Posted on 05/01/2014 3:25:30 AM PDT by GonzoII
How ironic.
Like when the Catholic church adds things to Scripture and its own personal interpretation of Scripture and then pronounces anathemas in its canons for anyone disagreeing with it?
Bless the Lord for what helps. It does seem RCs must be getting an indulgence for posting reposting refuted RC apologetics. Maybe to use up our time.
The same kind of disagreements that you castigated all "Protestants" for, you acknowledge exist in your church but somehow that still proves total unity that enables you to proclaim the superiority of the Roman Catholic church? I already acknowledged that there ARE major tenets of the Christian faith that are nonnegotiable - those that are clearly laid out IN Scripture which is the work of holy men of God carried along by the Holy Spirit to write what they did. They WERE the first leaders of the body of Christ. I hardly think they mistakenly omitted anything that was necessary for the salvation of souls.
The RCC did change and create new doctrines different from those held at the start which were given in Scripture. It was the FIRST guidebook and rule of faith and this was acknowledged repeatedly by most of the men called Early Church Fathers. Just reading their writings disputing the heresies of their day shows the continuous and consistent use of God's word to do so. To claim that all Catholics "constantly" appeal to Scripture and no one questions its authority ignores the existence of RCC practices which hold the authority of Scripture as EQUAL to tradition and the decisions of the Popes and magesterium. Some doctrines find NO basis in Scripture yet belief in them is mandated anyway. Maybe at one time Scripture was seen as the PRIME authority, but that was not the case during the Reformation and it isn't today.
Additionally, despite the claims of sola Scriptura, Protestants in fact do not actually act this way. Instead they bring some basic theological assumptions to the interpretation of Scripture which they inherited from the Reformers. Thus they are just as wedded to their own tradition as are Catholics.
There isn't anything wrong, per se, in having traditions - but they MUST be ones that have a Scriptural basis if they are to be enforced upon the whole church or proclaimed as essential for salvation. That really is the proper definition of sola Scriptura and at one time even the Roman Catholic church believed it and defended it. There are, like I said, basic doctrines that God has clearly told us in His word and we MUST believe them if we expect to be followers of Christ and be saved. For example, If some church decides nobody can be saved who doesn't give all their money and possessions to it and live as a commune under a central guru, then we can know they have no Scriptural basis for that and can label them as a cult and warn seekers away. If a Protestant church changes its statement of faith from belief in Jesus Christ as God in the flesh to Jesus was an angel God exalted to Savior, we can know the same way that they are a false religion. Sure, anyone can make up any religion they want - and there ARE millions of them out there, but it doesn't mean they are teaching the truth and are not being led by a false prophet.
Protestants, just like Catholics and Orthodox ALL have some central, agreed upon tenets that have always, by everyone and everywhere been held. These are the traditions - based upon Scriptural warrant - that differentiate Christianity from any other religion out there (even some who claim they are Christian). Individuals within each faith tradition must individually accept and believe what God has set forth as the faith. The Jewish people knew what they were because they had the word of God as their guide. Christians followed that same example and God did not fail to provide the same to us after Christ came to earth. What makes someone a Christian today is no different than it was at the start.
What Scripture says is not the same as what you says it says, this is only your private opinion on the matter. I, and many Catholics, find the competing Protestant interpretations of Scripture wanting. As well as having the authority of God's church behind them, the Catholic interpretation of Scripture just makes more sense.
Scripture says what it says. It is plain to understand by design. You prove Scripture BY Scripture. There really is no big mystery on Biblical interpretation. Words in context mean what they say. God expects us to obey, not fight over who is right or wrong about what He tells us. You cling to the authority of "God's church" and, believe it or not, I do too. I just disagree with you on who you say IS God's church. I don't believe it is a central organization based out of Rome, headed by one man who claims to be divinely gifted with infallibility that was passed down to him by the guy before him and so on.
Apostolic authority is one of MESSAGE, not position. And the message is proved by God's sacred and inspired word - the Bible. One of the ways anyone knew someone was passing on the teachings (that's what tradition is) was by how what they said was what has always been believed and what has always been believed is found IN Scripture. It IS our rule of faith - STILL.
You’ll have to EXPLAIN what you are driving at here.
Hey SLC!!!
We've got a prospect for ya!
Did you fail to read reply #73; or just ignore the facts found in it?
He is addressing “The Rock”that was named by him. PETER.
And I play word games?
Ha ha HA!
And miss out on all this umbrage being taken?
Not on your life!
Oh; HE does!
HE's shown me what Scripture REALLY means, and has given me the ability to post it on FR.
Catholics throw HISSY fits when they see the facts!
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
I predict that a YES/NO answer will not be forthcoming.
Or are they always unanimous?
I hope you are not confusing the Magi with the Quorum of Twelve...
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
1 John 3:21-23
Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.
Would that be the list of infallible ones? Or is that decrees that the Church has ordained that MUST be believed?
And just where does on get that list?
Does that include all the stuff about Mary being born sinless, perpetually virgin, and bodily assumed?
Does one must believe that the pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra?
Does that mean that one must believe that the priest can and does forgive their sins and that without that they are not forgiven? That God Himself cannot override the priest and forgive sins Himself?
Does one HAVE to believe that salvation, life eternal, comes through eating the eucharist and that if one doesn't partake of the eucharist, one does not go to heaven?
Please provide a list of doctrines that a Catholic MUST believe to remain a Catholic in good standing.
Ya think????
More or less. The only corrections that I would make is that the claims of the Catholic Church are not based on historical usage but on divine institution. Furthermore, this authority is not exercise solely by the see of Rome but by the entire Catholic Church.
I think the disputes between Catholics and Protestants as well as those between Protestants themselves bear out the limits of human reasoning as a sure guide of the truth.
Thus it remains that according to this premise assurance of Truth cannot be obtained upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, but requires an infallible magisterium.
Yes. Again I think the divisions in the church created after the introduction of sola Scriptura and the concept of private interpretation bear this out.
A valid comparison would be between sola ecclesia churches and those who most strongly hold to the most distinctive Prot doctrine, that of Scripture only being the infallible rule of faith as is the assured Word of God and transcendent standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims.
I should have stipulated that this is what I mean when I use the term Protestant, those who hold to one of the classic Protestant schools of theology. These are the only ones who have the intellectual honesty with which to enter into a debate. Those so-called liberal "Protestants", despite the legacy names from the past that they might have, can hardly be called Protestant. Indeed, some are even questionably Christian. They have moved from sola Scriptura to quis est Scriptura?.
That being said, I do think that the skepticism of these liberal "Protestants" can be traced to the introduction of the concept of private interpretation of Scripture. The idea of "nobody is going to tell me what Scripture means" has lead to "nobody is going to tell me what the truth is." But no, I do not count these when I critique Protestant thought.
However, RC position is not that the their teachings require actual Scriptural support, but only that they do not contradict it, nor is the veracity of RC teaching based upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, but upon the premise of the assured veracity of Rome.
Yes, there are some teachings that go beyond Scripture. This is clearly acknowledged but the vast majority of what Catholics believe is derived from Scripture. It is not enough that Catholic teaching not contradict Scripture. Throughout the centuries the Catholic Church has seriously studied the Scriptures to learn the truth. Scripture is the font from which flows the vast majority of Catholic teaching. The use of Scripture by Catholics to explain and defend her teaching bears this out and this is what I insist that Protestants acknowledge. To harp on those instances in which Catholics turn to Sacred Tradition and then imply that Catholics do not accept the authority of Scripture at all is dishonest.
So only Rome can make an infallible statement, versus possessing the gift of assured (conditional) infallibility?
If it is conditional then it is not infallible. And who possess this gift? What assurance do you have that, as a Catholic, I do not have this gift rather than you?
Nor should the gift of infallibility be considered to be localize just to Rome, something that is foreign to you. It is exercised by the entire Catholic Church, all the bishops of the world in union with the pope, as established by Jesus Christ. The bishop of the local see of where ever you live is also a part of this Magisterium.
It is amazing that Catholics will rail against Protestants as if they were presuming the gift of personal infallibility, versus basing the veracity of their assertions on the weight of infallible Scripture, while RCs expresses their own understanding of Scripture and of their church if they were infallible interpretations.
The difference is that Catholics look at the Church as being established by Jesus Christ and charged by him to be the teaching authority guarded by the Holy Spirit. All that a Protestant can assert is his own private judgment.
This is your interpretation, not a fact. Please do not confuse your opinions about Scripture with Scripture itself.
Yes, Scripture is the Word of God and has authority but in not one of your quotations is there mentioned “Scripture alone”.
No Elsie - you just can’t pretend that if protestants could somehow go back in time and replace the Popes with protestant leaders that there would be this miraculous utopia of a church with sinless, perfect humans and no scandals. Protestants have no more moral authority in pretending they could better run the Catholic Church, than the Pope can by somehow claiming he is not a sinner. Jesus picked sinful men like Peter, the 1st of 264 subsequent Popes, sinners, to lead his Church. Modern day Protestetants who spend more energy “Protesting” to justify why they are not Catholic than they spend on their relationship with Jesus, are not going to do any better in holding the office of Christ’s Church on earth.
You act like a knucklehead? Hmmm .
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.