Then James says, ‘I rule, then...' Acts 15:7-21

[RyanL]

truthinlove2:

Nice of you to make my point that Peter was a “fellow” bishop, not a “supreme” one.

hold your horses, cowboy. let me make an analogy from my days in the navy. when i was an ensign and first arrived on my submarine, i was known as the “george”. that means that every other ensign could tell me what to do - a good system for being corrected by your peers. when i was the senior-most ensign (and STILL and ensign), i was the “bull”, and as such had charge of all ensigns underneath me. did i out rank them? yes and no. we were all ensigns, but i was clearly in charge. if anyone disobeyed me, they would have to answer to the captain - in other words, what i loosed was loosed, and what i bound was bound. did i lord it over them and say “hey, everybody, i’m the boss!”? nope. that is extremely poor leadership. did i let other people have a say? always. is it any surprise that we should see peter do the same? you complain that he didn’t emphasize being the boss often enough - if he did you would call him a tyrant. peter was being a good leader, and the bible reflects exactly that.

truthinlove2:

The footnotes are from the Catholic Bible, written by none other than Catholics, and no are not inspired nor infallible.

i’ve read **** material from any number of “catholics”. there are catholic blasphemers, just like there are protestant ones. stick to the magisterium if you want to catch my eyes…

truthinlove2:

You have a distorted view of the “Scripture alone” side; it means that the Word of God is the only infallible and my final authority in matters of faith and doctrine. I can still read commentaries (even Catholic ones J ), but I don’t place my faith in or get my beliefs from man’s uninspired writings, but from the very breath of God in Scripture.

did you find a bible all on your own, perhaps at a garage sale, start reading it, and develope your theology? or were you raised with it (i.e., TAUGHT by your parents)? or did you first HEAR the word preached, and then you “searched the scriptures” to see if it were true? the answer to this will help me understand your theology - that said, i highly doubt the first one is the case. if it is not the case, your last sentence needs revision…for you would indeed be getting your beliefs from “uninspired” men…

truthinlove2:

This is a commentary from a Catholic translation of the Bible. Since it sounds ok to you, you would agree with me that Peter was not the “supreme” leader of the church, since James had prominence over Peter in Jerusalem, even though Peter was supposed to be in Rome(the See of power). Does not the pope have prominence over all other bishops as “visible head” of the church?

your chronology is muddled. at the assention, peter was not instantaneously transported to rome with the vatican built and a clear system of government in place! things take time. you may want to read the link i posted at the top of the thread about “was peter in rome”…

truthinlove2:

I agree, honestly forgot about Peter being named Simon, but you might want to get CM to see things our way, that the number of times a person is recorded doesn’t make them superior. J

i believe it was an honest mistake. that said, peter appears in the new testament more than any other apostle. like i said, biblical math is pretty shoddy - mostly. if you would argue for petrine primacy, this math cannot be relied on. if you would argue against it, it must be explained! if you would say that peter was “just some guy”, you have to explain why he’s in the new testament some 6 times more than “the apostle who Jesus loved”.
…cont’d…

 

[RyanL]

…cont’d…

truthinlove2:

I can withhold the Gospel, or I can preach it. Only God can forgive sins, not man.

it is not surprising to see this response - it is exactly the response of the scribes in matt 9. they accused Jesus of blasphemy for forgiving sins, as “Only God can forgive sins, not man.” and what does Jesus say (bold added)?

6But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7And he arose, and departed to his house.

8But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

notice that in verse 8 we see a PLURAL pronoun - “men”, not “man”. very important, because Jesus needed to make clear that He was deligating this power to MEN as well…

                John 20:23 - Jesus says, "If **you **forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If                     **you **retain the sins of any, they are retained."

you say only God can forgive sins. Jesus says He gives this power to men as well. God only breathes on men ONLY twice in the ENTIRE BIBLE - first, to give life to adam. secondly, right before He gives men the power to forgive and retain sins. as it is such a rarety for God to breath on men, we would do well to pay attention to what is happening - and that is God giving to men the power to forgive sins. those who have ears, let them hear!

truthinlove2:

James makes the sentence, or final ruling not Peter. The council was a democratic organization with many people getting a say. Peter had a hand in it, so did Paul and others. When the time for making a decision came, it was James who made the decision and had the final word. Certainly no evidence of a Peter-achracy .

no james didn’t. james made a statement binding on his faithful, which was canceled. peter made a statement binding on the church, and IT STILL REMAINS!

truthinlove2:

Book, chapter, and verse please? I can’t find the Scripture you referenced about Paul canceling James ruling.

sure. 1 cor 8:

4So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.
…
8But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

sounds like james can stuff it…. just kidding, st. james!

truthinlove2:

You can imagine a bishop of a local area correcting the infallible pope??? That is exactly what happened when Paul had to correct Peter’s polution of the Gospel. Read Galatians 2, I’ve already posted it once IN CONTEXT.

infallible does not mean impecable! the pope could be a gigantic schmuck, adultering, fornicating, and desicrating holy places. in such a case, i would DEMAND that a bishop correct him - if he did not, I WOULD! all that is ASSURED is that he won’t teach error “ex cathedra” on a matter of faith and morals! that’s it! there is absolutely NO guarentee that he will act in any manner whatsoever…does that clear anything up for you? can you see how any pope could be corrected in his **conduct **by anyone, and that doesn’t matter to our theology in the slightest?

truthinlove2:

Scripture stands by itself,

even you don’t believe this - you think you need the scripture AND the Holy Spirit. now, ***if ***that were the case, we would have no need for the magisterium, and everyone who read the bible would come up with exactly the same answers. unfortunately, that is not what happens. i am so very happy that God did not leave us to read a book in a dark room - He gave us the light of the church!

please consider prayerfully my responses, as i consider yours.
if He leads you, would you follow?
RyanL

 

[RyanL]

RyanL:

i’ve read **** material from any number of “catholics”.

so as not to offend my brother, i did not use the “s” word here. i used a four letter synonym which is a homonym of a vegas dice game…i didn’t realize it was offensive enough that it would be automatically changed…

RyanL

 

[Ignatius]

RyanL:

let me make an analogy from my days in the navy. when i was an ensign and first arrived on my submarine, i was known as the “george”. that means that every other ensign could tell me what to do - a good system for being corrected by your peers. when i was the senior-most ensign (and STILL and ensign), i was the “bull”, and as such had charge of all ensigns underneath me. did i out rank them? yes and no. we were all ensigns, but i was clearly in charge. if anyone disobeyed me, they would have to answer to the captain - in other words, what i loosed was loosed, and what i bound was bound. did i lord it over them and say “hey, everybody, i’m the boss!”? nope. that is extremely poor leadership. did i let other people have a say? always. is it any surprise that we should see peter do the same? you complain that he didn’t emphasize being the boss often enough - if he did you would call him a tyrant. peter was being a good leader, and the bible reflects exactly that.

Now that is a lucid explanation. Mind if I plagiarize it for my own use?

God Bless.

 

[RyanL]

enjoy!

if you publish, however, i expect a signed copy…

RyanL

 

[DustinsDad]

truthinlove2:

Actually James made the sentence, or ruling not Peter. Can you imagine a cardinal with power to make a sentence or ruling in the presence of the “supreme pontiff”, I sure can’t.Actually James made the sentence, or ruling not Peter. Can you imagine a cardinal with power to make a sentence or ruling in the presence of the “supreme pontiff”, I sure can’t.

This is all getting a bit ridiculous - watching folks such as you desparately try to twist Scripture as to somehow someway not fit into your pre-conceived erroneous notion of what Peter was and what the popes always have been. Do you even know what the Church believes about Peter, his unique role, and that of his successors? It is obvious you haven’t a clue.

Your argument makes as much sense as declaring Pope John Paul the 2nd wasn’t pope on June 16, 2000 because Cardinal Ratzinger dared to pen "DOMINUS IESUS".

Doesn’t matter to you, I suppose, that this was an authoritative church document made in communion with and with full approval of John Paul II…the mere fact that it wasn’t written by John Paul II means John Paul II wasn’t pope. I hope you can see how completely lame this line of “reasoning” is.

What we see in Acts 15 is quite simple…a big problem pops up in the Church, and the Church Magesterium (Peter and the Apostles/bishops in union with him) coming together to settle the problem for the entire church. It’s a done deal - that’s all that’s needed to demonstrate that the church was then what the church is now - the Catholic Church.

Peter’s declaration is the statement that settles the debate ("And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them…And all the assembly kept silence, cf Acts 15:7-12), Jame’s later statement is based entirely upon his union with Peter’s declaration("Simeon has related…Therefore my judgment is…"cf Acts 15:14-19) . And the church rejoiced.

In the protestant world, this can never happen. Anyone who disagrees with such a decision bounces down the road to shop for a church more in line with their version of the truth - or they decide to start their own church with their new novelty. It’s sad and amazing…and no wonder at the lengths a protestant will go to deny the plain meaning of Scripture…to admit the authority of the Catholic Church is to cease being Protestant.

That is all.

DustinsDad

 

[DustinsDad]

Truthinlove,

I think the time for dodging is long over…please address the verses from Matt 16 and their connection with Isaiah 22.

Please reconcile your assertion that only God forgives sins without using human instruments with John 20:23.

And finally, please answer my question from earlier: Would you say to the Catholic Church the following:

"You have gone too far! For all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them; why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the LORD?"

Honestly now, would you lay that complaint at the pope and the faithful bishops in union with him? Would you lay that complaint at the authority of the Catholic Church?

-DustinsDad-

 

[RyanL]

truthinlove,

please answer dustinsdad’s questions before you answer mine…i really want to see where he’s going with this…

RyanL

 

[truthinlove2]

RyanL:

hold your horses, cowboy. let me make an analogy from my days in the navy. … did i let other people have a say? always. is it any surprise that we should see peter do the same? you complain that he didn’t emphasize being the boss often enough - if he did you would call him a tyrant. peter was being a good leader, and the bible reflects exactly that.

Nice analogy, but Christ told the apostles they would not have a command structure like unbelievers do. The head is Christ, none other. Can the church have two heads, one visible, another invisible?, what verse bears this out? The Catholic church teaches that there are multiple people we can go through to reach God. The Bible from cover to cover predicts and states that only one person can fulfill that role, the Lord Jesus Christ.

RyanL:

i’ve read **** material from any number of “catholics”. there are catholic blasphemers, just like there are protestant ones. stick to the magisterium if you want to catch my eyes…

I believe it was an approved version, and the footnotes must be in the approved version of the Bible so anyone reading the Bible can come to the RCC’s interpretation. Why if the magisterium is the only one that can interpret Scripture, does Scripture itself say to interpret Scripture by Scripture?

did you find a bible all on your own, perhaps at a garage sale, start reading it, and develope your theology? or were you raised with it (i.e., TAUGHT by your parents)? or did you first HEAR the word preached, and then you “searched the scriptures” to see if it were true? the answer to this will help me understand your theology - that said, i highly doubt the first one is the case. if it is not the case, your last sentence needs revision…for you would indeed be getting your beliefs from “uninspired” men…

I grew up in the training and admonition of the Lord according to the Bible. I was taught and am still taught from the Scriptures, after all they are a deep ocean that we’ve had for 2000 years and still see God’s infinite wisdom from. I had a point in my life where I questioned the beliefs I held, God almost instantaneously corrected me, and that only proves the more that I am and will always be his, the Lord chastizes those who are his, but will never forsake them. When I’m taught about the Lord’s supper, head coverings, salvation, OT prophecies, End times, etc I check with Scripture. I heard the Word, but it was the Holy Spirit that convicted me of my sin, the Father that willed it, the Son that died so I could live with Him.

your chronology is muddled. at the assention, peter was not instantaneously transported to rome with the vatican built and a clear system of government in place! things take time. you may want to read the link i posted at the top of the thread about “was peter in rome”…

It really doesn’t matter where Peter was, if he was the “visible head” of the church, then James never would have been listed ahead of Peter(if that is the list of authority). If the pope visits a bishop in a parish in the US, does that bishop have primacy over the pope in his local organization? I believe the answer would be an obvious no.

if you would argue for petrine primacy, this math cannot be relied on. if you would argue against it, it must be explained! if you would say that peter was “just some guy”, you have to explain why he’s in the new testament some 6 times more than “the apostle who Jesus loved”.

strange logic. Scripture is written not for or against Peter primacy, but for Christ’s primacy.

The title Holy Father is God’s title
Head of the church is Christ’s title
Infallible teacher is the Holy Spirit’s title

 

[truthinlove2]

DustinsDad,

Please note the difference between Matt 16 keys of the kingdom of heaven(not the key of the house of David) and the following…

Isaiah 22

20And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah: 21And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. 22And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Isaiah 9

6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Revelation 3

7And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

BTW Peter was dead with no successor when this was written.

 

[truthinlove2]

DustinsDad:

Please reconcile your assertion that only God forgives sins without using human instruments with John 20:23.

When did Christ Himself in person breathe on the pope or any Catholic priest alive today?

Therefore, what Christ gave the apostles is unique and has not been repeated. Charasmatics love to claim the power that the apostles had and that it is for today, but we have the completed Scripture today. The Great Commision was also given, and in just a generation the Gospel went out to all the known world.

See also:

christiancourier.com/questions/canManForgiveSins.htm

I would say about your quote from Numbers, that Catholics can indeed learn of the true Gospel at times. That being said, there is much teaching from RCC that obscures and muddles the true message and heaps up other people to go through to get to God or Christ. Christ is seen as less eager to hear than Mary who is portrayed as more compassionate. I will leave you with Christ’s timeless words:
Mark 7:

8For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

I leave it up to you to take this Scripture and apply it to your lives.

 

[porthos11]

truthinlove2:

DustinsDad,

Please note the difference between Matt 16 keys of the kingdom of heaven(not the key of the house of David) and the following…

Isaiah 22

20And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah: 21And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. 22And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

And what difference is that, other than one kingdom temporal and the other eternal? Of course they’re not the same keys, since they’re not the same kingdom. It’s the language that matters, and referring to Isaiah 22 gives us the meaning of “key” or “keys”. Singular or plural should not matter too much. The Davidic kingdom is a foreshadowing of the heavenly kingdom. Jesus’ original Jewish listeners would have understood what he meant. The key is a symbol of full power.

Isaiah 9

6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

What’s this got to do with anything? This is ultimately a prophecy of Christ, whom we know is King.

Revelation 3

7And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

BTW Peter was dead with no successor when this was written.

Hah. You wish. Clement I was Pope in Rome at the time.

Again, this does not disprove anything. Jesus always has the keys, since he is the King. But as King he should have no problem delegating those keys, would he?

 

[DustinsDad]

Please note the difference between Matt 16 keys of the kingdom of heaven(not the key of the house of David) and the following…(posts verses from Isaiah 22:20-22 ; Isaiah 9:6-7; and Revelation 3:7

Now I didn’t really see you address the relation of Matt 16 to Isaiah 22 - but then I guess the only way to address the relation is to deny it exists.

Even given that, I must say that I am very surprised that you suggest that Christ’s kingdom of heaven referred to in Matt 16 is different than the kingdom of the House of David referred to in Isaiah and Revelation? Is this a different place, a different kingdom, a different king? Are you suggesting that the House of David referred to in these passages is NOT a kingdom at all??? I suggest to you that it is one kingdom indeed, the kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ!

Isaiah 22, Matt 16 and Revelation 3 all refer to this kingdom, all refer to a key or keys as the symbol of authority, and all refer to the nature of the exercise of this authority - opening and shutting/binding and loosing. You simply can not ignore the relation and pretend it doesn’t exist…at least not honestly. Here they are again…

I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open (cf Is 22).

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."* (cf Mt 16)*

The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens. (cf Rv 3)

Now just because Christ gives specific authority to Peter, doesn’t mean that Christ no longer has the authority himself. He is simply allowing Peter to participate in His own authority in a unique way, just as the chief minister participated in the authority of the king back in Isaiah 22.

And I’m glad you pointed out the verses in Isaiah 9…it shows that of Christ’s government, there will be no end:

Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this. This is awesome, because it correlates perfectly with the promise in Matt 16 thatthe gates of hell will not prevailagainst His church. You see, Peter and the Apostles with him are that government set up and established by Christ and under His promise of the protection of the Holy Spirit. This is precisely why, as we see in Acts 15, the Magesterium can say to the entire church: “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things…” Indeed, Christ’s words, “He who hears you hears me” is still alive and well in the Church Christ established - has been for 2000 years and counting!

The second that this government/authority set up and established by Christ would officially preach a false gospel, it would cease to be Christ’s government… hence, the gates of hell would prevail against Christ’s Church, and Christ will have failed, his governance wouldn’t have been perpetual.

BTW Peter was dead with no successor when this was written.

Sure Peter had a successor - it was Linus. Not sure what the point is for this little quip. Perhaps it is a subconscious slip…a clue that you are almost ready to accept the authority of Peter and the Apostles, but not quite ready to give up on sola Scriptura.

Well then, it is left for you who rejects church authority to demonstrate from Scripture where Christ eliminates the authority of the Apostles and His Church, and replaces it with Scripture alone.

DustinsDad

 

[DustinsDad]

porthos11:

And what difference is that, other than one kingdom temporal and the other eternal? Of course they’re not the same keys, since they’re not the same kingdom.

I’d have to disaree with you somewhat here…The Kingdom of the House of David, as used in the OT prophesies, all point to the Kingdom of Our Lord. The Rev 3 use of the term identifies Christ as that King prophesied in the OT. And like you said later in the post…The Davidic kingdom is a foreshadowing of the heavenly kingdom…both Kingdoms are ultimately the same, they have the same King

The Matt 16 use of the keys, simply shows that uniqe and authoritative role Peter and his successors have in Our Lord’s Kingdom. As you stated so well: *Jesus always has the keys, since he is the King. But as King he should have no problem delegating those keys, would he? :clapping: *

TruthinLove: BTW Peter was dead with no successor when this was written.
porthos11: /Hah. You wish. Clement I was Pope in Rome at the time.

I stand corrected…I thought it’d have been Linus.

For our Protestant poster’s edification, here is a list of the first four popes and the dates of their reign:

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)

-Peace in Christ-

DustinsDad

 

[porthos11]

DustinsDad:

I’d have to disaree with you somewhat here…The Kingdom of the House of David, as used in the OT prophesies, all point to the Kingdom of Our Lord. The Rev 3 use of the term identifies Christ as that King prophesied in the OT. And like you said later in the post…The Davidic kingdom is a foreshadowing of the heavenly kingdom…both Kingdoms are ultimately the same, they have the same King

Hi Dustins,

First off all, let me honor you for your excellent apologetics. You are definitely someone non-Catholics should reckon with.

I agree with you on this matter, although I was speaking of the more immediate meanings. Isaiah 22 immediately refers to the kingdom of Judah under King Hezekiah. Ultimately, though, they are the same, although the meaning is the extended one. Jesus immediately refers to the Kingdom of heaven. But even if we were to restrict ourselves to the original literal meanings, the understanding of the “key” metaphor is the same, which is why TIL’s argument doesn’t hold.

 

[truthinlove2]

When does Christ tell Peter, that the government will be on your shoulders, that you will have the power to shut and no one will open, or to open and no one will shut?

The answer is never.

So the keys in Matt 16, no matter how you spin the interpretation does not mean the key(singular) of the house of David. Christ is the one that has that. He never gave it to Peter. Even IF He did, the Bible is SILENT on a successor to Peter. So pope clement doesn’t have keys, pope urban doesn’t have keys, pope john paul II doesn’t have keys, but according to YOUR interpretation Peter has it, not the apostles. And no one got the keys after that. A plain reading of the Scriptures makes it clear that the key of David, and the keys of Matt 16 are two different things, not one and the same. Also Jesus gives this SAME authority to all the apostles in Matt 18. For crying out loud there are numerous times Christ or one of the apostles could have corrected a misunderstanding of a Christian by solely pointing to Peter, NEVER HAPPENS. The topic of this thread is about the RULING, JUDGEMENT, SENTENCE James makes depending on the version read, NOT PETER. Wow how many things can be “read” into Scripture to make Peter pope, but then not only that but to flawlessly pass this authority(not ever recorded by Scripture) down through 20 centuries but instead of flawless there has been division, anti-popes, “infallible” popes contradicting each other, selling of pardons from purgatory(can you imagine Jesus doing this???, the one who gave His LIFE’S BLOOD to atone for the sins of mankind to all who believe). Let’s contrast Christ to His imposter, oops I mean Vicar shall we:

Christ said: “My kingdom is not of this world.” The Pope conquers cities by force(check your history this happened).

Christ had a crown of thorns. The Pope wears a triple diadem.

Christ washed the feet of his disciples. The Pope has his kissed by kings.

Christ paid tribute. The Pope takes it.

Christ fed the sheep. The Pope shears them for his own profit.

Christ was poor. The Pope wishes to be master of the world(can you say euchumenical movement).

Christ carried on His shoulders the cross. The Pope is carried on the shoulders of his servants in liveries of gold.

Christ despised riches. The Pope has no other passion than for gold.

Christ drove out the merchants from the temple. The Pope welcomes them.

Christ preached peace. The Pope is the torch of war(Crusades anyone).

Christ was meekness. The Pope is pride personified.

 

[porthos11]

TIL,

This discussion is over. The administrators have quietly tolerated your circumventing of your suspension. But when you call the Pope names, you clearly show no respect to our faith, which is necessary for any civilized exchange.

I have reported your last post. I sure hope they ban you and your IP address.

Catholics, take note.

truthinlove2:

Let’s contrast Christ to His imposter, oops I mean Vicar shall we:

 

[RyanL]

i am truly sorry that til had to go. i am afraid he has a powerful demon, and we should pray for him that he may be well.

here is what i believe to be the anti-catholic site he was stealing material from and pawning it off as his own:
ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=pope

such venom in those sites. well…by their fruits you shall know them…

dustinsdad,

if you will allow me, i would love to play the part of the anti-catholic, and say to the church:

***“You have gone too far! For all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them; why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the LORD?”

you catholics exhalt yourselves above the “assembly of the Lord”! you use your traditions to make the commands of God to no effect! KJV! KJV! “it shall not be so among you” says plainly that we are not to have princes in the church, and your pope wears a crown! ***KJV! KJV!

---

***now where would you take this?

humbly,
RyanL

 

[DustinsDad]

RyanL:

dustinsdad,
if you will allow me, i would love to play the part of the anti-catholic, and say to the church:

"You have gone too far! For all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them; why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the LORD?"

*** you catholics exhalt yourselves above the “assembly of the Lord”! you use your traditions to make the commands of God to no effect! KJV! KJV! “it shall not be so among you” says plainly that we are not to have princes in the church, and your pope wears a crown! ***KJV! KJV!

---

******now where would you take this?

Heh,

I would take 'em right to Numbers 16…the quote is taken directly from Num. 16:3. Here we have folks rising up against Moses and Aaron (Divinely appointed authority) and using almost verbatim the same exact attacks used against the Catholic Church by anti-Catholic Protestants.
Numbers 16:1-3
Now Korah the son of Izhar, son of Kohath, son of Levi, and Dathan and Abi’ram the sons of Eli’ab, and On the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men; and they rose up before Moses, with a number of the people of Israel, two hundred and fifty leaders of the congregation, chosen from the assembly, well-known men; and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said to them, “You have gone too far! For all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them; why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the LORD?”
Now if you keep reading in Numbers 16, you see that these folks didn’t fare to well:
Numbers 16:28
And Moses said, “Hereby you shall know that the LORD has sent me to do all these works, and that it has not been of my own accord. If these men die the common death of all men, or if they are visited by the fate of all men, then the LORD has not sent me. But if the LORD creates something new, and the ground opens its mouth, and swallows them up, with all that belongs to them, and they go down alive into Sheol, then you shall know that these men have despised the LORD.”
And as he finished speaking all these words, the ground under them split asunder; and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, with their households and all the men that belonged to Korah and all their goods. So they and all that belonged to them went down alive into Sheol; and the earth closed over them, and they perished from the midst of the assembly.
So I guess the bottom line is, I’d tread veeeeery carefully when attacking the authority God establishes on this earth. We;ve already seen where such rebellion leads.

Peace!

DustinsDad