Posted on 05/16/2012 11:39:02 AM PDT by Salvation
Extra information for all at How Infallibility Works
Infallible Infallibility
Docility (on Catholic dogma and infallibility)
Beginning Catholic: Infallibility: Keeping the Faith [Ecumenical]
Papal Infallibility [Ecumenical]
Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)
Pope: may all Christians recognize true meaning of Peter’s primacy
THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH
Pope St. Leo the Great and the Petrine Primacy
The Epiphany of the Roman Primacy
THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH [Ratzinger]
Catholic Ping.
Let the hijacking begin!
Paul warned us about those introducing false teachings, "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." (2 Tim. 4:3–4).
The protestant “reformation” is simply not Biblical:
“I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas"; still another, "I follow Christ."
Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. 1Cor 1:10-17
You could easily read the above as “One of you says, "I follow Luther"; another, "I follow Calvin"; another, "I follow Wesley"; still another, "I follow Christ."
Christians cannot be “perfectly united in mind and thought” when they have different beliefs on, say, the necessity of water baptism, while others believe “This is my Body” means “This is a cookie”
God bless in your journey to the truth.
“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Mat 6:18
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.” John 16:12-13
“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” 1Tim 3:15
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." Mat 28:18-20
Fortunately, we have Christ’s promise that heresies will never prevail against the Church. They will arise, endure sometimes for centuries, like Protestantism, but we can be confident in Christ’s promise that the Church He established will always teach the Truth.
Everyone knows where this going.
I heard Patrick Madrid on Catholic-Radio talking about the infallibility of the Pope.
Patrick Madrid said something like this: Just about everyone thinks someone is ‘infallible’ when teaching about religion. It may be themselves, Uncle-Harry, their minister or a televangelist. People learn ‘truths’ about religion & the Bible & they ‘believe it’ no matter what is >actually in the Bible.
Joe: ‘The Pope ain’t infallible.’
Moe: ‘How do you know? Are you the Pope? Are you infallible?’
Joe: ‘I ain’t no Pope & ain’t infallible. No one is infallible!’
Moe: ‘You just admitted you’re not infallible = you can be >wrong! Maybe, the Pope is infallible & you don’t know what you’re talking about. You just be admitting your own short-comings.’
Joe: ‘Why am talking to you? If I wanted to hear about my short comings & failures, I’d go home & listen to my wife & mother-in-law.’
Rom. 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Do ‘t invite them! LOL!
They don’t believew Jesus when he gave the Keys to the Kingdom to Peter!
Yet they believe in Peter’s books in the Bible.
Where is their truth?
Did you read the article?
Infalliability isn’t about not sinning......that word is impeccability.
A Pope is human, just like us. He at least goes to Confession weekly, and I think I remember Pope John Paul II going to Confession daily.
Please go back and read that in the article!
John 14:26
“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.”
John 16:13
“However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.”
John 16:17
“Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”
Romans 2:10,11
“ but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.”
Text: Matthew 16:13-20
Is the Papcy Biblical
I. The world was fascinated with the process the Roman Catholic Church used to pick a new pope.
A. We were given detailed accounts of all the traditions surrounding a pope’s selection
B. We were shown the events step by step.
C. But in all the hoopla, how many wondered where the papacy came from?
1. It certainly wasn’t from the Bible because popes are not mentioned in the text.
2. Nor can you find cardinals, let alone elections, or colored smoke and the like.
D. The Roman Catholic Church bases it’s papacy on a set of beliefs
1. That Peter was the rock on which the church was founded
2. That Peter was the chief apostle
3. That there has be a succession to the apostles
E. While other denominations reject the papacy, the Roman Catholic church is not alone in these basic tenets.
1. Several major denominations believe that their leaders are a in a succession of leaders dating back to the apostles: one leader being appointed by other leaders, who were in turn appointed, and so on back to the days of the apostles.
2. The Episcopal Church and the Greek Orthodox Church are notable representatives of this belief.
II. Was Peter the rock? - Matthew 16:18
A. Much is made of the fact that Peter’s name means “stone” (Greek: petros)
1. What is glossed over is that Jesus said upon this rock (Greek: petra) I will build my church. There is a change in terms.
2. To slide around the difficulty, you will find people saying that Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, where the two words are the same. It is then argued that the difference was introduced by the translator to bring stylistic variances so it would be easier to read in Greek.
a. But wait! No Aramaic version of Matthew exists!
b. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “One thing which seems certain is that whatever this Hebrew (Aramaic) document may have been, it was not an original form from which the present Greek Gospel of Matthew was translated, either by the apostle himself, or by somebody else ... Indeed, the Greek Matthew throughout bears the impression of being not a translation at all, but as having been originally written in Greek.”
c. Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible: “It must be admitted, however, that no fragment of an Aramaic Matthew has ever been found and a Greek edition is more plausible than a Greek translation. Matthew’s gospel does not give evidence of being a translation, which is one of the weak evidences for the Aramaic theory.”
d. What leads scholars to admit that Matthew was written in Greek and not Aramaic?
(1) The little interpretations imbedded in the text - Matthew 1:23
(2) The smoothness of the word flow in Greek – especially idioms.
e. Besides other know translations, such as the Latin Vulgate preserves the different genders of the two words, using petrus (masculine) and petram (feminine) in it’s translation.
3. Some will say, Jesus spoke Aramaic and this was just translated by Matthew into Greek.
a. If so, Matthew was guided by the Holy Spirit in his writing - I Corinthians 2:12-13
b. Therefore the difference was by the choice of God, not man
B. Just who was the rock?
1. Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would be the foundation - Isaiah 28:16
2. Paul said Jesus was the Rock - I Corinthians 10:4
3. Peter quotes Isaiah and applies it to Jesus - I Peter 2:4-8
a. In this passage, Peter uses the Greek word lithos for stone
b. But note verse 8, he also calls Jesus a rock (Greek: petra) of offense – the same word Jesus used to say that upon this His church would be built.
c. Peter is claimed to be the Rock, but Peter said the rock was Christ!
4. The only foundation is Jesus Christ - I Corinthians 3:11
C. What was the rock in Matthew 16:18?
1. It was what Peter confessed, that Jesus was the Son of the Living God.
2. The truth of who Jesus was, is the foundation of the church.
III. Was Peter the chief apostle?
A. One proof offered is that when apostles are named, Peter always comes first.
1. While generally true, it is not always true - John 1:44; I Corinthians 3:22; 9:5; Galatians 2:9
2. Nor was Peter always first, such as at the foot washing - John 13:6
B. Another proof is the claim that Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom - Matthew 16:19
1. Yet it is ignored that Jesus repeated this in Matthew 18:18-20 to all the apostles.
2. When the church was founded, Peter was the main speaker, but notice - Acts 2:14
3. The foundation was laid on all the apostles - Ephesians 2:19-21
C. A few Catholics will claim that Peter was head of the council in Jerusalem, demonstrating his headship
1. However, Acts 15 shows that Peter testified at the council as had Paul and Barnabas - Acts 15:7, 12
2. But it was James who summed up the findings - Acts 15:13
3. And it was James who made the recommendation on how to solve the problem - Acts 15:19-20
4. The letter came from the group, not Peter - Acts 15:23
D. Paul said he was not inferior to the other apostles - II Corinthians 11:5; 12:11
E. Peter refused homage - Acts 10:26, something the popes have never refused.
F. Peter saw himself as a fellow elder, one of many - I Peter 5:1
G. Paul properly rebuked Peter for following James’ lead - Galatians 2:11-12
H. The closest claim is that James, Peter, and John seemed to be pillars in the church - Galatians 2:9. No where is there a claim that any single man was the pillar of the church.
I. Odd that when the apostles argued about who would be first, that Jesus rebuked them - Luke 9:46-48; 22:24-27
1. It was this desire for pre-eminence that Jesus condemned in the Jews - Matthew 23:6-11
2. This is why Jesus commanded no titles, such as “father.”
a. Yet Catholics call their priests “father”
b. The word “pope” is Latin for “father”
c. The very establishment of the pope is contrary to the wishes of the church’s founder, Jesus Christ.
3. Pope’s title: Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Patriarch of the West, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of Vatican City State
IV. Was Peter succeeded?
A. A Catechism of Christian Doctrine: “Did Christ intend that the special power of chief teacher and ruler of the entire church should be exercised by Saint Peter alone? Christ did not intend that the special power of chief teacher and ruler of the entire church should be exercised by Saint Peter alone, but intended that this power should be passed down to his successor, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, who is the Vicar of Christ on earth and the visible head of the Church. (a) A successor to Saint Peter, the first Bishop of Rome, was required for the same reason that successors were required for the other apostles. From the very beginning it was acknowledged by the Church that the successor of Saint Peter as Bishop of Rome was at the same time head of the entire Church. This successor of Saint Peter is called the Pope.”
B. The claim is flawed on many levels.
1. There is no proof that Peter was bishop in Rome.
a. The claim is based on a Roman Catholic tradition.
b. It is not found in the Bible
c. Nor is there historical evidence that I am aware of.
2. The first claim for succession of authority from Peter that we have recorded is by Stephen I in 250 AD; long after Peter’s death.
3. The claim that it has always been so is historically false
a. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, 248-258 AD, “None of us has ever dared to proclaim himself bishop of bishops, forcing with tyrannical terror the obedience of his colleagues ...”
b. It was Leo I (440-461 AD) who got the Roman Emperor, Valentinian III, to issue an edict declaring the Roman See as the supreme court of appeal for all bishops. The fact that such as declaration was necessary indicates it was in dispute.
c. And it was Augustine in Carthage who wrote in 430 AD, “Anyone who appeals to those overseas [i.e. Rome] shall not be received by the communion of the bishops of Africa.”
4. Interestingly, the first person to claim the title of pope was the bishop of Constantinople in 588 AD.
a. In response, the bishop of Rome, Gregory I, wrote: “You know it, my brother; had not the venerable council fo Chalcedon conferred the honorary title of universal upon the bishop of this apostolic See, whereof I am, by God’s Will, the servant, And yet none of us hath permitted this title to be given him; none has assumed this bold title, lest by assuming a special episcopate, we should seem to refuse it to all other brethren ... But far from Christians be this blasphemous name by which all honor is taken from all other priests, while it is foolishly arrogated by one.”
b. Gregory I also wrote: “I am bold to say, that whosoever adopts or affects the title of universal bishop has the pride and character of anti-Christ, and is in some manner his forerunner in this haughty quality of elevating himself above the rest of his order.”
c. In 604 AD, the emperor Phocas tried to give the title to Gregory I, but he refused it. However, his successor, Boniface III, accepted the title in 607 AD.
V. The claim for a universal head of the church, resting upon a man living upon the earth is clearly a man-made doctrine that took centuries to develop
A. There is no support for the office, the nature of the office, or even a remote concept within the Scriptures.
B. Why modify the truth? Why follow a religion that is the figment of man’s imagination?
C. Come to Christ, the true head of His church.
Catholics believe that Christ is the head of the Church.
I wonder at some of you guys/gals and where you get these weird ideas.
The Bible states: He said, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life.”
We believe that — now perhaps you will believe me.
2 Sam. 22:2 And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; 3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.
Psalm 18:31, "And who is a rock, except our God."
1 Cor. 10:4, "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ>."
Isaiah 44:8, "Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."
God knows of no other rock. I'll stay with what He says.
Please do not attempt to use secular and vernacular sources to dispute the definitions and meanings the Catholic Church uses in describing itself and it's doctrines and dogmas. When we very narrowly define a word for use in communicating it is done with the expressed purpose of NOT using allowing the secular world to define us and what we believe. You have no idea how irritating and dismaying it can be to make a very specific statement about what we as a Church or we as individuals mean and have non-Catholics and poorly catechised Catholics reply with "no you don't".
lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVSermons/IsThePapacyBiblical.htm
Okay. Is this thread about Humblegunner?
Protestants believe the first Pope possessed the charism of infallibility. Now, they might not believe that Peter was the first Pope (which he was), but they believe that his Epistles are infallible. They also believe that Luke, Matthew, Mark, Paul, Jude and John wrote infallibly. They believe that Moses "was infallible," too. And Hosea, Micah, Nehemiah, Isaiah, David, Solomon, Zechariah -- any Patriarch, Prophet, Apostle, or Evangelist who wrote a Bibilical Book is deemed by Protestants to be infallible. But somehow they see things as having changed, and the idea of the gift of infallibility being given to man is laughed off as "Popish superstition" at best, and as "Romish sacrilege" at worst.
No, "Protestants" do NOT believe Peter nor any of the other "writers" of Scripture were infallible, only that what they wrote down under Divine-inspiration is infallible. It is the word of God, itself, which is infallible, not the man God chose to pen it. And just because God chose them, does not mean whatever they say outside of Divinely inspired, God-breathed Scripture is infallible either. It is no different today and we still have the Holy Scriptures as God's infallible truth revealed to mankind. IT is our standard and authority because it comes from God.
Catholics believe that Christ is the head of the Church.
Col. 1:17-19
And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
We can agree on that point.
I wonder at some of you guys/gals and where you get these weird ideas.
Huh? Weird....! Catholics need to look in the mirror.
The Bible states: He said, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life.”
The Bible also says in 1 Timothy 2:5:
“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,”
It also says in Hebrews 8:3:
“For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law;”
We believe that — now perhaps you will believe me.
I believe the scriptures which are God’s words. John 14:26, John 16:13, Ps. 119:160, and John 17:17.
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
A dictionary can be a very frightening thing huh?
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.