tzor wrote:DoomYoshi wrote:So you acknowledge that the idea of Rome being the solitary place for Peter's apostolic succession was foreign to Peter and came much later.
You seem to be hopelessly hung up on this point. I will definitely acknowledge that your strange hangup on "solitary place" comes later.
It's not a strange hangup at all. As you already acknowledged the church of Antioch has a more rightful place to have the utmost patriarch. That kind of undermines the entire papacy. Peter was only concerned with the apostolic succession of Judas. Only a Judas would be concerned with the apostolic succession of Peter.
DoomYoshi wrote:No one person has to be that keystone. Why did Jesus appoint twelve apostles? Why are all twelve promised seats in heaven judging the twelve tribes of Israel?
Twelve is important because of the twelve tribes and mostly because the number was thought to represent completeness. However Jesus does more with Peter than with the other eleven. During his ministry he gives the "keys" to Peter and then after the resurrection (post Peter's three time denial of him) he gives him the three fold commission.
Remember that Peter and the others were "apostles" (one who is sent). This differs from Overseers. There are no apostles alive today. All "public" revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle. The issue is the structure of the Overseers. If the Apostles have a hierarchy, why should the overseers not?
They don't have a definite hierarchy. Even if they did, Peter is not the beloved disciple. "So the last will be first and the first will be last".
DoomYoshi wrote:Central authority doesn't actually have anything to do with truth. The Catholic position is not based on theology. The Catholic position is that unless you acknowledge that the pope is the vicar of Christ on Earth, then you aren't a Christian. It has nothing to do with truth.
But wait a second. The term "vicar" means representative. In Catholic nomenclature all the "bishops" are representatives or "vicars" of Christ and the Pope is a bishop. No seriously, to quote from the Catechism ...
894 "The bishops, as vicars and legates of Christ, govern the particular Churches assigned to them by their counsels, exhortations, and example, but over and above that also by the authority and sacred power" which indeed they ought to exercise so as to edify, in the spirit of service which is that of their Master.
DoomYoshi wrote:As you mentioned above, there are still debates in Catholicism. One thing that is never debated is the primacy of the pope. That's the chiefest difference between Catholics and Protestants. If it was about theology, there wouldn't be that back and forth borrowing and arguing about theology. In South America and Africa, Protestants and Catholics both kill homosexuals without a trial. In North America, they don't. The Christian experience is obviously very local and always will be.
It's more than whose number one. (Primacy definition, by the way.) At least we don't say "that would be telling." The biggest difference is that Catholics have one number one and Protestants have millions of them. Every Protestant is their own Pope. Every Protestant is their own supreme authority on what has been passed down from the Apostles, only they don't care about what is passed down from the Apostles (except for a few epistles) but from the Evangelists and their own interpretation of the Old Testament.
By the way, can you give a solid link on the allegation of "Catholics" killing homosexuals in Africa without a trial? I'm pretty sure that is in violation of Catholic tradition, but obviously in the everything goes world of Protestantism it's perfectly fine for someone else to do it. Why you think that some people randomly killing other people in one part of the world and not in the other is a good thing is totally beyond me. Is there a different God in Africa and South America? I think not. God is God always and everywhere.
No Protestant is their own authority. It's not like the prescription is "read your bible, come up with your own theology and then you are a church unto yourself". It's "let the Holy Spirit guide you as you read your bible communally and come up with a theology." We do care about what was passed down by the apostles (although admittedly not all). The Ante-Nicene Fathers collection and Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers collection were both printed by and still in print, by Protestant publishing houses. The argument is that through the years the Roman Catholic church made up their own stuff and then got off course (more on this later). For example, the Donation of Constantine influenced papal policy even though it was an obvious fabrication and then there is the similar Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals which is one of the grandest fabrications in the history of the world. One of the proofs that this corruption was happening is that many monastic orders (I mean the originals, not the Orders of later) were started because the monks thought that the church was being corrupted. This isn't surprising. The corrupting influences in God's people are always there. Take the story of Exodus-Joshua. After all that happened, all the punishments, all the idolatry in the journey back to Palestine, one would think the Israelites had figured out that obeying God was something they should do. Rather, Joshua right before he dies has to tell them that maybe they should destroy the idols they brought with them from Egypt. In every generation, at all times the church is in a process of corruption and reformation. If there isn't enough reformation, the corruption takes over. Since the Roman Catholic church is so fixated on papa and so large, the reformations come slowly and the corruption takes over.
I never said it was good that Christians are killing others. I said that it was proof that the Catholic/Protestant divide isn't about theology or even practicality since you can find similar theology and worship styles across the board. I can't find any news links or whatever, but I know that it is happening through various researches and testimonies over the years.
Here's a couple articles that gives some decent information about the state of gay rights in Africa: