Questions about the pope and the Catholic faith

[Willa]

Acts 1:21-22  Therefore, of these men WHO HAVE ACCOMPANIED US ALL THE TIME THAT THE LORD JESUS WENT IN AND OUT AMONG US, BEGINNING FROM THE BAPTISM OF JOHN TO THAT DAY WHEN HE WAS TAKEN FROM US, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.  

These are the parameters of an apostle.  None of those bishops after Peter's time had done these things.  There was no apostolic succession as claimed by the RCC because they must have been with Jesus throughout His ministry from baptism to death, resurrection and ascension.  In fact, James was the first head of the church.  Paul called himself an apostle but he  did not fill those requirements to be a true apostle.  He did meet the risen Christ but did not witness his baptism, ministry and crucifxion.

The pope was worth about 3 hours of news.  Having it carry on all day and then for a week or two is really offensive, while the media scorns true worship of God by evangelicals.  It is politically correct to be catholic now days!  But I found it offensive to "deify" Elvis as well.  

 

P.S.  It would be nice to limit quotes to 3 or 4 and then start anew.  

 

[gdemoss]

And then there was the Thirteenth Apostle who does not fit those particulars.  

[thereselittleflower]

Acts 1:21-22  Therefore, of these men WHO HAVE ACCOMPANIED US ALL THE TIME THAT THE LORD JESUS WENT IN AND OUT AMONG US, BEGINNING FROM THE BAPTISM OF JOHN TO THAT DAY WHEN HE WAS TAKEN FROM US, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.  

These are the parameters of an apostle.  None of those bishops after Peter's time had done these things.  There was no apostolic succession as claimed by the RCC because they must have been with Jesus throughout His ministry from baptism to death, resurrection and ascension.  In fact, James was the first head of the church.  Paul called himself an apostle but he  did not fill those requirements to be a true apostle.  He did meet the risen Christ but did not witness his baptism, ministry and crucifxion.

The pope was worth about 3 hours of news.  Having it carry on all day and then for a week or two is really offensive, while the media scorns true worship of God by evangelicals.  It is politically correct to be catholic now days!  But I found it offensive to "deify" Elvis as well.  

 

P.S.  It would be nice to limit quotes to 3 or 4 and then start anew.  

 

That was a very particular circumstance, one of the original 12 apostolic offices was vacant and Peter, the chief shepherd, declared how to fill that vacant office.

If your interpretation is correct, how did Paul become an apostle?

The APOSTLE Paul came much later onto the scene.

 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Willa]

Acts 1:21-22  Therefore, of these men WHO HAVE ACCOMPANIED US ALL THE TIME THAT THE LORD JESUS WENT IN AND OUT AMONG US, BEGINNING FROM THE BAPTISM OF JOHN TO THAT DAY WHEN HE WAS TAKEN FROM US, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.  

These are the parameters of an apostle.  None of those bishops after Peter's time had done these things.  There was no apostolic succession as claimed by the RCC because they must have been with Jesus throughout His ministry from baptism to death, resurrection and ascension.  In fact, James was the first head of the church.  Paul called himself an apostle but he  did not fill those requirements to be a true apostle.  He did meet the risen Christ but did not witness his baptism, ministry and crucifxion.

The pope was worth about 3 hours of news.  Having it carry on all day and then for a week or two is really offensive, while the media scorns true worship of God by evangelicals.  It is politically correct to be catholic now days!  But I found it offensive to "deify" Elvis as well.  

 

P.S.  It would be nice to limit quotes to 3 or 4 and then start anew.  

 

That was a very particular circumstance, one of the original 12 apostolic offices was vacant and Peter, the chief shepherd, declared how to fill that vacant office.

If your interpretation is correct, how did Paul become an apostle?

The APOSTLE Paul came much later onto the scene.

 

 

 

In Paul's own words, Galatians 1:1 NKJV  Paul, an apostle (not from men or through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead),---so Paul denied being made an apostle by Peter and he claimed to be made an apostle by God.  It pays to read the Bible and not make assuptions based on man made traditions.

I agree with the others that you are a sincere, sweet person. Even if you do have some unbibical ideas. Blessings,

Willa

Edited October 1, 2015 by Willa
reply was not included

[thereselittleflower]

Acts 1:21-22  Therefore, of these men WHO HAVE ACCOMPANIED US ALL THE TIME THAT THE LORD JESUS WENT IN AND OUT AMONG US, BEGINNING FROM THE BAPTISM OF JOHN TO THAT DAY WHEN HE WAS TAKEN FROM US, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.  

These are the parameters of an apostle.  None of those bishops after Peter's time had done these things.  There was no apostolic succession as claimed by the RCC because they must have been with Jesus throughout His ministry from baptism to death, resurrection and ascension.  In fact, James was the first head of the church.  Paul called himself an apostle but he  did not fill those requirements to be a true apostle.  He did meet the risen Christ but did not witness his baptism, ministry and crucifxion.

The pope was worth about 3 hours of news.  Having it carry on all day and then for a week or two is really offensive, while the media scorns true worship of God by evangelicals.  It is politically correct to be catholic now days!  But I found it offensive to "deify" Elvis as well.  

 

P.S.  It would be nice to limit quotes to 3 or 4 and then start anew.  

 

That was a very particular circumstance, one of the original 12 apostolic offices was vacant and Peter, the chief shepherd, declared how to fill that vacant office.

If your interpretation is correct, how did Paul become an apostle?

The APOSTLE Paul came much later onto the scene.

 

 

 

In Paul's own words, Galatians 1:1 NKJV  Paul, an apostle (not from men or through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead),---so Paul denied being made an apostle by Peter and he claimed to be made an apostle by God.  It pays to read the Bible and not make assuptions based on man made traditions.

I agree with the others that you are a sincere, sweet person. Even if you do have some unbibical ideas. Blessings,

Willa

Thank you for your kind words Willa even though we don't agree on these matters.

I agree with you though that man did not originate Paul's position of apostle, but God is the origin.

What we don't agree is on how God's choice was accomplished.

The word "from" or "of" as in other translations in "not from" "not of"  in the Greek mean

ἀπό apó, 

of origin

1. of the place whence anything is, comes, befalls, is taken

2. of origin of a cause

And the word  "through" in Greek means'

διά diá,

through

1. the ground or reason by which something is or is not done

   1. by reason of

   2. on account of

   3. because of for this reason

   4. therefore

   5. on this account

 

He's saying that the decision to make him an apostles did not ORIGINATE with men, it is not on account of men or by reason of men or because of men, but the decision originated with God.       That would not mean that other apostles were not involved in his ordination. It simply means they are not the origin of this plan.  God is.    And to this I and Catholics wholeheartedly agree.    

 

 

 

 

[Willa]

Dear friend,

It really helps to not try to wiggle out of what the Bible clearly states.  When Peter refers to Paul in his letter 2 Peter 3:15 he calls Paul our beloved brother and does not refer to him as the Apostle Paul.  Had he conferred this title it seems likely he would have used it.  When Jesus said "upon this rock I will build My church", he referred to the big rock, Petra, or cliff, not the little Petros or stone that he called Peter.  Perhaps he was referring to Peter's confession of Him being the Messiah as the big rock.  I don't know.  But he did not say Petros Peter.  

Making Jesus our Lord entails submitting to the authority of the teaching of the Bible.  It says that the Scriptures are God breathed.  I do pray that you come to love it as God's love letter to you. 

[thereselittleflower]

Dear friend,

It really helps to not try to wiggle out of what the Bible clearly states.  When Peter refers to Paul in his letter 2 Peter 3:15 he calls Paul our beloved brother and does not refer to him as the Apostle Paul.  Had he conferred this title it seems likely he would have used it.  When Jesus said "upon this rock I will build My church", he referred to the big rock, Petra, or cliff, not the little Petros or stone that he called Peter.  Perhaps he was referring to Peter's confession of Him being the Messiah as the big rock.  I don't know.  But he did not say Petros Peter.  

Making Jesus our Lord entails submitting to the authority of the teaching of the Bible.  It says that the Scriptures are God breathed.  I do pray that you come to love it as God's love letter to you. 

My dear friend, I don't think I'm trying to wiggle out of what the Bible clearly states. 

Peter refers to Paul's writings as scripture.   Personally I don't think Peter calling him beloved brother is in anyway signifying Peter did not also acknowledge he is an apostle.   He was their beloved brother.  They were very close.   Irenaeus, in the 2nd century, calls them both "the two most glorious apostles"  in Against Heresies 3:3:2   It is most clear the Early Church understood Paul was an Apostle.   Do you think Peter didn't know Paul was an Apostle?

 

[gdemoss]

Little flower, do you believe that the Catholic Church that you are a part of has replaced Israel?

[thereselittleflower]

Little flower, do you believe that the Catholic Church that you are a part of has replaced Israel?

I believe that Christ is the root and both jews and gentiles who believe are the branches.

[Your closest friendnt]

Dear friend,

It really helps to not try to wiggle out of what the Bible clearly states.  When Peter refers to Paul in his letter 2 Peter 3:15 he calls Paul our beloved brother and does not refer to him as the Apostle Paul.  Had he conferred this title it seems likely he would have used it.  When Jesus said "upon this rock I will build My church", he referred to the big rock, Petra, or cliff, not the little Petros or stone that he called Peter.  Perhaps he was referring to Peter's confession of Him being the Messiah as the big rock.  I don't know.  But he did not say Petros Peter.  

Making Jesus our Lord entails submitting to the authority of the teaching of the Bible.  It says that the Scriptures are God breathed.  I do pray that you come to love it as God's love letter to you. 

I am very greatfull to some Catholics I met in trying times of my life, contemplating to end all, they show me, there is the love of Jesus at the end of the rainbow, those beautiful people they stole my heart, never judging always supporting in some very peculiar way I never deserved, from that I learn that the love of Jesus is in the heart of the people, who love him the most by helping the most, even the ones that don't want to reach out to them. And they put their hands on my head, and pray, and pray.