Replies

"It's why Jesus entrusted the Word to Peter and his successors."

There is no such thing as Apostolic succession. If there were, a Pope about to die would annoint a successor. Instead of that they've been assassinating eachother. At one time there were two Popes.

Jesus entrusted his word to all believers. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Notice the order of "believe" and "baptize". You have to be older than a newborn baby to do that. Also, this doesn't leave any room for Peter, Popes or Purgatory, which are all late human inventions.

There is no such thing as Apostolic succession. If there were, a Pope about to die would annoint a successor. Instead of that they've been assassinating eachother. At one time there were two Popes.

Wow. Not sure where to begin with this one, but here goes:

First, Apostolic Succession is right in the book of Acts. After Judas commits suicide, do they decide to stay with 11 Apostles? No. They appoint a successor. So, we know of at least one definitive case of Apostolic Succession being passed down in the Bible and if the Apostles have the authority to appoint a successor to another Apostle, why would they not have the authority to appoint a successor to themselves?

Also, you contradict Christian history, once again. Could you provide documented evidence of the first ten Popes killing each other? My memory escapes me, but there is no documented evidence that Pope Linus killed St. Peter.

Notice the order of "believe" and "baptize". You have to be older than a newborn baby to do that. Also, this doesn't leave any room for Peter, Popes or Purgatory, which are all late human inventions.

Look, you're doing the typical Protestant argument and refusing to finish an argument on one topic and instead move from doctrine to doctrine attacking whatever you can until something sticks.

I would be more than happy to discuss any doctrine of the Church and its Biblical foundation, but it would be more productive if you responded to the rebuttals already made against your arguments instead of "carpet bombing" the thread, trying to hit whatever you can.

Peter is a late human invention? Wow, Christ would be surprised to hear that I imagine. I didn't know the Son of God needed imaginary friends. Don't try arguing semantics either, you know what "pope" means. Peter was given charge as the head of Christ's Church, thereby making him "pope." Were only the original Christians to be entitled to guidance on the teachings of Christ or is His Word eternal and for all time as He said? You can't have it both ways. Why would He entrust Peter with the Keys and tell him to feed His sheep for just one generation? Why would He place Peter in charge at all if there was to be no one after him? Were the following generations just somehow smarter or more open to the Truth that they did not need the guidance Christ instilled in Peter? Or are the following generations less worthy of the guidance Christ established through Peter? And why oh why would the very Apostles who walked with Christ elect another to take Stephen's place after his martyrdom if there is no succession? Could the very men who walked with God made flesh make such a mistake?

Purgatory, as has been explained many, many, many times on this thread is supported by Scripture (which was codified by the CATHOLIC Church even though Christ told no one to write anything down) but if you choose to ignore the evidence, that is up to you. I will pray for you regardless.

And if Jesus entrusted His word to all believers to be interpreted as it should, please tell me why over 31,000 Protestant denominations exist. After that, explain to me how you know YOUR interpretation is the correct one out of the other 30,999 versions.

My answer is simple, I follow the Church Christ instituted in 33 A.D. If one wanted to follow Christ, why would anyone choose differently?