I don’t have that kind of a search engine for the Bible.
Posted on 08/24/2014 3:18:46 AM PDT by markomalley
Read the same verses, but using spiritual perception, rather than soulish perception. The meaning becomes obvious to th believer in fellowship with God, but misunderstood to those without such perception.
This is not a debate about the canon.
The text clearly states when Pius held the Chair at Rome. That is evidence that by 140 AD there was a single Bishop in Rome.
And history also records a sppsd successor employing a murderous mob in seeking to obtain he office, and both records testifies to the contrast between what the Holy Spirit records in the plenary inspired Scripture versus the uninspired words of traditions.
And you can’t show anything but argue from a Protestant polemical theoretical position 2,000 years later.
That is absurd, as what i can show is how the Holy Spirit is faithful to record important events, thus the nature of Peter's leadership, and apostolic credentials, and the death of James but no successor, or manifest preparation for one in the light of Peter's impending departure, while describing the apostles as being part of the foundation which the church is built upon, and clearly instructing and recording the ordination of elders, not priests. Among other contrasts.
You can cite Francis Sullivan all you want, again,
Oh yes, bias assertion. No evidence can be accepted from conservative evangelicals that impugns Rome as they are driven by anti-Catholic bigotry, while Catholic scholarship that does the same must be dismissed or marginalized as they are liberal. I suppose even objecting to the title “Co-redemptrix” for Mary could be attacked.
They may be liberal and possible bias is to be considered, as is true of committed papists, but their arguments should be judged by their merits. Of course, Sullivan is not alone, as Paul Johnson and Klaus Schatz, among others must also be rejected or marginalized.
were Apostles in place, they were in charge, as they died out, they put men in place to carry on the Apostolic Faith
Exactly, not Romish popes.
Saint Polycarp attest to the 3 tiered ministry of Bishop, Priest/Presbyter [a discussion I have already had ad nausem with you before] and Deacon.
And it remains that this is not what Scripture teaches, with the Spirit not once titling "presbuteros" "hiereus," the exclusive word for "priest," but which was a later development due to imposed functional equivalence, and is defended by reliance upon etymological fallacy.
But while we can debate Scripture and history on and one, yet for a committed RC, this cannot be the basis for assurance of Truth, as it relies upon fallible human reasoning. For as i have said, the RC argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth.
And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus those who dissent from the latter are in rebellion to God.
As long as this falsehood is your premise then further exchange becomes increasingly a problem.
daniel1212:
All of your views of what scripture say are just that, your views. It is not absurd. The Apostles put men to take over, the NT is very silent about what those men did and what were there roles. Clearly Titus and Timothy were leaders of Churches there acting as overseers. So Bishops are in place during the transition from Apostles to the next generation. All of the Patristic evidence indicates how this transition was implemented and it was Bishops, Priests and Deacons.
You can only show what you think scripture teaches, I appeal to the early Fathers who canonized the scriptures and defended them against Gnostic heresies don’t interpret them the way you do. For example,, your writing “For I have written” I could give a hoot what you think. Who are you, another ex-Catholic turned protestant internet theologian????? Really?? Can you honestly say that the NT gave precise instructions as the ministry and function of Bishop, Presbyter and Deacon. It is very unclear and an appeal alone to Scripture can’t answer it, all you have is a protestant view that developed 1,600 years ex post the NT period. Saint Clement of Rome’s Letter, and he was a pupil of Saint Peter and there is evidence that we is the Clement that Saint Paul mentions clearly speaks of the fact that the Apostles worried that men would argue over who should be Bishop, etc, and thus they appointed men to lead the Churches. Saint Ignatius of Antioch’s Letters are even clearer and he was closely connected to the Apostle John, having been Saint Polycarp’s pupil who new The Apostle John.
Are you saying that all these men got it wrong????? and you got it right?
LOL! I actually used that line in law school once (not the “fodder” part). I don’t remember the details, but it had to do with someone marching over to someone else to do them harm, but then something being said by the would-be victim that was so shocking it would change the would-be perp’s intent. On the spur of the moment, that’s what I came up with. The class erupted in laughter, but the professor was not amused. :)
Did you know that according to the online etymological dictionary we’ve been getting called “bible thumpers” since 1843? I found that fascinating. I always take it as a compliment. :)
PS, CT, I read the Jerome letter, especially the Peter vs Paul sections. Interesting stuff. Not exactly on point, but a good read nonetheless. Some RC posters here on FR could learn a lot from his gracious example. Thanks.
And your response to the use of the word *petra* in the Greek is what exactly?
SHhow me where Peter is called *petra*.
I’m not southern and haven’t read King James in over 35 years after the NIV came out.
Enjoy your stereotypical delusions.
And the comment about you remaining ignorant is based on your own admission that you would not read something to learn more.
Your choice.
Springfield Reformer:
Yes, it is a good read. Glad to see you read it, it doesn’t take the King James only Bible Thumbing protestant spin and say Peter’s sin negated his authority, or negated the role as First among the Apostles which Christ gave him, which was why I decided to cite it and help the King James only types out a bit, consider that a charitable act on my part. As for gracious, well, at times I can be, and there are some protestants here who I have dialogued/discussed with over a long time and not got used lets say less than 100% charitable tone with [I freely admit that]. On the other hand, with many of the usual suspects among the FR protestants here, not so much. I will also freely admit, my patience is at and end with many of them thus the harsher tone.
Using Bible verses to support Protestant heresies is nothing more than spam.
Using Bible verses to illustrate Catholic heresies is nothing more than spam; according to the weak apologists on FR.
Catholics promote heresy in this board. They use their additions to Scripture to try to PROVE their point. Over and over again.
Taint none of it sticking to the wall these days.
metmom:
First off, I did not say I would not read them. Second, I said further, that I would not read them and post the commentaries in response to your scripture post fest. And I am very well versed in the Writings of the Church Fathers. I just have had it posting with you. And while you are not Southern, your approach is very similar to the King James Only Southern Bible thumpers who believe that the NT was written in King James English. So philosophically, your approach to things is consistent with theirs. So run along to your flavor of the week, maybe month, or perhaps year, protestant sect you are hanging out with these days, which I hypothesize, is not the first one you joined when you rebelled against the faith of your birth and ancestors.
Among Catholics who have been adequately catechized.
Peter being 'first' isn't even SHOWN in Scripture.
This, however, is...
::yawn::
I now see where CULTS get THEIR rules from!
Read the stuff with a comprehension of the language it was written in; and 'hidden' meanings will NOT be coming forth!
I did this in grade school.
My punishment; uh, failure to communicate, lesson was to place my nose in a very small circle on the blackboard for, what it seemed to me at the time; ETERNITY!
I suppose these days my mom could have sued the teacher/principal/school/school board/state and probably Obama, too, for Cruel and Unusual punishment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.