Posted on 10/21/2006 4:52:03 AM PDT by NYer
I do like your term "earthly authority," Petronski! It is very Scriptural. But, getting to the context, if you asked the Jews if they viewed the Pharisees as being positions like God, their tradition was clear that they would have denied it.
I'm going over that link you gave me and I can't find a darn thing about your doctrinal beliefs or a Statement of Faith. I'll keep browsing it.
That said, we are FOLLOWING Jesus command which say to Baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. See St. Matthew 28:19.
Be careful. What you are saying is true. But it does not follow from that that it is "Not the same job description at all". The bishops together decided that it was better for the Church that the office of bishop be restricted to unmarried men. (As those ordained by the Apostles, they have the authority to make such decisions, just as they decided authoritatively which books belonged to the canon.) They did not take Paul's "the husband of one wife" to be saying that a bishop *must* be married. They understood Paul to be saying that a bishop must not have more than one wife. Paul himself says that he who does not marry does even better (1 Cor 7). Limiting the office to unmarried men does not change the "job description", or the authority endowed by ordination to the office of bishop.
-A8
It means that an "episkopos" can't have more than one wife. It could mean that he can't be married and then divorced. It could mean that he can't be married to two women at the same time. But that's not the point.
Does the Catholic church allow bishops to be married, to have a wife?
That's the point. The biblical "episkopos" is not the same office as the Roman Catholic office of "bishop" because the scripture clearly indicates that being married does not disqualify one as a "episkopos".
It's so easy for us to get together and appoint a King Saul.
= = = =
INDEED! Seen it happy multiple times.
And, even a good leader who starts out well and even may be humble and anointed . . . can get puffed up by the miracles God may do through him or her . . . and then become useless or even a liability to the Body of Christ.
God has a history in Scripture of laying such folks aside and/or disciplining them quite seriously. At least He tends to lift the anointing and give it to someone else--if He can find someone--or just withdraw it from blessing mankind, if He can't.
Then explain why He hasn't destroyed the Papacy?
Indeed.
Submit one to another . . .
And all the "one another" commandments.
I want to know why my post #765 was removed considering the highly insulting things posted to Catholics here that you let stand?
Well then you agree with my original point. The biblical "episkopos" is not the equivelent of the modern Roman Catholic "bishop". As pointed out by you, tradition has defined the requirements for the Catholic bishop. It has passed from the realm of "biblical" to "traditional". Since I don't invest any authority in a tradition that contradicts the bible, and you do, than there's not much left for discussion.
Then why did you sit by and do nothing about post #319 which I pinged you on HOURS ago where Marajade called Catholics devils? Is this what my money in donations is going for here?
That post is still up along with several other insulting posts to us.
He kept Saul around a lot longer than I would have.
He kept Marx, Stalin, Mao around a lot longer than I would have.
He let Swaggart go longer than I would have.
He has let me get away with more longer than I would have.
He is merciful and compassionate.
He clearly has His reasons. It may be that He has chosen to as an object lesson along the way and particularly at the end.
Ask Him. He may answer. Then again, He may not.
He may expect all of us to increasingly SEEK HIM AND HIM ALONE--at least in that sense.
I just know that even individual congregations are going to be sifted more and more. That the candlelight of God's anointing is going to be withdrawn from more and more congregations where the leadership AND THE PEOPLE have ceased to SEEK GOD FIRST AND FOREMOST AND TO FOLLOW GOD REGARDLESS OF ALL ELSE.
And, I believe that increasingly as we get closer to the more dramatic parts of the END TIMES . . . such groups and organizations which claim to be Christian but are not or cease to behave like it . . . will suffer increasing hardships and even obliteration.
Some, of course, are already well along toward being consumed into a one world religion of the globalists. Those will certainly suffer their due fate in due course. I hope it's none that any of us are a part of. But horse sense tells me otherwise is the case.
I cannot prevent posters from "taking it personally."
Post 765 was removed because it was "making it personal." The post to which it was a reply was not personal.
Here's what Marajade said in #319:
"Really. I'm not here on the thread calling anyone but Catholics are of the devil."
It seems to me that what she was trying to say was something like this: "I'm not here on this thread saying that everyone except Catholics are of the devil". That can be taken a number of ways, but it does not have to be taken to mean that she herself is saying that Catholics are of the devil.
That is my attempt at a more charitable interpretation of what she was trying to say.
-A8
Thank you. That is how I meant it. I apologize for wording it poorly.
There is no contradiction. Not being the husband of two or more wives is compatible with not being a husband at all.
-A8
Glad we cleared that up. :-)
You explain to me how I was making it "personal" when all I did was ask him not to attribute to Catholics that we put the Pope on equal footing as God. I told him it was insulting to us and it is.
Please explain to me how when a poster tells us that we worship the Pope as a "God" how that isn't an insult or making it personal or reading our minds which ISN'T ALLOWED BY YOUR OWN RULES.
Please tell me how when a woman calls all Catholics devils that is not personal.
There's a little bit of a double standard going on here. I'm about to withdraw all of my financial support to an organization that would allow such insults towards Catholics to stand. I can't in good faith or conscience support it.
I admit I get a little too passionate at times and I can't type as quickly as my brain thinks it does and I end up omitting words. I fault of mine.
Sure there is. Your religion prohibits wives for bishops. The bible does not.
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.