Why are Catholics so bad?

[aspen]

The concept is there. Just like the Trinity.

Actually it is not. There are just as many examples of going to the church as an authority as there is scripture talking about looking to scripture - and there is no scripture tells us to seek scripture alone.

As far as prima scriptura - it is a concept that emerged after Protestant theologians had to give up on defending sola scriptura.

 

[Axehead]

What I'm discussing is prima scriptura. God reveals things to individuals many times. He has done so for me, but if I ever believe I get truth or understanding from God that is inconsistent with scriptures, I know there's something wrong with me.

Amen!

Actually it is not. There are just as many examples of going to the church as an authority as there is scripture talking about looking to scripture - and there is no scripture tells us to seek scripture alone.

As far as prima scriptura - it is a concept that emerged after Protestant theologians had to give up on defending sola scriptura.

"Oral Tradition" establishing doctrine on the same level of authority as God's Word is also a concept invented by man. The scriptures you use to establish this powerful and authoritative doctrine of "Oral Tradition" which establishes many doctrines that DO NOT AGREE with Scripture are very weak, indeed. You are taking much license and reading into these very few scriptures. Anything as major as "Oral Tradition" that creates authoritative words of God would be clearly established (without a doubt) by the preponderance of Scripture and it is just not there. This makes the RCC interpretations extremely private interpretations.

Axehead

 

[aspen]

Amen!



"Oral Tradition" establishing doctrine on the same level of authority as God's Word is also a concept invented by man. The scriptures you use to establish this powerful and authoritative doctrine of "Oral Tradition" which establishes many doctrines that DO NOT AGREE with Scripture are very weak, indeed. You are taking much license and reading into these very few scriptures. Anything as major as "Oral Tradition" that creates authoritative words of God would be clearly established (without a doubt) by the preponderance of Scripture and it is just not there. This makes the RCC interpretations extremely private interpretations.

Axehead

All of scripture, will the exception of Paul's letters started out as oral tradition! And even Paul's letters were read to the congregation.

 

[Mungo]

Amen!



"Oral Tradition" establishing doctrine on the same level of authority as God's Word is also a concept invented by man. The scriptures you use to establish this powerful and authoritative doctrine of "Oral Tradition" which establishes many doctrines that DO NOT AGREE with Scripture are very weak, indeed. You are taking much license and reading into these very few scriptures.

I keep saying this and no-one has yet proved me wrong.

No Catholic doctrine contradicts scripture and no scripture contradicts Catholic doctrine. When Protestants try to disprove this they rely on their own private misinterpretations of scripture.

Anything as major as "Oral Tradition" that creates authoritative words of God would be clearly established (without a doubt) by the preponderance of Scripture and it is just not there. This makes the RCC interpretations extremely private interpretations.

Axehead

Where does scripture say that anything as major as “Oral Tradition” would be clearly established by the preponderance of Scripture?

Is this just another Protestant “tradition of men”?

 

[Comm.Arnold]

Ahh it just keeps going.

 

[epostle1]

Sola scriptura has no biblical foundation, the "unarticulated and undeveloped doctrine" is non-existent in any time period prior to the so called reformation, is illogical, unworkable, indefensible, and man made.

http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/16799-bereans/

 

[James Forthwright]

As Thomas Aquinas said:

...acred doctrine...properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors.[sup][2][/sup]​

For this reason, some sources say that prima scriptura is the normative Catholic approach. Yves Congar referred to prima scriptura as the "normative primacy of Scripture" as he described the work of Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas. Pope John Paul II in an address to academics in 1986 said,

"Theology must take its point of departure from a continual and updated return to the Scriptures read in the Church."

This statement has been taken by some as support for interpreting the Church's teaching in terms of the prima scriptura perspective. --Wikipedia, 'prima scriptura'

 

[epostle1]

As Thomas Aquinas said:

...acred doctrine...properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors.[sup][2][/sup]​

For this reason, some sources say that prima scriptura is the normative Catholic approach. Yves Congar referred to prima scriptura as the "normative primacy of Scripture" as he described the work of Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas. Pope John Paul II in an address to academics in 1986 said,

"Theology must take its point of departure from a continual and updated return to the Scriptures read in the Church."

This statement has been taken by some as support for interpreting the Church's teaching in terms of the prima scriptura perspective. --Wikipedia, 'prima scriptura'

What is your point? What that means is, scripture is and alway has been the primary source for doctrine; is there something wrong with that?? 'prima scritura' is not 'sola scriptura'., and I think you are either very young or very confused, You obviously harbor an irrational hatred for Catholicism. Do you automatically paste hate speech without checking out what it refers to?

You believe hate cults on that link to the Vatican on the "one world government" but would never even entertain the idea that something the Church says might be true. This is the first paragraph of the link you posted that you war against :

1. Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity. Love — caritas — is an extraordinary force which leads people to opt for courageous and generous engagement in the field of justice and peace. It is a force that has its origin in God, Eternal Love and Absolute Truth. Each person finds his good by adherence to God's plan for him, in order to realize it fully: in this plan, he finds his truth, and through adherence to this truth he becomes free (cf. Jn 8:32). To defend the truth, to articulate it with humility and conviction, and to bear witness to it in life are therefore exacting and indispensable forms of charity. Charity, in fact, “rejoices in the truth” (1 Cor 13:6). All people feel the interior impulse to love authentically: love and truth never abandon them completely, because these are the vocation planted by God in the heart and mind of every human person. The search for love and truth is purified and liberated by Jesus Christ from the impoverishment that our humanity brings to it, and he reveals to us in all its fullness the initiative of love and the plan for true life that God has prepared for us. In Christ, charity in truth becomes the Face of his Person, a vocation for us to love our brothers and sisters in the truth of his plan. Indeed, he himself is the Truth (cf. Jn 14:6).​

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html​

oh, that evil pope :wacko:​

​

​

You have been poisoned by anti-Catholic hate that has warped your mind, leaving you unable to tell truth from lies. I suggest you read and absorb the entire encyclical as an anti-dote. Meanwhile, I will pray that your eyes be openned. ​

 

[James Forthwright]

What is your point? What that means is, scripture is and alway has been the primary source for doctrine; is there something wrong with that?? 'prima scritura' (sic) is not 'sola scriptura'., and I think you are either very young or very confused, You obviously harbor an irrational hatred for Catholicism. Do you automatically paste hate speech without checking out what it refers to?

Whoa! Slow down Kepha31. Your disjointed rant of a reply missed the mark on multiple accounts.

1. I am fully aware of the difference between sola scriptura and prima scriptura.
   
2. I am not young (either chronologically or spiritually).
   
3. I don’t hate Catholics. I was raised Catholic and have many dearly beloved Catholic friends and relatives, deceased as well as living.
   
4. One man’s “hate speech” is another man’s “testament of truth”. Just because someone voices a different opinion than yours doesn’t make it “hate speech”.

5. "The Point" I was making was that two legendary Catholic figures verified the primacy of the Sacred Scriptures as ultimate authority in determining correct doctrine.

You believe hate cults on that link to the Vatican on the "one world government" but would never even entertain the idea that something the Church says might be true. This is the first paragraph of the link you posted that you war against :
1. Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity. Love — caritas — is an extraordinary force which leads people to opt for courageous and generous engagement in the field of justice and peace. It is a force that has its origin in God, Eternal Love and Absolute Truth. Each person finds his good by adherence to God's plan for him, in order to realize it fully: in this plan, he finds his truth, and through adherence to this truth he becomes free (cf. Jn 8:32). To defend the truth, to articulate it with humility and conviction, and to bear witness to it in life are therefore exacting and indispensable forms of charity. Charity, in fact, “rejoices in the truth” (1 Cor 13:6). All people feel the interior impulse to love authentically: love and truth never abandon them completely, because these are the vocation planted by God in the heart and mind of every human person. The search for love and truth is purified and liberated by Jesus Christ from the impoverishment that our humanity brings to it, and he reveals to us in all its fullness the initiative of love and the plan for true life that God has prepared for us. In Christ, charity in truth becomes the Face of his Person, a vocation for us to love our brothers and sisters in the truth of his plan. Indeed, he himself is the Truth (cf. Jn 14:6).
http://www.vatican.v...eritate_en.html
oh, that evil pope

Yes, many things the Vatican/pope teaches are praiseworthy. However, you are selectively quoting irrefutable passages of love while choosing to completely ignore the unpleasant ‘New World Order’ insinuations mentioned later in that same encyclical.

Furthermore, some/most popes were, indeed, honorable men, others. . . not so honorable. Secondly, you are specifically addressing a rather old post of mine instead of responding to my latest response. Which is OK, I guess but it’s distracting and not really relevant to the discussion at hand.

You have been poisoned by anti-Catholic hate that has warped your mind, leaving you unable to tell truth from lies. I suggest you read and absorb the entire encyclical as an anti-dote. Meanwhile, I will pray that your eyes be openned (sic).

Thanks for your prayers, Kepha31 but maybe it’s time you took off those denominational stained-glass colored glasses you're wearing and begin to see where Catholicism veered from the straight and narrow path of scriptural Truth (which I clearly enumerated earlier in this thread).

Peace be with you, brother Kepha31,

James Forthwright

 

[epostle1]

"The tree shall be known by its fruit" (Luke 6:43-44) There's a fine line between "official teachings" and officially sanctioned sinful policies of the RCC. Judas was told by Christ that it would have been better if he had never been born (Matt. 26:24) and Israel has often born the sufferings and woeful recompense of its reprobate forefathers.

Earlier in this thread, I posted a numerical lengthy list of RCC teachings which directly conflict with the Word of God. So far there have been few Catholics who contested that post.

That might be because there are few Catholics in here.....can't imagine why.

Pope Benedict XVI calls for One World Government

YouTube video from a Protestant perspective:

Here is the pope's encyclical in it's entirety:

http://www.vatican.v...eritate_en.html

The charge of "One World Government" from the Pope is hate speech from paranoid fundamentalists. It insinuates that the Vatican is/will be in league with the United Nations for world domination. This shows a profound ignorance of the structure of the UN and the UN/Vatican relations. The Vatican is not, and can never be, a member of the United Nations. The Vatican holds a "permanent observer non member status" The Vatican has no political power, but can make recommendations to governments to pass just laws (such as abolishment of the death penalty) It is ineligible for membership to the UN for several reasons. One is that the Vatican cannot be neutral on immoral practices that the UN imposes on third world countries. A country must be neutral to be a member. The biggest enemy the Vatican (and the human race) has in the UN is the Planned Parenthood Foundation, who has carried over its philosophies from it's birth in Nazi Germany.

This false charge exploits people's fear and ignorance to demonize the Church. The long range plan is to discredit the Church's moral authority that stands in the way of a genocide to rid the world of "less desirableness" so we can all be happy. :unsure:

Whoa! Slow down Kepha31. Your disjointed rant of a reply missed the mark on multiple accounts.

1. I am fully aware of the difference between sola scriptura and prima scriptura.
   
2. I am not young (either chronologically or spiritually).
   
3. I don’t hate Catholics. I was raised Catholic and have many dearly beloved Catholic friends and relatives, deceased as well as living.
   
4. One man’s “hate speech” is another man’s “testament of truth”. Just because someone voices a different opinion than yours doesn’t make it “hate speech”.

5. "The Point" I was making was that two legendary Catholic figures verified the primacy of the Sacred Scriptures as ultimate authority in determining correct doctrine.



Yes, many things the Vatican/pope teaches are praiseworthy. However, you are selectively quoting irrefutable passages of love while choosing to completely ignore the unpleasant ‘New World Order’ insinuations mentioned later in that same encyclical.

Furthermore, some/most popes were, indeed, honorable men, others. . . not so honorable. Secondly, you are specifically addressing a rather old post of mine instead of responding to my latest response. Which is OK, I guess but it’s distracting and not really relevant to the discussion at hand.




Thanks for your prayers, Kepha31 but maybe it’s time you took off those denominational stained-glass colored glasses you're wearing and begin to see where Catholicism veered from the straight and narrow path of scriptural Truth (which I clearly enumerated earlier in this thread).

Peace be with you, brother Kepha31,

James Forthwright

"the unpleasant ‘New World Order’ insinuations" do not exist.

CARITAS IN VERITATE ON INTEGRAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHARITY AND TRUTH

Yes, I read some of your earlier posts. You clearly enumerated misrepresentations, made a mockery of excesses committed by overly pious Catholics, and you are unbiblically opposed to the proper use of religious statuary. I've had to refute evangelical Manachaeanism so many times I have whole files ready and waiting. If you want to have discussion on the heresy of iconoclasm in Protestantism I'd be happy to accommodate you. But if you are of the "one world government" crowd, I know where that venom comes from. The typical ploy of an anti-Catholic is to change the subject with every post, or use the cluster bomb / shot gun tactic using long lists that require 20 pages to address. Then you can say how dumb we are for not answering them.

After you slander the Pope and demonize the Church you then argue that you are not anti-Catholic because you were once an altar boy, have good friends that are Catholic by default, and hold a Ph.D. in theology from Jackkk Chickkk University. I am being sarcastic to hammer home a point.

I have a question for you. Why do converts to Catholicism revere their former faith, (it is not supplanted but embellished) while ex-Catholics become anti-Catholics? Which leads to another question: What category of Catholic were you when you left?

How Can Catholicism Be True When Catholics Are So Dead?

I confess confusion on my part in my reaction to your post on prima scriptura. Why you would bash the Church with a lie and later in the thread give her support threw me off; it's hard not to have one's back shoved against the wall. Sorry.

With that said, I never said you hated Catholics, all opinions are not equal, and your "scriptural truth" means your subjective opinion.

Consider this illustration. You are in a taxi and the taxi crashes breaking your leg. A bone is protruding from your leg. On the scene are the taxi driver who barely knows first aid and a passerby who happens to be an orthopedic surgeon. Whose “opinion” has precedence over how your leg will be treated? Does the taxi driver have an equal opinion to the orthopedic surgeon? Does the taxi driver even have a right to an opinion?
The taxi driver trying to assert a contrary opinion against the orthopedic surgeon’s professional expertise is utter arrogant foolishness; and to accept the taxi driver’s opinion over the surgeon’s risks losing your leg or even your life.​

Three Secret Strategies of Satan

 

[James Forthwright]

That might be because there are few Catholics in here.....can't imagine why.

Another factor you’re overlooking is that a large portion of Catholics rarely, if ever, discuss their faith. They dutifully go to mass every Sunday, but the rest of the day is spent watching football. “How ‘bout dem Cowboys?” Many Catholics don’t own a Bible, yet alone are knowledgeable or desire to discuss scriptural issues.

Yes, I read some of your earlier posts. You clearly enumerated misrepresentations,

Yeah, 70+ Catholic doctrine “misrepresentations”as you call them. You’d be hard-pressed to find half that many conflicts on the most egregious religious cults.

. . .made a mockery of excesses committed by overly pious Catholics, and you are unbiblically opposed to the proper use of religious statuary. I've had to refute evangelical Manachaeanism so many times I have whole files ready and waiting. If you want to have discussion on the heresy of iconoclasm in Protestantism I'd be happy to accommodate you.

Kindly show me an example in the Bible where idolatry is condoned? Or where statues of any of the OT prophets & saints were revered? Just because some Protestant denominations also bow to icons does not validate the process. They’re both wrong!

I have a question for you. Why do converts to Catholicism revere their former faith, (it is not supplanted but embellished) while ex-Catholics become anti-Catholics?

Not that truth is to be determined numerically, but for every convert to Catholicism from Protestantism I can name at least ten going in the opposite direction. There’s just not that much appeal to Catholicism nor desire to become Catholic priests. Many parishes are importing priests from Ireland. Jewish converts also claim to revere their former vehemently anti-Christian faith, so what? Most converts to any new faith learn of the fallacies of their former faith and are quite vocal in condemning them. You are only mentioning a few anecdotal exceptions to the rule.

Which leads to another question: What category of Catholic were you when you left?

Honestly, I was not a very observant Catholic at that time but when a dear friend invited me to his Bible Study in 1971, I was immediately impressed by their enthusiasm for the Word of God and their bold witness for Christ. Something you rarely find in Catholics.

I confess confusion on my part in my reaction to your post on prima scriptura. Why you would bash the Church with a lie and later in the thread give her support threw me off; it's hard not to have one's back shoved against the wall. Sorry.

With that said, I never said you hated Catholics, all opinions are not equal, and your "scriptural truth" means your subjective opinion.

Consider this illustration. You are in a taxi and the taxi crashes breaking your leg. A bone is protruding from your leg. On the scene are the taxi driver who barely knows first aid and a passerby who happens to be an orthopedic surgeon. Whose “opinion” has precedence over how your leg will be treated? Does the taxi driver have an equal opinion to the orthopedic surgeon? Does the taxi driver even have a right to an opinion?​

The taxi driver trying to assert a contrary opinion against the orthopedic surgeon’s professional expertise is utter arrogant foolishness; and to accept the taxi driver’s opinion over the surgeon’s risks losing your leg or even your life.​

​

I recognize that all opinions aren’t equal. That’s a given. Spending just a few minutes reading this forum should make that claim rather obvious. . . ​

Allow me to use a similar driving analogy. I’m sure it’s comforting for you to recline back in a long established denominational greyhound bus like the RCC and have their scholarly teachers do all the driving for you. Their thorough catechisms and insightful encyclicals seem to explain and guide you every step of the way (all you need to do is cut & paste their doctrinal positions). But what do you do when you notice that the driver keeps veering from lane to lane? His route often takes the broad path rather than Christ’s narrow way? Or your natural sense of direction and the map your reading (Holy Bible) tells you that you are heading in the wrong direction?​

Any sensible man would pull the cord to alert the dubious driver that you’d like to exit the bus at the next stop and find an alternate means of transportation. ​

 

[epostle1]

In 1998, more that 88,000 Protestants were received into the Catholic Church.

Since 1993, 300 Protestant pastors have contacted The Coming Home Network,

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0252.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJF8w04iX2I&feature=related


The Top 10 Reasons to Come Home to the Catholic Church

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s3xUi2FHtQ&feature=related

Another factor you’re overlooking is that a large portion of Catholics rarely, if ever, discuss their faith. They dutifully go to mass every Sunday, but the rest of the day is spent watching football. “How ‘bout dem Cowboys?” Many Catholics don’t own a Bible, yet alone are knowledgeable or desire to discuss scriptural issues.



Yeah, 70+ Catholic doctrine “misrepresentations”as you call them. You’d be hard-pressed to find half that many conflicts on the most egregious religious cults.




Kindly show me an example in the Bible where idolatry is condoned? Or where statues of any of the OT prophets & saints were revered? Just because some Protestant denominations also bow to icons does not validate the process. They’re both wrong!



Not that truth is to be determined numerically, but for every convert to Catholicism from Protestantism I can name at least ten going in the opposite direction. There’s just not that much appeal to Catholicism nor desire to become Catholic priests. Many parishes are importing priests from Ireland. Jewish converts also claim to revere their former vehemently anti-Christian faith, so what? Most converts to any new faith learn of the fallacies of their former faith and are quite vocal in condemning them. You are only mentioning a few anecdotal exceptions to the rule.




Honestly, I was not a very observant Catholic at that time but when a dear friend invited me to his Bible Study in 1971, I was immediately impressed by their enthusiasm for the Word of God and their bold witness for Christ. Something you rarely find in Catholics.


[/indent]

I recognize that all opinions aren’t equal. That’s a given. Spending just a few minutes reading this forum should make that claim rather obvious. . . ​

Allow me to use a similar driving analogy. I’m sure it’s comforting for you to recline back in a long established denominational greyhound bus like the RCC and have their scholarly teachers do all the driving for you. Their thorough catechisms and insightful encyclicals seem to explain and guide you every step of the way (all you need to do is cut & paste their doctrinal positions). But what do you do when you notice that the driver keeps veering from lane to lane? His route often takes the broad path rather than Christ’s narrow way? Or your natural sense of direction and the map your reading (Holy Bible) tells you that you are heading in the wrong direction?​

Any sensible man would pull the cord to alert the dubious driver that you’d like to exit the bus at the next stop and find an alternate means of transportation. ​

Please shorten your posts.

 

[Axehead]

http://www.christian.../16799-bereans/

If oral tradition is how much of the RCC has received their revelation, then why don't they continue to pass down through oral tradition? Instead, they produce reams and reams of extra biblical "revelation" in written form thereby contradicting their stance on oral teaching handed down from generation to generation.

Axehead

 

[epostle1]

Another factor you’re overlooking is that a large portion of Catholics rarely, if ever, discuss their faith. They dutifully go to mass every Sunday, but the rest of the day is spent watching football. “How ‘bout dem Cowboys?” Many Catholics don’t own a Bible, yet alone are knowledgeable or desire to discuss scriptural issues.

You personally know the large portion of Catholics? What is wrong with football? Are you jealous that we can enjoy life and not be so anal retentive? Most Catholics don't own a Bible? Yer kidding me, right? Where did you get that info? From a poll by the New York Times? Why would a Catholic want to discuss scriptural issues with evangelical bigots? A Catholic might not know the chapter and verses of say, the parable of the Prodigal Son, but a Catholic understand the principle of love and forgiveness by going to confession, with a practical richness and depth a way you can't even imagine.

Yeah, 70+ Catholic doctrine “misrepresentations”as you call them. You’d be hard-pressed to find half that many conflicts on the most egregious religious cults.

Empty hateful assertion.

Kindly show me an example in the Bible where idolatry is condoned? Or where statues of any of the OT prophets & saints were revered? Just because some Protestant denominations also bow to icons does not validate the process. They’re both wrong!

Another false charge.

IMAGES AND STATUES, RELICS & HOLY WATER
Do Catholics Worship Statues?

Not that truth is to be determined numerically, but for every convert to Catholicism from Protestantism I can name at least ten going in the opposite direction. There’s just not that much appeal to Catholicism nor desire to become Catholic priests. Many parishes are importing priests from Ireland. Jewish converts also claim to revere their former vehemently anti-Christian faith, so what? Most converts to any new faith learn of the fallacies of their former faith and are quite vocal in condemning them. You are only mentioning a few anecdotal exceptions to the rule.

You need to pull your head out of your sAnd. We had to start a whole new ministry to accommodate the exodus of Protestant ministers and scholars coming home. The best and the brightest are becoming Catholic and the reasons are found in the above video that you seemed to have ignored. 300 Protestant ministers in the USA alone are not an anecdotal exceptions. 88,000 Protestants in 1998 alone are not anecdotal exceptions. It's an exodus. It's explained in the video second up.

You haven't answered the question. Why do ex-Catholics become anti-Catholics? I'll tell you why. Because they get indoctrinated (and bombarded) with lies about Catholicism that they are not equipped to deal with, and statue worship is one good example. Your perspective of Catholicism is based on laxity and the memories that are what, 40 years old? That makes you an expert?

Honestly, I was not a very observant Catholic at that time but when a dear friend invited me to his Bible Study in 1971, I was immediately impressed by their enthusiasm for the Word of God and their bold witness for Christ. Something you rarely find in Catholics.

No wonder. You weren't a very observant Catholic.

I received the release of the Holy Spirit in 1971 and went to more Protestant bible studies and churches than you could shake a stick at. I met David Wilkerson. I testified at a Baptist church. I had an album signed by Larry Norman. I watched him and Keith Green in concert at a Jesus Festival during the Jesus Revolution in Indiana in the early '70's. Keith would make the piano shake. I read his Chronicles and knew their was something wrong but wasn't sure what it was. Every Easter I still play his "Easter Song". Then I met Catherine Doherty up north and realized that nowhere else can be found such richness, such depth, such beauty as in the Catholic Church. You are ripping yourself off. You sold your heritage for a pot of soup.

Don't fall for every lie ever printed against the Catholic Church.
​

I recognize that all opinions aren’t equal. That’s a given. Spending just a few minutes reading this forum should make that claim rather obvious. . . ​

Allow me to use a similar driving analogy. I’m sure it’s comforting for you to recline back in a long established denominational greyhound bus like the RCC and have their scholarly teachers do all the driving for you. Their thorough catechisms and insightful encyclicals seem to explain and guide you every step of the way (all you need to do is cut & paste their doctrinal positions). But what do you do when you notice that the driver keeps veering from lane to lane? His route often takes the broad path rather than Christ’s narrow way? Or your natural sense of direction and the map your reading (Holy Bible) tells you that you are heading in the wrong direction?​

Any sensible man would pull the cord to alert the dubious driver that you’d like to exit the bus at the next stop and find an alternate means of transportation. ​

The driver of your bus is operating purely on human effort. The driver on my bus is Peter, the only one with the keys.

 

[Axehead]

The driver of your bus is operating purely on human effort. The driver on my bus is Peter, the only one with the keys.

Can you figure out who this is?

Isa 22:22 And 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.

Rev 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Here is the link to Isaiah 22:22
Rev 3:7 And 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;

Hint: It's not Peter.

Why would a Catholic want to discuss scriptural issues with evangelical bigots?

Why is a good question, indeed!!

You need to pull your head out of your sand.

Usually it is "the sand". Did you have something else in mind?

We had to start a whole new ministry to accommodate the exodus of Protestant ministers and scholars coming home. The best and the brightest are becoming Catholic and the reasons are found in the above video that you seemed to have ignored. 300 Protestant ministers in the USA alone are not an anecdotal exceptions. 88,000 Protestants in 1998 alone are not anecdotal exceptions. It's an exodus. It's explained in the video second up.

No surprise. What is happening supports the scriptures.

1Tim 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2Th_2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

 

[Rex]

Why would a Catholic want to discuss scriptural issues with evangelical bigots?

Now there's the question of the day

from the same post

You need to pull your head out of your sAnd.

I can't resist posting kepha's comments from aspens.
"Anticatholic, Antimormon, A War on Christians........"


Kepha's post from yesterday.

The ideal is to discuss with charity and patience. That is what scripture calls us to do. Offensive and arrogant posts self destruct. Credibility is lost. There is nothing "Christian" about telling someone they are going to hell because they disagree with your belief system.

Disagreeing is one thing, but repeated bashing is something else.

Now are there any questions regarding the thread topic

The driver of your bus is operating purely on human effort. The driver on my bus is Peter, the only one with the keys.

Let Peter keep the keys I've got the door John 10:9 .......LOL I thought it was funny

 

[Axehead]

Let Peter keep the keys I've got the door John 10:9 .......LOL I thought it was funny

I know Kepha is going to hate this and think that we somehow know each other, but I thought it was funny, too.

 

[epostle1]

Let Peter keep the keys...

Is that a summary of the evangelical/non-Catholic/Protestant/born-again/non-denominational rebellious egalitarian position?

Isa. 22: 19-25​

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.​

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.​

Isa.22:21 ​

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.​

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.​

Isa.22:23​

Most people lived in tents in that culture. They understood the importance of having your tent pegs securely fastened so the wind wouldn't blow it down. A "throne of honor" Hmm...where have I seen "thrones" before? Oh yes, after His Ascension where the thrones are both on earth and in heaven. Matthew 19:28​

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 ​

Almost verbatim with:​

Matthew 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.​

APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY AND SUCCESSION

 

[mjrhealth]

I wonder how many people would be willing to stand before God, look Him in the eyes, and with a straight face tell Him, that there church is His Church, with all its sin, all the lies, all the evil, all the deception. The Church is supposed to reflect the Image of God, i know of none that do so, they all show the world as they are al of this world, they all must change to keep there place in this world for that reason. Our Lords Church will never change. A protestant look, sound and acts like a protestant, the same can be said of all denominations, there are none that look, sound and act like Christ. If you want to be a JW then got to their church, you want to be a catholic, then go to a catholic church, if you want to be like Christ, weel there is only one, the better way, you go to Him.

In all His Love

 

[Rex]

Is that a summary of the evangelical/non-Catholic/Protestant/born-again/non-denominational rebellious egalitarian position?



APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY AND SUCCESSION

Knowing a bit about Peters wonderful personality and love for Jesus, I suspect that if he were driving a bus today, he would crash it threw the front door of the Vatican, pedal to the metal for what the RCC has done to the message and name of the one whom he died for. There is no salvation to found in Peter or Paul or John or any other but Jesus. We are all gifted the same.

Jesus goes into an extensive prayer in John 17 for the disciples which includes.

[sup]6 [/sup]“I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. [sup]7 [/sup]Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You. [sup]8 [/sup]For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me.
[sup]9 [/sup]“I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. [sup]10 [/sup]And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them. [sup]11 [/sup]Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me,[sup][b][/sup] that they may be one as We are. [sup]12 [/sup]While I was with them in the world,[sup][c][/sup] I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept;[sup][d][/sup] and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. [sup]13 [/sup]But now I come to You, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have My joy fulfilled in themselves. [sup]14 [/sup]I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. [sup]15 [/sup]I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. [sup]16 [/sup]They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. [sup]17 [/sup]Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth. [sup]18 [/sup]As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. [sup]19 [/sup]And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified by the truth.

But Jesus didn't stop with the Disciples being one with God, having Gods word, sanctified by truth he went on to include, "those who will believe in Me through their word; that they also may be one in Us,


[sup]20 [/sup]“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will[sup][e][/sup] believe in Me through their word; [sup]21 [/sup]that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. [sup]22 [/sup]And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: [sup]23 [/sup]I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.
[sup]24 [/sup]“Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. [sup]25 [/sup]O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me. [sup]26 [/sup]And I have declared to them Your name, and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”


Now put the red all together
We are all gifted the same."those who will believe in Me through their word; that they also may be one in Us, And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: [sup]23 [/sup]I in them, and You in Me;