Catholics answer this please?

Question

Catholcism is about as unbiblical as you can get. I plan to post one such example a day and give catholics a opportunity try to justify it...up to the challenge?

1. the most obvious unbiblical part of cathlocism is the existence of the pope and his treatment as holy. I would like biblical explanations that justify the pope and why he is worshipped in catholcism. I am sure I will get all the basic responses about Simon Peter. I will than post a rebuttal. im looking for biblical justification of the papacy and the role it plays as a intercessor for God.

georgia b
whats your point?

what is the answer JP...why dance around it? and where is the biblical explanation i asked for?

still have not made a point sweetheart...just spit it out

whirlingmerc
I enjoyed your answer

Georgia b
Now that you finally made a point allow me to reply. You still have not given a biblical explanation for the pope as asked in the question, all you have done is show that you are angry that I have pointed out a propblem you dont see. I dont attack another christian religion, i attack a false doctrine that teaches things in contradiction of Christianity.

Was The Apostle Peter A Pope?
In the books of men, the following titles are commonly used with reference to a man: "Pope," "Holy Father," "Vicar of Christ," "Sovereign Pontiff." All of these are titles that rightly belong only to the Lord Jesus Christ and to God the Father. There is not a single instance in the Scriptures where any of the above titles are applied to a man. The term, "Holy Father" is used only once in the entire Bible, and it is used by Jesus in addressing God the Father. (John 17:11)

Among the above titles is the bold assertion that the Pope is the "Vicar of Christ." A "vicar" is "One serving as a substitute or agent; one authorized to perform the functions of another in higher office." (Webster). When one searches the Bible from cover to cover, he finds only one passage which gives an indication of a vicar of Christ or God. It is 2 Thess. 2:3-4; it is worded as follows

"Let no one deceive you in any way, for the day of the Lord will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits in the temple of God and gives himself out as if he were God."
Some religionists today advocate that man is saved by faith only. However, there is only one passage in the entire Bible that has the words "faith" and "only" together and it says, "not by faith only" (James 2:24). The Catholics today speak of the Pope as vicar, taking the place of God (Christ Himself is God, Matt. 1:23; John 1:1), yet there is only one passage in the entire Bible which speaks of a man doing such and it calls him "the man of sin."

James Cardinal Gibbons, a Catholic Archbishop said, "Jesus our Lord, founded but one Church, which He was pleased to build on Peter. Therefore, any church that does not recognize Peter as its foundation stone is not the Church of Christ, and therefore cannot stand, for it is not the work of God." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 82). The apostle Paul said, "For other foundation no one can lay, but that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus" (1 Cor. 3:11). There is no other foundation but Christ! Therefore, any church which does not recognize Christ alone as the foundation stone cannot be the church of Christ.

Catholic writers often speak of "the primacy of Peter" and "the primacy of the Pope." However, Col. 1:18, speaking of Christ, says, "And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy...

..." Thus, with reference to the authority in the church, the Lord Jesus Christ holds the primacy in all things. This leaves nothing for the Pope!

Catholics claim that the Pope is the visible head of the church. Please notice the following from Catholic sources:

"The pope, therefore, as vicar of Christ, is the visible head of Christ's kingdom on earth, the Church, of which Christ Himself is the invisible head." (Answer Wisely, by Martin J. Scott, p. 49).
"According to the will of Christ, all its members profess the same faith, have the same worship and Sacraments, and are united under the one and same visible head, the Pope." (Father Smith Instructs Jackson, by John F. Noll and Lester J. Fallon, p. 42)

Catholic officials always use the word "visible" no doubt thinking that it removes the thought of the Pope standing in opposition to the headship of Christ, and removes the apparent problem of having a church with two heads. Nonetheless, the Scriptures nowhere teach the idea of a visible and invisible head. Jesus said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." (Matt. 28:18; Emp. mine D.R.).

Luke 17:20-21 says, "And on being asked by the Pharisees, 'When is the kingdom of God coming?' he answered and said to them, The kingdom of God comes unawares. Neither will they say, 'Behold, here it is,' or 'Behold, there it is.' For behold the kingdom of God is within you." The kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom and therefore needs only a spiritual head or king.

Eph. 5:23-25 shows that Christ is the only head of the church. "Let wives be subject to their husbands as to the Lord; because a husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is head of the Church, being himself savior of the body. But just as the Church is subject to Christ, so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things." Consequently, the wife is subject to her husband as the church is to Christ. Just as the wife is subject to only one head--her husband, the church is subject to only one head--Christ. Just as the husband does not send a substitute to rule over his wife, Christ does not authorize a substitute to rule over His bride, the church.

Catholics often use the expression, "One fold and one shepherd" to sustain the doctrine of the papacy. (See Catholic Catechism For Adults, p. 59, q. 3). They teach that the "one shepherd" is the Pope and the "one fold" represents the Catholic Church. Hear what Jesus said about it:

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep...I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, even as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for my sheep. And other sheep I have that are not of this fold. Them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." (John 10:11, 14-16).
Jesus is that one good shepherd. If one can understand that one and one equals two, he can understand this. If one is subject to Christ as the one shepherd--that's one. If one is subject to the Pope as the one Shepherd--that's two!

The church is often compared to the human body in the Scriptures. The members of the church are represented as the various parts of the body. Christ is always said to be the head. (See 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 1:22-23; 4:15-16). Our question is: "What part of the body is the Pope?" Also, "How does one get the idea of a sub-head into the body?"

One of the greatest arguments against the primacy of Peter is the fact that the apostles had an argument among themselves as to which of them should be the greatest. Notice the following:

"Now there arose a dispute among them, which of them was reputed to be the greatest. But he said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and they who exercise authority over them are called Benefactors. But not so with you. On the contrary, let him who is greatest among you become as the youngest, and him who is chief as the servant.'" (Luke 22:24-26).

The very fact that the apostles had an argument among themselves shows they did not understand that Peter was to be prince. Also, the occasion of the argument was the night of the betrayal--the last night of the Lord's earthly ministry--and yet the apostles still did not understand that Christ had given Peter a position of primacy. The Lord settled the argument, not by stating that He had already made Peter head, but by declaring that the Gentiles have their heads, "But not so with you." Thus, Jesus very plainly taught that no one would occupy any such place as a Benefactor (or Pope) to exercise authority over the others.

There are ten major New Testament proofs which completely disprove the claim that Peter was in Rome from the time of Claudius until Nero. These Biblical points speak for themselves and ANY ONE of them is sufficient to prove the ridiculousness of the Catholic claim. Notice what God tells us! The truth IS conclusive!

PROOF ONE: We should consider Christ’s commission to Peter. This is often very embarrassing to Catholics, because Christ commissioned Peter to become chief minister to the CIRCUMCISED, not to uncircumcised Gentiles.

"The gospel of the CIRCUMCISION was unto Peter; (For He that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)" (Gal. 2:7-8).

Here we have it in the clearest of language. It was Paul, NOT Peter, who was commissioned to be the chief Apostle to the Gentiles. And who was it that wrote the Epistle to the ROMANS? It certainly WASN’T Peter!

"And when James, Cephas [Peter], and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace [i.e., the gift or office] that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision" (Gal. 2:9).

Paul further mentioned his special office as the Gentile Apostle in II Timothy 1:11: "Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles."

PETER is NOWHERE called the Apostle to the Gentiles! This precludes him from going to Rome to become the head of a Gentile community.

PROOF TWO: Paul specifically told the Gentile Romans that HE had been chosen to be their Apostle, not Peter.

"I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable" (Rom. 15:16).
How clear!
Paul had the direct charge from Christ in this matter. He even further relates in Romans 15:18 that it was Christ

PROOF THREE: We are told by Paul himself that it was he -- not Peter –who was going to officially found the Roman Church. "I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established" (Rom. 1:11).

Amazing! The Church at Rome had not been ESTABLISHED officially even by 55 or 56 A.D. However, the Catholics would have us believe that Peter had done this some ten years before -- in the reign of Claudius. What nonsense! Of course you understand that NEITHER Peter nor Paul established the Catholic Church! But these proofs are given to illustrate that it is utterly impossible for PETER to have been in any way associated with ANY Church at Rome.

PROOF FOUR: We find Paul not only wanting to establish the Church at Rome, but he emphatically tells us that his policy was NEVER to build upon another man’s foundation. "Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, LEST I SHOULD BUILD UPON ANOTHER MAN’S FOUNDATION" (Rom. 15:20).

PROOF FIVE: At the end of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans he greets no fewer than 28 different individuals, but never mentions Peter once! See Romans 16 -- read the whole chapter!

Remember, Paul greeted these people in 55 or 56 A.D. Why didn't’t he mention Peter? -- Peter simply wasn’t there!

PROOF SIX: Some four years after Paul wrote Romans, he was conveyed as a prisoner to Rome in order to stand trial before Caesar. When the Christian community in Rome heard of Paul’s arrival, they all went to meet him. "When THE brethren [of Rome] heard of us, they came to meet us" (Acts 28:15).

Again, there is not a single mention of Peter among them. This would have been extraordinary had Peter been in Rome, for Luke always mentions by name important Apostles in his narration of Acts. But he says nothing of Peter’s meeting with Paul.

Why? Because Peter was not in Rome!

Answer 1

interstingly Peter (Rocky Johnson) in his letter called everyone in the church living rocks being built into something for God not focusing on himself...(how cool is that?) the statement of Jesus that you are a rock (STONE, a person) and on this rock (not a masculine article and BEDROCK, the confesison) Jesus is building His chuch and will do it on a man with a confesison... do we focus on the man, the confession or both... and by the way Greek orthodox trace their bishps back to Peter... this is an aside

as far as this thread the asker might be overstating his case

well... I think Catholics would say they respect the Pope and homor his office but not worship him... so you might be overstating the case, but I think there are important points... sometimes its hard to tell if they are dealing with differences without distinctions and the Pope claimed to be the visible person in Christs place is tough for some not to act like they are worshiping him. Jesus said the poor and other chirstians were his visible pressence in another sense and the Biblical admonitions if to trat them well in additon ot treating people who geniunely represent him in teaching so its important in several ways

1) the church is built on the faith handed to the 12 Apostles
not an endless succession of apostles

If I look at the book of revelation I see the New Jerusalem built on 12 foundations, each with the name of an apostle... and obviously we have the twleve aopstles minus Judas and the 12th being Paul possibly.... I dont see an endless successtion of popes in the vision

2) individuals in the church is itself a kingdom of priests
so there is the priesthood of believers as said by Peter in his letter and as promised by God to Moses... so we should not take the scriptures or concience from individuals and relegate them to some clergy... but clergy can be very helpful if they follow and love God

3) there are stunning truths held by both protestants and catholics and I would not want to diminish them. There are things I like about Pope JPII and Pope Benedict but they sometimes latch onto humanistic evolutionaly ideas and sometimes onto ideas about Mary that can be Jesus substiitutes and gospel substitutes and take th e focus off of Jesus if they are not careful... on paper they are not suppose to be gospel substitutes but in practice?

4) the nature of grace is and willl always be a significant issue
Jesus told the apostles in the end they are unprofitable severants... in the end it is grace that takes St Peter to heaven or takes you or I and sometimes instead of letting Jesus serve us being our savior we try and buy him off with out little works instead of glorifying God leaning on His awesome work on the cross, letting Him serve us and then serve him acceptably being given the grace and cleansing and right perspective and a new heart

5) religious folk SOMETIMES lose sight of God
why do you think they crucified Jesus thinking they did God a favor? public enemy no 1 in the 15th century was Bible translators and people with saving faith in God were sometimes burnt drown or tortured even by the supposedly saintly Man for ALl seasons who had several tortured in his garden in the name of God... clearly there are in history alot of lost souls running around in serious need of God who think they are doing God big favors but are closer to the apostle Paul before his conversion when he was about the business of killing Chirstians than after when he taught grace and we all need to seek God when he can be found as hard as we can

so maybe oversting the case... but no one can doubt there are significant issues

Answer 2

+ The Pope +

Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:17-19)

The Catholic Church believes the Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock.

The Pope is the senior pastor of 1.1 billion Catholics, the direct successor of Simon Peter.

Anyone who has the presence of the Holy Spirit within them, including you and me, is considered holy. Just as the Blessed Virgin Mary is holy because God's messenger, the angel Gabriel, proclaims, "The Lord is with you."

The Pope is highly respected, but not worshiped.

+ Sources of Doctrine +

The Catholic Church does not use Holy Scripture as the only basis of doctrine. It could not. The early Catholic church existed before and during the time that the New Testament was written (by Catholics).

There were hundreds of Christian writings during the first and second centuries. Which New Testament writings would become official was not fully decided until about 400 AD.

Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit was guiding the early church (and is guiding the church today) to make the correct choices about things like:
+ The Holy Trinity (which is also only hinted at in the Bible)
+ Going to church on Sunday instead of Saturday (which is actually directly against one of the Ten Commandments)
+ Which writings include in the New Testament?
+ Who should be the next successor of Saint Peter?

Things that are even more modern like
+ Slavery is bad. Slavery is never declared evil in the Bible. This was one of the justifications for slavery in the Confederate States.
+ Democracy is good. The Bible states that either God should be the leader of the nation like Israel before the kings or kings should be the leader, "Give to Caesar that which is Caesar's." This was talked about a lot during the American Revolution.

This second source of doctrine is called Holy Tradition.

+ With love in Christ.

Answer 3

I've always wondered about this too. Why would anyone need to confess their sins to a priest when Jesus already died for all of us to freely talk to God? Catholicism kind of goes against the Pentecost when the curtain of the temple was ripped vertically in two from top to bottom... which signifies that God took down that barrier between us through Jesus. The barrier between God and us is down, so what's the deal with confession to priests and "Hail Mary" chants? And why does the Pope get so much kudos? It kind of puts popes on higher platforms than other Christians, when true Christians are all equal servants of God. The Bible says that God put Jesus' name above all others because of what he did. We are only servants to glorify God.

Answer 4

In all concerns, God the father is the appropriate Authority. We have faith that God's be conscious is composed in the two the Written be conscious as properly using fact the Sacred custom of the Church. That the Bible is the appropriate be conscious in all concerns is itself un-Biblical. Paul writes that the Church is the pillar of certainty, and Paul is going directly to exhort believers to proceed to be steadfast in the traditions that have been taught to them by making use of letter or by making use of be conscious. John writes the Gospels do not comprise all that Jesus taught and did. the 1st Gospel replaced into not written till a minimum of two an prolonged time after the Resurrection. So, what did the Early Church do for those first 2 an prolonged time? not something? look ahead to the Gospel to be written? No, the respond lies in the Oral custom. You talk as though the Bible itself is God, which of course it is not. The Pope has authority, given by making use of Jesus, to teach infallibly in concerns of religion and morals. The coaching Authority of the Church ought to in no way contradict the Bible using fact Sacred Tradtion and the Bible are mirror photos of another.

Answer 5

Did you know, that when ordained, each Catholic priest is given a tree that they can trace their ordaintion (whatever) all the way back to St. Peter? Several priests from my church have confirmed this. So, tell me, is doing the work of St. Peter, ordained by Jesus to be the one his church is built on is against Christ, then what is for him? It says in the bible, "This is Simon who I name Peter, meaning Rock. And on him shall I build my church."

Answer 6

I'm sorry that I can't answer this directly as I'm not a catholic. What I want to say is this month starting next week there will be a worldwide distribution of a tract titled "The end of the false religion is near". When you get your copy of it, read it and you will find that it very much agrees with your statements. I couldn't agree more myself. I wish you all the best in your search for a religion that conforms absolutely to the Bible and everything in it.

Answer 7

Did you happen to see this? http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Auc77xRaNxVr8h.7L3y7MdTsy6IX?qid=20061011073207AAbDYrS

If you can't get the point, you are tuned out to the rest of the world: a very dangerous and empty place to be. You wear the face of Jesus and condemn another Christian faith. Life is about the walk, not the talk. Get off your self-righteous, judgmental a$s and make a difference in someone's life. You'll need to get your hands dirty and feel others' pains; but it's much more fulfilling than standing behind a cyber-pulpit. To study the Bible all day and try to make it apply to real life, wastes the talents and time that our Creator gave us. I can only imagine how long it takes to drum up such a "thoughtful" argument against a faith that you're not even a part of. Who cares? The only "correct" way to worship is to help your fellow man and leave a legacy behind.

Edit: I am sooo glad you wrote all that (but I would have preferred you had run to Starbucks to get me a latte)! Just to recap the Kindergarten lesson for the day: 1. It's not nice to call names. 2. It's not nice to impersonate and defame (especially someone you claim to respect). 3. It's not nice to throw a thoughtfully-given gift into the trash. 4. The Bible is a book, and so is "Green Eggs and Ham." I rest my case.

Answer 8

Funny, you already know the answer, and you admit you dismiss it. Why bother asking the question then?


The answer is exactly the biblical verse you've already alluded to. "I tell you that you are Peter (latin: petros) and on this rock I will build my church."

In the original, Yshua's wording goes from second person familiar to third person formal. It is the equivalent of him saying to peter, "You're a rock" and then turns to the disciples and says, "And there's the rock I'm building my church on."

---------

So a vicar is one to whom authority is given. Jesus himself calls Peter the rock he'll build the church on. And as someone below me points out, THREE TIMES Jesus gives Peter the authority of the shepherd ("Do you love me?" "Yes." "Tend my sheep." "Do you love me?" "Yes." "Tend my sheep." "Do you love me?" "Jesus, this is starting really hurt. You know I do!" "Tend my sheep.") Peter could not be the foundation until he paid for the sin of denying Jesus three times -- by three times confessing his love for Jesus and feeling the pain of apparent betrayal (his Lord questioning him so sternly not once but three times, as if Jesus had no faith in Peter, just as Peter gave the impression of no faith in Jesus in thrice denying him).

When a King chooses a vicar, there is still only one King. Your argument of two heads holds no water.

Answer 9

We are members of The Body of Christ--The Pope is Holy because Jesus is Holy just like I am Holy or do you doubt that Jesus was Holy? If you are going to say that you don't think we are of the Body of Christ, please explain--Do you eat of his flesh or drink of his blood or do you do nothing-- or just a symbol? As far as the Pope goes -Didn't Moses ordain Joshua to lead the people after him? Do you think people did not follow Joshua because he wasn't on the mountain top with Moses when the Lord spoke to him?

Answer 10

How else were they supposed to become the religious superpower and make alot of money??? Their interpretation of what Peter was charged to do was wrong. The church that was being built was the church of Jesus Christ!
http://planttel.net/~meharris1/mikescorner.html