ECT Why shouldn't I convert from Evangelical Protestant to Catholic?

[RichRock]

Why do you want or need the opinion of anybody to be a Roman Catholic? In your heart you already are one.

I suggest that before you dive in and post in a thread you read the original post. Hint: 4th sentence.

Also, it's not Roman Catholic, but Catholic. Thankyou.

 

[RichRock]

heterodoxical had an interesting comment
you have to be able to make their argument for them
that got me thinking
how do you get around peter and the rock?
that would be my biggest problem making their argument
how did that work for you?

I listened to people like this guy, a protestant who became Catholic after research he undertook before attending protestant seminary to become a minister. Here he explains about Peter and the Rock:
http://www.catholic.com/video/is-peter-the-rock-in-matthew-1618

 

[God's Truth]

heterodoxical had an interesting comment
you have to be able to make their argument for them
that got me thinking
how do you get around peter and the rock?
that would be my biggest problem making their argument
how did that work for you?

How do you get, from what Jesus said to Peter that there is something called "Apostolic Succession"? There is no such teaching in the Bible.

Peter spoke truth as revealed to him from the Father.

Do you think Jesus built his church on this rock means Peter built a Cathedral?

The Catholic religion became heretical, introducing many things that go against the Word of God.


Things were said through Peter that was the beginning of all hearing that Gentiles could now be reconciled to God through Jesus.


How do you get that Jesus' Church is a building belonging to the Catholics, and a religion that preaches things that go against God?

 

[Sheila B]

Opinions are not Scripture. Only God's Word is a person's sole authority.

Jesus didn't think of the printing press for almost 1500 years AD. If the "book" was the sole authority to teach us how to best follow Christ... why the long preparation of illiteracy along with the absence of a cheap, availability of mass production of bibles?

The teaching authority of the church flies in the face of this one choice by Christ for His Kingdom that began as He sent the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles.
Acts 2:42 is the New Testament Church at work in the world!

 

[Aimiel]

The 'rock' Christ referred to when He changed Simon's name to Peter is the revelation knowledge available to every believer, directly from God, The Father. Without it, we wouldn't become Christian. We'd think (like the world) that Jesus was a nutcase.

 

[God's Truth]

Jesus didn't think of the printing press for almost 1500 years AD. If the "book" was the sole authority to teach us how to best follow Christ... why the long preparation of illiteracy along with the absence of a cheap, availability of mass production of bibles?

The teaching authority of the church flies in the face of this one choice by Christ for His Kingdom that began as He sent the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles.
Acts 2:42 is the New Testament Church at work in the world!

The books and letters from the apostles were read and shared by the Christians from the beginning.

With your false reasoning to follow the Catholic church, you would have to insist that all the killings under papal authority was justified and decreed by God.

Paul warned the true believers that false teachings would come.

2 Timothy 2:17 Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus,

Paul warned that even from among them wolves would come in.

Acts 20:29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.

The Catholic religion steadily brought in heresies.

Prayers for the dead and sign of the cross, approximately began in 310 AD.

Many heresies were added.

The title of pope or universal bishop, was first given to the bishop of Rome by the emperor Phocas, 610 AD.

Who was in charge of your religion before that, before 610 AD, since you claim your church, as you know it has been the truth from the beginning.

We have to watch our lives and our doctrines carefully.

Those who are Catholic did not watch carefully.

 

[chrysostom]

I listened to people like this guy, a protestant who became Catholic after research he undertook before attending protestant seminary to become a minister. Here he explains about Peter and the Rock:
http://www.catholic.com/video/is-peter-the-rock-in-matthew-1618

interesting

 

[Sheila B]

How do you get, from what Jesus said to Peter that there is something called "Apostolic Succession"? There is no such teaching in the Bible.

The first action the believers took in the Upper room, waiting for the Promised Holy Spirit, was to vote a successor to Judas who fell away and died. Scripture says: "Let another take his office."

Paul himself is shown to have become an apostle by degrees:
first he is baptized and joins the community. Then he is "sent" by the church. After some time, he is ordained by a ceremony consisting of "fasting and prayer and the laying on of the hands of the presbyters" and fasting does not happen very quickly!

After his ordination, his name is changed from Saul and he now "sends" and ordains others such as Timothy and Titus.

This shows the succession of ordination as Paul is a bishop and Apostle but not one of the original 12 as are Timothy, Silas, Titus, etc.

I would say the biblical representation along with the first extra-biblical writings of the Apostolic Fathers, show there definitely existed this very succession. Eastern Orthodoxy is on their 269th succession of Patriarch or so (I just heard that on EWTN earlier today).

So, both East and West have this unbroken line, which gives them a valid Eucharist and valid priesthood.

 

[Sheila B]

The 'rock' Christ referred to when He changed Simon's name to Peter is the revelation knowledge available to every believer, directly from God, The Father. Without it, we wouldn't become Christian. We'd think (like the world) that Jesus was a nutcase.

Scripture shows that Simon was called Kepha/Rock//Peter from that time on. It is not a universal name according to the witness of scripture.

A person is named, not knowledge.

 

[Sheila B]

I listened to people like this guy, a protestant who became Catholic after research he undertook before attending protestant seminary to become a minister. Here he explains about Peter and the Rock:
http://www.catholic.com/video/is-peter-the-rock-in-matthew-1618

That is a good 6 minute clip that gets to the heart of scripture and Jesus' intent. One really has to twist the obvious to come up with a denial that it is personal to a man named Simon bar Jonah.

 

[Omniskeptical]

The latin catholic church espouses such doctrines as male virgins, perpetual cherries, and rejects sola scriptura. What do they have to offer, except prudery and lies.

 

[God's Truth]

The first action the believers took in the Upper room, waiting for the Promised Holy Spirit, was to vote a successor to Judas who fell away and died. Scripture says: "Let another take his office."

That is because there are 12 Apostles to the Lamb. That has nothing to do with the Catholic’s apostolic succession.

Paul himself is shown to have become an apostle by degrees:
first he is baptized and joins the community. Then he is "sent" by the church. After some time, he is ordained by a ceremony consisting of "fasting and prayer and the laying on of the hands of the presbyters" and fasting does not happen very quickly!

That has NOTHING to do with the Catholic’s claim of apostolic succession from Peter.

After his ordination, his name is changed from Saul and he now "sends" and ordains others such as Timothy and Titus.

This shows the succession of ordination as Paul is a bishop and Apostle but not one of the original 12 as are Timothy, Silas, Titus, etc.

There are only 12 who are called Apostles to the Lamb.
No scripture you have used mean we are to have a line of men as leaders leading back to an apostle. In fact, the scriptures tell us it is forbidden to say, “I follow Peter”, or “I follow Paul”.
All the apostles were in union and taught the SAME truth.

I would say the biblical representation along with the first extra-biblical writings of the Apostolic Fathers, show there definitely existed this very succession. Eastern Orthodoxy is on their 269th succession of Patriarch or so (I just heard that on EWTN earlier today).

So, both East and West have this unbroken line, which gives them a valid Eucharist and valid priesthood.

What you say here means that they have left the straight and narrow. They are practicing things taught from men, things that go against the Word of God.

 

[Cruciform]

The latin catholic church espouses such doctrines as male virgins, perpetual cherries, and rejects sola scriptura.

...just like the historic Church of the first millennium-and-a-half of Christian history. By the way, the highlighted portion of your statement indicates you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about. Clean up your mouth, or keep it shut.

What do they have to offer, except prudery and lies.

What do you have to offer, except obscenity and ignorance. (Sadly, the question is entirely rhetorical.)



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Omniskeptical]

...just like the historic Church of the first millennium-and-a-half of Christian history. By the way, the highlighted portion of your statement indicates you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about. Clean up your mouth, or keep it shut.


What do you have to offer, except obscenity and ignorance. (Sadly, the question is entirely rhetorical.)



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I am not the one who doesn't know what the word virgin means biblically.

 

[Sheila B]

That is because there are 12 Apostles to the Lamb. That has nothing to do with the Catholic’s apostolic succession.

That has NOTHING to do with the Catholic’s claim of apostolic succession from Peter.

It shows that the apostles appointed bishops who were then called apostles also. Why else would Paul call himself an apostle when he was ordained by the presbyters of the church? Because the ceremony has it's roots in apostolic succession.

There are only 12 who are called Apostles to the Lamb.

Paul calls himself an apostle and refers to laying hands on Timothy, etc. in an ordination of like value, as Timothy is over the church he is appointed to by Paul. Paul tells these men to ordain also. What is this if not succession?

No scripture you have used mean we are to have a line of men as leaders leading back to an apostle. In fact, the scriptures tell us it is forbidden to say, “I follow Peter”, or “I follow Paul”.
All the apostles were in union and taught the SAME truth.

You are absolutely correct in the second two statements. That they all taught the same truth would be true of all the bishops who remained in right standing with the traditions and teachings (remember that the "letters" are being written over the decades, so apostolic tradition and OT would be the norm here). But, scripture also shows that the church had the authority given to it to decide matters, as the Council of Jerusalem shows.

What scripture does not show is that the church would have an end to this authority before Christ returned.

What you say here means that they have left the straight and narrow. They are practicing things taught from men, things that go against the Word of God.

I don't see that at all. Those who fell away from apostolic traditions are named as such. That has gone on all throughout church history.

 

[Sheila B]

Sorry, I have forgotten how to do the

thing and couldn't find directions on the site.

 

[Cruciform]

I am not the one who doesn't know what the word virgin means biblically.

Post your proof. Cite and quote a single qualified Christian Old Testament scholar who endorses the interpretation of Mary's words ("I have not known a man") that you're trying to promote here. I eagerly await your "proof."



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Omniskeptical]

Post your proof. Cite and quote a single qualified Christian Old Testament scholar who endorses the interpretation of Mary's words ("I have not known a man") that you're trying to promote here. I eagerly await your "proof."



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

You failed to highlight male virgin as an error. And I meant human male virgin to up the stakes. Why aren't human males virgins?

 

[God's Truth]

I don't see that at all. Those who fell away from apostolic traditions are named as such. That has gone on all throughout church history.

The Catholic church introduced many heresies.

 

[Omniskeptical]

The Catholic church introduced many heresies.

The Eastern Orthodox church says this all the time.