counterfeit christianity, page-36

evening snuff,

"One of the ironies of all this is that you rely on the Authority of a corrupt pagan body (your view) to canonise the Book you rely on! How can you trust it?"

?

"While you may reject what the Catholic Church says, the Gospels are clear about the role of Peter, Jesus chose him to lead."

Snuff,thats not what the question is here,there is no doubt that Peter was a leader

Please dont put up straw men and proceed to tear them down

The issue is,was peter the rock on which Jesus would make the foundation of his church

the unequivical answer,is NO

The bible is clear,as i quoted,that the fact that jesus is the son of god(a fact of which the catholic church denies his pre existent sonship)math16.16


"Why then would he leave no mechanism for leading the church into the future? Would he abandon us after saying I will be with you to the end of time"

Again,your changing the subject here,that isnt the question,that is another question irrelevant to the subject under discussion

If what you are saying is true,and it was peter who was the rock on which jesus was to build his church,and the gates of hell would not prevail against it(peter and the church)

Then please answer this question

Soon after jesus made this statement you say is inducting peter as the head of the church

Why did peter deny christ three times before the sun arose,when the cock crowed three times

The gates of hell did prevail against him

" One is then expected to believe that every Bishop of Rome after Peter is not of the Church, they have been following a pagan belief for 2000 years! I think this presents problems for your position because you still have to point to the Church of Christ through history, that historical Church established by the Apostles. We say it is the Catholic Church"

No,not at all,snuff

Surely,even you are aware of how papal rome historically came out of pagan rome,are you denying this fact?

i have no problems presenting the history of true christianity and its linage to you

1 Firstly,most importantly,catholocism is not justifiable from the scriptures

2 Directly disobeys scripture and holds tradition above scripture,which is the opposite to what christ taught

3 Easily pointed out and proved,how pagan rome adopted christianity by name only,and transferred all her pagan rituals and practices and just gave them christian names etc

"While you may reject what the Catholic Church says"

Certainly do,why should i accept anything religious from a historically from a pagan entity?Give me the scripture to prove your points,not opinion please snuff

"You will be pleased to know that Faith is a gift, as Peter experienced it when Jesus told him he would be the solid Rock of his church."

Yes thats what you have been taught,rome has always said"give me the boy and ill show you the man".The above quote from you is an assumption based on man made opinion not the bible as we have proved

"I might also add my point about the Orthodox Church, they believe as Catholics do, there is very little difference except for the leadership of the Pope"

Yer,i agree

But so what?

Whats that got to to do with anything we are discussing?

"I still want the history of your position pointed out to me – and I do not mean the odd event here and there, as occurred with the Albigensians"

Just because it dosent suit you about the albergensis waldensis etc,dosent mean its here and there just because you dont understand the subject,your view dosent match up with history nor scripture when you say peter was the rock,rome was still pagan rome and continued to be so well after christ spoke to peter,your view is based on what your church has told you happened

Rather than testing to see what they tell you is true,you just accept it as fact