Where does the Pope get his authority?

[Peterlag]

I have never claimed to be speaking "God's word." Anyway, you need a dictionary, my friend. A "lie" is an intentional falsehood, something known by the declarant to be untrue when declared. (Like saying your book is an award-winning book.) Expressions of honestly-held opinions cannot be lies even if those opinions are mistaken.

We are on two different pages. Even the way we see words. When I speak I speak from God's perspective. As far as He is concerned you either have the truth or you have a lie.

 

[RedFan]

When I speak I speak from God's perspective.

Or, maybe

When I speak it's my opinion.

Peter, you are a cross-examiner's dream witness!

 

[Aunty Jane]

WOW......over 800 words and I still don't see an answer.

Were you really looking for one? Perhaps you got lost in the counting….?
You said…
“Genesis 2:2-3 is not a command for Jews OR Christians to observe a Sabbath. It is God setting the example for men.”
Which I did explains was a pictorial example for men, but the “Sabbath rest” in Genesis was not mandated for anyone because it was not a requirement to observe a Sabbath until the Law of Moses was given to Israel.…and that was connected to their release from slavery in Egypt, as a reminder of God’s powerful deliverance. No one had observed a Sabbath before then, and the law was given exclusively to Israel.

The Jews had an inordinate focus on wealth and prominence, which we saw in the actions of the Pharisees as well as in the continuing argument among Jesus‘ own apostles over ‘who among them was the greatest’.

It was by design that Jesus was born to a poor family and grew up without the trappings of royalty. Had Jesus shown up as the son of a wealthy man with fine clothing and a large house, the Jews may have paid more attention to him….but he was not of their sort….he was sent only to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”…..mostly the poor and ignored members of Jewish society……so forcing these people to stop serving themselves for one day of the week reminded them of where they had come from…..poor slaves under the thumb of a wealthy and powerful nation. But they never really got the memo….and neither has Christendom.

We can serve our God every day by the way we live our lives. We don’t need wealth or position to do that…..in fact the simple life frees us to do more in God’s service. The ministry Jesus gave his disciples was one all could share in…..spreading the word about God’s Kingdom. There were no priests or nuns in original Christianity. Becoming a Christian was a choice which required accepting the Christian message, dedication to God in prayer, followed by full immersion baptism, but not in separation from your brothers and sisters as if you are somehow a member of some exclusive club which requires you to don special garb to identify you.
How was Jesus identified when the mob came to arrest him? Judas had to give him a kiss because Jesus was not identified by what he wore.

What does your church teach about the kingdom of God, Mary? What is it?

God rested on the 7th day and called it Holy. He then commanded the Jews to rest on that Holy day.

Yes, because that was the “day” when all that God created finally becomes what he purposed in the beginning. That “day” has not ended yet. It was a time period set aside to iron out any problems that could arise with the misuse and abuse of free will. And as I also mentioned, this whole 7th day was not just about us humans, but more importantly about powerful angels misusing their free will. If satan had not rebelled at the start of human existence, we would never have had to live this life. Christ would never have had to come to earth to “save” anyone. This carefully and lovingly prepared planet was never designed as a training ground for heaven….it was supposed to be our permanent home.

The vast majority of redeemed mankind will not go to heaven, but will be residents of this earth transformed into the beautiful paradise that God intended at the beginning…..the end of the 7th day bringing it all to completion. (Isa 55:11; Rev 21-2-4)

Do you think that you should follow Gods example and rest on the Christian holy day?

For Christians, there are no “holy days”…..Christendom adopted them from pagan sources, so why would we follow their example when it was to the Jews alone that God gave his laws, and their mode of worship was now obsolete. A new covenant was established with the redemption price paid by Christ’s death. He did not mandate any “holy days” as such, but simply requested that we remember his sacrifice and thank God always for that. And like the Passover (which it replaced) it is held on the same evening once a year.

For Christians there was no grand Temple….no Pope……no earthly priesthood….no special titles….no garments to distinguish them from their brethren….no liturgy….no rituals…..no infant baptism…..no heaven or hell as opposite destinations…..in fact nothing that the RCC claims is Christianity, is actually based on anything that Christ taught.

Patient Mary

Patience is only a virtue if one is taught the truth and then passes that truth on to others, so that they too can bring their worship into line with all that Jesus taught us…..Christendom is a disunited mess who misrepresent everything Jesus and his apostles taught…they are the “weeds” of Jesus’ parable…..but they are also victims of a ‘blindness’ that only comes from one source…the sower of the weeds whom Jesus identified as “the devil”. (2 Cor 4:3-4; Matt 13:36-43)

Our hearts are the “soil” that the seed of truth grows in….(Matt 13: 3-9)…..what kind of heart we have is determined by the choices we make about the most important aspect of our lives…..our unadulterated worship of the one Jesus called “the only true God”. (John 17:3)

Satan will make sure that when he goes down, as he most certainly will, he will take as many of mankind as he can deceive, down with him……we have to make sure that what we offer to God spiritually, is not a lame or sick sacrifice.

Sorry, I’m not good at three paragraphs or less….the Bible is a big book…..it cannot be explained in brief statements just because people have the attention span of a goldfish. If you don’t study…you don’t learn…but equally important of course is who are our teachers? Who taught us our truth?

 

[Marymog]

For Christians, there are no “holy days”…..Christendom adopted them from pagan sources, so why would we follow their example when it was to the Jews alone that God gave his laws, and their mode of worship was now obsolete. A new covenant was established with the redemption price paid by Christ’s death. He did not mandate any “holy days” as such, but simply requested that we remember his sacrifice and thank God always for that. And like the Passover (which it replaced) it is held on the same evening once a year.

For Christians there was no grand Temple….no Pope……no earthly priesthood….no special titles….no garments to distinguish them from their brethren….no liturgy….no rituals…..no infant baptism…..no heaven or hell as opposite destinations…..in fact nothing that the RCC claims is Christianity, is actually based on anything that Christ taught.

Ok...I will play your word game. Let's try this again.

Do you think that you should follow Gods example and rest?

 

[Marymog]

No I don't know of a man who is right about everything. But I believe Bullinger is right on this subject. Even a guy like me had 5 different teachers because I could only learn in part from any one of them.

Thanks Peter!

Sounds like YOU decide who is right and who is wrong.....but maybe I am misunderstanding you.

Mary

 

[Phoneman777]

I do not see what you see. Peter was a strict Jewish boy who even as an Apostle worked mostly with Israel. I never read a verse that said Peter was warned not to deny Jesus. I personally follow the writings of Paul and not Peter. I don't see Peter as anything other than an awesome guy to be able to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ who raised people from the dead and a personal friend of Jesus Christ.

Peter finally learned what the truth was all about only after the foundation of the church - Christ - was established, which is my point: that the could never have been built on a guy who suffered from chronic foot-in-mouth-disease.

 

[Peterlag]

Peter finally learned what the truth was all about only after the foundation of the church - Christ - was established, which is my point: that the could never have been built on a guy who suffered from chronic foot-in-mouth-disease.

I will agree to that. Pryor to the resurrection Peter was the same as all the others behind closed doors for fear of the Jews.

 

[Peterlag]

Thanks Peter!

Sounds like YOU decide who is right and who is wrong.....but maybe I am misunderstanding you.

Mary

I have been doing this a long time so I'm an expert at it. Expert enough to know that the Catholics have never been right about anything. If you want to know the truth of the Bible. Then just look at what the Catholics teach and then do the opposite and you will probably be right on with the correct teaching of the Bible.

 

[Peterlag]

Or, maybe


Peter, you are a cross-examiner's dream witness!

Oh my God, you're starting to crack me up. LOL

 

[Aunty Jane]

Ok...I will play your word game. Let's try this again.

Do you think that you should follow Gods example and rest?

I have learned from the example of the Israelites, not to go “beyond what is written”…as Paul said (1 Cor 4:6)……that is, not to add to or subtract a single thing to or from, what Jesus taught. The RCC has added a lot and in doing so subtracted the things they replaced with their traditions.
Would you like to discuss them?

Since all that Christ taught was from his Father, we do well not to add anything to our worship unless it is specifically commanded by God…..the Israelites were commanded to observe the Sabbath as they were commanded to hold their other observances. They were not permitted to add their own observances or festivals……
They did that once with “a festival to Jehovah” involving the worship of a golden calf whom they called their God, “Jehovah”….God punished the offenders with death.

“God’s example” was reflected in the Sabbath law given only to Israel as a reminder of their deliverance from slavery in Egypt….God’s Sabbath established in Genesis has not yet run its course. So the 1000 year reign of Jesus and his saints will conclude that 7th day, bringing all things back into harmony with Jehovah’s original purpose. Since God did not command observance of a weekly Sabbath for anyone but the Jews…..we will not observe it, but we respect anyone’s right to do so if they wish.

 

[Phoneman777]

I will agree to that. Pryor to the resurrection Peter was the same as all the others behind closed doors for fear of the Jews.

Our catholic friends refuse to acknowledge the Aramaic "kepha" Jesus spoke can be as broadly interpreted as our English "rock" to mean a small pebble or giant boulder. They further refuse to acknowledge that men inspired by the Holy Ghost purposefully distinguished between "Petros" and "Petra" for a reason: Christ Himself intended for such a distinction - between the "pebble" Peter and the "giant boulder" of his confession.

 

[Peterlag]

Our catholic friends refuse to acknowledge the Aramaic "kepha" Jesus spoke can be as broadly interpreted as our English "rock" to mean a small pebble or giant boulder. They further refuse to acknowledge that men inspired by the Holy Ghost purposefully distinguished between "Petros" and "Petra" for a reason: Christ Himself intended for such a distinction - between the "pebble" Peter and the "giant boulder" of his confession.

You got that right.

 

[The Learner]

here

 

[Marymog]

I have learned from the example of the Israelites, not to go “beyond what is written”…as Paul said (1 Cor 4:6)……that is, not to add to or subtract a single thing to or from, what Jesus taught. The RCC has added a lot and in doing so subtracted the things they replaced with their traditions.
Would you like to discuss them?

Since all that Christ taught was from his Father, we do well not to add anything to our worship unless it is specifically commanded by God…..the Israelites were commanded to observe the Sabbath as they were commanded to hold their other observances. They were not permitted to add their own observances or festivals……
They did that once with “a festival to Jehovah” involving the worship of a golden calf whom they called their God, “Jehovah”….God punished the offenders with death.

“God’s example” was reflected in the Sabbath law given only to Israel as a reminder of their deliverance from slavery in Egypt….God’s Sabbath established in Genesis has not yet run its course. So the 1000 year reign of Jesus and his saints will conclude that 7th day, bringing all things back into harmony with Jehovah’s original purpose. Since God did not command observance of a weekly Sabbath for anyone but the Jews…..we will not observe it, but we respect anyone’s right to do so if they wish.

Thanks Jane.

Sooooo after reading your 230+ words in this response and the 800+ words in your last response you still haven't flat out said that you don't think you should follow God's example and rest one day a week. I suspect that you don't feel comfortable writing those words, but you believe them. However, reading between the lines here is what I think you are saying: You will not follow the example that God gave you, but you have no problem with other people following God's example by taking 1 day out of 7 off to rest.

Ephesians 5:1 in part says become imitators of God. Your JW men have interpreted that to mean that "God’s appealing qualities can motivate Christians to imitate the One who best exemplifies such qualities." and that "Christians should imitate Jehovah “as beloved children.” A child cannot imitate a grown parent perfectly. Nevertheless, the child’s sincere efforts are sure to make a parent happy." Do you want to make Jehovah happy and imitate Him or not?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

For Christians, there are no “holy days”…..

Correction Jane!

For JEHOVAH WITNESSES, a religion founded 1,800 years after the death of Christ, there are no Holy Days.

 

[Marymog]

I have been doing this a long time so I'm an expert at it. Expert enough to know that the Catholics have never been right about anything. If you want to know the truth of the Bible. Then just look at what the Catholics teach and then do the opposite and you will probably be right on with the correct teaching of the Bible.

Lol...OK Peter (the expert), thank you. I acknowledge your Catholic rant and I suspect the Catholic Church is wrong about everything, that is until YOU say it is right. But we are getting sidetracked and we should get back to talking about the subject at hand; EW Bullinger.

What do you think about this statement from Harry A. Ironside about the great scholar EW Bullinger:

Having had most intimate acquaintance with Bullingerism as taught by many for the last forty years, I have no hesitancy in saying that its fruits are evil. It has produced a tremendous crop of heresies throughout the length and breadth of this and other lands, it has divided Christians and wrecked churches and assemblies without number; it has lifted up its votaries in intellectual and spiritual pride to an appalling extent, so that they look with supreme contempt upon Christians who do not accept their peculiar views; and in most instances where it has been long tolerated, it has absolutely throttled Gospel effort at home and sown discord on missionary fields abroad. So true are these things of this system that I have no hesitancy in saying it is an absolutely Satanic perversion of the truth.

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

We are on two different pages. Even the way we see words. When I speak I speak from God's perspective. As far as He is concerned you either have the truth or you have a lie.

Lol...Hold on Peter...HOLD ON!

When you speak you speak from God's perspective????

But in post #302 you said, "What I post is my opinion." And post #167 you said, "my evidence is my opinion." And in post #635 you said When I speak it's my opinion.

Sooooo which one is it? Are you posting your opinion or God's perspective?

Now I can see why @RedFan said you are a cross-examiner's dream witness!

 

[BreadOfLife]

@BreadOfLife
Can you explain why none of those "popes" you mention in the first 5 centuries ever claimed apostolic succession: never cited Matthew 16:18 as the source for authority: and never used Peter's confession or the Lord's affirmation of the heavenly inspiration of that confession as a basis for claim to primacy over all churches?

Care to explain why none of the church fathers over that same period used Matthew 16:18 as the basis for any such thing as succession, primacy, or authority over all churches?
Oh, and please. No citing of forgeries.

Can YOU explain why you would make such a historically-bankrupt statement?
Everything you claimed is nonsense . . .

Irenaeus
For if the Apostles had known hidden mysteries which they taught to the elite secretly and apart from the rest, they would have handed them down especially to those very ones to whom they were committing the self-same Churches. For surely they wished all those and their successors to be perfect and without reproach, to whom they handed on their authority (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 180-199]).

It is necessary to obey those who are the presbyters in the Church, those who, as we have shown, have succession from the Apostles; those who have received, with the succession of the episcopate, the sure charism of truth according to the good pleasure of the Father. But the rest, who have no part in the primitive succession and assemble wheresoever they will, must be held in suspicion (ibid 4:26:2).

Tertullian
For this is the way in which the apostolic Churches transmit their lists: like the Church of the Smyrnaeans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John; like the Church of the Romans where Clement was ordained by Peter. In just this same way the other Churches display those whom they have as sprouts from the apostolic seed, having been established in the episcopate by the Apostles.

Therefore, they will be challenged to meet this test even by those Churches which are of much later date – for they are being established daily – and whose founder is not from among the Apostles nor from among the apostolic men; for those which agree in the same faith are reckoned as apostolic on account of the blood ties in their doctrine. (The Demurrer Against the Heretics 32:1 [A.D. 200]).

Tertullian
The Lord said to Peter, "On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven" [Matt. 16:18-19]. ... Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).

Cyprian
The Lord says to Peter: "I say to you," he says, "that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church" . . . On him he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church? (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4 [A.D. 251]).

Firmilion of Caesarea
. . . when Christ breathed upon the Apostles alone, saying to them; "Receive the Holy Spirit: if you forgive any man his sins, they shall be forgiven; and if you retain any mans sins, they shall be retained." Therefore, the power of forgiving sins was given to the Apostles and to the Churches which these men, sent by Christ, established; and to the bishops who succeeded them by being ordained in their place (Letter to Cyprian 75:16 [A.D. 255-256]).

Ambrose of Milan
Christ made answer: "You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church . . ." Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]? (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yeah but E.W. Bullinger is the one who is correct. The church was built upon Jesus Christ and not Peter. Another huge red flag telling me I'm right is that the Catholics teach that the church was built on Peter and they have never been right about anything. I would bet my car that most of your scholars are Catholic.

EVERY ONE of the sources I listed was a Protestant (non-Catholic) source – but you can keep your car . . .

 

[Peterlag]

EVERY ONE of the sources I listed was a Protestant (non-Catholic) source – but you can keep your car . . .

That's odd. Now why would Protestant guys believe Peter was the first pope?