Was the Protestant Church/es Built on Sand?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ufamtobie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
carjack said:
I am sorry. I said no i do not believe he wanted seperate churches. I wanted to say that I went to Catholic School in 1st grade(I didn’t like it) and then my mother send me back in 7th grade as a punishment for not doing academically well in 6th grade. Needless to say, I never made the mistake of doing academically poor again after that so I would not have to go back. Yes, I learned how to pray, but the schools were miserable. I am currently going to Mass right now but feel like a stranger who is out of place there. I am trying to stay open minded though and go. I don’t feel the joy that I am supposed to feel when I go. I hope that will change. I do plan on attending RCIA.
Click to expand...
Carjack,

The reason why you feel like a stranger or feel left out at Mass is You still need to do your first Holy Communion and Confirmation, and become a full member, again, That means you have to go to SCHOOL something you don’t like. lol But hey it is Worth it, Receiving Jesus Christ For The First Time is awesome and EVERYTIME there after, then you will feel the Joy of going to Mass.

Keep saying your Rosary that brings you peace.

By the WAY how did you come up with the name Carjack ?

Ufamtobie
 
Correct me if i’m wrong, but wasn’t Luthers idea to reform the existing church rather than build a new one ?
 
abucs said:
Correct me if i’m wrong, but wasn’t Luthers idea to reform the existing church rather than build a new one ?
Click to expand...
No. i think if you read his writings you will discover that he did not know what he was doing. he became hatefull towards the CC and try to destroy it.
he fell he had the right to judge and condenm the CC and he did.
now tell me if this kind of behavior comes from God?

:bowdown2: :hmmm: :highprayer:
 
ufamtobie said:
Carjack,

The reason why you feel like a stranger or feel left out at Mass is You still need to do your first Holy Communion and Confirmation, and become a full member, again, That means you have to go to SCHOOL something you don’t like. lol But hey it is Worth it, Receiving Jesus Christ For The First Time is awesome and EVERYTIME there after, then you will feel the Joy of going to Mass.

Keep saying your Rosary that brings you peace.

By the WAY how did you come up with the name Carjack ?

Ufamtobie
Click to expand...
I guess I do have to go to school again :). Carjack is the combination of my middle name with my husband.
 
A popular belief is that Jesus was referring not to Peter, but to Peter’s confession of faith in verse 16: “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Even if Peter is the rock in Matthew 16:18, this is meaningless in giving the Roman Catholic Church any authority. Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church.
 
Sublime_Prince said:
A popular belief is that Jesus was referring not to Peter, but to Peter’s confession of faith in verse 16: “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Even if Peter is the rock in Matthew 16:18, this is meaningless in giving the Roman Catholic Church any authority. Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
are you really sure of that? how can you tell?
 
Sublime_Prince said:
A popular belief is that Jesus was referring not to Peter, but to Peter’s confession of faith in verse 16: “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Even if Peter is the rock in Matthew 16:18, this is meaningless in giving the Roman Catholic Church any authority. Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
“Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the apostles” … Aahhh Sparky, you might want to read the first ten or eleven chapters of The Acts of the Apostles … with you eyes and your mind open.

Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome … Right, Scripture is not about the organizational chart or the administrative flow diagram of the church, what happened to Mary and the apostles, how churches are to be built, and all the rest of the trivia that Protestants who take absolutely no time to attempt to understand the Catholic Church offer up here as “facts”. But understanding that would take some effort and research, something non Catholics with an agenda usually don’t want to put forth.

Luther being the supremely insecure man he was, decided that the Bible alone was the sole rule of faith. (Sola Scriptura) In deciding that, he threw out all the works of the early fathers of the church. To make a long story short, there is more evidence that Peter and Paul were in Rome in the early writings of the church, and secular history, that there is that Washington was at Valley Forge (and I think that is a Karl Keating reference - attribution 🙂 ) You’d just have to read something other than what your pastor tells you to. Unfortunately, that takes some effort and open mindedness.

Protestants have twisted themselves in knots trying to deny the commission of Peter by Jesus at Caesarea Phillipi. Still hasn’t worked. You might not believe it, but that doesn’t make it not true.

You are right in one thing. Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus Christ did when he commissioned Peter. Peter was just the first head of it.

Please do yourself a favor. Stop pulling single verses out of Scripture, and especially out of context, to justify your beliefs. Because if you do one day you just might read Luke 2, vs. 47 - 48, and go screaming into the night.

Try some research first, before you come onto a Catholic Forum and verbally vomit all over the place. Or was this your Sunday love offering at the Sword of Joshua Full Gospel Free Will Independent Evangelical Halleleujah and Praise the Lord Assembly of the Nazarene? If so, good job, now fork over your 10%.
 
Sublime Prince,

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Blessed art thou Simon Bar-Jona…seem’s He is specifically addressing Peter to me. Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, by my Father who is in Heaven…seem’s He is referring Peter having knowledge of who He is from His Father in Heaven, which must have been through the Holy Spirit.

Do you know why Jesus named him Peter? The Apostle Peter, also known as Saint Peter (from the Greek Petros, meaning “rock”), Shimon “Keipha” Ben-Yonah/Bar-Yonah, Simon Peter, Cephas and Keipha (Keipha and Cephas also mean rock)—original name Shimon or Simeon (Hebrew: שמעון‎) ( (Acts 15:14)—was one of the Twelve Apostles whom Jesus chose as his original disciples.

Matthew through Revelations, Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times.

Please tell me what you think Christ meant by Matthew 16:19?

Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Christ gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven or the authority to say the way to enter Heaven, especially when you consider our Lord saying, “…whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed also in Heaven.”

Mat 17:24 (17:23) And when they were come to Capharnaum, they that received the didrachmas, came to Peter, and said to him: Doth not your master pay the didrachma?
Mat 17:25 (17:24) He said: Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying: What is thy opinion, Simon? The kings of the earth, of whom do they receive tribute or custom, of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 (17:25) And he said: Of strangers. Jesus said to him: Then the children are free.
Mat 17:27 (17:26) But that we may not scandalize them, go to the sea, and cast in a hook: and that fish which shall first come up, take: and when thou hast opened it’s mouth, thou shalt find a stater: take that, and give it to them for me and thee.

In Matthew 17:24 - 25, the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.
In Matthew 17:26 - 27, Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ’s representative on earth.

Mar 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee. There you shall see him, as he told you.

In Mark 16:7, Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

1Pe 5:13 The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you. And so doth my son, Mark.

Peter writes from “Babylon” which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that “Babylon” meant Rome. Rome was the “great city” of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

The Church fathers spoke about Rome.

“Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.” Clement of Rome, The First Epistle of Clement, 5 (c. A.D. 96).

“I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 4 (c. A.D. 110).

‘You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth." Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, II:25 (c. A.D. 178).

I’ve already provided this link once, but there is lots of information that addresses your statements. .

May the peace of the Lord be with you.
Prodigal Son1
 
I think the case is pretty clear cut that Jesus established his church with Peter. His naming of Peter as rock and his very personal address in Matthew and its connection to Isaiah 22.

(4th link below)

On an EWTN show i also heard that there is a big chasm in Philipi in the rock that goes so far down you can’t see the bottom. On the show they said that this in Jesus time was called ‘the gates of Hades’ or ‘Jaws of Death’ as mentioned below (3rd link).

The fact that the Gospel mentions Jesus took the apostles ALL THE WAY to the region of Philippi i think is pretty significant. It is a long way. After Jesus makes such a huge ‘out of the way’ trip ,then the passage basically draws on the rock, gates of hades, Jesus promise to his church, a personal address to Peter and the recieving of the keys to the kingdom of God in parallel to Isaiah 22.

The fact that Peter was clearly the leader of the apostles in the New Testament, that Jesus had also specifically renamed Peter as Rock, which is a very unusual name, now and also back then, and Jesus’ journey to and actions at Philippi with Peter pretty much creates an open and shut case for me.

Could Jesus be any more specific ?

members.aol.com/joyinliving7/rock1.html
[(name removed by moderator)lainsite.org/html/upon_this_rock.html](http://www.(name removed by moderator)lainsite.org/html/upon_this_rock.html)
members.aol.com/joyinliving7/rock1.html
davidmacd.com/catholic/pope.htm

Is this still the Catholic Chuch of today ?
It seems to be the only one claiming it, and was believed in the East and West up until the Reformation, as far as my understanding goes.

From my understanding the East questions the degree of authority or primacy Peters’ church has, but not the claim that the Catholic Church is the successor from Peter.

In the West it was also universally understood until the schism. Of course if you are going to split from the church, sometime after the event you are going to have to build a case against it being Peters church or otherwise face the inevitability of going back IMHO.

And if the Catholic Church is not, then which is the church that was founded with Peter that the gates of Hades will not prevail against and which Jesus will be with until the end of time, having the power to bind and loose on Heaven and on Earth ?
 
abucs
👍 I saw this on EWTN too.

CARJACK!!!
Please make a mental note to yourself. People are people where ever you go. There are jerks everywhere. Even thost that are right can distribute the truth without charity as in this case. I was raised like you. I moved with my dad when I was 12. Mom was anti-Catholic. Dad was traditional hypocritical Cahtolic [long story]. He decided one day to get us to CCD one on one training RCIA with the pastor to receive Holy Communion. I loved God so much already. It was nice to get to go to church regularly. I still didn’t understand so many things. I was confirmed when I was 17 just to go to the seminary. I think I took 2 or 3 classes at night to get confirmed. I was pushed through because the Diocese didn’t know I wasn’t confirmed when they discovered my application for the seminary. I went to seminary and learned religion and logic. I still didn’t learn much depth in the faith. Long story short while in the military I began reading a prayer book called the Liturgy of the Hours. In it I discovered ancient documents that priests and religious read. We read it in the seminary but I was just so confused. I bought books on Vatican Council II and discovered that all thoses Catholics around me were lying to us…that the Church had changed is stand on so many things that in fact when you read the VC2 docs you find that that was just non-sense. In fact, it reiterated the teachings of old. I learned mixed stuff. When I met my now wife they taught they were the one true church and all other were hell bound. I’ve found similar in so many protestant denominations. My previoius church claimed to truly be non or rather not a denomination. My point is don’t choose a church based on what people say or do, but rather on the truth. In all my years trying to prove the Catholic Church was the whore of babylon, I could never do so. I kept running into scripture after scripture that coud only have pointed to either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church. If you’ve ever read the Nicene Creed the proclamation of our faith reads “we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church”. Google this document and read the history behind it. Then read the didache. Read St. Ignatius of Antioch’s document to the Smyrnians. He used the Greek word KATHOLIKOS which is the word catholic. He refered to the Church as catholic.

Now read John Chapter 6…focus on verses 32 to end 69 I beleive. This is very clear that Jesus is describing that Holy Communion or rather the Eucharist [biblical Greek word Eucharisteo]. This is clearly the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus. Don’t pick a church for social status or I feel good there. This isn’t a social club. Don’t you want to do what God wants and not some denomination. The Church is not a denomination. It’s been here from the very beginning and later because of sinful men that called themselves Catholic schism after schism popped up. Ironically, its been around for almost 2000 years. That should tell you that Christianity is a farst or all the others are in heresy. Ironically, when you hear some of the Protestants try to use the ancient church fathers they end up reading only what they want from the documents, maybe innocently, and just a few paragraphs there is even more clear evidence that the ancient church taught the real presence of Christ and anything else is heresy. It’s very clear. Another thing they do is read from ancient documents to support their believes without realize that the source they’re using were clearly heretics of their day for not believing in varioius obvious things like the Holy Trinity…the Hypostatic Union of Christ [both Human and Divine].
 
You lack of education in this area is not uncommon. In fact, there is a major movement going on now to get more people exposed to the truth in history, not make believe. Cardinal Newman said “to be deep in history is to seize to be Protestant”. He was a convert to the Catholic Church. In fact, if you watch EWTN on Monday nights 6:00 PM Eastern time, you will see one Protestant story after another, mostly for discovering the truth in reading for themselves. These documents have only been translated in recent times and were not readily available to the general public for reasons that you just need to read about. Dan Brown’s book the “Da Vinci Code” expoded me to the realization that they existed. I had basic questions that I can easily explain to you if you’re interested. But I returned to the Catholic Church once I realize the truth. I was mortified…so embarrassed. I was sooooooo humiliated for having been such a fool to believe those Protestants, that meant well. But they were clearly wrong and some of them just lie because they can’t handle the truth…it tears their world apart… I always advise people to take it easy on people with the truth. It could cause someone to reject God altogether… And guess who would be guilty of sin even more…the person trying to convert the other for not teaching the truth in love. I’m excited. I can testify to the truth so easy now.

Even my wife converted, which is a miracle in itself. She was anit-Catholic too, but realized the truth when she saw it away from knuckleheaded Catholics and a non-anti-Catholic twist. Most Protestants, whether they realize it or not, have a twisted version of what we believe. It’s because of the big names like Jack Chick and many other Boettner, etc. These are notorious anti-Catholic that even go as far as to conjure up new lies. The second is diseased for sure. I’m not sure about Jack Chick. But they have many followers. and they prey on people like yourself who know little or nothing about their own faith.

You are Catholic. You just need to get into a good RCIA program and decide for yourself. Give it a shot. But here’s something to think about.** “would you leave Peter because of Judas”?**
Other questions to ask:
Where does the bible come from. Who put it together and why?
How do we know which books belong in the bible?
Read 2 Thessolonians 2:15
**The bible says that the Church is the Pillar of truth, not the bible… but the bible is part of the deposit of faith and NO Catholic Church teaching goes against the scriptures…that’s another lie. **
**Peter warns the weak minded of isolating themselves and interpreting scripture. **
The bible (Paul ) tells us to hold fast to the teachings and Traditions handed to down.
Sorry to ramble on, but you sounded like some of these idiots were giving you doubts. I just wanted to give you some bible support from a once bible only former Protestant (former anit-Catholic:o ). God put this proud man in his place. I’m devoted to defending the truth, but not hurting people along my journey. It’s hard, because people try to get you angry just to say "see he’s angry"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top