"Let’s go back to some of my questions to which I don’t believe you have responded."
A "Loose ends" post:
"How many times is a group of Apostles named in the bible when Peter wasn’t among them?"
When Apostles are named, Pete is generally present in the list (moreso at the beginning of Acts).
"When Christ was preparing for his Passion, his intent was to bring down the Holy Spirit on all believers in equal shares or to the same extent across the board. There was nothing withheld from any of the disciples?"
TRUE - Christians have the HOLY SPIRIT indwelling. Not a toenail, or an earlobe - The ENTIRE Holy Spirit - who uses us as ministers in the way that HE chooses. There are different callings, and ministries, but ANY Christian can be (and is) used in whatever way the Holy SPirit desires. There ARE NO "Super Christians" - just Sinners, saved by the Blood of Christ.
"What did any of these “bad Popes” say in their encyclicals or proclamations that departed from Christ? Did they teach error?"
I've already listed many of the heresies and "errors" originated, and formalized by the RCC system over the centuries, so won't comment further here.
"2. Constantine was the first Pope;
3. That there was no Catholic Church before Constantine;"
The Roman Catholic organization came into existence as a Legal entity capable of owning property in this time period, and so as a discrete organization, it didn't exist before that time. There WAS the Church with the proper plurality of leadership before then, however. Constantine was the one who "Took over religion" in the Roman political system, and "Enforced Christianity" in a practical sense.
"4. That Peter was the “Apostle at large”."
Since James was the Bishop of the Jerusalem church (according to the Catholic Encycloedia), and Peter is on record Biblically as travelling around, then the classification follows.
"What is so “pagan” about the 7 sacraments recognized by the Catholic Church?"
Some of 'em are, and some of 'em aren't "Pagan". WE see them as "Normal process Christianity", and don't givem 'em "Special names", or apply "ceremonial Spiritual powers" to 'em. The Assemblies of God has NO "Sacraments", but does have two "Biblical Ordinances" that we Observe in a somewhat "ceremonial" fashion: Baptism (as a testimony and a symbol of what has already happened in the life of the one baptized), and Communion where we remember the Sacrifice of Jesus for us.
Paranthetic: today we had "The Lord's Supper" in the Original Biblical fashion (as opposed to the "Wafer and grape juice" style) - we gathered around tables, and had a communal meal discerning the "Lords Body" - which is the congregation gathered in His name. SInce we're in texas, it was barbeque, with all the fix'ins.
"What makes you say Catholics ignore Jesus (your answer focuses on Mary which is a huge topic in and of itself, but says nothing about Catholic “ignoring” Jesus, so I just want you to address the actual question if you could)?"
Catholics (depending on their level of "Marianist rabidity") tend to CONCENTRATE on their "Blessed Virgin" (or their collection of "saints") as their "Go to gal" in prayers, and petitions - INSTEAD OF obeying Jesus' clear instructions: GO to FATHER GOD, in MY NAME. The cheapens the character and person of Jesus (who is presented as one who "needs the advice of a collection of physically dead Christians, and His Mom".
NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH!!!!!! God KNOWS us COMPLETELY,and knows exactly what we have need of before we even ask. God has a PLAN FOR OUR LIVES, and a Ministry for us, and WE COME BOLDLY Before the Throne with Jesus as our advocate, clothed in HIS righteousness.
Mary, or the "Saints" aren't even involved in ANY of that. There's NO sign of anything like the RCC "Traditions" in the Word, ans simply no ROOM for it in Christian practice. It's obviously a practice copied from the pagans, and adapted into the RCC's "Program".
JP2 credits his "Survival" after the assassination NOT to Jesus, but to "Our Lady of Fatima". Remarkable for the "Vicar of Christ".
"[Discussing Papal authority as opposed to individualized interpretation of scripture] How can the one Holy Spirit be giving varying degrees of conflicting information (misinformation) to all these people?
If all we need to do is put our trust in the Holy Spirit and follow, why do we need the Bible?
Certainly you aren’t saying all we need is the Holy Spirit and nothing else are you?"
Go to the Ephesians 4 passages for a LIST of the ministries that God has given to the Church to "bring it together". The Problem is, of course, that everybody that CLAIMS to "Speak for God" - isn't. And THAT includes the Pope and His "Magisterium". There's nothing at all special about the Catholic Heirarchy that makes them any more "Accurate in their pronouncements", than the President of the Southern Baptist Conference is. Simple as that.
"…if the Holy Spirit is the one guiding them (Protestant denominations), shouldn’t they all be headed down (or up) the same path?"
And to a large degree they are, but the details vary. One effect of the Charismatic Outpouring that effected BOTH the protestants, and the RCC (And even the Orthodox) was that it re-focused many on Jesus, and showed us how UNIMPORTANT many of our "Traditions, and theologies actually were. God's in control of His church - regardless of what this or that denominational group thinks.
[“Anointing of the Holy Spirit that reveals JESUS is the "ROCK"’] Where do you see that in the Bible? Are you equating the cornerstone the rock?"
Peter was NEVER the "Rock" - he's certainly a "Stone" in the "building" but Jesus is the "Rock" (we see that first in Exodus 17:
6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.
7 And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not?
This is a direct "type" of Jesus (the smitten rock), and should give you an idea of the SERIOUSNESS of Moses' rebellion when he Struck the rock AGAIN in Num 20.
That the ROCK was Christ is confirmed in 1 Cor 10:
10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
Of course Jesus is ALSO the "Cornerstone: 1 Pet 2:
6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
"[past bad acts of the Popes and Church leaders] What Church actions have not been true to the Gospel?"
Covered in other posts.
"[“…but the "canonization process" for "Saints" INCLUDES the requirement that the "Dear departed" demonstrate his CLOUT with God by providing miraculous answers to prayers SENT TO THEM.”] That isn’t a quote from the Vatican is it?"
Not a "Quote", but a "summary". In order to be canonized, there's a Clear REQUIREMENT that the departed Saint/Pope/whatever has GOT TO provide TWO identifiable Miraculous occurrences that are demonstrably the RESULT of prayers addressed to Him/Her. JP2 had a bit of problem with the Nun's miracle, but I believe the beatification is now complete as of 2011. HE was a popular guy, and the people WANTED him to be canonized NOW - and so he was. A Good marketing move to be sure.
"[You allege that the Catholic Church didn’t speak out against slavery until 1888.] What is your source for the 1888 date?"
Apparently (according to the Catholic News agency) the date should be 1435 (Eugene 4), but even though the Popes condemned it, they were generally ignored. Bishops Gregory 16 issued a Bull in 1839, which was interpreted by American Bishops as condemning the "Slave Trade", but NOT "Slavery itself". 1888 is the time when Slavery was OFFICIALLY ended in Brazil.
"[You stated that the Bible says that attaching spiritual significance to something is equal to idol worship.] To that, I asked for you to educate me, but you didn’t come back to it in your response, so please do."
I though I covered that. But suffice to say that an Image as a Visual reminder wouldn't be important one way or another. You indicated concern that I would consider a crucifix that hangs in my entry hall: "nothing but a dust catcher - an ornament". But that's all it is. a Highly inaccurate piece of art picturing the crucifixion of Jesus. It HAS no spiritual significance. It's a chunk of ceramic attached to two pieces of wood.
"[Papal succession] It's all "Contrived", and inaccurate - the RCC doesn't even agree on it entirely."
Covered in another post, ALL Bishops were "Popes" until the 6th century when Rome decided to do their "Power grab" and appropriate the title for the Roman Bishop exclusively.
A good reference for the confusion of the earlier times is "the Catholic Encyclopedia" I'll let you peruse it at your leisure.
But since there's no Biblical evidence that Peter ever WAS what the Catholic church tries to present him as, it's all moot anyway. Catholic "Tradition" is simply unimportant to Non-Catholics.
Last edited by Bob Carabbio; 12-03-12 at 08:20 AM.