Posted on 08/24/2014 3:18:46 AM PDT by markomalley
Then the term “father” or “papa” or “Pope” doesn’t fit any one circumstance, now does it?
Logic!
Also - yours is a mistranslation;
countless guides??
I don’t think so.
The vulgate says; for if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many Fathers.
It is important to get the correct tanslation. KJV and protestants edited words - they have a fear of the Father word ... be aware.
HarleyD:
No actually, it is you that are more like them. They claim the Church went off the rails at the end of the 1st century, many Fundie Protestants use to claim it happened when Constantine made the Roman Catholic Church the state church [except he did no such thing], some now claim it was Emperor Theodosius, who did make it that, some claim it was Pope Damasus, some claim when Leo the Great was Pope, etc.
The Catholic Church claims 100%, Christ the Word made Flesh came into the world at a point of history and history has forever been changed and that he indeed found a Church to be a visible sign of his presence in the world for the rest of time and the Holy Spirit was sent to guide that Church down thru the centuries. The notion that Christ would become Incarnate, found a Church let if go off the rails doctrinally till the arrival of Mormonism, or JW, or Adventist or modern Pentecostalism is inconceivable and of course all these guys have their dates when the Catholic Church went off the railroad tracks, yet none of them can give you the precise date and all of them come up with some doctrines that are say well “????????”
I was on a blog called Called to Communion [as observer, not posting, although I have posted there before], run by Catholics who were once Reformed [some Anglican-Reformed, some Presbyterian, etc] and some of the Protestants that post there now claim it was Saint Augustine who caused the Catholic Church to go off the rails because of his faulty understanding of Hebrew, thus he did not get the nuances of it when he did his Theological writings in Latin [that is the readers digest version of it].
I don’t believe Christ came into the world, founded a Church, and then would not guide it to preserve and defend the authentic doctrine he left to the Apostles and for that Church which received it, in the form of a seed, would come to a fuller understanding of it as it faced challenges from unorthodox groups, etc.
Actually the Church started down the wrong road around 600AD when it accepted both John Cassian's (free will) and Augustine's (grace) views to be held jointly together. By 1000AD the Orthodox left when they excommunicated the Pope. By 1200AD so many were leaving the Roman Catholic Church that the Church had to issue new rulings that grace through the Eucharist could only be administered by a priest and that you had to attend the Church (check the 4th Lateran Council of 1215AD). The Catholics got so mad about criticism about their errors that they were willing to burn John Wycliffe at the stake for translating the Bible for all to read. By the 1500s, the time of the Reformation, there were so many errors that it was time for reform. One would have hope they would have looked inward. But that didn't stopped Catholics from issuing later doctrines like the infallibility of the Pope (something the Orthodox will never buy), the deity of Mary, etc.
It isn't surprising that Catholics have given up on Augustine (as well as some Protestants). Augustine is the heart of the Reformation. Whether Augustine had a faulty view of Hebrew I don't know and is immaterial. What Augustine did have was a superior understanding of theology-how scripture fits together-a rare gift. His later writings showed a progress in his thinking and understanding. Consequently, Augustine was one of the very first people to put together a systematic theology, at a time when few thought about that.
No one would argue that Christ isn't preserving the church. The argument centers on what precisely is the church. If you want to argue that the church is the Roman Catholic Church, then you would be right according to the RCC dogma but wrong according the Vatican II. Either only those people in the Catholic Church can be saved or other people outside the Catholic Church can be saved as well. Catholics cannot say what is right.
So what precisely is Christ preserving? What is "authentic doctrine"?
1Co 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.So the KJV went with the literal meaning on murioi ("10,000"), but good lexical resources will tell you this had become an expression effectively meaning "countless," so I get why some translators would use it on a theory of dynamic equivalence. I'm just not a big fan of dynamic equivalence. Though I will also concede there are translation scenarios where there really is no way to do a direct translation and searching for some sort of equivalent function is a matter of necessity.
nam si decem milia pedagogorum habeatis in Christo sed non multos patres nam in Christo Iesu per evangelium ego vos genuiAnd the Greek:
εαν γαρ μυριους παιδαγωγους εχητε εν χριστω αλλ ου πολλους πατερας εν γαρ χριστω ιησου δια του ευαγγελιου εγω υμας εγεννησαAnd the Vulgate:
For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.See http://www.latinvulgate.com/lv/verse.aspx?t=1&b=7&c=4
Third entry “And the Vulgate” should be “And the Douay-Rheims.” Sorry.
HarleyD:
Well I appreciate you giving me a date 600AD. Grace and Free will can’t go together?? I disagree, it is we on this side of the divide can’t reconcile how they do, only God knows.
You missed what I said, it was the Protestants who were attacking Saint Augustine, not Catholics. In other words, it was Protestants posting at a Catholic site stating Augustine got it wrong with his justification that was infused [Grace is not the debate] because he was not fluent in Hebrew and his understanding of Hebrew got lost in translation in Latin via Greek from the Hebrew [Again, it was the Protestants, Reformed mind you, criticizing Augustine, not Catholics]. Catholics have not given up on Augustine as he was one.
Diety of Mary, not even going to respond to that. No such thing has happened and can happen as she is human. I thought you would have gotten that by now as the Assumption of Mary has been discussed, and I think you and I have actually been part of those discussions. Mary is not God and no Catholic teaching would ever make such claim because that is heresy.
he issue of pre-Vatican II and post Vatican II on who is part of the Church is what you are getting at. There is only 1 Church, all are in it at some level, some more than others, but all are related to it or part of it so the question of how one understands “outside the Church there is no salvation” is one of those things that has always been part of Church teaching, but it has never been completely and definitively defined.
And the notion of papa or Pope is being used precisely in the manner that Saint Paul speaks of being a Father to the Corinthians. Nothing controversial here.
I don't know about the TOPIC, but the TITLE is: If No One Is Pope, Everyone is Pope
Do wash your hands or leave them dirty when you eat ? If you are a parent, do you teach your children to wash their hands or leave them dirty when they eat ?
I don't think that was the reason. Jerome, who was Fourth Century, explained the ritual washing was from Psalm 26 and he would have been very aware of the story from the gospel.
I will wash mine hands in innocency: so will I compass thine altar, O Lord:
Elsie:
But the article by Msg. Pope was written to Catholics and the Liturgical Texts at last Sunday’s Mass were Isaiah 22:20-24 from the OT and Matthew 16:16-18. Msg. Pope’s blog is for Catholics wanting to get a solid explanation on the Liturgical Readings and this one related to the role of the Pope and thus how those 2 Scripture text are understood in Catholic ecclesiology and in particular to the role of the Pope [Bishop of Rome]. So yes, in the Catholicism, there is One Pope and I nor any other Catholic not the Pope [because he is the Pope] is it.
It has nothing to do with hygiene. It has to do with the authority of the rabbis to change the very commandments of YHWH.
Procedure and Practice
The procedure is to pour water out from a cup or glass first twice over the right hand and then twice over the left hand--care being taken that the unwashed hands do not touch the water used for the washing. The hands are then dried with a towel before partaking of the meal. A benediction is recited over the washing of the hands: "Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with Thy commandments and has commanded us concerning the washing of the hands."
The reference to the command has to be understood in the context that rabbinic ordinances are also commanded by God. Observant Jews are very strict in this matter of washing the hands before meals.
Src
IOW, The rabbis made it up to prove their own power.
If no one has beer, everyone has beer?
Well, using the often-used RC hermeneutic, since the Scripture does not say He did not and would not, then it can be, if Rome says so.
As your responses have made clear by now, you believe whatever Rome officially says, under the premise of her assured infallibility as the historical magisterium and steward of Scripture. End of fantasy.
Had you been in the first century, the faithful RC would follow the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in the seat of Moses as the historical magisterium and steward of Scripture, asking why you should follow an itinerant preacher in the desert who are insects who disagreed with the magisterium who thus rejected him.
As well as another itinerant preacher who reproved them by Scripture, and invoked the baptism of the first itinerant preacher when challenged to name who gave Him His authority. (Mk. 11:27-33)
And who established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)
And the common people rightly discerned Truth and followed these preachers while the historical magisterium was wrong.
Laity: Never man spake like this man. Then answered the Catholic, "Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed." (cf John 7:46-49)
Mat 23:8-10 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. (9) And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. (10) Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
I'm quite sure that you believe this; but...
2 Corinthians 5:18-21
18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
HMMMmmm...
Nothing about 'church' here.
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.