I'm there
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (77)
sorted by:
Words have meaning, remember? What “church”? The eternal redemption church or the physical church? Peter started the latter. I’ll say yes, he was the leader.
Yes, words have meanings that you are, and I say this in good faith, poorly catechized about.
The "church" is the body of the faithful. Christ is the head. Read your Paulian epistles, that's his language, not mine. It doesn't matter if there is a building or not. Wherever people are gathered in Jesus' name, it's a church. Therefore, when Jesus was on earth, and the disciples were gathered in the upper room, for that last supper, that was the "church".
With all due respect, then, since you admit that Peter was the leader of the apostles, you're actually where the Orthodox and Chaldeans and the other pre-protestant groups are. They just deny the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. All bishops....Catholic, Orthodox, Chaldean, Armenian (basically all pre-protestant) can trace every bishop back to someone ordained by the Apostles. Remember, ordination started in Acts.
In acts the church was synodal, without Peter as the head. The Roman Catholic Church abandoned the synodal structure and started innovating to power grab. Papal primacy existed, but papal supremacy and papal infallibility did not exist in the first thousand years of Christianity. The original justification for these innovations were based on now admitted papal forgeries.
The Vatican admits these in these two semi recent documents attempting to reunite East and West.
Here’s the Chieti document
Here’s the Alexandria document
In both of these the Vatican concedes to most of the Orthodox criticism over the past thousand years. They admit the early church was nothing like the Vatican operates now; that they based their power originally on forgeries (why would the pillar and ground of truth need forgeries to seize power?)
That’s your Vatican saying it too; you don’t have to take my word for it.
I don't disagree. If the Great Schism were ever to be healed, though, the Orthodox would have to concede on a few issues themselves.
We are in agreement about the “church” and that it is a gathering of Christ’s worshippers and can include any number of aspects so long as those aspects align with the Bible. Did you know “Christian” is mentioned in the Bible (read Acts) because it is the only true religion and because Christ’s OG disciples were Christians? They literally followed and worshipped Christ on Earth. Again, can you point me to any chapter and verse where other religions (Catholicism, Mormonism, Protestants, Scientologists, Baptists, etc.) are mentioned in the Bible?
I’m not sure why you think I’m “Protestant” and that sola scriptura is somehow wrong, but that’s typically a Catholic view. Are you a Catholic? The Bible should be your only source of Christ’s teachings, which causes an issue for Catholics because there is no mention of Catholicism, the Pope, and any other Catholic ideologies in the Bible because it is a man-made, deceiving “religion” and not in alignment Christ’s teachings. And that’s why Catholics believe in ideas that are in clear disagreement with the Bible. How do you rationalize the Pope encouraging Catholics to agree with ideologies that contradict the Bible? I’d love to know your mental gymnastics needed to justify the Pope and his role in God’s kingdom.
Again, words have meanings that you keep mangling.
The Catholics mentioned in the Bible were Christians. No other form of Christians existed until other denominations broke away, such as the Chaldeans in 410AD, and the 2nd the Orthodox with the Great Schism. You're so laughably ignorant about history, that I'm walking all over you, God forgive me for enjoying it so much.
And Mormons aren't Christians. That you would even type that is so fucking ignorant it astounds me, for somebody claiming Catholic and Orthodox aren't Christian.
Catholics and Orthodox, etc. believe certain things heretics like you don't for two reason, but primarily because they have 7 books in the Bible that were removed by Luther 1,200 years after the Bible was compiled. Which organization compiled the Bible...why, the Catholic Church. The Bible, mon ami, is a Catholic book.
Uh. You can’t read, which may explain why you don’t understand the Bible. Where did I say Mormons are Christians? That’s as laughable as saying Catholics are Christians. One more time, fool, where are CATHOLICS mentioned in the BIBLE?
Now I’m a heretic? To say the Bible is a CATHOLIC book is blasphemy. The Bible is inspired by God and not tied to any errant man-made religion.
Enjoy Sheol and say hi to the Pope while you two non-believers co-mingle for eternity. You can’t Hail Mary yourself out of damnation. Better get started.