Would Jesus allow his Church to Teach Falsehoods?

[Albion]

"It is peculiar, isn't it, that people who cannot bring themselves to trust the Word of God, easily put their complete confidence in whatever some "saint" hundreds of years removed from the Apostolic Church had to say?"
​

That is peculiar.

Then we are in agreement on something, at least.

What's more peculiar is abandoning the Church of Jesus and following a King who left the Church in order to get a divorce.

No more peculiar than following a church whose final word is popes who have included kidnappers, murderers, sexual deviants, and army deserters.

And, by the way, Henry, the guy who wanted a divorce, remained a Catholic all his life. But his real problem was in being born at the wrong time. If he'd been a Kennedy, he'd have gotten that divorce easily and had the local bishop kiss his ring in the process.

 

[racer]

It demonstrates that the authority of the Church to make doctrine has always been understod by Christians.

How so?

Your view is new and inconsistent with the words of Jesus and the instructions of the apostles.

Maybe you've never heard of it, but it is not new.

 

[chestertonrules]

It's not splitting hairs. Your thread asks would God allow his Church to teach falsehoods? The body of believers is the church. It's not a particular sect of people within the body, but the body as a whole.

It is THE body of believers, not just any group of people claiming to speak for Jesus. He started a Church and gave it structure and authority. If you are outside that authority, then you are not in communion with his Church.

And God wasn't talking exclusively to Peter, nor the apostles as far as the keys of the kingdom or the power to bind and loose.

Of course he was. YOU are Peter, and I will give YOU the keys to the kingdom.

Tell me what power Peter could have exercised that you cannot if your faith is true?

Peter can speak for Jesus. I cannot.

As far as binding and loosing is concerned, it's not difficult to understand. If a brother/sister is living in sin, but comes to church and seeks the Lord's forgiveness, and that person is accepted back into the church, they are accepted back into the heavenly family. If that individual determines to not repent and they are put out of the church then the opposite applies.

That is not correct. Do a little research.

 

[chestertonrules]

How so?

Maybe you've never heard of it, but it is not new.

In the history of Christianity, 500 years is new.

 

[chestertonrules]

"It is peculiar, isn't it, that people who cannot bring themselves to trust the Word of God, easily put their complete confidence in whatever some "saint" hundreds of years removed from the Apostolic Church had to say?"
​

Then we are in agreement on something, at least.


No more peculiar than following a church whose final word is popes who have included kidnappers, murderers, sexual deviants, and army deserters.

And, by the way, Henry, the guy who wanted a divorce, remained a Catholic all his life. But his real problem was in being born at the wrong time. If he'd been a Kennedy, he'd have gotten that divorce easily and had the local bishop kiss his ring in the process.

All popes are sinners, but Jesus is faithful to his Church.

In fact, one of the popes denied Jesus three times!

 

[Albion]

1 Timothy 3
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Thank you for confirming Stryder's point. That is, it is the "household" of faith--the people--who constitute "the church."

Among all the people in history who have been Christians, there undoubtedly have been some who taught or held false doctrines.

 

[Albion]

All popes are sinners, but Jesus is faithful to his Church.

Then the fact that a king could be a sinner wasn't much of a point.

 

[chestertonrules]

Then the fact that a king could be a sinner wasn't much of a point.

What's more interesting is that he started a Church and you are a member.

Why would you abandon the Church started by the King of Kings for a Church started by the King of England?

 

[racer]

Speaking of the bible:

Matthew 18

17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Let's get this in context. I'm tired of your redundancy.

Matt 18:15; Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

Matt 18:16; But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

The church was the last resort. If it is the only authority, why would people try to resolve matters themselves if they are not equipped to do so?

Luke 10
16"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

We only accept them if they are teaching according to what Jesus taught. We must reject them when they promote false teachings. We are not bound to accept any authority unquestionably

John 20
21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

And, according to your own argument, if they are not teaching the gospel as delivered by Christ, then they are teaching falsely Which means they can not be of His church. Therefore we are not bound to follow them.

1 Timothy 3
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

So?

2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

And?

Matthew 16

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Again, So? And?

 

[chestertonrules]

Thank you for confirming Stryder's point. That is, it is the "household" of faith--the people--who constitute "the church."

Among all the people in history who have been Christians, there undoubtedly have been some who taught or held false doctrines.

The Church is hierarchical, and it has not taught false doctrines.

Heretics do, of course, but they are not listening to those sent by Jesus.

The Christians at Antioch didn't want to reject those sent by Jesus, so they sent representatives to the Church leadership for answers to their doctrinal questions.

 

[Albion]

It is THE body of believers, not just any group of people claiming to speak for Jesus.

No one said anything about "claiming to speak for Jesus." I hope that you don't feel that you, for instance, speak for Jesus.

The point was that all true believers are the church.

Do you think that if a Christian subscribes to even one doctrinal error of any sort, he ceases to be a Christian?

 

[racer]

It is THE body of believers, not just any group of people claiming to speak for Jesus. He started a Church and gave it structure and authority. If you are outside that authority, then you are not in communion with his Church.

I prefer to be in Communion with Christ.

Of course he was. YOU are Peter, and I will give YOU the keys to the kingdom.

Peter can speak for Jesus. I cannot.

That is not correct. Do a little research.

These types of non-answers only serve to further your own sad self-delusion. You are only seeking to comfort yourself by making unsubstantiated claims. What is your point? Does putting it in print make it more believable to you? More real? Why is that?

 

[chestertonrules]

The church was the last resort. If it is the only authority, why would people try to resolve matters themselves if they are not equipped to do so?

It is the ultimate authority, or last resort, if you prefer. Christians cannot reject the decisions of the Church.

We only accept them if they are teaching according to what Jesus taught. We must reject them when they promote false teachings. We are not bound to accept any authority unquestionably

Jesus told you to listen to the Church.

Do you believe you are an infallible interpreter of scripture?

And, according to your own argument, if they are not teaching the gospel as delivered by Christ, then they are teaching falsely Which means they can not be of His church. Therefore we are not bound to follow them.

You are bound to follow the Church which will not teach false doctrine because that is what Jesus promised.

 

[chestertonrules]

I prefer to be in Communion with Christ.


This types of non-answers only serve to further your own sad self-delusion. You are only seeking to comfort yourself by making unsubstantiated claims. What is your point? Does putting it in print make it more believable to you? More real? Why is that?

You clearly don't accept the words as written. Not much I can do about that.

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

 

[Albion]

The Church is hierarchical, and it has not taught false doctrines.

The church is hierarchical but that doesn't affect anything we've been discussing. And yes, it has taught false doctrines. Arianism, Nestorianism, Papal Supremacy, Mariolatry, Soul Sleep, there are many false teaching that have affected or afflicated the church yet the gates of hell have not prevailed..

The Christians at Antioch didn't want to reject those sent by Jesus, so they sent representatives to the Church leadership for answers to their doctrinal questions.

Well, we've already agreed that it is sensible to pay attention to those in authority. That doesn't make them infallible or unanimous, though. That's obvious.

 

[chestertonrules]

Do you think that if a Christian subscribes to even one doctrinal error of any sort, he ceases to be a Christian?

No. All Christians subsist with the Catholic Church, but not are in full communion.

Once you start leaning on your own understanding, or the teachings of men, it is easier to be drawn away, however.

That is why it is crucial that we are united in matters of faith and morals.

 

[Albion]

What's more interesting is that he started a Church and you are a member.

1. He didn't start any new church. The church in England is probably older than the church at Rome and owed nothing to the Roman Church for its founding. and

2. I am not a member. I'm an American. See the little logo?

Why would you abandon the Church started by the King of Kings for a Church started by the King of England?

I didn't.

 

[racer]

It is the ultimate authority, or last resort, if you prefer. Christians cannot reject the decisions of the Church.

They can if the Church is wrong.

Jesus told you to listen to the Church.

Where? According to you Jesus didn't tell "me" anything, He only spoke to the Apostles.

Do you believe you are an infallible interpreter of scripture?

Nope, I don't believe anybody is. What you in effect believe, though you may refuse to acknowledge it, is that you are infallible if you believe "you" can correctly discern that the RCC is infallible.

You are bound to follow the Church which will not teach false doctrine because that is what Jesus promised.

I'm sorry but some church leaders do teach false doctrines. Especially within the RCC.

 

[chestertonrules]

1. He didn't start any new church. The church in England is probably older than the church at Rome and owed nothing to the Roman Church for its founding. and

Silly comments like this make it clear that I am wasting my time.



You are a stubborn person who doesn't seem to care much for the truth.

 

[racer]

You clearly don't accept the words as written. Not much I can do about that.

It is clear that you are deeply deceived, and there's not much I can do to enlighten you. So, your misconceptions about with wHat I do and don't accept cause me no concern.

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Which gives no implication that this section means anything near what the RCC has built it up to mean.