Christians are not under the New Covenant

[theefaith]

Luke 2:30 - what has Simeon (to whom the Holy Spirit revealed that before he died he would see God's Messiah) saying to God while holding the baby Jesus, "for my eyes have seen your salvation", got to do with Mary? No reverence is given to the mothers of any of the Old Testament prophets and kings, so why should there be any difference for the mother of Jesus? Mary was favoured and blessed by God, and chosen to be Jesus' mother, but that doesn't mean we should revere her any more than we should revere Saul/Paul who was favoured and blessed by Jesus to become the most important Apostle and teacher of the Gospel. Besides, the verse says, "your salvation" (God's provision of salvation) not "our salvation" (okay, He is saving us!).

simeon says “I have seen my salvation”

Jesus Christ is our salvation and Mary is his mother so she is the mother of our salvation!


Actually Luke 1:30 says that Mary had found favour with God, not salvation.

the favor she found is our savior our salvation lost by adam

No, Mary consented to God's word to her to be done, i.e. she consented, as a servant of God, to God doing to her what He had said He would do (so God cannot be accused of rape!):

(38) Mary said, “Behold, the servant of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word.”​

She did not consent to "our salvation"! Salvation was not mentioned by the Angel Gabriel to Mary.

Really! It is the annunciation of our salvation!

Vs 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.

Jesus means salvation

 

[keithr]

Really! It is the annunciation of our salvation!

Vs 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.

Jesus means salvation

Jesus means "YHVH is salvation" (Online Bible Hebrew Lexicon) or "YHVH saved" (Strong's Hebrew Lexicon). The Hebrew name Yëhowshuwa‘ (or Jehoshua) comes from words YHVH and yasha', which means 'save', 'saviour' or 'deliverer'. So it could also mean 'YHVH saves' or 'YHVH is saviour'.

Naming the Messiah Jesus is not announcing our salvation. It's the same name as Joshua from the Old Testament, and Joshua being named Joshua did not announce our salvation either!

 

[theefaith]

Jesus means "YHVH is salvation" (Online Bible Hebrew Lexicon) or "YHVH saved" (Strong's Hebrew Lexicon). The Hebrew name Yëhowshuwa‘ (or Jehoshua) comes from words YHVH and yasha', which means 'save', 'saviour' or 'deliverer'. So it could also mean 'YHVH saves' or 'YHVH is saviour'.

Naming the Messiah Jesus is not announcing our salvation. It's the same name as Joshua from the Old Testament, and Joshua being named Joshua did not announce our salvation either!

matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Jesus means salvation
Lk 2:30 Jesus is salvation
Mary is the mother of our savior and salvation

 

[Moriah's Song]

Here are a few excerpts from the book "The Glories of Mary" written by St. Alphonsus Liguori. All quotations are taken from the chapter entitled "Mary Our Mediatrix."

One of my favorite books, written by a Saint and doctor of the church!

Mary, the most faithful mediatrix of salvation.
She has been made the ladder to paradise, the gate to heaven, the most true mediatrix between God and human beings.
No creature has since received any grace from God except through the hands of Mary.
Are we then going to scruple to ask her to save us when (as St. Germanus says) no one is saved except through her?
Moreover, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 969, affirms that Mary is a mediatrix:

Lk 1:30

Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.

The mother has a the right to all her child’s possessions, Mary is the mother of our salvation Lk 2:30 Jesus is our salvation Mary is his mother and mother of our salvation

Esther is a type of Mary who saved her people

All graces and salvation came thru Mary

I would suggest you have a book burning party asap! If the book "The Glories of Mary" is your favorite book then I can understand just how indoctrinated a person can be in the Catholic church. For now, due to length, I will focus only on the false notion of the Roman Catholic's doctrine of praying to Mary...

Who did Jesus tell us to pray to:
Jesus taught his disciples to pray to the Father in his name: “Pray then like this: Our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Prayer to the Father, it must be acknowledged, is where the weight of emphasis falls in the New Testament revelation.

“But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God” (Gal. 4:4-7). Abba, a word Jesus himself used in his own prayer life (Mark 14:36), is intimate but reverent.​

Stephen prayed to Jesus:
Think of the first Christian martyr, Stephen. In Acts 7, while being stoned to death, he sees the risen Christ standing at the right of the Father in the stance of an advocate (v. 55). Others-centered to the end, Stephen asks his Lord to forgive those killing him (v. 60): “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” The parallels between the way Stephen dies and Jesus himself are not be missed (e.g., compare Acts 7:60 and Luke 23:34).

There are at least two sound reasons to pray to Jesus. One theological and one scriptural. The theological reason is that prayer is talking to God. The scriptural reason is that there are biblical precedents for praying to Jesus. The responsible Bible reader listens to the Scriptures talk to us in its own terms as its storyline unfolds from Genesis to Revelation.

If Jesus is, as the Scriptures present him, the one person who is truly God and truly human—-the second person of the Trinity now incarnate, then how could praying to this Jesus be wrong in principle?

Paul speaks of the Corinthian church that prays to Jesus:
There is further evidence provided in 1 Corinthians, where Paul describes Christians as those who call on the Lord’s name: “To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours” (1 Cor. 1:2). Jesus is explicitly in view here. Indeed, the letter concludes with an appeal to Jesus: “Our Lord, come (maranatha)!” (1 Cor. 16:22)

Paul and the Ephesian church:
“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father” (Eph. 3:14). Paul was mindful, though, that prayer was through the Son and with the enablement of the Holy Spirit: “For through him [Jesus] we both [Jew and Gentile believers] have access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2:18).

What about the apostle John?
The book of Revelation ends on this same note: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev. 22:20)

Praying to Jesus as our High Priest -
The writer to the Hebrews adds to this picture in depicting Jesus as our great high priest who is sitting over the household of God representing us to God and God to us. It is to Jesus in this office or role that we can go to find help, and prayer is the means by which we can so approach him: “Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25).

Jesus as Mediator:
Jesus is the one mediator between God and ourselves. He’s the go-between in God’s plan. Paul captures this idea well in his first letter to Timothy: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time” (1 Tim. 2:5-6).

The Trinity and prayer:
Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Christian as a child of God is caught up in the communion of the Son with the Father. Jesus stands at the center as the mediator, the Father as the addressee, and the Spirit as the enabler. Prayer is to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit.

Yet there are no prayers addressed to the Holy Spirit in the Bible. (John 14-16). The Holy Spirit’s role is to give us such an affection for the Father and the Son that we’re motivated to approach the Godhead in this way. Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Christian as a child of God is caught up in the communion of the Son with the Father.

Lastly, there is not one hint in the Gospels, the Epistles, nor Revelation that praying to Mary is suggested or implied.

The apostle John was the last living member of the early church to die around 100 A.D. Common sense would tell us that Mary had died sometime approximately around 65 A.D if she were 20 years old when she gave birth. Therefore, the apostle John would surely have written in his Epistles that we should be praying to Mary. Yet, there is not even a mention of Mary after Pentecost. Both Mary and Joseph were "silently" omitted from scripture after their roles in the life and ministry of Jesus was finished because Jesus, the church and the spread of the gospels took center stage from then on and that is the way it should be.

Mary was the most blessed among all women - but she herself said she needed a Savior. Only sinners need a Savior.

Luk 1:46-47...And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

 

[theefaith]

I would suggest you have a book burning party asap! If the book "The Glories of Mary" is your favorite book then I can understand just how indoctrinated a person can be in the Catholic church. For now, due to length, I will focus only on the false notion of the Roman Catholic's doctrine of praying to Mary...

Who did Jesus tell us to pray to:
Jesus taught his disciples to pray to the Father in his name: “Pray then like this: Our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Prayer to the Father, it must be acknowledged, is where the weight of emphasis falls in the New Testament revelation.

“But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God” (Gal. 4:4-7). Abba, a word Jesus himself used in his own prayer life (Mark 14:36), is intimate but reverent.​

Stephen prayed to Jesus:
Think of the first Christian martyr, Stephen. In Acts 7, while being stoned to death, he sees the risen Christ standing at the right of the Father in the stance of an advocate (v. 55). Others-centered to the end, Stephen asks his Lord to forgive those killing him (v. 60): “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” The parallels between the way Stephen dies and Jesus himself are not be missed (e.g., compare Acts 7:60 and Luke 23:34).

There are at least two sound reasons to pray to Jesus. One theological and one scriptural. The theological reason is that prayer is talking to God. The scriptural reason is that there are biblical precedents for praying to Jesus. The responsible Bible reader listens to the Scriptures talk to us in its own terms as its storyline unfolds from Genesis to Revelation.

If Jesus is, as the Scriptures present him, the one person who is truly God and truly human—-the second person of the Trinity now incarnate, then how could praying to this Jesus be wrong in principle?

Paul speaks of the Corinthian church that prays to Jesus:
There is further evidence provided in 1 Corinthians, where Paul describes Christians as those who call on the Lord’s name: “To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours” (1 Cor. 1:2). Jesus is explicitly in view here. Indeed, the letter concludes with an appeal to Jesus: “Our Lord, come (maranatha)!” (1 Cor. 16:22)

Paul and the Ephesian church:
“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father” (Eph. 3:14). Paul was mindful, though, that prayer was through the Son and with the enablement of the Holy Spirit: “For through him [Jesus] we both [Jew and Gentile believers] have access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2:18).

What about the apostle John?
The book of Revelation ends on this same note: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev. 22:20)

Praying to Jesus as our High Priest -
The writer to the Hebrews adds to this picture in depicting Jesus as our great high priest who is sitting over the household of God representing us to God and God to us. It is to Jesus in this office or role that we can go to find help, and prayer is the means by which we can so approach him: “Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25).

Jesus as Mediator:
Jesus is the one mediator between God and ourselves. He’s the go-between in God’s plan. Paul captures this idea well in his first letter to Timothy: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time” (1 Tim. 2:5-6).

The Trinity and prayer:
Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Christian as a child of God is caught up in the communion of the Son with the Father. Jesus stands at the center as the mediator, the Father as the addressee, and the Spirit as the enabler. Prayer is to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit.

Yet there are no prayers addressed to the Holy Spirit in the Bible. (John 14-16). The Holy Spirit’s role is to give us such an affection for the Father and the Son that we’re motivated to approach the Godhead in this way. Through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Christian as a child of God is caught up in the communion of the Son with the Father.

Lastly, there is not one hint in the Gospels, the Epistles, nor Revelation that praying to Mary is suggested or implied.

The apostle John was the last living member of the early church to die around 100 A.D. Common sense would tell us that Mary had died sometime approximately around 65 A.D if she were 20 years old when she gave birth. Therefore, the apostle John would surely have written in his Epistles that we should be praying to Mary. Yet, there is not even a mention of Mary after Pentecost. Both Mary and Joseph were "silently" omitted from scripture after their roles in the life and ministry of Jesus was finished because Jesus, the church and the spread of the gospels took center stage from then on and that is the way it should be.

Mary was the most blessed among all women - but she herself said she needed a Savior. Only sinners need a Savior.

Luk 1:46-47...And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

not true
To be preserved is to be saved
For example Jesus Christ not only forgave you’re sins he preserves youre from sin

Mary was preserved

Jn 2
Christ worked the miracles before his time only cos his mother asked
Anyone else and he could not have done do
On becoming man He was subject to his own commandments
Honor Thy father and mother
And thru her prayers and intercession the disciples believed!!!
Glory to God!
For all praise of Mary ends in God whose mighty deeds made her holy immaculate mother of God Lk 1:43 Lk 1:49

All generations call me blessed! Lk 1:
Thanksgiving in praise of Mary for bearing our savior! Matt 1:23 And finding our salvation! Lk 1:30

 

[Moriah's Song]

Rejection of the one true church or its teaching is rejection of Christ and God!

Eph 5:29-32..."For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
32. Rather, "This mystery is a great one." This profound truth, beyond man's power of discovering, but now revealed, namely, of the spiritual union of Christ and the Church, represented by the marriage union, is a great one, of deep import. (v.30) So "mystery" is used of a divine truth not to be discovered except by revelation of God.

Despite the blunder having been long ago exposed by their own commentators, Cajetan and Estius, the Vulgate wrongly translates, "This is a great sacrament," which is made the plea by the Romish Church for making marriage a sacrament; it is plain not marriage in general, but that of Christ and the Church, is what is pronounced to be a "great mystery," as the words following prove, "I say it in regard to Christ and to the Church".

Yes, Christ and the church are one, but that does not mean that just because the Roman Catholic church calls itself to be the "one true church" that it really has been all along or is now the only "one true church" and all others are not!

Historically, however, the Roman Catholic Church began in the fourth century during the reign of Emperor Constantine. The Pope didn't begin to identify himself with that title until Siricius, the bishop of Rome, did in the fourth century. Also, we don't know historically that Peter was ever in Rome and there is nothing to indicate he ever claimed authority over other apostles.​

Tradition says that Peter died in A.D. 64-68 during Nero’s persecution of the Christians. He was crucified upside down on a cross. The beloved John was in exile on the Isle of Patmos before he was released and went to Ephesus where he died (A.D. 100-105). Now, since both Peter and John wrote their Epistles before they died as martyrs, how is it that they never designated any of the apostles as "head of the RCC" before then?

In the OT, you will find the word "elders" (or leaders) of each one of the 12 tribes. Those leaders were in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost and were later spread out into the regions of the Middle East to spread the gospel. They became the "elders" of the churches that were established by them.

In Acts and in the New Testament epistles, the church and its establishment is described. There is no mention of priests (except in reference to all believers), cardinals, or popes. Mary is not deified or prayed to, and saints are not venerated. We have no biblical evidence of infant baptism. The theology of the Lord's Supper being literally transformed into the body and blood of Jesus is not rooted in the Bible. Therefore, the Catholic Church should never be considered "the mother church."

There may be a remnant of true Christians within the RCC but the majority of the doctrines are, for the most part - heretical.

 

[keithr]

matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.

This is the Angel Of God speaking to Joseph (not Mary), saying that the boy's father is God (the Holy Spirit - verse 20) and that the boy should be called Jesus (that is, 'YHVH is the Saviour'), and that Jesus would save God's people (Israel) from their sins (not save them from the Roman or Herodian rule).

Mary is the mother of our savior and salvation

Mary was the mother of Jesus, our saviour, but she is not the "mother of salvation". God, YHVH, is our Saviour, and He saves us through His son Jesus, who He anointed to be our king and high priest. Mary's only role was to give birth to Jesus and be his mother until he began his ministry. Jesus existed before the world was created; Mary was just the mother of his human body.

 

[GodsGrace]

The true church, so to speak, began in Acts 2 at Pentecost and ever since then Acts 2.41-42 activities have been the real norm.

Hi Farouk,
I agree, somewhat, not fully.

Because: What were the activities in Acts 2:41-42?
Is that all there is to Christianity?
What about Church Service/Mass?

Acts 2:41-42
41So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.
42They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.


IOW, what were the teachings of the Apostles?
Do those that came right after the Apostles have any say in our Christianity since they were taught directly by the Apostles?

 

[Moriah's Song]

Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!

Traditional times of deaths of at least three apostles that could have been appointed "pope" after Peter was crucified if there was such a thing as "true apostolic succession."

Peter
Tradition says that Peter died in A.D. 64-68 during Nero’s persecution of the Christians. He was crucified upside down on a cross.

Thomas Didymus -
Ancient tradition says that Thomas died near Madras, India in A.D. 70. He was killed with a spear.

Philip
Philip died in Hieropolis, Turkey by hanging (A.D. 80).

John
Disciple whom Jesus loved (John 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20) The beloved John was in exile on the Isle of Patmos before he was released and went to Ephesus where he died (A.D. 100-105).

********************************************************************************​

A closer look:
The Roman Catholic Church claims that Saint Linus, of Tuscany, Italy was the first pope after Peter. However, that can't be true because Peter was, by tradition, alive until 64-68 and Peter was in Jerusalem most of the time - not in Rome.

From a very interesting article about Peter never being in Rome:

[The great historian, Schaff, states that the idea of Peter being in Rome is irreconcilable with the silence of the Scriptures, and even with the mere fact of Paul’s epistle to the Romans. In the year 58, Paul wrote his epistle to the Roman church, but does not mention Peter, although he does name 28 leaders in the church at Rome (Rom. 16:7). It must, therefore, be concluded that if the whole subject is faced with detached objectivity, the conclusion must inevitably be reached that Peter was never in Rome. Paul lived and wrote in Rome, but he declared that "Only Luke is with me." [1 Tim. 4:11]​

Yet if Saint Linus, of Rome, Italy was the successor of Peter, how is it that the apostle John was not "appointed as Pope" since John was the last know apostle to die and he lived longer than "Saint Linus"? If there was supposedly "apostolic succession" John should have been appointed pope of which there is zero proof of any of the apostles being given the title of "pope" anyway!

1st pope according to the Roman Catholic church:

Saint Linus, (born, Tuscany?—died AD 76/79; feast day September 23), pope from about 67 to 76 or 79, who may have been the immediate successor to St. Peter. St. Irenaeus identifies him with the Linus in 2 Timothy 4:21 and writes that “the blessed Apostles passed on the sacred ministry of the episcopacy to Linus.” Although his martyrdom is doubtful, he is among the martyrs named in the canon of the mass.​

Lastly, the apostles were known as "elders" as well as those in the surrounding areas of the Middle East that started "churches" in their homes.

The papacy based on Matt 16:18 and Isa 22:21-22

The papacy is a farce. We do not need the "traditions" of the Roman Catholic church for our salvation!

For me and my house....

Jhn 14..."And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, He is the Holy Spirit, who leads into all truth. The world cannot receive him, because it isn’t looking for him and doesn’t recognize him. But you know him, because he lives with you now and later will be in you. No, I will not abandon you as orphans—I will come to you." said Jesus!

 

[Moriah's Song]

matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.

The truth is right there in black and white theefaith....
the verse makes it very clear to me where it says...."for HE shall save his people from their sins." It does NOT say "Mary shall save his people from their sins!!!"

Jesus means salvation
Lk 2:30 Jesus is salvation

If you only believed those words...

Mary is the mother of our savior and salvation

And then you proceeded to ignore the truth instead.
Mary gave birth to our Savior but that does NOT make her the mother of our salvation - Jesus is our only means of salvation!

 

[theefaith]

MSong so you think Constantine created the Roman Catholic Church when he called the council of nicea?

 

[Moriah's Song]

MSong so you think Constantine created the Roman Catholic Church when he called the council of nicea?

709 - Kissing of the pope's foot began with Pope Constantine. (Note: It had been a pagan custom to kiss the feet of emperors. The Word of God forbids such practices. (Acts 10:25,26; Rev. 19:10; 22:9)
750 - The temporal power of the popes began. (Note: When Pepin, the usurper of the throne of France, descended into Italy, called by Pope Stephen II, to war against the Italian Lombards, he defeated them and gave the city of Rome and surrounding territory to the pope. Jesus expressly forbade such a thing, and He Himself refused worldly kingship. (Matt. 4:8,9; 20:25,26; John. 18:38)
788 - Worship of the cross, of images and relics was authorized. (Note: This was by order of Dowager Empress Irene of Constantinople, who first caused the eyes of her own son, Constantine VI, to be plucked out, and then called a church council at the request of Hadrian I, pope of Rome at that time. IDOLATRY in the Bible, and is severely condemned. (Exod. 20:4; Deut. 27:15; Psalm 115)

Perhaps you should look up the "History of the Roman Catholic Popes and the RCC."

 

[theefaith]

The truth is right there in black and white theefaith....
the verse makes it very clear to me where it says...."for HE shall save his people from their sins." It does NOT say "Mary shall save his people from their sins!!!"

If you only believed those words...
And then you proceeded to ignore the truth instead.
Mary gave birth to our Savior but that does NOT make her the mother of our salvation - Jesus is our only means of salvation!

Yes Jesus is the savior but Mary is his mother

Mary is the field

Matt 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.


Lk 1:28 the Lord is with thee!

 

[Moriah's Song]

Mary is the field....Lk 1:28 the Lord is with thee!

Why do you think those verses in the Bible means what you want them to?

Matt 13:44 does not even begin to imply what you want them to say any more than Luke 1:28 does.

If it is not in the Bible, it is heresy.

 

[theefaith]

709 - Kissing of the pope's foot began with Pope Constantine. (Note: It had been a pagan custom to kiss the feet of emperors. The Word of God forbids such practices. (Acts 10:25,26; Rev. 19:10; 22:9)
750 - The temporal power of the popes began. (Note: When Pepin, the usurper of the throne of France, descended into Italy, called by Pope Stephen II, to war against the Italian Lombards, he defeated them and gave the city of Rome and surrounding territory to the pope. Jesus expressly forbade such a thing, and He Himself refused worldly kingship. (Matt. 4:8,9; 20:25,26; John. 18:38)
788 - Worship of the cross, of images and relics was authorized. (Note: This was by order of Dowager Empress Irene of Constantinople, who first caused the eyes of her own son, Constantine VI, to be plucked out, and then called a church council at the request of Hadrian I, pope of Rome at that time. IDOLATRY in the Bible, and is severely condemned. (Exod. 20:4; Deut. 27:15; Psalm 115)

Perhaps you should look up the "History of the Roman Catholic Popes and the RCC."

a simple yes or no would suffice

 

[Moriah's Song]

a simple yes or no would suffice

My answer remains. You don't believe what we tell you, therefore if you search out the origin of the RCC and when the papacy began for yourself you might begin to understand that we are not the ones that are making things up about the CC.

 

[Moriah's Song]

Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!

From the catholic website:Who was the first pope of the catholic church

1. Does the Pope have a child?

Popes who were legally married​

Name Reign(s) Offspring
Adrian II (867–872) Yes (a daughter)
John XVII ( 1003 ) Yes ( three sons)
Clement IV (1265–1268) Yes ( two daughters)
Honorius IV ( 1285 – 1287 ) Yes (at least two sons)​

2. Why is there no pope named Peter?
Whose name has been “retired.” St. Peter was the first pope and there hasn’t been a Pope Peter since. He has “a unique and sacrosanct standing as a pope ,” as Popes and the Tale of Their Names puts it, and his followers have not wished to look as if they’re comparing themselves to him.

(Note: Peter was never a pope. Most theologians agree that Peter never even went to Rome.)
​

3. Was Peter the first Pope of the Catholic Church?
Roman Catholic tradition holds that Jesus established St. Peter as the first pope (Matthew 16:18). After Jesus’ death, he served as the head of the Apostles and was the first to perform a miracle after Pentecost (Acts 3:1–11).

(Note: not true.)

*****************************************************
​

The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the first pope upon whom God had chosen to build His church (Matthew 16:18). It holds that he had authority (primacy) over the other apostles. The Roman Catholic Church maintains that sometime after the recorded events of the book of Acts, the Apostle Peter became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishop was accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. It teaches that God passed Peter’s apostolic authority to those who later filled his seat as bishop of Rome. This teaching that God passed on Peter’s apostolic authority to the subsequent bishops is referred to as “apostolic succession.”

The Roman Catholic Church also holds that Peter and the subsequent popes were and are infallible when addressing issues “ex cathedra,” from their position and authority as pope. It teaches that this infallibility gives the pope the ability to guide the church without error. The Roman Catholic Church claims that it can trace an unbroken line of popes back to St. Peter, citing this as evidence that it is the true church, since, according to their interpretation of Matthew 16:18, Christ built His church upon Peter.

But while Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church (having primacy). See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Nor is it ever taught in Scripture that the bishop of Rome, or any other bishop, was to have primacy over the church. Scripture does not even explicitly record Peter ever being in Rome. Rather there is only one reference in Scripture of Peter writing from “Babylon,” a name sometimes applied to Rome (1 Peter 5:13). Primarily upon this and the historical rise of the influence of the Bishop of Rome come the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching of the primacy of the bishop of Rome. However, Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20), and the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11).

Also, nowhere does Scripture state that, in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the idea behind apostolic succession). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22). Paul does NOT call on believers in various churches to receive Titus, Timothy, and other church leaders based on their authority as bishops or their having apostolic authority, but rather based upon their being fellow laborers with him (1 Corinthians 16:10; 16:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23).

What Scripture DOES teach is that false teachings would arise even from among church leaders, and that Christians were to compare the teachings of these later church leaders with Scripture, which alone is infallible (Matthew 5:18; Psalm 19:7-8; 119:160; Proverbs 30:5; John 17:17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). The Bible does not teach that the apostles were infallible, apart from what was written by them and incorporated into Scripture. Paul, in talking to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus, makes note of coming false teachers. To fight against their error does NOT commend them to “the apostles and those who would carry on their authority”; rather, Paul commends them to “God and to the word of His grace” (Acts 20:28-32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17), not apostolic successors. It is by examining the Scriptures that teachings are shown to be true or false (Acts 17:10-12).

Was Peter the first pope? The answer, according to Scripture, is a clear and emphatic “no.” Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles. Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church. Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors. Yes, the Apostle Peter had a leadership role among the disciples. Yes, Peter played a crucial role in the early spread of the gospel (Acts chapters 1-10). Yes, Peter was the “rock” that Christ predicted he would be (Matthew 16:18). However, these truths about Peter in no way give support to the concept that Peter was the first pope, or that he was the “supreme leader” over the apostles, or that his authority would be passed on to the bishops of Rome. Peter himself points us all to the true Shepherd and Overseer of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:25).

Was Saint Peter the first pope? | GotQuestions.org

 

[theefaith]

Why do you think those verses in the Bible means what you want them to?

Matt 13:44 does not even begin to imply what you want them to say any more than Luke 1:28 does.

If it is not in the Bible, it is heresy.

Scripture re-write
Jn 19 John my friend, please care for my mother.

Or to the disciple, therefore applies to all disciples; “behold Thy mother”!!!

Mary is our spiritual mother

Mary is the Mother of the living in Christ and the new creation!

Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

John 19:26-27
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith has he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

Jesus is not just asking John to care for His mother, if so He would have said so.

Jesus is in the very least making Mary John’s spiritual mother! And if the apostle John needs a spiritual mother so do we!
What is the family of God without a mother? The mother is the heart of the family! Jesus said I will not leave you orphans! Jn 14:18 He proved Mary the mother of one disciple then He does so for all disciples!

As eve was the mother of all the living in the first creation, gen 3:20 so Mary is the mother of all those who live in Christ and the new creation!

Rev 12:17 our spiritual mother!

Rachel is spiritual mother of Israel!
A type of Mary as spiritual mother of Christians!

The 12 sons of Jacob have 4 biological mothers, but Rachel is the spiritual mother of all Israel!

Matt 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are no more.

 

[theefaith]

My answer remains. You don't believe what we tell you, therefore if you search out the origin of the RCC and when the papacy began for yourself you might begin to understand that we are not the ones that are making things up about the CC.

mom trying to understand you
You think when Constantine called the 1st council of nicea that he created the CC???

 

[theefaith]

From the catholic website:Who was the first pope of the catholic church

1. Does the Pope have a child?

Popes who were legally married​

Name Reign(s) Offspring
Adrian II (867–872) Yes (a daughter)
John XVII ( 1003 ) Yes ( three sons)
Clement IV (1265–1268) Yes ( two daughters)
Honorius IV ( 1285 – 1287 ) Yes (at least two sons)​

2. Why is there no pope named Peter?
Whose name has been “retired.” St. Peter was the first pope and there hasn’t been a Pope Peter since. He has “a unique and sacrosanct standing as a pope ,” as Popes and the Tale of Their Names puts it, and his followers have not wished to look as if they’re comparing themselves to him.

(Note: Peter was never a pope. Most theologians agree that Peter never even went to Rome.)
​

3. Was Peter the first Pope of the Catholic Church?
Roman Catholic tradition holds that Jesus established St. Peter as the first pope (Matthew 16:18). After Jesus’ death, he served as the head of the Apostles and was the first to perform a miracle after Pentecost (Acts 3:1–11).

(Note: not true.)

*****************************************************
​

The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the first pope upon whom God had chosen to build His church (Matthew 16:18). It holds that he had authority (primacy) over the other apostles. The Roman Catholic Church maintains that sometime after the recorded events of the book of Acts, the Apostle Peter became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishop was accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. It teaches that God passed Peter’s apostolic authority to those who later filled his seat as bishop of Rome. This teaching that God passed on Peter’s apostolic authority to the subsequent bishops is referred to as “apostolic succession.”

The Roman Catholic Church also holds that Peter and the subsequent popes were and are infallible when addressing issues “ex cathedra,” from their position and authority as pope. It teaches that this infallibility gives the pope the ability to guide the church without error. The Roman Catholic Church claims that it can trace an unbroken line of popes back to St. Peter, citing this as evidence that it is the true church, since, according to their interpretation of Matthew 16:18, Christ built His church upon Peter.

But while Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church (having primacy). See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Nor is it ever taught in Scripture that the bishop of Rome, or any other bishop, was to have primacy over the church. Scripture does not even explicitly record Peter ever being in Rome. Rather there is only one reference in Scripture of Peter writing from “Babylon,” a name sometimes applied to Rome (1 Peter 5:13). Primarily upon this and the historical rise of the influence of the Bishop of Rome come the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching of the primacy of the bishop of Rome. However, Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20), and the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11).

Also, nowhere does Scripture state that, in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the idea behind apostolic succession). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22). Paul does NOT call on believers in various churches to receive Titus, Timothy, and other church leaders based on their authority as bishops or their having apostolic authority, but rather based upon their being fellow laborers with him (1 Corinthians 16:10; 16:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23).

What Scripture DOES teach is that false teachings would arise even from among church leaders, and that Christians were to compare the teachings of these later church leaders with Scripture, which alone is infallible (Matthew 5:18; Psalm 19:7-8; 119:160; Proverbs 30:5; John 17:17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). The Bible does not teach that the apostles were infallible, apart from what was written by them and incorporated into Scripture. Paul, in talking to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus, makes note of coming false teachers. To fight against their error does NOT commend them to “the apostles and those who would carry on their authority”; rather, Paul commends them to “God and to the word of His grace” (Acts 20:28-32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17), not apostolic successors. It is by examining the Scriptures that teachings are shown to be true or false (Acts 17:10-12).

Was Peter the first pope? The answer, according to Scripture, is a clear and emphatic “no.” Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles. Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church. Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors. Yes, the Apostle Peter had a leadership role among the disciples. Yes, Peter played a crucial role in the early spread of the gospel (Acts chapters 1-10). Yes, Peter was the “rock” that Christ predicted he would be (Matthew 16:18). However, these truths about Peter in no way give support to the concept that Peter was the first pope, or that he was the “supreme leader” over the apostles, or that his authority would be passed on to the bishops of Rome. Peter himself points us all to the true Shepherd and Overseer of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:25).

Was Saint Peter the first pope? | GotQuestions.org

I never claimed they were impeccable or infallible in their own persons
The church and Christ are one acts 9:4 eph 5:32
Christ is infallible, his church is infallible
Matt 18:17 Matt 28:19 Jn 16:13