TxAgPreacher said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Succession is a lie.

---

Incorrect. The lie would be to ignore the laying on of hands and how successors were determined and sent forth. That part at least should be almost rote common knowledge.

---

5And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?" 6And he said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

"'This people honors me and my mother with their lips,
but their heart is far from me and my mother;
7in vain do they worship me and my mother,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'

8You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men."

---

I feel like that is EXACTLY what he would say to the modern Catholic church. Crazy. FIFY though...half jk.

Verse 8 is what nails the Catholic Church. It has become a monster that it was never intended to be.

titan said:

---

The thing you need to realize is the church that set the canon and assembled the Bible DID believe in that secession. With little dissent.

Forget the Pope, or even the Bishop of Rome. You are straying into denying the creed of 100 and the Sees. That is not a position can entertain, and we will have to agree to disagree.

---

Oh so the people who made up the system believed in it?

Book, chapter, and verse, or it's a tradition of men with no authority from God.

RAB91 said:

---

This comment seems to be in reference to Cardinal Burke. Assuming this translation is correct, this pope's pettiness is unbelievable. With all the popes in my lifetime I knew with 100% certainty they were better people then me (an average Catholic), but with this one it is a coin flip.

On plane from Slovakia, Pope Francis references Cardinal Burke's hospitalization with Covid: "Even in the college of cardinals, there are some vaccine deniers, and one of them, poor man, is in hospital with the virus. It’s an irony of life." pic.twitter.com/XBcG99exQR

— Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) September 15, 2021

---

He has a triple chin

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Womackster said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

This thread:

---

My protestant church has none of those heresies or the heresy of a pope.

---

You know how I know you're a heretic?

---

Because you've been brainwashed to obey the orders of the church made of imperfect men, rather than going to God's word itself.

Nowhere in the bible is apostolic succession or a Pope mentioned. Y'all have become sheep who would make excuses for anyone if they became pope. You're blind to the possibility that your church could possibly become corrupt. You think its impossible.

God never set up the giant bureaucracy established by the church at rome. Man created a hybridized religion, designed specifically to bring in pagans and Jews to feel more comfortable with christianity, and to control the masses.

That's why you'll see many traditions of man taught as commandments of God.

---

Protestantism is a tradition of man. I would rather be a sheep than a goat.

---

Genuinely a good one liner.

I follow the new testament church established on the day of pentecost.

Some protestant churches are in error. As well as catholic, orthodox, or any other.

Denominations are wrong.

True restoration to the bible is not.

---

Do you really follow the Church of Pentecost? How was this handed down to you? By whose authority? I agree denominations are wrong. That is why I stick to the first Church, the one that started on Pentecost, the one that was handed down, by Christ, to the Apostles, to the Bishops in an unbroken chain of succession down to this day.

---

The bible's authority. So God's himself. The incorruptible. The unchanging. The words that have been preserved, and say the same thing thet always have. Not by corruptible traditon of man.

Succession is a lie. You wont find it in the perfect word of God. They will tell you about it in the corrupt church, by men clinging to power like pharisees that teach as doctrine the commandments of men. These teachings are nowhere to be found in the bible.

Go ahead. Believe everything this marxist pope says. Listen to the cardinals, priests, and archbishops who's position's are also not found in the holy scriptures.

---

Can you show me in the Bible where it gives you this authority or where the bible declares it self the absolute authority?
If your church of the Pentecost gains it's authority from the Bible what did it do for the 60 years before the new testament was started to be written? What did it do for the hundreds of years it took for the New Testament to be compiled?
So can you show me where the succession was broken and where the teachings were broken if it's a lie?

American Hardwood said:

---

Why get hung up? That literally IS the point. That is the difference. I am glad that you find your service to be fulfilling I really do, but believing in the True Presence and not believing in it IS the difference between our faiths. Most of the rest of the arguments about Church hierarchy and whatnot is a sideshow by comparison.

I love my Protestant brothers as much as any Catholic. We all believe in God and Christ. While I wish that Protestants would accept the full beliefs I do, I think it is far more important to focus on our shared beliefs. There are enemies way bigger and far more deadly than fighting about our small but significant difference.

I don't always get the feeling that a lot of Protestants feel the same way unfortunately. It sure seems like Protestants believe a lot of things about the Catholic church that aren't true for whatever reason and that we actually agree for more often than not.

---

By far the main reason for that is no even reasonably accurate rendition of the early phase is in our teachings in school or even pop culture. If you are almost entirely unaware or ignorant of the entire Eastern Empire and Orthodox Church, with all the theological issues they thrashed through with the West --- and how the Canon was set ---- you don't even have a reference.

Instead, people are left looking at the magisterial imagery of the Pope, and almost entirely unaware of the role of the Patriarchates, Bishops, and councils that were custodians of the scripture and history.

Hell, there isn't even a major Hollywood movie on the Eastern Empire. It doesn't exist in people's awareness except when it fell (1453).

TxAgPreacher said:

---

titan said:

---

The thing you need to realize is the church that set the canon and assembled the Bible DID believe in that secession. With little dissent.

Forget the Pope, or even the Bishop of Rome. You are straying into denying the creed of 100 and the Sees. That is not a position can entertain, and we will have to agree to disagree.

---

Oh so the people who made up the system believed in it?

Book, chapter, and verse, or it's a tradition of men with no authority from God.

---

As I said, if you are going to deny the 1st and 2nd C tradition, we don't need to discuss it. Its like denying WW I trying to understand WW II.

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Womackster said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

This thread:

---

My protestant church has none of those heresies or the heresy of a pope.

---

You know how I know you're a heretic?

---

Because you've been brainwashed to obey the orders of the church made of imperfect men, rather than going to God's word itself.

Nowhere in the bible is apostolic succession or a Pope mentioned. Y'all have become sheep who would make excuses for anyone if they became pope. You're blind to the possibility that your church could possibly become corrupt. You think its impossible.

God never set up the giant bureaucracy established by the church at rome. Man created a hybridized religion, designed specifically to bring in pagans and Jews to feel more comfortable with christianity, and to control the masses.

That's why you'll see many traditions of man taught as commandments of God.

---

Protestantism is a tradition of man. I would rather be a sheep than a goat.

---

Genuinely a good one liner.

I follow the new testament church established on the day of pentecost.

Some protestant churches are in error. As well as catholic, orthodox, or any other.

Denominations are wrong.

True restoration to the bible is not.

---

Do you really follow the Church of Pentecost? How was this handed down to you? By whose authority? I agree denominations are wrong. That is why I stick to the first Church, the one that started on Pentecost, the one that was handed down, by Christ, to the Apostles, to the Bishops in an unbroken chain of succession down to this day.

---

The bible's authority. So God's himself. The incorruptible. The unchanging. The words that have been preserved, and say the same thing thet always have. Not by corruptible traditon of man.

Succession is a lie. You wont find it in the perfect word of God. They will tell you about it in the corrupt church, by men clinging to power like pharisees that teach as doctrine the commandments of men. These teachings are nowhere to be found in the bible.

Go ahead. Believe everything this marxist pope says. Listen to the cardinals, priests, and archbishops who's position's are also not found in the holy scriptures.

---

Can you show me in the Bible where it gives you this authority or where the bible declares it self the absolute authority?
If your church of the Pentecost gains it's authority from the Bible what did it do for the 60 years before the new testament was started to be written? What did it do for the hundreds of years it took for the New Testament to be compiled?
So can you show me where the succession was broken and where the teachings were broken if it's a lie?

---

Show me one passage that clearly establishes apostolic succession. You can't because Gods only structure is local authority for elders/shepherds/bishops/pastors(same office).

2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

The point of spiritual gifts was for people to know the will of God until the Holy scriptures were compiled, and then they passed away.

Only apostles could lay on hands and give spiritual gifts. When the apostles died the next generation still had the gifts. They died with them, and lasted until the scriptures were compiled.

1 Corinthians 13:8-10 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.

Quote:

---

Verse 8 is what nails the Catholic Church. It has become a monster that it was never intended to be.

---

Would it help you to look at the sequence with a fresh mind if I said, I can even understand where THAT impression could come from, and in a purely hypothetical sense, not rule it out.

But look at how the Bible was preserved and canonized. And what they believed. That's all asking.

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

What is the eucharist and where is it in the bible may be the most Protestant thing I've ever heard.

The last supper? The bread of life discourse in John 6? the passover of the old Testament?

---

All things Protestants acknowledge and celebrate and even re-enact. I guess I am wondering how it is exclusive to catholicism?

---

Do you believe it's the flesh and blood of christ? Or is the teaching hard and who can accept it?

---

Symbolically? Absolutely, what Christian doesn't believe that?

---

Not symbolically, obviously. That's a Protestant invention

---

Huh? You believe you are LITERALLY eating his body and drinking his blood? No way.

---

Why else would it be so important? You think eating bread and drinking juice is the most important part of being a Christian?

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Womackster said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

This thread:

---

My protestant church has none of those heresies or the heresy of a pope.

---

You know how I know you're a heretic?

---

Because you've been brainwashed to obey the orders of the church made of imperfect men, rather than going to God's word itself.

Nowhere in the bible is apostolic succession or a Pope mentioned. Y'all have become sheep who would make excuses for anyone if they became pope. You're blind to the possibility that your church could possibly become corrupt. You think its impossible.

God never set up the giant bureaucracy established by the church at rome. Man created a hybridized religion, designed specifically to bring in pagans and Jews to feel more comfortable with christianity, and to control the masses.

That's why you'll see many traditions of man taught as commandments of God.

---

Protestantism is a tradition of man. I would rather be a sheep than a goat.

---

Genuinely a good one liner.

I follow the new testament church established on the day of pentecost.

Some protestant churches are in error. As well as catholic, orthodox, or any other.

Denominations are wrong.

True restoration to the bible is not.

---

Do you really follow the Church of Pentecost? How was this handed down to you? By whose authority? I agree denominations are wrong. That is why I stick to the first Church, the one that started on Pentecost, the one that was handed down, by Christ, to the Apostles, to the Bishops in an unbroken chain of succession down to this day.

---

The bible's authority. So God's himself. The incorruptible. The unchanging. The words that have been preserved, and say the same thing thet always have. Not by corruptible traditon of man.

Succession is a lie. You wont find it in the perfect word of God. They will tell you about it in the corrupt church, by men clinging to power like pharisees that teach as doctrine the commandments of men. These teachings are nowhere to be found in the bible.

Go ahead. Believe everything this marxist pope says. Listen to the cardinals, priests, and archbishops who's position's are also not found in the holy scriptures.

---

Can you show me in the Bible where it gives you this authority or where the bible declares it self the absolute authority?
If your church of the Pentecost gains it's authority from the Bible what did it do for the 60 years before the new testament was started to be written? What did it do for the hundreds of years it took for the New Testament to be compiled?
So can you show me where the succession was broken and where the teachings were broken if it's a lie?

---

Show me one passage that clearly establishes apostolic succession. You can't because Gods only structure is local authority for elders/shepherds/bishops/pastors(same office).

2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

---

During the time of scripture being written only one Apostle was replaced and that was Judas. In the book of Acts we see Saint Matthias being appointed to his office.
Matthias Chosen to Replace Judas
12 Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day's walk[a] from the city. 13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, "Brothers and sisters,[b] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry."
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
20 "For," said Peter, "it is written in the Book of Psalms:
"'May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,'[c]
and,
"'May another take his place of leadership.'[d]

If you read the history of the Church you would see a clear line of succession. Love that quote from Timothy and agree full heartily, where did it grant any authority?

In 1 Timothy 3;15 the Church is "the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." The Catholic Church gave you the Bible. It is not against the Church and never has been.

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

---

well yes, apostolic succession is only necessary in Christ's earthly absence.

You don't need a regent when the King returns.

Also, the only reason you know which scripture is God breathed is because the Church told you so.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

---

well yes, apostolic succession is only necessary in Christ's earthly absence.

You don't need a regent when the King returns.

Also, the only reason you know which scripture is God breathed is because the Church told you so.

---

That's what your church told you to say, not what the bible says.

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

I have to take issue with your statement. The final choice as a Pro Life Catholic is not to be determined by what the Vatican/Pope says. I know that aborted babies' cells have been used and have continued to be used in all the medical MRNA vaccines, and other research. Knowing this, and believing that when I stand before God in my time of judgement ALONE, I will be guided by my belief that all life is sacred and must be protected regardless of what the Vatican/Pope says.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

---

The reason is you didn't understand your faith. My so called arrogance is a terrible excuse for why to leave a faith.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

---

Ah the moving of goal posts, never fails. Peter had not yet been Martyred but there are plenty of accounts of that and his successors. I know you want to reject anything that is not scripture but that is not taught in any way in scripture. I however won't put my head in the sand and participate with your heresy.

Mark Fairchild said:

---

I have to take issue with your statement. The final choice as a Pro Life Catholic is not to be determined by what the Vatican/Pope says. I know that aborted babies' cells have been used and have continued to be used in medical MRNA vaccines, and other research. Knowing this, and believing that when I stand before God in my time of judgement ALONE, I will be guided by my belief that all life is sacred and must be protected regardless of what the Vatican/Pope says.

---

You are blameless for your belief, as the church's statement on the vaccine is not infallibly authoritative.

However, the people who are taking the vaccine after consulting the church they rely on for guidance are also blameless.

Go in peace

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

---

The reason is you didn't understand your faith. My so called arrogance is a terrible excuse for why to leave a faith.

---

I fully understand my faith. You're being an pompous ass to assume otherwise.

I said arrogance was one reason. Corrupt leadership and unnecessary traditions created by men equated to doctrine were other factors.

You do you bro, if Catholicism works for you, great. But quit insulting my intelligence.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

---

well yes, apostolic succession is only necessary in Christ's earthly absence.

You don't need a regent when the King returns.

Also, the only reason you know which scripture is God breathed is because the Church told you so.

---

That's what your church told you to say, not what the bible says.

---

Where does the Bible say how it was compiled? Or why the gospel of Thomas or all other extra canonical sources were made extra canonical?

It's not just my church, it's the Orthodox church as well, and all christendom until about 300 years ago.

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

---

Ah the moving of goal posts, never fails. Peter had not yet been Martyred but there are plenty of accounts of that and his successors. I know you want to reject anything that is not scripture but that is not taught in any way in scripture. I however won't put my head in the sand and participate with your heresy.

---

Please explain how I moved any goalpost?

I have not back peddled on my position and inch.

Run if you want. I suspect you're beyond your depth in knowledge of the scriptures.

You're clearly just an idiot and educated rube who doesn't understand your faith.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

You're clearly just an idiot and educated rube who doesn't understand your faith.

---

Sad really.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

---

The reason is you didn't understand your faith. My so called arrogance is a terrible excuse for why to leave a faith.

---

I fully understand my faith. You're being an pompous ass to assume otherwise.

I said arrogance was one reason. Corrupt leadership and unnecessary traditions created by men equated to doctrine were other factors.

You do you bro, if Catholicism works for you, great. But quit insulting my intelligence.

---

If you believe the traditions are unnecessary then you don't know your faith. The whole "created by man" thing falls well short as well. We were left with men and the Holy Spirit when Christ went to heaven. 1500 years later a bunch of Catholics got upset and created their own church.

How is that not man made?

I totally agree with your statement, and I am in agreement with every man/woman using their "free will" to make their own choice. I was only pointing out that aborted cells have been used in all MRNA vaccines.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

---

Ah the moving of goal posts, never fails. Peter had not yet been Martyred but there are plenty of accounts of that and his successors. I know you want to reject anything that is not scripture but that is not taught in any way in scripture. I however won't put my head in the sand and participate with your heresy.

---

Please explain how I moved any goalpost?

I have not back peddled on my position and inch.

Run if you want. I suspect you're beyond your depth in knowledge of the scriptures.

---

First you ask for proof of apostolic succession then argue not that was just for one apostle, neverminded the fact it was the only possible example in scripture.

You are correct you have stayed in error this whole time.

I will not boast in my scriptural acumen, for I am a but a faithful layman, but I do think I have enough evidence on this thread to provide to your seminary if at any point you seek a refund.

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

---

well yes, apostolic succession is only necessary in Christ's earthly absence.

You don't need a regent when the King returns.

Also, the only reason you know which scripture is God breathed is because the Church told you so.

---

That's what your church told you to say, not what the bible says.

---

Where does the Bible say how it was compiled? Or why the gospel of Thomas or all other extra canonical sources were made extra canonical?

It's not just my church, it's the Orthodox church as well, and all christendom until about 300 years ago.

---

You're correct that we look back to history to see which books were rejected by those who still had spiritual gifts.

After that is established, we go based on what those scriptures said, not what traditions man has added to it.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

You're clearly just an idiot and educated rube who doesn't understand your faith.

---

No, the ones who don't know the faith are the ones who established universities everywhere and lead Europe through the dark ages after the fall of Rome while coming up with the Scholastic tradition.

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

---

Ah the moving of goal posts, never fails. Peter had not yet been Martyred but there are plenty of accounts of that and his successors. I know you want to reject anything that is not scripture but that is not taught in any way in scripture. I however won't put my head in the sand and participate with your heresy.

---

Please explain how I moved any goalpost?

I have not back peddled on my position and inch.

Run if you want. I suspect you're beyond your depth in knowledge of the scriptures.

---

First you ask for proof of apostolic succession then argue not that was just for one apostle, neverminded the fact it was the only possible example in scripture.

You are correct you have stayed in error this whole time.

I will not boast in my scriptural acumen, for I am a but a faithful layman, but I do think I have enough evidence on this thread to provide to your seminary if at any point you seek a refund.

---

I didnt pay anything for my education.

I like you. You're fun, and genuinely funny. We could be friends.

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

---

The reason is you didn't understand your faith. My so called arrogance is a terrible excuse for why to leave a faith.

---

I fully understand my faith. You're being an pompous ass to assume otherwise.

I said arrogance was one reason. Corrupt leadership and unnecessary traditions created by men equated to doctrine were other factors.

You do you bro, if Catholicism works for you, great. But quit insulting my intelligence.

---

If you believe the traditions are unnecessary then you don't know your faith. The whole "created by man" thing falls well short as well. We were left with men and the Holy Spirit when Christ went to heaven. 1500 years later a bunch of Catholics got upset and created their own church.

How is that not man made?

---

And you're an ass for continuing to state I don't know my faith. You believe what you want and I'm not going to say that you fail in your understanding.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You give the church at rome too much credit. There were many churches, and libraries that held the manuscripts.

Church history is written by non inspired falable men. The bible is breathed by God. It does not say anything about apostolic succession other than it would pass away when the perfect word of God was complete.

As for your vague unclear prophecy, Peter was never clearly established as pope. That's oral tradition. There is no clear passage establishing apostolic succession. Peter was rebuked by Paul. One could argue Paul wielded more influence than peter. Of course the scriptures never gave any head of the church other than Christ.

That prophecy is about replacing Judas not Peter.

---

Ah the moving of goal posts, never fails. Peter had not yet been Martyred but there are plenty of accounts of that and his successors. I know you want to reject anything that is not scripture but that is not taught in any way in scripture. I however won't put my head in the sand and participate with your heresy.

---

Please explain how I moved any goalpost?

I have not back peddled on my position and inch.

Run if you want. I suspect you're beyond your depth in knowledge of the scriptures.

---

First you ask for proof of apostolic succession then argue not that was just for one apostle, neverminded the fact it was the only possible example in scripture.

You are correct you have stayed in error this whole time.

I will not boast in my scriptural acumen, for I am a but a faithful layman, but I do think I have enough evidence on this thread to provide to your seminary if at any point you seek a refund.

---

I didnt pay anything for my education.

I still think your owed a refund, lol

I like you. You're fun, and genuinely funny. We could be friends.

We're Brothers in Christ I would gladly call you friend

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Makes me really glad my family no longer attends Mass.

---

This is the saddest thing I have read in this thread. Tragic really. Willfully removing oneself from life-giving sacraments.

---

Nah. We have a stronger relationship with Christ now. We're good!

---

Narrator: "he was not in fact, good."

---

Arrogance like this was part of the reason. You're only reinforcing that my decision was correct.

---

The reason is you didn't understand your faith. My so called arrogance is a terrible excuse for why to leave a faith.

---

I fully understand my faith. You're being an pompous ass to assume otherwise.

I said arrogance was one reason. Corrupt leadership and unnecessary traditions created by men equated to doctrine were other factors.

You do you bro, if Catholicism works for you, great. But quit insulting my intelligence.

---

If you believe the traditions are unnecessary then you don't know your faith. The whole "created by man" thing falls well short as well. We were left with men and the Holy Spirit when Christ went to heaven. 1500 years later a bunch of Catholics got upset and created their own church.

How is that not man made?

---

And you're an ass for continuing to state I don't know my faith. You believe what you want and I'm not going to say that you fail in your understanding.

---

If you knew the richness of the Catholic faith, nothing so petty or worldly could keep you from itn. That's all I'm saying. It's not a flavor of soda or a country club.