The Accused is going to Hell (For Rejecting Catholic Dogma)

1) I’m not lying, John 21:16 doesn’t used the word “ Poimonate” but “ Poimaine”. Poimaine means two things: 1) to shepherd 2) to rule. According to context, Poimaine must mean “to shepherd” because of the context: sheep of Christ.“A Text without a context is a pretext”2) I Agree that when Peter spoke, all were silent. However, when Paul and James spoke, all were silent as well (v 12).“The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.”If my opponent is consistent in his argument then it means that Paul and James must be Popes also because of the silence.3) From your own words you said that Petrine authority was FIRST exercised in the 2nd century. I TOTALLY AGREE! My opponent just refuted his own argument. He condemned himself to Hell according to his debate based both on his very stance that Peter wasn't the FIRST one to exercise Petrine authority but a second century bishop. 4) Pro said: “again in Acts 15 we see that Paul and Barnabas, though guided by The Holy Spirit; could not authoritatively decree if circumcision was necessary…I AGREE AGAIN. It’s because the decision was left to James NOT to Peter at the Council of Jerusalem:“It is MY JUDGMENT, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God” – Acts of the Apostles 15:195) I completely concur with Christian unity. The Scriptures said: There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling;one Lord, one faith, one baptism,one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. –Ephesians 4:4-6The problem with your argument is generalization:Premise 1: X is this and thatPremise 2: Y is XConclusion: Therefore, Y is this and that too.Protestants are various churches who “protests” against Roman Catholicism and these churches also claim to be the “only one true church” founded by Christ. I agree that Jesus Christ founded only one true church and this is in unity of the core doctrines:1) Theology: The Trinity ( Matthew 28:19)2) Soteriology: Salvation from hell done by the Trinity alone ( 1 Peter 1:2)Anyone IN the one church who goes against these core doctrines are rightly called “apostates” and hence, “heretics”.Other doctrines can be followed hand in hand with the core doctrines without being “heretics”:~Romans chapter 14~Dietary issuesHoly day issues6) PATRISTIC EVIDENCE AGAINST PAPAL AUTHORITYWhen Stephen, bishop of Rome, made a claim that he was a bishop over other bishops, Cyprian called a council of 87 north African bishops specifically to deny his claim. Cyprian believed all bishops were the successor of Peter together, representing one united "episcopal throne."Cyprian was overseer ["bishop" in Greek,episkopos, literally means overseer or supervisor] of Carthage from A.D. 249 to 258. He belongs to a period 200 years after the apostles, and he was one of the first to refer to elders as priests (which may have as much to do with his writing in Latin as with his theology). But to him, and to all the bishops of north Africa, there was no pope, not even 200 years after the apostles.No one says Peter's authority was passed on until A.D. 250, when Cyprian does so, and Cyprian specifically rejects the authority of the bishop of Rome.Cyprian called the 7th Council of Carthage in A.D. 258. The council was called specifically because Stephen, bishop of Rome, had condemned the decrees of a previous north African council. There, as he introduced the council to 87 bishops of North Africa, he declared:On this matter, each of us should bring forth what he thinks … for neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his colleague to the necessity of obedience; since every bishop … has his own proper right of judgment, and can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another. (Ante-Nicene Fathersvol. V, "The Seventh Council of Carthage under Cyprian")Whether a Roman Catholic agrees with Cyprian on that or not, he is being dishonest if he quotes Cyprian on the matter of Peter's authority and then implies or suggests that Cyprian meant that the bishop of Rome had Peter's authority. Cyprian clearly states that no bishop can rule another.So what did Cyprian think happened to Peter's authority?This unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate [office of bishop] itself to be one and undivided. Let … no one corrupt the truth of the faith by treacherous deception. The episcopate is one, each part of which is held by each one for the whole. (On the Unity of the Church 5)7) APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION ARGUMENT REFUTEDNowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; 4:2).The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right.Alignment with scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow (Acts 20:32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with (Acts 17:10-12). Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession.The first church, its growth, doctrine, and practices, were recorded for us in the New Testament. Jesus, as well as His apostles, foretold that false teachers would arise, and indeed it is apparent from some of the New Testament epistles that these apostles had to fight against false teachers early on. Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church's roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given is repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the "true church" or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.For instance, in Acts 20:17-28, the Apostle Paul has an opportunity to talk to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus one last time face to face. In that passage, he tells them that false teachers will not only come among them but will come FROM them (vv. 29-30). Paul does not set forth the teaching that they were to follow the "first" organized church as a safeguard for the truth. Rather, he commits them to the safekeeping of "God and to the word of His grace" (v. 32). Thus, truth could be determined by depending upon God and "the word of His grace" (i.e., Scripture).