Who founded your church?

[CharismaticLady]

Hi CharismaticLady,

If I may interject with some bible study. Peter's biblical Pedigree:

Peter is the one who calls for Judas Iscariot to be replaced, leading to the election of the Apostle Matthias (Acts 1:15-26).
Peter is the one who preaches the sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14-40).
When they are called before the Jewish authorities, Peter is the one who gives the speech in their defense (Acts 4:8-12).
Peter is the one who confronts Annanias and Sapphira about their lie (Acts 5:3-9).
The people of Jerusalem place the sick in the streets so that Peter's shadow might fall on them (Acts 5:15).
When the apostles are imprisoned as a group, miraculously freed, and then appear before the authorities, Peter speaks for them, saying that they must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29-32).
Peter confronts Simon Magus (Acts 8:20-23).
Peter heals the paralyzed Aeneas (Acts 9:32-34).
Peter raises Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:37-41)
Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2, Mk 3:16, Lk 6:14, Acts 1:13), except Galatians 2.
Peter is named first amongst the list of the apostles. (Matthew 10:2).
Peter alone receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42, Mt 16:18).
Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28, 1 Pt 5:2).
Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32).
Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” (Lk 22:32).
Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity (Mt 16:16).
Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Mt 16:17).
At God’s behest, Peter admits the first gentiles to the Church (Acts 10-11).
Peter (unlike James son of Zebedee) is miraculously delivered from prison and martyrdom (Acts 12:1-18).
Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.
Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).
Peter gave the sermon at Pentecost (Acts 1:14-36)
Peter led the replacing of Judas (1:22),
Peter worked the first miracle of the Church age (3:6-12).
Peter’s name appears at least 54 times in Acts; James appears a total of 4 times . Would you share James biblical pedigree with me please?

It is known that James was the head of the church in Jerusalem. Is that what you are talking about?

Curious Mary

Starting with the first quote. Jesus choose His own apostles. Peter disobeyed Jesus who told them to WAIT in Jerusalem. They had not received the power to come on the Day of Pentecost. Acts 1:8. They chose Matthias by GAMBLING, a pagan ritual of the Romans, casting lots, where one of the lots was bound to be chosen. It was Paul that Jesus chose, Himself, on the Road to Damascus.

You are basing your authority on Peter, not Christ.

 

[Marymog]

How old are you? Because calling a 50 some years old guy "kiddo" is kind of weird unless you're like 90. :)

To answer your 1st question I am around your age...actually a little older.

To address your "weird" statement the word kiddo can be used as a friendly form of address! If you don't like me being friendly and you don't want me to call you kiddo please let me know!!

With that said you skipped over the part about how you have to know WHO Tertullian was writing to and WHY he was writing to them!!

Do you have that knowledge or would you like to continue to dodge the issue at hand??

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Starting with the first quote. Jesus choose His own apostles. Peter disobeyed Jesus who told them to WAIT in Jerusalem. They had not received the power to come on the Day of Pentecost. Acts 1:8. They chose Matthias by GAMBLING, a pagan ritual of the Romans, casting lots, where one of the lots was bound to be chosen. It was Paul that Jesus chose, Himself, on the Road to Damascus.

You are basing your authority on Peter, not Christ.

Thanks Lady,

Goodness....You have gotten way off topic....Mathias, Paul, casting lots, road to Damasucus.....I thought we were talking about leadership of The Church after Christ was crucified????

Soooooo....getting back on topic......it seems you are unable to give a biblical pedigree for James that is more authoritative than Peters....dually noted!!!

Also, YOU said James was the leader of The Church which means that, according to the men who taught you, James (not Peter) was the leader of the Apostles after Jesus was crucified sooooooo it sounds to me like YOU are "basing your authority" on James, not Christ. After all, if James was the leader of The Church, wouldn't he have authority over Peter?????

Curious Mary

PS....Who taught you that James was the leader of The Church after Jesus died??

 

[theefaith]

How does that help? They passed the truth on to us.
If not, we could not spread the gospel as individuals.

So, the keys of the kingdom are God’s gift to his people to state heaven’s verdict on who will and will not enter the kingdom based on their response to the gospel. As such, all who faithfully preach and teach the gospel are able to exercise them under the authority of Jesus Christ himself.

the apostles are authorized to teach not individual Christians

the keys are the authority to administer the kingdom in Christ’s absence

 

[theefaith]

Yes, the church that remains true to him, including people from all tribes and tongues and denominations.

no just those who are baptized into Christ and his church
All heretics jews schismatics and apostates are outside the church

1 Pet 3:20
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us!
(Ark of Noah a type of the church, member of Christ and his church and salvation by baptism!)
(Outside the ark all died and outside the church there is no salvation!)

 

[theefaith]

I don't know if you are Orthodox or RCC, but I would suspect you are RCC. Both of those are break-offs - denominations - from the original church. That doesn't mean you cannot be saved by being in a denomination, but they are telling you, that only they are the true Church. It is not about Peter, but about Jesus. We need to be part of Jesus, not part of Peter. Peter didn't die for you.

Look around you, TF. Do you not see the trappings of paganism all around you at church and the Vatican. What are the priests wearing? What do you carry around with you? Is it a rosary? Where do you see people praying to Mary in the New Testament? Jesus is the ONLY mediator between us and the Father. If you believe the unscriptural new teaching that Mary is the Mediatrix, PLEASE think for yourself. I believe by your fruit that you do have the Holy Spirit dwelling inside you. You are my brother in the Lord. But you have been duped into being a good Catholic, when it is abiding in Christ that you need to dwell on.

1 Timothy 2:5
5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time, 7 for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle—I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying—a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

Jesus is the only mediator that of justice yes the covenant mediator
But the communion of saints is that all those who are in union with Jesus by the sacrament of baptism are in communion and can pray for each other and edify each other by godly lives
Rev 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

1. 2 Corinthians 5:19
   To wit, that God was in Christ, reconcilingthe world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

yet Paul says

2 Corinthians 5:18
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

 

[theefaith]

We can receive the writings of Paul and John also. The whole New Testament are witnesses to Jesus. It is Truth. I know it is very hard to undo all the lies you have grown up with. But it is Christ who died for you. And it is His Spirit that dwelt in ALL of His apostles, not just Peter. I know it is hard to believe someone outside the RCC, but it is like being able to actually see the forest, not just the trees. You need to see the whole picture and the true gospel.

Start here: What is the difference between the Old Covenant of the Old Testament, and the New Covenant that Jesus taught?

but the new covenant is a kingdom and the king went to heaven???
Problem? Who’s gonna administer the kingdom?
Matt 28:19
Peter and the apostles are appointed with Christ’s authority to teach, to govern and to sanctify by the sacraments in the holy church!

 

[Renniks]

To answer your 1st question I am around your age...actually a little older.

To address your "weird" statement the word kiddo can be used as a friendly form of address! If you don't like me being friendly and you don't want me to call you kiddo please let me know!!

With that said you skipped over the part about how you have to know WHO Tertullian was writing to and WHY he was writing to them!!

Do you have that knowledge or would you like to continue to dodge the issue at hand??

Mary

I'm not dodging, just curious. Been awhile since I read much of the early writings. I do know that there were a lot of different doctrines, it was not cut and dried. Also, it's often hard to discern exactly what they meant, because of thier different writing styles. I might go find some more of T's writings, or not. Probably just stick to scripture. You can call me Ray or Jay or kiddo, I'm not really picky, but I only pick on people I like and you seem a little more likable than some of the Catholics on here.

 

[Renniks]

the apostles are authorized to teach not individual Christians

the keys are the authority to administer the kingdom in Christ’s absence

So, I can not share the gospel?

 

[Renniks]

no just those who are baptized into Christ and his church
All heretics jews schismatics and apostates are outside the church

1 Pet 3:20
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us!
(Ark of Noah a type of the church, member of Christ and his church and salvation by baptism!)
(Outside the ark all died and outside the church there is no salvation!)

So, since I have not been baptized in the Catholic Church, I am a heathen to you?

 

[theefaith]

Charismatic lady

How do you get saved?

 

[Philip James]

Both of those are break-offs - denominations - from the original church

Hello CLady,

That's an intersting assertion. Can you then identify 'the original church' ?
This goes directly to the OP...

Who are they, where are they? What evidence do you have that they are the original church? Who are their leaders?
Can you trace their continuity back to the apostles?



In light of John's warning here:

They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.

It would seem crucial to identify that Church to whom Jesus said 'he who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me'.

Peace be with you!

 

[jaybird]

No - they Baptized bt the AUTHORITY OF Jesus Christ.
I suggest YOU also read post #1169 - THEN maybe we cna have an intelligent conversation . . .

they did NOT baptize in the name of Jesus?
Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

so whats the deal with this passage?

 

[jaybird]

more examples of how the ones trained by Jesus baptized:

Acts 10 48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

 

[BreadOfLife]

they did NOT baptize in the name of Jesus?
Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

so whats the deal with this passage?

more examples of how the ones trained by Jesus baptized:

Acts 10 48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

Ummmm, since you can't seem to follow a simple instruction - I'll RE-post the information from post #1169 for you.
You see - this is how educated people communicate - with scholarly liguistic evidence and not simple-minded rants about things you don't understand..

YOUR problem is that you don't understand Biblical language.
"In the name of" simply means, "By the authority of" - and I showed you the following scholarly evidence explaining it . . .

According to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange:
Putting all religious contentions aside for the sake of our language, the etymology of name offers a good place to start understanding: Old English nama, noma "name, REPUTATION," from Proto-Germanic *namon

(cognates: Old Saxon namo, Old Frisian nama, Old High German namo, German Name, Middle Dutch name, Dutch naam, Old Norse nafn, Gothic namo "name"), from PIE *nomn- (cognates: Sanskrit nama; Avestan nama; Greek onoma, onyma; Latin nomen; Old Church Slavonic ime, genitive imene; Russian imya; Old Irish ainm; Old Welsh anu "name").

We've all experienced the power of namedropping in our lives. People respect us and our opinions if they believe we are connected to someone with GREATER REPUTATION AND AUTHORITY.

In all cultures, people of authority have always lent their REPUTATION and their AUTHORITY to their delegates. The founders and leaders of religious movements use the same delegation strategies as the founders and leaders of nations. The English phrase in the name of simply asserts the REPUTATION and AUTHORITY of another person.

English Reports Annotated - Pages 1505-2672, 1505, page 2048:
...an action on a board given to trustees of an industrial society before the act may, after registration under the act, be brought in the name of the newly -incorporated body.

“In the name of” meaning:

Macmillan Dictionary
1. representing someone or something
2. using the authority given by someone or something

Collins Dictionary
1. in appeal or reference to
2. by the authority of; as the representative of

Idioms.TheReferenceDictionary.com
1. Based on the authority of someone or something. We proclaim these things in the name of God. In the name of King John, I command you to halt.
2. With someone or something as a basis, reason, or motivation.

Thesaurus.com
- through - at the hand of
- supported by - through the agency of
- via - with
- through the medium of
- under the aegis of
- with the assistance of

 

[jaybird]

Ummmm, since you can't seem to follow a simple instruction - I'll RE-post the information from post #1169 for you.
You see - this is how educated people communicate - with scholarly liguistic evidence and not simple-minded rants about things you don't understand..

YOUR problem is that you don't understand Biblical language.
"In the name of" simply means, "By the authority of" - and I showed you the following scholarly evidence explaining it . . .

According to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange:
Putting all religious contentions aside for the sake of our language, the etymology of name offers a good place to start understanding: Old English nama, noma "name, REPUTATION," from Proto-Germanic *namon

(cognates: Old Saxon namo, Old Frisian nama, Old High German namo, German Name, Middle Dutch name, Dutch naam, Old Norse nafn, Gothic namo "name"), from PIE *nomn- (cognates: Sanskrit nama; Avestan nama; Greek onoma, onyma; Latin nomen; Old Church Slavonic ime, genitive imene; Russian imya; Old Irish ainm; Old Welsh anu "name").

We've all experienced the power of namedropping in our lives. People respect us and our opinions if they believe we are connected to someone with GREATER REPUTATION AND AUTHORITY.

In all cultures, people of authority have always lent their REPUTATION and their AUTHORITY to their delegates. The founders and leaders of religious movements use the same delegation strategies as the founders and leaders of nations. The English phrase in the name of simply asserts the REPUTATION and AUTHORITY of another person.

English Reports Annotated - Pages 1505-2672, 1505, page 2048:
...an action on a board given to trustees of an industrial society before the act may, after registration under the act, be brought in the name of the newly -incorporated body.

“In the name of” meaning:

Macmillan Dictionary
1. representing someone or something
2. using the authority given by someone or something

Collins Dictionary
1. in appeal or reference to
2. by the authority of; as the representative of

Idioms.TheReferenceDictionary.com
1. Based on the authority of someone or something. We proclaim these things in the name of God. In the name of King John, I command you to halt.
2. With someone or something as a basis, reason, or motivation.

Thesaurus.com
- through - at the hand of
- supported by - through the agency of
- via - with
- through the medium of
- under the aegis of
- with the assistance of

ohh ok so all of this changes this:

Acts 10 48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

basically this passage is wrong now? now the apostles trained by Jesus Himself did not baptize in the name of Jesus. now they baptize however we say they baptize and whatever the bible says can simply be ignored.
thank you for showing me the "intelligent" way of understanding this

 

[theefaith]

So, I can not share the gospel?

more power to ya
But unofficial
A good example would be nice too

 

[jaybird]

and more examples of how the Apostles, the ones trained by Jesus Himself, practiced baptism.

Acts 19:5
On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

hard to believe there are people that reject these passages.

 

[theefaith]

So, since I have not been baptized in the Catholic Church, I am a heathen to you?

have you been baptized?

 

[BreadOfLife]

ohh ok so all of this changes this:
Acts 10 48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.
basically this passage is wrong now? now the apostles trained by Jesus Himself did not baptize in the name of Jesus. now they baptize however we say they baptize and whatever the bible says can simply be ignored.
thank you for showing me the "intelligent" way of understanding this

Nope - doesn't "change" anything.

It means the SAME thing it has always meant:
Baptizing "in the name of" Jesus Christ is Baptizing by the Authority of Jesus Christ as outlined in the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20).

The fact that YOU don't understand doesn't "change" it at all . . .