Where in the Bible is it explicidltly written where it clearly states that neither Jesus or Paul was not married [ no where, but we know they weren't, same for Peter being in Rome, we know he was , from his epitaph and his bones being found also from the writings of the Church fathers and from the writings found in the catacombs ] but the Bible is not clear on everything, including the price on the head of the Bishop of Rome [ Peter ]
Was Peter ever in Rome? What saith the Scriptures?
- Thread starter Axehead
- Start date
-
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!
Where in the Bible is it explicidltly written where it clearly states that neither Jesus or Paul was not married [ no where, but we know they weren't, same for Peter being in Rome, we know he was , from his epitaph and his bones being found also from the writings of the Church fathers and from the writings found in the catacombs ] but the Bible is not clear on everything, including the price on the head of the Bishop of Rome [ Peter ]
That's wonderful reasoning Neo, and it explains how ALL of your RCC dogmas and doctrines came to be. What's next?
Selene
New Member
Haven't you seen the Da Vinci Code? They're claiming that Christ was married to Mary Magdalene. We've always claimed that Christ was single. And now you have people thinking that Christ was married. That certainly is not coming from us. For 2000 years we've always taught that Christ was single. And here comes the Da Vinci Code. For 2000 years, we have taught that Christ was God, and it was only in the 4th century that Christ's divinity was questioned. That issue was already resolved at the end of the 4th century.....but today, there are people who say that Christ is not God.
Did I mention anything about what others claim? I thought we are only talking about what the RCC claims? The RCC is not the only one that claims fiction. Claiming Peter was in Rome is fiction. He was a first century Apostle and there is no mention in the Acts of the Apostles of his Papacy or visits to Rome. So, Rome infers and by extension you and Neo and the others infer many things that have no traceability in the Scriptures. Neo's own reasoning is that if it wasn't mentioned doesn't mean it did not happen. And since the RCC is the authority in all things, then whatever it says, stands! If you want to build your house on that, that is fine with me and others. We are just saying, that we are not buying what you are selling. We are just trying to explain to you the many and sundry reasons why we are skeptical of the "wares" you are peddling.
Selene
New Member
.
If you rely on the Scriptures so much, then why don't you pay attention to it. The Scriptures already stated that there are many things that were not recorded in the Bible (See John 21:25). Just because it's not recorded in the Bible does not mean that it is false. You say that St. Peter was not in Rome because it did not say that in the Bible. The fact that it is not even stated in the Bible shows that we are not even going against scripture. How can anyone accuse us of going against something that is not even mentioned in the Bible?? We say that St. Peter was in Rome because he was in Rome and we have the historical and archaeological evidence to prove it. What do you have? You have scripture telling you that not everything is written in the Bible.
Even the Bible does not say that Peter died. Just because the Bible does not record Peter's death, do you believe that he's still alive?? How do you know he died when the Bible never said that he died? Maybe you believe St. Peter is still alive, but we say that he's already dead, and we have his bones to prove it.
What a straw=man Selene the bible doesn't say Jesus didn't have a Humvee and a Rolex watch ether.
Just because someone in your church says so does that make it true.
Just because someone in your church says so does that make it true.
Selene
New Member
The strawman is on you. We already have historical documents and archaeological evidence showing that Peter was in Rome. Remember that we rely on more than just scripture. We also have the Apostolic Tradition. Because of the Apostolic Tradition, we already know that the Apostle Andrew went to Turkey and set up a Church there, so we don't question the Orthodox Christians in Turkey who were able to trace their lineage to the Apostle Andrew.
Selene, can't you see that the Lord provided eyewitnesses for major events in the life of the Church? Your only proof comes on the scene when all the eyewitnesses are dead. There are no eyewitnesses in the early church for Peter in Rome. There are no eyewitnesses for Peter being the Pope. There are no eyewitnesses to Believers asking Mary to intercede for them. You say Peter and Paul worked to build the church together in Rome and yet Paul, who says he would not build upon another man's foundation, never mentioned Peter, being in Rome. Be careful that you don't love your dogma more than the truth.
Everything you believe is based on hearsay from people that were not eyewitnesses of the Jesus Christ's life and death and resurrection.
That is a building built on sand, Selene.
The Scriptures and major events are eyewitness-approved. Read about, here.
This is why we cannot accept your extra-biblical knowledge that you place on the same level of authority as the Bible.
We are just trying to warn you.
Axehead
You go tiger
Just remember where the stone lands, right on the feet of the image, and it all comes tumbling down.
the feet of the roman empire
Just remember where the stone lands, right on the feet of the image, and it all comes tumbling down.
the feet of the roman empire
Selene
New Member
[font=lucida sans unicode']The eyewitness are the Church that Christ built through the Apostles. The eyewitnesses continues on in the Church. It does not die with the Apostles. The ministry of Christ continues on in the Church. It does not die with the Apostles. Christ's Church did not die. With you, everything stops when the Apostles died. With us, all the work of Christ and His Apostles continued on in the Church. Christ and the Apostle left behind a Church who continue to be eyewitnesses even to this day. [/font]
Selene, eyewitnesses of Christ cannot continue. They all died. Yes, the ministry of Christ continues as He has not died. He is alive and the HEAD OF HIS CHURCH. The members of the Church that were eyewitnesses of Christ did die.
There is no one today who was an eyewitness of Christ's life, His death and His resurrection. Those men are no longer with us, but God left us His Word (the Bible), written by these eyewitnesses.
Do you not find it troubling that there are NO New Testament EYEWITNESSES who saw Peter in Rome? Paul did not even write greetings or salutations to Peter when he readily greeted and saluted others.
Anyway, you are entrenched in your beliefs but we cannot accept extra-biblical knowledge that is on the same level of authority as the Word of God. There is no witness in the Word for your extra-biblical knowledge and there is no witness of the Holy Spirit with our spirit. We cannot go against the lack of a witness. Archaeology would only confirm a witness that already existed in the Scriptures. Men from 150 A.D and on are not a valid witness if the Scriptures say nothing about the subject.
Don't you see how men can manipulate people by saying they are of the "Only True Church" and God has passed down and entrusted only to them many things that are not in the Bible."
I guess you can't see that. So, someone has a "sight" problem.
Oh well...
Axehead
Oh, my friend, I don't ignore those verses at all.
They are speaking of a spiritual entity/organization (religion) on many waters (all nations). We are talking here about the consummation of all things, not about the physical city of Rome falling. And we are talking about an entity that commits spiritual fornication and has affected all nations.
Rev 14:8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Strong wine is a type of "strange" or false doctrine.
Isa 28:7 But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
[background=rgb(249, 253, 255)]"they err in vision: these were the prophets, the seers, who pretended to the visions of God, and related them to the people as such; but they mistook the imaginations of their crazy heads, intoxicated with liquor, for the visions of God; they erred in prophesying, which may be meant by "vision", they delivered out false prophecies, false doctrines, and grievous errors, of fatal consequence to the people; or, as Kimchi further interprets it, they erred "in seeing"; they mistook in those things which were plain and obvious to the eye of everyone, in things clear and manifest; drunkenness affects the eyes both of the body and of the mind, that a man can see clearly with neither." (Gill)[/background]
Mic_2:11 If a man walking in the spirit and falsehood do lie, saying, I will prophesy unto thee of wine and of strong drink; he shall even be the prophet of this people.
"The second angel declares that "Babylon the great has fallen" (14:8). This was historically pre-figured in the Old Testament as the prophets indicated that "Babylon has fallen" (Isa. 21:9; Jer. 58:8,9). On the spiritual plane, Babylon, the city of religion, the religious community, has fallen by the victory of Jesus Christ over all of Satan's activities (I John 3:8). The angel further explains that the femininely personified city of religion "has made all the nations drink of the wine of the passion of her immorality" (14:8). This will be repeated in a subsequent vision (17:2; 18:3), of which this angelic statement seems to be a precursor. The city of religion will be identified as "the mother of harlots" (17:5).
The entire practice of religion is immoral and contrary to the character of God. Religion fosters and encourages intoxication with unfaithfulness, self-indulgence, self-gratification, sensual passions, and with false loyalties and liaisons. The "deeds of the flesh" which include "immorality, impurity, sensuality, drunkenness and carousing" (Gal. 5:19-21) are indicative of religious behavior." (James Fowler)
And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. Rev_17:5
What the Lord is talking about here is spiritual harlotry. The MOTHER of Spiritual Harlotry throughout the world.
And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and castinto the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all. (Rev_18:21)
This "city" is juxtaposed against the "City of God", the "heavenly Zion", therefore it is a "city" that tries to counterfeit the "City of God". It is a false religious system that infected the world. This "city" that was thrown down is an earthly, kingdom and because she had caused many to stumble, the Lord has kept His promise.
"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matt_18:6)
[background=transparent][background=transparent][background=transparent]And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great [background=transparent]Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath. ([/background][background=transparent]Rev_16:19)[/background][/background][/background][/background]
"Illustrating this final bowl of judgment were "flashes of lightning and sounds of peals of thunder" (16:18) representing God's powerful presence (4:5), as well as "a great earthquake" like none ever experienced previously. Religion is truly shaken up, but God's people are participating in "a kingdom which cannot be shaken" (Heb. 12:28).
Religion is wrenched apart in the scene where John sees "the great city split into three parts" (16:19). The "great city" is identified as "Babylon the great." The designation of Babylon was apparently derived from the religious effort at Babel (Gen. 11:1-9) which became a situation of confusion and a symbol of futility. The Babylon of ancient history is repeatedly referred to throughout the Old Testament as a feared opponent of God's people (Isa. 47,48; Jer. 25,50,51; Ezek. 26-28; Dan. 2,7), which served as a pre-figuring of the satanically inspired evil of the spiritual city of Babylon, the religious community, and its barbarous adversarial assaults on the community of saints, the holy city of the new Jerusalem (21:10). Previously in the Revelation "the great city" is linked "mystically" or spiritually with the designation of Sodom and Egypt and Jewish Jerusalem (11:8), all of which represent communities of false religion, and could conceivably be connected with the "three part" split of Babylon.
In His omniscience God remembers the atrocities of Babylon, and gives to the collective religious community "the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath" (16:19). The "bowls" of judgment become the "cup" of judgment which religion must drink." (James Fowler)
Take your time and think about all of this, very carefully.
Axehead
Selene
New Member
The problem I see here is that what you are saying is that....Christianity died. You actually believed that the Church died with the death of the Apostles. Christianity is not about the Apostles and never was. Christianity is about Christ, who did not die. Christ is the Head of the Church and remained so even after the Apostles died. The Church remained alive even after the Apostles died because Christ remained the Head of the Church always.
I don't know how you confuse things. I notice that you do that with Rex, too. The Church has always been alive. The Lord has seen to that. He is the life of the Church. And He has preserved His Word for the Church (Psalm 12). And He gives His Spirit to each member.
Now you're talking!!
Selene
New Member
I'm glad to see that you believe the Church has always been alive. And it is the Church who continues to be the witnesses, and that is exactly what it says in the Bible. Are you denying what the bible says about the Church continuing to be witness?
1 Thessalonians 2:10 [font=lucida sans unicode'] You are witnesses, and so is God, of how holy, righteous and blameless we were among you who believed.[/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']Here you have St. Paul telling the Church in Thessalonia that they are witnesses. So, the Church continues to be a witness down through the generations. Do you know why the Church continues to be a witness to the Truth? Because Christ still works in the Church as the Head. Just because the Apostles have died does not mean that everything stops. Christ is alive and working in His Church, and we are witnesses of that. [/font]
Mat 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
What debate?
Selene
New Member
Okay.....let's take a closer look at that biblical passage:
Matthew 23:8-10 "But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called 'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ.
[font=lucida sans unicode']According to the Holy Bible, Jesus said not to call anyone "master," "teacher" or "father." If Jesus meant this literally, then you must ask yourself why did Jesus used the word "father" when referring to Abraham? [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']John 8:56 [/font][font=lucida sans unicode']Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.[/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']As a matter of fact, Christ even called a Pharisee "master." [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']John 3:10 [/font][font=lucida sans unicode'] [/font][font=lucida sans unicode']Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']So, do you think that Jesus is going to tell His Apostles not to call any man on earth "master," "teacher," and "father" and then turn around and use these words himself in reference to men on earth? The fact that Jesus used these words himself shows that Christ never meant what He said LITERALLY. Did the Apostles understand that Jesus did not meant what He said literally?? Yes, because they also use the words themselves. [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']Acts 7:2 [/font][font=lucida sans unicode']And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,[/font]
James 2:21 [font=lucida sans unicode']Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?[/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']So, as you can see, even the Apostles understood that Christ did not mean what He said literally because St. Stephen addressed the elders and high priest as "fathers" and even call Abraham "father." St. James also called Abraham "father." And we also have biblical scripture showing that St. Paul called himself a "teacher." [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']2 Timothy 1:11 [/font][font=lucida sans unicode']Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']So, is the Catholic Church going against Jesus' words when Jesus said not to call any man on earth "master," "teacher," or "father"? Absolutely not. Why? Because we understood that Jesus never meant that LITERALLY. And where did we understand this?? From the Apostles who was there and knew that Jesus never meant those words literally. From the Apostles who also used the words "father", "teacher", and "master." Surely, you are not going to tell me that the Apostles (who had the Holy Spirit in them) was disobeying Christ when they called other people "father", "teacher", or "master"? [/font]
[font=lucida sans unicode']So, if Jesus did not mean those words literally....then what exactly did He mean?? We already know the answer to that question.
[/font]
Selene
New Member
Similar threads
