J
- Status
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
No it is not… see above, I can keep attatching the verses with just Paul and not the rest if you would like.
D
djrakowski
Guest
So, Peter’s name wasn’t mentioned more than the other 11 apostles, of whom Paul was not a member?
E
Eden
Guest
I started a thread on the Eastern Christianity forums with your premise that if papal authority is false, Protestantism is true. I hope the Eastern Orthodox posters there will comment.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Maybe the should point that out, because Paul is widely accepted as and states that he is an apostle and no where on that page does it say the 12 apostles. So that makes that page inaccurate.
N
Nicene
Guest
While I do appreciate your conviction, In all honesty, (and I don’t mean this disrepectfully) if protestantism is the true church, I would have to remove too much scripture to make that a reality and dump every church out there claiming to be a church or the church.
It would require some major editing of the gospels, and truly removing every epistle of the NT, because they all point to the apostles building one unified structured church and tell how they are doing it. All opposition to that goal they vehemently deny and condemn.
Knowing what the NT says, the only way for me personally to become protestant, is to deny, and rewrite, edit, and remove too much scripture. That simple fact can’t be ignored.
It would also require the possibility and probability that that some of the ancient writings may probably be the word of God, without exclusion of the gnostic texts. Truly it would require that I decide what the word of God should be.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
A
Aaron_I
Guest
“Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then, gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues” (1 Cor 12:28).
Tell me, where are the apostles of the protestant churches. Their leaders cannot claim to be anything more than teachers or possibly even prophets. Apostles clearly constitute a higher role than either of these or they wouldn’t have been listed separately. So what is the role of the apostles? Here’s a good start: scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html
Now I realize that the validity of the entire website was completely ruined because it contained one poor argument
, so perhaps you doubt that you’ll find anything of interest. Still I hope you’ll at least look at it. After all, if the apostles hold the first place in the Church, you should probably make an effort to figure out what one is. Also, should you look at the website, be sure to only address the good arguments. I noticed you love to beat the heck out of bad arguments, and although I’m sure you enjoyed writing your eight posts, we didn’t care. Seriously, if an argument is truly a poor one, it shouldn’t take eight posts to discredit it.
Anyways, here’s one scripture that I think really shows Peter’s primacy:
Luke 22:31-32 “Simon, satan demanded to have you (plural, referring to all the apostles) to sift you (plural) like wheat, but I prayed for you (singular) that your (singular) faith may not fail, and when you (singular) have turned again, strengthen your brethren.” Jesus prays that Peter’s faith may not fail and charges Peter to be the one to strengthen the other apostles.
There was clearly an hierarchy in the early church. Read Acts 15:22-29. The apostles and presbyters replaced preachers who disagreed with them, and they did so with the authority of the Holy Spirit. Such an authority does not exist in the Protestant churches.
Tell me, where are the apostles of the protestant churches. Their leaders cannot claim to be anything more than teachers or possibly even prophets. Apostles clearly constitute a higher role than either of these or they wouldn’t have been listed separately. So what is the role of the apostles? Here’s a good start: scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html
Now I realize that the validity of the entire website was completely ruined because it contained one poor argument
, so perhaps you doubt that you’ll find anything of interest. Still I hope you’ll at least look at it. After all, if the apostles hold the first place in the Church, you should probably make an effort to figure out what one is. Also, should you look at the website, be sure to only address the good arguments. I noticed you love to beat the heck out of bad arguments, and although I’m sure you enjoyed writing your eight posts, we didn’t care. Seriously, if an argument is truly a poor one, it shouldn’t take eight posts to discredit it.Anyways, here’s one scripture that I think really shows Peter’s primacy:
Luke 22:31-32 “Simon, satan demanded to have you (plural, referring to all the apostles) to sift you (plural) like wheat, but I prayed for you (singular) that your (singular) faith may not fail, and when you (singular) have turned again, strengthen your brethren.” Jesus prays that Peter’s faith may not fail and charges Peter to be the one to strengthen the other apostles.
There was clearly an hierarchy in the early church. Read Acts 15:22-29. The apostles and presbyters replaced preachers who disagreed with them, and they did so with the authority of the Holy Spirit. Such an authority does not exist in the Protestant churches.
E
Eden
Guest
Which true church is that? Baptist? Episcopalian? Seventh Day Adventist? Presbyterian? Methodist? Pentecostal? Lutheran Reformed? Church of Christ? Nazarene? Alliance?
“You Protestants” can’t even agree amongst yourselves.
D
djrakowski
Guest
Eden said:
I wonder why none of the Protestants have responded that they agree on the ‘essentials,’ neglecting the facts that 1) they can’t agree amongst themselves on what constitutes the ‘essentials,’ and 2) the Bible doesn’t distinguish between ‘essentials’ and ‘non-essentials’
F
Fredricks
Guest
The universal church is not a denomination. That is not what the Bible says. You are part of this church based upon what you believe not church membership.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
I will state again the true church is the (universal church of believers) and you can pick and choose any protestant one you would like and they will be closer to scripture than the RCC after the 3rd century. And yes I know we all started as “catholic” but that is quite diffrent than RC.
or doing what the RCC does and appoint men to override scripture.
your for the epistles when they talk structure, but against them when they give bishopric instruction ie. Timothy.
But you can ignore plain and simple instruction in the epistles?
R
RyanL
Guest
Martin,
Couple of yes/no questions for you:
God Bless,
RyanL
Couple of yes/no questions for you:
- Did the Christian Church fall into a Great Apostacy until Reformer X “revived” the Gospel?
- Can you actually name anyone from the first 1000+ years of Christian history who taught the same thing you do about the Gospel (again, naming a NT writer begs the question)?
- If I can show you a Catholic Church prior to the 3rd Century, would you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church which Christ founded?
God Bless,
RyanL
E
Eden
Guest
Exactly.
The “universal”, i.e. Catholic Church is not a denomination. Denominations are a tradition of men.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Aaron I. said:
Anyways, here’s one scripture that I think really shows Paul’s primacy:
Paul had authority over the finances of the church (Acts 24:26,
2 Corinthians 9:5, Philippians 4:15-18).
D
djrakowski
Guest
But, is the Bible the pillar and foundation of truth, or the Church (1 Tim. 3:15)? And, if Church is as you define it, then how can it be the pillar and foundation of truth if essential doctrines of the faith are in dispute amongst members of this supposedly universal church of non-Catholics?
Secondly, you’re right. The universal church is not a denomination - those are the domain of Protestantism.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Lets see what paul goes on to say… so you can put it in context
2ti3:16
All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
D
djrakowski
Guest
Did the Church come from the Bible, or the Bible from the Church? What exactly was all scripture at that time? Was the canon of scripture (well, the canon you use, which is missing 7 books of the Old Testament) complete at the time 2 Timothy was written? If not, then it is you who have the burden of placing the entirety of scripture in its proper context - that of the Church that was responsible for giving it to you.
D
djrakowski
Guest
And you never answered the question of how the church as you define it can be the pillar and foundation of truth when you can’t even agree on what the Bible says!
R
RyanL
Guest
Three little questions…yes/no…yes/no…yes/no…
N
NotWorthy
Guest
OK, you’ve just proved also that Judas had primacy over Jesus and the Apostles as he managed the finances. Is this what you are saying?
Notworthy
- Status