User Tag List

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 92

Thread: It's "Catholic Church" not "RCC"

  1. #61
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    I agree with your words but must disregard your last sentence to do so.

    You speak of geneologeis it seems; of which I have no interest.

    I do consider Catholics siblings in faith though; and do not hold that the actions of the arcc are indicative of the motives or faith of Catholic followers of Christ today.

    peace
    Genealogies are blood relations. I am talking about bishops, just as Timothy did, and the handing down of bishop authority by the laying on of hands. The NT is pretty clear about that, and that is something many non-Catholics overlook.

    Peace to you too. I appreciate the respectful response

  2. #62
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,384 Times in 1,165 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64753
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Genealogies are blood relations. I am talking about bishops, just as Timothy did, and the handing down of bishop authority by the laying on of hands. The NT is pretty clear about that, and that is something many non-Catholics overlook.

    Peace to you too. I appreciate the respectful response
    That is a point worth considering; and I do not intend to limit any capacity of GOD. Thank you too friend. My point is expounded on in the following screenshots.

    And again; peace with sincerity.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  3. #63
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    14,517
    Thanks
    4,233
    Thanked 1,919 Times in 1,549 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    79 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    CC,

    Jesus did not say you have to believe in certain organizational doctrine to be saved.

    Gospel is all about Jesus and His word.

    as you know Gospel is good news. Jesus' word is Gospel.

    Jesus says we know them by their fruit.

    And He also says if we don't produce fruit, we will not inherit eternal life.

    love, peace and blessings in His word or teachings.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to meshak For Your Post:

    Rusha (February 25th, 2018)

  5. #64
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    No, it remains what Jesus established. And JESUS established His Church:
    Your copy pasta response does not address this:

    “How did they first excersize this authority? In Acts 15, it was a Council that decided on the matter if Circumcision. They made this decision based on their authority. They did not consult any scriptures in their decision, but were rather guided by the Holy Spirit: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements" (Acts 15:28).

    This is how doctrine is decided: Not by popular vote, not by each individual reading a Bible and deciding for themselves what is right or wrong, but by a Council of those appointed by Christ.“

    I clearly showed how indeed the bolded part above was wishful thinking that scripture was NOT addressed and denial that scripture was addressed and the decision was in accordance to it...

    this council was NO permission nor precedent to just have a bunch of men meet and vote a majority view...

    (Ever divide 2 by 3...interesting number deciding the pope)

    It was Sola Scriptura even at this first council...

    Please respond or send someone or appeal to an EO to do so...

    Thanks.
    Last edited by clefty; February 25th, 2018 at 02:02 PM.

  6. #65
    Member of the 10 year club on TOL!! CabinetMaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    On the back of a horse someplace in Colorado
    Posts
    5,090
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 817 Times in 562 Posts

    Blog Entries
    4
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    308419
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Oh please, spare me that lame worn out argument.

    The New Testament clearly states that Jesus chose apostles as leaders and made Peter the leader. Paul came later, and Paul submitted tom Peter's direction.

    Go back and learn how to read the Bible properly.
    Except when Peter was wrong and Paul had to correct him.
    Galatians 5:22-23 (New International Version)

    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

    What are my fruits today?

    Cityboy With Horses A blog about what happens when you say, "I Promise"

    "Moral standards" are a lot like lighthouses: they exist to help us stay on course as we sail through life. But we have to steer BY them, but not directly AT them. Lest we end up marooned on the shoals of perpetual self-righteousness.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CabinetMaker For Your Post:

    jsanford108 (February 26th, 2018),patrick jane (February 25th, 2018)

  8. #66
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CabinetMaker View Post
    Except when Peter was wrong and Paul had to correct him.
    And when James concluded the Acts 15 Council...Not Peter...As James was the Head of the church...

    Now add the seven churches in revelations that Peter did not start and well we see there is something a miss with his being the one and only...

  9. #67
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Genealogies are blood relations. I am talking about bishops, just as Timothy did, and the handing down of bishop authority by the laying on of hands. The NT is pretty clear about that, and that is something many non-Catholics overlook.

    Peace to you too. I appreciate the respectful response
    Hello?

    See? I am conceding to you that the Church was built on Peter...I will concede to you he was given the only keys to the kingdom...

    Now tell me... the keys to kingdom represent the authority Peter was given to open the gate to the kingdom and if indeed the key represents the teachings of Yahushua...do you think Peter dared to change those keys?

    Give it a try...take you house key file it down or cut some of it off or extend it or some of its “teeth” and tell me please if it still fits the lock it is intended for...does this altered key open its intended lock?

    I can show you much teaching that was changed since that first century church was established on Peter...and I dare say Peter was NOT the one that began altering the keys entrusted to him...

    What Peter loosed and what Peter bound was already done in heaven prior...Peter was instructed to pray “on Earth as it is in Heaven”...it is NOT “in Heaven as it is made to be on Earth”...

    Is why he claimed he was still kosher when the vision of unclean meat was given to him...3 times he declined...and translated the vision 2x that it was about PREACHING to the unclean gentiles...not eating them LOL...

    nothing there about making what is unclean on earth clean in heaven...

  10. #68
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by clefty View Post
    Hello?

    See? I am conceding to you that the Church was built on Peter...I will concede to you he was given the only keys to the kingdom...

    Now tell me... the keys to kingdom represent the authority Peter was given to open the gate to the kingdom and if indeed the key represents the teachings of Yahushua...do you think Peter dared to change those keys?...
    I assume that you agree that Jesus "fulfilled" the law, yes? ...and that he is King in the line of David?

    The "keys" represent authority to act on behalf of the King, but not to contradict him of course. Here is my post from another forum so thelink is no good here. See the part about thekeys:

    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    I looked through the old threads, and unless I missed something, there is no thread addressing the Papacy itself. There's a couple of threads dealing with the "rock" of Matt 16, but not the office itself. So here goes.

    I'm sure we all know THIS scripture, which most Christians argue over, by heart by now:

    "...Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."

    I'll try to make clear what the Pope actually is. Many people have mistaken ideas about what the Pope is, which is why they don't see the office in scripture.

    Simply, the Pope is the fulfillment of the office of Prime Minister that existed in the Kindoms of David and his successors, just as many things in the New Testament are fulfillments of their Old Testament "types".

    "And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call My servant Eliakim the son of Helcias, and I will clothe him with thy Robe, and I will strengthen him with thy Sash, and will give thy Power (authority) into his hand; and he shall be as a FATHER (the word 'Pope' means 'Father') to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. And I will lay the Key of the House of David (the symbol of primacy) upon his shoulder; and he shall open and none shall shut; and he shall shut and none shall open. And I will fasten him as a peg in a Sure Place(the Papal Office), and he shall be for a Throne of glory to the house of his Father. And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his Fathers house, diverse kinds of vessels, every little vessel, from the vessels of cups even to every instrument of music." (Isaiah 22:20-24)

    In the Davidic Kingdoms, there was the office of Prime Minister (who actually wore a key on his robe as a symbol of office). This position is what is referred to in the above text and in other historical documents. There were many "ministers" to the king, but only one Prime Minister, sometimes known as the "Vizier" of the House of David.

    So now let's fast-forward to the New Testament: JESUS is the King, the "son of David", in the line of David. So, the apostles, steeped in their Jewish culture, knew EXACTLY what it meant when Jesus gave Peter the "Keys". Peter was to be the Prime Minister of Christ's Kingdom, the "Keeper of the Keys".

    So this is what the Pope is: Prime Minister of the King's Kingdom: The Kings's representative, or "vicar" if you will. But the Pope also has a pastoral role, which is established in John 21: 15-17, when Christ told Peter: "feed my lambs.. ..feed my sheep.. ..tend my sheep."

    This is the Pope: Prime Minister of Christs Kingdom, and Pastor of the flock. With that in mind, the Papacy is ALL THROUGH the scriptures. Now, throw into that mix the fact there is ample evidence in the New Testament that Peter was first in authority among the apostles. Whenever they were named, Peter headed the list (Matt. 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13) ; sometimes the apostles were referred to as "Peter and those who were with him" (Luke 9:32). Peter was the one who generally spoke for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6), and he figured in many of the most dramatic scenes (Matt. 14:28-32, Matt. 17:24-27, Mark 10:23-28 ) . On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). It is Peter’s faith that will strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32) and, as I said, Peter is given Christ’s flock to shepherd (John 21:17). An angel was sent to announce the resurrection to Peter (Mark 16:7), and the risen Christ first appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48 ) .

    So, as Cyprian of Carthage said in 251 A.D. (almost a hundred years before Constatine):

    "The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever things you bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth, they shall be loosed also in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]). ... On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were also what Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" - The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to CatholicCrusader For Your Post:

    jsanford108 (February 26th, 2018)

  12. #69
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    I assume that you agree that Jesus "fulfilled" the law, yes? ...and that he is King in the line of David?

    The "keys" represent authority to act on behalf of the King, but not to contradict him of course. Here is my post from another forum so thelink is no good here. See the part about thekeys:
    The keys do represent the authority but much more...they represent the teachings of, the knowledge of, the ORDER of, the faith of...the kingdom of Heaven and Who is that King? Already named...

    And you even admit there is nothing given that allows the key holder to countradict or counter or teach anything other that what was previously established...

    He taught and modeled the NEW COVENANT and signed it with His Blood and sealed it with His death...IT IS FINISHED...and once the testator is dead NOTHING CAN BE CHANGED TO THE CONTRACT...the New Covenant

    And yet...look at your corporation...

    Make a two column list of what He taught, how He lived, and what yours teaches now...

    You are correct, NO authority was given to contradict Him the One who gave Peter the keys...and to his credit Peter did not change anything but actually warned of false teachers and wolves in sheep’s clothing and dogs once learning the true commandment returning to their vomit...

    Peter knew there are those speaking big words to change both times and laws...claiming they have the power to do so given to them by the keys they keep altering...

    Again even catholics despair at the changes of V2 and consider those changes heresy popes since not true catholics...

    Your tradition is to change tradition...as you said...you hope Peter would not recognize this Church...His Church...His bride faithful and opedient to Him HIS WAYS and not extra biblical councils by the traditions of pompous men wearing fish hats...

  13. #70
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by clefty View Post
    ........Again even catholics despair at the changes of V2 and consider those changes heresy popes since not true catholics.....
    There you are 100% wrong and off base. Unfortunately it would takes years to write a tome to explain it all, and that's been done to death already. I have neither the time nor the inclination to get into that discussion, especially since you are not even Catholic anyway. One has to really be Catholic before digging deep into what Vatican II was and was not.

    .....Your tradition is to change tradition......
    Not true. If you are really interested, try these:
    1) https://www.catholic.com/tract/apostolic-tradition
    2) https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition

  14. #71
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    There you are 100% wrong and off base. Unfortunately it would takes years to write a tome to explain it all, and that's been done to death already. I have neither the time nor the inclination to get into that discussion, especially since you are not even Catholic anyway. One has to really be Catholic before digging deep into what Vatican II was and was not.
    lol

    Yeah ok whatever...like non catholics are too dumb to understand some of yours prefer the mass in latin...against the modernism and ecumenicism of V2 and for the sake of sacred tradition...cuz that’s what He spoke...latin...lol



    I still wait for your response to my answer to your copy pasta OP claiming the council in Acts 15 acted above and outside of scripture...but by their own authority...not consulting the scripture they had which was the OT...

    Sola Scriptura prior your tradition’s claim to use its own tradition to change times and laws...

    Imagine Israel relying on its history of idolatry to continue its own idolatry...oh wait it does...nevermind...

    LOL

    So why should I bother to read any more copy pasta from you when you haven't even addressed your OP’s fundamental error?

  15. #72
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by clefty View Post
    ....Yeah ok whatever...like non catholics are too dumb to understand some prefer the mass in latin...for the sake cuz that’s what He spoke...
    No, it's got nothing to do with being dumb. And by the way I attend Latin language mass at my Catholic Church.

    I am saying that a non-Catholic does not appreciate what a Council truly is and therefore cannot fairly discuss it. It would be like an atheist discussing the Bible. He may be a very intelligent atheist but he can never really discuss the Bible because he does not believe its the word of God, just like you do not believe that councils presided over by the Pope are guided by God.

    Quote Originally Posted by clefty View Post
    ......I still wait for your response to my answer to your copy pasta OP claiming the council in Acts 15 acted above and outside of scripture...but by their own authority.....
    They acted by the authority Christ gave them. I believe the subject was circumcision. Yes, by the authority of JESUS they overturned the circumcision requirement. Christ overturned many OT laws.

  16. #73
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    No, it's got nothing to do with being dumb. And by the way I attend Latin language mass at my Catholic Church.
    yes because the ROMANS spoke latin...is why we refer to you as RCC and not a hebrew/Aramaic speaking messianic movement...

    I am saying that a non-Catholic does not appreciate what a Council truly is and therefore cannot fairly discuss it. It would be like an atheist discussing the Bible. He may be a very intelligent atheist but he can never really discuss the Bible because he does not believe its the word of God, just like you do not believe that councils presided over by the Pope are guided by God.
    Oh I believe the counsels are guided by Yah is why I am puzzled they reject Him and His word...UNLIKE the first council which consultated and ruled according to it...the OT laws laid out for the goyim amongst those native born...

    I even believe the Holy Spirit guides the selection of the pope and thus am curious as to how those who claim the seat is empty can explain that the Holy Spirit missed the fact he was a heretic...2/3 of of the Curia of course missed it too...


    They acted by the authority Christ gave them.
    authority to do what contradict Him? His Father’s Will? His Father’s previous commandments? Found in scripture they had

    I believe the subject was circumcision. Yes, by the authority of JESUS they overturned the circumcision requirement.
    what circumcision law? GENTILES WERE NEVER REQUIRED TO BE CIRCUMCISED TO BE AMONG JEWS IN THE OT...is why the judiazers were WRONG to teach it was required...

    Every gentile that was saved from Egypt was NOT required to be circumsized...

    You really do need to read the OT...and not copy pasta from your grand traditions

    Christ overturned many OT laws.
    really? To contradict His Father’s will? I just finished posting to you that He signed and sealed the New Covenant NO jot nor tittle changed...you of course continue our own tradition with these pompous claims He destroyed prior Law despite telling you NOT TO THINK that...

    And so overturning the OT law (which did NOT require) would exactly be to require gentiles to be circumcised...the irony

  17. #74
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by clefty View Post
    yes because the ROMANS spoke latin...is why we refer to you as RCC.....
    Ooookay.... ...and with that little nugget of crap I bid you fair ado. Find another Catholic to hassle.

  18. #75
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,679
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 467 Times in 428 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3676
    Quote Originally Posted by CatholicCrusader View Post
    Ooookay.... ...and with that little nugget of crap I bid you fair ado. Find another Catholic to hassle.
    Lol...wait wut? They spoke Greek?

    Was having a laugh...lighten up...

    And address my answer to your OP (my bad post 12,13 of this thread) that the apostles acted by their own authority without counsel to Scripture when I clearly showed that all four requirements were already found in the OT required of the goyim traveling amongst them...

    And circumcision was NOT required of them to travel saved with them...thus the Judaizers in the NT requiring the gentiles crowding into the synagogues every Sabbath be circumcised were NOT according to the Sola Scriptura and thus WRONG and unauthorized to demand the gentiles to do so...

    So actually it was the Judaizers who acted by their own authority and without scripture or according to it to make these demands to change the tradition...EXACTLY YOUR TYPE...

    The irony...but you dont seem to have any humor...

    So did the Roman Rites speak greek?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us