Do catholics worship God or the pope?
- Thread starter Unearthed
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The writings of the Early church fathers tell us:
But not to dwell upon ancient examples, let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation. Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death.12 Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours; and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity,14 compelled to flee, and stoned. After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west,16 and suffered martyrdom under the prefects. Thus was he removed from the world, and went into the holy place, having proved himself a striking example of patience.
Clement of Rome. (1885). The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (Vol. 1, p. 6). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
1 Such was the condition of the Jews. Meanwhile the holy apostles and disciples of our Saviour were dispersed throughout the world. Parthia,2 according to tradition, was allotted to Thomas as his field of labor, Scythia to Andrew,4 and Asia to John,6 who, after he had lived some time there, died at Ephesus.
2 Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia9 to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way. What do we need to say concerning Paul, who preached the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem to Illyricum,11 and afterwards suffered martyrdom in Rome under Nero? These facts are related by Origen in the third volume of his Commentary on Genesis.2
Eusebius of Caesaria. (1890). The Church History of Eusebius. In P. Schaff & H. Wace (Eds.), A. C. McGiffert (Trans.), Eusebius: Church History, Life of Constantine the Great, and Oration in Praise of Constantine (Vol. 1, pp. 132–133). New York: Christian Literature Company.
But not to dwell upon ancient examples, let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation. Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death.12 Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours; and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity,14 compelled to flee, and stoned. After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west,16 and suffered martyrdom under the prefects. Thus was he removed from the world, and went into the holy place, having proved himself a striking example of patience.
Clement of Rome. (1885). The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (Vol. 1, p. 6). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
1 Such was the condition of the Jews. Meanwhile the holy apostles and disciples of our Saviour were dispersed throughout the world. Parthia,2 according to tradition, was allotted to Thomas as his field of labor, Scythia to Andrew,4 and Asia to John,6 who, after he had lived some time there, died at Ephesus.
2 Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia9 to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way. What do we need to say concerning Paul, who preached the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem to Illyricum,11 and afterwards suffered martyrdom in Rome under Nero? These facts are related by Origen in the third volume of his Commentary on Genesis.2
Eusebius of Caesaria. (1890). The Church History of Eusebius. In P. Schaff & H. Wace (Eds.), A. C. McGiffert (Trans.), Eusebius: Church History, Life of Constantine the Great, and Oration in Praise of Constantine (Vol. 1, pp. 132–133). New York: Christian Literature Company.
-
1
- Show all
https://www.vision.org/was-apostle-peter-ever-in-rome-952
Bible indicate peter never in Rome.
Base on catholic source peter is the boss of apostle, why not say in the Bible he is in Rome at all
When Obama bought dog for his daughter it is in the news
When I bought an elephant for my son, not in the news
Why?
Because Obama was president, get more publication than me as low class citizen
Why Paul in Rome got publication on the Bible (act 28) not peter? He is the boss
Any where in the book of act, if apostle went to city that have a Christian community always a Christian give them shelter, if peter in Rome, why peter not let Paul stay with him?
And a lot more indication peter not in rome
Bible indicate peter never in Rome.
Base on catholic source peter is the boss of apostle, why not say in the Bible he is in Rome at all
When Obama bought dog for his daughter it is in the news
When I bought an elephant for my son, not in the news
Why?
Because Obama was president, get more publication than me as low class citizen
Why Paul in Rome got publication on the Bible (act 28) not peter? He is the boss
Any where in the book of act, if apostle went to city that have a Christian community always a Christian give them shelter, if peter in Rome, why peter not let Paul stay with him?
And a lot more indication peter not in rome
Historical sources says peter was in Rome. Since you do not accept such sources, How do you know the books of the NT were even written back then. It is those same historical sources that tells us who wrote what. It is the same authors that made copies of the NT. If you can not accept their testimony about Peter, then you have no ground to trust the NT itself. Because if you believe their writings are corrupt then the NT itself would likely be corrupt too. Why would a dishonest group be dishonest about history and honest about anything else? A corrupt stream does not have fresh water.
-
1
- Show all
Mark does not say he is the author of the Gospel of Mark https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+1&version=ERV
Matthew does not say that he is the author of the Gospel of Matthew https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1&version=ERV
Luke does not say he was the author of Luke neither, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+1&version=ERV
John also does not say he was the author of the gospel of John https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1&version=ERV
Luke does not say he is the author of book of Acts https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+1&version=ERV
We know whom the authors are from the writers, you reject.
WITNESS OF THE EARLY CHURCH TO THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE GOSPELS
Wendell S. Reilly
The Catholic Biblical Quarterly
Vol. 1, No. 2 (April, 1939), pp. 115-124 (10 pages)
Published By: Catholic Biblical Association
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43715801
Matthew does not say that he is the author of the Gospel of Matthew https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1&version=ERV
Luke does not say he was the author of Luke neither, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+1&version=ERV
John also does not say he was the author of the gospel of John https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1&version=ERV
Luke does not say he is the author of book of Acts https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+1&version=ERV
We know whom the authors are from the writers, you reject.
WITNESS OF THE EARLY CHURCH TO THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE GOSPELS
Wendell S. Reilly
The Catholic Biblical Quarterly
Vol. 1, No. 2 (April, 1939), pp. 115-124 (10 pages)
Published By: Catholic Biblical Association
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43715801
Peter in Rome sound not consistence with the book of act
https://www.vision.org/was-apostle-peter-ever-in-rome-952
https://www.vision.org/was-apostle-peter-ever-in-rome-952
We also know from those books you reject and church council which books belong to the NT.
Books used in the churches included some that are not considered to be scripture today.
https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-books-not-included-in-the-new-testament/
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/5-books-that-are-not-included-in-the-bible.aspx
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com...question9-books-left-out-of-new-testament.cfm
https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2016/why-were-some-books-left-out-of-the-bible
Books used in the churches included some that are not considered to be scripture today.
https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-books-not-included-in-the-new-testament/
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/5-books-that-are-not-included-in-the-bible.aspx
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com...question9-books-left-out-of-new-testament.cfm
https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2016/why-were-some-books-left-out-of-the-bible
I started reading your article, as soon as I saw the Waldensian who were well know as being false teachers and the fact that the grave of Peter was found in Rome --- I stop reading. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3152828?seq=4#metadata_info_tab_contents
https://theromanguy.com/italy-trave...ca/how-to-see-st-peters-tomb-in-vatican-city/
https://catholicstraightanswers.com/church-possess-actual-bones-st-peter/
https://earlychurchhistory.org/communication/st-peters-tomb-discovered/
There is doubt this is peter's body, bones by some.
We also know from those books you reject and church council which books belong to the NT.
Books used in the churches included some that are not considered to be scripture today.
https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-books-not-included-in-the-new-testament/
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/5-books-that-are-not-included-in-the-bible.aspx
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com...question9-books-left-out-of-new-testament.cfm
https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2016/why-were-some-books-left-out-of-the-bible
Books used in the churches included some that are not considered to be scripture today.
https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-books-not-included-in-the-new-testament/
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/5-books-that-are-not-included-in-the-bible.aspx
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com...question9-books-left-out-of-new-testament.cfm
https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2016/why-were-some-books-left-out-of-the-bible
We are not told what happens to Peter in scripture any more than we are told what ultimately happens to Paul. We know from early witnesses such as Clement who was one of a number of Elders in Rome in the first century. The reason? God’s sovereign choice. I don’t think it’s a gospel matter is probably the reason why. No one doubts Paul perished as a martyr in Rome. Probably beheaded as he was a Roman Citizen Probably on Vatican hill. But be careful dismissing Clement. His letter is most likely authentic and may be the clement mentioned by Paul in Phillipians 4.
To put it bluntly there is better and more credible evidence about the subject than the conspiracy theories you have posted on this forum. In fact, if you are going to use the same standard in evaluating evidence regarding Peter as said conspiracy theories you would be forced to acknowledge Clement is a far more reliable witness.
To put it bluntly there is better and more credible evidence about the subject than the conspiracy theories you have posted on this forum. In fact, if you are going to use the same standard in evaluating evidence regarding Peter as said conspiracy theories you would be forced to acknowledge Clement is a far more reliable witness.
Of the books listed only the Didache and 1 Clement were ever considered as being canonical. Only a small (like 2 or 3) collections contain the two and it’s not clear that they were ever regarded as scripture. In fact the reason why I say 2 or 3 because there’s good evidence 2 of the 3 collections are closely related. Meaning one is probably a copy of the other. The others we didn’t have extant copies until much later. Some not until 20th century. And “Q” is merely a theory of 20th century theological higher criticism and no copy has ever been found.
the fact is the canon with very few exceptions was already known long before the councils of the fourth and fifth centuries. And Rome didn’t define the canon until 1546. Dogmatically that is.
the fact is the canon with very few exceptions was already known long before the councils of the fourth and fifth centuries. And Rome didn’t define the canon until 1546. Dogmatically that is.
-
1
- Show all
Not only conspiracy, but base on the Bible please consider my question
Catholic source say peter in Rome from AD 32 to AD 62
Why Luke who wrote about Paul in Rome not mention about Peter his boss
Imagine president and his one of cabinet member visit Rome. Than news only wrote cabinet member visit Rome.
It wear, news may say president visit Rome without mention cabinet member, not all the way around
Catholic source say peter in Rome from AD 32 to AD 62
Why Luke who wrote about Paul in Rome not mention about Peter his boss
Imagine president and his one of cabinet member visit Rome. Than news only wrote cabinet member visit Rome.
It wear, news may say president visit Rome without mention cabinet member, not all the way around
Clement isn’t a catholic source. He’s an early eyewitness to the events. If you want to know how things were historically you want to talk with the people who were actually there. Clement is one of those people. And Paul was Luke’s “boss” as you put it. Why didn’t Luke write about it? Who knows? Who cares? It’s not all that important. It doesn’t impact the Gospel and furthermore it doesn’t give the current pope in Rome any divine authority than if Peter was martyred in Tupelo Mississippi.
-
1
- Show all
How do you know what clement wrote. Jesuit have reputation to alter history.
Like I say, on 1965 in my country there was assignation of 7 military general. Government say it by communist, prof Ben Anderson investigate and say, it done by CIA
A lot of odd thing that Luke not mention the president of apostle there when apostle Paul there.
Also every where when Paul visit that there was Christian community, they give warm welcome, read act. There wasn't welcoming party where boss peter in Rome for Paul? It is wear, or peter not there.
Like I say, on 1965 in my country there was assignation of 7 military general. Government say it by communist, prof Ben Anderson investigate and say, it done by CIA
A lot of odd thing that Luke not mention the president of apostle there when apostle Paul there.
Also every where when Paul visit that there was Christian community, they give warm welcome, read act. There wasn't welcoming party where boss peter in Rome for Paul? It is wear, or peter not there.
Historically and Biblically, Peter was first among equals. If two servants were in the same city at the same time, one would not expect that both would make headlines so to speak.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/paul/timeline.cfm Paul was in Rome around 66 CE
https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/paul/timeline.cfm Paul was in Rome around 66 CE