No. He established one "catholic" (universal) Church. It was an actual human organization, with a CEO (Peter), a hierarchical organization of other leaders, doctrines, and membership requirements.
Jesus prayed, in effect, that there NOT be rival "churches" to his organization. In John 17: "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me."
Cheers,
Bruce
2007-12-04 07:58:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bruce 7
·
6⤊
0⤋
For Protestantism to work, we have to compare the model of what we have today and try to match it with scripture. It is fits, then we’re good; if it doesn’t, then we know something is wrong. So, does it fit?
Lets examine a few basics. Protestantism relies on personal interpretation of scripture, and no outside biblical authority to interpret the sacred texts. This means they can read the bible, make their own interpretations, and teach that version to others.
Did the Apostles do that? In other words, when Jesus taught the Apostles, were they free to take what they’d learned from Him, interpret it their own way, and teach THAT version to others, OR were they only able to teach the ONE Faith set down by Jesus Christ?
OBVIOUSLY everyone knows they received and taught ONE Faith. It was not open to personal interpretation, hence the constant fights against heresy, and if anyone had a question or dispute, it was settled by the Apostles (there’s your Church authority).
Plus, we have one more detail to consider. Everything of the Protestant movement is based entirely on scripture. It is a religion of the book. What happens, then, when we look at history and find out that the bible wasn’t always there? By Protestant claims, all truth can only be found in the bible. Well, this is where history shuts it down. Jesus died in 33 AD. The first book of scripture, Thessalonians, wasn’t written until 17 YEARS LATER, around 50 AD. That’s a gap of nearly 2 decades with no written scripture! How was the faith taught? How were disputes settled? Did Christianity come to a grinding halt for 17 years until someone decided to sit down and write something on paper?
So then even before Protestants get started on comparing themselves to the early church found in scripture, they have to account for a period of time when there was NO BIBLE, a fact that completely unravels their book-based religion. Yet, in the absence of the written word, Christianity was still being taught and practiced. How was that possible?
Sacred Tradition. The Faith was preserved by the teaching authority of the Church, which Jesus gave to the Apostles, and which they handed on to their successors, all the way to our present day.
There is only one Church that can actually lay claim to having apostolic origin WITH the proof to back it up, both then and now. That is the Roman Catholic Church.
God bless.
2007-12-04 09:04:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Danny H 6
·
6⤊
2⤋
No! He established one Church - just as you quoted from Matthew 16:18.
2007-12-04 06:20:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
He authorized the beginning of His church, those known as true "Christians." Those who follow Him, are devoted to Him, and who love Him unconditionally. There are supposed to be no divisions in the Church, and yet, sadly, there are many.
1st Corinthians 1:10
2007-12-04 06:17:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by kc 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
Let me ask you something. When I can go boldly to Jesus with the Holy Spirit inside of me (Christ in me), why would I want to talk to Peter or a Pope? As long as I have the Holy Spirit in me, I have the testimony of Jesus because the Holy Spirit teaches me all things. Peter was nothing until Jesus gave him the Holy Spirit. Christ is the Rock and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against the saints carrying the testimony of Christ.
1 Corinthians 6:19
"What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?"
2007-12-04 07:14:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Jeancommunicates 7
·
1⤊
5⤋
The early churches were led by apostles in each country.
They met together regularly to resolve problems & differences.
Peter was considered the first apostle among equals.
Martin Luther (a Catholic priest) broke with this precedent.
This began the Protestant Reformation in the 17th century.
Protestants have continued to fracture over differences.
2007-12-04 06:21:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Robert S 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
You need to study the grammar and the definition of the words in Greek here. It is a Greek play on words in which Peter is called the pebble (rock), but Jesus is called the Mountain Side, Bolder (rock also).
In other passages in the Bible Jesus is referred to as the cornerstone, the foundation, the Rock (again the mountainside).
So from the context and grammar it is easily shown that Peter was not the one the Church of Jesus Christ was built upon.
2007-12-04 06:32:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by realchurchhistorian 4
·
2⤊
7⤋
Jesus named Peter as the rock forever. Many Anglicans in the US are extremely close to the Catholic faith..
Many Anglican priests have switched over to be become Catholic priests. This is return to their roots and their beliefs. God bless them..
2007-12-04 06:35:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by claire l 1
·
6⤊
2⤋
He definetly built his church to Peter on the concept that all focus's to him as he is the truth and the life no one comes to the father accept by me...
2007-12-04 06:15:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
If you actually read all of the Bible, and not just one verse, you'll learn that in Acts, Peter and Paul decide that Peter would preach to the Jews, and Paul to the non-Jews.
So, if you want to take this one verse literally, Peter established the church of Messianic Jews.
Happy Hanukkah.
2007-12-04 06:19:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by jimmeisnerjr 6
·
3⤊
5⤋