Protestant Forum I Checked Out

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Emeraldlady said:
so that even though there are quarrels and discussions among the members, the family unit stands.
Click to expand...
But it does not. Especially if the same process is followed to “accuse” all the others of disunity. Maybe you think it does. But the very authority that is boasted about so many times is does not create unity. In name “maybe” but come on. Catholics disagree just as much on the Catechism then the supposedly 30 000 non-Catholic denominations.
 
Last edited:
b/c Jesus gave the keys to Peter. The “keys” represent ministerial authority via an act of delegation. Jesus could have stayed on Earth to administer his kingdom, but it was God’s plan to have humans do it for him (humans that could become divine like Jesus through grace); just as he had done in the past (a city on a mountain-Jerusalem).

Scriptural support for the above answer:

Jesus alluded to this “use of people in administering his Kingdom” in the Parable of the Tenants (Mt. cpt 21).

The keys as representative of authority in a Kingdom are referenced in the OT (Isaiah c22, v22).
 
MichaelP3 said:
40.png
adf417:
Any yet there is still division on this issue which should prove to you that further clarification on this, or any issue is not necessarly what is needed.
Click to expand...
So first of all you admit division. That is okay as it is pretty evident.

Further more clarification is not needed if I understand you correctly? Because?

And then that just makes the point. This “authority” also makes for division as is proved. And the division is very evident. Whether one calls themselve a specific name does not eliminate that. They are not “just submitting”. Which then again begs the question on this “authority”.

Just a thought and my question stands.

Regards.
Click to expand...
No! Division is no okay and that kind of division is not what i was speaking of. I probably should have used the term “disagreement” above. Disagreeing on music styles vs disagreeing on the Trinity is two totally different things. One will create division and the other will create frowns.

Peace!!!
 
You are stating your opinions but are not backing them up with scripture or tradition. You are relying on yourself and not on an authority.

Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom.
 
adf417 said:
Disagreeing on music styles vs disagreeing on the Trinity is two totally different things. One will create division and the other will create frowns.
Click to expand...
Well disagreeing on the Trinity is not a problem between the CC and non-Catholics. (The ones not agreeing to the Trinity are not even considered Christian in many circles).

I honestly do not think you get my point if that is your post. That is you have division in the CC just as much as any other. And to the point, the authority didn’t help much.

Regards
 
Last edited:
Right.

Even if this is the way it was intended to Peter. I have many times asked the question if everyone have actually checked the “line of the popes” and checked how every single Pope got where they got themselves. I have. I do not think all the others have. Take some time to check it out rather than what you are told. A direct line from Peter or even Jesus is very very subjective unless you have great faith in specifically that then it could be the case.

Ps. And that is but one problem that doesn’t add up.
 
Last edited:
Great question! It seems to me after reading Acts that the “church” started at that time. It is not clear to me how the RC church can make the claim that they are the first Christian church. Also, when you read what the apostle Paul has to say in his letters to “the church” …in Galatia, in Ephesus, in Corinth, in Phillipi, in Colosse, in Thessalonica, etc, it makes that claim seem ridiculous at best
 
Bon_Croix said:
b/c Jesus gave the keys to Peter. The “keys” represent ministerial authority via an act of delegation. Jesus could have stayed on Earth to administer his kingdom, but it was God’s plan to have humans do it for him (humans that could become divine like Jesus through grace); just as he had done in the past (a city on a mountain-Jerusalem).

Scriptural support for the above answer:

Jesus alluded to this “use of people in administering his Kingdom” in the Parable of the Tenants (Mt. cpt 21).

The keys as representative of authority in a Kingdom are referenced in the OT (Isaiah c22, v22).
Click to expand...
Which humans have the capability of becoming divine like Jesus? I think this is a new concept for me. Which verses in Matthew 21 are you referencing?
 
The church started at Pentecost (after death of Jesus).

When Jesus was alive he said, “Thou are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church” (future tense). Jesus expressed his intent for his church before the church started.

Acts is full of examples where Peter is the leader of the Church. He sets people straight by giving speeches. Important decisions are made at the Council at Jerusalem, and Peter delivers the speech after deliberating with the Apostles. The Church obligates the gentile members to abstain from unlawful marriage and meat of strangled animals (it has bound its members)–a task allocated to Peter by Jesus when he said, “what you bind on earth is bound in heaven”.
 
Becoming divine like Jesus is the New Covenant. – Read John Cpt. 6. and then its eventual taking place in Mt: 26, v28.

Becoming divine like Jesus was not possible under the Old Covenants.

The apostles received the Baptism of John the Baptist. At Pentecost, they received the Holy Spirit as was promised.
 
Last edited:
The church in Acts is the Catholic church.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind that eternal life is the life of God; eternal life is not a place, but a state. if you “go to heaven”, you are not “going to a place”.
 
Last edited:
Edie said:
It seems to me after reading Acts that the “church” started at that time. It is not clear to me how the RC church can make the claim that they are the first Christian church.
Click to expand...
You would probably need to read some of the early Apostolic Fathers. Those saints that were closely associated with the apostles. They lived in the first generation of Apostolic leadership.

Saint Ignatius of Antioch - He was ordained by Saint Peter to serve in Antioch and was the third bishop of Antioch.

Saint Polycarp - Saint Jerome wrote that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that John had ordained him bishop of Smyrna.
 
Our opinions differ from each other, and any scriptural or traditional understanding would also.
 
Bon_Croix said:
WHat other Church has Peter and his successors at its head?
Click to expand...
Only the western church, and that the Roman Catholic church, not Protestantism , makes this claim of itself.

This claim has challenges from the beginning as successors started "lording over " other bishops (beyond pastoral ), and evidenced thru and from eastern patriarchy and eventual schism, and then obviously thru Protestant movements/ schisms.

For sure a foundation and tradition is there to support Catholic claim, but challenges did not start with P reformation.
 
Last edited:
This is a common misconception in Catholic circles. Unless you meant the early Church or the catholic Church (small c meaning universal) of which we all (like it or not) are members.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top