What Did jesus mean" Upon This Rock, I Will Build my Church?"

[Catalyst]

can you prove by ANY credible non Catholic source that early church was the RCC of today, that there was a papacy, and that RCC doctrines were in place, such as venerating mary and the 'saints?"

Well, that eliminates the NEW TESTAMENT, that's going to make it rough.

However, if you hold Roman Catholic began after Constantine, then the letter of Clement to Corinth describes the church exactly as it appears today. So we'd be able to say that at the first of the 2nd century it looked like the RCC does today. And the E.O. and the Ethiopean, and the Coptic, and the Anglican, and the Lutheran....

The council at jerusalem was led by "bishops" and heads of the Church with one leader over them, there you have the Papacy in image, if not yet title.

If the old testament is a predilection of the new, you have the Melchizedekian priesthood which Mel was the High priest of, so if there were a high priest there were priests under Him. And after that you had the Levitical and Aaronic priesthoods, each had a leader over them that heard from God and delivered the message, executed it.

The Church today is to execute the LOVE of GOD to the masses. We are here to execute for Him, be His tools of righteousness, not tools of theology. Everything about the NT church reflects off of the old testament priesthoods.

So, Ummm... you'll have a much harder time proving the church of ROME is out of line, than that they are in line. And to preempt SATURNNEPTUNE, No I'm not RCC. I disagree with most of their doctrines. Taking the time to understand their arguments and giving credit to their reasoning isn't a sin in my faith. See under my God that I am learning to learn more and more personally, you don't have to BASH those that don't believe exactly like you do to have a place at the table. In fact His goal is Unity, not dissension.

Your sole purpose that I can see in a RCC discussion is to denigrate and dehumanize them. AND YOU DO IT ALL FOR GOD.

So, I'll deny I'm baptist if someone asks and says they know you. I don't want YOUR baggage on my witness.

Now, I said that to you nicer than you have been to me. We can go private and hash out your bigotry and reconcile it all between us and be pals, or not, that's up to you. But your taking pot shots needs to go the way of your brain, and disappear.

 

[Moriah]

There was a Roman Catholic faith LONNNNNGGGGG before there were baptists.

The Roman Catholic Church is an apostate church, so they were an apostate church a LONNNNNNNGGGG time ago.

 

[saturneptune]

There was a Roman Catholic faith LONNNNNGGGGG before there were baptists. You are just being Pedantic if you deny that. And that's petty and petulant.

If you wanted a board where everyone would just agree with you and make you feel good about yourself, why not make your own Baptist group like the KKK did. Then they would all agree. You can be the grand donkey, or whatever you choose, dragon is already taken, and moose. So, if you just wish to get your rocks off bashing on me, knock yourself out. I don't have to buy tickets for this freak show, and free entertainment, while lower in quality is still entertainment.

Any of my RCC friends would tell you, I challenge them more than they have usually ever been challenged. That's because I took the time to understand why and how they believe what they believe, and can hit them with the really tough thoughts. Unlike you, I wasn't content parroting the same ole lemmingish cliches people before you have muttered.

BTW, No matter how much you puff your chest out, wrong is still wrong.

You keep talking about lemmings, and that is basically the way the Catholic Church exists. Members are not encouraged to read and study the Bible on their own, but to listen to those high quality moral pillars you call priests. You go to a priest to confess sins instead of the Lord. Your members have no concept of understanding Scripture by the Holy Spirit living in us, again you go to your handy dandy priest, if he can take a break between playing with the choir boys. Do not talk to me about lemmings, your church is bursting with them.

The RCC did not come into being as an administrative organization until about 500 AD. Who do you think was preserving the New Testement Church before that? The RCC has not preserved the NT church before or since it has been in existance. All they have done is oppose it.

 

[Catalyst]

YESHUA1:>>yes! the early Christians had doctrines/practices that would be 'baptist like", and the Bishops/pastors among early fathers were definitly on the whole NOT whatwould be considered RCC! The RCC strated to get really going under origen and Augustine, and during time of Constatine! <<<<<<

The book of ACTS was a fledgling church. They had apostles over them to monitor and train the people. That is akin to a priesthood over the people doing the role the priesthood/leaders of the church are supposed to do today. They didn't sit around in a group huddle and congratulate each other on believing the same thing, they were organized into community service groups. They were such an organized and respected community activist group, Pliny the Younger, asked for permission, basically, to not execute them unless he had to. And HIS governor agreed.

They were engaged in works in the community, not preaching.
They were overseen by people outside of their group. A bishop over many houses, if you will.
Timothy was over all the house churches in whatever city he was in, I'm getting lazy and sleepy. So there you had a Bishop training the individual house leaders to keep them in line and straight. He also held some authority over them if you read the letters.

Clement around the time that 1 John was written, described a church that was nearly exactly like the RCC is today. So way back there, around 30 years after the actions in acts, the RCC looking church existed.

History is a real problem with some of these thoughts.

However, a lot of what you say is accurate as well. They were more community driven and smaller groups. What I think it would look like today would be a church house, with a pastor, and elders, over a community of small groups. And them be engaging in community charity, for lack of a better word. What that would be missing is the person over all the pastors in the area, to be Biblical.

It wouldn't have it's Timothy, or Titus.

 

[Walter]

I challenged you to produce historical proof that the Baptists existed concomitant with the early church as you claim back to the time of Jesus, yet you've yet to do that either.

WM

I'm not holding my breath, either! :laugh:

They can whine and bluster all they want, but they can't produce one shred of historical evidence. Case closed!

 

[Catalyst]

The Roman Catholic Church is an apostate church, so they were an apostate church a LONNNNNNNGGGG time ago.

I'm quite sure God values your judgement for him. Does that gig pay well?

Why not skip the accusations and answer the points.

What I'm starting to see more and more of, is you say something that challenges someone's personal hunches of the faith, and they lash out emotionally, not dealing with the points argued, and make bold SELF PROCLAIMED comments like you just did. That has zero value. Which means you hold zero value to me in a chat. You can't talk with, just AT. So don't talk to me.

 

[Yeshua1]

Well, that eliminates the NEW TESTAMENT, that's going to make it rough.

However, if you hold Roman Catholic began after Constantine, then the letter of Clement to Corinth describes the church exactly as it appears today. So we'd be able to say that at the first of the 2nd century it looked like the RCC does today. And the E.O. and the Ethiopean, and the Coptic, and the Anglican, and the Lutheran....

The council at jerusalem was led by "bishops" and heads of the Church with one leader over them, there you have the Papacy in image, if not yet title.

If the old testament is a predilection of the new, you have the Melchizedekian priesthood which Mel was the High priest of, so if there were a high priest there were priests under Him. And after that you had the Levitical and Aaronic priesthoods, each had a leader over them that heard from God and delivered the message, executed it.

The Church today is to execute the LOVE of GOD to the masses. We are here to execute for Him, be His tools of righteousness, not tools of theology. Everything about the NT church reflects off of the old testament priesthoods.

So, Ummm... you'll have a much harder time proving the church of ROME is out of line, than that they are in line. And to preempt SATURNNEPTUNE, No I'm not RCC. I disagree with most of their doctrines. Taking the time to understand their arguments and giving credit to their reasoning isn't a sin in my faith. See under my God that I am learning to learn more and more personally, you don't have to BASH those that don't believe exactly like you do to have a place at the table. In fact His goal is Unity, not dissension.

Your sole purpose that I can see in a RCC discussion is to denigrate and dehumanize them. AND YOU DO IT ALL FOR GOD.

So, I'll deny I'm baptist if someone asks and says they know you. I don't want YOUR baggage on my witness.

Now, I said that to you nicer than you have been to me. We can go private and hash out your bigotry and reconcile it all between us and be pals, or not, that's up to you. But your taking pot shots needs to go the way of your brain, and disappear.

We are talking about the very heart of the Gospel of Christ! paul admonish the "First pope" to his face, and he was also one to rock those Judaizers and false teachers creeping into the churches!

no, its biblical to contend and fight for the 'faith once and for all delivered to the saints", and that was NOT RCC!

 

[saturneptune]

I'm not holding my breath, either! :laugh:

As much as you can prove the Baptist church did not start with the apostles. Since the RCC did not exist for 500 years after the Ressurection, and when it did form, it was an administrative function, there is no substance to it. The doctrine that has evolved since that point is nothing today but an apostate organization, not even worthy of the word church. You cannot site one piece of evidence that the Baptist faith came out of the RCC. Even if you did go back to the apostles, the doctrine and beliefs make it quite clear it is not the preserved New Testement church that Christ promised to preserve. Basically, all the RCC was created for was an unholy alliance for European royalty to keep hold of power.

 

[Moriah]

I challenged you to produce historical proof that the Baptists existed concomitant with the early church as you claim back to the time of Jesus, yet you've yet to do that either.

WM

The Truth was there in the Old Testament times and is the same Truth to this day.

The Catholic Church might go back a long way, but they became apostate when they went against God. It seems just about every year they added to their doctrines that go against God’s Word.

There were people preaching falseness even while the Apostles were still on earth. Paul warned as soon as he was gone savage wolves would come in among the flock.

 

[Walter]

You keep talking about lemmings, and that is basically the way the Catholic Church exists. Members are not encouraged to read and study the Bible on their own, but to listen to those high quality moral pillars you call priests. You go to a priest to confess sins instead of the Lord. Your members have no concept of understanding Scripture by the Holy Spirit living in us, again you go to your handy dandy priest, if he can take a break between playing with the choir boys. Do not talk to me about lemmings, your church is bursting with them.

The RCC did not come into being as an administrative organization until about 500 AD. Who do you think was preserving the New Testement Church before that? The RCC has not preserved the NT church before or since it has been in existance. All they have done is oppose it.

'Members are not encouraged to read and study the bible on their own'? Where do you get this dribble? Catholics confess their sins to a priest INSTEAD of the Lord'? You really don't have a clue. Take the time to read the catechism before you spout your nonsense. At least do that!:BangHead:

 

[Catalyst]

You keep talking about lemmings, and that is basically the way the Catholic Church exists. Members are not encouraged to read and study the Bible on their own, but to listen to those high quality moral pillars you call priests.

That's a lie. I didn't think lies were allowed on a Xian board?

You go to a priest to confess sins instead of the Lord.

that's biblical to go to a priest/spiritually elder person. However it's not instead of the Lord. It's just a place to go and have someone hold you accountable. I'm betting you've yet to confess your snarling spitting comments to me to anyone. According to 1 john, those sins aren't yet forgiven. :BangHead:

Your members have no concept of understanding Scripture by the Holy Spirit living in us,

I don't lead any congregation, and I'm a far cry from Catholic, so thanks for burning that strawman up, I hope you feel bigger now. That catholic boogey man is out to get you! Pull the covers over your head.

again you go to your handy dandy priest, if he can take a break between playing with the choir boys.

That's pure hatred. At least he's not sleeping with the wives of his congregation or prostitutes like all the protestant preachers do. :| Not sure which is worse. But I see you made a choice, sleeping around is ok for a spiritual leader, better than being cat'lik.

Do not talk to me about lemmings, your church is bursting with them.

Strawman, you have no clue what my church is. You are trying to make me Catholic. You have no choice. You have no rebuttals to my comments, so you ignore them and bash me around some more. That isn't debate, it's bullying. Except rather than be intimidated I'm entertained at your peevishness. You are a lemming, you follow what others before you have said. You didn't go do the research yourself to learn. Therefore you put more faith in what some man said the Bible says, than what the bible actually says. And you want to lecture me? buzz off.

The RCC did not come into being as an administrative organization until about 500 AD.

The letter of Clement to Corinth debunks that. So, buzz off again.

Who do you think was preserving the New Testement Church before that?

Clement and ignatius and John, John the elder, and John the Apostle that God loved. Among others they trained, like Timothy, Titus, Barnabus. Timothy and Titus were leaders, like a bishop over an area of churches. OMG a BISHOP, just like the RCC has, unlike the SBC. Incredible. They really ARE biblical.

The RCC has not preserved the NT church before or since it has been in existance. All they have done is oppose it.

Perhaps not the nt church you have fashioned out of your fantastical phantasmagoric whims. But biblically they are much more in line than you are. You have not responded to any of those arguments yet.

Here is this conversation so far.

YOU make some bold proclamation.
I debunk it in scripture.
YOU IGNORE THAT ARGUMENT, and repeat something else you find even more heinous.
I debunk that in scripture, and flip it back on you.
You ignore ThAT ONE TOO< and throw something else on the table.

Listen, bub, I was you before you were you. I've been there. I grew up. I quelled the hate I was bred to contain, I investigated the scripture to see if their arguments had any merit at all. AND LO AND BEHOLD, I learned much, and they are more biblical than we, as protestants are. In fact, per their understanding they are MUCH MORE DEVOUT than hate slinging fundamental baptists repeating man's teachings about bigotry towards the RCC are.

Got milk?

 

[Catalyst]

I'm not holding my breath, either! :laugh:

They can whine and bluster all they want, but they can't produce one shred of historical evidence. Case closed!

OH my goodness. Don't take a breath, that dust speck of a mind may get sucked into your nose and made a bugger. Then he'd have no chance for being helped.

 

[Yeshua1]

'Members are not encouraged to read and study the bible on their own'? Where do you get this dribble? Catholics confess their sins to a priest INSTEAD of the Lord'? You really don't have a clue. Take the time to read the catechism before you spout your nonsense. At least do that!:BangHead:

Who pronounces a catholic absolved and freed from sin? jesus or the priest?

can you read and interprete the bible for yourself, or does Rome have the authority ONLY for correct interpretations?

 

[Moriah]

'Members are not encouraged to read and study the bible on their own'? Where do you get this dribble? Catholics confess their sins to a priest INSTEAD of the Lord'? You really don't have a clue. Take the time to read the catechism before you spout your nonsense. At least do that!:BangHead:

Many people claiming to be Catholic do not adhere strictly to the popes teaching as they once did. I know that the Catholics taught people not to read the Bible on their own without a priest or nun around to help. In fact, our family’s Catholic Bible even stated that in the Bible, among other Catholic beliefs.

Even if Catholics read their Bibles, more than they used to, they still are reading blindly.

 

[Walter]

As much as you can prove the Baptist church did not start with the apostles. Since the RCC did not exist for 500 years after the Ressurection, and when it did form, it was an administrative function, there is no substance to it. The doctrine that has evolved since that point is nothing today but an apostate organization, not even worthy of the word church. You cannot site one piece of evidence that the Baptist faith came out of the RCC. Even if you did go back to the apostles, the doctrine and beliefs make it quite clear it is not the preserved New Testement church that Christ promised to preserve. Basically, all the RCC was created for was an unholy alliance for European royalty to keep hold of power.

So, what you are really saying is. "Since I can't show one shred of historical evidence proving that 'baptistic' type churches existed during the time of the Early Church, but since the Catholic Church is obviously a heretical Church not grounded in scripture but rather repugnant to the word of God, then I must conclude that 'baptistic' type churche existed from the very start and those evil Cat'lics must have destroyed all the evidence".:laugh:

 

[Moriah]

Click on the link to a site that gives a list of Catholic Heresies and Human Traditions with approximate dates the heresies became binding.

I am not advocating the site, since I do not know much about the site itself, but the list with dates is very helpful.


http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/catholic_heresies-a_list.htm

 

[prodical son]

Peter was not a pope, and Jesus is the Rock of Ages and the ONLY Foundation of the church. Building upon any other foundation is like building your home on sand.

While all believers are priests through Christ, Christ is the Great High Priest. To the best of my knowledge, the name Peter does NOT mean "rock"; it means "little stone". Jesus said "Upon THIS rock (meaning Himself), I will build my church." He did NOT say, "Upon you, Peter, I will build my church."

Peter was just one of 12 disciples. Although he seemed more verbal than the rest, Jesus did not exalt him above the others.

loved your remarks John-mark!!

 

[Walter]

Who pronounces a catholic absolved and freed from sin? jesus or the priest?

can you read and interprete the bible for yourself, or does Rome have the authority ONLY for correct interpretations?

The Catholic Priest forgives sinners of their sins in the name of Jesus Christ, by the Authority given to priest by Christ. Christ makes his position clear on this issue when he breathed on his apostles saying to them "He who's sins you forgive they are forgiven, he who's sins you retain, are retained, (John 20:22-23). The Priest does NOT forgive sins by his own authority or in his own name but in the name of Jesus Christ.

How many Baptist denominations are the result .of your 'reading and interpreting the bible for yourself'? You guys label each other 'heretics' and 'apostates' and question each others salvation all the time on this board (regardless that it violates the rules of this board) and if you go back and read this very thread, you willl see examples of what I'm talking about. Each of you claiming that YOUR interpretation is the one that the Holy Spirit is behind.

 

[saturneptune]

The Catholic Priest forgives sinners of their sins in the name of Jesus Christ, by the Authority given to priest by Christ. Christ makes his position clear on this issue when he breathed on his apostles saying to them "He who's sins you forgive they are forgiven, he who's sins you retain, are retained, (John 20:22-23). The Priest does NOT forgive sins by his own authority or in his own name but in the name of Jesus Christ.

How many Baptist denominations are the result .of your 'reading and interpreting the bible for yourself'? You guys label each other 'heretics' and 'apostates' and question each others salvation all the time on this board (regardless that it violates the rules of this board) and if you go back and read this very thread, you willl see examples of what I'm talking about. Each of you claiming that YOUR interpretation is the one that the Holy Spirit is behind.

And since we have never bothered to disrupt a Catholic board, we have no idea what you call each other. What purpose does a group of spreaders of false doctrine have in being unified. Does the priest exercise his authority to forgive sins before or after playing with the choir boys?

 

[Yeshua1]

The Catholic Priest forgives sinners of their sins in the name of Jesus Christ, by the Authority given to priest by Christ. Christ makes his position clear on this issue when he breathed on his apostles saying to them "He who's sins you forgive they are forgiven, he who's sins you retain, are retained, (John 20:22-23). The Priest does NOT forgive sins by his own authority or in his own name but in the name of Jesus Christ.

How many Baptist denominations are the result .of your 'reading and interpreting the bible for yourself'? You guys label each other 'heretics' and 'apostates' and question each others salvation all the time on this board (regardless that it violates the rules of this board) and if you go back and read this very thread, you willl see examples of what I'm talking about. Each of you claiming that YOUR interpretation is the one that the Holy Spirit is behind.

You would be surprised in how ALIKE we are in essentials of the faith though!

Are catholics allowed to have understandings of doctrines that are not of the RCC view point?

As some baptists hold to A Mil/pre mil, other giftsfor today or not, others KJVO or others etc!