[Roneyslelry]

The New Testament?

[Pheboasmabs]

My dad's a big fan of Chesterton. Lewis is good too, he was always excellent at popularizing the theology.

[Quiniacab]

Start with Mere Christianity.

C.S. Lewis really is the best. Chesterson is also good.

I'd also go with Scott Hahn, and his book "Rome Sweet Home".

Politically Correct Death by Francis Beckwith is also helpful too.

[Nigeopire]

Yes, his Confessions is very good!

Thanks for that addition.

[Andromino]

I'm not sure. I've encountered many protestants who say that Catholics are not 'true' Christians.

Catholics are Christians, first and foremost.

[gardenerextraordinaire]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I'm not sure. I've encountered many protestants who say that Catholics are not 'true' Christians.

Catholics are Christians, first and foremost. Yeah. It's weird. I have no explanation for this (if it is truely happening.) Thanks, Ben.

[GSgCGxsF]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I'm not sure. I've encountered many protestants who say that Catholics are not 'true' Christians.

Catholics are Christians, first and foremost. Messianic Jews are first and foremost christians.
After that all heathen-christians follow, both catholics and non-catholics.

Catholics are no more or less catholics then protestants or orthodox or whatever else there is.

[CarrieSexy]

Catholics are no more or less catholics then protestants or orthodox or whatever else there is. Sigh. English idioms.

"first and foremost" means that we are Christians first, Catholics second.

[Weislenalkata]

Originally posted by The diplomat
He can't. It would disprove his Catholic theology. Why do you think I suggested it?

(Oh wait, you're not a Protestant or something, right?)

[Wrencytet]

Originally posted by The diplomat


He can't. It would disprove his Catholic theology.
How can something written by Chatolics disprove their theology?

[Anfester]

Well, in truth we are the first ones. I don't see how protestants could claim to be first, when all of their founders were at one time ordained Catholic priests.

[CKDIWEQ]

The Catholic church didn't exist at the time of the apostles, none of today's organized churches were. Not that it matters anyway, all churches are after all part of the REAL worldwide Church, which is Christ's body, the sum of all believers. So Apostle Peter wasn't the first pope?

[Corporal White]

He was the first bishop of Rome, but the Catholic church and the office of pope as it has become, did not exist.

[BamSaitinypap]

He was the first bishop of Rome, but the Catholic church and the office of pope as it has become, did not exist. Oh ok. So who was the first pope then?

[DYjLN8rF]

From Wikipedia:

Ignatius of Antioch
A letter written by Ignatius to Christians in Smyrna [2] around 106 is the earliest surviving witness to the use of the term Catholic Church (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8). By Catholic Church Ignatius designated the Christian Church in its universal aspect, excluding heretics, such as those who disavow "the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again" (Smyrnaeans, 7). He called such people "beasts in the shape of men, whom you must not only not receive, but, if it be possible, not even meet with" (Smyrnaeans, 4). The term is also used in the Martyrdom of Polycarp in 155 and in the Muratorian fragment, about 177. This does not conform with my memory of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. IIRC, the Roman Catholic Church broke with the Byzantine's Eastern Orthodox Church. When a huge Orthodox Army showed up in Italy looking to kick the Catholic Church's butt, a Latin Cross appeared in the sky, and the Catholics were so heartened by this, they trounced the Orthodox Army.

[nuabuncarnigo]

Originally posted by Felch
That doesn't explain how it would disprove the theology. I think you may be underestimating the rigorous logic applied to Catholic doctrine. Many important Catholic doctrines are either not found in the NT or are clearly contradicted by the NT, like purgatory, papal authority, indulgences, praying to Mary and dead saints.

[WapSaibian]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Oh ok. So who was the first pope then? I don't know. Not any of the bishops before the pope became the pope, so to speak. The Catholic church grew slowly into what it is today, in the beginning after the apostles, the Church had no higher hierarchy as it has in nearly all churches today. It took a while before the patriarchates around the med grew to prominence and even longer before the pope became the sole head of the church. But I believe you knew this already?

[worldofwarcraft]

I don't know. Then why can you say for sure that Peter was not the Pope?

Not any of the bishops before the pope became the pope, so to speak. So it should be simple. One of the bishops had to call himself the pope. Which one? There's a whole list.

The Catholic church grew slowly into what it is today, in the beginning after the apostles, the Church had no higher hierarchy as it has in nearly all churches today. 'nearly all churches'? You mean all 'protestant churches'?

Half of all protestant churches don't even believe in the concept of ecclesiastical territories, or even Bishops. You need to clarify what you mean.

Today, there is no consensus on how the church ought to be ordered. If you believe that Apostle Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, then that means there was a specific heirarchy very early on in the life of the church.

It took a while before the patriarchates around the med grew to prominence and even longer before the pope became the sole head of the church. But I believe you knew this already? I'm not sure you do. Peter was given authority over the other Apostles, by Christ himself. Peter, as you acknowledge was Bishop of Rome. Ergo, the office of the pope was instituted in Rome upon his appointment as Bishop of Rome.

It is true that there were other patriarchs, representing significant Christian communities, Eusebius records 4 besides Rome at the start of the 4th century, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople. This in no way negates the primacy of the See of Peter in Rome.

[FYvWldC0]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Then why can you say for sure that Peter was not the Pope? He was the first bishop of Rome. I did some checking, turns out the first bishop of Rome to call himself pope, was Boniface III in 607:

The Bishop of Rome is the bishop of the Holy See, more often referred to in the Catholic tradition as the Pope. The first Bishop of Rome to bear the title of "Pope" was Boniface III in 607, the first to assume the title of "Universal Bishop" by decree of Emperor Phocas. Earlier Bishops of Rome are customarily extended the title Pope as a courtesy, except in strict historical discourse.


'nearly all churches'? You mean all 'protestant churches'?

Half of all protestant churches don't even believe in the concept of ecclesiastical territories, or even Bishops. You need to clarify what you mean.

Today, there is no consensus on how the church ought to be ordered. If you believe that Apostle Peter was the first Bishop of Rome, then that means there was a specific heirarchy very early on in the life of the church. Most churches, and then I mean churches as in the Catholic Church, the different Protestant churches, the Orthodox churches and so on, have a highly developed form of hierarchy. Not all of them, which were why I wrote that. But in the early history of the church, each Christian community was bonded much more loosely than today or say 400 AD. The Pope was in the beginning no more powerful than the other "grand bishops", like the patriarchs of Alexandria, or Constantinople for example. But look, I'm not here to squabble with you, just so you don't misunderstand that.

I'm not sure you do. Peter was given authority over the other Apostles, by Christ himself. Peter, as you acknowledge was Bishop of Rome. Ergo, the office of the pope was instituted in Rome upon his appointment as Bishop of Rome.

It is true that there were other patriarchs, representing significant Christian communities, Eusebius records 4 besides Rome at the start of the 4th century, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople. This in no way negates the primacy of the See of Peter in Rome. Well, this is one place you as a Catholic and I as a Protestant disagree. We don't see the authority given to Peter as something that automatically is inherited by others.

[Tibaveriafark]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Are you going to answer my question Diplomat?

When was the first bible published? How is this relevant? We know the NT was written between 50 and 100 AD, long before the Catholic Church was around. What matters is what the apostles actually wrote. The teachings of purgatory, indulgences etc were created by the Catholic Church and did not originate with the teachings of the Apostles.

You say that you do not understand Sola Scriptura. It is quite simple. The Word of God is the ultimate authority. How can the words of the Pope who is a mere man be made equal to God's word? It is impossible.

2 Tim 3:16-17
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

The Apostle Paul makes it clear that the Word of God teaches the Christian what we need to know and thoroughly equips us.