ECT WHO IS THE HEAD OF THE EKKLESIA TODAY ??

[Cedarbay]

"Mr. Ray's book about Papal Primacy focuses much of its attention insisting that Peter lived in Rome. In other words because Peter had his P.O. Box in the secular city of power, that entitled him to a primacy of authority which later Roman Pontiffs inherited (even when there were two or three popes at the same time in France and at Rome?!) But there can be a difference between power and authority which Mr. Ray fails to acknowledge.

The Church of the Scriptures and Early Church History had several places of authority (e.g., Jerusalem, Ephesus), that may not have seemed very powerful by secular standards. Yet they were places of authority because of how the "heads" of the churches in those communities (apostles James, John) lived their lives as well as laid down their power and their lives in faithfulness to Christ as much as Peter.

Mr. Ray's own Roman Catholic Church points this out in its ecumenical document "Papal Primacy and the Universal Church."

Papal Primacy raises more questions for all Christians not so that we will become part of the Roman Catholic Church, but so that the Catholic/Universal Church may be a better witness about authority and power in and for the world."

Amazon review of Stephen Ray's book, "Upon This Rock".

 

[revpete]

Yes, and by the end of the 1st century, that one historic Church was already commonly known as "the Catholic Church."


Merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part, as has already been demonstrated in Post #89 above. Time to stop deliberately misrepresenting what the Pope said.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

In that case the word catholic simply means universal.

Ok, how else are we to interpret his words when he said that Christ's life ended in the failure of the cross?
As stated the popes words are damming in any context.

Pete

 

[revpete]

Yes, the New Testament teaches that believers are to follow the teaching and example of ALL the apostles, not only of Paul. Nice try, though.

 

[DAN P]

In that case the word catholic simply means universal.

Ok, how else are we to interpret his words when he said that Christ's life ended in the failure of the cross?
As stated the popes words are damming in any context.

Pete ��

Hi and all believers have not read John 21:18-19 , but Peter died in Jerusalem and in verse 18 some one would dress Peter and look after him , like a caregiver !!

There is NO proof that Peter EVER lived in ROME !!

DAN P

 

[Cruciform]

Would you provide valid proof that he is not?

No need, since the burden of proof rests on you to provide valid proof for your claim that he is a "Catholic apologist." Please do so.

 

[Cruciform]

Amazon review of Stephen Ray's book, "Upon This Rock".

Internet address, please. I'd like to read it for myself, just as you ought to read Ray's book for yourself.

 

[Cruciform]

In that case the word catholic simply means universal.

Yes, and a term that was coined by the early Christians in the 1st century to refer to that one historic church founded by Jesus Christ in 33 A.D. By the close of the 1st century, Christ's Church was already commonly known as "the Catholic Church."

Ok, how else are we to interpret his words when he said that Christ's life ended in the failure of the cross?

That isn't what he said at all. Rather, Francis observed that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross, "humanly speaking," "seemed" to end in failure. Big difference there. You may want to listen to what the Pope actually says, rather than trusting in the popular media to tell you what he supposedly says. For more, see this.

As stated the popes words are damming in any context.

Categorically refuted above.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[revpete]

Hi and all believers have not read John 21:18-19 , but Peter died in Jerusalem and in verse 18 some one would dress Peter and look after him , like a caregiver !!

There is NO proof that Peter EVER lived in ROME !!

DAN P

Er, y u telling me this Dan?

Pete

 

[Cedarbay]

Internet address, please. I'd like to read it for myself, just as you ought to read Ray's book for yourself.

Amazon site you gave for the book.

 

[Cedarbay]

No need, since the burden of proof rests on you to provide valid proof for your claim that he is a "Catholic apologist." Please do so.

Will do. I had to write to the publisher in jolly 'ole England. Will let you know.

 

[revpete]

Yes, and a term that was coined by the early Christians in the 1st century to refer to that one historic church founded by Jesus Christ in 33 A.D. By the close of the 1st century, Christ's Church was already commonly known as "the Catholic Church."


That isn't what he said at all. Rather, Francis observed that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross, "humanly speaking," "seemed" to end in failure. Big difference there. You may want to listen to what the Pope actually says, rather than trusting in the popular media to tell you what he supposedly says. For more, see this.


Categorically refuted above.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I have read the transcript and its damming, as I said. Oh yes I agree that the early church was Catholic in the sense of universal but not ROMAN Catholic. There's a difference.

Pete

 

[Right Divider]

0 Bible results for “ekklesia.”

Sorry, we didn’t find any results for your search. Please try the following:

Double-check spelling, especially people and place names.
Make sure there are spaces between words. Bible Gateway treats “nameoftheFather” and “name of the Father” differently.
Use fewer words in your search, especially if you’re unsure of the exact phrase. For example, “baptizing name Father” and “baptizing them in the name of the Father” will both return Matthew 28:19; however, the latter leaves a greater chance for spelling and syntax errors.
Retry your search in another translation.


King James Version (KJV)

by Public Domain

What an incredible ignoramus are you!

 

[Cruciform]

I have read the transcript and its damming, as I said.

In what possible way, exactly, given Post #107 above?

Oh yes I agree that the early church was Catholic in the sense of universal but not ROMAN Catholic. There's a difference.

Not doctrinally, but yes, Roman (Latin) Catholicism is merely one Liturgical Rite among several that make up the Catholic Church.

 

[DAN P]

In what possible way, exactly, given Post #107 above?


Not doctrinally, but yes, Roman (Latin) Catholicism is merely one Liturgical Rite among several that make up the Catholic Church.[/QUOT


Hi , but the new testament was written in Greek and that is why Puratory and POPE are not in Greek , so you LOSE !!

DAN P

 

[Cruciform]

Hi , but the new testament was written in Greek and that is why Puratory and POPE are not in Greek , so you LOSE !!

Now go ahead and cite the biblical text which states that "Only words that appear explicitly in the Bible may be used by Christians to define and describe their beliefs." Chapter and verse, please.

 

[revpete]

Yes, and a term that was coined by the early Christians in the 1st century to refer to that one historic church founded by Jesus Christ in 33 A.D. By the close of the 1st century, Christ's Church was already commonly known as "the Catholic Church."


That isn't what he said at all. Rather, Francis observed that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross, "humanly speaking," "seemed" to end in failure. Big difference there. You may want to listen to what the Pope actually says, rather than trusting in the popular media to tell you what he supposedly says. For more, see this.


Categorically refuted above.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

The natural man does not understand the things of God anyway because they are foolishness to Him. However, when any Christian reads the words they're implying that Christ's death on the cross was a failure. If the pope meant them that way is for God to decide but what I'm getting at is the words gives us glimpse of what and how he thinks of Christ and IMO it's not good at all.

Pete

 

[Cruciform]

However, when any Christian reads the words they're implying that Christ's death on the cross was a failure. If the pope meant them that way is for God to decide but what I'm getting at is the words gives us glimpse of what and how he thinks of Christ and IMO it's not good at all.

You have already been answered---and objectively corrected---on this point in Post #107 above.

 

[Wick Stick]

There is NO proof that Peter EVER lived in ROME !!

No proof... just mounds and mounds of testimony.

 

[heir]

Now go ahead and cite the biblical text which states that "Only words that appear explicitly in the Bible may be used by Christians to define and describe their beliefs." Chapter and verse, please.

We have all scripture which throughly furnishes us (2 Timothy 3:16-17 KJV). There's no need for an outside source.

 

[Wick Stick]

We have all scripture which throughly furnishes us (2 Timothy 3:16-17 KJV). There's no need for an outside source.

Uh... except for the multiple points at which Scripture quotes or alludes to various "outside sources." Then it would perhaps be nice to have some idea what is being talked about.