Why didn’t Jesus specifically outline the papal system in the gospels...

>Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What does that have to do with Protestants?

Everything.

A Protestant could use the same verse to accuse Catholics of “iniquity.”

As much as I don't like Latins at least they're Christian. I went to a protestant wedding (denomination with tens of millions worldwide) and I noticed something weird with the "teaching" and the prayers, after thinking and asking around turns out they're Arians.

>missed the entire point of the verse and reductionist it down to just one word
Protestantism, not even once.

>CALL NO MAN FATHER
1 Corinthians 4:14
1 Corinthians 4:17
2 Corinthians 6:17-18
2 Timothy 1:2
Philemon 1:1
1 Peter 5:13
>Why are Protestants not Christians
Well, let’s go through a few reasons vaguely.
>Different canon from the Apostles
>Unauthoritative teaching, no basis for assurance of interpretations
>No Apostolic Succession
>Some reject the council of Nicaea
>They have built without authority upon the foundation of the Apostles, in which Christ is the head cornerstone (Ephesians 2:19-22) (1 Corinthians 3:10)
>Innovationism

Attached: 45D77FB5-E1FA-438C-AA7C-D806B2DF184B.jpg (762x817, 186K)

That verse has literally nothing to do with Protestantism, brainlet. Have you read your bible?

Have you?

>1 Corinthians 3:10
>10 By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. 11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.
>16 Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst? 17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple.
Doesn’t seem to be talking about papal succession here.

Attached: 6a7318433fa5cce32c32354e4cc64f7951ed6ef4d27755d99de39bcd14e3d013.png (1772x540, 230K)

I never said it was... what? Nice derailment

I’m and I also wanted to say I am not Catholic, I’m Eastern Orthodox

What are the best books that focus and expand on this?

The interlinear Bible

The issue is you have it backwards.
Jesus didnt write anything, and the gospels were written decades after his death (and resurrection).
Jesus founded a Church, and the Church created the Bible, and chose which books belong to it and which ones don't (like say, The Shepherd of Hermas or The Epistle of Clement).
In Acts, the scripture they mention is the old testament (and the quotes come mainly from the Greek Septuagint).

The answer for your questions aren't in the bible. Study Church history and patristics, how the church worked in the first centuries of the first millenium. Mainstream history from historians from prestigious universities.

The idea that everything Christians do should be based in the bible in an innovation.

>and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it
>has to share claim to christianity with orthodox and protestant churches
>has to share claim to abrahamic monotheism with judaism and islam
>is morally bankrupt as an institution
>massacred 5 digits worth of cathars teehee LOL

I would assume the premise is from the top-down and "immanent", that is to say not even the gates of Hell shall prevail against it, never mind anything else, not from the bottom-up and "transcendent", that is to say everything but the gates of Hell shall prevail against it. Not that it matters much, since the Catholic Church is an even worse candidate for the latter than for the former.

Don't be such a Eastern-wisdom bullshitter "single word ooh aah guess my meaning," explain yourself!

Because he tell the disciples multiple time they are all equals and there is no one in them who is superior. Establishing the council system. Papal superiority comes later , papal infalliblety is one of the biggest heresyes there is.

Catholoics are NOT christian.
Catholicism is a mish mash of various pagan religions mixed with some luciferianism and goddess worship.
they are the modern day pharisees. so steeped in tradition and dogma.
But Christ did talk about the papal system, in Revelations there is a whore of Babylon.

>god's word is flawless
>the flaws in his word lead to his own followers murdering each other in centuries of outright warfare
lol you guys are retarded. god doesn't exist. best you come to terms with it rather than continue to waste your lives.

Yeah it's almost as if Jesus was just a dude and couldn't see the future. Weird.

Do you know how infinitely unlikely aka impossible it is that there is no intelligent designer.
It would be more sensible to argue that the entirety of Shakespear's work was typed by monkeys randomly playing on a typewriter.

meant this for&>1

>the universe can't create itself, it needs a creator
*fedora sweating sounds*
nigga for real, if a 5 year old can debunk your shit you have issues. Yea Forums is NOT your dumping ground, go to /x/ where you belong with the other schizos and spooked mofos.

at least goatman is actually an enjoyable meme

Protestantism is more fit to call itself Christianity than Catholicism. Why? Because there are sects of Protestantism that do not use the Tanakh. There are also sects of Protestantism that use the entirety of the Bible, such as the Gospel of Thomas and the like. Protestantism is even more honest than Catholicism because Catholicism claims that they have a line of popes that goes all the way back to St. Peter.

And there's also St. Paul's fucking bullshit but that's another story.

Attached: 1562788547295.jpg (682x570, 156K)

At the center of God, you can find the Law of Non-Contradiction, which is self-creating. Necessity is necessary. Either a necessary thing produced contingent things, or there was no necessary thing, and all things exist without true cause, or randomly, but even this movement is caused by a pre-existent higher law that allows such a movement. God is Truth.
>if a 5 year old can debunk your shit you have issues
At least it is true that you think like a child.

Attached: 2A22C5F9-8271-4548-8BD0-4093F11C9DBE.jpg (500x750, 68K)

>if i make up a bunch of terms and throw them around like i've seen the scientists do, that means i'm right
No.

Yeah, super wonderful that your summer theology class is going so well. Can you answer me why your pic is quoting from a Jewish holy book? Are you arguing for Judaism? Just for shits and giggles.

So you can keep changing the topic after every time I make a point? I know how you people are. Nothing convinces you, you never concede anything. You don’t want to believe, so you will not.
James 4:8
>Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded.
Proverbs 8:17
>I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.

>So you can keep changing the topic after every time I make a point?
Cunt I'm not even the same person, summerfagging not giving you enough Anonymity yet for you to figure that out? He probably fucked off because after reading the thread, you really are being a little shit.

And there it is again, why are you quoting from Jewish proverbs when they have nothing to do with Christianity? Let me repeat that for you, CHRISTianity?

>Some reject the council of Nicaea
Does this accusation even has a meaning
That sentence is so oversaturated it became as meaningful as air

>6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

This.

So you're among the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Is that what you're trying to communicate?

This, unironically. Catholics believe in praying to the saints and indeed even making them objects of worship as with Mary.

God is the only one who you should pray to and is the only one you should worship.

And I forgot, Catholics also pray to the archangels Michael and Gabriel, which is by far the biggest affront to God than anything else aside from straight up worshiping Satan.

Catholics are fucking stupid but they don't pray to saints or to Mary as objects as worship. They pray for "intercession" because they think that the said saints will be better fit to convey whatever problems they have to Jewish Creator Yahweh™. Same goes for Mary.

Lucifer did nothing wrong

you're assuming a function to the gospels that doesn't necessarily have to be so

I think it is pretty clear, or it least it was clear to early Christians which is why it was nearly universally accepted.

Jesus confirmed Peter alone in an office as the first of the Apostles. He intended it to be a permanent office transmitted to Peter's successors because Jesus' kingdom will last until the end of time. This office of shepherding the Church is passed on through the sacred office of the bishops. Therefore, the church teaches that "the bishops have by divine institution take place of the apostles as pastors of the Church, in such a way's that whoever listens to them is listening to Christ and whoever despises them despises Christ and him who sent Christ.

Peter's succession is already intimated when Jesus connected the promise of the keys he will give to Peter with the prime ministerial office in David's kingdom in Isaiah 22. Jesus affirmed that Peter will be given the dynastic office of chief shepherd in Jesus' kingdom.

Apostolic succession is also clearly evident when Peter determined that a successor must be chosen to fill the place vacated by Judas' betrayal and suicide:

Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David, concerning Judas who was guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share of this ministry ... For it is written in the book of Psalms, 'Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it'; and, 'His office let another take" (Acts 1:16-17, 20).

Apostolic succession is evident in the first missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas. They "appointed elders [bishops and priests] for them in every church, with prayers and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they believe" (Acts 14:23).

In his second letter to Timothy St. Paul laid out the generational program for apostolic succession that was practiced by the Apostles and their successors, and is continued to the present time: "You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you [Timothy was a second generation of Christians] have heard from me [Paul was of the first generation] before many witnesses entrust to the faithful men [the third generation] who will be able to teach others [the fourth generation] also (2 Tim 2:1-2).

By the end of the second century, apostolic succession was understood as the sure indicator of orthodoxy. St. Irenaeus of Lions, writing against the Gnostics around the year 180, affirmed "the tradition of the Apostles," was safeguarded in the unbroken line of succession of those men who were instituted bishops by the Apostles, and their successors. He placed the greatest importance on the successors of St. Peter in Rome.

“In the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head--that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]--of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church.”
-St. Optatus, “The Schism of the Donatists,” c. 367 A.D.

“They (the Novatian heretics) have not the succession of Peter, who hold not the chair of Peter, which they rend by wicked schism; and this, too, they do, wickedly denying that sins can be forgiven (by the sacrament of confession) even in the Church, whereas it was said to Peter: 'I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven.'"
-St. Ambrose of Milan, “On Penance,” 388 A.D.

Apostolic succession ended when you guys let Paul fuck it up for you and you didn't clean up his filth. St. Irenaeus of Lions was just the way they capped the history of the Church for good and ensured that anything that came forward from it would be their own crooked horseshit.

Intercession?
I'm Italian and the people here tattoo the faces of presumed saints on themselves, dedicating themselves fully to them.
99% of Italian Catholics are pagans. Priests encourage local pagan festivities and customs.

If that's then why be a Christian? Jesus lied when he said the gates of hell shall not prevail over the Church.

yea but Peters office is not one of dogmatic power or power to anoint all bishops and priests. Its a sort of like the butler of the church, to govern over it as a govenant of the house not as a master.

Jesus didn't lie about anything. Don't let the Catholics or other occultist/pagan sects of the true faith lead you astray.

In the Davidic kingdom, the king appointed a cabinet of ministers (1 Kgs 4:1-6; 2Kgs 18:37). Of these ministers, one was elevated to a unique status. His authority was second only to that of the king, who gave him the authority over all other minsters and everyone else in the kingdom. This was a common practice in the Near East. For example, when Joseph became the prime minister of Egypt, Pharaoh said, "You shall be over my house [dynasty and kingdom], and all my people shall order themselves as you command; only as regards the throne will I be greater than you ... I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no man shall lift up hand or foot in all the land of Egypt" (Gen 41:40,44). The Symbol of Joseph's office was the signet ring that Pharaoh took from his hand and put it on Joseph's hand (Gen 41:42)

Now let's fast forward to David's kingdom. David ruled from 1010 to 970 BC. However, his dynasty continued after his death. Hezekiah became the king of Judah at the age of 25 approximately 265 years after King David's death. Hezekiah's rule from 715 to 687 was marked by a great religious reform. It was during his reign that Shebna, the prime minister or royal steward (Is 22:15) was removed from his office:

Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man ... I will thrust you from your office, and you will be cast down from your station" (Is 22:17, 19).

Eliakim will be installed in his place as prime minister (Is 22:20-22). The symbol of that office is "the key of the house of David" (Is 22:22).

The point of Jesus' reference to Isaiah 22 when he talks about keys is to indicate that Peter will also be given an office in Jesus' kingdom, which is his Church. That office will continue as long as Jesus' kingdom on earth continues. Jesus is the new Moses. Like the first Moses, Jesus established a priestly hierarchy in his kingdom. Peter and his successors are the chief ministers in that kingdom, the rock upon which Jesus will build his Church.

That's because Gnosticism is still sparsely around. Once that dies, then Jesus lied. But there are many other religions that share his precepts, so I guess it really is impossible to truly die.

I'm American and I've never heard of this. But then again I'm not Catholic, nor am I Christian.

>Peter will also be given an office in Jesus' kingdom, which is his Church. That office will continue as long as Jesus' kingdom on earth continues.
Yeah but where's the proof that a line of popes extends from Peter to modern day Francis?

I don't need proof because Jesus promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail over the Church. If you have a reason to think succession has been broken then I would like to hear it, because that would serve as proof Christianity is wrong.

>I don't need proof because it says so in the book
Yeah but it doesn't say that YOUR form of Christianity is the Church. Pastor Mike in Mississippi could very well be the Church unless you prove beyond reasonable doubt that you guys are the shit. Which reminds me, shouldn't the Vatican have a very clear record of this?

the keys are not given only to Peter you must know that.
+
The validity of Scott Hahn’s pro-papacy apologia rest on the two passages being parallel to each other. But do they line up? A closer examination shows that while there are some parallels between the two, there also exist divergences. Christ’s promise to Peter has two elements:

The keys of the kingdom of heaven, and
The power to forgive sins.
Isaiah’s prophecy to Eliakim has two elements:

The keys to the house of David, and
The power to make final decisions.
The first element shows a rough similarity. The keys of the house of David bestowed on Eliakim in Isaiah 22 can be viewed as a prophetic type that is fulfilled when Christ bestowed the keys of the kingdom of heaven on Peter in Matthew 16. When we compare the second element, the power of the keys, we find a divergence. What Jesus gave to Peter was not so much administrative but priestly authority, the power to grant absolution. Scott Hahn can make a typological argument – the first element: the keys of the house of David are equivalent to the keys of the kingdom of heaven, but to assert that the second element: the power to open and close doors are equivalent to the power of binding and loosing is something of a stretch.

The church is not referring to the papacy, if that's what you're implying. It refers to the body of people who follow Christ in faith. As was said in Matthew 18:20:

For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.

So that it only takes 2 people to form a church in Jesus Christ. When Jesus said that the gates of hell wouldn't prevail over the church, he meant that hell has no power compared to faith in Jesus Christ.

Fuck you guys. All yapping and no actual material. Your faith is based on dogshit. Have a pleasant novus ordo this coming Sunday. or Saturday evening, since that accounts for Sunday in official Catholic shit. Y'know, because Jesus cares what day of the week you spread his message.