In Roman Catholic History, Did That "Church" Ever Feel Threatened?

No. I don't.

We are not asserting that Mary's mediation is the same as that of Christ or on His level in any way. Christ's mediation is unique. That is why I do not see the assertion that Mary is co-redemptrix as a problem or in conflict with Scripture.

That said, as of now the doctrine of "co-redemptrix" is heterodox--that is--it isn't defined, nor condemned. Catholics, therefore, are free to accept or reject it as they see fit. However, both Pope Francis and Benedict have commented against the doctrine.
Really not the same, it is better because we were told she has a softer heart.
 
Oh as if RCs have given us any facts and again with the RC arrogance. I mean Rom you are replying to an RC who is worried about every idle word.
There you go. One more Scripture verse to ignore, right?

Out of Christian charity I remind everyone of that verse.
 
And so I say to you, you are Peter [Kepha], and upon this rock [Kepha] I will build MY CHURCH, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
The Roman Catholic Church probably did NOT instruct you to the fact that the New Testament makes several references to Jesus as a rock or as the foundation of the church. Romans 9:33 says that: "God warned them of this in the Scriptures when He said, "I have put a Rock in the path of the Jews, and many will stumble over him (Jesus). Those who believe in Him will never be disappointed."
 
There you go. One more Scripture verse to ignore, right?

Out of Christian charity I remind everyone of that verse.
No I am not ignoring it at all. Truth is not idle talk and I was just pointing out your feelings on the matter to an RC. Oh you only send that verse to my posts and do so incorrectly. But no surprise as RCs do not seem to understand it and ignore it. They have trouble with the logs in their own eyes. Yep RCs don't like their hypocrisy pointed out IMO.

Yep everyone can see what you are doing and note it. They can discern what is happening.
 
Can God bind error, sir? Yes, or no?

Note: this passage is not used to proof text the collective infallibility of the Church, it is used primarily as a proof text for the foundation of the papacy as well as the infallibility of the pope.
The New Testament makes several references to Jesus as a rock or as the foundation of the church. Read the following:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"And no one can ever lay any other real foundation than that one we already have - Jesus Christ. 1 Cor. 3:11.

"And by a miracle God sent them food to eat and water to drink there in the desert; they drank the water that Christ gave them. He was there with them as a mighty Rock of spiritual refreshment. 1 Cor. 10: 4

God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said, "I have put a Rock in the path of the Jews, and many will stumble over him (Jesus). Those who believe in Him will never be disappointed.
 
The New Testament makes several references to Jesus as a rock or as the foundation of the church. Read the following:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"And no one can ever lay any other real foundation than that one we already have - Jesus Christ. 1 Cor. 3:11.

"And by a miracle God sent them food to eat and water to drink there in the desert; they drank the water that Christ gave them. He was there with them as a mighty Rock of spiritual refreshment. 1 Cor. 10: 4

God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said, "I have put a Rock in the path of the Jews, and many will stumble over him (Jesus). Those who believe in Him will never be disappointed.
Jesus is clearly the head, the saviour, the word, the foundation, the rock and it is never said about the RCC. I mean the word Catholic is not even in scripture.
 
Thank you.

Now, if what Peter binds or looses will be bound and loosed in heaven, it logically follows that Peter cannot bind error, since God cannot bind error.

Was that so hard?
There is absolutely NO biblical record of Peter serving as the head of the apostles, the head of the Church, or the bishop of Rome. If you think and believe differently, then show everyone where that is substantiated in the Holy Bible.
 
There is absolutely NO biblical record of Peter serving as the head of the apostles, the head of the Church, or the bishop of Rome. If you think and believe differently, then show everyone where that is substantiated in the Holy Bible.
Dude--like---have you ever read the New Testatament? You might want to try it sometime. Peter's primacy is all over the pages of Scripture.
 
There is absolutely NO biblical record of Peter serving as the head of the apostles, the head of the Church, or the bishop of Rome. If you think and believe differently, then show everyone where that is substantiated in the Holy Bible.
Peter's primacy is all over the pages of Scripture.

Yet nowhere is Peter said to be head of the apostles, head of the Church, or bishop of Rome.

That is why you came back to the thread empty handed.
 
The New Testament makes several references to Jesus as a rock or as the foundation of the church. Read the following:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"And no one can ever lay any other real foundation than that one we already have - Jesus Christ. 1 Cor. 3:11.
"The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." (Revelation 21:14)

The city spoken about is the new Jerusalem, the Church.
"And by a miracle God sent them food to eat and water to drink there in the desert; they drank the water that Christ gave them. He was there with them as a mighty Rock of spiritual refreshment. 1 Cor. 10: 4
Yes, this refers to the rock that gave the Israelites water. The rock was Christ. Paul is not referring to Matthew 16:18 in this passage, but the Old Testament where God provided water for the Israelites from the side of a rock. The Rock was Christ.
God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said, "I have put a Rock in the path of the Jews, and many will stumble over him (Jesus). Those who believe in Him will never be disappointed.
I don't see what this has to do with Matthew 16:18
 
Dude--like --this statement is nothing more than a declarative statement of your unsubstantiated opinion. It is not evidence from the Scriptures as you were asked to provide.
I DID. Read----the New Testament, specifically the Gospels and the Acts. See Peter's role and prominence in the Gospel?

Yeah---that would, you know, like---be the proof.
 
Hey --chick -- so like give us an example from like the NT where you claim like "Peter's primacy is all over the page." Go for it chick.
So--like--you want me to like--cute and paste the entirety of the four Gospels and the Acts?

Not gonna happen. Google it and read it for yourself. There is the proof.
 
NOPE! This is a real city where all believers will live for all of eternity; once time as we know it comes to an end. We will reside there forever with Jesus. It has nothing to do with the rcc.
Um, I quoted Revelation to show that the apostles are also given as the foundation of the Church. I did not quote the passage to prove the RCC is the Church.
 
Back
Top