Why so much emphasis on Catholicism specifically?

[NotWorthy]

** Notworthy: Note, don’t ignore the fact that the 46 OT books were being read in the Liturgy as well (not 39, OS!).

Sorry but the Jews canonized the Old Testament and the apocrypha books were not accepted. While they numbered their books differently than we do today, it was the same 39 books we have today.**
That’s real good. When did the Jews do this? They didn’t close the OT Canon until the 14th century. Or are you referring to the Council of Jamnia? The same group that dis-credited all the works of the NT? Was God guiding them to canonize the OT books at the same time that they were dis-avowing the NT books? How does this make sense, OS?

Besides, the OT Scriptures are meant to be read in the light of Christ. The Jews, sadly do not do this? How are you going to believe that the Jews who do not follow this tradition know what is Scriptural and what is not?

Notworthy: BTW, how long has your Church been around?!? Have you celebrated your 50th anniversary yet?!?***

Actually it was Peter who ordained Demetrius who was the first Bishop of my church.***

And what church is that? Who is this Demetrius?

 

[epostle]

“Pope” is in the Bible.

Isa. 22:21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be A FATHER to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. -

Eliakim is called “father” or “papa” of God’s people. The word Pope used by Catholics to describe the chief steward of the earthly kingdom simply means papa or father in Italian. This is why Catholics call the leader of the Church “Pope.” The Pope is the FATHER of God’s people, the chief steward of the earthly kingdom and Christ’s representative on earth.

Further context:

Isa. 22: 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your station. 20 In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And 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. 23 And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons.
25 In that day, says the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a sure place will give way; and it will be cut down and fall, and the burden that was upon it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken."

Isa. 22:19 - Shebna is described as having an “office” and a “station.” An office, in order for it to be an office, has successors. In order for an earthly kingdom to last, a succession of representatives is required.
This was the case in the Old Covenant kingdom, and it is the case in the New Covenant kingdom which fulfills the Old Covenant. Jesus our King is in heaven, but He has appointed a chief steward over His household with a plan for a succession of representatives.
. 20: In that day I will call my servant Eli’akim the son of Hilki’ah,

Isa. 22:20 - in the old Davidic kingdom, Eliakim succeeds Shebna as the chief steward of the household of God. The kingdom employs a mechanism of dynastic succession. King David was dead for centuries, but his kingdom is preserved through a succession of representatives.

22: And 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.

Isa. 22:22 - we see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim. Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. The keys of Christ’s kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.

23: And I will fasten him like a peg (Nail) in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house.

Rev. 1:18; 3:7; 9:1; 20:1 - Jesus’ “keys” undeniably represent authority. By using the word “keys,” Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant reformation 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Revelation 3:7 RSV
7: "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `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.

Matthew 16:19 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."

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This “binding and loosing” authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish “halakah,” or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

Jer. 33:17 - Jeremiah prophesies that David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the earthly House of Israel. Either this is a false prophecy, or David has a successor of representatives throughout history.

Dan. 2:44 - Daniel prophesies an earthly kingdom that will never be destroyed. Either this is a false prophecy, or the earthly kingdom requires succession.

 

[epostle]

Old Scholar, I find your “devils advocate” tactics offensive. There are too many ignorant anti-Catholic bigots flooding this fora, and we don’t need a plastic one throwing gasoline on a fire to put it out. A hardened heart will only use your information to attack Catholics who are not so well prepared somewhere else.

Change sides.

 

[servant_joe]

Right on epostle. this is my first post. there are so much to learn in our Catholic faith.
servant joe

 

[po18guy]

I tried to put this in the “Ask and Apologist” section but I’m not sure everything worked.

Hear, hear! I think that too much time is spent on debates. Since we firmly believe that Catholicism is the faith that Christ Himself instituted, let’s put the truth out there and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

The evil one has been so wildly successful that he now has Christian fighting Christian rather than his vile corruption. Who is the real winner in these debates? I think the evil one is, since it is likely that no one is convinced either way, regardless of the sincerity or keenness of the arguments.

It is clear that the church needed reforming 500 years ago. It is also clear that the internal reform did come. Unfortunately, I believe that the evil one used the reformers to forever divide the body of Christ. Once divided, Christ’s strength is lessened, leaving opportunities for the evil one to advance.

Ego divided the church, and humility will unite her yet again.

Christ’s peace.

 

[trustinyou]

***You must remember this is a forum to defend the Catholic faith and to do so, it must be discussed. Questions must be asked and answered and more questions. There are many who are not very knowledgeable reading these forums, and maybe their faith will be strengthened, or corrected—whatever the case may be.

Don’t forget as well, many may take a “devil’s advocate” approach in order to get certain subjects discussed.***

From an earlier quote,you wrote about ..false doctrines of R.C.C.......What do you think they are,and if you wouldnt mind,what denom. do you belong to.

 

[NotWorthy]

From an earlier quote,you wrote about …false doctrines of R.C.C…What do you think they are,and if you wouldnt mind,what denom. do you belong to.

He says he follows the Church started by Demetrius, who was ordained by Peter.

I’m a little vague on what that means.

 

[trustinyou]

He says he follows the Church started by Demetrius, who was ordained by Peter.

I’m a little vague on what that means.

newadvent.org/cathen/04707a.htm
heres a link on the Demetrius(s) in the bible,not much on him,no writings anything,but I got a feeling you’ve already looked him up…so what hes saying is that the true teachings of Christ came from Peter to Demetrius. Sooo,wheres all of his writings or letters at? or did he just deliver them

 

[hasikelee]

I tried to put this in the “Ask and Apologist” section but I’m not sure everything worked.

Maybe it’s a simple issue of demographics and location.

You mention you are British…well the demographics in Britain are very different from America, as is the religious situation and culture.

As Europe’s population begins to melt away and people from the Middle East move in, the focus of apologetics and debates will match that change.

Americans are still in the midst of white, mainly affluent Protestants, Baptists, Lutherans, etc.

 

[jcrichton]

I tried to put this in the “Ask and Apologist” section but I’m not sure everything worked.

…My question is this: why does Catholic Answers spend so much of its energies addressing/refuting Protestant Christianity?

…Mere Christianity contains the necessary and sufficient doctrines for our salvation, so why waste all this time arguing amongst ourselves? We will understand everything in heaven, let’s get on with our earthly work (Matthew 28:16-20) together.

God bless

---

Hi, Quenched!

Though the statement following your query seems full-hearted and thought-out you are missing two key elements:

1. Christ did not found a myriad of churches, and
2. The Catholic Church considers herself to be that Church founded by Christ.

The Church has had to refute the various heresies that sprong (even while the Apostles still lived and preached the Gospel of Christ Jesus) throughout time (not just during that very first century) and even today the assault on the Church still persists as attested by the various posts of those who frequent this and other Catholic Forums:

i.e.:***

You are kidding me? What do you thing Popes Clement and Victor were doing?***

***I certainly don’t mean to belittle the Roman Catholic Church. I want to show that it is not the church that existed in the early centuries and was changed when Rome took it over. It is the false doctrines that are not scriptural that I don’t like and I fear that many are being led astray by them. I firmly believe that the church of the first 3 centuries is the correct one but it changed when Rome took over. Had it changed those things when the Reformation came along instead of running those with the truth off, then we would all belong to it. ******

---

Though the words may not be typical of non-Catholic Christians, it’s been my experience that non-Catholics either fall onto these beliefs on their own or their denominational teachings occupy a great amount of study on the Catholic Church–through their own denominational specs, of course.

I have visited non-Catholic Bible sites and they are exceedingly stringent when it comes to enforcing their bylaws which adamantly forbid any language that introduces the Catholic Faith–though they insist on Scriptures only… in actuality they mean “non-Catholic” only. Conversely, in the various Catholic sites that I have visited all who choose to post feel that they can not only inquire about Church’s Doctrines but, as the excerpt above, they feel that they must rescue us from error (I am being waaaay generous with my language).

I must concur with you that Christians should never be at opposite ends of an argument… but when there are so many variations of doctrines which are under the umbrella of “Scriptural” or “show me in Scriptures” which do profess contradictory teachings, Catholics should never waiver in aligning themselves with the Church that Christ built!

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[BlaineTog]

Ok, so, back on topic: why put so much emphasis on Catholicism specifically?

1. Because it’s true, and the truth is important.
2. Because it’s fun. I enjoy apologetics, I really do. It’s interesting, evocative, thrilling, and a generally pleasant experience.
3. Because people have questions, and questions beg answering.
4. Because even though there are certainly greater things to be addressed, this still needs to be addressed as well. AIDS and Cancer are a big issues, but that doesn’t mean the common cold, bone fractures, and scraped knees should be overlooked.
5. How much emphasis are we putting on this, really? So we spend some of our free time thinking and posting about our faith. It’s not like all 70,000 (or however many) people who’ve joined the forums do this full-time.
6. Because it strengthens your own knowledge and understanding of your faith to discuss it in a coherent, logical, straight-forward, honest, open, argumentative way, and by putting your understand out there, you allow others to show you the holes in your reasoning that you didn’t see for yourself even after writing it all out.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Hmmm . . . the question is, why should Catholics on a Catholic Apologetics forum empahsize Catholicism?

Wait. I know the answer to this. Don’t tell me . . . . it’s because that’s what the forum was created for, and that’s why we’re here!

Did I get it right?