|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 1:16:49 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Truth Project
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
Once again, you put out an allegation without bothering to do any research.
Once again? Excuse me?
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 1:29:55 AM
|
|
|
Heavendweller
Posts: 295
Joined: 12/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
So I ask again who are we to believe RC or God?
Hello Kelman,
I've read your comments and first must preface my response with a request. Please don't question me with a strawman inquiry as per above. I am not Roman Catholic and I'm not proposing that you become such. However, this does not mean that I have to disparage the RCC and those who belong to that faith. It's one thing to dissent while showing common courtesy toward those with whom one disagrees. It's quite another to disagree while using insulting and discourteous remarks. The former is far more effective for dialogue.
quote:
HD said: I have read many threads on Crosswalk dealing with a plethora of doctrines and teachings. The posters, all who claim Scripture as their guide, disagree with each other regularly, sometimes ferociously. Yet, all subscribe to Sola Scriptura.
Kelman replied: No, in fact, there are many who do not subscribe to Sola Scripture. Of those who actually do adhere to this doctrine there are few differences.
Kelman, perhaps you need to review many of the threads on Crosswalk and read the moderator Ps.103's comment about moderating the Theology forums. She has been amazed at the sharp disagreement among Bible believing Christians.
I first came to this forum to get some answers for deep questions I've been struggling with. The result was that instead of finding answers, I began to ask even more questions. The varying and opposing answers to many questions about faith and salvation was astounding to me. All from Christians who claim the Bible as the sole rule of faith in their lives.
quote:
HD said: Should the Christian faith be continually re-interpreted with each successive generation?
Kelman replied: Depends on what you mean by "continually" re-interpreted. The Reformers were interested in the truth of God's Word and realized that it was being adulterated in the church of that day. So, yes this "re-interpretation" was needed and God ordained.
You are aware of, I would think, that from the beginning of the Reformation, the major reformers in the 16th C. vehemently disagreed with each other. Luther and Calvin parted ways and Zwingly was considered a heretic by Luther. The anabaptists were opposed by both Luther and Calvin because they believed in believer's baptism. In fact, Luther was extremely vicious in his comments regarding them. Yet, all of these Reformers subscribed to Sola Scriptura.
quote:
Besides, why shouldn’t God-fearing and humble theologians and teachers continue to study the truths which come from Scripture? Do those who disagree think they have received "all" that God has for us in Scripture? Are the theologians of the past infallible?....of course not. Regardless, God never lets us personally off the hook - we are to compare what we are taught to Scripture - all of Scripture.
Kelman, I'm not sure what your trying to say here exactly. I can say that Christians weren't meant to be debating and arguing about doctrine such as the nature of Christ, the Trinity, Baptism, when such things were understood and settled within the Councils as the Christian Church was being established in the first centuries of her existance. It's one thing to discuss these matters and be instructed in the faith, it's quite another to be involved in senseless controversy over matters of faith that have been firmly established. The verse that comes to mind is: "Remove not the ancient landmark that your fathers have set." Proverbs 22:28
quote:
HD said: BTW Kelman, according to your comment, Lutherans teach heresy, since they believe as Martin Luther did, in regenerational baptism.
Kelman replied: No, we are speaking of two different things. Water cannot regenerate only the Holy Spirit can. Salvation cannot be lost and all those water baptized are most certainly not saved as Scripture is quick to tell us in the account of Simon Magus.
So Kelman, you then disagree with the initial reformer, Martin Luther, of the Reformation? Hmmm....So you use Scripture and Luther used Scripture to teach about a major doctrine of the Christian faith and you both come up with two different conclusions. See what I mean about Sola Scriptura? And you would also disagree with Luther on The Lord's Supper and Confession, two other MAJOR doctrines of the Christian faith.
BTW, I found it interesting that while reading Calvin's Institutes, he vehemently opposed rebaptizing people who had been baptized in the Roman Catholic Church. And he gave plenty of Scripture to back up his reason. Yet, Reformed Baptist churches who claim to follow Calvin's teachings, and all Evangelical Protestant churches that I have been part of, re-baptize anyone who has been baptized as an infant in a Lutheran Church, Anglican Church, Methodist Church, or Roman Catholic Church. And these churches use Scripture to defend their reason for doing so.
quote:
As for Luther, his belief on the matter is actually debated. Luther spoke and wrote in a vigorous manner and he did not qualify every statement he made or, in fact, present a completed argument on all sides of the issue.
Frequently when he spoke of baptism he had in view those who did not recognize the value of water baptism. The fact that no qualifications to all that is said concerning water baptism in a given text is not proof that Luther does not admit any such qualifications. It merely proves that at the time in question they are not the focus. There's been much written which absolutely questions and rebuts Luther believed regeneration in water baptism.
Kelman, I hope you reconsider what these comments. I have attended Lutheran Bible studies as well as been instructed in the Lutheran faith. I will quote from Luther's catechism:
The Sacrament of Holy Baptism
Baptism is not just plain water, but it is the water included in God's command and combined with God's word. It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare. Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."
How can water do such great things? Certainly not just water, but the word of God with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God's word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus 3: 5-8."
Perhaps the Lutheran pastor who was instructing the class in Baptism was misinformed? Of course that would be rather difficult since he had the Catechism along with stacks of Luther's writings to prove what Luther believed.
quote:
Kelman stated: In any event, whatever Luther believed on this issue or any other is not important - he is not infallible. We have the Word of God which teaches water baptism does not save.
So even the reformers can be questioned? How do you know what doctrines they were right on and which they were wrong on? After all, Luther and Calvin were very learned men and studied the Scriptures dilligently. Should I be instructed by the Luther model, the Calvin model, the Zwingly model, the Wesley model, or choose another model altogether? And how do I know that when I have made a decision for Calvin, that Luther's teachings are actually more Scripturally sound? Or do I pick and choose a few from each faith tradition, using of course, the Bible as my sole rule of faith?
quote:
HD said: So we have many from the Reformed tradition saying that the AOG teach heresy with regard to the gifts of the Spirit and free will.
Kelman replied: Apples and oranges. AOG is not a Sola Scriptura denomination because they "do" believe in additional revelation from dreams, visions and tongues.
Really Kelman? I attended an AOG church and they most certainly had in their statement of faith that they "believed the Bible as God's written word is self-authenticating, clear for the rational reader, that Scripture interprets Scripture, and is sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine."
Now as to whether or not youagree with their claim is a different matter. They claim the same rule of faith as all the other Protestant churches I have been part of. As to believing in tongues, the gifts of the Spirit, being slain in the Spirit, or any of the other number of things you might consider unbiblical...Assemblies of God claim these things ARE Biblical and they use Scripture as their defense for their beliefs.
BTW, I looked up what Wikipedia said regarding SS. "Sola Scriptura was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by the reformer Martin Luther and is a definitive principle of Protestants today. Legacy - Sola Scriptura continues to be the doctrinal commitment of conservative branches and offshoots of the Lutheran churches, Reformed churches, Baptist churches, as well as other Protestants, especially where they describe themselves by the slogan, "Bible believing."
I think quite a few churches could fit under the heading of "off shoots, other Protestants, and Bible believing."
Heavendweller
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 2:22:27 AM
|
|
|
PeterD
Posts: 598
Joined: 4/27/2007
Status: offline
|
Why is the Pope mixing together Church and state by speaking to political leaders? And would this then make the Pope the most important man in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 2:25:50 AM
|
|
|
Heavendweller
Posts: 295
Joined: 12/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
Heavendweller: And the infightings among AOG with respect to WoF teachings. Some AOG subscribe to WoF teachings and watch TBN regularly.
Kelman: These are not valid comparisons - they do not hold to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura since they allow for additional revelation that does NOT come from Scripture. You do a disservice to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura to include churches that do not adhere to it and use that as an evidence of “differences”.
Kelman, as I have said, AOG have the same claim to the Bible being their sole rule of faith just as you do. You may not like it, but argue with them, not me. BTW, the Wesleyan faith also believes the Bible to be their sole rule of faith and final authority for Christian doctrine. Yet, they strongly adhere to Entire Sanctification, a doctrine I know you strongly oppose.
Should you suggest Wesleyans and Methodists don't adere to Sola Scriptura, then take it up with one of the professors at any Methodist or Weslayan University. I attended a Wesleyan College and am quite familiar with their strong stance regarding Sola Scriptura.
quote:
HD said:After all, who decided on the Canon of Scripture, but bishops who believed their authority to make such a decision was directly given them by our Lord Jesus Christ?
Kelman replied: No, actually it was God who "decided" what Scripture is - man does not decide. What eventually became canon became such because God's people recognized it as such as these books circulated in the various churches.
What people, Kelman? Perhaps what I've read and have been taught regarding the Councils of Carthage and Hippo is just nonsense then? These men prayed ferverently and had intense dialogue as to what books should be included and which should be excluded, due to the spurious gospels that had been in circulation at the time. IOW, they didn't just make a decision rashly or cavalierly or assuming that it was already self-evident which books were already inspired by the Holy Spirit.
God gave these Bishops this task and they took it quite seriously. And their decision was not up for grabs by any and all dissenters who were in the body of Christ and wished to argue from Scripture that there decision was wrong.
quote:
The only apostolic tradition that exists is Scripture.
Kelman, how do you know this for sure? I think that history prior to the Reformation prooves otherwise. Again, don't give me the RCC strawman arguement. I'm not saying you should submit to the Magesterium. However, you need to reconsider your view on tradition. Some verses to consider are: II Thess. 2:15, II Tim. 2:2, II Thess. 3:6, I Cor. 11:2.
quote:
And, of course, if one is a member of a church they are accountable to the spiritual leaders of that church. Maybe we have a different understanding of "accountability".
I've been a member of various Protestant churches over the course of MANY years. I didn't see much accountability at all. If one looks at the churches which the Apostles started and the Early Church of the first several centuries, the understanding of accountability was quite different than that in most Evangelical churches of today.
quote:
Perhaps yours is the RC understanding, whereby upon penalty of sin you must obey their doctrines. Whereas, we understand God gives the church no authority to make additional laws which bind men's conscience - a la the Pharisees.
I'm not RC. However, I've never known of any Christian in an Evangelical church that I've attended, whether it be AOG, Wesleyan, Reformed, non-denom., being excommunicated for serious sin.
quote:
HD said:Which again, I believe are based upon Holy Scripture, just like all the others who make the same claim. Hmmmm....something wrong with this picture?
Kelman:What appears to be wrong is you believe you are neither capable and/or desire to discern God's Word even though this is His command.[/quote]
You think you understand me? Do you know my heart? Be careful lest you judge me wrongly, Kelman. You have no idea of the inward yearnings and desires of my heart. Nor do you know how I view God's Holy Word?
quote:
HD said: These bishops could excommunicate those within the Church who were spreading heresy. I beg the question here, could any Christian attend those councils and claim to have the same authority from Jesus Christ to define Christian doctrine and condemn heresy?
Kelman: Try reading a balanced view concerning some of these councils –you’d be amazed.
I have Kelman. Tis the very reason I have found myself in a bit of a quandary. Studying church history can do that for many Protestants who have been taught to think a certain way.
quote:
HD:Could any Bible believing, Spirit-filled Christian claim they have just as much a right to this authority and therefore can make the same declarations merely because Holy Scripture is perspicuous to all believers?
Kelman: What are you talking about? Read Acts to see that ALL members of the church made the decision – not just the Apostles.
So are you saying the Apostles did not have a unique and distinctive role within the Body of Christ? Did they not have certain authority given to them by Christ that other Christians did not have? Are all eyes, are all hands, are all feet within the body of Christ? What exactly was the point of having Apostles if all Christians have the very same calling in the body of Christ?
quote:
HD:These Christians think nothing of tearing down and bringing into question matters of doctrine and teaching that were already settled by the Church in her councils within the first thousand years of Christianity.
Kelman:These "Christians" you seem to so disparage were great theologians and godly men. Thank God they tore down some "doctrines" of past centuries. What are you afraid of? God did not tell us to be blind followers - especially blind followers of those who have proven themselves to be blind.
Not afraid of anything. Never said we should be blind followers. You misunderstand me. How much do you submit to the teachings of these godly Reformers? Which teachings do you choose to submit to and which do you choose to disagree with, using Scripture as your guide?
quote:
HD: No Kelman, Doghouse is not straining at gnats
Kelman:You are welcome to "strain" right along with him - neither capable of discerning what a Christian or church is. Although, apparently interest is limited, still, the answer to the question can be found in Scripture.
You are so very kind in your responses Kelman. Where did you learn that from anyway?
quote:
HD: There was not a mentality among Christians in the early Church of "me and Jesus." Nor was there a mentality of Sola Scriptura.
Kelman:Then you are unfamiliar with Scripture which teaches Christ alone saves. It’s unfortunate you seem to think a church can somehow save you. Anyone who doesn't subscribe to "me and Jesus" is in big trouble since He and He alone is Redeemer and Mediator.
Never said a church can save me. You put words in my mouth. Gee, where did you learn to be so understanding and kind?
quote:
HD:I think each of us are responsible to God to be faithful to the light and revelation He has given us.
Kelman:Your entire post proves you believe exactly the opposite, you can't have it both ways; though, you certainly do try.
Kelman, you think you know me but you have no idea of the inward longings of my heart. You seem to think you can cavalierly make assertions about me, but you do so without wisdom and discernment. If you want to communicate with me that's fine. But please try to be more loving and forbearing. I think you'll get further that way with me and many others.
In Christ's Love,
Heavendweller
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 2:33:18 AM
|
|
|
PeterD
Posts: 598
Joined: 4/27/2007
Status: offline
|
In this world that we live in, the Pope is neccessary, since the government's are listening to him.
...And now under who's name is the Pope leading the nation's?
< Message edited by PeterD -- 4/18/2008 2:40:37 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 4:39:24 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5082
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Odeliya
To whom much is given, much will be required… I will be held responsible if I fall for unwise, unscriptural teachings of a bishop, etc. be it Protestant, Catholic, Benny Hinn - much more then uneducated,illiterate poor peasant girl of the 1 century.
You know, that is a very sobering observation. Christians were once at the mercy of those teaching them, they had no ability to check if the teaching was true or not. And, of course, we now know much of it wasn't.
We, otoh, have been given much and God expects us to use what we've been given. And yet, some on these RC threads appear to live in fear of investigating Scripture for themselves - "and search scriptures daily, whether those things were so". Someone has taught them only their superiors may tell them what is truth.
quote:
ME is the one who answers for me. Yep, and when the time arrives and God says: "this night thy soul shall be required of thee"....He won't ask your church for permission and they won't be going along for the ride.
_____________________________
beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 4:55:21 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5082
Status: offline
|
quote:
And this from someone who actually states that scripture came before the Church! How can someone ever have a rational arguement when some adhers to this kind of perspective?
And this from someone who is clueless as to what Scripture and the church actually are. I’ll try to explain the most fundamental of facts, hopefully, you’ll evidence some grasp. Scripture is simply the Gospel written down and the church stems from this Gospel without which there would be no church. Now, that wasn't so very hard was it?
And still RC has little to no use for the Word of God. Their clergy and theologians don't believe it is inerrant. But, some man they vote into a job is...go figure. They make their tradition superior to Scripture because they're fully aware their doctrines lack any biblical support...guess they gotta get some from somewhere.
quote:
Saying "recognized" is a distinction without meaning. More fundamental facts which seem to elude you. Are you seriously proposing that Christians were without Scripture until what 300AD or so? Don't be silly. By 340 Eusebius chronicles all the books of Scripture which he says have been widely circulated and read.
quote:
As for the OT you accept the authority of the Jewish authorities that rejected several books that the aposltes accepted. My, my, how cavalierly we reject the Scripture authorized by Jesus Christ and His Apostles. And, apparently Jerome agreed with Christ and the Apostles since he wrote:
"As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of the Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures...." (Prefaces to Jerome's Works, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, Daniel" Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1954, pp. 492-93)
Pity your popes don't agree with Jesus Christ, the Apostles, Jerome, et al.
quote:
So if there was no other apostolic tradition besides scripture, how did it work for 300 yrs before they were correctly identified as such? Such elementary questions so I'll take this slow for you. The Apostles preached(that would be the spoken word). Then, even while they continued to preach(still the spoken word) - they began to pen(write down) the Gospels and epistles(letters). So, these letters were circulated (that means sent around to the churches). And as can be plainly seen from the writings of Eusebius, et al, these letters were read and ACCEPTED as Scripture. And, of course, they always had the OT that Christ and the Apostles accepted as the inspired Word of God.
quote:
I would say that protestant accountability rests with the individual because people aptly point out,... Sadly, you don't understand that your accountability is before God - not your pope or your denomination.
quote:
..the individual can come to a different conclusion about scripture and reject the teachers instruction. Yeah, sure if the individual isn't brain dead he can. God won't accept: "my church made me do it", anymore then He'll accept: "the devil made me do it." or the ever popular Nuremberg lament “I was just following orders”.
quote:
But they can reject their teaching right? Yikes, you sound like you live in Nazi Germany. Your pope must have forgotten all he learned and hated about living under totalitarianism....but, I guess that's okay when it's his totalitarianism.
_____________________________
beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 5:16:37 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5082
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Heavendweller
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
So I ask again who are we to believe RC or God? Hello Kelman,
I've read your comments and first must preface my response with a request. Please don't question me with a strawman inquiry as per above. I can't address the majority of your posts now; but, hopefully tomorrow I will.
But, I will respond to the above. That was no so-called "strawman inquiry". It is a legitimate query to make in a thread entitled "Why do we need a Pope".
quote:
However, this does not mean that I have to disparage the RCC and those who belong to that faith. I reject your characterization of "disparage". I am most serious when I ask "who should we believe - God or RC". RC doctrine does not align with Scripture and I would be remiss if I pretended it did. Besides, I am not here to agree with you, RC or anyone else. I witness amazing so-called "disparaging" remarks directed toward Protestants which don't seem to greatly offend you or other RCs - this is a two-way street; and, if I am on it, I am not on it alone.
quote:
It's one thing to dissent while showing common courtesy toward those with whom one disagrees. It's quite another to disagree while using insulting and discourteous remarks. Again, I reject your characterizations. Perhaps you might scour other posts for their so-called "insulting" remarks. If you find the tenor of my posts too difficult to endure, let me know, before I bother to respond to any more of yours.
_____________________________
beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 7:58:19 AM
|
|
|
martyfran
Posts: 597
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
Once again, you put out an allegation without bothering to do any research.
Once again? Excuse me?
John
Yes, you made a claim and you provided absolutely no evidence to support your position. When people do these types of things, it makes you wonder if they are interested in learning the truth, or if they are just pushing an agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 4:03:11 PM
|
|
|
Catholicandloveit
Posts: 675
Joined: 1/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
Provide chapter and verse where it says Scripture is not the sole source of authority. Scripture is the apostolic tradition handed down to us - not the papal tradition. And when you add to Scripture and declare yourself the authority over it you do indeed invalidate Scripture.
The New Testament books were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament. There were Christians during this time even without the scripture. This alone shows there is authority before and outside of scripture.
quote:
Your posts are, in fact, filled with non-sequiturs. First, it is not "my" opinion we are capable of discerning Scripture it is God's opinion. He happens to state exactly that in Scripture. His children are commanded to “judge” all things. But as always, you are free to ignore what He says.
So if all are capable of discerning and this is from God - how can you judge anyones discernment to be wrong, if all discernment is from God - Is God wrong?
I would love to chat more about this with you but I really don't have the energy to right now. Maybe next week.
Peace - Have a nice weekend,
Mary
_____________________________
Eternal God, in whom mercy is endless, look kindly upon us and increase Your mercy in us, that in difficult moments we might not despair nor become despondent, but with great confidence submit ourselves to Your holy will, which is Love and Mercy itself.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/18/2008 6:34:50 PM
|
|
|
texastweet
Posts: 399
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Scripture is simply the Gospel written down and the church stems from this Gospel without which there would be no church. Now, that wasn't so very hard was it?
Kelman
This only demonstrates that you will use any means possible to defend a position. Here you try to redefine scripture to fit your indefensible position. Scripture as commonly used refers to the entire NT and OT. Everyone knows the Church started at Pentacost and unless you intend to say all the later written epistles and letters (oh yah and the 4 gospels) are not part of your scripture=gospel calculation then you should rethink you position. So how could the Acts of the apostles be written without being done? If the apostles decided not to write anything down would Christianity still exist?
Well you have obviously blown a fuze--to much of the Pope of tv must be considered a contributing factor...
Otis
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:53:40 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5082
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Catholicandloveit
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
Provide chapter and verse where it says Scripture is not the sole source of authority. Scripture is the apostolic tradition handed down to us - not the papal tradition. And when you add to Scripture and declare yourself the authority over it you do indeed invalidate Scripture. The New Testament books were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament. There were Christians during this time even without the scripture. This alone shows there is authority before and outside of scripture. Nope, it certainly proves no such thing. What you fail to take into consideration is that the Apostles preached the Gospel; and, then they wrote it down, so as Peter writes, we would always have the truth.
Christians were not without Scripture for centuries. Within the epistles themeselves we are told NT Scripture was already circulating. And, by 340 Eusebius chronicles the books of Scripture which he says have been widely circulated and read - exactly how the canon came into being - by the circulation and acceptance of the people of God in the churches.
quote:
quote:
Your posts are, in fact, filled with non-sequiturs. First, it is not "my" opinion we are capable of discerning Scripture it is God's opinion. He happens to state exactly that in Scripture. His children are commanded to “judge” all things. But as always, you are free to ignore what He says.
So if all are capable of discerning and this is from God - how can you judge anyones discernment to be wrong, if all discernment is from God - Is God wrong? Being "capable" of discerning truth from Scripture does not mean we always do so correctly. No one discerns correctly all the time. Instead of asking "Is God wrong" when He says we can know the truth of Scripture, why not just believe Him; and then set out to do exactly that?
quote:
Peace - Have a nice weekend, Thank you, Mary....hope you have/had a nice one also.
_____________________________
beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:55:23 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5082
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
Scripture is simply the Gospel written down and the church stems from this Gospel without which there would be no church. Now, that wasn't so very hard was it? Kelman
This only demonstrates that you will use any means possible to defend a position. Nope, what it actually demonstrates is the relationship of the Gospel, Scripture and the church to one another. And, of course, I use the very acceptable defense of truth...well, acceptable to some, that is.
I'm fully aware of your inability to understand the relationship of the Gospel, Scripture and the church.....hmm, perhaps if you turned off your TV?
_____________________________
beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 9:38:16 AM
|
|
|
Mannamuncher
Posts: 4317
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: online
|
The un-Jesus like extravaganza of the
papal pomp is repulsive to some folk.
Many ask me (knowing I was RC), what is up
with the all the pagentry and parade atmosphere ?
Unbelievers look at the pope and just grimace...
So, this is what religion is all about ?
This over-dressed man represents Jesus Christ ?
The pope is meaningful to the RCC exclusively.
80 % of the world tolerates his high opinion of
himself, and the 20 % that pledge allegiance to
the RCC, accept their own individual preferences.
Who really agrees with pope, other than clergy ?
Maybe he should turn in his resignation...
_____________________________
A wicked and deceitful heart cannot discern itself.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 11:31:10 AM
|
|
|
martyfran
Posts: 597
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mannamuncher
The un-Jesus like extravaganza of the
papal pomp is repulsive to some folk.
Many ask me (knowing I was RC), what is up
with the all the pagentry and parade atmosphere ?
Unbelievers look at the pope and just grimace...
So, this is what religion is all about ?
This over-dressed man represents Jesus Christ ?
The pope is meaningful to the RCC exclusively.
80 % of the world tolerates his high opinion of
himself, and the 20 % that pledge allegiance to
the RCC, accept their own individual preferences.
Who really agrees with pope, other than clergy ?
Maybe he should turn in his resignation...
Manna,
Are you interested in the truth, or are you just pushing an agenda?
You claim the pope is overdressed. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I notice that you fail to cite any scripture to support your claim. The question then becomes, why should we care about your opinion. Your opinion has no more weight than anybody elses, which means that you are falling victim to a subjective morality. The pope is immoral because you don't like how he's dressed.
You then claim that nobody other than clergy supports the pope. Ok, provide the evidence. Show us that nobody in the world, other than ordained Catholic priests and bishops agrees with the pope.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:03:26 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Truth Project
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
Once again, you put out an allegation without bothering to do any research.
Once again? Excuse me?
John
Yes, you made a claim and you provided absolutely no evidence to support your position. When people do these types of things, it makes you wonder if they are interested in learning the truth, or if they are just pushing an agenda.
Post it... Or retract...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:20:10 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1711
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeterD
Why is the Pope mixing together Church and state by speaking to political leaders? And would this then make the Pope the most important man in the world.
Peter:
The popes have always mixed together church and state. That's how "the Holy Roman Empire" was created and propagated. At that time, the pope was indeed "the most important man in the world". Emperors literally kissed his feet.
However, this is contrary to the teachings of Christ, who said that His Kingdom is not of this world. The papacy is an unauthorized usurpation of the authority of Christ, and will be judged accordingly.
Christ will certainly set up His righteous Kingdom on this earth after He has wiped out the unrighteous kingdom of the Vatican (which is located in the city that sits on seven hills). Read the book of Revelation.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:28:40 PM
|
|
|
martyfran
Posts: 597
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
and its leader is a man... Good luck...
John
John,
Here is the claim you made. What this uninformed comment ignores, is that the Pope's have taught that Jesus Christ is the head of the Church. Yes, Jesus did set Peter apart, to be the earthly head of the Church. That is clearly taught in scripture. But as far as the ultimate head of the Church, that is Jesus Christ. You would have realized this if you had bothered to do a little research first.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 1:47:59 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Truth Project
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
and its leader is a man... Good luck...
John
John,
Here is the claim you made. What this uninformed comment ignores, is that the Pope's have taught that Jesus Christ is the head of the Church. Yes, Jesus did set Peter apart, to be the earthly head of the Church. That is clearly taught in scripture. But as far as the ultimate head of the Church, that is Jesus Christ. You would have realized this if you had bothered to do a little research first.
I don't agree with your your church teaching and it's error regarding Scriptures... I don't believe Jesus is the leader of the Roman Catholic Church simply because they or you say so... I don't have to post a reason for each and every claim I make, though if asked I should and would... You have NO idea how much research I have done, or the fact that most of days in school were at a Catholic one...
Bottomline we don't agree, that doesn't make my(or yours) claims and or thoughts uninformed...
John
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 2:13:46 PM
|
|
|
martyfran
Posts: 597
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
I don't agree with your your church teaching and it's error regarding Scriptures... I don't believe Jesus is the leader of the Roman Catholic Church simply because they or you say so... I don't have to post a reason for each and every claim I make, though if asked I should and would... You have NO idea how much research I have done, or the fact that most of days in school were at a Catholic one...
Bottomline we don't agree, that doesn't make my(or yours) claims and or thoughts uninformed...
John
John
Of course, I don't agree with your church either, and it's error regarding the scriptures. And of course, that is one thing that we can agree on, that your pastor teaches error when it comes to scripture. Because, your pastor certainly is not infallible, and so he cannot help but get things wrong on occaision.
Now, my response to your earlier claim would have been different if you had prefaced things by stating that you were giving an opinion. The way you worded things, you made it sound as if you were stating a fact. And of course, there is no evidence to support your claim as a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 2:58:20 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Truth Project
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: martyfran
Of course, I don't agree with your church either, and it's error regarding the scriptures. And of course, that is one thing that we can agree on, that your pastor teaches error when it comes to scripture. Because, your pastor certainly is not infallible, and so he cannot help but get things wrong on occaision.
Yet I don't claim to be in the one true Church...
quote:
Now, my response to your earlier claim would have been different if you had prefaced things by stating that you were giving an opinion.
I am under no obligation to support my each and every claim when made... If asked, yes...
quote:
The way you worded things, you made it sound as if you were stating a fact.
Huh? No... You took it that way so you could go on your crusade against supposed "allegation(s) without bothering to do any research"
quote:
And of course, there is no evidence to support your claim as a fact.
Fact or your opinion?
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 3:30:09 PM
|
|
|
Heavendweller
Posts: 295
Joined: 12/22/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeterD
Why is the Pope mixing together Church and state by speaking to political leaders? And would this then make the Pope the most important man in the world.
Peter:
The popes have always mixed together church and state. That's how "the Holy Roman Empire" was created and propagated. At that time, the pope was indeed "the most important man in the world". Emperors literally kissed his feet.
However, this is contrary to the teachings of Christ, who said that His Kingdom is not of this world.
Even the Reformers, Luther and Calvin, mixed church and state and resorted to the government and the politics of the day to have whom they considered heretics, punished. There was no Western rubric as we know it in Europe at the time.
Why? Because the only governments that existed at the time in Western Europe were monarchies. There was no such thing as a Democratic Republic as we know it in the United States today. So it was that England after the English Reformation and separating from the Roman Pontificate, punished and put to death heretics.
Christianity has a scarred past.
Heavendweller
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 4:37:42 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1172
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
The papacy is an unauthorized usurpation of the authority of Christ, and will be judged accordingly. Actually - all are judged by their works relative to their gifts. So thankfully, the Pope will not be subject to the random standard of some earthly person, but to the right and just standard determined by God...
_____________________________
The dog regularly reads Atlantic Monthly
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 6:13:24 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Truth Project
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
quote:
The papacy is an unauthorized usurpation of the authority of Christ, and will be judged accordingly. Actually - all are judged by their works relative to their gifts. So thankfully, the Pope will not be subject to the random standard of some earthly person, but to the right and just standard determined by God...
If that's the case I be sure to stay out of the collateral damage area if the pope is ever close to where I live...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/19/2008 10:48:53 PM
|
|
|
PeterD
Posts: 598
Joined: 4/27/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeterD
Why is the Pope mixing together Church and state by speaking to political leaders? And would this then make the Pope the most important man in the world.
Peter:
The popes have always mixed together church and state. That's how "the Holy Roman Empire" was created and propagated. At that time, the pope was indeed "the most important man in the world". Emperors literally kissed his feet.
However, this is contrary to the teachings of Christ, who said that His Kingdom is not of this world. The papacy is an unauthorized usurpation of the authority of Christ, and will be judged accordingly.
Christ will certainly set up His righteous Kingdom on this earth after He has wiped out the unrighteous kingdom of the Vatican (which is located in the city that sits on seven hills). Read the book of Revelation.
Hello Ezra,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Rome
The city of Constantinople (now Istanbul) was built on seven hills, after the city of Rome.
In its long history, Istanbul served as the capital city of the Roman Empire (330-395), the Byzantine Empire (395-1204 and 1261-1453), the Latin Empire (1204-1261), and the Ottoman Empire (1453-1922).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Hill
Did the Pope of Rome come into being from a power struggle, not church related meaning politics?
Revelation 17:9
9 This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; (ESV)
Their seems to be a great power located in the city that sits on seven hills.
What does the Pope say about these seven mountains which the woman is seated;?
PeterD
< Message edited by PeterD -- 4/20/2008 12:01:00 AM >
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
