The myth of grace-only & easy-believism shattered forever

[RogerDC]

Since Jesus is referring to spiritual leaders, no.

In Matthew 23:9, Jesus said no one “on earth” can be called Father, and that there is only “ONE Father”, and that is God. This means you can’t even call your biological father, “Father”. Dumb.

Acts 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,

Therefore the title was addressing family relations use of that term.

What?

Doesn’t say that.

In Matt 23:8, Jesus says don’t call anyone “rabbi” - “rabbi” is Hebrew for “teacher”, so Jesus is saying don’t call anyone “teacher”. So, for example, you can’t say, “There goes Mr. Brown, the history teacher.” Dumb.

The idea is not to exalt yourself over others by a title.

So titles like, “Pastor … Minister … Bishop … Deacon”, are sinful? If it’s okay for Paul and Steven to address religious leades as “Fathers”, then it’s okay for me.

It is one thing to lead by example like servant leadership, but it is another to take the place of authority when Jesus Christ, the Word of God, is the authority over every believer and thus Head over every Christian.

When a Catholic calls a priest, “Father” or “Pope”, he is not implying the priest replaces Jesus as the ultimate authority.

The point is, Jesus was telling believers not to be called Rabbi, nor Father, nor Master when God is the One each believer is to look to for that.

The point is, Jesus was trying to make a point, and didn't mean his words to be taken literally by fundamentalists dunces.

 

[RogerDC]

David repented. That is how he was abiding in Him when he wrote the Psalms.

The 7 Popes were teaching others while living in sin? Not the same thing, brother.

God could make Jack the Ripper or Adolf Hitler or the Boston Strangler write or utter infallible words or make infallible decisions, if He so desired. So there’s no reason why God couldn’t make a Pope who is “living in sin” do likewise.

Peter is the first Pope the moment he was named Peter in according to Catholics' point of view, right?

I would say that is purely your assumption and that it is incorrect. I’m not aware of any such Catholic teaching. In Matt 16:19, Jesus told Peter, “I WILL give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven” - indicating a future event.

When he rebuked Jesus for saying the prophesy regarding His death, Jesus rebuked Satan out of him. So that should be enough evidence to drop the lie of the doctrine of infallible Pope.

You think Peter was possessed by Satan when Jesus rebuked him in Matt 16:22?

 

[RogerDC]

The body of believers is the church.

That’s depends on how you define “believers”. True believers are those who do the will of God, but there are false believers who will not be saved:
“Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord”, shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he who do the will of my Father, who is in Heaven” (Matt 7:21).
True believers are “those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus” (Rev 12:17).

Those who call themselves “believers” but reject God’s one, true Church - the Catholic Church - do not do the will of God, nor keep the commandments, so they don't qualify as true believers and are outside the Church.

the fullness is in the believers, each and everyone of them, not a denomination

I don’t think so. Paul elaborates on “the fullness” of Christ later in Ephesians (4:11-16), and he never applies the “fullness” in a singular, individual sense, but only in a plural, collective sense - “the saints … the body of Christ … we … the whole body”. So the “fullness” of Christ in Eph 1:22-23 applies to “the Church, which is his body”, not to individuals

Furthermore, the Scriptures demonstrate that the Church has a central authority, which indicates the Church must be a specific denomination with specific doctrines: Paul consults the Church leadership (then located in Jerusalem) to settle doctrine (Acts 15:2-3) and to verify the correctness of his preaching (Galatians 2:2).

 

[Truther]

Are you not then turning yourself into a "mini-shepherd", rather than having them follow their relationship with Christ?

No, just feeding the sheep truth.
Nobody shepherds the Lord’s flock but the Lord Himself.
Sheep feeders are just helpers to the shepherd.

 

[RogerDC]

FALSE STATEMENT

Which Scripture says Mary can't be a mediator between mankind and "the MAN, Christ Jesus"?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

No, just feeding the sheep truth.
Nobody shepherds the Lord’s flock but the Lord Himself.
Sheep feeders are just helpers to the shepherd.

^This is how every other leader is every other Christian faith (including those you disagree with) feels about their actions.

 

[Ezra]

Which Scripture says Mary can't be a mediator between mankind and "the MAN, Christ Jesus"?

what scripture says .the HOLY SPIRIT is that

 

[FollowHim]

Most churches today teach false doctrines for several reasons:
ignorance, unbelief, for popularity, for financial benefit, etc.
Only a few churches are teaching correct doctrine these days.
There is more to correct doctrine than “Jesus is Lord and Savior”.
Many Spirit-filled Christians are warning, “The church is fast asleep!”

Grace-only, cheap-grace, hyper-grace, easy-believism …
are all called antinomianism! This is the notion that a one-time
justification saves … apart from sanctification. But, this is an
incomplete understanding of God’s wonderful free gift of grace!

The problem with easy-believism is that it allows
those who are living in hypocrisy, disobedience, and sin
(i.e. those who are NOT walking in obedience)
to live comfortably with a false assurance of salvation!
This leads to the tragedy described in Matthew 7:21-23 (for example).

“… some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches,
saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives.
… they have denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” (Jude 4-5, NLT)

NOTE: We are talking here about believers who have received the Holy Spirit.

There are at least 10 NT verses for each of the following truths …

Believers prove they have true saving faith:
1 -- by their obedience
2 -- by practicing righteousness
3 -- by living holy lives
4 -- by having a healthy fear of God
5 -- by repenting of their occasional sins
6 –- by overcoming sin, the world, Satan, persecution
7 -- by enduring in the faith to the end of their lives

Re: #4 … If people are believing and trusting in grace-only, cheap-grace,
hyper-grace, easy-believism, etc., HOW can they be fearing God?

So, all of these verses PROVE the road to eternal life is indeed narrow,
and believers are responsible for playing their part in their salvation!
Or, shall we view these verses as merely bluffs, exaggerations, lies even?

Initially, through His grace, God gives to new believers:
Jesus’ righteousness, redemption, reconciliation, etc. and salvation.
However, this grace/salvation is NOT guaranteed to last forever!
Because ONLY their old-past-former sins have been forgiven (2 Peter 1:9).
And because NT verses warn about the possibility of losing salvation.

Some believers became “estranged from Christ”
… they had “fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4).

Some believers are “of those who draw back to perdition” (Hebrews 10:39).

And there are many more warning verses.
.

What shattered the lie of being eternal locked into the Kingdom of God through gaining the magic key no matter how you live, is the truth God has righteous people who knew him.

Zacharia and Elizabeth knew God and were righteous, before Christ was born and the new covenant.
It was by faith and obedience.

John the baptist preached the way, the straight path, the path of God.
Isaiah put it like this

3 Many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths." The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Isaiah 2:3

I have met believers to whom love and emotional openness is idealism which leads to disaster. And they are right if openness is not to God, and without intimacy and personal boundaries. When we make our most intimate souls real, on the outside, we are vulnerable to manipulation and liars. The difference is with Christ and knowing sin and seeing people and our emotional needs and desires for what they truly are, we are stronger than the most lost sinner in the world. If you grow up where honesty is weakness, vulnerability is defeat, hurt is just accepting further pain, then truly knowing Jesus is like death. And these believers tried to deal with me to cause pain, guilt, anger, revenge, bitterness, frustration.

But in Christ we are made whole, our needs are met in Him, our vulnerabilities and weaknesses openly admitted and worked with. Walking in the light is true freedom, being incapable of doing something but good at others is a true blessing given by God. You stay within your areas of strength and avoid mistakes in areas you cannot handle.

But here is the problem. If love is the enemy, how can God be ones saviour and friend.
So if we preach love is the fulfilment of the law, we need to discover what this really means.
And in discovering this we will find we can walk in the Spirit and be overcomers.

No door is closed to anyone willing to open their hearts and let God in to cleanse, purify and make them whole, Amen.

 

[Enow]

I think we are having a communication disconnect here.
​

My points was that ultimately all Christians believe that God is the source of all Truth. There is a variety of beliefs on the ways that Truth is delivered and organized. But everyone believes God is in charge.

There are people who claims to hear voice from God, but we are not to believe every spirit but test them and in this case, by the accepted scriptures by those that love Him to keep His words which I believe the Lord led me to confirm is the KJV when I had been using the NIV & NASB regularly. Again, only the Lord can confirm that to you, but the line of discernment regarding the lost books for why they are not in the Bible is because there were some verses that were running against scripture. Since no lie can be of the truth, that is why the lost books were not considered scripture.

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.... 26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. 28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

So when someone is claiming God is speaking to him, that may very well be, but each one of us is called to prove all things by Him and to abstain from all appearances of evil.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

Now the Catholics will defend the line of succession of supposedly infallible Pope in not teaching errors even though there were 7 Popes that were glaringly living in sin while in the service as the Pope. As much as they may argue that the Holy Spirit will keep them from teaching error, it is hypocritical of the Holy Spirit to not keep them from living in error or in sin and so the doctrine of the infallible Pope collapse on that basis.

Then there is Joseph Smith's doctrine of polygamy. In all that time that he claims he was using tongues with interpretation in the right way, the Holy Spirit never reproved him for it? For as important as the Book of Mormons is with any other books, for why they were necessary because of claims that the original scripture had been changed and whatever other reasons for why the church has gone astray for Mormonism to be the right way, has to become circumspect. Everything has to be proven by Him.

Even the things they had taught in my former church when Jesus says for believers not to make promises nor commitments because we cannot make ourselves good or to do good when we are living by faith in Jesus Christ to help us to do that and to be good. Of course, the only reasons promises got into the church for taking the office of deacons and elders was because they had unknowingly, many members that were of Freemasons. One time they were going to address the Masons in church, but when finding out how many there were that were Freemasons, they swept the issue of contention under the rug. It is no wonder to me why they followed blindly Billy Graham's commitment to follow Christ for the evidence of salvation and became the center for the Promise Keepers' program in the valley for all the churches to join in on.

Their conscience was defiled and they could not see the sins they were in for practicing by so many years in spite of verse 36 of Matthew 5:33-37.

Don't let that happen to you, sister. Do not be a defender of Mormonism or Joseph Smith, since we are all suppose to be defending the faith in Jesus Christ in serving Him by testifying of Him in seeking His glory which is to the glory of God the Father. If we are to be literally the latter day saints of Jesus Christ, then that is what we should do in relying on Him thru the Spirit in us to serve Jesus Christ and nothing else in His name in seeking the glory of. I know there is no such thing as a perfect church, but when they call evil, good, even though they don't do polygamy any more, something has to be way off for someone supposedly being a prophet from God to restore believers to the right way and he goes and teach that. For God to be so insistent on Smith to get Christian to go in the right way, He would not turn a blind eye to Smith going the wrong way in teaching others the same.

I'm not saying he is not saved, but it goes to show how people can be of the least in the kingdom of God when they teach others to break one of His commandments.

Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I know a lot of Christian churches are allowing for divorces and not just for the cause of adultery either. My former church goes through all the trouble of putting hurdles in the path of those seeking to get married to make sure they are ready for marriage, but when it comes to divorce, hardly any hurdles at all once the couple decides for it. They should have been praying and fasting while separated fro a while for the Lord to bring them back together again, unless of course, one is an unbeliever, then they are free to get a divorce when the unbeliever is not content to live with her or him as the apostle Paul shared his thoughts on that which he believed the Lord did not command but permitted him to speak below.

1 Corinthians 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? 17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.

Pray about it, sister. Hopefully, I have shared my concerns enough to show how we all are suppose to prove everything by Him with prayer.

 

[BreadOfLife]

What?
You think the Pope wrote the N.T.?
You must, because it is still being written by him, hourly.....

Really?
Show me an example of this, Einstein . . .

 

[Truther]

Really?
Show me an example of this, Einstein . . .

Because the Pope is seen as an oracle of God.

When God speaks, he speaks. Correct?

 

[Enow]

WRONG.

I'll give you one Catholic Tradition that ALL Christians adhere to - and that is the NT Canon of Scripture.
NOWHERE does the Bible contain a list of Books that belong in it. The Canon was declared by the Catholic Church at thew Synod of Rome in 382 AD.

It was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo eleven years later (393).
At the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

If you are referring to the Books of the Apocryphal Books, it would be best if you explain why the CC had though Tobit should have been considered scripture.

"Many claim the apocrypha should never have been included in the first place, raising doubt about its validity and believing it was not God-inspired (for instance, a reference about magic seems inconsistent with the rest of the Bible: Tobit chapter 6, verses 5-8)."

APOCRYPHA KJV

The fact that the CC bothered to list those books as Apocrypha makes me wonder if they knew why as if separating them from the rest of scripture.

As for the "Nicolaitans" - you're barking up the wrong tree. I already debunked your false idea with Scripture.
Here it is again for your review . . .

here is how Scripture differentiates the clergy and laity:

2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an oral statement or by a letter from US."

2 Thess. 3:6
"Now WE command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from US.”

1 Thess. 5:12
We ask you, brothers, to respect those who are laboring among you and who are OVER YOU in the Lord and who admonish you,

1 Tim. 5:17
Let the elders that RULE WELL be counted worthy of DOUBLE HONOUR, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

But that is entirely different when the CC has been adding traditions to the churches. That is not keeping the traditions the churches had already received from Paul, let alone Peter. See the point?

As for the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, the idea of having a governing body outside of the church is what God hates when the Word of God, Jesus Christ, is the only authority outside of that assembly.

You can see the evil when one Protestant Presbytery make compromises with social values and another claiming to be Biblical, but ignoring the commandment from the Lord for women not to teach or speak in church and yet they rule they see nothing that is contrary to the faith they have in Jesus Christ as I consider that as side stepping the commandment from the Lord. Women are to serve in outreach ministry & if they had kept to that role, more people would be engaged socially and with Bible study from their homes by them to stay active in the church.

No one can say how those people in the Presbytery gets elected to those positions. Nobody can say how we can hold them accountable to the word of God. Nobody dare speak otherwise unless the pastor risks losing his job & so he or she just goes along with it.

So when 7 of your Popes goes bad and nobody calls him to the mat in correcting him? How can he perform the Mass if he does so in an unworthy manner as the Catholics taught that to mean when receiving it? Did they really get the Eucharist?

Can you not see how Pope Clement 1 was a covetous Pope that wanted the Corinthians to pay tribute to him at Rome for why he gave all those ridiculous references about giving and how he deserves a portion from the flock and accuse them of jealousy for not giving to his "collectors" when they come as read in his first epistles to the Corinthians?

That was the beginning of the conquest of the laity, and although the Protestants somehow had followed suit, my former church yielded to have a Presbytery over them because they wanted to protect the property of the church from being sold out from under them so that by the Presbytery owning that church property, it could not happen.

Jesuits have been known to infiltrate and to cause chaos as that old oath of theirs would have them do until it got taken off of the internet. I would not doubt that they were behind this, but it could very well be that Protestants were following suit like the CC when they should not have. You cannot deny that the local CC has to pay tribute to a higher authority by tradition which sure looks like Pope Clement 1 started it.

That is what Jesus was teaching His followers not to do .. to rule in that fashion as authority when the Word of God is as they are to lead by example to serve others and not to be served like kissing their feet or like kissing the Pope's ring.

If the Lord can't help you see the truth in His words that the CC have not been keeping the traditions handed down by Paul & Peter, but creating their own; hence Eucharist and Mass, then I can't help you, brother, but I pray that He will someday.

 

[Truther]

^This is how every other leader is every other Christian faith (including those you disagree with) feels about their actions.

No, they think they are sub-shepherds.

They are mere elders, not shepherds.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Because the Pope is seen as an oracle of God.

When God speaks, he speaks. Correct?

You're not paying attention again, Einstein.

YOU said that the Pope writes the New Testament "hourly".
I said - show me an example of this.

CAN you do that??
I didn't think so . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

If you are referring to the Books of the Apocryphal Books, it would be best if you explain why the CC had though Tobit should have been considered scripture.

"Many claim the apocrypha should never have been included in the first place, raising doubt about its validity and believing it was not God-inspired (for instance, a reference about magic seems inconsistent with the rest of the Bible: Tobit chapter 6, verses 5-8)."

APOCRYPHA KJV

The fact that the CC bothered to list those books as Apocrypha makes me wonder if they knew why as if separating them from the rest of scripture.

But that is entirely different when the CC has been adding traditions to the churches. That is not keeping the traditions the churches had already received from Paul, let alone Peter. See the point?

As for the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, the idea of having a governing body outside of the church is what God hates when the Word of God, Jesus Christ, is the only authority outside of that assembly.

You can see the evil when one Protestant Presbytery make compromises with social values and another claiming to be Biblical, but ignoring the commandment from the Lord for women not to teach or speak in church and yet they rule they see nothing that is contrary to the faith they have in Jesus Christ as I consider that as side stepping the commandment from the Lord. Women are to serve in outreach ministry & if they had kept to that role, more people would be engaged socially and with Bible study from their homes by them to stay active in the church.

No one can say how those people in the Presbytery gets elected to those positions. Nobody can say how we can hold them accountable to the word of God. Nobody dare speak otherwise unless the pastor risks losing his job & so he or she just goes along with it.

So when 7 of your Popes goes bad and nobody calls him to the mat in correcting him? How can he perform the Mass if he does so in an unworthy manner as the Catholics taught that to mean when receiving it? Did they really get the Eucharist?

Can you not see how Pope Clement 1 was a covetous Pope that wanted the Corinthians to pay tribute to him at Rome for why he gave all those ridiculous references about giving and how he deserves a portion from the flock and accuse them of jealousy for not giving to his "collectors" when they come as read in his first epistles to the Corinthians?

That was the beginning of the conquest of the laity, and although the Protestants somehow had followed suit, my former church yielded to have a Presbytery over them because they wanted to protect the property of the church from being sold out from under them so that by the Presbytery owning that church property, it could not happen.

Jesuits have been known to infiltrate and to cause chaos as that old oath of theirs would have them do until it got taken off of the internet. I would not doubt that they were behind this, but it could very well be that Protestants were following suit like the CC when they should not have. You cannot deny that the local CC has to pay tribute to a higher authority by tradition which sure looks like Pope Clement 1 started it.

That is what Jesus was teaching His followers not to do .. to rule in that fashion as authority when the Word of God is as they are to lead by example to serve others and not to be served like kissing their feet or like kissing the Pope's ring.

If the Lord can't help you see the truth in His words that the CC have not been keeping the traditions handed down by Paul & Peter, but creating their own; hence Eucharist and Mass, then I can't help you, brother, but I pray that He will someday.

Ummmm, I never mentioned the OT Canon OR the Deuteroocanonical Books.
I told you that YOU and ALL of Protestantism adheres to a NEW Testament Canon that the was declared bu the Catholic Church. This is a CATHOLIC Tradition that YOU follow.

As for the Deuterocanonical Books that you reject - you are rejecting the very Books that Jesus and the NT writers studied from.
There are some 200 quotes and references from these Books that are on the pages of the New Testament. Time for a history lesson . . .

Not long after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, a group of Rabbis asked permission from the Roman authorities to hold a Rabbinical school at Jabneh (or Jamnia). One of the things discussed was use of the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) by early Christians. The name, Septuagint", comes from the number of scholars (70) who translated the Hebrew texts into Greek.

At this gathering, they decided to eject 7 Books (and portions of Esther and Daniel) that they felt were “uninspired”. They provided a new Greek translation because the early Christians were converting the Jews using the Septuagint, which was compiled about 200 years before the birth of Christ. According to historical sources, the rabbinical gathering at Jabneh was not even an "official" council with binding authority to make such a decision. It can be clearly shown that Jesus and the Apostles studied and quoted from these 7 Book with some 200 references to them in the NT.

The main advocate for removing the 7 Deuterocanonical Books was Rabbi Akiva, who was also known for proclaiming that a man named Simon Bar Kohkba was the real Messiah during the 2nd Jewish revolt (circa 132 AD).

So, YOUR Protestant Father, Martin Luther chose to go with a POST-Christ, POST-Temple Canon of Scripture that was declared by a FALSE Prophet who proclaimed a FALSE “Christ”.

And THAT is who YOU chose to follow . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, they think they are sub-shepherds.

They are mere elders, not shepherds.

NOT according to Jesus, Einstein . . .

John 21:15-19
When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “FEED MY LAMBS.”
He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “TEND MY SHEEP.”
He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” [Jesus] said to him, “FEED MY SHEEP.
Amen, amen, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”
He said this signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when he had said this, he said to him, “Follow me.”


"FEEDING" and "TENDING" sheep . . .
Gee - isn't that what a SHEPHERD does?

 

[Enow]

In Matthew 23:9, Jesus said no one “on earth” can be called Father, and that there is only “ONE Father”, and that is God. This means you can’t even call your biological father, “Father”. Dumb.

If He says for you not to be called Rabbi nor Master and goes on with an example for you also not to call any one "Father" then He is referring to NOT being like the ruling Pharisees, but God rules over you and the fellow believers. Understand now?

I mean, as it is, you are not applying His words at all here, right? What did Jesus say that for? You nor the CC can answer that in how to apply His words.

What?In Matt 23:8, Jesus says don’t call anyone “rabbi” - “rabbi” is Hebrew for “teacher”, so Jesus is saying don’t call anyone “teacher”. So, for example, you can’t say, “There goes Mr. Brown, the history teacher.” Dumb. So titles like, “Pastor … Minister … Bishop … Deacon”, are sinful? If it’s okay for Paul and Steven to address religious leades as “Fathers”, then it’s okay for me. When a Catholic calls a priest, “Father” or “Pope”, he is not implying the priest replaces Jesus as the ultimate authority.
The point is, Jesus was trying to make a point, and didn't mean his words to be taken literally by fundamentalists dunces.

Says someone that is taking someone in higher authority over him as the final say on the Word of God rather than on Jesus Christ by thru the Holy Spirit in you.

1 John 2:20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth......... 26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

So how do you apply 1 John 2:27 when the CC demands they can only teach you the correct interpretation of His words? Do you believe the apostle John over the CC or not?

 

[Enow]

God could make Jack the Ripper or Adolf Hitler or the Boston Strangler write or utter infallible words or make infallible decisions, if He so desired. So there’s no reason why God couldn’t make a Pope who is “living in sin” do likewise.

1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

To imply the Holy Spirit would teach no error thru any one living in sin when the apostle John just gave His words that they could not do the truth when they are not in fellowship with the Father & the Son, makes the doctrine of the infallible Pope a lie.

If you keep holding to that doctrine, the you can't criticize any believer living in sin when they teach others. The church has been instructed to cast out as in excommunicate any unrepentant brother and not have fellowship with him. That includes those in authority. They are not untouchable.

1 Corinthians 5:4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.... 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: 10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Or else child molesting priests need not be reproved. Need not be moved to another parish where they can continue molesting children. How many Catholics cry foul? How do they not look down on the superiors handling the matter? Infallible Pope has been disproven by the scripture above when you are not supposed to even eat communion with that sinning Pope, let alone a child molesting priest.

I would say that is purely your assumption and that it is incorrect. I’m not aware of any such Catholic teaching. In Matt 16:19, Jesus told Peter, “I WILL give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven” - indicating a future event.

Saint Peter the Apostle | History, Facts, & Feast Day

"St. Peter the Apostle, original name Simeon or Simon, (died 64 ce, Rome [Italy] ), disciple of Jesus Christ, recognized in the early Christian church as the leader of the 12 disciples and by the Roman Catholic Church as the first of its unbroken succession of popes. Peter, a Jewish fisherman, was called to be a disciple of Jesus at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry."

You think Peter was possessed by Satan when Jesus rebuked him in Matt 16:22?

How else did Satan make Peter say that?

Matthew 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

 

[Enow]

That’s depends on how you define “believers”. True believers are those who do the will of God, but there are false believers who will not be saved:
“Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord”, shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he who do the will of my Father, who is in Heaven” (Matt 7:21).
True believers are “those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus” (Rev 12:17).

Explain how these saints can still be a part of the kingdom of heaven then.

Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I bet the CC has no correct interpretation or answer for that verse. Or for how the vessels unto dishonor that are in His House are those that did not depart from iniquity ( including former believers that err from the truth & had their faith overthrown ) as deferring from the vessels unto honor that did.

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

So how can the vessels unto dishonor be in His House still when obviously they are those with His seal that did not depart from iniquity?

Those who call themselves “believers” but reject God’s one, true Church - the Catholic Church - do not do the will of God, nor keep the commandments, so they don't qualify as true believers and are outside the Church.I don’t think so. Paul elaborates on “the fullness” of Christ later in Ephesians (4:11-16), and he never applies the “fullness” in a singular, individual sense, but only in a plural, collective sense - “the saints … the body of Christ … we … the whole body”. So the “fullness” of Christ in Eph 1:22-23 applies to “the Church, which is his body”, not to individuals

If there was such a thing as a one truth church, it would be mentioned in the Book of Revelations, but it is not. A church can go astray, but Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone for why He is the Head of the Church and thus over the Head of every individual believer; not the Pope nor the priest, and certainly not the CC as the head for you to be led by her when the Church is led by Jesus Christ. That is the example for the Church to do, and not take the place of Jesus Christ for following Him since He alone is the Good shepherd of every believer.

Furthermore, the Scriptures demonstrate that the Church has a central authority, which indicates the Church must be a specific denomination with specific doctrines: Paul consults the Church leadership (then located in Jerusalem) to settle doctrine (Acts 15:2-3) and to verify the correctness of his preaching (Galatians 2:2).

When a church goes astray Biblically, then they lose authority because believers are not to have fellowship with works of darkness.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

So when do you apply that? At least you can understand why the Catholics left in becoming "Protestants", granted, they did not prune everything Catholic away when they had left. They should have kept on going in proving everything Catholic by the scripture but they didn't.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

No, they think they are sub-shepherds.

They are mere elders, not shepherds.

They are people striving to feed His sheep, as Christ commanded in John 21.
Just like you.