Posted on 11/25/2011 7:50:11 PM PST by rzman21
No I won’t. Next you’ll be ranting about how Peter is The Rock upon which your church is founded. Even though he denied his Lord three times.
Maybe He meant them as well.
The Church IN NOT a human institution. And the Church does NOT stand between a Catholic and his/her God. It merely points the way and nourishes the soul.
The whole Billy Graham bit about individualistic salvation isn’t supported by the Bible, nor is the doctrine of Sola Fide.
Jesus commanded us to be subject to the apostles and to be one. And the apostles in turn ordained the bishops as their successors. St. Paul says in Hebrews that we are to obey them, so Protestants abandoned the Church that Christ founded.
Salvation has collective and individual aspects. Evangelicalism’s major error is its overemphasis on the individual over the collective or communitarian aspects.
Apostolic succession was emphasized early on to distinguish the apostolic Christians from the heretical Gnostics.
Protestantism’s muddying these waters has paved the way for the likes of Dan Brown to run around claiming that Gnostics were just misunderstood Christians.
Judge not lest ye be judged.
ping for later
Here is your answer:
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father
Seems like some Protestants always try and find a way to discredit the Catholic Vhurch, the very Church that all other Christian religions came from...
What a colossal lie. The "Catholic" church did not come around for eons after all the apostles died (most of them MARRIED, but the catholic church doesnt like it when people mention that fact).
“Maybe in your 16th century revisionist Christianity and manmade dogma of Sola Scriptura.”
No Bishop Paul, no Bishop Timothy, Etc. and no Fathers either.
“Sorry FRiend, but I don’t need a mortal man to accept Jesus, walk with Jesus, and live with Jesus.”
Well, actually you do. We all do. How else do you know of Jesus other than by the original writings of mortal men and by those men who have preserved Christianity across the generations? Would you even be a Christian were it not for the early disciples? Do you not see that we need future generations of men to continue to teach the Word? It is rather boastful to write that you know Jesus through your own acts and not because of anyone else. You only know Jesus because of the acts of many generations of men. You should be more humble, perhaps. Just a suggestion. The choice is yours.
Does the great Catholic art of the medieval period and the Renaissance also “give you the creeps”?
Having been taught to be a Catholic, I realized there was a 33.3% chance he was in Heaven and a 66.6% he was not.
It didn't take me too long to consider that was a "Good luck, kid .. I hope you make it" kind of situation and I refused to believe that God gave man such lousy odds.
Through a series of circumstances, not the least was a conversation with a Jesuit, Newman Center priest that concluded for me that "No man knows where they're going before they die and neither can they", that I read the Bible for the first time in my life.
Catholicism ceased to be a valid politic and I started attending an independent Baptist church.
My point is that, I understand language and words have meanings ... and if it takes higher learning to understand the Scriptures and God ... well ... get off this forum because we here believe the governmentation of one of God's gifts to man (The USA) was hammered out in Victorian English and transcribed for the generations to come in a language well suited for the superficially educated man or woman to understand.
We really DO have documents of "Thou shalts and Thou shalt nots" that 'higher learning politicians' are constantly trying to tell us they mean something other than what they say ... or that there is something there that ain't.
If you have to explain it..... Why not just take the WORD for it’s word?
They have no special powers nor titles (per se), but they too have our best in mind and we should follow their wisdom ... (Throw the firecracker you idiot .. do you want to lose a finger ?")
IOW, if they don't follow us by instead remaining faithful in Christ when they perceive us, tempt them to perform the same sin we perform by substituting themselves as Christ for others. In this fashion they also may step out of fellowship with God and not spiritually oppose those whom we seek to promote.
OTOH, by remaining in faith in Christ, we may study Scripture and accept what God provides by the work of God the Holy Spirit in us, rather than the soulish working of other men.
When they all depict Jesus (having never seen Him) with long hair, denying the Scriptural caution that a man have short hair ... yeah .. it does.
False. The only way I have EVER known Jesus Christ is by the sole ministry of God the Holy Spirit by His Word. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by His Word.
It is not a dead thing nor imaginary. No man, no matter how erudite, educated, mesmerizing, dignified, nor entertaining has ever had a similar power as that given directly by God Himself in this age of the hypostatic union.
Men and the Church may indeed promote our thinking so as to encourage our fellowship with God and His ministry, and as members of the Church, He has given us unique spiritual gifts to perform His volition by remaining in obedience to Him first, before any groupings of men.
Men might indeed give testimony and echo His Word, but it isn't their work which saves.
God doesn't need any member of the Bride of Christ to fulfill those things He has predestined and preordained.
All believers are today members of His Royal Priesthood.
Probably the same reason the early Church didn't grasp the doctrine of the Trinity until around 400 AD.
I know I may be preaching to the choir, but the following reasoning might assist those who do not understand the discernment involved.
Which has more authority?
A man wearing traditional garb, insisting we call him Father, and given such a title by Tradition within the RCC?
OR
The Word of God instructing us not to call another man Father?
If the later, then how can one place any veracity in the volition of the former?
If the former, then he has now become the counterfeit substitute for what God has provided in a direct relationship with God the Father via His Son.
Unlike any other time before the Incarnation, believers today have the power given them by God the Father to have a direct relationship with Him.
The ONLY intermediary is God the Son. Any other intermediary becomes a counterfeit substitute for Christ. What has that counterfeit substitute provided which not only exceeds that of the Son, but is even recognized by God the Father as senior to that which He has given the Son?
None
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.