Restore Living

Not every familiar thought is true. Biblical renewal means bringing our assumptions beneath God’s Word and allowing truth to reshape how we live. Romans 12:2 #RestoreLiving #RenewYourMind #BiblicalTruth

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC The difference is this: I submit my beliefs to the authority of God's inspired Word. You submit Scripture to the authority of sacred tradition. That's the fundamental difference between us.

@SteelMcSolid @RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Nobody is excusing behavior that is unchristian. Just citing how God still has His church here today regardless of it. :) You assume authority you do not have

Spanish Cardinal Varela calls for restoring traditional liturgy after Vatican II reforms have turned Masses into a "parody" of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. signofthecrossmedia.com/news/spanish-c…

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Jesus calls Peter Petros (a stone), but says, "upon this rock (petra) I will build My church." Regardless of how one interprets "the rock," the passage never teaches papal succession or infallibility.

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Matthew 16:18–19 — Peter is given the “rock” role and the keys:
“on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it… I will give you the keys…”

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Jesus prayed for Peter because Peter was about to deny Him. After his restoration, Peter was to strengthen his brothers. That's a beautiful commission—but where does the passage teach papal infallibility or successors in Rome?

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Luke 22:31–32 — Christ prays that Peter’s faith may not fail, and then commands him to strengthen his brethren:
“I have prayed for you that your own faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC John 21 restores Peter after his denial and commissions him to shepherd Christ's flock. Peter later gives the same charge to other elders - and calls himself a "fellow elder," not the supreme head of the Church. Where does Scripture teach this office would pass to successors?

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC John 21:15–17 — Christ commissions Peter to feed Christ’s flock (“lambs” and “sheep”): this is the NT commission connected with Peter’s pastoral authority

Christ offers more than escape. He offers Himself: “Come unto me… and I will give you rest.” Rest begins not merely by stopping, but by coming to Jesus. Matthew 11:28 #RestoreLiving #RestInChrist #ComeToJesus

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC That's the claim. The question is where Christ promised Peter or any successor personal infallibility when defining doctrine. Luke 22:32 and Matt. 16:18 don't say that. Can you show the passage?

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC On that, Catholic teaching holds Christ’s promise to Peter assures protection from error in that defined case.

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC The question isn't whether someone later taught it, but whether Christ or the apostles did. Papal infallibility (1870) the Immaculate Conception (1854), and the Assumption (1950) became binding dogmas centuries later. Where are they taught in Scripture? (Gal. 1:8; Acts 17:11, KJV

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Again, cite what Gospel teaching the Catholic Church has changed. Cite it. Show me in Christian History where it was taught differently.

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC "Infallible" and "bad pope" sit uneasily together. If a pope can be gravely wrong in his conduct, how do we know his claimed doctrinal infallibility comes from Scripture rather than later tradition?

@SteelMcSolid @RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Bad popes existed just like bad kings, presidents, and pastors in every group. But Catholic teaching holds that the Holy Spirit protects defined doctrines on faith & morals from error, even if the pope is personally sinful. No ‘bad pope’ ever successfully changed core dogma.

@Xavier_DMercy Peace be with you all. I encourage everyone to test every doctrine by the inspired Word of God. May we all seek His truth above every tradition. God bless.

@RestoreLiving Read this: catholic.com/magazine/print…

Hebrews 9:23 teaches that "the heavenly things themselves [are purified] WITH BETTER SACRIFICES THAN THESE". Malachi 1:11 teaches Pure Offerings or Sacrifice, with Incense, will be Universal in the New Covenant, and will be offered from Dawn to Dusk around the Globe everywhere, as now happens in the Catholic/Universal Church, and the Didache of the 12 Apostles applies this Bible Prophecy to the Eucharist.

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Peace be with you all. I encourage everyone to test every doctrine by the inspired Word of God. May we all seek His truth above every tradition. God bless.

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC meaning the Mass is not another bloody atonement. It is the one sacrifice of Christ celebrated as a memorial and thus reaching believers in real worship

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC I believe Christ is truly present with believers, but I do not believe the bread and wine become His literal body and blood. The Lord's Supper is a sacred memorial and proclamation of His once-for-all sacrifice (1 Cor. 11:26; Heb. 10:10–14).

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Do you believe the Real Presence of the Eucharist? Yes, No or I’m not sure?

@Xavier_DMercy The Didache is an important historical document, but it isn't inspired Scripture. If the apostles intended the Eucharist to be Christ's sacrificial offering, where do they teach that in the New Testament? That's the authority I'm asking for.

Here is “clear apostolic teaching” that interprets Malachi 1:11 as referring to the Eucharist as a sacrificial offering met directly by the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), one of the earliest post-New Testament Christian documents (generally dated late 1st century, often 50–100 AD). It is widely regarded as preserving apostolic tradition and practice from the communities of the apostles. Here is the relevant text from Didache 14:“On the Lord’s Day of the Lord gather together, break bread and give thanks [celebrate the Eucharist], after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until they are reconciled, lest your sacrifice be defiled. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: ‘In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.’” (quoting Malachi 1:11, 14) The Didache explicitly: (1) Calls the Eucharistic gathering (breaking of bread and thanksgiving) (2) a sacrifice (Greek: thusia). (3) Requires confession and reconciliation so that the sacrifice remains pure. Directly applies Malachi 1:11 (“a pure sacrifice… in every place… among the nations”) to this Christian practice. This is not a later medieval development. It is an early witness, close to the apostolic era, showing that the first generations of Christians already understood the Eucharist as the pure offering prophesied in Malachi—offered by the nations in every place, replacing the old Temple sacrifices. Later writers such as Justin Martyr (mid-2nd century) continue the same interpretation, but the Didache already provides the clear, early linkage.

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC You're assuming the only alternative is a "mere symbol." I believe the Lord's Supper is a sacred memorial and proclamation of Christ's once-for-all sacrifice (1 Cor. 11:26), not a sacramental re-presentation of that sacrifice. Where do the apostles teach otherwise?

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC You believe it is a symbol only I assume. That was not taught until 1525 by a man with no Apostolic Authority.

@Grim_Dutch @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC The apostles entrusted the Church with preserving and teaching the gospel—not changing it. Their inspired writings remain the standard by which every later teaching must be tested (Gal. 1:8; Acts 17:11).

@RestoreLiving @SteelMcSolid @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC I’m happy to hear you find Ignatious valuable with his teachings. You cite the Apostles authority but deny the Authority they pass on in Christ’s church. Some of them were directly discipled by an Apostle. You do not think we should listen to them?

@Xavier_DMercy Hebrews isn't my only authority—it's part of God's inspired Word. If Malachi 1:11 prophesies Christian worship, where do the apostles interpret it as the Eucharist being Christ's sacrificial offering? I'm asking for clear apostolic teaching.

Hebrews is not the only Book in the Bible. Any answer to Malachi 1:11? Also, Christ's Literal Words at the Last Supper can better be translated, "Offer this as My Memorial Offering/Memorial Sacrifice". Look it up. Hebrews mainly discourages Animal Sacrifices, but it itself says there are "better sacrificeS than these", showing Sacrifices in the Plural, the Holy Masses. Hebrews 13:10 also says: "we have an Altar from which they (non-Christian Jews) have no right to eat" showing the Lamb's Supper is also the Lamb's Sacrifice.

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC The Bereans didn't ask whether a teaching was old; they searched the Scriptures to see whether it was so (Acts 17:11). That's still my standard.

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Hello 👋 I think you mistake want I am doing. I answered your question. I follow a teaching that is almost 2000 years old. I believe in Apostolic Succession/authority and do not follow theology/teachings that are about 500 years or less old. Peace be with you

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Christ's sacrifice was once for all (Heb. 10:10–14)—past, present, and future. Its saving power reaches every believer in every age without being made present again as a sacrificial offering. Where do the apostles teach otherwise?

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is complete and sufficient precisely because the Mass does not add to it or repeat it as if the Cross were unfinished. Instead, the Eucharist makes that one sacrifice present “ever anew” so that its saving fruits can reach believers in every age.

@Grim_Dutch @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC I keep quoting Hebrews. You keep quoting Church Fathers and the Catechism. Why not simply show me where the apostles teach the Mass as a sacramental offering? That's the authority I'm asking for.

@RestoreLiving @SturdyTruth @CatholicSOTC The Catechism the Eucharist is “the memorial of Christ’s Passover, the making present and the sacramental offering of his unique sacrifice.”