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.
Based on.........?
O.K., but I can only assume that she got her quotes, and scripture references, and inspiration from a .........Catholic Bible??...
Based on.........?
Based upon Rome's nasty penchant for inserting inclusions during the copy process.
That's EXACTLY what the protestants have done...if they saw something in the Bible that they didn't like, they changed it...how is that working out for you....it is very easy to believe anything, when you can change it at will!!
I love it when you attempt to justify your inane decision...you reinterpret whatever to suit your own needs . Please look back at where you came from and where you are headed...it is virtually impossible for any one human being to understand the entirety of Christianity without the guidance of the organization which Christ has put in charge of helping us do so.....impossible, ...not difficult, ...impossible
Yeah, but you will notice that my opinions are virtually always correct...;0)
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
well, I looked in the first century and didn't find it...did you, and if so, where???
please provide an example of a non-Catholic, non protestant, Christian.
a Protestant is, by definition, a non Catholic almost Christian.
all true Christians agree on all Catholic doctrines....
TC, I knew you were a tad older than me, but I did not think you were around in the 1st Century.
:-)
No we do not.
LOL.
O.K., but I can only assume that she got her quotes, and scripture references, and inspiration from a .........Catholic Bible??...
That is kind of ironic. I mean, all true Christians know that there is only one true church. It is the 1901st Comm Gp, 60th MAW of the 2nd Removed Navigators Church of the Divine Word. Guaranteed to navigate you 🚣🏿 through muddy waters 😎 trying times, 😱 tumultuous days, 🙀 foggy weather, 😸 Known to relieve people from gloom, despair and agony on me, deep dark depression, excessive misery. 🎶🎤🎧 Oh yes, I almost forget. It clears out all the false doctrines of those works based religions, henceforth known as WBRs. They will remain un named, but the guilty parties know who they are. 🙉🙈🙊 They got me to read my old Catholic family Bible. It was the smartest thing I ever did. I had no idea my Catholic Bible would clear up so many things. I did not even have to throw out any New or Old Testament books to fit my desires. 😡 I did not add any, and I interpreted everything correctly, without the help of a catholic priest. I am not sure if they are supposed to interpret it for me, or just read it and tell me what it says. 😃😄😀 Either way, I did not need them. Everyone should read their Catholic Bibles. They might come away with a different point of view. Don't knock it till you've tried it. Let's hear it for the only true church. 🎷🎻🎸🎺🎼🎶🎵🎤
It might be good to observe that in spite of Jewish claims to infallibility, and the identical claims of infallibility by the Roman church, the ecclesiastical branch has never been very good at maintaining pure doctrine - It has ever been the prophet who is raised up with the purpose of straightening them boys out.
Of course, they don't like being upbraided much, so in righteous indignation, they kill the prophet, and eventually YHWH quits sending prophets altogether. A few questions arise thereby:
Foremost: Where have all the prophets gone (long time passing)
If Israel was punished for every prophet from Abel to Zacharias, I wonder who will catch the grief for all the prophets since Zacharias?
Lastly, when the prophets do finally again appear, they arrive as a prophet of doom. Who in our day will recognize an Ezekiel, laying naked in the streets, playing with sandcastles and cooking on poop?
AUTHORITAY!!! It is a caution.
You post the same things over and over in the face of all the evidence and proof that goes contrary to what you claim...
The apostles knew what they were preaching and later committed to writing was scripture...John of course knew what was scripture and what wasn't...He ultimately put the cap on it, so to speak with the book of Revelation...
They didn't need a council to decide what to teach and preach...And that canon was being protected centuries before you religion was created...
All your religion gave the world was a perverted set of the gospels, epistles, letters, Law, Prophets and Psalms...
nice try..but wrong. Where in Scripture does it say those things? Answer: no where. But I’ll tell you what Scripture DOES say: that Peter and the 11 were commissioned by Christ, that what they bound on earth was bound in heaven, and what they loosed on earth was loosed in heaven. Matthias was chosen. And that decision was binding. Unless you want to call God a liar.
I've never met a Catholic who knew let alone agreed on all Catholic doctrine.
A Catholic woman I used to work with said her "Priest" told her that she could think of God as female if she wanted.
Catholicism, 500,000 denominations all under one roof.
Martin Luther
“I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.”
- - - - - -
Martin Luther (attributed to him)
The Bible is the ultimate rule of faith. (This tradition is not found in the Bible)
- - - - - -
The Bible tells us that the “ignorant and unstable” twist the Scriptures to their own destruction.
The Bible calls the church “the pillar and foundation of truth,” and Jesus tells us that His Church is the ultimate rule of faith.”
“If he won’t listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” —Jesus
My point is that Luther’s non-biblical doctrine of Sola Scriptura has resulted in countless, often contradicting, interpretations and denominations, in opposition to Christ’s desire for Christian unity.
At most, all Protestants may hold a handful of doctrines in common, and of those Sola Scriptura is erroneous.
In contrast, the Catholic Church, the Church that Christ founded, offers a rich and non-contradictory body of Sacred Teaching that can be found on-line in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
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.