OFFICE OF POPE IN THE BIBLE

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,962
3,410
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why is it eisegesis to take the words of Christ literally? "Call no man father" means what it says -- call no man father. It would apply to those at the time of Christ as well as those in our time.

The pope and the papacy are not derived from Scripture, neither is an earthly priesthood distinct from other Christians. All Christians belong to God's Royal Priesthood.

The "keys of the kingdom" given to Peter was the Gospel message itself. He first preached it to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. And it is the Gospel which is the incorruptible "seed" of the New Birth. And without the New Birth, no man can enter or see the Kingdom of God.
I LOVE it when people pervert Matt. 16:18-19 because it becomes a public teaching point.

Sooooo, YOU think that Jesus forbade calling ALL men "Father"??
Wanna bet??

Is Jesus telling us that we can’t call certain people "fathers" or “teachers” when they may actually be fathers or teachers? The answer is “No.” He is telling us that no man is to be considered father above our Father in heaven and no person is to be considered teacher above our Teacher in heaven. In the verse that precedes this (Matt: 23:8), Jesus tells us not to call people “Teachers”.

Jesus was speaking about the Scribes and Pharisees who exalted themselves before all:
“They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in synagogues, greetings in marketplaces, and the salutation 'Rabbi.” (Matt 23:6-7).

If calling people "Father" and "Teacher" is forbidden by Jesus - EXPLAIN the following:
- Jesus said, “Your FATHER Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56).
- St. Stephen refers to "our FATHER Abraham," (Acts 7:2).
- St. Paul speaks of "our FATHER Isaac” (Romans 9:10).
- For I became your FATHER in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15).
- We see in Matt. 19:5, Mark 10:7 where Jesus quotes Gen. 2:24, which states: “That is why a man leaves his FATHER and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”
- In Eph. 5:31, Paul quotes the very same verse. The same Greek word, πατερ (pat-ayr’), is used in all 3 verses.
- God commands us to “Honor your FATHER and Mother” (Exod.20:12).
- "For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a TEACHER oOf the Gentiles in faith and truth" (1 Tim. 2:7).
- "For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and TEACHER" (2 Tim. 1:11).
- "God has appointed in the church first Apostles, second prophets, third TEACHERS"
(1 Cor. 12:28).

I eagerly await your intelligent response . . .
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I eagerly await your intelligent response . . .
Context is critical. Show us where in the New Testament any Christian actually addressed Peter, James, John, or Paul as "Father". Christ said "all ye are brethren" so Peter speaks of "our brother Paul" in his second epistle. And the Lord started the Lord's Prayer with "Our Father, which art in Heaven..." which precludes and excludes calling any man "father" as a clerical title.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,962
3,410
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Context is critical. Show us where in the New Testament any Christian actually addressed Peter, James, John, or Paul as "Father". Christ said "all ye are brethren" so Peter speaks of "our brother Paul" in his second epistle. And the Lord started the Lord's Prayer with "Our Father, which art in Heaven..." which precludes and excludes calling any man "father" as a clerical title.
Ummmm, I didn't make up the rules here - you anti-Catholics did by saying that calling ANY man "Father" was forbidden. This is absolute anti-Biblical nonsense.

- Jesus said, “Your FATHER Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56).

YOUR
turn . . .
 

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,765
5,608
113
www.CheeseburgersWithGod.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
HUH??
What
are you talking about?? I never said that "all" who were in the flesh were dead.

I said that all who are born again are dead TO the flesh - but are still IN the flesh.
I think YOU just want to argue for the sake of arguing . . .
You left out this part, claiming "biblical truth", which it is not:
Your flesh isn't "dead" until you leave this world.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,962
3,410
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You left out this part, claiming "biblical truth", which it is not:
You should know better that that . . .

John 17:15-16
My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not OF the world, even as I am not of it.

Rom. 6:11
So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Finally - Paul describes our condition as humans IN the flesh struggling with sin:
Rom. 7:21-25
So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,640
13,027
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The teaching on the Eucharist was unanimous for 16 centuries until your reformulators came along and produced 200 interpretations within 60 years. You are so pathetically fragmented, you don't even know whose interpretation you are following. I follow what was taught by Jesus and the Apostles and in the 1st and 2nd century, and I can prove it's consistency. This thread is about the office of Pope in the Bible, not the Eucharist.

Uh, so why did you bring up the Eucharist?

And Uh, why are you bashing another's faith?
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,640
13,027
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
All these verbose rants in a vain attempt to cover up the fact that you were proven wrong.

We who are in Christ are IN the flesh until we die.
We are not OF the flesh . . .

It's pretty sad listening to the few Catholics here desperately trying to be champions of all knowing with a forked tongue.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,962
3,410
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's pretty sad listening to the few Catholics here desperately trying to be champions of all knowing with a forked tongue.
It's even sadder to read the rantings of blind anti-Catholics who refuse to acknowledge when they're wrong . . .
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,640
13,027
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's even sadder to read the rantings of blind anti-Catholics who refuse to acknowledge when they're wrong . . .

I get a visual that your walls are decorated with homemade blue ribbons that say;
"I'm right and everyone else is wrong"....
Pride suits you.
 

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,765
5,608
113
www.CheeseburgersWithGod.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You should know better that that . . .

John 17:15-16
My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not OF the world, even as I am not of it.

Rom. 6:11
So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Finally - Paul describes our condition as humans IN the flesh struggling with sin:
Rom. 7:21-25
So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
You are not doing what Paul did, and it is that difference that is not biblical.

He very clearly stated that those who are in Christ are a new creation, that it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us. But he also spoke to and of those who were hearing the gospel for the first time and of that transitional time before wholly coming to Christ. But the two do not mix any more than light mixes with darkness.

So then, better if you preached to the one or to the other, and not go back to that time which should now be past, but should now be well defined as distinctly different. Otherwise you mix what should no longer be mixed, and give a foothold to those who would linger in their fleshly nature with excuse, as if from authority. Such lingering is without any authority or excuse.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Taken

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Context is critical. Show us where in the New Testament any Christian actually addressed Peter, James, John, or Paul as "Father". Christ said "all ye are brethren" so Peter speaks of "our brother Paul" in his second epistle. And the Lord started the Lord's Prayer with "Our Father, which art in Heaven..." which precludes and excludes calling any man "father" as a clerical title.
That's your flawed opinion. You have been given context and you ignored it. Precludes and excludes is typical dichotomous thinking (either/or) and not both/and.

Judges 17:10; 18:19 – priesthood and fatherhood have always been identified together. Fatherhood literally means “communicating one’s nature,” and just as biological fathers communicate their nature to their children, so do spiritual fathers communicate the nature of God to us, their children, through (hopefully) teaching and example.

Acts 7:2; 22:1,1 John 2:13 – elders of the Church are called “fathers.” Therefore, we should ask the question, “Why don’t Protestants call their pastors “father?” I'm spoon feeding you verses but you will still arrogantly deny them.

Titus 1:4 – Paul calls Titus his true “child” in a common faith. Priests are our spiritual fathers in the family of God.

1 Peter 5:13 – Peter refers to himself as father by calling Mark his “son.”

1 John 2:1,13,14 – John calls the elders of the Church “fathers.”

1 John 2:1,18,28; 3:18; 5:21; 3 John 4 – John calls members of the Church “children.”

Get over your self.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I get a visual that your walls are decorated with homemade blue ribbons that say;
"I'm right and everyone else is wrong"....
Pride suits you.
You are wrong when you are proven wrong. Pride is when you refuse to try to understand, and insist on asserting a man made system after your view has been repeatably debunked.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,858
3,276
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's false because this list is a pack of lies. #1 is a false summary. This is what 2105 says:
2105 The duty of offering God genuine worship concerns man both individually and socially. This is "the traditional Catholic teaching on the moral duty of individuals and societies toward the true religion and the one Church of Christ."30 By constantly evangelizing men, the Church works toward enabling them "to infuse the Christian spirit into the mentality and mores, laws and structures of the communities in which [they] live."31 The social duty of Christians is to respect and awaken in each man the love of the true and the good. It requires them to make known the worship of the one true religion which subsists in the Catholic and apostolic Church.32 Christians are called to be the light of the world. Thus, the Church shows forth the kingship of Christ over all creation and in particular over human societies.33
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a1.htm
What subsists in the Catholic and apostolic Church does not mean nobody else has truths. 817-820 is ignored because it contradicts Slicks agenda. None of these paragraph numbers are linked to the catechism, they offer no context, no link to the page and no footnotes. There is nothing in scripture that says every devotion and practice must be found explicitly in scripture to be valid. That is a false unbiblical tradition. It would take months to refute all of Matt Slick's misrepresentations and lies. One is quite revealing.

Slick grossly misrepresents the catechism, and so do by posting this crap.
It's a belief that tradition could be counted for scripture as a false doctrine.

The Christian life is founded around biblical scripture, not traditions of men.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Why is it eisegesis to take the words of Christ literally? "Call no man father" means what it literally says -- call no man father. It would apply to those at the time of Christ as well as those in our time.
No, hyperbole is a literary device, it does not mean what it says.
Matt. 23:9 – Jesus says, “call no man father.” It's hperbole, not literal. But YOU use this verse in an attempt to prove that it is wrong for Catholics to call priests “father.” This is an example of “eisegesis” (imposing one’s views upon a passage) as opposed to “exegesis” (drawing out the meaning of the passage from its context). In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of “fathers” and “rabbis” because they were hypocrites. Jesus warns us not to elevate anyone to the level of our heavenly Father.
We don't call priests "God", an absurdity invented by fundie cults.
The pope and the papacy are not derived from Scripture, neither is an earthly priesthood distinct from other Christians.
Why don't you address the scriptures in the OP, and stop running from them.
All Christians belong to God's Royal Priesthood.
That is a teaching your borrowed from us.
The "keys of the kingdom" given to Peter was the Gospel message itself.
Not according to scripture. You made that up. See the OP.
He first preached it to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. And it is the Gospel which is the incorruptible "seed" of the New Birth. And without the New Birth, no man can enter or see the Kingdom of God.
Fine, but that has nothing to do with "keys". See the OP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
It's a belief that tradition could be counted for scripture as a false doctrine.

The Christian life is founded around biblical scripture, not traditions of men.
The words of Jesus are traditions of men? Do you think Jesus taught the apostles for three years and only spoke NT verses? You guys are constantly making straw man fallacies about tradition. You don't know what it means and you don't want to know. That is a false man made Protestant tradition in itself!
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,858
3,276
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The words of Jesus are traditions of men? Do you think Jesus taught the apostles for three years and only spoke NT verses? You guys are constantly making straw man fallacies about tradition. You don't know what it means and you don't want to know. That is a false man made Protestant tradition in itself!
Mark 7:8KJV
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Colossians 2:8KJV
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Mark 7:8KJV
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Colossians 2:8KJV
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
You still can't tell the difference between good traditions that Paul commands us to keep, and the bad traditions of men. To you, all traditions are bad, there are no good traditions. This is not biblical.

One might loosely define tradition as the authoritative and authentic Christian history of theological doctrines and devotional practices. Christianity is fundamentally grounded in the earth-shattering historical events in the life of Jesus Christ (His incarnation, preaching, miracles, passion, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension). Unfortunately, history is your enemy.

Eyewitnesses (Lk 1:1-2; Acts 1:1-3; 2 Pet 1:16-18) communicated these true stories to the early Christians, who in turn passed them on to other Christians (under the guidance of the Church’s authority) down through the ages. Therefore, Christian tradition, defined as authentic Church history, is unavoidable, and is a very good thing — not a “bad” thing at all.

Many read the accounts of Jesus’ conflicts with the Pharisees and get the idea He was utterly opposed to all tradition whatsoever. This isn’t true. A close reading of passages such as Matthew 15:3-9 and Mark 7:8-13 will reveal that He only condemned corrupt traditions of men, not tradition per se. He uses qualifying phrases like “your tradition,” “precepts of men,” “tradition of men,” as opposed to “word of God” or “the commandment of God” and so forth. St. Paul makes the same contrast:

Colossians 2:8 (RSV) ”See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ.”

By word of mouth or by letter
The New Testament explicitly teaches that traditions can be either good (from God) or bad (from men, when against God’s true traditions). Corrupt traditions from the Pharisees were bad; though many of their legitimate teachings were recognized by Jesus (see, e.g., Mt 23:3). The spoken gospel and the apostolic writings (some eventually formulated as Holy Scripture; some not) were altogether good — the authentic Christian tradition as revealed by the incarnate God to the apostles, and “ratified” by the Church.

The Greek word for “tradition” in the New Testament is paradosis. It occurs in Colossians 2:8, and in the following three passages:

1 Corinthians 11:2 “… maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.”

2 Thessalonians 2:15 “… stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.”

2 Thessalonians 3:6 “… the tradition that you received from us.”

St. Paul makes no distinction between written and oral tradition. He doesn’t regard oral Christian tradition as bad and undesirable. This is made even more clear in two other statements to Timothy:

2 Timothy 1:13 “Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, …”

2 Timothy 2:2 “and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

St. Paul is urging Timothy not only to “follow” his oral teaching which “heard from” him, but also to pass it on to others. This is a clear picture of authentic historical continuity of Christian doctrine: precisely what the Catholic Church calls sacred Tradition, or, when emphasizing the teaching authority of bishops in the Church, “apostolic succession.”

The phrase “deposit of faith” is also used when describing the original gospel teaching as handed over or delivered to the apostles (see, e.g., Acts 2:42, Jude 3). The Catholic Church considers itself merely the “custodian” or “guardian” of this public revelation or “deposit” from God, because we believe God set up His Church (Matthew 16), making St. Peter the leader, and that it has continued through history ever since. It’s all God’s doing, not ours. We participate in His plan by His grace and mercy only.

Pass it on
When the first Christians went out and preached the gospel of Jesus Christ after Pentecost, this was an oral tradition. Some of it was recorded in the Bible (e.g., in Acts 2) but most was not, and indeed could not be, for sheer volume (see John 20:30, 21:25). It was primarily this oral Christian tradition that turned the world upside down, not the text of the New Testament (many, if not most people couldn’t read then, anyway).

Accordingly, when the phrases “word of God” or “word of the Lord” occur in Acts and the epistles, they almost always refer to oral preaching, not to the written word of the Bible, as many Protestants (and probably a lot of Catholics, too) casually assume.

The New Testament itself is a record of primitive, apostolic Christianity. It is a development, so to speak, of both the Old Testament and early oral Christian preaching and teaching and tradition. The process of canonization of the New Testament took more than 300 years and involved taking into account human opinions and traditions as to which books were believed to be Scripture. It was not immediately obvious to all Christians (as some assume or argue).

Many notable Church fathers accepted books as part of Scripture which are not now so recognized (e.g., The Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement). Many others didn’t accept certain canonical books until very late (e.g., Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, and Revelation). Thus, the Bible cannot be separated and isolated from tradition and a developmental process.

In Catholicism, Scripture and Tradition are intrinsically interwoven. They have been described as “twin fonts of the one divine well-spring” (revelation), and cannot be separated, any more than can two wings of a bird, two sides of a coin, or two blades of a pair of scissors.

The Church also has strong authority, so that the Catholic rule of faith consists of Scripture, Tradition, and the Church. This may be conceived in a word-picture as a “three-legged stool.” If you remove any one of the legs, the stool collapses; all three are equally necessary for it to stand up.

That is Catholicism: and (if anyone wonders about it) all these notions are firmly backed up by Scripture itself, without any contradiction as regards Catholic Tradition or Church dogma and doctrine.
http://www.themichigancatholic.org/2014/05/tradition-isnt-always-a-bad-word-in-scripture/
 
Last edited:

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,640
13,027
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Get over your self.


Acknowledging men as "daddy's" and "daddy figures" is one thing. Scripture is clear about actually ADDRESSING men on earth.

Matt 23:9
...."CALL" no man "YOUR FATHER" upon the earth,
....For (because) "ONE" "IS" "YOUR FATHER", which is in heaven.

A man WHO IS "IN" Christ, takes ON Jesus' Holy Heavenly Father, as "his "ONLY" Father"...unless of course IF one is a Catholic, then "THEY" ELECT a MAN ON EARTH to be "their" "holy father".
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,640
13,027
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are wrong when you are proven wrong.

You making claims for others, they did not make, is not proving one wrong.

You, making disparaging comments toward others, is not proving one wrong.

You, disagreeing with others is not proving the other wrong.

You, using carnal understanding, against spritual understanding, does not prove the other wrong.

Pride is when you refuse to try to understand,

Point is, what you say; IS UNDERSTOOD, but it is carnal and irrelevant in regard to Spiritual things.

and insist on asserting a man made system after your view has been repeatably debunked.

I am not the one following a MAN MADE "system", or "earthly elected" "holy father" that is obviously teaching the Lord's Word and Forgiveness and Blood, are NOT Sufficient.

How man times have you been Born Again?
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
As already proved, it is perfectly biblical for Christians to call their priests “father”. However, the address “holy” is a word the Protestant Church of Christ reserves for God alone, but is its reservation biblically substantiated?

We know that Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man (Mark 6:20). The prophet Zechariah’s prophecy referred to holy prophets (Luke 1:70), and St. Luke’s narrative also referred to holy prophets (Acts 3:21). Did St. Peter mistakenly call the writers of Scripture the holy men of God (2 Peter 1:21 Douay-Rheims)? Was St. Peter not referring to men when he wrote about a holy priesthood (1 Peter 2:5 Revised Standard Version)? Was Sarah not one of the holy women who hoped in God (1 Peter 3:5)? And did St. Peter not encourage the Church to remember the predictions of the holy prophets (2 Peter 3:2)? (All emphases added.)

Clearly, the “Bible alone” does not reserve the address “holy” for God alone, but rather, suggests that there are indeed holy men and women. And therefore, since “father” is a biblical address for priests, the two words, added together, form an address that does not violate the Scriptures.

" that is obviously teaching the Lord's Word and Forgiveness and Blood, are NOT Sufficient."
It's obvious to me that you haven't a clue what you are taking about.

For the third time:

Matt. 23:9 – Jesus says, “call no man father.” But Protestants use this verse in an attempt to prove that it is wrong for Catholics to call priests “father.” This is an example of “eisegesis” (imposing one’s views upon a passage) as opposed to “exegesis” (drawing out the meaning of the passage from its context). In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of “fathers” and “rabbis” because they were hypocrites. Jesus warns us not to elevate anyone to the level of our heavenly Father.

Find a Protestant scripture scholar or reputable teacher that agrees with your “eisegesis”, and don't be so arrogant.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.