Peter the Rock / Protestant and Catholic

Is Peter The Rock of the Church?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 30.6%
  • No

    Votes: 34 69.4%

  • Total voters
    49
Status
Not open for further replies.

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,253
✟816,720.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
To answer the first post; It is St. Peter's confession that is actually the rock on which the Church is built; "You are the Christ, the son of the living God"; this is what the Church is built on. The keys are given to that Church; "the" Church; not just to Peter.

To emphasize the importance of Rome, there is a connection with Peter and Rome; Peter may (it is likely I think) have been Bishop of Rome. Regarding the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome, that is questionable. A more plausible patriarch of the Church would be St. James of Jerusalem who was Bishop, and who led the first ecumenical council.
 
Upvote 0

concretecamper

Member of His Church
Nov 23, 2013
6,742
2,553
PA
✟271,779.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
To answer the first post; It is St. Peter's confession that is actually the rock on which the Church is built; "You are the Christ, the son of the living God"; this is what the Church is built on. The keys are given to that Church; "the" Church; not just to Peter
then how do you square the name change? God did this when someone's position was changed.

Everyone make a list of who's name was changed by God and why. Name change is a big deal! It didnt happen often. And please, dont go down the language error route and say "little pebble".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Woke

Active Member
Supporter
Oct 8, 2019
239
82
71
California
✟38,620.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Let's see if the Church Fathers perceived the Keys as a metaphor?

Origen
f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).


These are 3rd century writings. I challenge anyone to show me anything from the early Church that shows keys were a metaphor.

Looks like someone else is starting to burn.
So to understand your belief clearly are you and your partner teaching the Catholic Church believes Peter actually received metal keys when Christ said he gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom?

And what does it teach about the rock? A granite rock of some sort was it?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Amen Jesus worked thru men who were devoted to serving God. It was men whom were moved by the Spirit that agreed on the traditions of the church. That was my point.

Yes. Jesus worked thru men who were devoted to serving God.

I did not say and do not agree that there was an agreement on the "traditions of the church."

So by that thought you seem to be saying that the only way the Christian church knew what books are to be included in the Canon of Scripture was because it was revealed by word-of-mouth in the early church, that is, by the tradition of the Catholic Church.

So then, you and as far as that is concerned, all Catholics say that its tradition is superior to Scripture.

Now just take a minute and think about what you are believing and saying.

You are saying in effect that when Sacred Tradition is claimed to be the thing by which Scripture is given, then tradition is inadvertently the thing that gives blessing and approval to the Bible.

However, Hebrews 7:7 says...…..
"But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater."

The unfortunate psychological effect of saying that Roman Catholic tradition is what gave us the Bible is that it elevates YOUR tradition to a level far greater than what is permitted in Scripture. In fact, it is contradicted by scripture:

1 Corth. 4:6...........
"Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."

Are you sure that is the position you want to be in????
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I follow Jesus and the Church ( Jesus commanded us to follow the Church). Therefore, I follow scripture since scripture is part of the whole Tradition.

You follow YOUR interpretation of scripture, which is in serious error (based on what you've posted)

AGAIN...……...Post #265.

They are not new or novel, you just have not down the BIBLE study to know what they are.

Wonderful. Now that we know you follow Jesus and Scripture, please post for us from the Scriptures the BIBLE doctrine of...…….
1. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary.
2. The Sinlessness of Mary.
3. The Assumption of Mary.
4. The Rosary.
5. The doctrine where Bishops are not permitted to marry.

Would you go ahead and post your responses and SCRIPURE for all of us who disagree with you?
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
nope, only Peter was given the Keys.
incorrect again.

2 for 2

This whole question of "Keys" is in my opinion nothing but a SMOKE screen to get the attention off of the inability to correctly do the exegesis of the Scriptures'.

Found at What are the keys of the kingdom? | GotQuestions.org is the one of the best explinations of those KEYS.

"Keys are used to lock or unlock doors. The specific doors Jesus has in mind in this passage are the doors to the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus is laying the foundation of His church (Ephesians 2:20). The disciples will be the leaders of this new institution, and Jesus is giving them the authority to, as it were, open the doors to heaven and invite the world to enter. At this point it is important to understand how, biblically speaking, one enters the Kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus said that, unless one is born again, he will not see the Kingdom of Heaven (John 3:3). One is born again as the Holy Spirit works through the Word of God to bring about new life in a dead sinner. The content of the message is the substitutionary death of Christ and His subsequent resurrection (Romans 10:9–10). So the faithful preaching of the gospel is the key to the kingdom.

In Matthew 16:19, Jesus is specifically addressing Peter, so it is significant that, in the book of Acts, Peter figures prominently in the “opening of doors” to three different groups of people so they can enter the Kingdom. In Acts 2, it is Peter who preaches in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost; about three thousand Jewish people are saved that day. Peter’s preaching had “unlocked the door” of heaven for the Jews. Later, in Acts 8, the Samaritans believe the gospel and receive the Holy Spirit; again, Peter (and John) was present for this event. Peter had “unlocked the door” for the Samaritans. Then, in Acts 10, Peter brings the gospel to a Roman centurion’s household, and they, too, receive the Holy Spirit. Peter had “unlocked the door” for the Gentiles. The “keys” that Jesus had given him worked in each case."
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes. Jesus worked thru men who were devoted to serving God.

I did not say and do not agree that there was an agreement on the "traditions of the church."

So by that thought you seem to be saying that the only way the Christian church knew what books are to be included in the Canon of Scripture was because it was revealed by word-of-mouth in the early church, that is, by the tradition of the Catholic Church.

So then, you and as far as that is concerned, all Catholics say that its tradition is superior to Scripture.

Now just take a minute and think about what you are believing and saying.

You are saying in effect that when Sacred Tradition is claimed to be the thing by which Scripture is given, then tradition is inadvertently the thing that gives blessing and approval to the Bible.

However, Hebrews 7:7 says...…..
"But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater."

The unfortunate psychological effect of saying that Roman Catholic tradition is what gave us the Bible is that it elevates YOUR tradition to a level far greater than what is permitted in Scripture. In fact, it is contradicted by scripture:

1 Corth. 4:6...........
"Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."

Are you sure that is the position you want to be in????

Brother please...we are NOT talking about the Roman Catholic Church. I’ve already established that the RCC did not exist when these traditions were established. I showed you the early church writings from the first 3 centuries of the church that support these traditions long before the RCC was established in 1054AD. Your not acknowledging the difference. My point was that the scriptures were written by men devoted to God who were moved by the Holy Spirit which is the same manner in which the traditions of the church were reached. That is exactly why these traditions were ratified by ecumenical council to ensure that the majority of men moved by the Holy Spirit would be able to overcome errors of individuals who might be misled. These men prayed rigorously to God asking Him for guidance in these matters.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I follow Jesus and the Church ( Jesus commanded us to follow the Church). Therefore, I follow scripture since scripture is part of the whole Tradition.

You follow YOUR interpretation of scripture, which is in serious error (based on what you've posted)

That is clearly not a correct answer. If it was then you would have no problem in answering my question posed to you in post #265...……….

Now that we know you follow Jesus and Scripture, please post for us from the Scriptures the BIBLE doctrine of...…….
1. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary.
2. The Sinlessness of Mary.
3. The Assumption of Mary.
4. The Rosary.
5. The doctrine where Bishops are not permitted to marry.

Since YOU follow Scripture, YOUR comment, now please post those Scriptures that say what I have asked you.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
see post above. It was not a metaphor no matter how many time you say it was.

God’s will is that sinners be granted access to heaven through the righteousness of Christ. Consider Jesus’ warning to the Pharisees: “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in” (Matthew 23:13). If the gospel message is distorted or ignored, or if unrepentant sin is not adequately disciplined, the doors to the Kingdom of Heaven are being shut in people’s faces.

Will you respond to post #265??????????
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
First, there is no more reason for interpreting it that way than to say that because the Royal Steward and the Apostle both were given something, they were given identical roles to play in God's work.

nope, only Peter was given the Keys.
incorrect again.
It's you who were incorrect there, reversing the meaning of my comment by quoting only part of the sentence.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
AGAIN...……...Post #265.

They are not new or novel, you just have not down the BIBLE study to know what they are.

Wonderful. Now that we know you follow Jesus and Scripture, please post for us from the Scriptures the BIBLE doctrine of...…….
1. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary.
2. The Sinlessness of Mary.
3. The Assumption of Mary.
4. The Rosary.
5. The doctrine where Bishops are not permitted to marry.

Would you go ahead and post your responses and SCRIPURE for all of us who disagree with you?

The wages of sin is death yet Enoch and Elijah never died. The Bible never says that Mary died either. Many things were revealed to the apostles that they had not received from Christ. I’m sure you remember Peter’s revelation when Jesus asked His disciples who do you say I am? Why is it impossible to believe that Mary never sinned? The Bible says all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. It also says all in Judea came to be baptized by John the baptist. The Greek word translated to all does not always mean all. It can also mean a multitude or majority. Personally I prefer to remain neutral on these matters except for priest celibacy which is another reason that the Roman church was excommunicated. It was the Roman church that began to insist that priests remain unmarried which the eastern churches rejected the idea. This is another topic that led to the excommunication of the Roman Church.

Only the RCC prays the rosary. The EOC have a similar practice except they pray a series of prayers to Jesus not Mary.

The perpetual virginity of Mary comes from the protoevangelium of James in which Joseph is said to have been previously married and had children from a previous wife. It claims that Joseph was a widower before he married Mary. I don’t know if it’s true but I do know it doesn’t matter and I wouldn’t call someone a liar unless I had proof to back up my claim. Your basically accusing the church of lying with no evidence to support your claim. Their lack of scriptural evidence is not proof of guilt. The other 11 disciples could’ve challenged Peter when he said that Jesus is the Son of God by asking for proof from the scriptures and Peter would not be able to provide a single shred of evidence from the Old Testament writings because they do not say that the Messiah is the Son of God. So lack of scriptural evidence does not automatically indicate an error or false teaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Brother please...we are NOT talking about the Roman Catholic Church. I’ve already established that the RCC did not exist when these traditions were established. I showed you the early church writings from the first 3 centuries of the church that support these traditions long before the RCC was established in 1054AD. Your not acknowledging the difference. My point was that the scriptures were written by men devoted to God who were moved by the Holy Spirit which is the same manner in which the traditions of the church were reached. That is exactly why these traditions were ratified by ecumenical council to ensure that the majority of men moved by the Holy Spirit would be able to overcome errors of individuals who might be misled. These men prayed rigorously to God asking Him for guidance in these matters.

I do understand and I do agree with your comment of the RCC being established in 1054.

I AM saying that anything the church says which it says is doctrine - which is not found in the Bible is a doctrine of men and THAT is the problem.

From the Catholic Catechism
The Catholic Church says...……..

"The apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.'" (Par. 77).

"This living transmission, accomplished through the Holy Spirit, is called tradition . . . " (Par. 78).

"Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence." (Par. 82).
Within the Catholic scope of Tradition, many doctrines have been "revealed" to the Church over the centuries. For example, there is the veneration of Mary
her immaculate conception
her bodily assumption into heaven.
There is also the Apocrypha,
transubstantiation,
praying to saints,
the confessional,
penance,
purgatory, just to name a few.

Protestantism as a whole differs with Catholicism in these additions.

It is not enough to simply say that Sacred Tradition is equal to Scripture based upon the decree of the Catholic Magisterium. Like any spiritual teaching, It must compare it to the Bible.

Matt. 15:1-6.

"Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 2"Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." 3And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4"For God said, Honor your father and mother,' and, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5"But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or mother, "Anything of mine you might have been helped by has been given to God," 6he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Whatever might be said about this passage, at least one thing must be observed: The tradition of the religious leaders was subject to the Word of God. Are the religious leaders of the Catholic Church exempt from subjection to the Word of God? And likewise, is their Sacred Tradition also exempt? I think not.
Roman Catholicism, the Bible, and Tradition | CARM.org
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
This whole question of "Keys" is in my opinion nothing but a SMOKE screen to get the attention off of the inability to correctly do the exegesis of the Scriptures'.

Found at What are the keys of the kingdom? | GotQuestions.org is the one of the best explinations of those KEYS.

"Keys are used to lock or unlock doors. The specific doors Jesus has in mind in this passage are the doors to the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus is laying the foundation of His church (Ephesians 2:20). The disciples will be the leaders of this new institution, and Jesus is giving them the authority to, as it were, open the doors to heaven and invite the world to enter. At this point it is important to understand how, biblically speaking, one enters the Kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus said that, unless one is born again, he will not see the Kingdom of Heaven (John 3:3). One is born again as the Holy Spirit works through the Word of God to bring about new life in a dead sinner. The content of the message is the substitutionary death of Christ and His subsequent resurrection (Romans 10:9–10). So the faithful preaching of the gospel is the key to the kingdom.

In Matthew 16:19, Jesus is specifically addressing Peter, so it is significant that, in the book of Acts, Peter figures prominently in the “opening of doors” to three different groups of people so they can enter the Kingdom. In Acts 2, it is Peter who preaches in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost; about three thousand Jewish people are saved that day. Peter’s preaching had “unlocked the door” of heaven for the Jews. Later, in Acts 8, the Samaritans believe the gospel and receive the Holy Spirit; again, Peter (and John) was present for this event. Peter had “unlocked the door” for the Samaritans. Then, in Acts 10, Peter brings the gospel to a Roman centurion’s household, and they, too, receive the Holy Spirit. Peter had “unlocked the door” for the Gentiles. The “keys” that Jesus had given him worked in each case."

I have to agree with you here. The Roman bishop was the only patriarch who supported this claim. All 4 of the other patriarchs rejected it.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I AM saying that anything the church says which it says is doctrine - which is not found in the Bible is a doctrine of men and THAT is the problem.

So you can say with certainty that these men who established these traditions had not received revelation from God? And yet the majority of the council voted in favor of them. It’s ironic that your quoting the Pharisees and yet they would make the same claims about the teachings of the apostles who couldn’t back their teachings with the Old Testament scriptures.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Brother please...we are NOT talking about the Roman Catholic Church. I’ve already established that the RCC did not exist when these traditions were established. I showed you the early church writings from the first 3 centuries of the church that support these traditions long before the RCC was established in 1054AD. Your not acknowledging the difference. My point was that the scriptures were written by men devoted to God who were moved by the Holy Spirit which is the same manner in which the traditions of the church were reached. That is exactly why these traditions were ratified by ecumenical council to ensure that the majority of men moved by the Holy Spirit would be able to overcome errors of individuals who might be misled. These men prayed rigorously to God asking Him for guidance in these matters.

I do understand and I do agree with your comment of the RCC being established in 1054.

I AM saying that anything the church says which it says is doctrine - which is not found in the Bible is a doctrine of men and THAT is the problem.

From the Catholic Catechism
The Catholic Church says...……..

"The apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.'" (Par. 77).

"This living transmission, accomplished through the Holy Spirit, is called tradition . . . " (Par. 78).

"Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence." (Par. 82).
Within the Catholic scope of Tradition, many doctrines have been "revealed" to the Church over the centuries. For example, there is the veneration of Mary
her immaculate conception
her bodily assumption into heaven.
There is also the Apocrypha,
transubstantiation,
praying to saints,
the confessional,
penance,
purgatory, just to name a few.

Protestantism as a whole differs with Catholicism in these additions.

It is not enough to simply say that Sacred Tradition is equal to Scripture based upon the decree of the Catholic Magisterium. Like any spiritual teaching, It must compare it to the Bible.

Matt. 15:1-6.

"Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 2"Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." 3And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4"For God said, Honor your father and mother,' and, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5"But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or mother, "Anything of mine you might have been helped by has been given to God," 6he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Whatever might be said about this passage, at least one thing must be observed: The tradition of the religious leaders was subject to the Word of God. Are the religious leaders of the Catholic Church exempt from subjection to the Word of God? And likewise, is their Sacred Tradition also exempt? I think not.
Roman Catholicism, the Bible, and Tradition | CARM.org
The wages of sin is death yet Enoch and Elijah never died. The Bible never says that Mary died either. Many things were revealed to the apostles that they had not received from Christ. I’m sure you remember Peter’s revelation when Jesus asked His disciples who do you say I am? Why is it impossible to believe that Mary never sinned? The Bible says all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. It also says all in Judea came to be baptized by John the baptist. The Greek word translated to all does not always mean all. It can also mean a multitude or majority. Personally I prefer to remain neutral on these matters except for priest celibacy which is another reason that the Roman church was excommunicated. It was the Roman church that began to insist that priests remain unmarried which the eastern churches rejected the idea. This is another topic that led to the excommunication of the Roman Church.

Only the RCC prays the rosary. The EOC have a similar practice except they pray a series of prayers to Jesus not Mary.

The perpetual virginity of Mary comes from the protoevangelium of James in which Joseph is said to have been previously married and had children from a previous wife. It claims that Joseph was a widower before he married Mary. I don’t know if it’s true but I do know it doesn’t matter and I wouldn’t call someone a liar unless I had proof to back up my claim. Your basically accusing the church of lying with no evidence to support your claim. Their lack of scriptural evidence is not proof of guilt. The other 11 disciples could’ve challenged Peter when he said that Jesus is the Son of God by asking for proof from the scriptures and Peter would not be able to provide a single shred of evidence from the Old Testament writings because they do not say that the Messiah is the Son of God. So lack of scriptural evidence does not automatically indicate an error or false teaching.

I can hardly believe that you are makeing these claims my brother.

The Bible says that Enoch and Elijah did not die. We accept that by faith in the Word of God.

The bible DOES NOT SAY that Mary DID NOT DIE now does it?????

1 Corth. 15:22...……...
"For as in Adam all die, (Physically) so also in Christ shall all be made alive."(Spiritually).
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I do understand and I do agree with your comment of the RCC being established in 1054.

I AM saying that anything the church says which it says is doctrine - which is not found in the Bible is a doctrine of men and THAT is the problem.

From the Catholic Catechism
The Catholic Church says...……..

"The apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.'" (Par. 77).

"This living transmission, accomplished through the Holy Spirit, is called tradition . . . " (Par. 78).

"Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence." (Par. 82).
Within the Catholic scope of Tradition, many doctrines have been "revealed" to the Church over the centuries. For example, there is the veneration of Mary
her immaculate conception
her bodily assumption into heaven.
There is also the Apocrypha,
transubstantiation,
praying to saints,
the confessional,
penance,
purgatory, just to name a few.

Protestantism as a whole differs with Catholicism in these additions.

It is not enough to simply say that Sacred Tradition is equal to Scripture based upon the decree of the Catholic Magisterium. Like any spiritual teaching, It must compare it to the Bible.

Matt. 15:1-6.

"Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 2"Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." 3And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4"For God said, Honor your father and mother,' and, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5"But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or mother, "Anything of mine you might have been helped by has been given to God," 6he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Whatever might be said about this passage, at least one thing must be observed: The tradition of the religious leaders was subject to the Word of God. Are the religious leaders of the Catholic Church exempt from subjection to the Word of God? And likewise, is their Sacred Tradition also exempt? I think not.
Roman Catholicism, the Bible, and Tradition | CARM.org

The traditions mentioned here are in reference to contradicting the scriptures. The traditions your listing do not contradict the scriptures. They simply can’t be supported by them.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Found at What are the keys of the kingdom? | GotQuestions.org is the one of the best explinations of those KEYS.

"Keys are used to lock or unlock doors. The specific doors Jesus has in mind in this passage are the doors to the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus is laying the foundation of His church (Ephesians 2:20). The disciples will be the leaders of this new institution, and Jesus is giving them the authority to, as it were, open the doors to heaven and invite the world to enter.
It has been explained here before, but there is more than a little irony in these claims made by the RCC.

It is a key that was was given in the OT, but it's keys in the NT, so these are not parallel anyway.

But beyond that, the Papacy makes a big deal out of there being not one but two keys. The crossed keys are used in Roman Catholic imagery and the church even has invented a specific meaning for each of the two keys. Yet at the same time, we are expected to believe that one key in the OT holds the same meaning.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BNR32FAN
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,121
7,244
Dallas
✟873,941.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I do understand and I do agree with your comment of the RCC being established in 1054.

I AM saying that anything the church says which it says is doctrine - which is not found in the Bible is a doctrine of men and THAT is the problem.

From the Catholic Catechism
The Catholic Church says...……..

"The apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.'" (Par. 77).

"This living transmission, accomplished through the Holy Spirit, is called tradition . . . " (Par. 78).

"Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence." (Par. 82).
Within the Catholic scope of Tradition, many doctrines have been "revealed" to the Church over the centuries. For example, there is the veneration of Mary
her immaculate conception
her bodily assumption into heaven.
There is also the Apocrypha,
transubstantiation,
praying to saints,
the confessional,
penance,
purgatory, just to name a few.

Protestantism as a whole differs with Catholicism in these additions.

It is not enough to simply say that Sacred Tradition is equal to Scripture based upon the decree of the Catholic Magisterium. Like any spiritual teaching, It must compare it to the Bible.

Matt. 15:1-6.

"Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 2"Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." 3And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4"For God said, Honor your father and mother,' and, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5"But you say, Whoever shall say to his father or mother, "Anything of mine you might have been helped by has been given to God," 6he is not to honor his father or his mother.' And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Whatever might be said about this passage, at least one thing must be observed: The tradition of the religious leaders was subject to the Word of God. Are the religious leaders of the Catholic Church exempt from subjection to the Word of God? And likewise, is their Sacred Tradition also exempt? I think not.
Roman Catholicism, the Bible, and Tradition | CARM.org


I can hardly believe that you are makeing these claims my brother.

The Bible says that Enoch and Elijah did not die. We accept that by faith in the Word of God.

The bible DOES NOT SAY that Mary DID NOT DIE now does it?????

1 Corth. 15:22...……...
"For as in Adam all die, (Physically) so also in Christ shall all be made alive."(Spiritually).

What do you think about this verse?

“And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭1:5‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Was everyone in Judea and Jerusalem baptized by John the baptist?

Surely you know that the Bible specifically says that both Enoch and Elijah did not die.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The traditions mentioned here are in reference to contradicting the scriptures. The traditions your listing do not contradict the scriptures. They simply can’t be supported by them.
Much that's from the sacred texts of other world religions are in that same category then.

You'll have to excuse me, but I have to get ready to bathe in the Ganges. The Bible doesn't specifically condemn that act, so it must be equally as valid as what the Bible directs.

:destroyed:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.