How would Catholics respond to this.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hoonbaba

Catholic Preterist
Apr 15, 2002
1,941
55
42
New Jersey, USA
Visit site
✟3,159.00
Faith
Catholic

Hoonbaba

Catholic Preterist
Apr 15, 2002
1,941
55
42
New Jersey, USA
Visit site
✟3,159.00
Faith
Catholic
By the way,

one brother shared this with me:

---------------------------------

Why is it that Paul made the distinction that he didn’t receive his apostleship through this supposed succession of offices I keep hearing about? (Galatians 1:11-18)

And how could Paul so challenge (and blame) the “first Pope” (ie. Peter) over the matter of taking the Gospel to the Gentiles if Peter was the “leader of the apostles”? (Galatians 2:11-12)

In reality, most people would see Paul as the “leader” of the early Church, yet there is more difficulty in trying to say Paul was the “first pope” seeing there are no obscure verses to utilize.

So, I’m still in the same situation. On one hand I see all the history backing the Roman Catholic claim but I see all the biblical support backing something other than the Roman Catholic Church (notice I didn’t say the Bible supports the Protestant position, since it most certainly does not).
---------------------------------

Can someone provide answers for those questions?

-Jason
 
Upvote 0

VOW

Moderator
Feb 7, 2002
6,912
15
69
*displaced* CA, soon to be AZ!
Visit site
✟13,000.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
To Jason:

Wolseley has touched on this topic in the past, so I'll give it a try, if us old duffers have any memory left, LOL.

Paul reprimanded Peter in terms of CONDUCT, not of teaching or belief. Think of it along the lines of Paul telling Peter to get his elbows off the table, or not to pick his nose in public.

As for your other question, I've encountered this in Apologetics. Folks like to point a finger and say, "Hey, PAUL was the one traveling all over, establishing Churches, and writing all those Scriptures!"

First, I doubt sincerely whether Paul actually picked up a pen and thought, "Today, God and I are going to write a book for the New Testament." Paul had heard of problems in the baby churches, and he was writing to them to correct them. His corrections are applicable to us, even today, and we should thank the Holy Spirit for preserving Paul's letters for us.

But the Bible isn't a popularity contest: He who writes the most, wins. Remember, Jesus never wrote ANYTHING, except some scribbles in the dust which were eventually rubbed away!

To illustrate the position of Peter in the New Church, look at the Gospels, first. Of course, there is where Jesus renamed Simon to Rock, and gave him the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. But read the parts about after the Resurrection, in those precious days before Jesus returned to the Father. MOST important, see that even though Peter denied Christ three times before the Crucifixion, Jesus didn't go stomping up to Peter and say, "You blew it, Buddy. Give Me back those Keys." No, instead, Jesus asks Peter three times if Peter loves Him. And He directs Peter to care for His sheep. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, and He was making sure the "sheep" would be cared for after He returned to the Father.

The most profound and yet still very subtle indication of Peter's leadership, though, is in the book of Acts. Read through it VERY carefully, and take note of each time the Apostles are mentioned by name.

Which Apostle is ALWAYS named first?

GREAT stuff!



Peace,
~VOW
 
Upvote 0

isshinwhat

Pro Deo et Patria
Apr 12, 2002
8,338
624
Visit site
✟13,555.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Why is it that Paul made the distinction that he didn’t receive his apostleship through this supposed succession of offices I keep hearing about? (Galatians 1:11-18)

He didn't receive his teaching from men, but his Apostolic authority was granted through ordination, both as a presbytr and a bishop.

Galatians 2:1
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up by revelation; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain.

Acts 9:17-19 - even Paul, who was directly chosen by Christ, only becomes a minister after the laying on of hands by a bishop.

Acts 13:3 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority must come from a Catholic bishop.

Paul also carried on this Tradition as a bishop, ordaining Timothy and others.

1 Timothy 4:14
Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the council of elders laid their hands upon you.

God Bless,

Neal
 
Upvote 0

Hoonbaba

Catholic Preterist
Apr 15, 2002
1,941
55
42
New Jersey, USA
Visit site
✟3,159.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by isshinwhat
He didn't receive his teaching from men, but his Apostolic authority was granted through ordination, both as a presbytr and a bishop.

Neal, I think you're missing the question.  Gal 1:11-18 indicates that nobody actually laid hands on him, and that Christ himself appointed him.  Is this the case?

Or am I the one missing something??? =)

God bless!
 
Upvote 0

Defender of the Faith 777

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2002
1,121
4
Visit site
✟2,076.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Two questions which I am ignorant about:

What does your church teach happened with John Hus?

What do you find false about the website article? Didn't read it, but I'm sure that it would be more appropriate if there were someone who could explain it, rather than just congregating without letting the other side defend itself.
 
Upvote 0

ZooMom

Thanks for the memories...
Feb 5, 2002
21,374
1,010
America
✟29,993.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by Defender of the Faith 777


What does your church teach happened with John Hus?

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07584b.htm

What do you find false about the website article? Didn't read it, but I'm sure that it would be more appropriate if there were someone who could explain it, rather than just congregating without letting the other side defend itself.
Ok. Why don't you read it and then tell us what you find right with it. We can go from there. :)


What's the connection with Jan Hus and this thread? :confused: :scratch:
 
Upvote 0

ZooMom

Thanks for the memories...
Feb 5, 2002
21,374
1,010
America
✟29,993.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I would agree. But, I would also say that Paul's conversion was not complete until his initiation and baptism.

I have a question. Do we know if the man's house he was brought to was a deacon or priest or bishop? Or was he just an elder of the Christian community in that town? Be interesting to know. :)
 
Upvote 0

isshinwhat

Pro Deo et Patria
Apr 12, 2002
8,338
624
Visit site
✟13,555.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Neal, I think you're missing the question. Gal 1:11-18 indicates that nobody actually laid hands on him, and that Christ himself appointed him. Is this the case?

Or am I the one missing something??? =)

I agree that Paul was given knowledge in a very special way, yet even he was Baptized and had hands laid upon him for the filling of the Holy Spirit (Confirmation) (Acts 9:17-19). He did also go out to preach, as each of us could do, yet even then he went to the pillars of the Church to be "sent out". Paul was sent out by the Holy Spirit, but notice how it was accomplished:

Acts 14:1-4
Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyre'ne, Man'a-en a member of the court of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." Then after fasting and praying they [the Apostles in Jerusalem] laid their hands on them and sent them off. So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleu'cia; and from there they sailed to Cyprus.

God Bless,

Neal
 
Upvote 0

Hoonbaba

Catholic Preterist
Apr 15, 2002
1,941
55
42
New Jersey, USA
Visit site
✟3,159.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by isshinwhat
I agree that Paul was given knowledge in a very special way, yet even he was Baptized and had hands laid upon him for the filling of the Holy Spirit (Confirmation) (Acts 9:17-19). He did also go out to preach, as each of us could do, yet even then he went to the pillars of the Church to be "sent out". Paul was sent out by the Holy Spirit, but notice how it was accomplished:



God Bless,

Neal

Hi Neal, thanks for sharing.  I completely overlooked Paul's baptism.  I guess it's easily assumed that he was ordained as an apostle, yet it wasn't written down.  Does Sacred Tradition teach anything like that, or is it just assumed?

God bless!

-Jason
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.