[MeOnTheBeach]

[MeOnTheBeach quoted by Heart-Rest] "On the authority totem pole, a prophet is higher than a Pope, right? Rev 11 is very clear about the two prophets being on the earth just before the second coming of Christ. Therefore, these two prophets have higher authority than the Pope. Therefore, they are not part of the Catholic Church and are rejected outright by Catholics. Catholic Church can not be the true Church of God because it has no provision for succeeding authority of the Pope to these true prophets. And God's house is not divided."

I'm guessing you quoted this for some reason? If you're going to quote something, at least address what you've quoted.

"Jesus also promised to send the Holy Spirit, to guide the Church He was building into all truth."

So he started out guiding to all truth....

"...is infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit when teaching faith and morals,"

But that's not how it worked out... so lets qualify it to be a bit more vague.

The Church teaches that the Bishops are the successors to the Apostles...,"

Of course it teaches that...NOW... because they had no choice, the Appostles were all dead. That's like tripping, doing a face plant, getting up and saying, "I meant to do that!" They said this in order to make themselves look legitimate...and killed anyone that disagreed.

Then you go off creating some strawman about the myriads of problems you think I have... Your not going to prove your point by clouding the issues.

The original points still remain, which I will not ignore.

1. There is no legitimate succession between Peter and Linus or Clement. They made this up after the fact.
2. There was no complete Church organization after the death of the Apostles, from 70AD to 325AD.
3. The Catholic church did not further the teachings of Christ.
4. The Catholic church has no prophets or Apostles. Which is in direct contradiction to Rev 11.

You can't get around Rev 11. It looms over the Catholic church like a sword.

In reality there is not a single thing about the Catholic church that points to it being a continuation of the Church Christ set up in 33AD. Nothing. Nota.

[Heart-Rest]

[MeOnTheBeach quoted by Heart-Rest] "On the authority totem pole, a prophet is higher than a Pope, right? Rev 11 is very clear about the two prophets being on the earth just before the second coming of Christ. Therefore, these two prophets have higher authority than the Pope. Therefore, they are not part of the Catholic Church and are rejected outright by Catholics. Catholic Church can not be the true Church of God because it has no provision for succeeding authority of the Pope to these true prophets. And God's house is not divided.

I'm guessing you quoted this for some reason? If you're going to quote something, at least address what you've quoted.

Well, I don't know what you're doing down on that beach there, "MeOnTheBeach", but here is what I addressed directly to that quote of yours, which I guess you didn't see for some reason:

Well, St. Paul puts "Apostles" first here:

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts.
1 Corinthians 12:27-31

However, you are quoting from the prophetic book of "Revelation", which most people believe was written by the Apostle John.    Who do you think is "higher on the totem pole" - the prophet John who wrote "Revelation", or the Apostle John who walked with Jesus Christ?    Do you see how absurd that question is if they are in fact the same person?    Those Church functions were apparently NOT mutually exclusive for John the Apostle, and there is really no reason they should be.

The Church teaches that the Bishops are the successors to the Apostles (the Pope is the Bishop of Rome), and they have been placed in charge by Jesus Himself of the Church Jesus built, and are under the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit when teaching faith and morals.

Among all the comments you made, I honestly could not find one accurate statement in your response.

This statement you made was particularly egregious:

"There was no complete Church organization after the death of the Apostles, from 70AD to 325AD."

As far as the organization of the Church goes, are you denying that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church He built, as it plainly states in the Bible (Colossians 1:18)?

If He is the Head of the Church, would not that make it the best organization in the world?

Do you believe what Jesus Christ solemnly promised, that He would be with that Church till the end of the world, as it plainly says in the Bible?

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.    Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.   Amen."    Matthew 28:18-20

Do you think Jesus was lying about being there with them, unto the end of the world?

Do you think Jesus was merely mistaken about that?

Do you think Jesus meant to say, "lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world, except between 70 A.D., and 325 A.D.", or "but not after the original 12 Apostles I picked die"?

I urge you to do further studying on Church history, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, and the Bible, relating to the Church that Jesus Christ built.