Please help me witness to Catholics

[dittohead conservative]

I know Jesus meant He is the rock and the foundation and the cornerstone etc etc...

But why do Catholics insist Jesus was speaking of Peter (É) my question mark looks like an E,sorry.

the replies so far go like this- The RCC has both scripture and tradition to back the two thousand year interpretation over the five hundred year interpretation. (RC vs. Protestant)

And they also say that Jesus teaching that a building built on a strong foundation stands firms while that built on sandy disintegrates? How much disintegration-splintering has come about since the five hundred year interpretation was proposed?

I told them that The RC church would not exist if they didn't misinterpret the verse, and they said- The first few centuries who called Peter the first Pope, Linus the 2nd Pope, Anacletus the 3rd Pope, Clement the 4th Pope, and Evaristus the 5th Pope were wrong? That when the Early Church Fathers (those who were taught by the Apostles and the Apostles' successors) wrote of Peter being the first Pope, they were wrong? So, you're going to claim that history is wrong, when those involved in that history were taught by those who knew the Apostles but that you, over 2,000 years after the fact, are right?

Thanks, but I'll go with history. They knew better how to translate verses of a Bible that wasn't even put together until the 4th century by whom? The Catholic Church.

What can I say to this- look- I know we do not want to draw this out forever- but i could not search and find any posts specifically on Peter and the RCC. I could use some very good replies please- thanks.

[LightOfMyLife]

Here are some scriptures to help in this link http://www.gotquestions.org/upon-this-rock.html

[dittohead conservative]

If Peter truly was the founder of the Roman Catholic Church, it would be in full agreement with what Peter taught (Acts chapter 2, 1 Peter, 2 Peter).

Can anyone be more specific about this sentence?

[iSong6:3]

Sorry, have to close due to rule #14 violations re: copying from other message boards. We've told you this before.

[Kliska]

James was the head of the church right after Jesus' death, and Peter "bowed" to his authority. Read Acts and the council of Jerusalem recorded there. That shows Peter, nor any of the other apostles bowed to Peter's supposed authority, he was no "pope" and Jesus never taught that.

[dittohead conservative]

I don't think Paul did- but what explaination is for this? link included....http://www.catholic-convert.com/wp-c...nesiphorus.pdf



Onesiphorus and Paul’s Prayer for the Dead


Does the Bible record St. Paul praying for a dead man? Does the New Testament relate an
incident of prayer for the dead? It seems quite certain that it does.
Let’s begin with Onesiphorus—a faithful Christian who cared for St. Paul while he was
in prison and who took great personal risk to serve the apostle. He was such a good man
that Paul writes, "[Onesiphorus] often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains"
and "he searched for me eagerly and found me" and "you well know all the service he
rendered at Ephesus" (2 Tim 1:16-18).
But from all indications—certainly from the words Paul uses—Onesiphorus has died or
been killed before Paul wrote Second Timothy. Almost all commentators concede that
Onesiphorus had probably died—maybe even martyred during Nero’s persecution. Paul
speaks of him in the past tense and strangely asks for God's mercy on his "household"
without mentioning him, as though he was no longer here. Because Onesiphorus had
served so well and was no longer alive, Paul prays for God’s blessing on his surviving
family. All implications are that Onesiphorus has died.
But Paul prays for him! In 2 Timothy 1:18, while in prison awaiting his death, Paul prays
for the dead man and it is recorded in the Bible. Here is what St. Paul writes, "May the
Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day." This is not just an expression
of sentimental emotion—this is a prayer for a man who has died, it is prayer for the dead.
Paul, who was earlier known as Saul the Pharisee, was well immersed in the teaching and
tradition of the Pharisaical Jews. The Jews prayed for the dead and Paul would not have
seen the practice as egregious or unbiblical; rather, he would have viewed prayer for the
dead as a proper practice for a Jew, and also now for a Christian who believes in the
afterlife.
Here is what the widely respected six-volume Anchor Bible Dictionary writes,
"2 Timothy also includes greetings to the household of Onesiphorus (4:19) and a prayer
that the Lord might grant mercy to his household because of his service to Paul (1:16).
Onesiphorus himself does not seem to be included, suggesting that he was either not
envisioned as present among the (alleged) recipients of 2 Timothy, was with Paul, or was
already dead. The latter is most likely since the author of 2 Timothy writes: “May the
Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day” (1:18). If Onesiphorus had
indeed died, then this prayer is the earliest one for the dead found in Christian literature.
As such it has been cited as clear scriptural support (especially among Roman Catholics)
for prayer for the dead. (Jewish precedent for such prayer is found in 2 Macc 12:43–45.)"

[hsmommy]

I haven't done any research on this, so take with a grain of salt. If this fellow was in prison, that would account for Paul praying for his family. It would also put his deeds into the past tense. Neither of these two things necessarily means that he was dead. Putting this into today's context, if Pastor Joe was imprisoned for his faith, we might say things like, "He was very diligent in his service to the homeless. May God be with his family during this time." Neither of these statements implies that he is dead. His service to the homeless is in the past tense because he isn't ministering to them right now, he's ministering to fellow inmates & guards. His family needs God's blessing & support now more than ever.

Just throwing this out for consideration.

Besides, the Bible tells us that is appointed once for us to die. Prayer isn't necessary after our "appointment". What could a dead person possibly need prayer for?

Lorna

[IbelieveinJesus]

Well, first, 2nd Timothy is a letter Paul wrote to Timothy, it is not some sort of transcript of words Paul was saying, nor is it a written Prayer..

Second, that aside, in just reading those verses, it would not have occurred to me that Onesiphorus had died, and Paul was Praying for the dead...

You know that everyone in the province of Asia has deserted me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes. May the Lord show mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains. On the contrary, when he was in Rome, he searched hard for me until he found me. May the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! You know very well in how many ways he helped me in Ephesus.

I think folks are reading something into this Epistle that isn't there...

-Ted

[Buzzardhut]

If it's on a catholic site that's a clue there is something wrong with the teaching.

[TheRedeemed]

If it's on a catholic site that's a clue there is something wrong with the teaching.

Yep! They don't just pray for the dead, they also pray TO the dead to intercess on their behalf.

Be very careful of anything RC.

[Buzzardhut]

Yep! They don't just pray for the dead, they also pray TO the dead to intercess on their behalf.

Be very careful of anything RC.

Correct, since they don't fully trust in Jesus' salvation they have to dabble in other arts.

[dittohead conservative]

and to be taken as allegory and stories? And to those (preterists, JW's and RC's who think that Revelation happened already?

[metroames]

and to be taken as allegory and stories? And to those (preterists, JW's and RC's who think that Revelation happened already?

Did past prophecy occur in an allegory sense? No! All the prophecies about Jesus happened literally. There is no reason to take future prophecies anything but literal either. Interpreting Scripture in a symbolic way becomes highly variable to each individual reader, but everyone reads a literal fulfillment the same way. There is no confusion if we are all on the same page:

1 Corinthians 14:32-34 - And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

[Rapture444]

What do you say to those who think the Book of Revelation is not literal?

I tell them to enjoy the Antichrist.

Eventually.

If they will not listen. Then I give up.