Posted on 08/22/2018 9:11:36 AM PDT by ebb tide
No, the church met for hundreds of years under the model set forth in Paul’s letter to Timothy where he outlined the qualifications of elders and deacons. (“Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.”)
The Catholic church really didn’t start until 313AD when Emperor Constantine declared himself leader over Rome and the Christian church. The Bible never explicitly refers to Peter as pope or overall leader. Peter was also married.
The first catholic pope in Rome was Leo I in 440AD.
If Peter was Pope, he sure didn’t act like every other Pope.
Check out what he wrote in I Peter 5. To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder and a witness of Christ’s sufferings who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.
He called himself just a fellow elder, one among equals. He cautioned against dishonest gain and against lording over others in the flock (the church)
To be fair, I also believe the Pastor system promoted by most protestant churches isn’t really correct either. The Bible doesn’t refer to pastors as a job, rather an avocation or spiritual gift. The gift of being a pastor is to be there to help others divine the truth of scripture and to guide them.
Scripture is pretty clear that churches should be managed by a plurality of leaders (elders) and not one man and certainly not a hierarchal structure.
For the record, I was raised catholic, attended catholic schools and left when I was about 18 when I discovered the truth of scripture rather than traditions of man. I also had some minor run ins with homosexual priests.
While I do believe the catholic church to be biblically far off base, I also believe that there are many true Christians within the church. It’s extremely sad to me that the leaders are so willing to turn a blind eye to devastating criminal behavior among those who should be most trusted.
While I do believe the catholic church to be biblically far off base, I also believe that there are many true Christians within the church.
While I am on the Catholic side of the divide, I appreciate the balance and analysis in your post and the one that I am generally in agreement with, though from my perspective, if one truly delves into the Bible, we’re the ones that are fully Biblical.
There is a joke about this, that I’ve heard from the Catholic perspective.
A man dies, and is being given a tour of heaven. St. Peter says:
Over here, we have the Catholics. They had the whole truth, but didn’t live all that much of that.
Here we have the Baptists, who lived what they had with fervour.
And here we have the Episcopalians. My, aren’t they dressed nice.
In fairness, I should note that on my mother’s side, I’m descended from Baptists and Anglicans (Dad’s Norwegian Lutheran).
, we’re the ones that are fully Biblical.
He most likely can make Catholics out of gravel.
Might take good aggregate for a Protestant.
There is a remnant, I would not claim being RC, P, Or jewish as my ticket into heaven.
Now as to being fully biblical. Explain to me why the Catholic 10 commandments are not that same as in the Bible.
The Hebrew Biblical text doesn’t come with numbers, so it is up to the reader to figure out how to get to divide the material up to get to ten. One could ejust as asily end up with eleven or nine if one were not told that the answer was ten, depending on whether one likes terse prose or prosaic prose.
The Church Fathers differed among themselves in how they divided things up. Of those who we have enough writings remaining to know their method of division, the best-known to follow the Catholic (and Lutheran) way of dividing things is St. Augustine.
However one divides it, if one compares Bibles I think that one will find that Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 read the same. Only when one begins looking at excerpted versions will one discover that catechietical traditions sometimes tend to abbreviation.
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.