Select your best hookup:
Local
Gay
Asian
Latin
East Europe

privatedelight chat

Critics say it is impersonal or a threat to monogamy. jasper singles I talked to Katja Grace, who originally had the thought. The speeches of the preceding paragraphs, if duly considered and implemented, will enable to share in a specifically more serene interpersonal relationships in Lovesflirt. doublelist arizona The challenge now is like you stated, guys are lowering their standards extra and a lot more and girls that I would deliberately sit chairs away from at a club, are not inclined to respond as a test.

websites like craigslist for hookups

Your data may be shared with other firms in this group. dating in boise idaho A girl I operate with went on a date with a guy who played Puff the Magic Dragon on the piano and sang it and cried. The concerns individuals are asking on the internet as they attempt to date during a pandemic are both heartwarming and heartbreaking. best hookup spots in seattle Refusing to comply with the trail blazed by swipe driven apps like Tinder, dating app Hinge puts its focus on relationships and interesting conversations.

Home  Sign In  Search  Date Ideas  Join  Forums  Singles Groups  - 100% FREE Online Dating, Join Now!


12/28/2014 7:14:23 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
Pope Francis may have said those things, but Pope Pius X called Protestant ministers "enemies of the cross of Jesus Christ". Pope Pius IX said that not much hope should be given to those who die without converting. Pope Eugene IV said that neither hereics nor schismatics nor Jews will enter Heaven unless they convert. St. Ireaneus, I think it was, said that he who does not have the Church for a mother cannot claim to have God as a Father. St. Robert Bellarmine said heretics will not enter Heaven because their faith is false. St. Teresa of Avila had a vision wherein God showed her Lutherans going to Hell in large numbers. See also Pope Pius XI's encyclical Mortalium Animos.

In light of the Catholic teaching that doctrine can not change, only develop,it appears that you are in the wrong century and/or not up to speed with what has developed as indeed Pope Francis said "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics."

In consideration of your anti-Pope Francis stance and anti-second Vatican stance(as your posting history can give evidence to),truth be known,even other Roman Catholics would consider you a heretic.


You are Roman Catholic and yet you choose to reject the authority and teachings/documents from the Second Vatican Council,so let me remind you again and I quote
Ronald L. Conte Jr.(Roman Catholic theologian and translator of the Catholic Public Domain Version of the Bible.) :

"any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated"

According to this lud,you have committed the sin of heresy and the committed the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!

DateHookup.dating - 100% Free Personals


12/28/2014 7:19:17 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

looptex1
Over 4,000 Posts! (4,596)
Chatsworth, GA
49, joined Jun. 2008
online now!


Quote from casheyesblond:
In light of the Catholic teaching that doctrine can not change, only develop,it appears that you are in the wrong century and/or not up to speed with what has developed as indeed Pope Francis said "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics."

In consideration of your anti-Pope Francis stance and anti-second Vatican stance(as your posting history can give evidence to),truth be known,even other Roman Catholics would consider you a heretic.


You are Roman Catholic and yet you choose to reject the authority and teachings/documents from the Second Vatican Council,so let me remind you again and I quote
Ronald L. Conte Jr.(Roman Catholic theologian and translator of the Catholic Public Domain Version of the Bible.) :

"any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated"

According to this lud,you have committed the sin of heresy and the committed the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Nice to see you again cash,

Btw, does this mean that Lud is a Protestant now?

12/28/2014 7:26:36 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
mindya
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (23,620)
Vancouver, BC
64, joined Jan. 2009


Quote from looptex1:
Nice to see you again cash,

Btw, does this mean that Lud is a Protestant now?


A Protestant Catholic.....so much for unity...

12/28/2014 7:28:19 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


@looptex and mindya


12/28/2014 7:29:16 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
mindya
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (23,620)
Vancouver, BC
64, joined Jan. 2009


Cash.

12/28/2014 7:39:09 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Matthew, Mark, Luke, And John may have gotten some details wrong but none of the four gospels contains any doctrinal or moral error.

12/28/2014 7:54:38 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from looptex1:
Nice to see you again cash,

Btw, does this mean that Lud is a Protestant now?


That's funny! Good one, Loop!


Cash, that's a great post. Thanks!

What troubles me is this: I have no problem seeing Catholics as Christians, and it boggles me that while I can accept them as Christian, that can't accept me as one? That's just so wrong.

12/28/2014 8:05:43 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

looptex1
Over 4,000 Posts! (4,596)
Chatsworth, GA
49, joined Jun. 2008
online now!


Quote from ludlowlowell:
Matthew, Mark, Luke, And John may have gotten some details wrong but none of the four gospels contains any doctrinal or moral error.

lol, now that takes the cake.
The author, not the reader, got it wrong.

That's about like saying, God made the mistake, not man.

Good one Lud,

12/28/2014 8:09:57 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from msreesi:
That's funny! Good one, Loop!


Cash, that's a great post. Thanks!

What troubles me is this: I have no problem seeing Catholics as Christians, and it boggles me that while I can accept them as Christian, that can't accept me as one? That's just so wrong.

Lud tends to like to step out of his sedevacantist closet just long enough to deny Protestants are Christians while clinging to his anti Pope Francis stance and anti Second Vatican stance.But the thing is,his position is only held by a minority of traditionalist Catholics,not the majority.

The Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church speaks of "many elements of sanctification and of truth" that are found outside the visible structure of the Church but Lud conveniently chooses to ignore this.

And Lud doesn't like me to mention that paragraph 16 of Lumen Gentium from the Second Vatican Council says that even Muslims who worship in the religion of Abraham may share in salvation. There is further clarification of this in Second Vatican Declaration on the relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. Basically this document states that the plan of salvation includes not only practicing Catholics, but also those who acknowledge the Creator and who strive wholeheartedly to live up to His decrees like Jews and Muslims.

Ya reject that too don't ya lud ?

And Lud don't like this part from 2000 declaration Dominus Iesus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:
"For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church"

12/28/2014 8:10:14 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

looptex1
Over 4,000 Posts! (4,596)
Chatsworth, GA
49, joined Jun. 2008
online now!


Quote from msreesi:
That's funny! Good one, Loop!


Cash, that's a great post. Thanks!

What troubles me is this: I have no problem seeing Catholics as Christians, and it boggles me that while I can accept them as Christian, that can't accept me as one? That's just so wrong.


Not all are Jews that say they are Jews.
Not all are Christians that say they are christian.
But, the word does say, ye shall know them by their fruit,

Just call it as it is, many worship with their mouth but their heart is far from him.

12/28/2014 9:00:24 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
mindya
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (23,620)
Vancouver, BC
64, joined Jan. 2009


Lud needs rubber boots so he can go wading through BS and appear to come out smelling good...

12/28/2014 9:06:00 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
joyusall2
Over 2,000 Posts (3,574)
Queensland
Australia
70, joined Oct. 2011


Quote from looptex1:
Not all are Jews that say they are Jews.
Not all are Christians that say they are christian.
But, the word does say, ye shall know them by their fruit,

Just call it as it is, many worship with their mouth but their heart is far from him.



Yes I see what your saying
True repentance is difficult
it involves
the HEART
not just lip service

and you feel bad
when you truly own up
to your weakness (missing the mark)
and You TRY
to have reverence for Jesus (no matter how much man tries to make u fear)
so you acknowledge him as LORD before others no matter what -----

12/28/2014 9:06:08 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

looptex1
Over 4,000 Posts! (4,596)
Chatsworth, GA
49, joined Jun. 2008
online now!


Quote from mindya:
Lud needs rubber boots so he can go wading through BS and appear to come out smelling good...

Maybe, but then again rubber boots would make him flip flop worse than his sandals.

12/28/2014 9:08:35 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
mindya
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (23,620)
Vancouver, BC
64, joined Jan. 2009




12/28/2014 9:09:09 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


^^^^^

12/28/2014 9:26:00 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


He calls us Protestants, but he's the one who protests. Hmm

OK- I'll behave now.

12/28/2014 9:53:28 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


You guys who quote Vatican II was not an ibfallible council. Duriing the council it was stated over and over that Vatican II was merely a "pastoral" council. Pope Paul VI said at the end of the council that if anything the council sais contradicted Catholic traditional teaching, that traditional Catholic teaching should hold sway.

12/28/2014 9:57:34 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
mindya
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (23,620)
Vancouver, BC
64, joined Jan. 2009


Quote from msreesi:
He calls us Protestants, but he's the one who protests. Hmm


He's not quite there Reese - he only qualfies as a rotestant...

12/28/2014 10:03:55 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
You guys who quote Vatican II was not an ibfallible council. Duriing the council it was stated over and over that Vatican II was merely a "pastoral" council. Pope Paul VI said at the end of the council that if anything the council sais contradicted Catholic traditional teaching, that traditional Catholic teaching should hold sway.


So you disagree with the Popes that follow Vatican 2?

Ya, reformer lud.

Sheesh, you are worse than I am!

You are saying that you are an old Catholic, and do not support the Catholic church that exists today.

You are against the Roman Catholic Church! You, interpret not only Scripture, but what Vatican 2 said!

By what authority do you oppose your own Pope?

You are saying, he is not infallable?

Are you saying, the Church was wrong to write Vatican 2?

Yep. you are lud. Ya reformer, you.

12/28/2014 10:08:16 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
You guys who quote Vatican II was not an ibfallible council. Duriing the council it was stated over and over that Vatican II was merely a "pastoral" council. Pope Paul VI said at the end of the council that if anything the council sais contradicted Catholic traditional teaching, that traditional Catholic teaching should hold sway.

The problem here is your interpretation of the word “pastoral.” All councils are pastoral, in that they are concerned with the work of the Church — but this does not mean that they are merely “poetic” and therefore not binding. Second Vatican is an official ecumenical council, and all that was said in the Council is therefore binding for all Catholics.

Dei Verbum discusses divine Revelation; it speaks about the Trinitarian God revealing himself and about the Incarnation as fundamental teaching. These are not only pastoral teachings — they are basic elements of the Catholic faith.

Some practical elements contained in the various documents could be changed, but the body of the doctrine of the Council is binding for all Catholics.

In other words,(and pay close attention Lud),the Second Vatican Council is sometimes called a “pastoral council” because the Fathers of the Council chose to teach at length, with many detailed explanations, rather than by issuing terse Canons with attached anathemas. However, this does not imply that the Council did not exercise the Magisterium, nor that its magisterial teachings are optional.

12/28/2014 10:09:11 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Listen to what your flip flops are telling you lud.

R_ E_F_O_R_E_R, over and over again.

Hey, I have heard of people who had voices in their head. You are the first to claim, they come from your sandals. Damn reformers that they are!

Git rid of them lud! Cut them off your feet!

? Matthew 18:9 ?

New International Version
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell

Tis better you cast those Sandals away, buy a real mans set of shoes. No flip flopping with a good set of hiking boots.

12/28/2014 10:11:53 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
You guys who quote Vatican II was not an ibfallible council. Duriing the council it was stated over and over that Vatican II was merely a "pastoral" council.

I repeat,the authority of the Second Vatican Council is not reduced by the assertion that it was a pastoral council. Every Ecumenical Council has the full authority of the Pope and the body of Bishops.

An Ecumenical Council is essentially the body of Bishops gathered with the Pope. Now it may be that the Pope participates by sending a representative, as has happened in past centuries. And not every Bishop in the world needs to participate. The body of the Council simply needs to represent the body of Bishops. But given that every Ecumenical Council (all 21 so far) consists of the Pope and the body of Bishops, every Ecumenical Council has the full authority of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic church has two types of authority: (1) the spiritual teaching authority, also called the Magisterium, and, (2) the temporal authority. The Magisterium issues doctrines, which are teachings on matters of faith, morals, and salvation.


So therefore what I wrote in previous post still stands:

Any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated. Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated. Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

That would be you Lud

12/28/2014 10:12:38 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from isna_la_wica:
Listen to what your flip flops are telling you lud.

R_ E_F_O_R_E_R, over and over again.

Hey, I have heard of people who had voices in their head. You are the first to claim, they come from your sandals. Damn reformers that they are!

Git rid of them lud! Cut them off your feet!

? Matthew 18:9 ?

New International Version
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell

Tis better you cast those Sandals away, buy a real mans set of shoes. No flip flopping with a good set of hiking boots.



12/28/2014 10:16:17 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from isna_la_wica:
Listen to what your flip flops are telling you lud.

R_ E_F_O_R_E_R, over and over again.

Hey, I have heard of people who had voices in their head. You are the first to claim, they come from your sandals. Damn reformers that they are!

Git rid of them lud! Cut them off your feet!

? Matthew 18:9 ?

New International Version
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell

Tis better you cast those Sandals away, buy a real mans set of shoes. No flip flopping with a good set of hiking boots.


Oh my word!!

He'd better cast those sandals as far as the east is from the west.

12/28/2014 10:29:33 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


According to Luke 10:16, anyone who rejects the pope rejects Jesus, and anyone who rejects Jesus rejects God.

12/28/2014 11:00:27 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
According to Luke 10:16, anyone who rejects the pope rejects Jesus, and anyone who rejects Jesus rejects God.

Actually Christ is referring to the seventy disciples, two and two, that they might strengthen and encourage one another.

And it's basically saying that those who despise the faithful ministers of Christ, who think meanly of them, and look scornfully upon them, will be reckoned as despisers of God and Christ.

I think Pope Francis would very well qualify as a minster of Christ and as your posts can give evidence to,you have thought meanly of him and looked scornfully upon him while rejecting what he has said so I guess according to what you wrote,that would make you the one rejecting Jesus and further rejecting God.


Quote from ludlowlowell:
it is increasingly clear that Pope Francis is not a very good pope. Pope Francis, for one thing, can't seem to distinguish between encouraging sinners to repent and condoning sin.


12/28/2014 11:01:53 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


So are you saying there are 70 Popes?

Luke 10 YLT

10 And after these things, the Lord did appoint also other seventy, and sent them by twos before his face, to every city and place whither he himself was about to come,

2 then said he unto them, `The harvest indeed [is] abundant, but the workmen few; beseech ye then the Lord of the harvest, that He may put forth workmen to His harvest.

3 `Go away; lo, I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves;

4 carry no bag, no scrip, nor sandals; and salute no one on the way;

5 and into whatever house ye do enter, first say, Peace to this house;

6 and if indeed there may be there the son of peace, rest on it shall your peace; and if not so, upon you it shall turn back.

7 `And in that house remain, eating and drinking the things they have, for worthy [is] the workman of his hire; go not from house to house,

8 and into whatever city ye enter, and they may receive you, eat the things set before you,

9 and heal the ailing in it, and say to them, The reign of God hath come nigh to you.

10 `And into whatever city ye do enter, and they may not receive you, having gone forth to its broad places, say,

11 And the dust that hath cleaved to us, from your city, we do wipe off against you, but this know ye, that the reign of God hath come nigh to you;

12 and I say to you, that for Sodom in that day it shall be more tolerable than for that city.

13 `Wo to thee, Chorazin; wo to thee, Bethsaida; for if in Tyre and Sidon had been done the mighty works that were done in you, long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes, they had reformed;

14 but for Tyre and Sidon it shall be more tolerable in the judgment than for you.

15 `And thou, Capernaum, which unto the heaven wast exalted, unto hades thou shalt be brought down.

16 `He who is hearing you, doth hear me; and he who is putting you away, doth put me away; and he who is putting me away, doth put away Him who sent me.'


12/28/2014 11:03:16 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from casheyesblond:

I think Pope Francis would very well qualify as a minster of Christ and as your posts can give evidence to,you have thought meanly of him and looked scornfully upon him while rejecting what he has said so I guess according to what you wrote,that would make you the one rejecting Jesus and further rejecting God.




12/28/2014 11:08:48 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
According to Luke 10:16, anyone who rejects the pope rejects Jesus, and anyone who rejects Jesus rejects God.


But I am not rejecting Pope Francis.

And neither is he rejecting me, we already went through all that lud.

You are the one, that disagrees with him.


Share on Twitter? Share on Facebook? email this story? comment on this story? 176
By Austen Ivereigh
Special to Crux October 28, 2014
Catholics and Evangelicals should not wait for theologians to reach agreement before praying and working together, Pope Francis recently told a group of Pentecostal Anglican bishops in Rome.

To continue to focus on differences between Christian denominations is “sinning against Christ’s will,” the pontiff said, because “our shared baptism is more important than our differences.”

Francis was speaking at a meeting with the ruling body of the Communion of Evangelical Episcopal Churches (CEEC), adding: “We all have the Holy Spirit within us, which prays within us.”

The meeting on Oct. 10 and the lunch at the pope’s Vatican residence, Casa Santa Marta, was in honor of Francis’s friend Bishop Tony Palmer, an Anglican evangelical who was killed in a motorcycle accident in August.
In new video, Francis urges Catholics and Protestants to ...
www.cruxnow.com/.../pope-francis-urges-catholics-protestants-work-tog..

You better start following what he said lud.

He does not agree with your attack on Anglicans. You are flip flopping lud. You either agree with your Pope, which you say you do, or you do not, which you also say you do.

Like sheesh, , flip flop upon flip flops!

12/28/2014 11:13:53 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


It is true that the Church teaches that those who are ignorant of the Catholic faith through no fault of their own but who led a good life, can be saved, and this has been a doctrine from long before Vatican II. But these should be seen as extraordinary cases. Ordinarily, outside the Church there is no salvation.

But why take a chance on that? Why not trust God all the way and convert? "Unless ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of God" --Jesus

12/28/2014 11:17:43 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
It is true that the Church teaches that those who are ignorant of the Catholic faith through no fault of their own but who led a good life, can be saved, and this has been a doctrine from long before Vatican II. But these should be seen as extraordinary cases. Ordinarily, outside the Church there is no salvation.

But why take a chance on that? Why not trust God all the way and convert? "Unless ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of God" --Jesus


Why not follow your own church lud?

Pope Francis served Anglicans supper.

But you will not.



12/28/2014 11:26:26 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
It is true that the Church teaches that those who are ignorant of the Catholic faith through no fault of their own but who led a good life, can be saved, and this has been a doctrine from long before Vatican II. But these should be seen as extraordinary cases. Ordinarily, outside the Church there is no salvation.

But why take a chance on that? Why not trust God all the way and convert? "Unless ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of God" --Jesus


I would suggest that you read paragraphs 830-856 in the Catechism:
Remember, Pope John Paul II personally approved this version of the Catechism.Start with 830 which begins with "830 The word "catholic" means "universal,"

The fact is,in its time the Second Vatican Council did not state that the one and only Church of Christ is exclusively the Roman Catholic Church and I feel quite sure that irritates you and so you reject it.

In the Constitution Lumen gentium, it says only that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, not expressing any exclusivity with the Latin word "subsistit".. The Council Fathers replaced the word "is" with the word "subsistit".


Again I say,the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church speaks of "many elements of sanctification and of truth" that are found outside the visible structure of the Church and you don't like that either !


And ya especially don't like paragraph 16 of Lumen Gentium from the Second Vatican Council that says that Muslims who worship in the religion of Abraham may share in salvation. There is further clarification of this in Second Vatican Declaration on the relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions . Basically this document states that the plan of salvation includes not only practicing Catholics, but also those who acknowledge the Creator and who strive wholeheartedly to live up to His decrees like Jews and Muslims.



And ya don't like this part from 2000 declaration Dominus Iesus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that says that for those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church"

Ya reject that too don't ya lud

You are Roman Catholic but it makes no difference to you at all that the President and Secretary of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal Cassidy and Bishop Kasper had an active part in drafting the document,Dominus Iesus.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the department of the Pope's Curia or administration that deals with clarifying Catholic doctrine and moral teaching. (documents issued by this vatican congregation). And the documents of this congregation are signed by the Pope and therefore indeed carry his authority -- they are an expression of the ordinary papal magisterium.

But this makes no difference to you although you are Roman Catholic,you choose to reject it.

I repeat

any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated"

According to this lud,you have committed the sin of heresy and the committed the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.




[Edited 12/28/2014 11:28:44 PM ]

12/28/2014 11:33:31 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from casheyesblond:
I would suggest that you read paragraphs 830-856 in the Catechism:
Remember, Pope John Paul II personally approved this version of the Catechism.Start with 830 which begins with "830 The word "catholic" means "universal,"

The fact is,in its time the Second Vatican Council did not state that the one and only Church of Christ is exclusively the Roman Catholic Church and I feel quite sure that irritates you and so you reject it.

In the Constitution Lumen gentium, it says only that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, not expressing any exclusivity with the Latin word "subsistit".. The Council Fathers replaced the word "is" with the word "subsistit".


Again I say,the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church speaks of "many elements of sanctification and of truth" that are found outside the visible structure of the Church and you don't like that either !


And ya especially don't like paragraph 16 of Lumen Gentium from the Second Vatican Council that says that Muslims who worship in the religion of Abraham may share in salvation. There is further clarification of this in Second Vatican Declaration on the relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions . Basically this document states that the plan of salvation includes not only practicing Catholics, but also those who acknowledge the Creator and who strive wholeheartedly to live up to His decrees like Jews and Muslims.



And ya don't like this part from 2000 declaration Dominus Iesus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that says that for those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church"

Ya reject that too don't ya lud

You are Roman Catholic but it makes no difference to you at all that the President and Secretary of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal Cassidy and Bishop Kasper had an active part in drafting the document,Dominus Iesus.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the department of the Pope's Curia or administration that deals with clarifying Catholic doctrine and moral teaching. (documents issued by this vatican congregation). And the documents of this congregation are signed by the Pope and therefore indeed carry his authority -- they are an expression of the ordinary papal magisterium.

But this makes no difference to you although you are Roman Catholic,you choose to reject it.

I repeat

any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated"

According to this lud,you have committed the sin of heresy and the committed the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.




I already posted that cash, but lud refuses to read what his church says.

12/28/2014 11:44:34 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from isna_la_wica:


I already posted that cash, but lud refuses to read what his church says.

He chooses to reject it

There are "some" Catholics that utterly reject Vatican II. They say: “Vatican II taught heresy.” Rejection of the authority of any Ecumenical Council, regardless of the content of its teachings, regardless of whether or not the Council taught infallibly, is the mortal sin of schism, and carries the penalty of automatic excommunication according the what his church says.

12/28/2014 11:48:03 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from casheyesblond:
He chooses to reject it

There are "some" Catholics that utterly reject Vatican II. They say: “Vatican II taught heresy.” Rejection of the authority of any Ecumenical Council, regardless of the content of its teachings, regardless of whether or not the Council taught infallibly, is the mortal sin of schism, and carries the penalty of automatic excommunication according the what his church says.


Yes!

Lud is rejecting his church.

I am glad I have communion with Anglicans, which his church accepts, compared to what he is going to get!

Convert lud, follow your Church!

lol.

Quick, run out side, find an Anglican and hug him/ her!

Not me though, I hate freaking hugs..... lol. Won`t wear sndals either, like sheesh,,, men should wear real boots/ shoes. Kinda gay I think, flip flops,,,,,lol.



[Edited 12/28/2014 11:49:37 PM ]

12/29/2014 12:02:57 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


The girls here will love this one. Did you know that there are 36 verses about shoes/ sandals in the Bible?Yikes, that is almost half the number you all probably have in your closets!

Shoes
Exodus 3:5
Verse Concepts
Then He said, "Do not come near here; remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground."


2 Samuel 15:30
Verse Concepts
And David went up the ascent of the Mount of Olives, and wept as he went, and his head was covered and he walked barefoot. Then all the people who were with him each covered his head and went up weeping as they went.
Acts 7:30-35
"After forty years had passed, AN ANGEL APPEARED TO HIM IN THE WILDERNESS OF MOUNT Sinai, IN THE FLAME OF A BURNING THORN BUSH. "When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he approached to look more closely, there came the voice of the Lord: 'I AM THE GOD OF YOUR FATHERS, THE GOD OF ABRAHAM AND ISAAC AND JACOB.' Moses shook with fear and would not venture to look. read more.
Deuteronomy 25:8-9
"Then the elders of his city shall summon him and speak to him. And if he persists and says, 'I do not desire to take her,' then his brother's wife shall come to him in the sight of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face; and she shall declare, 'Thus it is done to the man who does not build up his brother's house.'
Ruth 4:8
Verse Concepts
So the closest relative said to Boaz, "Buy it for yourself." And he removed his sandal.
Psalms 60:8
Verse Concepts
"Moab is My washbowl; Over Edom I shall throw My shoe; Shout loud, O Philistia, because of Me!"
Psalms 108:9
Verse Concepts
"Moab is My washbowl; Over Edom I shall throw My shoe; Over Philistia I will shout aloud."
Song of Solomon 7:1
"How beautiful are your feet in sandals, O prince's daughter! The curves of your hips are like jewels, The work of the hands of an artist.
Isaiah 9:5
Verse Concepts
For every boot of the booted warrior in the battle tumult, And cloak rolled in blood, will be for burning, fuel for the fire.
Amos 2:6
Verse Concepts
Thus says the LORD, "For three transgressions of Israel and for four I will not revoke its punishment, Because they sell the righteous for money And the needy for a pair of sandals.
Matthew 3:11
Verse Concepts
"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Mark 1:7
Verse Concepts
And he was preaching, and saying, "After me One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to stoop down and untie the thong of His sandals.
Luke 3:16
Verse Concepts
John answered and said to them all, "As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
John 1:27
Verse Concepts
"It is He who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie."
Acts 13:25
Verse Concepts
"And while John was completing his course, he kept saying, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not He. But behold, one is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'
Genesis 14:23
Verse Concepts
that I will not take a thread or a sandal thong or anything that is yours, for fear you would say, 'I have made Abram rich.'
Mark 6:9
Verse Concepts
but to wear sandals; and He added, "Do not put on two tunics."
Acts 12:8
Verse Concepts
And the angel said to him, "Gird yourself and put on your sandals." And he did so. And he said to him, "Wrap your cloak around you and follow me."
Deuteronomy 33:25
Verse Concepts
"Your locks will be iron and bronze, And according to your days, so will your leisurely walk be.
Ezekiel 16:10
Verse Concepts
"I also clothed you with embroidered cloth and put sandals of porpoise skin on your feet; and I wrapped you with fine linen and covered you with silk.
Isaiah 3:18
In that day the Lord will take away the beauty of their anklets, headbands, crescent ornaments,
Exodus 12:11
Verse Concepts
'Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste--it is the LORD'S Passover.
Isaiah 20:2-3
at that time the LORD spoke through Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, "Go and loosen the sackcloth from your hips and take your shoes off your feet " And he did so, going naked and barefoot. And the LORD said, "Even as My servant Isaiah has gone naked and barefoot three years as a sign and token against Egypt and Cush,
Ezekiel 24:17
Verse Concepts
"Groan silently; make no mourning for the dead Bind on your turban and put your shoes on your feet, and do not cover your mustache and do not eat the bread of men."
Ezekiel 24:23
Verse Concepts
'Your turbans will be on your heads and your shoes on your feet. You will not mourn and you will not weep, but you will rot away in your iniquities and you will groan to one another.
Joshua 5:15
Verse Concepts
The captain of the LORD'S host said to Joshua, "Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy." And Joshua did so.
Joshua 9:5
Verse Concepts
and worn-out and patched sandals on their feet, and worn-out clothes on themselves; and all the bread of their provision was dry and had become crumbled.
Joshua 9:13
Verse Concepts
"These wineskins which we filled were new, and behold, they are torn; and these our clothes and our sandals are worn out because of the very long journey."
Deuteronomy 29:5
Verse Concepts
"I have led you forty years in the wilderness; your clothes have not worn out on you, and your sandal has not worn out on your foot.
Amos 8:6
Verse Concepts
So as to buy the helpless for money And the needy for a pair of sandals, And that we may sell the refuse of the wheat?"
Deuteronomy 25:9-10
Verse Concepts
then his brother's wife shall come to him in the sight of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face; and she shall declare, 'Thus it is done to the man who does not build up his brother's house.' "In Israel his name shall be called, 'The house of him whose sandal is removed.'
Ruth 4:7-8
Verse Concepts
Now this was the custom in former times in Israel concerning the redemption and the exchange of land to confirm any matter: a man removed his sandal and gave it to another; and this was the manner of attestation in Israel. So the closest relative said to Boaz, "Buy it for yourself." And he removed his sandal.
Matthew 10:10
Verse Concepts
or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support.
Luke 10:4
Verse Concepts
"Carry no money belt, no bag, no shoes; and greet no one on the way.
Ephesians 6:15
Verse Concepts
and having shod YOUR FEET WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL OF PEACE;
Luke 15:22
Verse Concepts
"But the father said to his slaves, 'Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet;
- See more at: http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Shoes#sthash.AUV7zeBV.dpuf
36 Bible verses about Shoes - Knowing Jesus
bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Shoes

12/29/2014 12:09:22 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from isna_la_wica:
Yes!

Lud is rejecting his church.

I am glad I have communion with Anglicans, which his church accepts, compared to what he is going to get!

Convert lud, follow your Church!

lol.

Quick, run out side, find an Anglican and hug him/ her!

Not me though, I hate freaking hugs..... lol. Won`t wear sndals either, like sheesh,,, men should wear real boots/ shoes. Kinda gay I think, flip flops,,,,,lol.


Oh, Lord! I'm ROFL

We must be related! I hate flip flops, I hate hugs...

Oh and I don't have many shoes. I wear what I have till I wear 'em out. That's just how I roll.

12/29/2014 12:25:17 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


The Second Vatican Council was not an infallible council. Whoever said that rejecting Vatican II is heresy is full of balone, I don't care how high up in the Vatican he is. Pope Paul VI said, at the end of Vatcan II, that if anything from the council contradicted traditional Catholic teaching, that the traditional teaching should hold sway.

Read what Pope Eugene IV said during the Council of Florence, which WAS an infallible council. Or what Sts. Augustine, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Robert Bellarmine, Teresa of Avila, or John Vianney, among many others, had to say.

It is true that a non-Catholic can be saved without converting, but only if they fail to convert because they were inculpably ignorant of the Catholic faith, and only if they lived a good life. To reject the Catholic Church is to reject Christ Himself.

12/29/2014 12:32:37 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from ludlowlowell:


It is true that a non-Catholic can be saved without converting, but only if they fail to convert because they were inculpably ignorant of the Catholic faith, and only if they lived a good life. To reject the Catholic Church is to reject Christ Himself.



BOLONEY! You are so full of it! You don't even know what you are talking about.

12/29/2014 12:41:24 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Oh yes I do.

12/29/2014 1:02:50 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
The Second Vatican Council was not an infallible council. Whoever said that rejecting Vatican II is heresy is full of balone, I don't care how high up in the Vatican he is. Pope Paul VI said, at the end of Vatcan II, that if anything from the council contradicted traditional Catholic teaching, that the traditional teaching should hold sway.

Read what Pope Eugene IV said during the Council of Florence, which WAS an infallible council. Or what Sts. Augustine, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Robert Bellarmine, Teresa of Avila, or John Vianney, among many others, had to say.

It is true that a non-Catholic can be saved without converting, but only if they fail to convert because they were inculpably ignorant of the Catholic faith, and only if they lived a good life. To reject the Catholic Church is to reject Christ Himself.


But you disagree with your church.

Fact.

You are not a Catholic supporter.

Does your Pope agree with Vatican 2?

Yet, you do not?

But you tell others they cannot interpret scripture, and only the leaders in your church can?

Lud, you are not following what you tell us that we must!

You are a reformer.

Luther would love you. Calvin, also would approve of your elect stuff, but alas, by your own standards, you left the elect.

Get rid of them flip flops lud. Cut em off!

12/29/2014 1:32:47 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

furchizedek
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,868)
Kingman, AZ
74, joined Sep. 2010


Quote from casheyesblond:
I would suggest that you read paragraphs 830-856 in the Catechism:
Remember, Pope John Paul II personally approved this version of the Catechism.Start with 830 which begins with "830 The word "catholic" means "universal,"

The fact is,in its time the Second Vatican Council did not state that the one and only Church of Christ is exclusively the Roman Catholic Church and I feel quite sure that irritates you and so you reject it.

In the Constitution Lumen gentium, it says only that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, not expressing any exclusivity with the Latin word "subsistit".. The Council Fathers replaced the word "is" with the word "subsistit".


Again I say,the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church speaks of "many elements of sanctification and of truth" that are found outside the visible structure of the Church and you don't like that either !


And ya especially don't like paragraph 16 of Lumen Gentium from the Second Vatican Council that says that Muslims who worship in the religion of Abraham may share in salvation. There is further clarification of this in Second Vatican Declaration on the relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions . Basically this document states that the plan of salvation includes not only practicing Catholics, but also those who acknowledge the Creator and who strive wholeheartedly to live up to His decrees like Jews and Muslims.



And ya don't like this part from 2000 declaration Dominus Iesus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that says that for those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church"

Ya reject that too don't ya lud

You are Roman Catholic but it makes no difference to you at all that the President and Secretary of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal Cassidy and Bishop Kasper had an active part in drafting the document,Dominus Iesus.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the department of the Pope's Curia or administration that deals with clarifying Catholic doctrine and moral teaching. (documents issued by this vatican congregation). And the documents of this congregation are signed by the Pope and therefore indeed carry his authority -- they are an expression of the ordinary papal magisterium.

But this makes no difference to you although you are Roman Catholic,you choose to reject it.

I repeat

any Catholic who rejects all teachings of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects the authority itself of the Second Vatican Council, for any reason, thereby commits the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Anyone who rejects any particular teaching of Vatican II, a teaching which has been subsequently taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, thereby commits the sin of heresy and is automatically excommunicated"

According to this lud,you have committed the sin of heresy and the committed the sin of schism and is automatically excommunicated.

Quote from isna_la_wica:


I already posted that cash, but lud refuses to read what his church says.


"lud refuses..."

That's a good one.

12/29/2014 2:28:41 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Whoever said that the rejection of Vatican II is heresy is full of baloney.

Vatican bureaucrats are not infallible.

12/29/2014 2:59:01 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
msreesi
Over 2,000 Posts (2,785)
Stout, OH
54, joined Jul. 2014


Quote from ludlowlowell:

Vatican bureaucrats are not infallible.

Yet we can't go to Heaven unless we heed them, confess to them (rather than to God in Jesus name), and ask them to be our intercessor to the Intercessor?



[Edited 12/29/2014 2:59:31 AM ]

12/29/2014 6:28:47 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  
deneez
Over 4,000 Posts! (5,068)
Rochester, MI
58, joined Apr. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
The Second Vatican Council was not an infallible council. Whoever said that rejecting Vatican II is heresy is full of balone, I don't care how high up in the Vatican he is. Pope Paul VI said, at the end of Vatcan II, that if anything from the council contradicted traditional Catholic teaching, that the traditional teaching should hold sway.

Read what Pope Eugene IV said during the Council of Florence, which WAS an infallible council. Or what Sts. Augustine, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Robert Bellarmine, Teresa of Avila, or John Vianney, among many others, had to say.

It is true that a non-Catholic can be saved without converting, but only if they fail to convert because they were inculpably ignorant of the Catholic faith, and only if they lived a good life. To reject the Catholic Church is to reject Christ Himself.


Your sandals have doubled their size since I've last looked, it would appear you're having a hard time filling them.

Nothing has changed within the concept of redemption, salvation, infallibility, Communion (the rule of Eucharistic acceptance and adoration), and communion.

Like you, I went through a period of actually needing to mature in my faith and get busy reading some of the encyclicals put forth and have found my life the richer for it.

Much of what has been addressed here you would have been able to address in step (pun)...if you would have actually read them.

ALL are redeemed through Christ, including the atheist. Pope Francis did not invent this, he simply understands the difference between redemption and salvation. For the soul that finds Christ today the Lord does not need to come and shed HIs Blood again, it was done for all time, but the person must accept the revelation of HIs Messiah-ship for salvation and even then, it is written "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." The Church has never declared that anyone is in hell. Even Judas.

Who is saved is God's business - After contemplation and prayer it is the one thing that comes to my lips, "Jesus, save me", "This is the very perfection of a man, to find out his own imperfections." I say this not in pride but to offer you Truth.

This idea of 'Conservative' Catholics vs 'moderate' or 'liberal' Catholics has become misleading, because it denotes that there is a divide among 'political' lines, and yes there id and has been, but God forbid should it divide us within the core teachings of the Church which are 'doctrinal' in nature and are not based on political ideologies which have not always respected life. Be it the earth and creation with the destruction of natural habitat and resources (yes, Pope Francis has spoken about the destruction of the rain forests and currently has an encyclical in the works on climate change), the dignity of the unborn, and the plight of the underprivileged ("how can it be that the market goes down 2 points, but a homeless man freezes, and no news of this?) These are Christian concerns because of how they will impact the 'littlest amongst us'....how will the poor be impacted by our move from the coal age to what is coming, it ought be a concern, they certainly were not the greatest consumers of the cause of the problem.

However, the Pope's hierarchy is in order, as is many evangelical Christians.

Love God (which rejects no moral divine law)
Love neighbor
Do good

all else will be added unto it.



[Edited 12/29/2014 6:30:21 AM ]

12/29/2014 7:53:05 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


605 At the end of the parable of the lost sheep Jesus recalled that God's love excludes no one: "So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish."410 He affirms that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many"; this last term is not restrictive, but contrasts the whole of humanity with the unique person of the redeemer who hands himself over to save us.411 The Church, following the apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ did not suffer."412
Catechism of the Catholic Church - Jesus Died Crucified
www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm

Read the above catehicism.

Pope Francis, was not changing any thing when he said this:

“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists,” he said, answering his own query. “Everyone! And this blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the blood of Christ has redeemed us all!”


He was simply stating what has already existed in the catechism of the church.
And I repeat it :

"411 The Church, following the apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ did not suffer."

And this catechism is also backed up by scripture:

John 17:2 tells us that it is Gods plan, to give ALL men to Christ :

John 17:2Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

2 according as Thou didst give to him authority over all flesh, that -- all that Thou hast given to him -- he may give to them life age-during;

And John 6 : 3 says that no one seeking him, shall be cast out :

John 6:37Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

37 all that the Father doth give to me will come unto me; and him who is coming unto me, I may in no wise cast without,, to give all m, to

Pope Francis is acknowledging what has been written all along.

It is not Francis that has changed any thing, rather it is lud that refuses to acknowledge what his own church,Scripture and the men who wrote the catechism`s, taught. And they are not some church beurocrat.

12/29/2014 10:15:14 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


The Catholic belief system distinguishes between redemption and salvation. Jesus redeemed the whole human race when He died on the cross. This does not mean every one will be saved; it basically only means that everyone has the grace to be saved, thanks to Jesus.

Pope Francis mentioned the Muslims. In Saudi Arabia Christianity is illegal. There are no Protestant, Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox Churches anywhere in Saudi Arabia. The average Saudi citizen knows very, very little about Jesus or Christianity. In many other Muslim countries Christianity might not be officially illegal, but one can go several hundred miles without finding a Christian church. Does God love these people? Of course He does. People who live in this kind of ignorance--an ignorance that is not their own fault--can be saved without becoming Catholic. But for adult Protestants in America, people who claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit, people who change denominations at least once or twice in their lifetimes, people who have all kinds of information at literaally their fingertips, these people are not going to be able to claim inculpable ignorance of the Catholic Church.

"Unless ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of God." --Jesus

12/29/2014 10:29:01 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

isna_la_wica
Over 7,500 Posts!! (7,588)
Brantford, ON
63, joined Mar. 2012


Quote from ludlowlowell:
The Catholic belief system distinguishes between redemption and salvation. Jesus redeemed the whole human race when He died on the cross. This does not mean every one will be saved; it basically only means that everyone has the grace to be saved, thanks to Jesus.

Pope Francis mentioned the Muslims. In Saudi Arabia Christianity is illegal. There are no Protestant, Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox Churches anywhere in Saudi Arabia. The average Saudi citizen knows very, very little about Jesus or Christianity. In many other Muslim countries Christianity might not be officially illegal, but one can go several hundred miles without finding a Christian church. Does God love these people? Of course He does. People who live in this kind of ignorance--an ignorance that is not their own fault--can be saved without becoming Catholic. But for adult Protestants in America, people who claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit, people who change denominations at least once or twice in their lifetimes, people who have all kinds of information at literaally their fingertips, these people are not going to be able to claim inculpable ignorance of the Catholic Church.

"Unless ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of God." --Jesus


And neither can you lud. You have had the catechisms posted on here for you.

Yet you still ignore them.

Lets read that scripture you are alluding to, you quoted verse 3, not sure what translation you used:

Matthew 18 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

18 At that hour came the disciples near to Jesus, saying, `Who, now, is greater in the reign of the heavens?'
2 And Jesus having called near a child, did set him in the midst of them,
3 and said, `Verily I say to you, if ye may not be turned and become as the children, ye may not enter into the reign of the heavens;
4 whoever then may humble himself as this child, he is the greater in the reign of the heavens.
5 `And he who may receive one such child in my name, doth receive me,
6 and whoever may cause to stumble one of those little ones who are believing in me, it is better for him that a weighty millstone may be hanged upon his neck, and he may be sunk in the depth of the sea.
7 `Wo to the world from the stumbling-blocks! for there is a necessity for the stumbling-blocks to come, but wo to that man through whom the stumbling-block doth come!
8 `And if thy hand or thy foot doth cause thee to stumble, cut them off and cast from thee; it is good for thee to enter into the life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast to the fire the age-during.
9 `And if thine eye doth cause thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast from thee; it is good for thee one-eyed to enter into the life, rather than having two eyes to be cast to the gehenna of the fire.
10 `Beware! -- ye may not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you, that their messengers in the heavens do always behold the face of my Father who is in the heavens,
11 for the Son of Man did come to save the lost.


Now, it does not say what you insinuates it does .

For, you deny that those children can come to Christ, out side of the Roman Catholic church. You deny that Christ came for the lost.

Those flip flops are a stumbling block to you lud. Cut the darn things up, burn them and cast them out!

12/29/2014 10:46:41 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Christ did come for the lost. The Church exists so that the formerly lost can have a home---a home both in Heaven and in this journey here. Jesus is like the doctor and the Church is like the hospital. Sin is a sickness, of course.

The point is not to keep non-Catholics out but to ca non-Catholics in. The idea is not hmmf we're better than you. The idea is, come and join us!

12/29/2014 10:50:16 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

looptex1
Over 4,000 Posts! (4,596)
Chatsworth, GA
49, joined Jun. 2008
online now!


Quote from ludlowlowell:


But for adult Protestants in America, people who claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit, people who change denominations at least once or twice in their lifetimes,


It sounds like your talking about yourself.
Wasn't it you who changed because you claim you could not understand?

I've been in the same church since I was born again.
Joined in1977 and still going to the same church, believe the same things, teach and preach the same things.

I've yet to flip or flop about what I believe.

I can point out many member in my church, that have belonged before I did, they have yet to flip or flop to another church.

Its seems that it is you that changed, not the protestants.

12/29/2014 10:58:02 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


When I started this thread I had in mind the various Protestant churches as institutions, flip flopping on things like slavery, racism, divorce, contraception, and other moral issues. I don't deny that there are many sincere Protestant Christian individuals out there.

12/29/2014 12:16:13 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

bigd9832
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (21,701)
Chicago, IL
64, joined Oct. 2007


When you made this thread you were very confusing about what you were talking about...

Quote from ludlowlowell:
Protestantism flip flops. When slavery was popular, Protestantism supported slavery, When it became unpopular, Protestantism was against it, all the while telling people that morality wasn't important, all you needed was faith in Jesus, and even the worst slave traders could still go to Heaven if they believed in Jesus. Catholicism has always been against slavery. Pope after pope after pope condemned it.


This is very confusing. You talk about Protestants as if there is only one sect. There are many and each has it's own beliefs. If you are going to criticize Protestants you have to make these distinctions. If you are not able to then maybe you are not the best candidate to do this type of study.

Quote from ludlowlowell:
When racism was popular, Protestantism embraced racism. You should have seen the racists at my old Methodist church back in Alabama during the 1960s! When racism became unpopular, Protestantism went against Protestantism. The Catholic Church has always been against racism.


I don't think there was a mainstream Protestant sect that embraced racism officially. I might be wrong about that. But if I am, it is up to you to point them out.

I feel that every time a Catholic uses the word "heretic" that he/she is expressing a religious prejudice, tantamount to a racial comment.

Quote from ludlowlowell:
When contraception was unpopular, Protestantism was against contraception. When contraception became popular, Protestatntism was pro-contraception. The Catholic Church has always been against contraception.


Contraception is a Catholic thing, not a Protestant one. I don't think many Protestant churches cared about how many kids their parishioners had or how they avoided getting pregnant.

But if there is a Protestant sect that even pays attention to contraception then it's your duty to point them out. Otherwise all you are doing is making blanket statements that have little meaning to anyone but you.

Quote from ludlowlowell:
As homosexual sex becomes more and more popular, you will see Protestant churches all of a sudden deciding that the "spirit" now says homosexual sex is now okay (it's already begun to happen). The Catholic Church has always stood against this perversion, even if the present weak pope almost decided to approve of it. The Holy Spirit will not allow the Church to teach error.


I think homosexuality has forced us, as Christians, to examine our own attitudes about sin. We must be able to separate the sin from the sinner, which, if I may remind us all, that each and every one of us are sinners. There are no exceptions.

Perhaps one of the reasons why we as Christians are so slow to grow is because of people like you, who criticize the growth that is happening right before our very eyes. The Catholic church has made changes over the years. I have seen them.

Perhaps you bite off a bit more than you could chew here. Or perhaps you don't care how accurate you are, as long as you get to point out the flaws of the Protestant church.

Cause frankly, I don't think you know what you are talking about.

12/29/2014 4:22:46 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

furchizedek
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,868)
Kingman, AZ
74, joined Sep. 2010


Quote from msreesi:
Quote from ludlowlowell:

Vatican bureaucrats are not infallible.

Yet we can't go to Heaven unless we heed them, confess to them (rather than to God in Jesus name), and ask them to be our intercessor to the Intercessor?


Excellent, msreesi! You nailed it.

12/29/2014 6:30:40 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
The Second Vatican Council was not an infallible council. Whoever said that rejecting Vatican II is heresy is full of balone, I don't care how high up in the Vatican he is.



According to Roman Catholic church and teachings,heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt of any infallible teaching of the Magisterium.

However, it is possible to commit heresy in other ways. For example, rejecting all or most non-infallible teachings would be heresy. Rejecting all teachings of Tradition or of Scripture, other than those taught by the Magisterium, would also be heresy. In addition, it is clear that many of the heresies in the early Church were directly contrary to the clear and definitive teachings of Tradition and Scripture, apart from any infallible teaching of the Magisterium. (The magisterial condemnations of those heresies came later.)

But even if we consider the individual teachings of Vatican II as non-infallible, it may still be a heresy to reject those teachings.

Suppose that a non-infallible teaching of Vatican II is subsequently taught universally by successive Popes and by the body of Bishops dispersed through the world. If the teaching were non-infallible in its assertion by the Second Vatican Council, that same teaching becomes infallible and a required belief when subsequently it is taught universally. But it is not as if that universality were unrelated to the Council. The ordinary teaching of any Ecumenical Council certainly may contribute substantially to the universality of the teaching. And the subsequent exercise of the Magisterium by Popes and Bishops on that same point may occur as a result of the non-infallible teaching of that Council.

Once a non-infallible teaching of the ordinary Magisterium is taught universally by the body of Bishops led by the Pope, then it becomes a teaching of the infallible Magisterium. Teachings that are ordinary but not universal are non-infallible; teachings that are ordinary and universal are infallible.


The teachings of the Universal Magisterium are required beliefs under pain of heresy. It is a grave sin to reject any infallible teaching of the Magisterium, whether taught by Papal Infallibility, or Conciliar Infallibility, or the Universal Magisterium.


source: Ronald L. Conte Jr., Roman Catholic theologian and Bible translator

12/29/2014 6:45:18 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

casheyesblond
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,297)
Belmont, NC
53, joined Feb. 2009


Quote from ludlowlowell:
Pope Paul VI said, at the end of Vatcan II, that if anything from the council contradicted traditional Catholic teaching, that the traditional teaching should hold sway.

How about you produce that quote and in context why don't cha.

Meanwhile

It was indeed Pope Paul VI , after being elected on 21 June 1963,immediately announced that the Council would continue and it was this same Pope that helped carry forward the work of the Council.

Simply put,the church would be more than happy to inform you that many of the teachings of Vatican II have become infallible because they have continued to be taught by each Pope that followed and by the body of Bishops dispersed through the world. So these teachings, which ultra-conservatives claim were originally only non-infallible, are now infallible under the ordinary and universal Magisterium.

And any Roman Catholic who now rejects those infallible teachings commits the sin of formal heresy, and is automatically excommunicated.


I'm curious Lud,which opposing Catholic group are you part of ?

For example,

Society of St. Pius X
Society of St. Pius V
Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen
Sedevacantist, conclavist, and other Traditionalist groups


Which one ?


wanted to add,good post denny and rich

12/29/2014 7:26:08 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

bigd9832
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (21,701)
Chicago, IL
64, joined Oct. 2007


Quote from ludlowlowell:
According to Luke 10:16, anyone who rejects the pope rejects Jesus, and anyone who rejects Jesus rejects God.


CLV Luke 10:16 "He who is hearing you is hearing Me. And he who is repudiating you is repudiating Me. Yet he who is repudiating Me is repudiating Him Who commissions Me."

I don't see the word "pope" anywhere in this verse. How can this verse be about a "pope" that isn't there?

The word "pope" is not literally in this verse, but only interpreted there. In this case we can interpret the white rabbit there too if we want to.

12/29/2014 8:29:14 PM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Jesus is speaking to His apostles here, the first bishops of the Catholic Church. He is also speaking to Peter, the first pope. If someone rejects them it's the same as rejecting Jesus.

12/30/2014 1:01:22 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

furchizedek
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,868)
Kingman, AZ
74, joined Sep. 2010


Quote from ludlowlowell:
Jesus is speaking to His apostles here, the first bishops of the Catholic Church. He is also speaking to Peter, the first pope. If someone rejects them it's the same as rejecting Jesus.


Was The Apostle Peter A Pope?

In the books of men, the following titles are commonly used with reference to a man: "Pope," "Holy Father," "Vicar of Christ," "Sovereign Pontiff." All of these are titles that rightly belong only to the Lord Jesus Christ and to God the Father. There is not a single instance in the Scriptures where any of the above titles are applied to a man. The term, "Holy Father" is used only once in the entire Bible, and it is used by Jesus in addressing God the Father. (John 17:11)

Among the above titles is the bold assertion that the Pope is the "Vicar of Christ." A "vicar" is "One serving as a substitute or agent; one authorized to perform the functions of another in higher office." (Webster). When one searches the Bible from cover to cover, he finds only one passage which gives an indication of a vicar of Christ or God. It is 2 Thess. 2:3-4; it is worded as follows:

"Let no one deceive you in any way, for the day of the Lord will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits in the temple of God and gives himself out as if he were God."
Some religionists today advocate that man is saved by faith only. However, there is only one passage in the entire Bible that has the words "faith" and "only" together and it says, "not by faith only" (James 2:24). The Catholics today speak of the Pope as vicar, taking the place of God (Christ Himself is God, Matt. 1:23; John 1:1), yet there is only one passage in the entire Bible which speaks of a man doing such and it calls him "the man of sin."

James Cardinal Gibbons, a Catholic Archbishop said, "Jesus our Lord, founded but one Church, which He was pleased to build on Peter. Therefore, any church that does not recognize Peter as its foundation stone is not the Church of Christ, and therefore cannot stand, for it is not the work of God." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 82). The apostle Paul said, "For other foundation no one can lay, but that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus" (1 Cor. 3:11). There is no other foundation but Christ! Therefore, any church which does not recognize Christ alone as the foundation stone cannot be the church of Christ.

Catholic writers often speak of "the primacy of Peter" and "the primacy of the Pope." However, Col. 1:18, speaking of Christ, says, "And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy..." Thus, with reference to the authority in the church, the Lord Jesus Christ holds the primacy in all things. This leaves nothing for the Pope!

Catholics claim that the Pope is the visible head of the church. Please notice the following from Catholic sources:

"The pope, therefore, as vicar of Christ, is the visible head of Christ's kingdom on earth, the Church, of which Christ Himself is the invisible head." (Answer Wisely, by Martin J. Scott, p. 49).
"According to the will of Christ, all its members profess the same faith, have the same worship and Sacraments, and are united under the one and same visible head, the Pope." (Father Smith Instructs Jackson, by John F. Noll and Lester J. Fallon, p. 42)
Catholic officials always use the word "visible" no doubt thinking that it removes the thought of the Pope standing in opposition to the headship of Christ, and removes the apparent problem of having a church with two heads. Nonetheless, the Scriptures nowhere teach the idea of a visible and invisible head. Jesus said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." (Matt. 28:18; Emp. mine D.R.).

Luke 17:20-21 says, "And on being asked by the Pharisees, 'When is the kingdom of God coming?' he answered and said to them, The kingdom of God comes unawares. Neither will they say, 'Behold, here it is,' or 'Behold, there it is.' For behold the kingdom of God is within you." The kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom and therefore needs only a spiritual head or king.

Eph. 5:23-25 shows that Christ is the only head of the church. "Let wives be subject to their husbands as to the Lord; because a husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is head of the Church, being himself savior of the body. But just as the Church is subject to Christ, so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things." Consequently, the wife is subject to her husband as the church is to Christ. Just as the wife is subject to only one head--her husband, the church is subject to only one head--Christ. Just as the husband does not send a substitute to rule over his wife, Christ does not authorize a substitute to rule over His bride, the church.

Catholics often use the expression, "One fold and one shepherd" to sustain the doctrine of the papacy. (See Catholic Catechism For Adults, p. 59, q. 3). They teach that the "one shepherd" is the Pope and the "one fold" represents the Catholic Church. Hear what Jesus said about it:

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep...I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, even as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for my sheep. And other sheep I have that are not of this fold. Them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." (John 10:11, 14-16).
Jesus is that one good shepherd. If one can understand that one and one equals two, he can understand this. If one is subject to Christ as the one shepherd--that's one. If one is subject to the Pope as the one Shepherd--that's two!

The church is often compared to the human body in the Scriptures. The members of the church are represented as the various parts of the body. Christ is always said to be the head. (See 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 1:22-23; 4:15-16). Our question is: "What part of the body is the Pope?" Also, "How does one get the idea of a sub-head into the body?"

One of the greatest arguments against the primacy of Peter is the fact that the apostles had an argument among themselves as to which of them should be the greatest. Notice the following:

"Now there arose a dispute among them, which of them was reputed to be the greatest. But he said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and they who exercise authority over them are called Benefactors. But not so with you. On the contrary, let him who is greatest among you become as the youngest, and him who is chief as the servant.'" (Luke 22:24-26).
The very fact that the apostles had an argument among themselves shows they did not understand that Peter was to be prince. Also, the occasion of the argument was the night of the betrayal--the last night of the Lord's earthly ministry--and yet the apostles still did not understand that Christ had given Peter a position of primacy. The Lord settled the argument, not by stating that He had already made Peter head, but by declaring that the Gentiles have their heads, "But not so with you." Thus, Jesus very plainly taught that no one would occupy any such place as a Benefactor (or Pope) to exercise authority over the others.

12/30/2014 1:08:34 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

furchizedek
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (17,868)
Kingman, AZ
74, joined Sep. 2010


Question: "Was Saint Peter the first pope?"

Answer: The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the first pope upon whom God had chosen to build His church (Matthew 16:18). It holds that he had authority (primacy) over the other apostles. The Roman Catholic Church maintains that sometime after the recorded events of the book of Acts, the Apostle Peter became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishop was accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. It teaches that God passed Peter’s apostolic authority to those who later filled his seat as bishop of Rome. This teaching that God passed on Peter’s apostolic authority to the subsequent bishops is referred to as “apostolic succession.”

The Roman Catholic Church also holds that Peter and the subsequent popes were and are infallible when addressing issues “ex cathedra,” from their position and authority as pope. It teaches that this infallibility gives the pope the ability to guide the church without error. The Roman Catholic Church claims that it can trace an unbroken line of popes back to St. Peter, citing this as evidence that it is the true church, since, according to their interpretation of Matthew 16:18, Christ built His church upon Peter.

But while Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church (having primacy). See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Nor is it ever taught in Scripture that the bishop of Rome, or any other bishop, was to have primacy over the church. Scripture does not even explicitly record Peter even being in Rome. Rather there is only one reference in Scripture of Peter writing from “Babylon,” a name sometimes applied to Rome (1 Peter 5:13). Primarily upon this and the historical rise of the influence of the Bishop of Rome come the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching of the primacy of the bishop of Rome. However, Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20), and the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11).

Also, nowhere does Scripture state that, in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the idea behind apostolic succession). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22). Paul does NOT call on believers in various churches to receive Titus, Timothy, and other church leaders based on their authority as bishops or their having apostolic authority, but rather based upon their being fellow laborers with him (1 Corinthians 16:10; 16:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23).

What Scripture DOES teach is that false teachings would arise even from among church leaders, and that Christians were to compare the teachings of these later church leaders with Scripture, which alone is infallible (Matthew 5:18; Psalm 19:7-8; 119:160; Proverbs 30:5; John 17:17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). The Bible does not teach that the apostles were infallible, apart from what was written by them and incorporated into Scripture. Paul, in talking to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus, makes note of coming false teachers. To fight against their error does NOT commend them to “the apostles and those who would carry on their authority”; rather, Paul commends them to “God and to the word of His grace” (Acts 20:28-32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17), not apostolic successors. It is by examining the Scriptures that teachings are shown to be true or false (Acts 17:10-12).

Was Peter the first pope? The answer, according to Scripture, is a clear and emphatic “no.” Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles. Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church. Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors. Yes, the Apostle Peter had a leadership role among the disciples. Yes, Peter played a crucial role in the early spread of the gospel (Acts chapters 1-10). Yes, Peter was the “rock” that Christ predicted he would be (Matthew 16:18). However, these truths about Peter in no way give support to the concept that Peter was the first pope, or that he was the “supreme leader” over the apostles, or that his authority would be passed on to the bishops of Rome. Peter himself points us all to the true Shepherd and Overseer of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:25).

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Peter-first-pope.html#ixzz3NMXlkdo9

12/30/2014 10:37:22 AM I've Got These Rubber Sandals | Page 2  

ludlowlowell
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (35,780)
Panama City, FL
64, joined Feb. 2008
online now!


Furchizedek, you quoted Galatians and Ephesians! I thought you believed that Paul was a false apostle!

Furch, the idea of a foundation for the Church is a metaphor. Jesus is the metaphorical foundation of the Church because He founded it. Peter is also the metaphorical founddation of the Church because Jesus founded the Church on Peter's rock-like faith. There is no contradiction here.

Jesus is like a military unit's commanding officer, and the pope is like its executive officer. Disobey the XO and the CO will not be pleased. Or Jesus is like a corporation's president and the pope is like the corporation's vice president. Disobey the VP and the prez will not be pleased. Jesus is like Gil Favor and the pope like Rowdy Yates---when Mr. Favor is out scouting, Mr. Yates is in charge. Or the pope could be likened to one of Johnny Carson's guest hosts.