Posted on 03/21/2024 7:26:46 AM PDT by ebb tide
It’s funny you bring up circular logic.
The fact is, circular logic may be the only logic available to Protestants since there is no truth for the Christian outside of the Holy Scriptures, according to Protestants.
Besides, the scriptures in fact testify that Protestants don’t believe in scripture as much as true Catholics do. For example, a few passages come to mind.
Paraphrasing, “whatever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” The papacy.
Paraphrasing, “Whose sins ye shall forgive they shall be forgiven them; whose sins ye shall retain they shall be retained.” The confessional.
Paraphrasing St. John, “And Jesus did many other things that if they were written down, the entire world could not contain them.” Authority that compliments Holy Writ.
Paraphrasing, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you will have no life within you.” Holy Communion.
Disclaimer: The so-called popes from 1958 to the present could not possibly be popes because they each left the Catholic faith and publicly taught false doctrines. True Catholics thus live according to what the Church has taught consistently since the time of Jesus Christ. The papacy is protected from promulgating erroneous doctrines, and the abovementioned have all done so or at least been members of Freemasonry, which by membership one disavows membership in the Catholic church and thus the office of the pope as well.
Because they are sending billions of people to hell.
If you support this Pope in word or deed or even acquiescence there can be little doubt where you are heading.
Ah, you said you wouldn’t pray for this Pope. I’m glad you reconsidered.
I'll take time to focus on just one of your examples. Paraphrasing, “whatever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” The papacy.
I suggest we do more than just "paraphrase" the Bible if it's something you're going to hang your religion on (the papacy). Go to https://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/matthew/16-19.html, which shows Matthew 16:19. Click on the Settings gear and turn on the Strong's Numbers. This will turn some of the words into links so we can research the underlying Greek words. The words that aren't links are English words added in to make the translation readable in English. Here's what it looks like with the English words added:
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Here's what it looks like without the English words added (just the words translated directly from Greek):
whatsoever thou bind on earth be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou loose on earth be loosed in heaven.
Note the absence of the words "shall" and "shalt". In other words, the original Greek doesn't imply that whatever Peter says is right and wrong will change Heaven's mind on what is right and wrong. Going by just this alone, it could just as literally be saying that Peter, as one who professes faith in Christ, has the responsibility to get it correct on what he says is right and wrong. Whatever Peter binds better be what Heaven has bound, and whatever Peter loosens better be what Heaven loosened.
And if you don't believe me, look at the Amplified translation, which err's on the side of accuracy more than ease of reading.
whatever you bind [forbid, declare to be improper and unlawful] on earth [a]will have [already] been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose [permit, declare lawful] on earth [b]will have [already] been loosed in heaven.
Footnotes
Matthew 16:19 Gr estai dedemenon, future perfect passive referring to a state of having already been bound.
Matthew 16:19 Gr estai lelumenon, future perfect passive.
Two notes about reading the AMP translation: 1) anything in square brackets [] is the translators' way of saying that they're not sure exactly how best to translate it, for people who like to dig into the weeds. Also, 2) the footnote marks for a and b back up what the definition of the Greek word esomai means.
Lastly, let's use some sense here. Are we really supposed to believe that Jesus told Simon, "Hey, Simon. I'm giving you the new name Little Rocky and I'm letting you call the shots on what's right and wrong. Heaven is sitting around waiting for you to write the rules cuz we can't do it." ?
I mean, really?
I challenge you to find one thread where Catholics are telling others they are wrong in their religion.
Take your silly judgement elsewhere you’re wasting it on me
“the original Greek doesn’t imply that whatever Peter says is right and wrong will change Heaven’s mind on what is right and wrong”
The fact is, that Peter’s judgments will be consistent with Heaven’s; not that his judgments will change Heaven’s mind.
What predicated such false witness, oystir?
Prove that statement or apologize for slandering me.
What makes you think I support Jorge’s attacks on the Catholic Church, cgbg?
Looky-here: A prot going outside the Bible to defend “sola scriptura”; the epitomy of hyprocrisy!
So how is that different from other Christians? Aren't we all supposed to educate others on what's right and wrong? For example (I know, it's that pesky Bible again LOL):
Galatians 6:1 -- Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted.
How can we fulfil that teaching from Paul unless we all speak at least some level of judgement? When we do it, we must get it right (speak Heaven's rules, not our own).
Maybe it's time you looked at my tagline. Here it is in context:
1st Thessalonians 5:19-22 -- 19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt 21 but test them all; hold on to what is good, 22 reject every kind of evil.
I've tested the teaching of "papal supremacy" and "apostolic succession" and find it horribly audacious and blasphemous to Christ and His Word. Papa Frank is Exhibit A on how dangerous it is to put into man's hands too much control over God's church.
'Splain, Lucy. The post #25 you're replying to was use of nothing but the Bible, and it wasn't about solar scriptura but about Repent and Believe's post #18 paraphrase of the Bible to define the papacy.
Where is that in your "bible"?
Using your own terrible logic you would conclude that the office of apostle is reprehensible “because, well, Judas”.
It must be true! It’s in a Jack Chick tract!
For sila scriptura folk y’all sure don’t read much.
I once suggested you pray for Francis, that it would be in keeping with tradition, you replied, “never.” I have since seen a change where you have suggested that you pray for the pope to change his ways/ thinking. I actually don’t know your present practice. I hope you pray for the Pope.
Why do you continue to bear false witness?
I never said such a thing. I said I never pray for his evil intentions; but I do pray, daily, for his soul.
There's a difference???
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.