Catholicism - Heart and Soul of a Great Nation

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mcdugga wrote:
Pat, some Popes bought their seat. Some Popes were simply the bastard son of the previous Pope. If this represents a holy, apostolic succession to you, ordained and protected by God, then I fear you too may be “drunk with the wine of her fornication”.[/quote]

There have been Popes who have been true scumbags as people. However, every single Pope has been infallible, meaning no Pope can change or has changed any dogma that has been accepted by the Church throughout history. Not surprising when you consider that Jesus said “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” Jesus was very clear that all the power of Hell could not overtake the Catholic Church and this has been proven time and time again throughout history when you consider some of the shady characters who became Pope.

Any attack I’ve ever seen on the Catholic Church by baptists/southern baptists/evangelical nuts is easily refutable by knowledge of the Bible.[/quote]
I can’t believe that people believe that the Catholic church started in the first century with the apostles and followers of Jesus. It’s a HISTORICAL FACT that the Roman Catholic church started with Emperor Constantine in the fourth century. I guess people who have faith in the Catholic church deny this just like they deny clear scripture that refutes just about all Catholic doctrine. Faith can be a good thing and a bad thing.

Now as far as the Christian congregation being built and a man named Peter this is completely FALSE. Unfortunately, Matthew 16:18 does cause some confusion but Jesus DID NOT say “you are Peter and on YOU I will build my congregation.” He said “you are Peter and on THIS ROCK MASS I will build my congregation.” Jesus was talking about himself as being the Rock Mass. No where is Peter identified as the Rock Mass or the Christian congregation being built on him. Jesus however is. I know that the Greek word for Peter which is Petros means piece of rock and Petra, the word Jesus used for ROCK MASS means MASS OF ROCK. But we don’t have to go as far as trying to identify the Greek words, all we have to do is turn to other parts of the Bible to see who clearly is identified as the congregation being built on.

First of all none of the apostles thought Jesus was talking about Peter when Jesus made that statement because later at Luke 22:24 the apostles argued over who was the greatest among them. If the Christian congregation was going to be built on Peter then there would not have been any disputing as to which one was the greatest. The Scriptures clearly show that as foundation stones, all the apostles are equal. All of them, including Peter, rest upon Christ Jesus as the foundation cornerstone. Ephesians 2:19 & 20 clearly shows this when it states:
“Certainly, therefore, you are no longer strangers and alien residents, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, and you have been built up upon the FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES and prophets, while CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF IS FOUNDATION CORNERSTONE.”
That verse clearly shows that the apostles are equal founding members but Jesus is the foundation corners stone. In ancient construction the cornerstone was laid first and was the most important stone in the building of a solid foundation. Peter even identifies Jesus as the ROCK MASS on which the congregation is being built at 1 Peter 2:7 & 8 which states:
“It is to YOU, therefore, that he is precious, because YOU are believers; but to those not believing, Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??the identical stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner, and Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢?? These are stumbling because they are disobedient to the word. To this very end they were also appointed.”

Paul similarly wrote at 1 Corinthians 10:3 which states:
“and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ.”

The Bible is clear that Peter was not the Rock Mass that the congregation was built on, Jesus is. Jesus was referring to himself as the Rock Mass when he was talking to Peter. The Bible is clear that the apostles including PETER are equal parts of the foundation on which the congregation or church was built. Jesus is the cornerstone. He is clearly the head of the congregation.

The whole Catholic church is built on this false teaching. Can you see how bad a false teaching can be? They wrongly believe that Jesus built the Christian congregation on Peter and that they can trace the Popes back to Peter. So they believe that the Pope should be the leader and put in an elevated position. This is clearly wrong. Even though the Bible is clear as to who the Christian congregation is built on peoples faith will cause them to either not understand the scriptures I wrote above or cause them to deny these scriptures. Again, faith can be a good thing but it can also being a very bad thing.
[/quote]
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
It’s ambiguous because Jesus did not clearly state in that verse as to who the Rock Mass is. He does not state that Peter is the Rock Mass. Did you read my post? I listed several scriptures that clearly identify Jesus as the Rock Mass and the Christian congregation being built on him. All of the apostles are equal parts of the foundation but Jesus is the chief cornerstone.

You want research here ya go.

Augustine (354-430�?� C.E.), usually referred to as �¢??Saint Augustine,�¢?? at one time believed that Peter was the rock-mass but later changed his view. . Lange�¢??s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Matt 16:18, ftn, pg 296) quotes Augustine as saying: �¢??The rock is not so named from Peter, but Peter from the rock (non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra), even as Christ is not so called after the Christian, but the Christian after Christ. For the reason why the Lord says, �¢??On this rock I will build my church,�¢?? is that Peter had said: �¢??Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.�¢?? On this rock, which thou hast confessed, says he, I will build my church. For Christ was the rock (petra enim erat Christus), upon which also Peter himself was built; for other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.�¢??�¢??Translated and edited by P.�?� Schaff, 1976.

[/quote]

Agree to disagree. There is overwhelmingly evidency that Jesus was specifically talking about Peter.[/quote]
Show me overwhelming evidence from the Bible that Peter was the Rock Mass that the Christian congregation was built on. I showed several scriptures to show that the Christian congregation was built on Jesus and that he was the Rock Mass and not Peter. All you showed me was that Jesus said Peter was blessed. Use the Bible to prove your doctrine.

142

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mcdugga wrote:
Pat, some Popes bought their seat. Some Popes were simply the bastard son of the previous Pope. If this represents a holy, apostolic succession to you, ordained and protected by God, then I fear you too may be “drunk with the wine of her fornication”.[/quote]

There have been Popes who have been true scumbags as people. However, every single Pope has been infallible, meaning no Pope can change or has changed any dogma that has been accepted by the Church throughout history. Not surprising when you consider that Jesus said “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” Jesus was very clear that all the power of Hell could not overtake the Catholic Church and this has been proven time and time again throughout history when you consider some of the shady characters who became Pope.

Any attack I’ve ever seen on the Catholic Church by baptists/southern baptists/evangelical nuts is easily refutable by knowledge of the Bible.[/quote]
I can’t believe that people believe that the Catholic church started in the first century with the apostles and followers of Jesus. It’s a HISTORICAL FACT that the Roman Catholic church started with Emperor Constantine in the fourth century. I guess people who have faith in the Catholic church deny this just like they deny clear scripture that refutes just about all Catholic doctrine. Faith can be a good thing and a bad thing.

Now as far as the Christian congregation being built and a man named Peter this is completely FALSE. Unfortunately, Matthew 16:18 does cause some confusion but Jesus DID NOT say “you are Peter and on YOU I will build my congregation.” He said “you are Peter and on THIS ROCK MASS I will build my congregation.” Jesus was talking about himself as being the Rock Mass. No where is Peter identified as the Rock Mass or the Christian congregation being built on him. Jesus however is. I know that the Greek word for Peter which is Petros means piece of rock and Petra, the word Jesus used for ROCK MASS means MASS OF ROCK. But we don’t have to go as far as trying to identify the Greek words, all we have to do is turn to other parts of the Bible to see who clearly is identified as the congregation being built on.

First of all none of the apostles thought Jesus was talking about Peter when Jesus made that statement because later at Luke 22:24 the apostles argued over who was the greatest among them. If the Christian congregation was going to be built on Peter then there would not have been any disputing as to which one was the greatest. The Scriptures clearly show that as foundation stones, all the apostles are equal. All of them, including Peter, rest upon Christ Jesus as the foundation cornerstone. Ephesians 2:19 & 20 clearly shows this when it states:
“Certainly, therefore, you are no longer strangers and alien residents, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, and you have been built up upon the FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES and prophets, while CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF IS FOUNDATION CORNERSTONE.”
That verse clearly shows that the apostles are equal founding members but Jesus is the foundation corners stone. In ancient construction the cornerstone was laid first and was the most important stone in the building of a solid foundation. Peter even identifies Jesus as the ROCK MASS on which the congregation is being built at 1 Peter 2:7 & 8 which states:
“It is to YOU, therefore, that he is precious, because YOU are believers; but to those not believing, Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??the identical stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner, and Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢?? These are stumbling because they are disobedient to the word. To this very end they were also appointed.”

Paul similarly wrote at 1 Corinthians 10:3 which states:
“and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ.”

The Bible is clear that Peter was not the Rock Mass that the congregation was built on, Jesus is. Jesus was referring to himself as the Rock Mass when he was talking to Peter. The Bible is clear that the apostles including PETER are equal parts of the foundation on which the congregation or church was built. Jesus is the cornerstone. He is clearly the head of the congregation.

The whole Catholic church is built on this false teaching. Can you see how bad a false teaching can be? They wrongly believe that Jesus built the Christian congregation on Peter and that they can trace the Popes back to Peter. So they believe that the Pope should be the leader and put in an elevated position. This is clearly wrong. Even though the Bible is clear as to who the Christian congregation is built on peoples faith will cause them to either not understand the scriptures I wrote above or cause them to deny these scriptures. Again, faith can be a good thing but it can also being a very bad thing.
[/quote]
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
It’s ambiguous because Jesus did not clearly state in that verse as to who the Rock Mass is. He does not state that Peter is the Rock Mass. Did you read my post? I listed several scriptures that clearly identify Jesus as the Rock Mass and the Christian congregation being built on him. All of the apostles are equal parts of the foundation but Jesus is the chief cornerstone.

You want research here ya go.

Augustine (354-430�?� C.E.), usually referred to as �¢??Saint Augustine,�¢?? at one time believed that Peter was the rock-mass but later changed his view. . Lange�¢??s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Matt 16:18, ftn, pg 296) quotes Augustine as saying: �¢??The rock is not so named from Peter, but Peter from the rock (non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra), even as Christ is not so called after the Christian, but the Christian after Christ. For the reason why the Lord says, �¢??On this rock I will build my church,�¢?? is that Peter had said: �¢??Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.�¢?? On this rock, which thou hast confessed, says he, I will build my church. For Christ was the rock (petra enim erat Christus), upon which also Peter himself was built; for other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.�¢??�¢??Translated and edited by P.�?� Schaff, 1976.

[/quote]

Agree to disagree. There is overwhelmingly evidency that Jesus was specifically talking about Peter.[/quote]
Show me overwhelming evidence from the Bible that Peter was the Rock Mass that the Christian congregation was built on. I showed several scriptures to show that the Christian congregation was built on Jesus and that he was the Rock Mass and not Peter. All you showed me was that Jesus said Peter was blessed. Use the Bible to prove your doctrine.

143

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Here is your post below.

Honest_Lifter:
I do consider myself a Christian. By the way, are you making sure, as a Christian, that you are following first all the things that we have been commissioned specifically to do? Things such as preaching the Bible’s message throughout the earth and observing the memorial of Christ’s death?

These are some things that would take priority over any celebration of Christ’s birth or resurrection.

Am I wrong that you said this, that Jesus’ Death is more important that Christ’s birth or ressurection? I wanted clairity of your statement, and you never gave it. Now you are changing your question to where does it state to observe Christ’s death.

You make all this very frustrating by making claims and then changing your story.[/quote]

You make that implication yourself based on what I said, and then just ran with it as if it was right out of my mouth. I said that we were commmanded to commemorate his death. Look it up if you don’t believe me: Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, John 13.

If you want to hear what people have to say, you have to be patient.

“Counsel in the heart of a man is as deep waters, but the man of discernment is one that will draw it up.” - Proverbs 20:5

144

[quote]Sloth wrote:

Were we commissioned to not observe/celebrate/mediate upon his birth? What’s your point?[/quote]

What? Are you saying that there was a command to NOT observe his birth?

145

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Here is your post below.

Honest_Lifter:
I do consider myself a Christian. By the way, are you making sure, as a Christian, that you are following first all the things that we have been commissioned specifically to do? Things such as preaching the Bible’s message throughout the earth and observing the memorial of Christ’s death?

These are some things that would take priority over any celebration of Christ’s birth or resurrection.

Am I wrong that you said this, that Jesus’ Death is more important that Christ’s birth or ressurection? I wanted clairity of your statement, and you never gave it. Now you are changing your question to where does it state to observe Christ’s death.

You make all this very frustrating by making claims and then changing your story.[/quote]

You make that implication yourself based on what I said, and then just ran with it as if it was right out of my mouth. I said that we were commmanded to commemorate his death. Look it up if you don’t believe me: Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, John 13.

If you want to hear what people have to say, you have to be patient.

“Counsel in the heart of a man is as deep waters, but the man of discernment is one that will draw it up.” - Proverbs 20:5
[/quote]

I see about the Lord’s Supper/ Communion. Now what do you say? Is his death more important than his resurrection?

“The purposes of a man’s heart are deep waters, but a man of understanding draws them out.” -
Proverbs 20:5

“Who can say, “I have kept my heart pure; I am clean and without sin”?” Proverbs 20:9

146

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mcdugga wrote:
Pat, some Popes bought their seat. Some Popes were simply the bastard son of the previous Pope. If this represents a holy, apostolic succession to you, ordained and protected by God, then I fear you too may be “drunk with the wine of her fornication”.[/quote]

There have been Popes who have been true scumbags as people. However, every single Pope has been infallible, meaning no Pope can change or has changed any dogma that has been accepted by the Church throughout history. Not surprising when you consider that Jesus said “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” Jesus was very clear that all the power of Hell could not overtake the Catholic Church and this has been proven time and time again throughout history when you consider some of the shady characters who became Pope.

Any attack I’ve ever seen on the Catholic Church by baptists/southern baptists/evangelical nuts is easily refutable by knowledge of the Bible.[/quote]
I can’t believe that people believe that the Catholic church started in the first century with the apostles and followers of Jesus. It’s a HISTORICAL FACT that the Roman Catholic church started with Emperor Constantine in the fourth century. I guess people who have faith in the Catholic church deny this just like they deny clear scripture that refutes just about all Catholic doctrine. Faith can be a good thing and a bad thing.

Now as far as the Christian congregation being built and a man named Peter this is completely FALSE. Unfortunately, Matthew 16:18 does cause some confusion but Jesus DID NOT say “you are Peter and on YOU I will build my congregation.” He said “you are Peter and on THIS ROCK MASS I will build my congregation.” Jesus was talking about himself as being the Rock Mass. No where is Peter identified as the Rock Mass or the Christian congregation being built on him. Jesus however is. I know that the Greek word for Peter which is Petros means piece of rock and Petra, the word Jesus used for ROCK MASS means MASS OF ROCK. But we don’t have to go as far as trying to identify the Greek words, all we have to do is turn to other parts of the Bible to see who clearly is identified as the congregation being built on.

First of all none of the apostles thought Jesus was talking about Peter when Jesus made that statement because later at Luke 22:24 the apostles argued over who was the greatest among them. If the Christian congregation was going to be built on Peter then there would not have been any disputing as to which one was the greatest. The Scriptures clearly show that as foundation stones, all the apostles are equal. All of them, including Peter, rest upon Christ Jesus as the foundation cornerstone. Ephesians 2:19 & 20 clearly shows this when it states:
“Certainly, therefore, you are no longer strangers and alien residents, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, and you have been built up upon the FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES and prophets, while CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF IS FOUNDATION CORNERSTONE.”
That verse clearly shows that the apostles are equal founding members but Jesus is the foundation corners stone. In ancient construction the cornerstone was laid first and was the most important stone in the building of a solid foundation. Peter even identifies Jesus as the ROCK MASS on which the congregation is being built at 1 Peter 2:7 & 8 which states:
“It is to YOU, therefore, that he is precious, because YOU are believers; but to those not believing, Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??the identical stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner, and Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢?? These are stumbling because they are disobedient to the word. To this very end they were also appointed.”

Paul similarly wrote at 1 Corinthians 10:3 which states:
“and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ.”

The Bible is clear that Peter was not the Rock Mass that the congregation was built on, Jesus is. Jesus was referring to himself as the Rock Mass when he was talking to Peter. The Bible is clear that the apostles including PETER are equal parts of the foundation on which the congregation or church was built. Jesus is the cornerstone. He is clearly the head of the congregation.

The whole Catholic church is built on this false teaching. Can you see how bad a false teaching can be? They wrongly believe that Jesus built the Christian congregation on Peter and that they can trace the Popes back to Peter. So they believe that the Pope should be the leader and put in an elevated position. This is clearly wrong. Even though the Bible is clear as to who the Christian congregation is built on peoples faith will cause them to either not understand the scriptures I wrote above or cause them to deny these scriptures. Again, faith can be a good thing but it can also being a very bad thing.
[/quote]
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
It’s ambiguous because Jesus did not clearly state in that verse as to who the Rock Mass is. He does not state that Peter is the Rock Mass. Did you read my post? I listed several scriptures that clearly identify Jesus as the Rock Mass and the Christian congregation being built on him. All of the apostles are equal parts of the foundation but Jesus is the chief cornerstone.

You want research here ya go.

Augustine (354-430� C.E.), usually referred to as Saint Augustine, at one time believed that Peter was the rock-mass but later changed his view. . Langes Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Matt 16:18, ftn, pg 296) quotes Augustine as saying: The rock is not so named from Peter, but Peter from the rock (non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra), even as Christ is not so called after the Christian, but the Christian after Christ. For the reason why the Lord says, On this rock I will build my church, is that Peter had said: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. On this rock, which thou hast confessed, says he, I will build my church. For Christ was the rock (petra enim erat Christus), upon which also Peter himself was built; for other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Translated and edited by P.�?� Schaff, 1976.

[/quote]

Yes I read your post, no you are not right in this matter. Peter was the rock of the church, and Jesus so named him. The statement does not make sense any other way, he is attributing characteristics of the leader of Jesus’s church, so how could he attribute one property to himself and the rest to Peter. I am afraid this is just an attempt to defraud or invalidate the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church was the only Christian Church. There are several places where Peter’s authority is established, see the end of John.
This does not take away Jesus’s petrological properties, he’s is still the corner stone. He is also known as the Lamb of God, the Good Shepard, Son of Man (like Elijah), etc. Nobody, least of all Peter is competing for equality with Jesus.

147

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:

[quote]mcdugga wrote:
Pat, some Popes bought their seat. Some Popes were simply the bastard son of the previous Pope. If this represents a holy, apostolic succession to you, ordained and protected by God, then I fear you too may be “drunk with the wine of her fornication”.[/quote]

There have been Popes who have been true scumbags as people. However, every single Pope has been infallible, meaning no Pope can change or has changed any dogma that has been accepted by the Church throughout history. Not surprising when you consider that Jesus said “on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” Jesus was very clear that all the power of Hell could not overtake the Catholic Church and this has been proven time and time again throughout history when you consider some of the shady characters who became Pope.

Any attack I’ve ever seen on the Catholic Church by baptists/southern baptists/evangelical nuts is easily refutable by knowledge of the Bible.[/quote]
I can’t believe that people believe that the Catholic church started in the first century with the apostles and followers of Jesus. It’s a HISTORICAL FACT that the Roman Catholic church started with Emperor Constantine in the fourth century. I guess people who have faith in the Catholic church deny this just like they deny clear scripture that refutes just about all Catholic doctrine. Faith can be a good thing and a bad thing.

Now as far as the Christian congregation being built and a man named Peter this is completely FALSE. Unfortunately, Matthew 16:18 does cause some confusion but Jesus DID NOT say “you are Peter and on YOU I will build my congregation.” He said “you are Peter and on THIS ROCK MASS I will build my congregation.” Jesus was talking about himself as being the Rock Mass. No where is Peter identified as the Rock Mass or the Christian congregation being built on him. Jesus however is. I know that the Greek word for Peter which is Petros means piece of rock and Petra, the word Jesus used for ROCK MASS means MASS OF ROCK. But we don’t have to go as far as trying to identify the Greek words, all we have to do is turn to other parts of the Bible to see who clearly is identified as the congregation being built on.

First of all none of the apostles thought Jesus was talking about Peter when Jesus made that statement because later at Luke 22:24 the apostles argued over who was the greatest among them. If the Christian congregation was going to be built on Peter then there would not have been any disputing as to which one was the greatest. The Scriptures clearly show that as foundation stones, all the apostles are equal. All of them, including Peter, rest upon Christ Jesus as the foundation cornerstone. Ephesians 2:19 & 20 clearly shows this when it states:
“Certainly, therefore, you are no longer strangers and alien residents, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, and you have been built up upon the FOUNDATION OF THE APOSTLES and prophets, while CHRIST JESUS HIMSELF IS FOUNDATION CORNERSTONE.”
That verse clearly shows that the apostles are equal founding members but Jesus is the foundation corners stone. In ancient construction the cornerstone was laid first and was the most important stone in the building of a solid foundation. Peter even identifies Jesus as the ROCK MASS on which the congregation is being built at 1 Peter 2:7 & 8 which states:
“It is to YOU, therefore, that he is precious, because YOU are believers; but to those not believing, Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??the identical stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner, and Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢?? These are stumbling because they are disobedient to the word. To this very end they were also appointed.”

Paul similarly wrote at 1 Corinthians 10:3 which states:
“and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ.”

The Bible is clear that Peter was not the Rock Mass that the congregation was built on, Jesus is. Jesus was referring to himself as the Rock Mass when he was talking to Peter. The Bible is clear that the apostles including PETER are equal parts of the foundation on which the congregation or church was built. Jesus is the cornerstone. He is clearly the head of the congregation.

The whole Catholic church is built on this false teaching. Can you see how bad a false teaching can be? They wrongly believe that Jesus built the Christian congregation on Peter and that they can trace the Popes back to Peter. So they believe that the Pope should be the leader and put in an elevated position. This is clearly wrong. Even though the Bible is clear as to who the Christian congregation is built on peoples faith will cause them to either not understand the scriptures I wrote above or cause them to deny these scriptures. Again, faith can be a good thing but it can also being a very bad thing.
[/quote]
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
It’s ambiguous because Jesus did not clearly state in that verse as to who the Rock Mass is. He does not state that Peter is the Rock Mass. Did you read my post? I listed several scriptures that clearly identify Jesus as the Rock Mass and the Christian congregation being built on him. All of the apostles are equal parts of the foundation but Jesus is the chief cornerstone.

You want research here ya go.

Augustine (354-430�?� C.E.), usually referred to as Saint Augustine, at one time believed that Peter was the rock-mass but later changed his view. . Langes Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Matt 16:18, ftn, pg 296) quotes Augustine as saying: The rock is not so named from Peter, but Peter from the rock (non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a petra), even as Christ is not so called after the Christian, but the Christian after Christ. For the reason why the Lord says, On this rock I will build my church, is that Peter had said: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. On this rock, which thou hast confessed, says he, I will build my church. For Christ was the rock (petra enim erat Christus), upon which also Peter himself was built; for other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Translated and edited by P.�??�?� Schaff, 1976.

[/quote]

Yes I read your post, no you are not right in this matter. Peter was the rock of the church, and Jesus so named him. The statement does not make sense any other way, he is attributing characteristics of the leader of Jesus’s church, so how could he attribute one property to himself and the rest to Peter. I am afraid this is just an attempt to defraud or invalidate the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church was the only Christian Church. There are several places where Peter’s authority is established, see the end of John.
This does not take away Jesus’s petrological properties, he’s is still the corner stone. He is also known as the Lamb of God, the Good Shepard, Son of Man (like Elijah), etc. Nobody, least of all Peter is competing for equality with Jesus.[/quote]

Wasn’t it Peter when he was Martyred wanted to be crucified upside down because he believed he was not worthy to be crucified the same way as Jesus? Peter definitely did not consider himself equal to Jesus. Doesn’t Peter or Petra mean Rock?

148

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

OK, and what is your point?[/quote]

Wow. Seriously? I have read enough of your posts to know you are more intelligent than that. That point is crystal clear to ANY person claiming to call themselves Christian, which you have done.
[/quote]

Tell me the point then.[/quote]

The post you made that statement in IS the point.[/quote]

I don’t understand. If you care to elaborate, feel free.
[/quote]

dmaddox wrote: Without his Resurrection his death would have been no different than you or I dying.

I’m not sure what you don’t understand about this statement. There isn’t any elaborating to do. What about this do you not understand?

[/quote]

What does he want me to do about that?[/quote]

Who?
[/quote]
dmaddox[/quote]

Oh that is right. You guys dont beleive in the physical Resurrection of Jesus, so the resurection did not happen. Without the physical ressurrection of Jesus then what he did on the cross means nothing.

If you guys beleive in the literal interpretation of the Bible how do you explain when Jesus asked Thomas to touch his hands and side? To me that seems like a physical resurrection.[/quote]
Dmaddox, who ever said that we don’t believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus? Of course we believe that Jesus was resurrected three days after he died. The Bible clearly states this. We just said that we don’t celebrate this on Easter. We celebrate his death only. Why? Because that is what Jesus said to celebrate and you can find examples in the Christian-Greek scriptures of the early Christians celebrating the memorial of his Death; not his birth or his resurrection. We pattern ourselves after the first century Christians in the Bible.

As to which is more important his death or resurrection, the Bible doesn’t say. Of course his resurrection is important, without his resurrection God would not be able to fulfill his purpose of Jesus being King of the heavenly Kingdom, destroying the wicked at Armageddon, destroying death once and for all and dealing the death blow to Satan. We don’t celebrate it because Jesus did not say to and the first century Christians in the Bible did not celebrate it. Furthermore, Easter is the formal way most Christian religions celebrate Jesus’ resurrection. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible states that Easter was â??originally the spring festival in honor of the Teutonic goddess of light and spring known in Anglo-Saxon as Eastre,â?? or Eostre."

When Paul wrote the second letter to the Corinth congregation he made it clear as to whether it’s okay to mix good with bad. 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 states:
"Do not be joined to unbelievers. What do right and wrong have in common? Can light and darkness be friends? 15 How can Christ and Satan agree? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16 How can the temple of the true God and the statues of other gods agree?
We are the temple of the living God. God has said, "I will live with them. I will walk among them. I will be their God. And they will be my people. 17 “So come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch anything that is not pure and clean. Then I will receive you.”

Clear and direct. DO NOT MIX GOOD WITH BAD.

Look at the example with the Israelites (Exodus 32:1-10,25-28, 35). When Moses was receiving the 10 commandments, the Israelites adopted an Egyptian religious practice and renamed it a “festival of God.” They even had a party. Did God approve or ignore this since they directed this worship to him. Of course not. The Israelites were severly punished for that.

149

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Here is your post below.

Honest_Lifter:
I do consider myself a Christian. By the way, are you making sure, as a Christian, that you are following first all the things that we have been commissioned specifically to do? Things such as preaching the Bible’s message throughout the earth and observing the memorial of Christ’s death?

These are some things that would take priority over any celebration of Christ’s birth or resurrection.

Am I wrong that you said this, that Jesus’ Death is more important that Christ’s birth or ressurection? I wanted clairity of your statement, and you never gave it. Now you are changing your question to where does it state to observe Christ’s death.

You make all this very frustrating by making claims and then changing your story.[/quote]

You make that implication yourself based on what I said, and then just ran with it as if it was right out of my mouth. I said that we were commmanded to commemorate his death. Look it up if you don’t believe me: Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, John 13.

If you want to hear what people have to say, you have to be patient.

“Counsel in the heart of a man is as deep waters, but the man of discernment is one that will draw it up.” - Proverbs 20:5
[/quote]

I see about the Lord’s Supper/ Communion. Now what do you say? Is his death more important than his resurrection?

“The purposes of a man’s heart are deep waters, but a man of understanding draws them out.” -
Proverbs 20:5

“Who can say, “I have kept my heart pure; I am clean and without sin”?” Proverbs 20:9 [/quote]

For some reason, you feel I think we don’t need Jesus to be cleared of sin. I have never said that, nor do I believe it. We need Jesus, plain and simple.

As far as what is more important, that is not for me to decide.

150

A few more scriptures how we should not mix the good with the Bad:

Isaiah 52:11
Turn away, turn away, get out of there, touch nothing unclean; get out from the midst of her, keep yourselves clean, YOU who are carrying the utensils of Jehovah.

Rev 18:4
And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues.”

151

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

OK, and what is your point?[/quote]

Wow. Seriously? I have read enough of your posts to know you are more intelligent than that. That point is crystal clear to ANY person claiming to call themselves Christian, which you have done.
[/quote]

Tell me the point then.[/quote]

The post you made that statement in IS the point.[/quote]

I don’t understand. If you care to elaborate, feel free.
[/quote]

dmaddox wrote: Without his Resurrection his death would have been no different than you or I dying.

I’m not sure what you don’t understand about this statement. There isn’t any elaborating to do. What about this do you not understand?

[/quote]

What does he want me to do about that?[/quote]

Who?
[/quote]
dmaddox[/quote]

Oh that is right. You guys dont beleive in the physical Resurrection of Jesus, so the resurection did not happen. Without the physical ressurrection of Jesus then what he did on the cross means nothing.

If you guys beleive in the literal interpretation of the Bible how do you explain when Jesus asked Thomas to touch his hands and side? To me that seems like a physical resurrection.[/quote]
Dmaddox, who ever said that we don’t believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus? Of course we believe that Jesus was resurrected three days after he died. The Bible clearly states this. We just said that we don’t celebrate this on Easter. We celebrate his death only. Why? Because that is what Jesus said to celebrate and you can find examples in the Christian-Greek scriptures of the early Christians celebrating the memorial of his Death; not his birth or his resurrection. We pattern ourselves after the first century Christians in the Bible.

As to which is more important his death or resurrection, the Bible doesn’t say. Of course his resurrection is important, without his resurrection God would not be able to fulfill his purpose of Jesus being King of the heavenly Kingdom, destroying the wicked at Armageddon, destroying death once and for all and dealing the death blow to Satan. We don’t celebrate it because Jesus did not say to and the first century Christians in the Bible did not celebrate it. Furthermore, Easter is the formal way most Christian religions celebrate Jesus’ resurrection. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible states that Easter was â??originally the spring festival in honor of the Teutonic goddess of light and spring known in Anglo-Saxon as Eastre,â?? or Eostre."

When Paul wrote the second letter to the Corinth congregation he made it clear as to whether it’s okay to mix good with bad. 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 states:
"Do not be joined to unbelievers. What do right and wrong have in common? Can light and darkness be friends? 15 How can Christ and Satan agree? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16 How can the temple of the true God and the statues of other gods agree?
We are the temple of the living God. God has said, "I will live with them. I will walk among them. I will be their God. And they will be my people. 17 “So come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch anything that is not pure and clean. Then I will receive you.”

Clear and direct. DO NOT MIX GOOD WITH BAD.

Look at the example with the Israelites (Exodus 32:1-10,25-28, 35). When Moses was receiving the 10 commandments, the Israelites adopted an Egyptian religious practice and renamed it a “festival of God.” They even had a party. Did God approve or ignore this since they directed this worship to him. Of course not. The Israelites were severly punished for that.

[/quote]

mse2us, I would like to say thank you for being open with your answers and you do not use questions to confuse the people on this page. Again thank you for being direct. I might not agree with some of the doctrine you say, but I do respect you.

How can Jesus be the King of Heaven and not be God?

I see your idea of mixing the Good with the Bad. I go to church on Easter Sunday to be with fellow beleivers to remember the resurrection of Jesus. We even do a Maundy Thursday service commemerate the last supper and commemerate his death. What is wrong with that? Do you guys even celebrate his birth, death, or resurrection? If so how?

The reason the people were punished was because they were not worshipping God, but the golden Calf that they made. You can call a brazen image anything you want. The Israelites had just come from a land that worshipped idols on a regular basis. What did they do when Moses was gone for a period of time? They reverted back to idol worship. That was why they were punished. The Catholic Church does not worship idols. They do not worship the Saints. They ask the saints to interceed for them. I understand and beleive that Jesus is the high priest and the ultimate intercessor, but it helps to know that other people are praying for you. If you are alone you ask the saints or Mary to pray for you. “Where 2 or more are gathered in my name there I will also be.” I personally do not subscribe to this, but I can see their point. I will stand behind my brothers.

152

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
A few more scriptures how we should not mix the good with the Bad:

Isaiah 52:11
Turn away, turn away, get out of there, touch nothing unclean; get out from the midst of her, keep yourselves clean, YOU who are carrying the utensils of Jehovah.

Rev 18:4
And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues.”
[/quote]

You have harped on our ability to worship and remember Jesus’ Birth, Death, and Resurrection. Your turn. How do you guys celebrate those things?

153

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]mcdugga wrote:
Pat, some Popes bought their seat. Some Popes were simply the bastard son of the previous Pope. If this represents a holy, apostolic succession to you, ordained and protected by God, then I fear you too may be “drunk with the wine of her fornication”.[/quote]

Incorrect. Here is the list of every Pope, find the one who bought their seat…

That’s not to say that the papacy had not been affected by political corruption and other bad behaviours of various degrees, but the succession is intact and the core dogma of the church has always been protected by the pope and never changed.[/quote]

Quid pro quo:

Alexander was followed by Julius II who purchased the papacy with his own private fortune. He didn’t even pretend to be a Christian. A notorious womanizer who sired any number of bastards, Julius was so eaten away with syphilis that he couldn’t even expose his foot to be kissed.

http://www.rense.com/general63/popo.htm

154

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
Since I respect you pat and enjoy reading your posts and use of logic on the boards. I will try my best to present my argument in a clear manner. Got the information from here Matthew 16:18 HCSB - And I also say to you that you are - Bible Gateway Jesus tells peter “And I also say to you that you are Peter, [a] and on this rock [b] I will build My church, (A) and the forces [c] of Hades will not overpower it.”. The meaning of [a]Peter or Petros means “a specific stone or rock” and [b]rock or petra means “a rocky crag or bedrock”. Now obviously these two words are not referring to the same thing and if you put the meaning of the words into Jesus statement you have him saying “And I also say to you that you are (a specific rock), and on this (bedrock) I will build My church, (A) and the forces [c] of Hades will not overpower it.” Now if peter was referred to as Petra I couldn’t reasonably back up my assertion. Irrespective of this matter I consider you a brother in Christ.

155

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

OK, and what is your point?[/quote]

Wow. Seriously? I have read enough of your posts to know you are more intelligent than that. That point is crystal clear to ANY person claiming to call themselves Christian, which you have done.
[/quote]

Tell me the point then.[/quote]

The post you made that statement in IS the point.[/quote]

I don’t understand. If you care to elaborate, feel free.
[/quote]

dmaddox wrote: Without his Resurrection his death would have been no different than you or I dying.

I’m not sure what you don’t understand about this statement. There isn’t any elaborating to do. What about this do you not understand?

[/quote]

What does he want me to do about that?[/quote]

Who?
[/quote]
dmaddox[/quote]

Oh that is right. You guys dont beleive in the physical Resurrection of Jesus, so the resurection did not happen. Without the physical ressurrection of Jesus then what he did on the cross means nothing.

If you guys beleive in the literal interpretation of the Bible how do you explain when Jesus asked Thomas to touch his hands and side? To me that seems like a physical resurrection.[/quote]
Dmaddox, who ever said that we don’t believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus? Of course we believe that Jesus was resurrected three days after he died. The Bible clearly states this. We just said that we don’t celebrate this on Easter. We celebrate his death only. Why? Because that is what Jesus said to celebrate and you can find examples in the Christian-Greek scriptures of the early Christians celebrating the memorial of his Death; not his birth or his resurrection. We pattern ourselves after the first century Christians in the Bible.

As to which is more important his death or resurrection, the Bible doesn’t say. Of course his resurrection is important, without his resurrection God would not be able to fulfill his purpose of Jesus being King of the heavenly Kingdom, destroying the wicked at Armageddon, destroying death once and for all and dealing the death blow to Satan. We don’t celebrate it because Jesus did not say to and the first century Christians in the Bible did not celebrate it. Furthermore, Easter is the formal way most Christian religions celebrate Jesus’ resurrection. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible states that Easter was Ã?¢??originally the spring festival in honor of the Teutonic goddess of light and spring known in Anglo-Saxon as Eastre,Ã?¢?? or Eostre."

When Paul wrote the second letter to the Corinth congregation he made it clear as to whether it’s okay to mix good with bad. 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 states:
"Do not be joined to unbelievers. What do right and wrong have in common? Can light and darkness be friends? 15 How can Christ and Satan agree? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16 How can the temple of the true God and the statues of other gods agree?
We are the temple of the living God. God has said, "I will live with them. I will walk among them. I will be their God. And they will be my people. 17 “So come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch anything that is not pure and clean. Then I will receive you.”

Clear and direct. DO NOT MIX GOOD WITH BAD.

Look at the example with the Israelites (Exodus 32:1-10,25-28, 35). When Moses was receiving the 10 commandments, the Israelites adopted an Egyptian religious practice and renamed it a “festival of God.” They even had a party. Did God approve or ignore this since they directed this worship to him. Of course not. The Israelites were severly punished for that.

[/quote]

mse2us, I would like to say thank you for being open with your answers and you do not use questions to confuse the people on this page. Again thank you for being direct. I might not agree with some of the doctrine you say, but I do respect you.

How can Jesus be the King of Heaven and not be God?

I see your idea of mixing the Good with the Bad. I go to church on Easter Sunday to be with fellow beleivers to remember the resurrection of Jesus. We even do a Maundy Thursday service commemerate the last supper and commemerate his death. What is wrong with that? Do you guys even celebrate his birth, death, or resurrection? If so how?

The reason the people were punished was because they were not worshipping God, but the golden Calf that they made. You can call a brazen image anything you want. The Israelites had just come from a land that worshipped idols on a regular basis. What did they do when Moses was gone for a period of time? They reverted back to idol worship. That was why they were punished. The Catholic Church does not worship idols. They do not worship the Saints. They ask the saints to interceed for them. I understand and beleive that Jesus is the high priest and the ultimate intercessor, but it helps to know that other people are praying for you. If you are alone you ask the saints or Mary to pray for you. “Where 2 or more are gathered in my name there I will also be.” I personally do not subscribe to this, but I can see their point. I will stand behind my brothers. [/quote]
I appreciate your kind words. That’s a good question as to how Jesus can be King in Heaven and not be God. Do you know about the Kingdom that is talked about in the Hebrew scriptures and that Jesus mentions over 100 times in the Gospels? Daniel 2:44 explains it:
“And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;”

This of course is the Kingdom that Jesus told us to pray for. Now how do we know that Jesus will be the King? Daniel 7:13 & 14 explains:
13 â??I kept on beholding in the visions of the night, and, see there! with the clouds of the heavens someone like a son of man happened to be coming; and to the Ancient of Days he gained access, and they brought him up close even before that One. 14 And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin."

As I’m sure you know Jesus is the SON OF MAN and the Ancient of Days is none other than God. Can you see the distinction? God is going to give Jesus the Kingdom . He will be King of this Kingdom which will rule over earth. Can you see that those two verses above point to a Kingdom that is going to remove human governments on earth and PEOPLEs, NATIONAL GROUPS on earth, which is were people and national groups reside will serve Jesus as the King of this Kingdom. God’s Kingdom is not in ones heart as the King James translation mistranslates. No God’s Kingdom is a heavenly government that will rule over earth and remove all the wickedness that we see today. Isaiah 9:6-8 explains this well when it states:
“6 For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. 7 To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom in order to establish it firmly and to sustain it by means of justice and by means of righteousness, from now on and to time indefinite. The very zeal of Jehovah of armies will do this.”

Remember, we don’t celebrate Jesus’ birth or resurrection. We commemorate Jesus’ death by doing exactly what Jesus and his apostles did during the last supper. The event is very conservative. A brother gives a 20 minute talk usually discussing what Jesus’ sacrifice did for mankind and why it was necessary. After this talk the bread and wine are passed among the audience and only those with the heavenly hope partake of the bread and the wine. Since the Bible states that only a “Little Flock” have the heavenly hope very few eat the bread and drink the wine. Those with an earthly hope, which is most people, just observe. For example, no one in my Kingdom Hall partook of the bread and wine. We pass the bread and then the wine and after the wine is passed the memorial service is over. There no partying, dancing or celebrating in the traditional sense.

156

So Christians (Catholics and Protestants) will not go to heaven? In fact they will not even stay on earth? My brothers and I will just become dust.

What makes the 144,000 so special that they can go to heaven, but the rest of you all stay on earth? That makes no sense to me.

157

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
What makes the 144,000 so special that they can go to heaven, but the rest of you all stay on earth? That makes no sense to me. [/quote]
Don’t bring up sense in a thread about religion.

158

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Amen the bible is consistently and abundantly clear about who the rock is.[/quote]

Do some research. You are incorrect.
I am not sure how this is ambiguous…
Mt. 16:18-19
“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Man, their is an incredible amount of misinformation about Catholicism! The lies have taken on a life of their own. If you seek the truth you will realize we are not far apart, but very close.[/quote]
Since I respect you pat and enjoy reading your posts and use of logic on the boards. I will try my best to present my argument in a clear manner. Got the information from here Matthew 16:18 HCSB - And I also say to you that you are - Bible Gateway Jesus tells peter “And I also say to you that you are Peter, [a] and on this rock [b] I will build My church, (A) and the forces [c] of Hades will not overpower it.”. The meaning of [a]Peter or Petros means “a specific stone or rock” and [b]rock or petra means “a rocky crag or bedrock”. Now obviously these two words are not referring to the same thing and if you put the meaning of the words into Jesus statement you have him saying “And I also say to you that you are (a specific rock), and on this (bedrock) I will build My church, (A) and the forces [c] of Hades will not overpower it.” Now if peter was referred to as Petra I couldn’t reasonably back up my assertion. Irrespective of this matter I consider you a brother in Christ.[/quote]

My personal feeling is that the dispute is centered on the fact that if the Catholic interpretation, which was the only one for some 1500 years, is the true interpretation, that that would some how invalidate the Protestant sects. This is not true. Even different we share the same ancestry. My history is your history.
In the end it doesn’t matter. Catholics are going to hold to their history and tradition and people will interpret what they want. Our differences don’t matter, our love for God is the only thing that matters.

159

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
So Christians (Catholics and Protestants) will not go to heaven? In fact they will not even stay on earth? My brothers and I will just become dust.

What makes the 144,000 so special that they can go to heaven, but the rest of you all stay on earth? That makes no sense to me. [/quote]

Out of the billions of people who have lived and died since the time of Christ, I am pretty sure those slots are filled. 144,000 is a college football stadium.

160

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
So Christians (Catholics and Protestants) will not go to heaven? In fact they will not even stay on earth? My brothers and I will just become dust.

What makes the 144,000 so special that they can go to heaven, but the rest of you all stay on earth? That makes no sense to me. [/quote]

Out of the billions of people who have lived and died since the time of Christ, I am pretty sure those slots are filled. 144,000 is a college football stadium.[/quote]

My thoughts are that 144,000 if a literal number is 12x12,000. That means there will be 12,000 people from each tribe of Israel. So if you are taking the number as being literal you will have to be of Jewish decent to be one of the 144,000. I do not subscribe to the number is an actual number, but a number that just means a large amount of people.