jesus called Paul to be a missionary but he never said, " Paul, you will replace Judas as one the 12 Apostles" . This is your own, unsubstantiated theory. There is nothing in scripture to suggest that Matthias was ever relieved of his Apostleship. this again is an unsubstantiated theory of your own making.
michaelsmth626;5679088:

If I believe that all the Popes in history all defining what is and what is not then Jesus and the 12 failed. It was completed not needing additional amendments. If it did then I must question the very work of Jesus The Father and the Holy Spirit.

The Popes have never changed Catholic Doctrine. This has remained unchanged since the Apostolic period. They have clarified Doctrine and made it more specific, but you will not be able to find an example of Catholic Doctrine that is inconsistent with Scripture. Go ahead and try.

 

[JRKH]

So we have raised some questions and placed it in context. Yours and other saving grace for your position is standing on the presumption that God protected and inspired Peter with out receiving the HS.

Yes, Peter as well as the other Apostles and minsters of His Church were/are protected from error. Peter was clearly given Authority in Mt 16 to “Bind and Loose”. So you believe that he did this without God’s protection? As to whether he had recieved the Holy spirit or not, well we have differing texts and so that part remains a mystery.

You have to apply a lot of faith to that. Even the OT prophets never spoke without its presences. Or you have to claim the HS is not entirely necessary.

Do you have a problem with applying a lot of FAITH to something? My beliefs rest upon the nearly 2000 year history of Apostolic succession as well as the clear statements of Scripture which cannot contradict the Church since The Church compiled the Texts in the first place.

But lets look at another factor, this is the key element. Jesus chose the 12 in the first place. Then there were 11 the Catholics chair and power rest on the claim that Peter has the right not only to just appoint but somehow this power [to establish doctrine] is transferred to the next in line.

It most certainly does. To me the key still rests in the power to “Bind and Loose” which is given to Peter, and to The Church. It makes no sense at all for such power to die with the original Apostles for two very good reasons. 1) Jesus Knew that He wasn’t returning in their lifetime and so established The Church to assure guidance and continuity. 2) If you wish to believe that the Apostles authority did NOT transfer, then you can forget about having a reliable NT canon since you cannot prove the Holy Spirit was present ca 400 AD when the NT Canon was established.

Paul was chosen and is recorded as saying he layed the foundation that others could build on.

Those last words say alot Jesus called 12 the 11 and Paul. These 12 layed the foundation, that was there mission, on those 12 others can build but [no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.]

You seem to think Paul is making some statement that applies only to himself. This is not true. He as a minister and Apostle of Christ established communities in various cities teaching them the Good News. This is the foundation upon which others (duly ordained successors) would build. I cannot see where you think that the quote you used contradicts the Catholic Church or apostolic succession.

Jesus called 12 but the CC wants me to believe that threw Peter this foundation or better said the Gospel doctrine can be added to, that the predecessors of Peter inherited the right add to what Peter and the others had layed. I dont believe that. If that is true then the Apostles failed to take the message to the world, it also indicates that the New Covenant was not complete. Jesus finished it and the 12 layed its foundation that others build on in the HS. Now I fully believe that the HS teaches and calls teaches and priest and all such things but the power to lay the foundation was never passed. John seen the 12 names on the foundation in Rev. Twelve is a number that links the NT with the OT in many ways. These 12 testified to Jesus, laying that foundation, we all are grafted into threw Jesus with their testimony.

OK, I think I see what you are saying now. That the person who replaced Judas was not Matthias, but Paul of Tarsus. Is that what you are saying? If it is, fine, great, I have no problem with that. That is the sort of detail that I prefer to leave to God. However, that does not prove that the selection of Matthias was made in error or that he was any less of a validly ordained apostle (meaning one who is sent).

The scriptures say that praise comes from another mans mouth and not his own. Jesus said If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. The 12 were the chosen ones to testify. Chosen by Jesus, not appointed by Peter. All we have to do is listen to the testimony of Matthias, ,I dont hear a thing.

How many letters in the NT were written by Thomas? How many by Andrew? If you need to hear their testimonies - and I mean accounts of their testimonies after Pentacost, there are several apostles that fall short.

If I believe that all the Popes in history all defining what is and what is not then Jesus and the 12 failed. It was completed not needing additional amendments. If it did then I must question the very work of Jesus The Father and the Holy Spirit.

Yes I know. You prefer to do your own “defining”, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit of course. But then so do millions of other “Bible believing Christians”. Never mind that the “Holy Spirit” tells you one definition and someone else a conflicting definition.
Never mind that the Protestants cannot agree on what “infallible scripture” really says. Never mind that protestants cannot lay claim to a single set of beliefs based on the teachings of the Bible. The one thing protestants can ALL be sure of is that the Catholic Church is wrong.

Please forgive me for the outburst above. I would delete it but feel it needs to be said at this point. I have watched you and paulc go back and forth over this and that verse and this and that interpretation. It is all fruitless unless there is some way to resolve the difference. There IS such a way in NT scripture, but unfortunately Protestants have rejected it. Such resolution requires authority and the humility of the opposing parties to submit their pride and position to that authority. Look at Mt 18:15-18 and see how Christ wanted us to settle disagreements.

Peace
James

 

[michaelsmth626]

Sorry gang, small detour.

Michael Smith;

Baptismal Regeneration was taught by the ECF’s. These quotes I cite as hostile witnesses as they are Protestants who reject it:

"’…As a matter of historical fact, there was a general consensus among the Fathers that baptism was the instrument of regeneration and washing away of sin.’ (justforcatholics.org/a116.htm) (accessed [8]/ 25/ 09)

There you are, I’m concerned with understanding what the Apostles taught not the ECF

‘…The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers.’ (the-highway.com/sacramental_Webster.html) ([8]/ 25/ 09)"

I’m hoping that you will agree that the ECF’s taught Baptismal Regeneration so that I don’t need to drop 2 full posts worth of citations (non-exhaustive) form the first 3 centuries A.D.

I dont dispute the fact thats what they teach.

If they did teach this, is it possible that your interpretation of Scripture regarding Baptism is wrong if you are at odds w/ the “unanimous consent” of the Fathers?

Then possibly, we can conclude that your interpretation is in error and also perhaps we could suspect other areas where you feel that Catholics “misinterpret” Scripture.

The fathers as you call them are your fathers not mine.

For I did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but **I **received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.” 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God,

Not some one from the 2nd or 3rd century.
If Peter and Paul and Jesus were standing next to your fathers who is it that you would believe about baptism?

When water baptism and the baptism of the HS is spoken about about in scripture it is clear the 2 are not the same thing. One is the work of men as a sign of repentance.

“ Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.”
3 “ The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

  ‘ Prepare the way of the LORD;
  Make His paths straight.’”

Mark 1:4 John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Mark 1:8 I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

Mathew 3:1 In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 2 and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” 3 For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying:

  “ The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

  ‘ Prepare the way of the LORD;
  Make His paths straight.

Mathew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Who did John say would do the Baptizing in the HS? Did he mention that this would be in water like his ministry of repentance No.

Jesus confirms it.

Acts 1:5 for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.

John truly baptized with water, it says nothing about receiving the Holy Spirit by being baptized in water. It a repentant heart and mind on Christ that baptism represents.
Not a commitment to a church.

This next one is for those of you that want to dismiss Peter not being under the Power of the HS when he cast lots for Matthias.

Acts 1-7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

They had no power until they received the HS. And you shall GO be a witness after you have receive power, you shall GO to the end of the earth. Peter was under his own power when he elected Mattias.

I want you to also note what Jesus says about the Father [know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority]. There are things that are not included in the power of the HS. I believe they go beyond just the times and places, but you believe that Peter received all authority to bind and lose what ever he pleased.

Look here to bind and lose is hardly an open ended statement. I wont bore you with the true meaning of binding and losing.

7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples.

Acts chapter 10 is the fruit of the statements I am making, Peter spoke and the house hold of Cornelius, in fact it says all the Gentiles received the HS, buy hearing the word. Just as Mosses was directed to speak to the Rock Numbers 20 and just as Jesus spoke to the woman at the well. John 4. Threw Jesus comes the HS, living water.

“If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water.”

I will say I have no Idea why Peter called for them to be baptized after they had already received the HS but he did. I cant imaging what purpose it could have served by placing the cart be for the horse. In that I mean John came preparing the way with baptism but now we see the full manifestation of the work of Christ fulfilled. And those that believe on Him shall be saved, end of quote, period, final. Not by works are you saved but by faith threw grace. This to is speaking of the gift of the HS.

Now you can reference all the baptism scriptures you like. Just as paul c did.

Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.

He even put said in ( ) like that indicates Peter is now in charge of dispensing the HS.
All the above statement says is exactly what I have said and John said and what Jesus said.
Repent and be baptized. = prepare yourself make your self acceptable to Jesus (Johns ministry preparing the way) Then as Peter said, repent and be baptized, then you will receive the Holy Spirit in a separate Baptism by Jesus of the HS. But this is not depended on the water what it is truly speaking of is repentance a renewing of your mind and heart in repentance. The water part is irrelevant before Jesus and the Father they are looking at the mind and hearts of men.

 

[SteveGC]

Just because it was before Pentacost, doesn’t mean that Peter wasn’t inspired by the Holy Spirit. Afterall, the Prophets before Jesus were inspired by the Holy spirit prior to pentacost.

Peter was given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 16) so he had the power to appoint other apostles and also to create a succession plan.

JKRH:

Yes, Peter as well as the other Apostles and minsters of His Church were/are protected from error. Peter was clearly given Authority in Mt 16 to “Bind and Loose”. So you believe that he did this without God’s protection? As to whether he had recieved the Holy spirit or not, well we have differing texts and so that part remains a mystery.

Indeed, guys. Let’s look at Mt 16:17 and consider the notion of the transmission of the Spirit.

17And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but **My Father **who is in heaven.

Not only did Christ Himself declare Peter “blessed”, but He specifically stated that Peter had directly received revelation from the Father. If that’s not a clear example of the receipt of the Holy Spirit for an individual, I’m not sure what is…except of course for the explicit one to the whole group at Pentecost. Is the argument really that Peter did not have the Spirit within? I mean, was he also not baptized in the faith already? How many instances of Holy Spirit transference do we need to show that he atleast did have the Spirit guiding him, and that we must concede that many of his subsequent actions could indeed have been protected by the Spirit? If the choice of Matthias was wrong, I wonder why it was never corrected?..something to do with the fact that God works with the imperfections of men, including Peter in his leadership role, throughout all time to bring about the greatest good, maybe?

 

[michaelsmth626]

Yes, Peter as well as the other Apostles and minsters of His Church were/are protected from error. Peter was clearly given Authority in Mt 16 to “Bind and Loose”. So you believe that he did this without God’s protection? As to whether he had recieved the Holy spirit or not, well we have differing texts and so that part remains a mystery.

Right after that account Mt 16 you claim to not know whether Peter had received the HS.
your quote; well we have differing texts and so that part remains a mystery.

Why does your scripture not say in Mt 16:22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”
23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.”

Looks to me like Peter let what the Lord said in verse 18 go to his head.
And he most certainly was not error free or under the HS influence just several verses later.

Here read it again out of Acts, I know this is Jesus speaking and not Peter but lets say Jesus knows best.
Acts 1:8** But you shall receive power** when the Holy Spirit has come upon you;

 

[michaelsmth626]

Indeed, guys. Let’s look at Mt 16:17 and consider the notion of the transmission of the Spirit.

17And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but **My Father **who is in heaven.

Not only did Christ Himself declare Peter “blessed”, but He specifically stated that Peter had directly received revelation from the Father. If that’s not a clear example of the receipt of the Holy Spirit for an individual, I’m not sure what is…except of course for the explicit one to the whole group at Pentecost. Is the argument really that Peter did not have the Spirit within? I mean, was he also not baptized in the faith already? How many instances of Holy Spirit transference do we need to show that his subsequent actions were clearly guided by God?

So then why did John the Baptist say he needed to be baptized by Jesus?
He was influenced by the Spirit just like the few prophets and judges were.
Ponder on that wise men. I would like to here your answer.

Or has blessed just become the new catch word for receiving the HS.

 

[SteveGC]

So then why did John the Baptist say he needed to be baptized by Jesus?
He was influenced by the Spirit just like the few prophets and judges were.
Ponder on that wise men. I would like to here your answer.

Or has blessed just become the new catch word for receiving the HS.

Hey, bud…it’s just conjecture on my part. I don’t know if the Spirit somehow came into Peter for the purpose of protecting his selection of Judas’ replacement or not. I just am speculating about the significance of Christ’s statement to Peter, especially the part about validating that Peter had direct revelation from God. I always presumed that the Spirit had something to do with the transmission of revelation from the heavens to people on earth. Maybe I’m wrong about that. Frankly, I couldn’t care less about it. Doesn’t change my belief that Peter was the first Pope. There’s too much evidence elsewhere where it really matters that confirms that.

Let me ask you…what do you prove about Peter if he wasn’t protected by the Spirit in that selection? Didn’t Matthias remain an apostle? If you concede that Peter received the Spirit at Pentecost, if God’s will was for a different apostle selection, wouldn’t Peter immediately have recognized this error and corrected it? Did that happen?

 

[JRKH]

Right after that account Mt 16 you claim to not know whether Peter had received the HS.
your quote; well we have differing texts and so that part remains a mystery.

Why does your scripture not say in Mt 16:22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”
23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.”

Looks to me like Peter let what the Lord said in verse 18 go to his head.
And he most certainly was not error free or under the HS influence just several verses later.

Here read it again out of Acts, I know this is Jesus speaking and not Peter but lets say Jesus knows best.
Acts 1:8** But you shall** receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you;

As I said in my post, but which you did not address, there is little point in our going back and forth over this. You made quite clear in your post to Lionheart777 that you are not interested in any evidence from the early Church that supports the catholic position.
(You said:
“There you are, I’m concerned with understanding what the Apostles taught not the ECF.”
And
“The fathers as you call them are your fathers not mine.”)

If you WERE truly interested in understanding what Jesus and the Apostles taught you would read and listen, not JUST to what is written in the Bible, but also to what was written by those who were taught directly by the Apostles and their immediate students. In other words you would seek the guidance of those who were closest to the Apostles in the timeline.
You refuse this wonderful resource. Why?

And please don’t tell me it is because they are not in the Bible because I’ll wager that you use a concordance or other text to assist you in reading and understanding the Bible and thus use an extravbiblical text to authenticate your understaning of Scriupture.

I said it before and I’ll say it again. Christ was smart enough to know that His Church needed Authority and He gave it said Authority as outlined in Mt 18:15-18 and demonstrated in Acts 15. We disagree and there is no hope of our coming to agreement on our own. Therefore Christ wants us to “Tell It To The Church”. Shall we Obey Christ Michael?

Peace
James