Titles

[cubanito]

well Paul does say to the Corinthians that they may have ten thousand teachers but only he has begotten them in Jesus Christ and that they are to imitate him.

Imitate me, Paul, not somebody I appoint in my stead.

JR

 

[jckstraw72]

Imitate me, Paul, not somebody I appoint in my stead.

i was responding to this:

Can anyone here in CF picture the Apostle taking the title "Pontifex Maximus" or say "Peter the Great", or "James the Great", or "Paul the Great"? Its just not there in the Bible, because the Apostles were humble men who exalted Jesus, not themselves over their brethren.

so after the Apostles died was the Church supposed to have no visible leaders?

 

[cubanito]

My RC daughter is these days most upset with the current occupant of the "Holy See." According to her, and I really don;t know if it is true, "His Benedictine Magnifinex" blessed a fleet of Ferraris.

So perhaps now we can add "Mechanicus Supremo" to the list

but on the other side...

What of the titles assumed by the Protestant clergy? I am an active PresbyPCA, so I will now pick on my own to show it is not merely the RC that is knee deep in self-adulation.

What exactly is there to revere in a Reverend, praytell? Are not Scriptural titles like "minister", "sheherd" or even "elder" quite enough? And oh yeah, what about the "Westminster Divines?"

JR, thrower of stones in every direction

 

[ThreeAM]

Then let us call to mind EG White, that woman who called herself a prophetess. Has she not prophesied falsely? Has this not been proven repeatedly? Yet some of her progeny carry on her scorched earth campaign against all things Latin, as if she had not been revealed to be a false prophet, and as if they have a leg to stand on.

None of us do, really.

1. EG White is not the subject of the OP and so it is OT to bring her into the discussion.

2. EG White NEVER refered to herself as a prophetess. I challenge you to PM me with a quote from her where she refered to herself as a prophetess.

3. I would also point out that EG White lived a very humble and modest lifestyle as opposed to the lavish lifestyle of the Papacy.


James you are about as acurate here as you were on the calendar post.

 

[Redwolf]

In point of fact, it is the office which is invested with honor, and the Holy Saints of God after their death. Ironically, the quality that makes a true Saint is humility. Once again, a Saint who is honored is honored for Christ, in the manner He spoke of "Let your light so shine before men that they might see your good deeds and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. I give glory to God for James the Brother of the Lord, known in his day as "James the Just."

Paul did describe himself as 'equal to the apostles.' Moses described himself as "the most humble man on earth." Nehemiah wrote "remember me O God for all my good."

As much as I disagree with Rome on important issues, and as much as I object to pontiff maximus in the same manner that I object to papal primacy, I am not convinced or even persuaded that Roman popes take such titles 'to themselves.'

Then let us call to mind EG White, that woman who called herself a prophetess. Has she not prophesied falsely? Has this not been proven repeatedly? Yet some of her progeny carry on her scorched earth campaign against all things Latin, as if she had not been revealed to be a false prophet, and as if they have a leg to stand on.

None of us do, really.

So, you agree with all this pope is god stuff? Don't you wonder about how the REAL GOD might feel about that? May be He thinks that's blasphemy?

So, here we see that it was not God who gave the pope his goodies, it was Constantine, who was the first holy roman emperor. Straight from pagan, to holy roman.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] "...superior papal authority and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #19, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] "...the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man." Pope Nicholas I, quoted in History of the Councils, vol. IX, Dist.: 96, Can 7, "Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para", by Labbe and Cossart.[/FONT]


Here's a better than vague idea of what blasphemy is:

Main Entry: blas·phe·my
Pronunciation: 'blas-f&-mE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mies
1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable

Isn't that something?

 

[cubanito]

i was responding to this:



so after the Apostles died was the Church supposed to have no visible leaders?

Infallible leadrs no, for this we have the Comforter (the Holy Spirit) and the written Word.

Temporary, fallible ones yes, and as the Orthodox point out, a multitude of them, as it was from the begining, when Paul could call Peter to task on equal footing, calling Peter hypocrite to his face.

JR

 

[linssue55]

1. Titles for the Pope do not detract from the praise due to God.
Not so! Look at ALL the people that believe this, and follow it everyday. Praising idols of the flesh.
--praising someone or an office does not make it an idol. WORSHIPPING them, or it, does. Now who in the RCC WORSHIPS the Pope?


2. No one denies that Popes are sinners.
MANY do!
--WHO?! Papal Infallibility has NOTHING to do with sin


3. To judge some of them as worse sinners should not be done. We are all sinners, and we dont know their hearts, nor the hearts of anyone else to compare them to.
We are to Discern (knowing the practices of others between good and evil) ......which I do

1 Cor 2:15
"The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment."
---ok well as long as you think thats being humble....

4. They are indeed just men. BUT Jesus commanded us to be holy as the Father is holy. The office of the Papacy is a holy job, as it is dedicated to serving Christ (not that the person in it is necessarily holy).

The one, whom ever is appointed MUST follow all of God's mandates......and not to worship any other Gods and idols (ie....virgin Mary). The catholic church DO NOT follow these mandates, and many of their beliefs and practices are not scriptural.
---saying that the Catholic Church worships Mary just shows how ignorant of the Church you really are. Thats so completely absurd.

Here is what the Lord thinks about all of this, and what will happen during the tribulation..........


Never fear, the Lord is in control of history. Don't forget, in the tribulation the "Scarlett W-hore" will be destroyed by another faction. God has a great sense of humor......lol, He has two evil's that destroy each other. This is really killing two birds with one stone.

---oh ok and the RCC is the harlot of Babylon. Gee, thats original--never heard that one before. I love how so many Protestants bash the RCC for everything and anything, but they dotn realize that they openly hope and believe that the world's largest body of Christians is our enemy. bravo.

This is all I have to say......


Romans 11:8 According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.

 

[jckstraw72]

So, you agree with all this pope is god stuff? Don't you wonder about how the REAL GOD might feel about that? May be He thinks that's blasphemy?

why do you say REAL GOD as if there is a fake God?

 

[Deb7777]

You should have a problem with the pompous titles that the Papacy has claimed for themselves to exhalt themselves before men and before God. It shows clearly, that the church of Rome even its formative years was greatly, was influenced by pagan Rome in a greater degree than by the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles, hence the Roman titles of "Pontifex Maximus" and appellation of the word "Great" being added to their names.

Can anyone here in CF picture the Apostle taking the title "Pontifex Maximus" or say "Peter the Great", or "James the Great", or "Paul the Great"? Its just not there in the Bible, because the Apostles were humble men who exalted Jesus, not themselves over their brethren.

Your personal problems with the Catholic Church is not my problem. Condemn as you like, judge as you like, Catholics love and respect the person of Peter and Shepherd of Christ flock. I don't take any stock in a voice that has no history or authority to speak for Christ and did not safeguard and pass on the Christian faith. Your lack of a voice in Christian history and lack of unity and agreement on your new doctrines among the thousands of new Churches that split with the Christianity of old is evident and not a sign that your new church is the one just because you have the bible and can read. Many new Churches read the bible, yet their readings do not lead to unity but disunity through what the Holy Spirit has reveal to them. You believe you read correctly, so does your brethen who is also of a new chruch and disagrees with your reading. You are a seventh day adventist, but your fellow bible readers do not acknowledge your supremacy in intrepretating correct scripture just like you do not agree with your feollow bible readers in other new churches of having correct intrepretation. I don't see your Church being acknowledge in the protestant world of being the voice who speaks for Christ. Does Christ need many different doctrines in the new Churches to teach the faithful ,can't all you bible readers agree on what scripture really mean and show the world the truth in your unity of scripture. Baptism, salvation, the lord's supper, hell, etc. you all have different intrepretation according to your bible reading and you are all right! I don't have time to carry on , I'm sure we would not agree, we don't recognize your scripture wisdom just like many protestant brethen does not either.

 

[jckstraw72]

Infallible leadrs no, for this we have the Comforter (the Holy Spirit) and the written Word.

Temporary, fallible ones yes, and as the Orthodox point out, a multitude of them, as it was from the begining, when Paul could call Peter to task on equal footing, calling Peter hypocrite to his face.

JR

ok, awesome

 

[linssue55]

well Paul does say to the Corinthians that they may have ten thousand teachers but only he has begotten them in Jesus Christ and that they are to imitate him.

The wisdom of Paul.......too bad others don't follow it.

 

[Redwolf]

Scripture please! From the KJV.

You need to ask RCCians for scripture to support the pope's delusions of grandeur.

 

[linssue55]

Ya know what, you only know if you were reported if you actually transgressed the rules you agreed to when you signed up, and which are applied equally to everyone. If someone reports you, and the mods find your post within the rules, you never hear about it.

Do the math.

Not so. I was reported, the mods let me know, I told my story, then they looked into it, and found what I had said was NOT against the rules.

They do contact you, you just have to figure out what post was in the so called violation. It is just a matter of a process of elimination, then you find it. Simple.

 

[jckstraw72]

You need to ask RCCians for scripture to support the pope's delusions of grandeur.

i think very few of hte Popes have delusions of grandeur despite what your Protestantism demands you think.

 

[linssue55]

So, you agree with all this pope is god stuff? Don't you wonder about how the REAL GOD might feel about that? May be He thinks that's blasphemy?

So, here we see that it was not God who gave the pope his goodies, it was Constantine, who was the first holy roman emperor. Straight from pagan, to holy roman.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]"...superior papal authority and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #19, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]"...the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man." Pope Nicholas I, quoted in History of the Councils, vol. IX, Dist.: 96, Can 7, "Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para", by Labbe and Cossart.[/FONT]


Here's a better than vague idea of what blasphemy is:

Main Entry: blas·phe·my
Pronunciation: 'blas-f&-mE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mies
1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable

Isn't that something?

The Arrogance of man!!...

The cosmic system is alive and powerful!

 

[linssue55]

Infallible leadrs no, for this we have the Comforter (the Holy Spirit) and the written Word.

Temporary, fallible ones yes, and as the Orthodox point out, a multitude of them, as it was from the begining, when Paul could call Peter to task on equal footing, calling Peter hypocrite to his face.

JR

Yes! Being filled with the spirit. God is in control of histroy, we retain an RMA......"Relaxed Mental Attitude"......in these very troubled times.

 

[linssue55]

Your personal problems with the Catholic Church is not my problem. Condemn as you like, judge as you like, Catholics love and respect the person of Peter and Shepherd of Christ flock. I don't take any stock in a voice that has no history or authority to speak for Christ and did not safeguard and pass on the Christian faith. Your lack of a voice in Christian history and lack of unity and agreement on your new doctrines among the thousands of new Churches that split with the Christianity of old is evident and not a sign that your new church is the one just because you have the bible and can read. Many new Churches read the bible, yet their readings do not lead to unity but disunity through what the Holy Spirit has reveal to them. You believe you read correctly, so does your brethen who is also of a new chruch and disagrees with your reading. You are a seventh day adventist, but your fellow bible readers do not acknowledge your supremacy in intrepretating correct scripture just like you do not agree with your feollow bible readers in other new churches of having correct intrepretation. I don't see your Church being acknowledge in the protestant world of being the voice who speaks for Christ. Does Christ need many different doctrines in the new Churches to teach the faithful ,can't all you bible readers agree on what scripture really mean and show the world the truth in your unity of scripture. Baptism, salvation, the lord's supper, hell, etc. you all have different intrepretation according to your bible reading and you are all right! I don't have time to carry on , I'm sure we would not agree, we don't recognize your scripture wisdom just like many protestant brethen does not either.

1 Cor 2:15

"The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment."

To discern the good from the evil.

Heb 5:14
"But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil."

 

[linssue55]

You need to ask RCCians for scripture to support the pope's delusions of grandeur.

I'll pass.

 

[Oblio]

Not so. I was reported, the mods let me know, I told my story, then they looked into it, and found what I had said was NOT against the rules.

They do contact you, you just have to figure out what post was in the so called violation. It is just a matter of a process of elimination, then you find it. Simple.

You said:

Ditto! It happens alot, being reported I mean.

Sure, that can happen, but if your post is being reported just because someone is upset that you made a post that disagrees with their philosopy or theology, you will not be contacted and the report will be denied. The fact that you were contacted means that you were not clearly within the rules, for if you were the report would have been denied without any further action.

Any claim or insinuation that you are being oppressed for 'telling the truth' is IMO simply whining that you can't make a solid theological point without resorting to polemics and transgressions of the rules.

 

[Redwolf]

1. Titles for the Pope do not detract from the praise due to God.
Not so! Look at ALL the people that believe this, and follow it everyday. Praising idols of the flesh.
--praising someone or an office does not make it an idol. WORSHIPPING them, or it, does. Now who in the RCC WORSHIPS the Pope?

You pronounce the pope as god, yet you claim you do not worship him. God's are worshipped, are they not, and they do, indeed, require adoration?

The Catholic church declares that you must bow before and display acts of worship unto a MAN called Pope. The very

words of these Popes are such that they proclaim themselves "God on earth" for all Catholic to adore...
"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself" -Catholic National July 1895.

The priest above? He looks worshipful.


"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" -Pope Leo XIII

The title "Lord God the Pope" is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4

But, the Bible says that Jesus is the head ...... Has He abdicated?

"And ye are complete in him (Jesus), which is the head of all principality and power:" Colossians 2:10 "And he (Christ) is the head of the body, the church..." Colossians 1:18

So, you guys say that all you do is venerate the pope. Actually, it's no different from worship.

One entry found for venerate.
Entry Word: venerate
Function: verb
Text: to offer honor or respect to (someone) as a divine power <a proper setting in which to venerate God> -- see [SIZE=-1]WORSHIP [/SIZE]1