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.
Yes, and he told the Corinthians in 1Corinthians 15 that salvation is “at the last trump.”
He also said to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”
The epistle to the Hebrews is his best effort though.
.
Ephesians 1:13-14.....read it in the Greek.
Ephesians 1:13-14. Two of the most beautiful verses of scripture in God’s word. If people would read the book of Ephesians every day for a week, they would be transformed in their spiritual life. It’s just beautiful!
Read Hebrews 6, and 10, and 2Peter 2.
In all three of these chapters it is made plain that people that had received the Holy spirit still became hopelessly lost.
Go with the detail for understanding, not with the generalities. This is where Peter meant that people become lost by “wresting” with his words. (To their OWN destruction)
With Salvation comes the Holy Spirit of God into the heart of the cleansed spirit. But God is gentle for His burden is light. He will not force conformity but will work mightily when the broken spirit asks for guidance away from sin. Falling into grievous errors has hallmarked every Age of Church History.
Living the Christian life is God living in you, transforming your soul by a daily walk with Him. As Paul taught and the Church at Jerusalem sent in a letter to the new Gentile Christians, they would do well avoiding fornication and the food sacrificed to idols. As Paul discovered with the Corinthians, some of the Christians there were in error regarding those who had died in Christ. And Paul's third letter was to the believers in Thessalonika who had been led into error regarding the rapture of the Church.
Salvation is NOW, not at some future trumpet sound. The snatching away of dead and alive Believers happens at the trumpet. That some who are alive and remain shall be transformed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye, testifies that they ARE saved awaiting the Rapture, for your mind cannot make repentance as quickly as the transformation will happen. The saved walk in faith, faithing in His promises as realized in their lives.
Who was the book of Hebrews written to? And the book of Peter? It matters. Especially in the matter of doctrine in this age of the grace of God.
.
It is beautiful until one allows himself to believe those effluvious words of encouragement to a strong congregation are meant as a general guarantee of predestined salvation.
.
Also re-read 2 Peter 2 and see who Peter was talking about in verse 16. He wasn’t speaking people wrestling with his OWN words. He was speaking of people wrestling with PAUL’S words. Important difference.
They are written to all.
That is a very basic premise of the word of God.
Obviously the entire evangelistic portion of the NT was written to “The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel,” but that always includes those of us that sojourn with them spiritually.
It is not a closed invitation.
Good luck I’m gonna pull the eject lever on this thread. This post is what I’ve been saying to him, in so many words. It doesn’t seem to be sinking in.
I don’t know how much more direct one could be than to say: One can’t say “there is no gift of infallibility from the Holy Spirit” and yet also say “the Holy Spirit keeps me from reading (and therefore learning) Scripture incorrectly”. The two statements are incompatible.
Amazing that anyone could say they aren’t incompatible. Just Amazing! And ponderous man. Ponderous.
.
>> “He wasn’t speaking people wrestling with his OWN words. He was speaking of people wrestling with PAUL’S words. Important difference.” <<
.
Those that wrest with any of scripture are always looking for something that isn’t there. There is nothing in Paul’s epistles that declares guaranteed salvation to anyone, but some will read it in there somehow, and once they do that, they are on the slippery slope.
.
Ephesians tells you that, too. "That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Eph. 2:7. We, in this time of His grace in order that we might be reconciled to Him, are the "but now" of Ephesians, Chapter 2. Formed BEFORE the foundation of the world, but kept secret until revealed to Paul. Also found in Ephesians Chapter 1:4.
.
>> “Without that broken and contrite spirit, the likelihood of allowing the Holy Spirit to do the saving is slim.” <<
Precisely!
It all depends on what your total goals are.
Please give me scripture from Paul’s epistles that proves your point.
.
His grace is to all generations.
The promise to Abraham’s family is the very same promise that the NT apostles preached.
Dispensationalism is just garbage to sell books and get wealthy.
.
The epistle to the Hebrews is the best place to go to understand what Paul preached. (all of it, not parts)
Talk about 'fer cryin' out loud',,,,,
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Baptize means water??? Then the Eunuch could have said, 'here is water; what doth hinder me to be watered'??? I mean, if baptize means water...
Or, 'here is baptize; what hinders me to be watered???
Of course water doesn't mean baptize...
If you believe Paul wrote Hebrews.
Where did you get that perverted version of scripture???
1Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
So Protestants believe this DOESN’T mean that baptism now saves us through the resurrection of Christ?
Not water baptism...The baptism that now saves is a spiritual act of God which results from a good conscience toward God, Not by getting wet...A Spiritual baptism...With the Holy Ghost...No water involved...
With the exception of Romans through Philemon. That the apostle Paul preached. That is the whole point of the mystery, hid in God, from the foundation of the world. Found in Ephesians.
They are not the same. One is about a kingdom of believers. The other is about a body of believers. Ephesians, Chapter 2 will explain. "Time past", "but now", and "the ages to come". Evidently God has divided His timeline for mankind. This is HIS division as given to Paul. Otherwise why not call all time NOW in Ephesians?
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.