Skip to comments.In Defense of the Papacy: 9 Reasons True Christians Follow the Pope
Posted on 02/22/2013 5:43:18 PM PST by NYer
click here to read article
No, Scripture does NOT say Jesus said many things not written down, only that Jesus DID many things that HAD they been written down, it would take up ALL the resources of the world to contain them - obviously speaking of the full knowledge of God:
Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written. (John 21:25)
Rome has used the verse in John, however, to justify their declaring ANYTHING they can think of to being part of those "things" Jesus did and include them as part of the "tradition" to be held as valid as Holy Scripture. The Apostle John mentions in his gospel that Jesus said to them:
And you also must testify, for you have been with me from the beginning. (John 15:27)
That is why John says:
The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. (John 19:35)
And then ends with the words about the things Jesus did and leaves us with the reason why John wrote down what he did:
This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. (John 21:24)
And, prior to this, he said - after the resurrection:
Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)
My contention is that what matters to our salvation HAS been written IN Scripture and NOTHING has been omitted that must be filled in by "theologians" centuries later. The Bible is the authority because it is GOD-breathed. Trusting in sinful, fallible men to tell us what God saw fit to record for us as well as giving each of us His Holy Spirit, who would teach us all things, is foolish. The "illiterate" fishermen Jesus called to be His Apostles sure didn't STAY that way and everything Christ revealed to them, has been preserved for us to this day. The Holy Spirit is the same.
I think one of those "rare" statements was in 1870 when the Pope declared, ex-cathedra, that whatever the Pope declared ex-cathedra was infallible. So Rome infallibly declared that she was infallible. That's why one Pope can proclaim that nobody can be saved who is not a Roman Catholic and subject to the Pope and a future Pope can say, "Nevermind. He didn't say it officially.".
Yes. I can't imagine the Lord is pleased with bickering children. Or what at times seems to be our intent to wound each other.
IMHO too many Catholics are unmindful of CCC numbers 817-819, 1267, 1271 (forgot to reference 1271 in my above comment to you). I'm not suggesting that you are. Just that we as a group often are.
Peace be with you.
and 838 :)
838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter." Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."
I consider myself "certainly, but imperfectly Catholic" as well.
1)The Jews brought the Bible to the world. In fact, they are still hand-copying Torah Scrolls exactly as G-d instructed them to do at Sinai, preserving the Word of G-d faithfully. All the Catholic and other chrstian churches have ever done is corrupt and twist it.
2)It is a simple fact that the vast majority of Catholics, including practically all the clergy, regard the Bible as primitive mythology written by "stone-age savages." Genesis is regarded as having been adapted from ancient Babylonian and Canaanite mythology. And since today is Purim, I'll throw in that they also reject the historicity of the Book of Esther.
Read the commentary in any Catholic bible (other than reprints of the Douay-Rheims) and you will read all this blasphemous nonsense. Furthermore, your co-religionists are always attacking the historicity of the Bible on this forum. Why don't you argue with them?
Yes, Simon Peter Magus knew the Apostles...
It was pretty clear. If popes's don't want to be taken seriously, they should speak what they mean and that should be that.
Or if you are speaking of me taking you literally, let me know which statements you really didn't mean.
Scripture tells that there were many things that Christ said and did that were not written down.
You are getting scripture mixed up with tradition. It's been pointed out to you that your statement is not scriptural.
All scripture is God breathed, if God wanted it written down, it would have been written down.
Believing the Catholic tradition that there were other things said by Jesus is fine, just don't assume that the Catholic church is supposed to fill in the blanks with no proof.
LOL, that's the Catholic denomination's field of "expertise."
It's called tradition, highly respected as even more important than scripture.
Christians stick with God's word as breathed by the Holy Spirit.
Thanks boatbums, very informative post.
honestly not realize that the Catholic Church is Christ's Church, despaite the evidence ("invincible ignorance") and yet
still be saved, although without being a member of visible Catholic Church.
So all those countless numbers of dead Christians thru-out the Dark Ages at the hands of the Catholic religion for not bowing down to a pope was kind of an 'OOPS' moment for your religion???
I don't think so...I knowingly and willingly reject your religion and its leaders as a 'false' Christianity (while acknowledging there are Christians within the folds) and have no fear whatsoever that I may not be a genuine Christian...
If a pope says something, it should be the truth and unchanging. Ex Cathator or not.
I like the part where a pope decided that what they say is infallible.
The hypocrisy is deep and wide.
Not it doesn't...Why do you misquote scripture to justify a false teaching...Is that the quote your religion teaches you???
Hm...could you please point out the Scripture(s) that very clearly says this? Because I do not think I have ever ready anything like this in my Bible.
That's because it's not in the Bible...It's part of their 'tradition'....See how that works???
You are mistaken...I find it interesting that other Catholics will not correct you on this so I guess I have to...
There IS a chair...A Catholic Throne that is designed for the purpose of the pope leading from and doing his ex-cathedra thing...
Your current pope had it removed but not so very long ago, he had the 'throne' put back in place...Presumably so the next winner can do his thing from that throne...
Keep displaying your ignorance.
Douay-Rheims Christian Community
25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. But Jesus did many other things; if all were written down, the world itself would not hold the books recording them.
Keep displaying your own invincibility in the same? well that, and much else...
[yes I realize that's getting personal --- but you started it, so no whining]
As was pointed out, there is no mention of things he (Christ) said not being "written down".
The notables from amongst the early church defeated various gnosticisms, by use of scripture, using what had been written down, not by substitution of some vague allusions to esoteric knowledge that they themselves had had transmitted to them...that is, until within Tradition™ itself, by dribs and drabs, and subtle shifts of definitions & applications, that very thing can be seen to have developed.
You want to split atoms between words and actions? I wonder what counts for more.
Thank you for the incoherent reply.
yeah, but it was retroactive......when something is declared a truth, that means that it was always the truth....didn't become truth at that point.
yeah, but it was retroactive......when something is declared a truth, that means that it was always the truth....didn't become truth at that point.
not at all...I've seen Democrats interpret history and I've seen Republicans do the same....one would hardly believe they were describing the same thing. I have seen school books so distort history,that they had to be removed from the classroom.
a real basic history of the church is that for 2013 years (more or less a few) the Catholic church has been the spokesman for Christianity. Somewhere in the 1600's a revolution took place where some few people decided that they knew better than the Catholic church how things really were. They took books out of a 1,600 year old bible, denied some basic tenets of Christianity, made up their own rules as they went along and said "this is now christianity".... I know that this is pretty basic, but by and large that's what happened.
I think the Lord (who has a sense of humor) is more than pleased that His children are discussing religion. I find these discussions to be extremely entertaining, educational, and thought provoking. I learn a lot, say a lot, and never mean to demean anyone elses ideas nor beliefs. I try to understand where on earth some people come up with their ideas, but respect them nevertheless.
this certainly beats discussion of many things I can think of.....maybe except politics!!..:)
he might have known some of them...he was an itinerant magician who sought to join Chriatianity and the Catholic church because they could do miraculous things and he wanted in on the action. You have brought his name up several times and they are all basically meaningless...he means nothing to Catholics nor Protestants...
true Christians realize that thier beliefs need not be compressed into a tiny ....few hundred pages book...written around the year 0. Christ means so much more than that, He did things, said things accomplished things, that the few evengalists could have NEVER transcribed. While there is certainly no error in the scriptures, to believe that the wholeness of Christianity is contained therein is the hight of naivete'
I didn't feel like looking up each scripture so that I wouldn't misquote it. A good teacher NEVER does his student's homework....I pointed out, by reference, the passages that I was referring to. Besides being slow to look things up, I am a slow typist.
nah...we just stir them in with the "witches" that the protestants burned at the stake and hope that God sorts them out!! oops
you can name the following item...items...which have been declared "infallible"...which are indeed in error......you may number them if you wish...
How do y'all think the Lord feels about those who intentionally post provocative threads that wound and START the bickering in the first place? I have pleaded many times to those who repeatedly do this on Free Republic, but it seems to fall on deaf ears (eyes). Perhaps such persons like causing bickering and discord? Maybe if they hear from those in their own camps occasionally, it would sink in. Just a thought.
I understand that...but the chair he sits in is of no relevance whatsoever...the pope can speak Ex Cathedra from a Greyhound bus if the occasion ever presents itself. I understand formality and all that, but the physical chair does not have magical properties. If Vatican City burns down tomorrow and the "chair" is destroyed, the Pope would then speak from somewhere else and still be protected by Christ's promise of infallibility!
Incoherent? By your lights, Jesus was speechless when He did so many things that were not recorded. He said nothing, not a word, when He acted.
Who is being incoherent?
you missed the entire section concerning other churches....perhaps you missed the disagreements between Rome and Egypt or the disagreements between Rome and northern Africa or the disagreements between Rom and Constantinople.
You view history through the lens of Rome . I on the other hand have studied history....Rome claims much that is untrue and always has been. God on the other hand is truly infallible
From what I understand, the Orthodox do NOT accept many things that Roman Catholicism has stated MUST be believed to be saved. Things such as this thread castigates the "Protestants" for not doing such as obedience to the Pope of Rome, Papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception - hardly things that sound like "little" or inconsequential issues. Yet I can't remember even ONE thread that challenges the Orthodox the way "Protestants" are almost daily. Do you have an answer for why this is?
I agree. Can anyone really imagine the Apostle Peter writing things in his epistles (letters) to the church that he "made up" or were his own personal opinions, yet demanding that they still all receive and obey them under threat of hell? It is a historical fact that the Catholic Church persecuted other Christians who refused to give allegiance to the Pope of Rome. They justified their actions by citing such proclamations as those of Pope Boniface in his Unam Sanctum and so-called "heretics" were persecuted and prosecuted - some even executed - based solely on their refusal to be subject to the Pope. It sure seemed as though this teaching was incontrovertible back then, but now they say it was just a misunderstanding and he really didn't mean it the way it sounded. Peoples' LIVES were at stake here! It is stuff like this that convinces me that the Roman Catholic Church cannot possibly be THE one, true church. It is patently obvious that Jesus was speaking of a spiritual body and not an institution whose claim to fame is longevity. If what they teach is NOT verified by the sole, objective authority we have - the Word of God - then they are no more authentic than any other religion is.
I said early on in this thread that I agreed with another poster that it was a divisive post. And I posted Catholic teaching to back up my opinion. My comment about bickering referenced Catholic teaching for a reason (i.e. talking to Catholics) but if nonCatholics want to misinterpret my motives they are free to do so. I'm responsible for what I write, not how others interpret it. Peace be with you.
Don't you think there is a difference between words and action? Scripture clearly says Jesus DID many other things that IF they had been written down, the whole world could not contain all that COULD be written. That is a far cry from insisting, as your church does, that Jesus SAID many things not written down and then attributing these "sayings" to Tradition that was orally passed down and equally binding on all Christians as his words were. They produce no real proof of what these unwritten sayings were.
If you notice, the Apostle John clearly stated that Jesus DID many things not written down BUT that what he DID write down was for their belief and salvation:
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:31)
John reiterated this same thing when he wrote in his epistles:
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may believe on the name of the Son of God. (I John 5:13)
The real question here is why would the Apostles have omitted writing things Jesus said to them if it affected our eternal life? We know that after Jesus ascended into Heaven, the Holy Spirit, as he promised them, would continue to reveal truth to them and we have that truth preserved in the books of the New Testament. Did the Holy Spirit forget something or leave something out that theologians only realized centuries later? I don't buy that.
I've never started a thread. Nor am I competent to read the minds of those who do. Personally I dislike ALL threads that bash anyone's religion. Objective discussion about differences interests me. But when it crosses the line so that comments (or the original article itself) consist of mocking, setting up straw men, etc I find little use. It's not scriptural. It's not charitable. And it's not how Jesus asked us to treat each other.
Perhaps those of us who'd like to see dialogue on a more charitable level should make extra effort to lead by example? Peace be with you.
Dear friend in Christ, please forgive this humble catholic for posting this thread that has so upset you. That was never my intention. For those of us on fire with love for our Lord and His Church, we want everyone to experience that joy. Knowing how Bible christians always seek scriptural source material, in our exuberance to share that, we occasionally post a thread that meets biblical scrutiny. If I have offended you or any others with this thread, then I ask your forgiveness. We share the same love for Jesus Christ.
And I appreciate that. It’s one thing i.f, during the course of the conversation about a thread topic, the tone turns confrontational, it’s another if the thread STARTS OUT provoking the confrontation. That’s what I wish would change
I wish you peace as well.
I am going to assume that you pinged me informationally rather than requiring that I answer GeronL's post (from what I can gather) at #57. I am certainly willing to respond to it nonetheless. I suspect that this was between you and wintertime. I created a lengthy and reasonably scholarly response to GeronL and old fumblefingers (moi) managed to lose the entire post AS I tried to post it. I will recreate it in shorter form and ping you. I also don't really think that ANY competent education (public, private, homeschool, whatever) teaches that ANY emperor or other secular leader "crowned himself" pope EVER.
I don't presume to give you a hard time for being IIRC an EX-Catholic. The United States of America is still somewhat a free country, thank God, and your choices are your choices. OTOH, it is not really necessary to re-fight the Thirty Years' War at every opportunity. This IS a conservative website and we are a lot better off being able to ally with one another across denominational lines than helping the left by unnecessarily wrasslin' with one another.
My reconstructed response to your #57 is coming soon. I usually agree with you on virtually everything OTHER than our respective flavors of Christianity.
No problem, the Holy Spirit trumps that for us true Christians.
Just in case that went over your head, nothing you typed pertains to me or any other born again Christian with a personal relationship with Jesus.
You are trying too hard, relax and let Jesus infuse Himself with you and you with Him.
You don't have to make Christians look bad in order to make Catholicism look good. Or maybe you do.
Don't worry student, I will not do your homework
Remember: three pages, single spaced.
I only respond to posts, and not often, that seem to attack protestantism. I have no real beef with Catholics, heck we are on the same side almost all the time.
Hold on here, what you want is "Renaissance," keywords "countless - numbers - dead - Christians," -- but let me explain.
The "Dark Ages" was when the monks, especially, were copying literature, re-establishing agriculture, saving civilization, and converting Huns, Goths, Vikings and Vandals.
The "Middle Ages" was when the Catholics were into founding cities, building cathedrals, starting universities, and trying to liberate the historic Christian heartland (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Odessa) from hostile Muslims. Also 60% of the population died off from the Black Plague.
The "Renaissance" --- here's what you're looking for --- was when you had the European Wars of Religion (Link), featuring battles, executions and massacres of Anglicans vs Catholics, Lutherans vs Catholics, Puritans vs Anglicans, Anabaptists vs Lutherans, Calvinists vs Anabaptists, and altogether hundreds of thousands of dead Christians splattered across hundreds of murderous principalities over the course of over 150 years.
This horror-show contributed, in no small measure, to a persistent revulsion against religion in Europe, the "Enlightenment" and eventually the French Revolution and on to the "Modern Age," a.k.a. the Age of Murder.
My own evaluation of it is: these people imposed a present hell on each other in a thoroughly inter-churchy multi-denominational way here, and got their recompense from a just God in the hereafter.
As an image of how Christians ought to relate, I prefer what Paul said (tagline).
Tagline for you.
You gotta be kidding me!!!!! We're talking about what the God of creation said to his Creation and you are being so flippant about adding to or taking away from what God says??? I'll bet you wouldn't dare misquote your pope though...
Wow nice light hearted gloss over of facts of murdered Christians by the Catholic church.
Those things should be taken seriously.
Like others here, it seems the talking points are to ignore what Catholics did wrong and bring up others that did bad things too.
Kinda like the kid who wants to not get in trouble for throwing rocks by saying Oh Bobby threw a dirt clod.
I personally try to post informative threads, and look for FReepers who will reciprocate interest with interest, respect with respect, prayer with prayer.
If the Orthodox brethren have not been baited, it may be because they refuse to be baited: in which case, my hat's off to them.
Tagline to all who serve Our Lord.
1 through the lemniscate