Upon THIS Rock I will build my Church

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
May I quote you on that? Oh, look, I've done it!
Tell you what – the next time you catch me telling a LIE on tis forum like I usually catch all of YOU anti-Catholics – let me have it. You haven't been able to do that yet because I don't lie on this forum.

And I will continue to point out the lies, myths and fairy tales that I see YOU guys post . . .
 

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,694
5,574
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Tell you what – the next time you catch me telling a LIE on tis forum like I usually catch all of YOU anti-Catholics – let me have it. You haven't been able to do that yet because I don't lie on this forum.

And I will continue to point out the lies, myths and fairy tales that I see YOU guys post . . .
Well...that didn't take any time at all!

To say that I am a "anti-Catholic" is a lie.

I have made it very clear that I am not anti-Catholic at all, and have even included Protestants together with Catholics in my comments many times. You are just so against anything anti-Catholic that you are blinded to any criticism of any kind.

Have you ever had a civil discussion here where you did not go on the defensive and start calling names? Shall I make it a poll? 'Cause the answer is, No, you have not. That's your M. O..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well...that didn't take any time at all!

To say that I am a "anti-Catholic" is a lie.

I have made it very clear that I am not anti-Catholic at all, and have even included Protestants together with Catholics in my comments many times. You are just so against anything anti-Catholic that you are blinded to any criticism of any kind.

Have you ever had a civil discussion here where you did not go on the defensive and start calling names? Shall I make it a poll? 'Cause the answer is, No, you have not. That's your M. O..

For what it is worth, I’ve never perceived you to be anticatholic, Scott.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScottA and Helen

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For what it is worth, I’ve never perceived you to be anticatholic, Scott.
Wrong.

Simply “disagreeing” with Catholic doctrines is not anti-Catholic. I have PLENTY of charitable conversations with Protestants just about every day who“disagree” with the Catholic Church.
It is when a non-Catholic feels the need to LIE and misrepresent what the Church teaches that makes them ANTI-Catholic. YOU have done this on numerous occasions – and the following from earlier in this thread is just a small example . . .

Epostle wrote:
“Where do you get this crazy idea we follow Peter? Do you "follow Peter" by reading 1st and 2nd Peter? How many recent declarations from the Chair of Peter are you even aware of??? Try picking on the encyclicals taught in the last 100 years, instead of the same boring rhetorical arguments from the 16th century that have been refuted a zillion times.”

YOU responded with:
“It doesn't matter whether you are Catholic or Protestant,having an intermediarybetween you and Jesus besides the Holy Spirit...is not biblical. There is no refuting it. "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus."”

This is a complete misrepresentation of what the Catholic Church teaches.
The Pope is not an “intermediary” who usurps the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the earthly head of Christ’s Church.
- Jesus singled-out Peter with the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.
- Jesus singled-out Peter to strengthen the others and bring them back after losing faith.
- Jesus singled-out other than Peter to Feed His Lambs and Tend His Sheep.
Peter and his successors are earthly Shepherds – not replacements for theHoly Spirit . . .
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
And I will continue to point out the lies, myths and fairy tales that I see YOU guys post . . .
The biggest fairy tale was making Peter "the first pope". That's where it all began. Even the Orthodox (the original Catholics) don't buy this nonsense.

"The term ‘Roman Catholic’ refers to the heresy formed around the person of the Pope of Rome (who broke away from the Orthodox Church in 1054 A.D.), which strives to subject the world to the incontrovertible doctrinal and decretal authority of this man, declared to be the “substitute [vicari] of the Son of God”, “Christ on earth”, etc. This is the fundamental and only truly unchanging doctrinal aspect of this sect and its essence; all other characteristics may be changed or ‘developed’ in new directions, of which history already records many examples..."

True Orthodox Polemics - Heretics - Roman Catholics
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The biggest fairy tale was making Peter "the first pope". That's where it all began. Even the Orthodox (the original Catholics) don't buy this nonsense.

"The term ‘Roman Catholic’ refers to the heresy formed around the person of the Pope of Rome (who broke away from the Orthodox Church in 1054 A.D.), which strives to subject the world to the incontrovertible doctrinal and decretal authority of this man, declared to be the “substitute [vicari] of the Son of God”, “Christ on earth”, etc. This is the fundamental and only truly unchanging doctrinal aspect of this sect and its essence; all other characteristics may be changed or ‘developed’ in new directions, of which history already records many examples..."

True Orthodox Polemics - Heretics - Roman Catholics
Gee – another anti-Catholic poster citing anti-Catholic sources to post historically-bankrupt, anti-Catholic drivel. Why am I NOT surprised??

Ummmmm, first of all - the Orthodox weren't the "original Catholics".
They WERE, however, part of the Catholic Church until they split.

For your information, sparky - the term “Roman Catholic” has its roots – NOT in the East-West split of the 11th century – but in the English rebellion of the 16th century. This term was used by Henry VIII’s followers to differentiate his “Catholic Church of England” from the“Catholic Church of Rome”.

You need to get your history straight if you’re going to try to be a “good” little anti-Catholic . . .
 
Last edited:
B

brakelite

Guest
They were considered rabble-rousers and enemies of the state.
yes, they had to be didn't they. Otherwise there was no evidence rhyme nor reason to kill them. They certainly couldn't be killed because they conciensously worshipped in a way that differed from the established apostasy.

The plain fact is that heresy was bad for the general peace.
I think the destruction of heretics was bad for the general peace.
The subjects existed at the pleasure of the King
I could quote the popes who thought everyone existed for his pleasure.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
yes, they had to be didn't they. Otherwise there was no evidence rhyme nor reason to kill them. They certainly couldn't be killed because they conciensously worshipped in a way that differed from the established apostasy.
However you want to pervert it – they were maters of state – and NOT Church.
I think the destruction of heretics was bad for the general peace.
And AGAIN – this is coming from an historically-bankrupt person.

Whether a person was executed or not had to do with the authority of a kingdom in a time when there was not only no freedom of religion or the press – there was NO press to speak of.
I could quote the popes who thought everyone existed for his pleasure.
Then please DO that . . .
 

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,694
5,574
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gee – another anti-Catholic poster citing anti-Catholic sources to post historically-bankrupt, anti-Catholic drivel. Why am I NOT surprised??

Ummmmm, first of all - the Orthodox weren't the "original Catholics".
They WERE, however, part of the Catholic Church until they split.

For your information, sparky - the term “Roman Catholic” has its roots – NOT in the East-West split of the 11th century – but in the English rebellion of the 16th century. This term was used by Henry VIII’s followers to differentiate his “Catholic Church of England” from the“Catholic Church of Rome”.

You need to get your history straight if you’re going to try to be a “good” little anti-Catholic . . .
I see the confusion has caused you to reply to Aspen with a comment directed at me, and I will get back to that, but wanted to comment here first:

The "history" that you refer to above is not His story, but the story of men. Which has been the problem with the church from the start.

In spite of man's inability to fulfill the desires and commands of the Lord in building His church...He has done so anyway. It's just that it is not recorded in man's worldly church history. So, your argument about the accuracy of historical events is of absolutely no value - "the flesh profits nothing."

And if you will notice (if I might persist to be so kind), I did not name the Catholics, the Popes, the Protestants, or the Bishops, but simply the church. I wonder if you yourself can limit yourself in the same manner without prejudice that we might finally have a civil conversation? Can you do that?
 
Last edited:

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,694
5,574
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wrong.

Simply “disagreeing” with Catholic doctrines is not anti-Catholic. I have PLENTY of charitable conversations with Protestants just about every day who“disagree” with the Catholic Church.
It is when a non-Catholic feels the need to LIE and misrepresent what the Church teaches that makes them ANTI-Catholic. YOU have done this on numerous occasions – and the following from earlier in this thread is just a small example . . .

Epostle wrote:
“Where do you get this crazy idea we follow Peter? Do you "follow Peter" by reading 1st and 2nd Peter? How many recent declarations from the Chair of Peter are you even aware of??? Try picking on the encyclicals taught in the last 100 years, instead of the same boring rhetorical arguments from the 16th century that have been refuted a zillion times.”

YOU responded with:
“It doesn't matter whether you are Catholic or Protestant,having an intermediarybetween you and Jesus besides the Holy Spirit...is not biblical. There is no refuting it. "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus."”

This is a complete misrepresentation of what the Catholic Church teaches.
The Pope is not an “intermediary” who usurps the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the earthly head of Christ’s Church.
- Jesus singled-out Peter with the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.
- Jesus singled-out Peter to strengthen the others and bring them back after losing faith.
- Jesus singled-out other than Peter to Feed His Lambs and Tend His Sheep.
Peter and his successors are earthly Shepherds – not replacements for theHoly Spirit . . .
Since I named the Protestants also, why did you not defend the Protestants also? The point was made in general, including both the Catholics and Protestants...on purpose, to make the point that it was in fact not an "anti-Catholic" issue.

But you are not being honest.

If you want to claim that the position of the Catholic church has never assumed a position of intermediary between people and Jesus, history will attest to the truth. But even if it were possible for you to produce evidence in support of such a claim, you could not do the same and make the same claim that the Catholic church has not assumed an intermediary position between people and the church. Either way presents a problem that many are guilty of. Which is not "anti-Catholic", it is anti-flesh in leadership.

You see, it is not "the church" (regardless of one affiliation or another) that leads us into all truth...but the Holy Spirit, in whom there is no factions big or small, no hierarchy, no issue of priestly robes, or funny hats, etc..
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Since I named the Protestants also, why did you not defend the Protestants also? The point was made in general, including both the Catholics and Protestants...on purpose, to make the point that it was in fact not an "anti-Catholic" issue.

But you are not being honest.

If you want to claim that the position of the Catholic church has never assumed a position of intermediary between people and Jesus, history will attest to the truth. But even if it were possible for you to produce evidence in support of such a claim, you could not do the same and make the same claim that the Catholic church has not assumed an intermediary position between people and the church. Either way presents a problem that many are guilty of. Which is not "anti-Catholic", it is anti-flesh in leadership.

You see, it is not "the church" (regardless of one affiliation or another) that leads us into all truth...but the Holy Spirit, in whom there is no factions big or small, no hierarchy, no issue of priestly robes, or funny hats, etc..
That's what I LOVE about your posts, sparky - they're so full of hypocrisy.

In post #322, YOU said:
"To say that I am a "anti-Catholic" is a lie."

And then, you end your latest rant with talk about "priestly robes" and "funny hats".
Gee - NO anti-Catholicism there . . .

As for your other dishonest comment in RED about other "intermediaries" - this is yet another anti-Catholic attack because it completely misrepresents Catholic teaching. the Church is the BODY of Christ - not an "intermediary" or substitute.
When Jesus confronted Saul in Acts 9:4-5 - He said, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?"

Saul was persecuting the CHURCH, which is Christ - and He chose to identify His very SELF with that Church.
Nobody usurping the Holy Spirit - just the ones in YOUR dishonest mind . . .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Philip James

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I see the confusion has caused you to reply to Aspen with a comment directed at me, and I will get back to that, but wanted to comment here first:

The "history" that you refer to above is not His story, but the story of men. Which has been the problem with the church from the start.

In spite of man's inability to fulfill the desires and commands of the Lord in building His church...He has done so anyway. It's just that it is not recorded in man's worldly church history. So, your argument about the accuracy of historical events is of absolutely no value - "the flesh profits nothing."

And if you will notice (if I might persist to be so kind), I did not name the Catholics, the Popes, the Protestants, or the Bishops, but simply the church. I wonder if you yourself can limit yourself in the same manner without prejudice that we might finally have a civil conversation? Can you do that?
First of all - WHAT are you talking about??
This was in response to Enoch 111 - NOT you.

Your last comment in RED challenges me to try to have a "civil" conversation - while YOU continue to make uncharitable attacks on me like the your other comment in RED. Your hypocrisy knows NO bounds.

So - why don't YOU let ME know when you're ready to engage in a "civil" conversation, hmmmm??
 
B

brakelite

Guest
However you want to pervert it – they were maters of state – and NOT Church.
Prove it. Show us in some definitive way that the church had nothing to do with the murder of so-called heretics... Perhaps you could use John Huss as an example...

Whether a person was executed or not had to do with the authority of a kingdom in a time when there was not only no freedom of religion
And why was there no freedom of religion, and what happened to the country who would dare to choose to other than be submissive to the popes?
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Prove it. Show us in some definitive way that the church had nothing to do with the murder of so-called heretics... Perhaps you could use John Huss as an example...
Uhhhh, no - the onus is NOT on me tpo provide a negative proof for an historically-bankrupt accusation.
The burden of proof is on the accuser - NOT the accused. YOU are the one who made these false allegations so YOU need to prove them . . .

Didn't the Senate hearings this past week teach you anything??
And why was there no freedom of religion, and what happened to the country who would dare to choose to other than be submissive to the popes?
The religion of the State - of the King - was conferred to ALL of the subjects of the Kingdom. NOT for "fear" of the Pope - but as a matter of loyalty to the KING.

Why don't you ask about what Henry VIII and his daughter Elizabeth I did to those 120 thousand or so who refused to leave the Catholic Church and join the Church of England??

STUDY
your history, man . . .
 

marksman

My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
Feb 27, 2008
5,578
2,446
113
82
Melbourne Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
To me it is very clear that the Rock Jesus speaks of here refers to the revelation of Who Jesus is.
Therefore it must be the foundation that He builds His Church on and in turn, the reference point for the unity of the Church of God.

Any thoughts on this?

I am starting a new fellowship in the next few weeks along with another brother. It has taken us about a year to plan and pray and find out what God wants from us.

Our doctrinal statement is "Jesus Christ is Lord" and our vision is "Know, Love, Care." We are going to meet on the Sabbath (Saturday), we will start at 2.37pm and end when we end.

The whole gathering will be subject to revelation that is given to any individual who will share it with everyone else. We believe that God will show us what we need to know for that day to meet needs and develop ministry and calling.

Based on the priesthood of all believers, everyone will be invited to get revelation from the Lord and we will submit to anyone who is operating under the anointing as giving direct revelation from the Lord. If it is directive, we will follow the instructions given.

The outcome of our meeting will be entirely in the hands of the Holy Spirit. That way we don't have to spend copious hours preparing meetings and sermons. All we have to do is prepare ourselves.

That means for us he will build HIS church, not ours.