Apostolic councils?

[DNB]

Earned?? No.
It was GRANTED by our Lord Jesus Christ . . .

Matt 16:16-19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Matt. 18:15-18
"If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.
If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.
Amen, I say to you, WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven, and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

John 16:12-15
“I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now.
But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to ALL truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to YOU the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will TAKE from what is MINE and declare it to YOU.
Everything that the Father has is MINE; for this reason I told you that he will TAKE from what is MINE and declare it to YOU.

John 20:21-23
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent ME, so I send YOU.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins YOU FORGIVE are forgiven them, and whose sins YOU RETAIN are retained.”

Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

You continuously argue in circles. On a theoretical basis, you are correct, but in practice you are absolutely light years away from the truth. How in the world do you Catholics fail to see the overt and indisputable corruption that has both infiltrated and permeated the catholic church, from its inception until now, respectively? You won't dare admit or even address the orgies, opulence, abuse, scandals and corruption, deceit, unbiblical tenets and dogma, illicit sex and pregnancies, paganism and gnosticism, etc that was so indicative of the catholic church - clearly displaying the break in apostolic tradition from an extremely early period.

You are in denial and deluded!

 

[BreadOfLife]

You continuously argue in circles. On a theoretical basis, you are correct, but in practice you are absolutely light years away from the truth. How in the world do you Catholics fail to see the overt and indisputable corruption that has both infiltrated and permeated the catholic church, from its inception until now, respectively? You won't dare admit or even address the orgies, opulence, abuse, scandals and corruption, deceit, unbiblical tenets and dogma, illicit sex and pregnancies, paganism and gnosticism, etc that was so indicative of the catholic church - clearly displaying the break in apostolic tradition from an extremely early period.

You are in denial and deluded!

The Church is NOT defined by it's worst sinners.
It NEVER HAS been. If that were the case - we would ALL be on the road to Hell.

Judas was a Devil - yet he was one of the Twelve that Jesus chose.
The Church is the Body of Christ (Col. 1:18) - DESPITE the sins of its members.

STUDY your Bible and have faith in Christ . . .

 

[DNB]

The Church is NOT defined by it's worst sinners.
It NEVER HAS been. If that were the case - we would ALL be on the road to Hell.

Judas was a Devil - yet he was one of the Twelve that Jesus chose.
The Church is the Body of Christ (Col. 1:18) - DESPITE the sins of its members.

STUDY your Bible and have faith in Christ . . .

My accusations were directed at your leaders, at the head chief of staff, the CEO, the numero uno, mr pontiff himself - and you know it!
Admit it, and be free from their vices. You owe no man or institution such an allegiance. No, you are wrong, it has not been handed down by Christ, the evidence is clear, that is my entire point. Show me an impeccable church (its leaders), and I will become as tenacious as you towards it. But neither of us can, I realize it, but you prefer idolatry.

 

[BreadOfLife]

My accusations were directed at your leaders, at the head chief of staff, the CEO, the numero uno, mr pontiff himself - and you know it!
Admit it, and be free from their vices. You owe no man or institution such an allegiance. No, you are wrong, it has not been handed down by Christ, the evidence is clear, that is my entire point. Show me an impeccable church (its leaders), and I will become as tenacious as you towards it. But neither of us can, I realize it, but you prefer idolatry.

As I educated you on another thread - EVERY Christian institution had bad people in it. It's been that was from the beginning when Jesus chose Judas. The Church has NEVER defined by it's worst sinners. If it was - YOU might be at the top of the list - who knows?

As for a bad Pope - God has led His people through a LOT worse than a bad leader - READ your Bible.
But that NEVER spelled the "end" for His people.

Your lack of faith is appalling . . .

 

[DNB]

As I educated you on another thread - EVERY Christian institution had bad people in it. It's been that was from the beginning when Jesus chose Judas. The Church has NEVER defined by it's worst sinners. If it was - YOU might be at the top of the list - who knows?

As for a bad Pope - God has led His people through a LOT worse than a bad leader - READ your Bible.
But that NEVER spelled the "end" for His people.

Your lack of faith is appalling . . .

..therefore, the tradition was broken if the pope was corrupt, he who had ascended to the pontificate due to apostolic succession.
How does it taste to have your foot in your mouth all the time?

 

[jaybird]

..therefore, the tradition was broken if the pope was corrupt, he who had ascended to the pontificate due to apostolic succession.
How does it taste to have your foot in your mouth all the time?

it doesnt seem to phase him.

 

[DNB]

it doesnt seem to phase him.

lol!

 

[Brakelite]

Apostolic being defined based on Biblical testimony, is divinely authoritative (council in Jerusalem, Acts 15). If you are referring to ecumenical councils, or councils convened after the Apostolic age (90ad), there is absolutely zero authority.

Well, there was authority after the Apostles, just depends on whether you want to recognise it.
KJV Revelation 13:2
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

 

[Brakelite]

you did not answer my question

Yes, he did.

 

[Brakelite]

The Gospel of Thomas?? You actually have the courage to publicly claim this as truth??

You would be laughed right out of ANY scholarly discourse - Catholic OR Protestant. It's a Gnostic pile of manure that is filled with error and contradiction - and being from the mid-to-late 2nd century, IMPOSSIBLE for Thomas to have written.

Dude - I know I said you were ignorant - but this takes you over the EDGE . . .

PS - If Peter WASN'T the leader . . .
a. Tell me WHY Jesus singled out Peter when He gave him the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 16:18-19) if did not put him in charge.

b. Tell me WHY Jesus asked Peter and Peter alone to feed His lambs and tend His sheep (John 21:15-19) if did not put him in charge.

c. Tell me WHY Jesus said that He prayed for Peter ALONE to strengthen the others and bring them back to faith (Luke 22:31-32) if did not put him in charge.

d. Tell me WHY Peter called "Protos" (First) in the Gospel (Matt. 10:2) if he was not in charge??

e. Tell me WHY Peter's name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Matt. 10:2; Mk 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13) if he was not in charge??

f. Tell me WHY Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mark 16:7) if he was not in charge??

g. Tell me WHY Peter takes the lead in calling for a successor for Judas (Acts 1:22) if He was not in charge??

h. Tell me WHY Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, making him the first Christian to preach the Gospel in the Church (Acts 2:14-36) if he was not in charge??

i. Tell me WHY Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12) if he was not in charge??

j. Tell me WHY Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11) if He was not in charge??

k. Tell me WHY Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40) if he was not in charge??

l. Tell me WHY Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6) if he was not in charge??

m. Tell me WHY Peter's name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together if He was not in charge??

His name is mentioned 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon and 6 as Cephas). John is the next with only 48 mentions, and Peter is present 50 percent of the time we find John in the Bible.

Good luck . . .

I remember a rugby team I played for in my younger years. There was one player on the team who got more mentions in after match discussions than any other player. He invariably played crucial roles in many scoring plays... But also was always in the mix when any misdemeanors and skirmishes arose. He was just like he Peter. Impulsive... Reactionary... Over confidant. He was also big and burly and hard to pull down. He needed encouragement though often because he was so prone to mistakes. He needed lots of guidance because f he wasn't a thinker, just a brawler. Yet he scored points. So he was spoken to, and spoken about, frequently. And he was the first name chosen when at training we picked sides for practice. But none of those criteria added up to him being captain.

 

[Marymog]

so how did the bible go from scripture in many language to scripture in one language, who decided this?

Ummmm......it didn't go from many languages to one language. I don't understand what you are saying.....

 

[Marymog]

..therefore, the tradition was broken if the pope was corrupt, he who had ascended to the pontificate due to apostolic succession.
How does it taste to have your foot in your mouth all the time?

Oh goodness DNB,

You are a very interesting person.

What you wrote makes no sense. If the person that is picked to lead The Church is corrupt then that means tradition is broken???? Have you ever read Scripture? It is rife with corrupt men who were chosen by God!! Read their stories kiddo and you will see how uneducated you statement is.

You are what Christianity calls a "church of one". You believe you, set your own doctrine/dogma, tell everyone else when they are wrong or right in their doctrine/beliefs because you know the truth. You are a lone ranger Christian. You are the person that leads your church. It's all about you.

Soooooo when you become corrupt does your "church of one" end???

Keeping it real....Mary

 

[Brakelite]

Oh goodness DNB,

You are a very interesting person.

What you wrote makes no sense. If the person that is picked to lead The Church is corrupt then that means tradition is broken???? Have you ever read Scripture? It is rife with corrupt men who were chosen by God!! Read their stories kiddo and you will see how uneducated you statement is.

You are what Christianity calls a "church of one". You believe you, set your own doctrine/dogma, tell everyone else when they are wrong or right in their doctrine/beliefs because you know the truth. You are a lone ranger Christian. You are the person that leads your church. It's all about you.

Soooooo when you become corrupt does your "church of one" end???

Keeping it real....Mary

True. It wasn't when the pope became corrupt. The church fell away altogether over a long period of time. Not just with one bad pope. But it began to go downhill the moment the bishops of Rome lusted after political power. The cessation of pagan Roman persecution before Constantine came along was costly for the church. Constantine's false conversion and the declaration of a state religion made things worse. Then when Constantine presided over church councils and began deciding church doctrine (like the nature of the Godhead for example in the matter of 'Arianism') the slippery slope downward became steeper.
After that total apostasy was inevitable as Justinian would put the lid on the coffin of integrity when he pronounced that the bishop of Rome was the civil as well as religious head over the church and state. The church in Rome of course lapped that up, and so began the Catholic persecution against those Christians who saw through the artifice and recognized the dangers and would have nothing to do with the new religion now being promulgated and enforced by rule of law and sword. Rather than defeating paganism, the church had emraced it and baptized it giving it new names.
The church committed spiritual adultery with the kings of the earth, seeking their favour and support and abandoning the blessing and support that came from God alone as in the apostolic age.
The problem the Pope had at the time of Justinian's decree was that Rome was being ruled by the Ostrogoths. It was the Ostrogoths who appointed the bishop...much to the chagrin of the church, seeing the Ostrogoths were Arian. So the church appealed to Constantinople. And Justinian obliged, and in 538AD Bellisarius entered Rome and turfed out the Arian "heretics" and the church began its medieval descent into perfidy and the dark ages began. Thus began the "papacy". Truth was lost and trampled underfoot, just as the scriptures had foretold in Daniel. And as the true heavenly sanctuary was trampled upon and the High Priest there blasphemed and replaced by a counterfeit in Rome, so the people of Europe were left in darkness and ignorance. Religious wars and persecutions, papal scandals and court vice and simony became commonplace and so ensued a long sad bloody history of Europe for 1260 years...42 "months' and times, time and half a time....when in 1798 General Berthier of the Napoleonic Republican army entered Rome as a deliverer of oppression and took the ailing pope captive declaring the papal states a republic and disbanding the college of cardinals. The union of the adulterous church and state was finished. Exactly as scriptures had foretold...1260 years duration. However...the little horn, although beaten, was not defeated entirely. The mortal wound would and has since healed.
Today the Pope has his civil credentials returned. And the book of Revelation declares that the time is soon coming when the whore will once again ride the state beast, only on a global scale enforcing her religious dogma and traditions upon mankind to the detriment of truth and sound doctrine. And so we today witness the pope gaining prestige and momentum as he garners international support for his coming leadership role in the NWO.
Such was apostolic succession.

 

[jaybird]

Ummmm......it didn't go from many languages to one language. I don't understand what you are saying.....

Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Geez, Syriac, im sure if i searched i could find more, but thats many different languages, then rome took over the faith and made all the bibles available in Latin, the language of the very few. why did they do that? BOD said they even put chains on the bibles. did Jesus and the 12 ever put scriptures under lock and chain?

 

[DNB]

Well, there was authority after the Apostles, just depends on whether you want to recognise it.
KJV Revelation 13:2
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Indubitably!

 

[DNB]

Oh goodness DNB,

You are a very interesting person.

What you wrote makes no sense. If the person that is picked to lead The Church is corrupt then that means tradition is broken???? Have you ever read Scripture? It is rife with corrupt men who were chosen by God!! Read their stories kiddo and you will see how uneducated you statement is.

You are what Christianity calls a "church of one". You believe you, set your own doctrine/dogma, tell everyone else when they are wrong or right in their doctrine/beliefs because you know the truth. You are a lone ranger Christian. You are the person that leads your church. It's all about you.

Soooooo when you become corrupt does your "church of one" end???

Keeping it real....Mary

Nope, those fallible men in the Bible were not corrupt in their office as messengers from God. Never from 'ex-cathedra' (inspired by the Spirit) did they promulgate a false doctrine - like all your forefathers (papacy) did.
Your leaders are those derived from apostolic succession, that is the point, and the pronouncement from the Catholics. But, because we can tell a charlatan by their works, we deem the legacy of the pontificate as corrupt and out-of-line of apostolic succession.
It's not that difficult Mary, it's called 'the proof is in the pudding'.

 

[jaybird]

True. It wasn't when the pope became corrupt. The church fell away altogether over a long period of time. Not just with one bad pope. But it began to go downhill the moment the bishops of Rome lusted after political power. The cessation of pagan Roman persecution before Constantine came along was costly for the church. Constantine's false conversion and the declaration of a state religion made things worse. Then when Constantine presided over church councils and began deciding church doctrine (like the nature of the Godhead for example in the matter of 'Arianism') the slippery slope downward became steeper.
After that total apostasy was inevitable as Justinian would put the lid on the coffin of integrity when he pronounced that the bishop of Rome was the civil as well as religious head over the church and state. The church in Rome of course lapped that up, and so began the Catholic persecution against those Christians who saw through the artifice and recognized the dangers and would have nothing to do with the new religion now being promulgated and enforced by rule of law and sword. Rather than defeating paganism, the church had emraced it and baptized it giving it new names.
The church committed spiritual adultery with the kings of the earth, seeking their favour and support and abandoning the blessing and support that came from God alone as in the apostolic age.
The problem the Pope had at the time of Justinian's decree was that Rome was being ruled by the Ostrogoths. It was the Ostrogoths who appointed the bishop...much to the chagrin of the church, seeing the Ostrogoths were Arian. So the church appealed to Constantinople. And Justinian obliged, and in 538AD Bellisarius entered Rome and turfed out the Arian "heretics" and the church began its medieval descent into perfidy and the dark ages began. Thus began the "papacy". Truth was lost and trampled underfoot, just as the scriptures had foretold in Daniel. And as the true heavenly sanctuary was trampled upon and the High Priest there blasphemed and replaced by a counterfeit in Rome, so the people of Europe were left in darkness and ignorance. Religious wars and persecutions, papal scandals and court vice and simony became commonplace and so ensued a long sad bloody history of Europe for 1260 years...42 "months' and times, time and half a time....when in 1798 General Berthier of the Napoleonic Republican army entered Rome as a deliverer of oppression and took the ailing pope captive declaring the papal states a republic and disbanding the college of cardinals. The union of the adulterous church and state was finished. Exactly as scriptures had foretold...1260 years duration. However...the little horn, although beaten, was not defeated entirely. The mortal wound would and has since healed.
Today the Pope has his civil credentials returned. And the book of Revelation declares that the time is soon coming when the whore will once again ride the state beast, only on a global scale enforcing her religious dogma and traditions upon mankind to the detriment of truth and sound doctrine. And so we today witness the pope gaining prestige and momentum as he garners international support for his coming leadership role in the NWO.
Such was apostolic succession.

how big an influence did Constantine have on the faith?

 

[BreadOfLife]

..therefore, the tradition was broken if the pope was corrupt, he who had ascended to the pontificate due to apostolic succession.
How does it taste to have your foot in your mouth all the time?

WHY would the Tradition be "broken" because of a flawed sinful MAN?
We are ALL flawed, sinful people. So, going by YOUR logic - Christ can't even save us because of that.

What an anti-Biblical CROCK . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I remember a rugby team I played for in my younger years. There was one player on the team who got more mentions in after match discussions than any other player. He invariably played crucial roles in many scoring plays... But also was always in the mix when any misdemeanors and skirmishes arose. He was just like he Peter. Impulsive... Reactionary... Over confidant. He was also big and burly and hard to pull down. He needed encouragement though often because he was so prone to mistakes. He needed lots of guidance because f he wasn't a thinker, just a brawler. Yet he scored points. So he was spoken to, and spoken about, frequently. And he was the first name chosen when at training we picked sides for practice. But none of those criteria added up to him being captain.

That's an interesting story - and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with Peter's Primacy.
The Scripture verses I presented DO.

Nice story, though . . .

 

[DNB]

WHY would the Tradition be "broken" because of a flawed sinful MAN?
We are ALL flawed, sinful people. So, going by YOUR logic - Christ can't even save us because of that.

What an anti-Biblical CROCK . . .

Oh, for, crying out loud - it is because these flippin' ignominious men were the flippin' leaders, who determined tradition & doctrine, namely the flippin' papal bulls and councils, council of trent, vatican I & II. In other words, half of Catholic flippin' dogma was promulgated by these flippin' charlatans. Which part of corruption do you not understand - a little leaven, leaveneth the whole flippin' lump!