Roman church errors and inventions

[Photini]

about the time the church blended roman religion in with christianity and called it truth..

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

1. No, it's not a fact. It's a self-claim.

2. Let's say it's true. Peter's dead. Thus, by your own position, the church is now without any authority and has been for 1,941 years.

No, Peter gave his authority to his successors. We know from the bible that apostles were replaced (Acts 1) and that bishops and other clergy were appointed. So we see Jesus appointing the twelve and we see the twelve appointing others. This is not an opinion or claim- this is right there in the bible.

Who appoints protestant ministers? Themselves, that is who.

Jesus pointed us to God's Scriptures (over 50 times!) and promised us His Holy Spirit. He commanded US to not 'lord it over each other as the gentiles do.' He never so much as even mentioned any Pope in Rome or the Catholic Denomination. For anything. About anything. Not once. Nope.

Yet Jesus appointed twelve (who founded the Catholic Church and faith)- He didn't simply teach and leave. He left us with an authority. You just pick and choose what you want from that authority- the bible, but you reject the appointments the apostles made.

I trust the apostles and the Holy Spirit- which gave us (according to scripture) both the authority of the Church via its leaders and the scriptures. There is no denying that authority is clearly established in scripture, given to particular persons. That is why we have the bible- it was texts written by authorities.

But protestants prefer to ignore the authority Christ created and focus only on the fruit of that authority - the scriptures. Why? It should seem apparent given the 30,000 denominations and theologies out there- you can make it say whatever you will.

I follow the will of God, I follow the authority that began with Christ. I don't follow my own personal interpretation of scripture which fits my every whim and desire.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

I'll say it: Jesus left no ONE in charge - and certainly not me.
Which is where we differ from the RCC and LDS, both of which dogmatically insist that itself is in charge (exclusively, infallibly, unquestionably).

It's a conflict between the extreme individualism, institutionalism and authoritarianism of the RCC and LDS, with the humility and community of Protestantism.

Jesus gave us His Holy Scriptures, His Holy Spirit, and each other.
He never so much as even mentioned the Roman Catholic Church or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (each of those self-claims to the contrary) or the Bishop in Rome or the Council of Twelve.




Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah

I can't believe you call Catholicism individualistic over protestantism. Protestantism is individualized Christianity taken to the extreme. There is a reason there are so many protestant denominations- because there isn't a concern about community- but a concern about meeting the wants of the individual. People will drive dozens of miles to get to a church because they like the music, or the pastor. There is no communal faith- there is no agreement. The only agreement is the subjectivism of the individuals faith- they all admit they are wrong on some issues.

Protestants are funny in the sense that they irrationally hold these conflicting beliefs:
1) They read the bible objectively
2) A person's beliefs are to be based on the bible
3) But they and everyone is a little wrong when it comes to theology

That can't be the case, either everyone reads the bible and come to the same conclusions- or they read it subjectively, which is why they agree on some things and don't agree on others.

It is undeniable that protestant faith is based on subjective interpretation of scripture. If it wasn't, everyone would be in agreement. But it isn't. Subjective interpretation means people read what they want to read and what they have been taught to read to local, fallible church leaders.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

No, it's not a fact. It's a self-claim.

2. Let's say it's true. Peter's dead. Thus, by your own position, the church is now without any authority and has been for 1,941 years.

No, Peter gave his authority to his successors.

Well, that's the claim of the RCC and LDS, but it's not substantiated. It's just a remarkable, self-serving self-claim.

The fact is Peter is dead. IF your position is that Jesus gave all authority to Peter then you might find it some feet below the floor of the Vatican, where it's been for 1,941 years. Dead.

We know from the bible that apostles were replaced (Acts 1) and that bishops and other clergy were appointed.

Yes, we know that Judas was "replaced." We have no record that any of the other Apostles were (in spite of the fact that several died within the period when Scriptures were penned). And we have no indication that Matthaias had the Authority you claim was given to PETER (make up your mind, my friend). And, while it's never recorded, I'm sure you'll agree that Matthias is dead now, too.

Yes, clergy appointed clergy. They still do. Where is it stated that a clergyperson is THE infallible/unaccountable authority? And what would that have to do with the RCC Denomination? My dad is ordained, is he now THE infallible, unaccountable authority? I doubt you think so. You see, none of this argument really does a thing to support the RCC and LDS position that ITSELF is the Authority.

Jesus pointed us to God's Scriptures (over 50 times!) and promised us His Holy Spirit. He commanded US to not 'lord it over each other as the gentiles do.' He never so much as even mentioned any Pope in Rome or the Catholic Denomination. For anything. About anything. Not once. Nope.

Yet Jesus appointed twelve- He didn't simply teach and leave. He left us with an authority.

... and there's NOTHING to indicate that such is the RCC or LDS (their bold, egotistical, accountability-evading self-claims to the contrary). Jesus pointed us to God's Scriptures (over 50 times!) and promised us His Holy Spirit. He commanded US to not 'lord it over each other as the gentiles do.' He never so much as even mentioned any Pope in Rome or the Catholic Denomination. For anything. About anything. Not once. Nope.

I trust the apostles and the Holy Spirit

1. Then you are not a faithful Catholic. See your Catechism # 87.

2. You might trust 3 of the Apostles because 3 of them were penmen of some of the Scriptures (Matthew, John and Paul). But only in that sense, since all 13 of them (14 if you want to count Matthias) are dead and only 3 of them wrote anything.

3. Odd position since you have been definding the RCC as the Authority, not Scriptures (what we have from the Apostles) or the Holy Spirit.

That is why we have the bible- it was texts written by authorities.

This is not historical or even Catholic. In reality, we don't know who wrote MANY of the books of the Bible, and it's never mattered. As my priest said, "The Authority of the Bible comes from the Author - who is God." I agree with my priest. Here's what "The Handbook of the Catholic Faith" (the "explanation" book for the Catechism given to me by my Catholic teachers) states on page 136, "The Bible is the very word of God and no greater assurance can be given. The Bible was inspired by God. Exactly what does this mean? It means that GOD is the Author of the Bible. God inspired the penmen to write as God wished and God guided those penmen to write without error." The authors go on to say that the authority of the Word comes from the Author - God, and NOT the penmen (many of whom aren't even known). I agree.

But there's another critical factor. When we look to SCRIPTURE, we aren't simply looking in the mirror. But when Catholics and Mormons look at that "three legged stool" (as Mormons call it), they simply are declaring self to be the sole (and infallible and unaccountable) authority.

I don't follow my own personal interpretation of scripture which fits my every whim and desire.

The RCC does.
So does the LDS.
Each appoints ITSELF as the sole interpreter of Scripture.
Each declares ITS OWN individual interpretation as the ONLY valid and authoritative one.
Each appoints ITSELF as the sole arbiter for whether itself is correct or not (moot since each predeclares that it cannot err in matters of faith and doctrine, thus why bother investigating if it has).

There is NO ONE on the planet that stresses individual interpretation and arbitration more than the RCC (although, historically, the LDS came close - it's lately backed way off from that leaving the RCC pretty much alone).




.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

It is undeniable that protestant faith is based on subjective interpretation of scripture. If it wasn't, everyone would be in agreement. But it isn't.

List for me one denomination that is in full agreement with the Catholic Church. Seems to me your rebuke applies at least equally to that Denomination.





.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

So Peter is the comforter Jesus said that He'd send when He left?

Jesus made in plain in several locations that Peter and the Apostles were to be leaders of the church and that a hierarchy would be continued.

The Paraclete was said to remind us and protect the truth as well as be the comforter. And where is it that the Paraclete would work? In us and the Church right?

Hope you're having a good day Jack.
Things looking up in the job search?

Pretty good day. The job search looks bad but I know God has my back so I am not worried.

How are you?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

1. No, it's not a fact. It's a self-claim.

2. Let's pretend it's true. As you know, Peter's dead. Thus, your own position must be that the church is now without any authority at all and has been for 1,941 years. I find the Protestant position more biblical and reasonable.

1. Not a self claim but historical fact. This means it has nothing to do with anything I have done.

2. Peter's office is dynastic. Again this is historical fact and not from anything I have done.

As to the Protestant position I think it safe to say that you are going by your opinion as the Protestants did before you. I am content to go with what the Church has taught for 2,000 years and not something from within the last 500.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Paraclete was said to remind us and protect the truth as well as be the comforter. And where is it that the Paraclete would work? In us and the Church right?

Greetings. So you do not believe it is working in us and the Church. Not sure I understand.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

List for me one denomination that is in full agreement with the Catholic Church. Seems to me your rebuke applies at least equally to that Denomination.





.

The Catholic Church is not in division and they have many sub sets.

However... Protestantism is so diverse that they go from the far right to the far left in teachings with out any unity at all.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Greetings. So you do not believe it is working in us and the Church. Not sure I understand.

The Paraclete is here and working in the Church to do as Jesus said.

Jesus gave the Keys to his kingdom and the authority to shephard his sheep to men. The Paraclete was not said to take on any of the authority like the authority given to Peter and the Apostles. Maybe that is because the Paraclete is not a man and cannot preside over men and their squables.

 

[katholikos]

I scanned the 49 pages of 498 posts in this thread, and I wonder: Is there any point to all this? How many times can people make the same accusations, get the same answers, give the same responses, over and over and over and over and over and over again, ad absurdem ad infinitum?

I think I'm gonna root around for a thread called Protestant errors and inventions . I'll bet I find one.

 

[Rick Otto]

The Holy Ghost is God. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are all One God and so they are not the vicar of itself. That is like saying me, myself and I. That me is the vicar of myself. Kind of silly huh?

Silly analogy, yes... because the three self-referential pronouns you picked all refer to the one same person. God is three persons, right?

 

[katholikos]

I scanned the 49 pages of 498 posts in this thread, and I wonder: Is the any point to all this? How many times can people make the same accusations, get the same answers, give the same responses, over and over and over and over and over and over again, ad absurdem ad infinitum?

I think I'm gonna root around for a thread called Protestant errors and inventions . I'll bet I find one.

Well that didn't take long:
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6870283&highlight=errors

But its locked. Surprise surprise.

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=SpiritualAntiseptic;No, Peter gave his authority to his successors...
- you can make it say whatever you will."

lol,...

I follow the will of God, I follow the authority that began with Christ. I don't follow my own personal interpretation of scripture which fits my every whim and desire.

I love a surprise ending!

 

[Rick Otto]

Originally Posted by katholikos

I scanned the 49 pages of 498 posts in this thread, and I wonder: Is the any point to all this? How many times can people make the same accusations, get the same answers, give the same responses, over and over and over and over and over and over again, ad absurdem ad infinitum?

"Yo, Mistah Kay!"
While you're up, get me a copy of the latest decimal of pi.
​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well that didn't take long:
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6870283&highlight=errors

But its locked. Surprise surprise.

 

[Rick Otto]

Simple. If you do not believe Jesus left someone in charge while he is away then just say no one is in charge.

Oh,... now I get it. The Holy Spirit is no one.
So that's the way it is?
Bummer.

 

[katholikos]

Oh,... now I get it. The Holy Spirit is no one.
So that's the way it is?
Bummer.

If thats the way its supposed to work, then why are you guys divided up into thousands of denominations with contradictory doctrines?

Either the Holy Spirit can't do his job right, or thats not the way its supposed to work

 

[simonthezealot]

If thats the way its supposed to work, then why are you guys divided up into thousands of denominations with contradictory doctrines?

Either the Holy Spirit can't do his job right, or thats not the way its supposed to work

Why are you divided in two or dozens or whatever? is it a numbers game?
There where divisions long before 1054...NEWSFLASH there is only one body of Christ it consisstss of bornagain believers

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

If thats the way its supposed to work, then why are you guys divided up into thousands of denominations with contradictory doctrines?

Either the Holy Spirit can't do his job right, or thats not the way its supposed to work

We wouldn't be if your popes would have done their job right.

LLOJ shudders as he looks at the in-box......