Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Fathers of Chaledon seemed to have believed that the Primacy of Rome had more to do with the fact that it was an imperial capitol rather than the Succession of St. Peter, which also applies to Antioch. Of course this in no way lessens the significance of Rome as a See of St. Peter, it merely demonstrates that the idea of papal primacy based soley on Peter was not believed by the Chaledonian Fathers.
"For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city."- Canon XXVIII
You have no way to know such a thing.
Dunno which pic you're looking at but i see three men with their eyes closed,Yes, we can. For one thing, it is a bunch of wild-eyed,
LOL , sure.sweaty,
So far on truths side we have middle aged men.middle-aged men
kneeling?clumped around what appears to be a kneeling,
Truth again!young girl,
On her HEAD.. yeah that is a very bad idea. To lay hands on someone and prayall reaching out to put their hands on her. Its inappropriate just in that.
Somehow I doubt the Apostles looked more like the former then the latter.
Want to talk dirty and pedophilic?Yes. It is kind of dirty and pedophilic.
Yes, the laying of hands and prayer is a very dangerous practice...But the other sense was the one I was talking about -- spiritually dangerous.
Yes.. We do lay hands on men and women when they go out into new mission fieldsMine too, right before we send out our missionaries for example...
Like when the Holy Spirit asks for Saul and Barnabas to be set aside in Acts 13
Yes, this authority (God's authority is what it is) God gave to all of us. You justThe Holy Ghost directed the apostles, who had received their authority from Jesus Christ, to lay hands upon Paul and Barnabas. Paul makes mention of this authority having been delegated to Titus and Timothy, and specifically mentions the laying on of hands regarding Timothy.
Do the people of your church have this very authority that was once given to the apostles by Christ himself, conferred by the laying on of hands throughout history?
I only recall IBS posting one ECF..So we are 78 posts into this thread and no one is even putting up an argument to support the vaticans claim that the Petrine primacy was known for all ages.
In all seriousness, this is the problem I have w/ Catholicism. If heresy is anything that didn't originate with the Apostles, what good are "understandings that came later?"
And Pope St. Leo the Great argued quite succinctly that they were wrong in this -- that Rome's primacy did not have to do with Rome's worldly position but Jesus' establishment of Peter as the prince of the Apostles.
Yes, this authority (God's authority is what it is) God gave to all of us. You just have to read the Bible without preconceived ideas.
How about this: 700 or 7000 horsemen? They contradict, so neither of the books can be trusted.
How about this: the account of the resurrection event, and who all was there, and the order of the events. They contradict, so none of the Gospels can be trusted.
Except the gospels don't contradict. Tradition contradicts.
So we are 78 posts into this thread and no one is even putting up an argument to support the vaticans claim that the Petrine primacy was known for all ages.
Yet people are willing to follow blindly this institution? You can't trace your own claims and yet you'll trust they have had this loyal to the LORD succession for 2000 years...
This should be very disconcerning.
What we are seeing is the most fundamental of your beliefs do not have a shred, a shred of historical proof for hundreds of years. Thats not good guys.
I said God has given all of us authority. You doubt this then you'll have toCan you please show me in scripture where all believers have the same authority as Paul and Timothy?
Hebrews 13
17Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
Paul writes that some have authority over others, and watch for their souls.
2 Corinthians 10
8For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed: 9That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters.
What is the point of even mentioning authority if 'everyone has it'? If everyone has the same 'authority', there is no true authority to be had.
Really? Did Mary Magdalene first see and recognize the risen Jesus while she was running with the other Mary to tell the disciples about his missing body (Matthew 28), or did she run to Peter and 'that other disciple' to tell them about his missing body, run back to the sepulchre, and stand weeping over his missing body, unaware that he was alive until the risen Jesus appeared to her there (John 20)?
Start a new thread.
Note for laconic student, who seems to be having an off night:
[Quoting some RC thingy] "... Peter ... presides and "exercises judgment in his successors" the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his [Peter's] blood"
To go there: an idiom of speech, referring to their intent. In this case, conflating the blood of a very fallible mortal with that of the Lamb of G-d. As in - -
do NOT go there!
Can you be in charge of getting that for us?again context is such overlooked but yet important factor. His blood is referring to Peter being Martyred for the sake of Christ's Church.
Peter was martyred in Rome.
again we really need a *rolls eyes* icon added to the smilies.
Can you be in charge of getting that for us?
I want some of those cute smilies FIF uses sometimes as well..
please!!
*insert flirty smiley here lol
No. It is entirely relevant to the discussion at hand.
Someone said that because there are two varying accounts of succession recorded in regard to the bishop of Rome, neither of them can be right. I am demonstrating that this is poor logic which could be used to apply to the bible itself. The bible is not God, it is not perfect.
You mean of the resurrection? Or the bishops?They are contradictory. There are no extant records of the account.
NOTHING guys?So we are 78 posts into this thread and no one is even putting up an argument to support the vaticans claim that the Petrine primacy was known for all ages.
Yet people are willing to follow blindly this institution? You can't trace your own claims and yet you'll trust they have had this loyal to the LORD succession for 2000 years...
This should be very disconcerning.
What we are seeing is the most fundamental of your beliefs do not have a shred, a shred of historical proof for hundreds of years. Thats not good guys.
NOTHING guys?
Really?
Why is that?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?