Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Protestants aren't proper Christians, says Pope
Daily Mail ^ | 11th July 2007 | SIMON CALDWELL

Posted on 07/10/2007 6:55:28 PM PDT by indcons

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 601-606 next last
To: D-fendr
Jesus founded His Church with Peter as its head to be kept and transmitted through apostolic succession

psst - Peter was NOT the lead Apostle after the crucifiction =

That guy on the right was - and he didn't die until 62 AD

This iconic painting, done back when you could become a human torch for going against the church, was one of those 'coded message' paintings...

151 posted on 07/11/2007 8:25:25 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Brandie

I am no fan of any church who claims to be the one true church.

I choose to put faith in God, not any man dressed in robes.


152 posted on 07/11/2007 8:26:47 AM PDT by JRochelle (Vacant Lott needs to be evicted from the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Well my Roman Catholic brother -in-law told someone, in my earshot, that “ oh no she is not Catholic, she is a Christian”. So, tell it to your non-separated brethren!

It's just as ignorant coming from his mouth.

153 posted on 07/11/2007 8:32:06 AM PDT by jude24 (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle
I choose to put faith in God, not any man dressed in robes.

;o)

And he said unto them in his doctrine, Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces,...And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 Which devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers: these shall receive greater damnation(Mark)

154 posted on 07/11/2007 8:41:06 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: jude24
As you all are fond of pointing out the many types of Protestants, I would submit that there are just as many variations on Roman Catholicism. In fact, there are those who claim to be RC that believe virtually nothing of traditional, "small o" orthodox Christianity. And yet, you would maintain that they are all, still, at least in the One True Church. Kinda makes it a magic institution though as just being "in it" can provide salvation.
155 posted on 07/11/2007 8:44:03 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Claud, where the rubber meets the road is Jesus saying that those who worship must worship in Spirit and in Truth. Those who teach obvious, made-up UNTRUTH cannot be the true Church,

Yes indeed, and that is EXACTLY what this document is saying. Only you think that the Reformation doctrines of the 16th century are the pure Gospel, unalloyed and uncorrupted....and we think (with better reason IMHO) that those doctrines are exactly the kind of made-up untruth that you condemn.

But for *where we think the Truth to lie*, we are in perfect agreement.

156 posted on 07/11/2007 8:59:26 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; betty boop; Mad Dawg; xzins; .30Carbine; Quix; P-Marlowe; blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg
That settles it! The Pope says that none of you are proper Christians.

LOLOL! There are also people who say I'm just a figment of their imagination. That doesn't bother me either.

Moreover, if we Christians are falsely accused for our testimony in Jesus Christ, it heaps eternal blessings upon us.

Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great [is] your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. - Matt 5:11-12

So, "thank you" to everyone who interpreted Pope Benedict's remarks to mean that we who are not of the Roman Catholic Church are somehow, second class Christians!

157 posted on 07/11/2007 9:21:35 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: danneskjold
If you're only referring to an unbroken line of bishops beginning with the original Apostles, ok, sure. However, I'm not sure how that causes a non-Catholic to be "improper"...

I think the word "improper" is an interpolation by the Daily Mail writer, not the Pope's actual word.

158 posted on 07/11/2007 9:29:47 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: jude24
As usual, your analysis is "on the money".

What I find more interesting is that this suggests a little fuzziness around the edges of extra ecclesium nulla salus - you don't, strictly speaking, need to be a communicant in the Roman or Eastern churches to be a Christian.

Correct. Anyone who is validly baptized (and the vast majority of Protestant baptisms would count as valid) would be considered to be a Christian.

As far as EENS is concerned, everyone who is saved will be saved by being incorporated into Christ's one church. There's no Baptist heaven or Methodist heaven or Lutheran heaven, there's only Catholic (or catholic or universal) heaven.

(Disunity is always either sin or the consequence of sin, and heaven means being cleansed from all sin and all of its consequences, hence, there is no disunity in heaven.)

How, exactly, that works out in an individual case is something we'll have to leave up to God.

159 posted on 07/11/2007 9:40:04 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: indcons

I’d call this a papal smear.


160 posted on 07/11/2007 9:41:51 AM PDT by wolfinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Some of the hard core types here subscribe to the beliefs of Hilaire Belloc, a last century French Catholic supremacist.

Belloc was an Englishman whose father was French. In fact, he stood for election to the British House of Commons at one point (not sure if he won).

I have no idea what a "Catholic supremacist" is. Is that a Catholic with the temerity and bad manners to actually believe that his faith is true? I'll proudly plead "guilty as charged" to that, then.

He contended that Protestantism and Muhammadanism are both just heretical deviations of the Truth.

Obviously, to a Catholic, Protestantism and Muhammadanism [sic] are both in error. Both also contain some elements of truth.

161 posted on 07/11/2007 9:44:41 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: jude24
As usual, your measured responses are much appreciated. The subject is a difficult one and can be very easily taken out of context for those who are not familiar with Vatican 2 and what was said by the Church.

Vatican 2 speaks of ecclesiastical community. It goes to great measures (and Popes have stressed this latter) to say that other members of Christian communities are certainly Christian, although not totally unified. "Church" can mean many different things.

Regards

162 posted on 07/11/2007 9:51:04 AM PDT by jo kus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Moreover, if we Christians are falsely accused for our testimony in Jesus Christ, it heaps eternal blessings upon us.

Great point, A-G! I wish I had thought of that!

163 posted on 07/11/2007 9:51:33 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (As heard on the Amish Radio Network! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1675029/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: xzins; betty boop; Mad Dawg; .30Carbine; Quix; hosepipe; Dr. Eckleburg
Thank you oh so very much for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!

And thank you for raising the issue of the “doctrines and traditions of men” – one of my favorite subjects. As you know, I personally reject all of the doctrines and traditions of men across the board – and this gives me yet another opportunity to explain why.

God didn’t make us with a “cookie cutter.” Peter was not like Paul who was not like John who was not like doubting Thomas. But Jesus chose each and every one of them. Likewise, in Revelation 2 and 3 – He accepts with commendations and rebukes seven different churches with very different circumstances and challenges.

The apostles themselves had disputes precisely because some of them tried to rationalize Christ to their Jewish traditions, what they reasoned to be “true” despite their being filled with the Holy Spirit. (Acts 15) In other words, there were moments when even the apostles trusted their own reasoning above the revelations of God. Likewise, they insinuated themselves into God’s blessing of the indwelling Holy Spirit and were astonished to see their error (Acts 10 and 11)

Surely no one would question the intent of the Apostles! It appears therefore to be an unfortunate tendency of mortal men to "anthropomorphize" God. Evidently aware of the risk, Paul did not immediately confer with men (Gal 1) but instead received the doctrine directly from God for three years before visiting Peter for 15 days.

Faith and reason are complimentary. But reason cannot substitute for faith.

To see what happens when man wanders beyond the words of God, rationalizing what he doesn’t understand – we need only compare the Talmud to the Tanakh (Torah, writings and prophets.) Or compare the dogma, doctrines and traditions of any Christian Church to Scriptures. No assembly of men is exempt from this tendency which God warns against:

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. – Deuteronomy 4:2

Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with [their] lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, [as] the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. – Mark 7:5-9

God’s revelations are elegant. The doctrines and traditions of men are rationalizations, convoluted like a pile of cooked spaghetti and bulky to boot.

I’ve taken a lot of guff around here - both from atheists and theists - specifically because I value Spiritual revelations above all other kinds of knowledge – including sensory perception and reason.

But how could I not? I’ve known Jesus personally for nigh onto a half century. I love Him, I believe Him, I trust Him. He is not a “hypothetical.” It’s no contest who I believe.

For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. – 2 Tim 1:12

So I eschew all of the doctrines and traditions of men across the board – choosing instead to rely on God the Father’s revelations in (1) Jesus Christ His only begotten son, by whom and for whom everything is made, (2) the indwelling Holy Spirit, (3) the Scriptures, which the Spirit Himself authenticates by bringing alive within, (4) the Creation, both spiritual and physical.

Nevertheless, I praise God for the assemblies of men – the churches (or sheep pens to follow the John 10 metaphor) – when they truly dedicate themselves to Jesus Christ! Some Christians – especially new Christians just beginning their walk with the Lord – do not know the Shepherd well enough yet to follow Him through the gate into the open field or whatever pen (assembly) He chooses for them.

At bottom, we are individual Christians according to His own will, like the Apostles were, each at a different point in our sanctification, each a different part of His body (I Cor 15), each having some – but not all – of the Truth He alone is revealing to us (John 14-17, Romans 8, I Cor 2.)

Therefore, I do not expect any other Christian to see things exactly the same way I do except for our core beliefs. Nor would I suggest that any individual Christian or assembly is at risk for having a different leading in the Spirit.

It is as if we are looking at the same seven-faceted diamond facing different facets. But it is the same diamond and the same Light.

To God be the glory!

164 posted on 07/11/2007 9:54:23 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Thank you oh so very much for your encouragements! Please consider yourself pinged to post 164.
165 posted on 07/11/2007 9:56:08 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: IIntense

And there it is! By todays standards there seems to be a position that no one sins anymore or once saved always saved regardless of ones sins. I too have asked myself how so many people go to holy communion by there are few and far between standing in a line for confession. And yes I like the term confession better.We have many churches today who go along with abortion and especially homosexuality. There is a serious problem among Christians today. Why is it after 911 more people have turned to Islam? Todays moral standard is a little low. All one has to do is turn on the television to see how the American people have just accepted low standards of just about anything. I mean homosexuality is so much part of any television show one would think one in two are homosexual today. But then I am coming from the Ozzie and Harriet crowd and I miss it.And it amazes me how profanity is part of everyday life for people in general and on TV and the movies.


166 posted on 07/11/2007 10:05:35 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7

Coded messages, like art, sometimes is in the eye of the beholder.

You state your belief on the foundation of Christ’s church, the Pope states that of his church.

They differ. I see more factual reason to believe the Pope and see your views as more in line with a Dan Brown methodology.

We differ. So be it.


167 posted on 07/11/2007 10:06:51 AM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; P-Marlowe; HarleyD; Frumanchu; topcat54; BibChr; Alamo-Girl; ...
For all his vaunted, entirely too opulent status, Pope Benedict is an empty vessl, "pontificating" foolishness, traditions of men, and UNTRUTH.

Amen, x.

"One Mass is more fearful than if ten thousand armed enemies were landed in any part of the realm." -- John Knox.

But when it comes to denouncing idolatry and fable, we're poor fascimiles of those who went before us in history who faced more than internet rebukes; who suffered real injury and death to proclaim the Gospel in truth and Spirit.

From a magazine article by Edward Panosian on the life of John Knox...

"...The young Knox had known of the burning of the Scottish nobleman and humanist, Patrick Hamilton, in 1528. Hamilton, who had studied in Paris and learned the teachings of Luther at Marburg, had returned as a teacher to St. Andrews University. As a preacher of the new reformation views and doctrines, he offended the Archbishop, was tried for having taught "theological views deemed heretical," admitted them to be Biblical, and was condemned to the stake.

In the wintry wind of that February day, the difficulty of lighting the fire and the need to re-light it several times prolonged the agony of Hamilton's death over six hours. Men later said that the smoke of his burning infected all on whom it blew. While men asked, "Wherefore was Patrick Hamilton burnt?" (as Knox later wrote), more young Scots visited Germany and Switzerland where the reformation was underway. More Lutheran books and more English New Testaments and Bibles, Tyndale's and Coverdale's, were bought and sold, in spite of repeated injunctions against them.

Under the preaching of George Wishart, Knox was enlisted in the cause of the Gospel in which he was to spend his life. Wishart was a gentle preacher and teacher of the reformed faith. "Suspected of heresy because he read the Greek New Testament with his students," he had fled his native Scotland, studied in England at Cambridge, in Switzerland under the influence of Zwingli, and in Germany. He returned to effect reform--of church and state--at home.

John Knox's first entrance on the stage of church history is as Wishart's literal bodyguard, carrying a sword because of an assassination attempt by a priest upon the preacher. Having preached the evangelical doctrine throughout Scotland, doctrine which according to his trial included salvation by faith, the Scriptures as the only test of truth, the denial of purgatory and confession to a priest, and the rejection of the Roman Catholic mass as blasphemous idolatry, Wishart was arrested by Cardinal Beaton (hated nephew of the archbishop who had burned Hamilton), tried, and burned on the eighteenth anniversary of Hamilton's death (1546). Knox was eager to accompany his noble friend, but the elder Wishart refused, saying, "One is sufficient for one sacrifice."

Within a few weeks, Scottish nobles murdered the cardinal and, as refugees, took possession of Beaton's seaside castle of St. Andrews. Knox was invited to be their chaplain and continued to tutor his young students. In this strange parish Knox first preached. So vehement was his excoriation of the lives of his rebel "parishioners" and of the teachings and doctrines of the Roman church that after his first sermon his hearers declared: "Others snipped at the branches of popery; but he strikes at the roots, to destroy the whole." Now the Protestant rebels against an ecclesiastical government awaited help from England. But French ships arrived instead. French troops captured the castle and its defenders, and Knox began 19 months as a French galley slave under flogging and cursing, learning to be an apostle of liberty to his people.

One incident during those months reveals something of the latent fire in the Scottish preacher, even while in chains. A picture of the Virgin Mary was brought on board, while the galley was in port, to be kissed by the slaves. When Knox refused, the picture was thrust into his face. Outraged, he flung the "accursed idol" into the river, saying "Let our Lady learn to swim."

After his release, Knox went to England for five years. Now ruled (1549) by the protestant, Edward, England welcomed John Knox. He preached in a settled parish, learned much about reforming work, and became a royal chaplain. With the accession of the bloody queen, Mary Tudor, Knox became a Marian exile to avoid becoming a Marian martyr, and labored and learned at Frankfurt and in Calvin's Geneva. Those were retreats for preparation before advances for battle. In a letter to a friend, Knox wrote a sterling tribute to the moral quality of life in Geneva, calling it "the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the Apostles. In other places I confess Christ to be truly preached; but manners and religion to be so seriously reformed, I have not yet seen in any other place besides."

Back in Scotland for several months, his preaching further strengthened the Protestant cause. As a result, many of the Scottish nobility banded together into a covenant in which they renounced "the congregation of Satan, with all the superstitious abomination and idolatry thereof" and affirmed the establishment of "the most blessed word of God and his congregation," and the defense of "the whole congregation of Christ, and every member thereof." These "Lords of the Congregation" became the political backbone of the remaking of a nation..."


168 posted on 07/11/2007 10:09:01 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

So, “thank you” to everyone who interpreted Pope Benedict’s remarks to mean that we who are not of the Roman Catholic Church are somehow, second class Christians!

= = =

I’ll stand by Christ’s Blood and His saving TO THE UTTERMOST . . .

His opinion, perspective is all that eternally matters, to me.

Not the traditions and opinions of man—especially those so rooted in so much fossilization of thought, form and ritual.


169 posted on 07/11/2007 10:21:48 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: xzins
those things that have not got one whit, one iota of biblical backing

Sola scriptura is not to be found in the Bible either. Do you similarly discount it?

170 posted on 07/11/2007 10:24:15 AM PDT by jddqr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
the theory of Apostolic succession is not supported by Scripture.

Isn't Matthew 16:19 pretty clear in the matter that Jesus is assigning the power of binding and loosing to Peter, i.e. including the appointment of successors as the Rock of the Church?

171 posted on 07/11/2007 10:27:17 AM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Kinda makes it a magic institution though as just being "in it" can provide salvation.

I think it's more magical that someone can utter "I accept Jesus as my personal savior" and be assured of salvation, irregardless of the sins they commit after that point,...

172 posted on 07/11/2007 10:33:16 AM PDT by jddqr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; xzins
if we Christians are falsely accused for our testimony in Jesus Christ, it heaps eternal blessings upon us.

Amen, AG.

"Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head." -- Romans 12:20

173 posted on 07/11/2007 10:33:31 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
Who was the lead Apostle after the Crucification?

There wasn't one. The closest you get to a "super" Apostle is James in Jerusalem, that's if you consider him an Apostle.

174 posted on 07/11/2007 10:39:42 AM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

I never tire of reading your profession of faith, dear Sister in Christ.


175 posted on 07/11/2007 10:41:09 AM PDT by MHGinTN (You've had life support. Promote life support for those in the womb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
To God be the glory!

To God be the Glory indeed! Sola de gloria

176 posted on 07/11/2007 10:44:50 AM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
Mormons claim in effect that their religion predates Christianity (both Catholic and protestant), so why they want to call themselves Christians is beyond me.

And what about all of the old testament prophets who prophesied of Christs coming? Mormon's believe that Christs gospel was on the earth at various times prior to his birth. When Christ brought the gospel it was in fact a restoration of what had been on earth before.

177 posted on 07/11/2007 10:45:58 AM PDT by sandude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; LeGrande; betty boop; Mad Dawg; xzins; .30Carbine; Quix; P-Marlowe; Dr. Eckleburg

“That settles it! The Pope says that none of you are proper Christians”

Look, don’t worry about it. I issued an edict this morning nullifying whatever he said about us and affirmed the scriptures that say “believe on the Lord Jesus and you are saved”. As an added bonus I threw in Hebrews 12:18-24,

“For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more: (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart: And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:) But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.”

No masses, perpetual sacrifices, relics, icons, prayers to saints, angels or dead humans, purgatory, prayers for the dead, absolution, indulgences, mantras or human mediators. It’s very simple, “Trust in the Lord and do good”!


178 posted on 07/11/2007 10:47:12 AM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan
I issued an edict this morning nullifying whatever he said about us

Issue all the edicts you want, but coming from a false church, they aren't worth the paper they are written on.

179 posted on 07/11/2007 10:59:33 AM PDT by jddqr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: jddqr; blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg; Alex Murphy; P-Marlowe; BibChr
Sola scriptura is not to be found in the Bible either. Do you similarly discount it?

Actually, the inspiration of scripture by God Himself is found in scripture.

The Bible says, "All scripture is inspired by God..."

And don't try to tell me that "sola scriptura" is other than synonymous language recognizing that scripture comes to us from Almighty God.

180 posted on 07/11/2007 11:01:29 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
From a magazine article by Edward Panosian on the life of John Knox...

Truth can be stranger than fiction. It's hard to believe that Christians (of whatever group) could believe they honor Jesus and Truth by killing people.

181 posted on 07/11/2007 11:03:45 AM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Krankor

So, then, you concede Osama bin Laden’s brand of Islam is just as much the one, true religion as the Anglicans?


To him it probably is. To anyone, THEIR religion is the one true religion. Unfortunately, everyone else feels the need to convert each other, either by preaching or by force.


182 posted on 07/11/2007 11:05:39 AM PDT by BritExPatInFla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

bttt


183 posted on 07/11/2007 11:06:50 AM PDT by linn37 (Phlebotomists need love too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
he IS the valid successor to the Apostles, Starting with whom? Who was the frist head Apostle after Christ?

St. Peter, perhaps? I'm not even religious and knew that one. :)
184 posted on 07/11/2007 11:07:50 AM PDT by BritExPatInFla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Argus
Isn't Matthew 16:19 pretty clear in the matter that Jesus is assigning the power of binding and loosing to Peter, i.e. including the appointment of successors as the Rock of the Church?

I think your catechism gives a good explanation of whom the Rock is:

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

The Rock is Jesus and the church is built on our Faith in Jesus the Christ, the son of the living God. The church militant is the body of indwelt believers.

Luke 17:20-21 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them and said, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation, nor will they say 'See Here!' or 'See There!' For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you."

185 posted on 07/11/2007 11:14:44 AM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
An allusion used as a metaphor does not necessarily imply that the occasion alluded to actually happened. It only proves that it is an apt comparison.
186 posted on 07/11/2007 11:16:28 AM PDT by jude24 (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: jddqr; Alamo-Girl; LeGrande; betty boop; Mad Dawg; xzins; .30Carbine; Quix; P-Marlowe; ...

“Issue all the edicts you want, but coming from a false church, they aren’t worth the paper they are written on”

Since God is no respector of persons, my edict is just as good as his and carries about as much weight as his. I also used a very high grade copy paper to hand write it on. My edict does not need footnotes, endnotes, glossary, pictures, diagrams or commentators to explain the obvious. “Trust in the Lord with all of your heart and lean not upon your own understanding, in all your ways acknowledge Him and He will direct your paths”. It says nothing about perpetual sacrifices or holy orders. Just “By grace are you saved through faith and not of yourself, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any one should boast.” It’s so simple, but then again, I guess you can’t make any money on it or build an impressive edifice around anything that easy to understand.


187 posted on 07/11/2007 11:18:11 AM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt
So even if Muslims are descendants of Ishmael, Ishmael did not worship the Elohim of Abraham.

I think that there is more to the story here. Many people who read the Bible believe that once Abraham sent Hagar and Ishmael away that there was no more contact. The traditions of the Muslim world tell of Abraham and Ishmael building altars together in Mecca. This in fact may be true. The Old Testament was a record kept by the descendent's of Issac and I don't think they were interested at all in preserving anything other than their own story. We do get a clue though in Genesis 25:9.

And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah...

This scripture supports the view that there was indeed contact between Abraham and Ishmael throughout Abraham's life. How else could Ishmael have known his father had died? If they did build altars in Mecca and elsewhere as the Muslim traditions hold then I think you can make a case that they did worship the same God.

188 posted on 07/11/2007 11:23:58 AM PDT by sandude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
Really? When I used to live in Virginia I'd regularly have Baptists, upon learning I am RC, ask me "so how does a Catholic get to heaven?"

I can only speak to my experiences with individuals from the different denominations. However, my main point is that this is coming from the Pope himself as fact, not merely members of the congregation expressing an opinion...

189 posted on 07/11/2007 11:24:42 AM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Actually, the inspiration of scripture by God Himself is found in scripture

No question. But where in the Bible does it say to *ONLY* rely on the Bible? You know, the word "Sola"?

190 posted on 07/11/2007 11:26:20 AM PDT by jddqr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

“424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.”

Wait, wait, Martha recited the formula too, so maybe she is a “rockette”!

John 11:27, “She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”


191 posted on 07/11/2007 11:27:41 AM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
I'm already tussling on this topic over here
192 posted on 07/11/2007 11:31:19 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: jddqr; blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe

So, you have the choice between (A) God’s Words and (B) some man’s words.

Question: Would YOU choose A or B?


193 posted on 07/11/2007 11:31:31 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Campion
I think the word "improper" is an interpolation by the Daily Mail writer, not the Pope's actual word.

I don't know...I'm going by the text of the article, and it seems that the word "proper" is what was used...

Post 64

194 posted on 07/11/2007 11:32:38 AM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
I see more factual reason to believe the Pope

re my post indicating that it was James the Just, blood brother of Jesus, who was the head apostle after the crucification, with Peter and John in a councilor like position, (as Paul sneeringly referred to the three as "the so called pillars of the church") until Jame's death in 62 AD - and then other BLOOD relatives took James' place in succession for about 200 years - so it says in the KJV of the NT - but let's not let that get in the way of the ROMAN church's claim of succession 0 that eliminates the fact that Jesus had BLOOD siblings - and there was, in the beginning, a blood line of succession - which would negate the rule of ROME - and Gasp - mean that Mary didn't forever remain a virgin, which she was never so claimed to be until about 300 years AFTER the crucification -

There was a reason that the ROMAN church forbade, under penalty of death, people owning and reading for themselves, the Bible and the ROMAN church didn't sanction Catholics to read the NT until the middle of the 20th century. Too many things in the NT are spelled out clearly, if one reads with a discerning mind, that clearly is a disconnect with the ROMAN church =

"There is One God and One Mediator between God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus, Who gave Himself a Ransom for All, to be testified in due Time." —1 Tim. 2: 5, 6;

195 posted on 07/11/2007 11:36:38 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Thank you so much for sharing that information!

Sad that so many people do not understand the price paid for our freedom to worship.

196 posted on 07/11/2007 11:47:11 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Question: Would YOU choose A or B?

BOTH A *and* B! God's word + the word of his vicar on earth.

197 posted on 07/11/2007 11:48:06 AM PDT by jddqr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Argus
Isn't Matthew 16:19 pretty clear in the matter that Jesus is assigning the power of binding and loosing to Peter, i.e. including the appointment of successors as the Rock of the Church?

Then why was it that James the Just, blood brother of Jesus, was the first ruling Apostle in Jerusalem after the crucification - with John and Peter basically in councilor positions, these three making up what Paul sneeringly referred to as "The so-called pillars of the Church"

It's all in the NT - James was the head Apostle until his death - stoned in the courtyard of the Temple by Temple Priests, in 62AD - and then other family members of Jesus succeeded - it's all there in the New Testament - the book that the Roman Church that came into being some 300+ years after the crucification, forbade, on pain of torture/death, to own or read for themselves - that they kept from being translated into the peoples own languages so they COULD - (Blast that Luther and King James!) = my own ancestors were arrested, harried and driven to sell their homes and, ultimately, leave their countries in order to have the freedom to own/read the Bible...and follow what Jesus, Himself, actually taught -

198 posted on 07/11/2007 11:48:29 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Campion; Gamecock; Dr. Eckleburg; HarleyD; Frumanchu; topcat54; P-Marlowe
Obviously, to a Catholic, Protestantism and Muhammadanism [sic] are both in error. Both also contain some elements of truth.

But what's the difference between them, according to the Vatican?


199 posted on 07/11/2007 11:49:38 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (As heard on the Amish Radio Network! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1675029/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Quix
I’ll stand by Christ’s Blood and His saving TO THE UTTERMOST . . . His opinion, perspective is all that eternally matters, to me.

And to me as well.

To God be the glory!

200 posted on 07/11/2007 11:49:49 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 601-606 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson