• 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.

Peter Is Not The Rock!

Status
Not open for further replies.

beamishboy

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2008
5,475
255
30
✟6,878.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Not sure you totally misunderstood, because it is pretty
much how protestants believe. Especially here on CF
because we tend to 'focus' on those subjects. Or when
I go to a relatives house and they have all these
ceramic things of mary, but Jesus never is mentioned...
HOWEVER, now that I've said that... protestants
do the same thing (according to God) just different
items, men or women.

1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. 3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentilea; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentileb: 11 For there is no respect of persons with God.






:crossrc::prayer::crosseo:

The beamishboy has been to Fatima and has seen all the Mary trinkets, etc. They even have smoking sets of Mary. Mary ash-trays, our Lady cigarette cases, etc. I won at a game while in Fatima and I got this large wooden statue of our Lady of Fatima with 3 shepherd kids at her feet. Didn't know what to do with it and it's now in my room and I used her extended hand more as a clothes hanger. I have no intention of being rude to RCs but I treat it more as a souvenir from Fatima with zero religious significance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rick Otto
Upvote 0

MoNiCa4316

Totus Tuus
Jun 28, 2007
18,882
1,654
✟49,687.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
We believe that Mary leads us closer to God, that is why there is so much about Mary in the Catholic Church.. not because we worship her or anything for her own sake, but because we believe she's a powerful intercessor and does a lot to help lead us to Christ. Her role in the Church is pretty complex, we believe she is our Mother and we love her too. If we were to reject her intercession or say that she isn't important or is "Just a vessel", we would not only miss out on graces, it would also be like saying "I don't want you to pray for me"..
In the end, God uses Mary and the Pope for His glory and to advance His Kingdom, we don't put them above God or equal to Him, but we don't cut them out of our lives either.

btw, about people's houses and Mary statues.. I have a little statue of Mary but I also have a painting of Jesus (the "Sacred Heart of Jesus") ;)
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Oki I'm sorry :hug:
I took like it like you're saying that by thinking that Peter is the rock, we are putting him above Christ or taking away from His glory.. but I don't see it that way.
sorry if i misunderstood..
Greetings. It seems like it is more important to Roman Catholic theology that Peter be the Rock and I can understand your denomination's feelings on that, but to make/build a whole Doctrine on him appears to be misplaced in my most humble view.

Do you doubt that #3778 is in the feminine form?

http://www.scripture4all.org/

tauth <3778>, pd Dative Singular Feminine

Matt 16:18 `And I yet to thee am saying, that thou art Peter, and upon this/tauth <3778>, the Rock I shall be building of Me the Out-Called, and gates of Hades not shall be prevailing of her;

Hebrew 11:2 For in this/tauth <3778> were testified to the Elders/presbuteroi 3 To Faith/F we are apprehending...........

1 Corin 10:4 And all the same drink spiritual they drank, for they drank out of the spiritual/F following/F rock/petraV <4073>F the yet rock/petra <4073>F was the Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Rick Otto

The Dude Abides
Nov 19, 2002
34,112
7,406
On The Prairie
✟29,593.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Antipopes...
The term antipope refers to any person who claims to be pope, but whose claim is treated as invalid today by the Roman Catholic Church. This should be a straightforward concept, but in practice it is much more difficult and complex than it might appear.
The problems lie in determining who qualifies as pope and why. It isn't enough to say that their election did not follow standard procedures, because those procedures have changed over time. Sometimes the rules aren&#8217;t even followed. Innocent II was elected in secret by a minority of cardinals but his papacy is treated as legitimate. It isn't enough to say that an alleged pope did not lead an adequately moral life because many legitimate popes led terrible lives while the first antipope, Hippolytus, is a saint.
Over time names have shifted back and forth between the lists of popes and antipopes because people have changed their minds about what to do with them. The Vatican&#8217;s official list of popes is called the Annuario Pontificio and even today there remain four instances where it isn&#8217;t absolutely clear on whether someone was a legitimate successor of Peter.

Silverius vs. Vigilius: Pope Silverius was forced to resign by Vigilius who became his successor, but the dates don&#8217;t match up properly. The date of Vigilius&#8217; election is listed as March 29, 537, but Silverius&#8217; resignation is marked as November 11, 537. Technically there can&#8217;t be two popes at the same time, so one of them had to be an antipope &#8212; but the Annuario Pontificio treats them both as valid popes for the time period in question.
Martin I vs. Eugenius I: Martin I died in exile on September 16, 655, without ever having resigned. The people of Rome weren&#8217;t sure that he would return and didn&#8217;t want the Byzantine emperor to impose someone awful on them, so they elected Eugenius I on August 10, 654. Who was the real pope during that year? Martin I was not removed from office by any canonically valid procedure, so Eugenius&#8217; election should be treated as invalid &#8212; but he&#8217;s still listed as a legitimate pope.
John XII vs. Leo VIII vs. Benedict V: In this very confusing state of affairs, Leo was elected pope on December 4, 963, while his predecessor was still alive &#8212; John didn&#8217;t die until May 14, 964 and he never resigned. Leo, in turn, was still alive when his successor was elected. Benedict&#8217;s papacy is listed has having started on May 22, 964 (just after the death of John) but Leo didn&#8217;t die until March 1, 965. So, was Leo a legitimate pope, even though John was still alive? If not, then Benedict was presumably valid, but if he was, then how was Benedict a valid pope? Either Leo or Benedict has to have been an invalid pope (an antipope), but the* Annuario Pontificio doesn&#8217;t decide one way or the other. Benedict IX vs. Everyone Else: Benedict IX had the most confusing papacy, or the most confusing three papacies, in the history of the Catholic Church. Benedict was forcibly removed from office in 1044 and Sylvester II was elected to take his place. In 1045 Benedict seized control again, and again he was removed &#8212; but this time he resigned as well. He was succeeded first by Gregory VI and then by Clement II, after which he returned once again for a few months before being ejected. It&#8217;s not clear that any of the times Benedict was removed from office was canonically valid, which would mean that the other three mentioned here were antipopes, but the Annuario Pontificio continues to list them as genuine popes.

http://atheism.about.com/od/popesandthepapacy/a/antipopes.htm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nilloc
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Ok question. How do the Catholics translate that predicate #3778

Matt 16:18 `And I yet to thee am saying, that thou art Peter, and upon this/tauth <3778>, the rock I shall be building of Me the Out-Called, and gates of Hades not shall be prevailing of her;

tauth <3778>, pd Dative Singular Feminine

Textus Rec.) Matthew 16:18 kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/pope_peter_rock.htm

............OK, I'm going to get a little "heady" here by talking about Aramaic, and ancient Greek. The Greek text is a translation of Jesus' words, which were actually spoken in Aramaic. Aramaic only had one word for rock, kephas (which is why Peter is often called Cephas in the Bible). The word Kephas in Aramaic means "huge rock." The Aramaic word for "little stone" is "evna," and Peter was not called "Evna" or "Envas" or anything like that. In Aramaic, Jesus said "You are Peter (Kephas) and upon this rock (kephas) I will build my Church." The metaphor worked well in Aramaic where nouns are neither feminine or masculine, but in Greek, the noun "rock" was feminine, and therefore unsuitable as a name for Peter. So the Aramaic word Kephas was translated to the masculine name Petros when it referred to Peter, and to the feminine noun petra when it referred to the rock. In ancient Koine Greek, petra and petros were total synonyms, unlike modern Attic Greek and unlike Ionic Greek which was about 400 year before Christ.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

ticker

...at your service!
Jun 10, 2007
3,421
374
The Kingdom...kinda...
✟28,214.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm sure it's a joke. Actually, the beamishboy had two options: Reply with a "Hahaha" as they sometimes do in the Teens forums although we don't understand a thing or to be honest and say I don't understand your meaning. But the beamishboy is a Knight of Truth and so I'll just say that although I'm sure you were making a joke, I didn't understand it at all.

And the beamishboy leaps onto his steed and rides off in the sunset to his Castle of Truth.
Yes. It was a joke.


EDIT: ...or was it??? (And the Ticker jumps into his Landspeeder and flies off into the twin Tatooine sunset to the Tosche station to pick up some power converters). :D


EDITx2: ...and if you got that and laughed, you're a nerd. :blush:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,550
28,531
74
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,300.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
:wave:LLOJ, I'm sorry I don't know the word that "this" is translated from.. but the description of it on the website is "adjective "this" refers to nearest preceding noun"
maybe anyone else knows?
Here is how it is used in the Masculine. Man, I need to study the greek more LOL....

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Luke 21:23 "Woe yet to the-ones in belly having, and to those giving suck in those, the Days. For shall be great distress upon the Land, and wrath in the People, this/toutw <5129>;

toutw <5129> pd Dative Singular Masculine

Textus Rec.) Luke 21:23 ouai de taiV en gastri ecousaiV kai taiV qhlazousaiV en ekeinaiV taiV hmeraiV estai gar anagkh megalh epi thV ghV kai orgh en tw law toutw
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

Anglian

let us love one another, for love is of God
Oct 21, 2007
8,092
1,246
Held
✟28,241.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
As some of the earlier posts in this thread demonstrated, the early Church, whilst according a primacy of honour to Rome, interpreted that in different ways from early on. Some (oddly enough in Rome) saw this as meaning that the Petrine verses made St. Peter's faith the 'rock', some that it made him 'the rock'; none of these, by the way, denied that Christ Himself is the bedrock.

What needs demonstrating is that there was an office that was created; that that office could be passed on; and that that office belongs in Rome and can be passed on in Rome; and then it needs to be demonstrated that that office has authority over the other Apostles.

The Catholic understanding of these issues developed in a way that was not the case in the East - hence the different interpretations of the same verses. It might, by the way, be worth noting that the current Catholic Pope, Benedict XVI, has, in the past, written about the need for the holders of his office to be an elder among elders - just what St. Peter calls himself in his epistles.

It is the Roman development of this post into one having authority over every other bishop which is one of the main divides between us. But before Western Protestants criticise Rome too severely, they might like to reflect that without the Catholic Church they'd all probably be either Muslim or Pagans now. It was Rome which, through the Dark Ages, carried civilisation and the Faith forward; Rome which turned aside Attila and his Huns; Rome which helped inspire Charles Martel and the victory at Poitiers.

If European Christians in the Middle Ages believed that Rome was the rock against which the gates of hell would not prevail, they had plenty of evidence from which to derive that belief.

A more balanced view of these things would help discussion - but for reasons I can never fathom, a visceral loathing of Rome seems built into the faith of some Protestants and Orthodox. It is so sad that a gospel of love has prompted, on all sides, so much hate.

peace,

Anglian
 
Upvote 0

beamishboy

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2008
5,475
255
30
✟6,878.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
As some of the earlier posts in this thread demonstrated, the early Church, whilst according a primacy of honour to Rome, interpreted that in different ways from early on. Some (oddly enough in Rome) saw this as meaning that the Petrine verses made St. Peter's faith the 'rock', some that it made him 'the rock'; none of these, by the way, denied that Christ Himself is the bedrock.

What needs demonstrating is that there was an office that was created; that that office could be passed on; and that that office belongs in Rome and can be passed on in Rome; and then it needs to be demonstrated that that office has authority over the other Apostles.

The Catholic understanding of these issues developed in a way that was not the case in the East - hence the different interpretations of the same verses. It might, by the way, be worth noting that the current Catholic Pope, Benedict XVI, has, in the past, written about the need for the holders of his office to be an elder among elders - just what St. Peter calls himself in his epistles.

It is the Roman development of this post into one having authority over every other bishop which is one of the main divides between us. But before Western Protestants criticise Rome too severely, they might like to reflect that without the Catholic Church they'd all probably be either Muslim or Pagans now. It was Rome which, through the Dark Ages, carried civilisation and the Faith forward; Rome which turned aside Attila and his Huns; Rome which helped inspire Charles Martel and the victory at Poitiers.

If European Christians in the Middle Ages believed that Rome was the rock against which the gates of hell would not prevail, they had plenty of evidence from which to derive that belief.

A more balanced view of these things would help discussion - but for reasons I can never fathom, a visceral loathing of Rome seems built into the faith of some Protestants and Orthodox. It is so sad that a gospel of love has prompted, on all sides, so much hate.

peace,

Anglian

Hi Anglian,

It may not be hate but more a shock that one can get it so wrong. Honestly, that's how I feel about it. And they're not just wrong but they exhibit a universal belligerence against anyone who does not accept that shockingly erroneous belief. For some Protestants, it's a reaction to the hate they can feel from the other side. If you recall, Anglian, I used to say that I would rather talk to Orthodox Christians because I don't sense that strong hatred emanating from them. Perhaps, I'm just a sinner but honestly, I hate those who hate me even though I shouldn't.

It has come to such a state that even if Jesus were to tell me that the RC church is right, I would ask him to send me to hell. But of course, thankfully, Jesus would never do that.

But that is my personal feelings and I think I have to tell them to you because you seem to think there is unwarranted hatred by Protestants for RCs. If there is any hatred, it's usually because some of us feel that same or even stronger hatred from the other side and as sinners, we reciprocate rather than forgive. Wrong of course but some of us can't help it. I know I can't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: New Creation
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,978
8,072
✟542,711.44
Gender
Female
Faith
Messianic
It is the Roman development of this post into one having authority over every other bishop which is one of the main divides between us. But before Western Protestants criticise Rome too severely, they might like to reflect that without the Catholic Church they'd all probably be either Muslim or Pagans now.
No.. chances are they would probably still be a sect of Judaism as it was in the beginning.
 
Upvote 0
Catholics also believe that Christ is the Rock, but in a different way...we believe that the Pope is Christ's visible representative upon earth, that's why he also is called "the rock". Christ is the one who builds the Church and He is the Head, and Peter is the one on whom the Church is built.
The church is not built on Peter. The Church is built on Christ and Him alone. Peter was one Apostle out of the 12 plus Paul that were chosen and sent for the very same reason. :) To preach Christ and Him crucied and risen to the saving of the soul. which Christ saves and not Peter. :)
 
Upvote 0

katholikos

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2008
3,631
439
United States
✟6,027.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
....even if Jesus were to tell me that the RC church is right, I would ask him to send me to hell......
That sums up protestantism right there: The total willingness to reject what Christ has ordained in favor of their personal false doctrines. I couldn't have said it better myself.


.

.
AN UNBROKEN HISTORY

Jesus said his Church would be "the light of the world." He then noted that "a city set on a hill cannot be hid" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.

Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today&#8217;s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)

Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.

Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.

The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church&#8217;s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members&#8212; even some of its leaders&#8212;have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy.

Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church&#8217;s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.



FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH

If we wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, we need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of his Church. The Church we seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.

The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13, CCC 813&#8211;822)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, and so on). The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23&#8211;32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church.

His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2).

Although some Catholics dissent from officially-taught doctrines, the Church&#8217;s official teachers&#8212;the pope and the bishops united with him&#8212;have never changed any doctrine. Over the centuries, as doctrines are examined more fully, the Church comes to understand them more deeply (John 16:12&#8211;13), but it never understands them to mean the opposite of what they once meant.

The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25&#8211;27, Rev. 19:7&#8211;8, CCC 823&#8211;829)
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn&#8217;t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21&#8211;23).

But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).

The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19&#8211;20, Rev. 5:9&#8211;10, CCC 830&#8211;856)
Jesus&#8217; Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19&#8211;20).

For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28).

Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to "make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19).

The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, "the Catholic Church," at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius&#8217;s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.

The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19&#8211;20, CCC 857&#8211;865)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2).

These beliefs include the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the forgiveness of sins through a priest, baptismal regeneration, the existence of purgatory, Mary&#8217;s special role, and much more &#8212;even the doctrine of apostolic succession itself.

Early Christian writings prove the first Christians were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice and looked to the successors of the apostles as their leaders. What these first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.
source
http://www.catholic.com/library/Pillar.asp
 
Upvote 0

beamishboy

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2008
5,475
255
30
✟6,878.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
That sums up protestantism right there: The total willingness to reject what Christ has ordained in favor of their personal false doctrines. I couldn't have said it better myself.

That's precisely what I find so hateful. Are you able to do something that does not excite hatred? I ask this sincerely because I really hope there will come a time when I can think of RCs without feeling angry. You are presumably older than me and I hope you will be able to show some good example to someone my age. There's no point scoring points on this forum - that won't earn you God's favour. If you continue to do that which makes me view RCs with anger, surely you can't be doing something right in God's sight. Surely even your Pope will ask you to stop this! I have already said that my anger for RCs is extreme because of their behaviour particularly on CF. I don't think I had hatred before. Why then do you persist to provoke me?
 
Upvote 0
Jesus’ Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19–20).
Why leave out the rest.

Mat 28:19
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

As for the church being Holy one must understand that it is the People that are the church. So if the man is not Holy then he is not even part of the church. For the Church is those people who have Christ in them. Per scripture. :) So therefore if we have three people standing on a street corner and only one have Christ in them then the only one that is the church is the one that has Christ in him and the other two even if they attend the CC are not part of the true Church.
 
Upvote 0

beamishboy

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2008
5,475
255
30
✟6,878.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
That sums up protestantism right there: The total willingness to reject what Christ has ordained in favor of their personal false doctrines. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I am not a saintly Christian. When I said I hated the RC church to such an extent that I'd rather go to hell than become RC, I was not speaking on behalf of Protestantism. I'm only saying that I've been so badly provoked and offended by RCs in CF (your post is one such example) that I even feel happy when something bad happens to RCs in general. I ask myself what makes me so enraged about RCs. Why do I not feel the same about Orthodox Christians whose beliefs aren't that much different. That's because most of the time, Orthodox Christians do have LOVE. I can feel it. But with RCs, I can only feel hatred and animosity from them and I respond in kind. I really hope the RCs in CF will begin not to take cheap shots at Protestantism and provoke us unnecessarily. It does no good to your cause. It can't advance your beliefs. I am so angry that I am now determined to take the Eucharist Challenge. My friends have been doing it and I have resisted but now is the time when I can't resist any longer. Thanks to you.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,978
8,072
✟542,711.44
Gender
Female
Faith
Messianic
I am not a saintly Christian. When I said I hated the RC church to such an extent that I'd rather go to hell than become RC, I was not speaking on behalf of Protestantism. I'm only saying that I've been so badly provoked and offended by RCs in CF (your post is one such example) that I even felt happy when something bad happens to RCs in general. I ask myself what makes me so enraged about RCs. Why do I not feel the same about Orthodox Christians whose beliefs aren't that much different. That's because most of the time, Orthodox Christians do have LOVE. I can feel it. But with RCs, I can only feel hatred and animosity from them and I respond in kind. I really hope the RCs in CF will begin not to take cheap shots at Protestantism and provoke us unnecessarily. It does no good to your cause. It can't advance your beliefs. I am so angry that I am now determined to take the Eucharist Challenge. My friends have been doing it and I have resisted but now is the time when I can't resist any longer. Thanks to you.
While I may even agree with every reason that you have for this focused hatred of RD's... I am more concerned with your spiritual walk. Use the seventy x seven rule .. forgive and pray that their eyes are opened to the whorish wine of deceit causing visions of grandeur and they repent of their addiction. Point ing out sin or your hatred of sin usually doesn't affect the sinner as much as the Lord talking to their hearts. It is far better to pray and plant seeds, that the Lord can water.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anglian
Upvote 0

CardinalSin

Regular Member
Jul 11, 2008
260
6
65
✟23,028.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
That sums up protestantism right there: The total willingness to reject what Christ has ordained in favor of their personal false doctrines. I couldn't have said it better myself.

To be perfectly honest, I did think what you've written was a cheap shot. It is also ill-advised. To take on a 13-year-old who has already expressed anger for Catholic provocation is something I can't understand. What can possibly be your motive? Was it prudent, what you did?

The danger of posting on the forum is we sometimes want to score points against others without thinking of the consequence of our actions. It's always good to be prayerful before we shoot off a post. And we should consider what effect our post can have. I can understand indiscretion among those who are very young but I expect adults to be more responsible.

I beg your forgiveness if I have taken a liberty I shouldn't have but I was speaking from the heart.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.