Posted on 04/28/2015 8:36:56 AM PDT by RnMomof7
It’s a question that requires little thought to answer; are you infallible? It ranks right up there with, “Are you God?” But to Catholic apologists the question is quite serious; that’s because they believe that there is a man on earth who, on the subject of faith and morals, is infallible; they call him, “holy father.” See, it does rank right up there with, “Are you God,” at least when coming from people who think their leader is equal with God on deciding issues of faith and morals.
According to Catholic apologist, John Martignoni, this question should cause Protestants to suddenly doubt everything they believe, and Catholics should take comfort in knowing they and only they, have an infallible leader here on earth. But how can they know? Is there one Catholic person out there, besides the pope of course, who will confess to being infallible? And if a Catholic is not infallible, how can he or she “know” their pope is infallible? They can’t! So if they cannot infallibly declare their pope to be infallible, then their assertion is nothing more than a fallible opinion. And if they are wrong, which my fallible counter-assertion says they are, then they are being deceived.
The logic that so often accompanies claims of papal infallibility goes something like this: “Jesus did not leave His people vulnerable to the doctrinal whims of competing leaders.”
The logic used is quite revealing; it indicates very strongly that those who use it have no idea what it means to have the gift of the Holy Spirit, because if they had the gift of the Holy Spirit they would not be looking to Rome for infallible direction. It also reveals that they think everyone else is like them, wanting to follow the whims of their leaders. It also denies the notion that Christ has relationship with man through the gift of the Holy Spirit. Their magisterium reserves that privilege for themselves and people buy into it. It’s no different than Mormons following their prophet in Utah.
The pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church, but the Apostle Paul explicitly said that Christ is the head of His Church and He reconciles all things to Himself. To wit, Catholics will be quick to agree that Christ is the head, but then immediately contradict themselves by saying, “but He established the papacy through which He reveals His truths .” Based on what? If Christ is the head and we are the body, where does the papacy fit in? I see no evidence of this claim in Scripture or history, so if the evidence is not there the papacy must belong to a different body; one that is not associated with Christ and His church.
In his newsletter on his website where he shares chapter one of his new book, “Blue Collar Apologetics,” John Martignoni instructs his faithful followers to establish the fact that Protestants are not infallible early on in discussions with them. The purpose of doing this is to attempt to convince the Protestant that he could be wrong about what he believes. The funny thing is Martignoni never tells his readers what to do if the Protestant turns the question back on them; and that is most certainly what is likely to happen.
Does Martignoni really not see this coming, or is he simply at a loss for how to address it? Once a Catholic apologist is faced with admitting their own fallibility, they will immediately be forced to deal with the realization that their claim of papal infallibility is itself a fallible opinion; so they must, therefore, admit that they could be wrong as well. And once they realize the playing field is level, the evidence will do the talking.
A Catholic apologist who is willing to concede that his belief regarding papal infallibility is nothing more than a fallible opinion will likely ask another similar question, “What church do you belong to and how old is it?” In their minds this is the true “gotcha” question. They believe, in their fallible opinions of course, that they belong to the church founded by Christ nearly 2000 years ago. But the fact is, and yes it is a fact, there was no Roman Catholic Church 2000 years ago; it took a few hundred years for that to develop. Furthermore, by their own admission, the doctrines they hold equal in authority to the Bible, which they call “sacred traditions,” did not exist at the time of the apostles; that also is a fact.
There is something, however, that is clearly older than any Protestant or Roman Catholic Church and that is the written books of the Bible. If a person bases his or her faith on these written works then no supposed authority that came later can undermine the power of God working through them. It is unfortunate that when a person comes to Christ in faith through reading the Bible, that there are so-called Christians who come along to cast doubt in their minds. For example, in a tract on the Catholic Answers website called, “By What Authority,” it is stated, “In fact, not one book of the Bible was written for non-believers.”
Not according to the Apostle John who explicitly wrote, “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name”? He did not say these are written because you believe; he said, these are written that you may believe. John’s gospel is a firsthand written testimony of the ministry of Jesus for the purpose of bringing people to Him, and Catholic apologists are telling us it was never John’s intention for us to become believers by reading it? Amazing; isn’t it? The Catholic Answers philosophy seems to be to make up facts rather than face them.
So for the sake of the next John Martignoni disciple who wants to ask me if I am infallible, the answer is no; and incidentally your answer to my identical question is also no. Thus I am not interested in your fallible opinion that your pope is infallible when speaking on faith and morals. Perhaps one of you can go tell Mr. Martignoni that chapter his one is incomplete, and that he might want to consider adding a realistic response to his question rather than a bunch of scenarios where the Protestant is simply dumbfounded. His current scenarios might have been fun for him to write, but they are only going to embarrass his readers when they go out armed with the Martignoni sword.
Recommend you read Ephesians 1:13-14 and the Greek behind it.
I would post the judging as by fire except it would be too hard a saying for Cathaholics to read.
According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
Source book, chapter, verse?
If we Christians are honest, I would suspect the vast majority of us struggle daily with sin. I know I certainly do. I do not have as much victory over sin as I wish I did. The struggle goes on EVERYDAY. I remember what Dwight L Moody said. He felt like a lifeboat on the sea, to get as many people saved as possible, so we preach the gospel, while there is still time. The day is coming, however, when the struggle will be over. Remember, precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His saints, remembering to CAREFULLY define what a saint is. 😇
We are told to not quench the Spirit or to grieve Him, but nowhere is there any indication that we can kick him out or drive Him out, or that He will leave us or forsake us.
2 Corinthians 1:21-22 And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.
2 Corinthians 5:4-8 For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.
So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
Ephesians 1:13-14 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.
Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Colossians 1:13-14 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Colossians 2:13-14 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
Colossians 3:3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
1 Peter 1:3-5 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3156607/posts?page=313#313
2 Corinthians 1:21-22 Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
For which the Greek, from the Byzantine, is:
2Corinthians 1:21-22 ο δε βεβαιων ημας συν υμιν εις χριστον και χρισας ημας θεος ο και σφραγισαμενος ημας και δους τον αρραβωνα του πνευματος εν ταις καρδιαις ημων
The first word in bold above is “bebaion,” the idea of confirmation, frequently used in commercial settings to confirm a bargain. Which of course makes sense of the remaining terms used here, which are also elements of a secured contract.
The second word in bold above is “sphragisamenos,” being sealed is to be marked by the signature, signet ring, or other unique proof of identity, that we belong to God, and this sealing is done by God, who is the one taking action in this verse. We do not and cannot seal ourselves. We do not, by our own powers, have access to God’s “signet ring.”
The third bolded word above is “arrabona,” and indicates what we might loosely refer to as earnest money, but in Hebrew culture conveys more the idea of a pledge of covenant, a security given as a guarantee that the deal will go through, though we only receive part payment at the beginning. See ערב for the related Hebrew stem indicating “pledge.”
1 Cor 3: 10 -13
But just what is your point? Still trying to make a case for a perpetual infallible magisterium since there is none in Scripture, either explicitly or as essential for discernment and authority? Or are you simply trying to show that i do not believe in any magisterium and convince me of what i said i affirmed?
But as for your request, i have more than once during my times in churches, but should it be doctrine or discipline? I will provide both. As part of a Fundamental church years ago, whose quality of preaching, moral standards and commitment to doctrinal purity and souls was far more than all other churches i knew, esp. Rome (i became born again while still a RC and know both sides), I became convinced - after some real honest searching - that God had not taken away the Pentecostal gifts, and that even if i did not see any operative then doctrinally i had to allow for them.
(I am in fact quite skeptical of claims of such operating, and critical of the Benny Hinn type genre.)
However, in this church one could not even disagree with the rapture teaching, and i felt i could not heartily say "Amen" when Pentecostals were denigrated without distinction along with cults. Thus this, along with some other points, led me to leave that church, though i yet continued with another Fundamental church that i was concurrently also serving in (with the knowledge of both), whose pastor was not so doctrinally intensive.
However, the Lord often led me to go into the local barrooms and offer tracts for free, though it was usually only a matter of seconds before i was forced out by the management at my back.
But the pastor thought it could be a bad testimony, and therefore i had to stop going there. Well, i think for the most part i obeyed until he later moved on.
These are not the only examples i could provide during many years, and even if i could have pushed matters higher, there was no real need to do so.
But what if there was? Suppose my reservations about some conclusions of Calvinism prevented me from ever being called upon to teach others, and so i progressively went as high as i could go in a hierarchical church in presenting my case? Upon what basis would the veracity of their decision rest and be settled? That mere fact that the Church made this decision is a guarantee that it is valid?
Or would its veracity and enduring acceptance have to rest upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power? Under which did the church begin, and its leadership establish their Truth claims? And decision in Acts 15? And what power enforced discipline of dissenters?
And in real life, what has happened when Rome most recently issued judgments without the threat of the power of the sword of men (and or claiming autocratic power) to enforce it? As one poster wryly commented,
The last time the church imposed its judgment in an authoritative manner on "areas of legitimate disagreement," the conservative Catholics became the Sedevacantists and the Society of St. Pius X, the moderate Catholics became the conservatives, the liberal Catholics became the moderates, and the folks who were excommunicated, silenced, refused Catholic burial, etc. became the liberals. The event that brought this shift was Vatican II; conservatives then couldn't handle having to actually obey the church on matters they were uncomfortable with, so they left. — Nathan, http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2005/05/fr-michael-orsi-on-different-levels-of.html
Comparing this to a RC, one can be a weekly RC and disagree on quite serious matters and never have it become a problem.
And while a RC may be able to appeal to higher levels than his own pastor, which i support in principal, the question remains, where in Scripture do we see ensured infallibility essential for magisterial authority and discerning what is of God? If it was, then why did God not provide it even when dissent from the magisterium was a capital offense?
Where do we see unconditional assent of mind and will enjoined and dissent unconditionally excluded as ever being valid, since the magisterium at its highest level of exercise cannot possibly ever be wrong?
You see, it is not enough to fault Prots who dismiss the need for the magisterial office and authority, or fault it as not going high enough, but you must provide a perpetually infallible magisterium from Scripture, even due to this quality being essential in Scripture for the discernment of Truth and authority.
It'll save you from having to write pedantic statements like "Once again you are displaying your ignorance of the RF..."
Thank you. That did not apply here.
I have attended MANY Masses at scout camps...outside...whatever weather...and they were as meaningful as Mass in any Cathedral. However, when Catholicism was beginning in the first century...holding Mass outside probably became a little stressful so they decided to build a church building...probably just a modest house. They then thought...we are honoring the creator of the universe so lets try to build an edifice that is a little more appropriate, so they built a nice church building....and it progressed from there. Nothing wrong with that, just man's attempt to offer to God to build as beautiful a building as possible to honor Him...
Yeah, but it will sooner or later. Catholics usually come home after they realize that their store front excuse for leaving the church was a really bad idea and certainly did not fulfill their search for what they thought was missing....it wasn't.See you soon, back where you belong.!!
Just where did I err in pointing out that you accepted the influence of a person that you considered a jerk in leading you away from Christ's church?????????????????
Actually, I knew what I was missing. The most important thing in all creation: Heaven. I didn't want to miss it, so I changed my state of residence, from Hell to Heaven. It's a beautiful thing. Everyone should try it. When I was a catholic, I did not have even one ray of hope for Heaven. Now, I do. I decided to trust in Christ, and not in man made religions, even if people think their religion is the one true church.
See you soon, back where you belong.!!
I am already where I belong, in the arms of Jesus, not in some church, so don't hold your breath. Look, I know you are concerned with people, but don't you think it just might be entirely possible that others are too? All I can say is, I hope you make it. I will. See you at the pearly gates.
I do. About every 5 minutes.
I've stopped stressing about sin though.
God knows I do it. I know I do it.
For one thing, temptation is not sin so I don't need to beat myself up for being weak when I get tempted. I just say, "Nope, not going there. Get out of here."
And if I do sin, I see it as evidence that God is working in me, showing me stuff so I can confess of it and repent of it and we can work together on it to over come it.
But I also know, and He also knows, that as long as I'm in this body, I WILL sin. It's going to happen, so I thank Him that He chose to save me anyway and is working on me to over come it all anyway.
He isn't looking at me as I see myself. He sees me clothed in the righteousness of Christ and the finished product to the praise of His glory. He's looking at what I can become in Him, what He's making me in the new man, not in the flesh which has been crucified with Christ.
Sometimes I thing we expect more of ourselves than God expects of us, that we set higher standards for us than He does.
I know that I am much more forgiving of other people than I am of myself.
Hang in there, brother. He's working on you and not discouraged with what you think are setbacks.
There are areas where dispute is allowed for, things that Paul refers to as *disputable matters*.
GOD HIMSELF, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, allows room for disagreement on issues. Who are people to try to usurp that?
Romans 14:1-23 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”
So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.
Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.
Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.
We are all works in progress, all beginning at a different place in life with a different background of teaching, experiences, upbringing, etc. God works on us from the inside out, taking care of first what HE knows needs to be dealt with the most. It isn't going to fit someone else's ideas of what should be going on but rather God's timetable and plan.
People in their arrogance, presume to sit in judgment on others, pointing fingers at each other in pride, condemning them for not being like us, when we don't even know if we'd be doing half as well as them if we started from where they are, and presuming to sit in judgment of the work of God in their lives, in effect sitting in judgment on God.
And what's really the worse sin?
The smoking? The drinking? The perceived error in doctrine?
Or the pride, judgment, and condemnation that is in us when we sit in judgment of others who we really are no better than or who are no better than us?
The problem with a legalistic religious system, be it Catholicism, some Baptist churches, some cult churches, whatever, is that it fosters an us against them mentality where we condemn others for things that God does not and then it puffs people up with pride. It leaves no room for mercy and compassion. Just beating someone over the head for failure to measure up to the standards established by some church hierarchy.
Dealing with sin means dealing with the heart, not just the outward actions. After all, the Pharisees were righteous, ACCORDING TO THE LAW.
In Catholicism, I found NO room for mercy and grace, just judgment and condemnation, always being beat over the head with it, needing to beg God for forgiveness, thinking He would reject me for any least little sin, looking for an excuse to send me to hell for the least little infraction, and punishing for for the same.
Fortunately, I found out what God is REALLY like....
Psalm 103:1-14Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is within me, bless his holy name!
Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits, who forgives all your iniquity,who heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from the pit, who crowns you with steadfast love and mercy, who satisfies you with good so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's.
The Lord works righteousness and justice for all who are oppressed. He made known his ways to Moses, his acts to the people of Israel.
The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. He will not always chide, nor will he keep his anger forever. He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities.
For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.
As a father shows compassion to his children, so the Lord shows compassion to those who fear him. For he knows our frame; he remembers that we are dust.
The Catholic church needs to get over itself and stop trying to make cookie cutter Christians out of people.
In post 1006 you said..... see post 937...metmom got her inspiration from a guy at work that everyone thought was nuts.
I didn't *accept the influence of a person I considered a jerk.*
I had already turned my life over to God, and when this guy started talking about the things of God, the Holy Spirit convicted me of the truth of what the guy was saying, in spite of what I or others thought of him.
In Him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed in Him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, which is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.Now: you didn't tell me your specific objection, nor did you tell me the specific point you wanted to highlight in Ephesians 1:13-14, so (as I sad) I'll have to guess. Are you looking at the idea of the "guarantee of our inheritance", with an eye to the Protestant idea of "one-time event of salvation" and/or "once-saved-always-saved"? If, so, I'm not sure how you could say that... nor do I see how this conflicts at all with what I wrote.
Well done!
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.