Please stay away from the pope!!!

[Selene]

Yes, okay, I agree with this. The bible did not fall from the sky.
But if I may ask you something...given that there are fallen people within the Church, how do you proceed in following RCC doctrine blindly? I'm not attacking, just honestly curious. You tend to state the Catholic Catechisms more frequently than Bible verses. We know the bible to be fully inspired, but we don't know if the now, or then leaders, over the generations, were. Even if the Church is Christ's bride, if we place more faith in it, instead of Christ Himself, isn't that still a sin??

That's where our faith comes in. The Bible says that Christ promised to be with His Church and as Head of the Church, He will guide her in all truths (John 16:13). This is what the Bible says and where we must have faith. If we can't believe what the Bible says about Christ's promise to His Church, then what good is our faith? Our faith has always been in Christ and His promise.

 

[Rach1370]

That's where our faith comes in. The Bible says that Christ promised to be with His Church and as Head of the Church, He will guide her in all truths (John 16:13). This is what the Bible says and where we must have faith. If we can't believe what the Bible says about Christ's promise to His Church, then what good is our faith? Our faith has always been in Christ and His promise.

It's not wrong to have faith in God and His promises! But having blind faith labelled as 'faith in Christ' in our human leaders, can be a folly, can it not? While we can be guaranteed in the faithfulness of Christ, we cannot say the same of others. For example...what of the many priests who violated that trust and faith? What about the pastors who preach 'gods truth' but are committing adultery? The bible itself warns us of false teachers, those who preach Christ for their own gain, to the harm of the 'flock'. That is why I believe we must run everything past God's word and the Spirit dwelling inside us, rather than just relying on the leaders within the Church. Too often history has shown us that just because they are in the pulpit or the robes, does not necessarily mean they are saved and have Christ's and our best interests at heart.

 

[Selene]

It's not wrong to have faith in God and His promises! But having blind faith labelled as 'faith in Christ' in our human leaders, can be a folly, can it not? While we can be guaranteed in the faithfulness of Christ, we cannot say the same of others. For example...what of the many priests who violated that trust and faith? What about the pastors who preach 'gods truth' but are committing adultery? The bible itself warns us of false teachers, those who preach Christ for their own gain, to the harm of the 'flock'. That is why I believe we must run everything past God's word and the Spirit dwelling inside us, rather than just relying on the leaders within the Church. Too often history has shown us that just because they are in the pulpit or the robes, does not necessarily mean they are saved and have Christ's and our best interests at heart.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that we are to submit and be obedient to authority (which includes our Church leaders). This is also found in the Bible (Hebrews 13:17). Because the Holy Bible DOES say that we are to submit and obey our Church leaders, we follow it. However, our Catechism also says that if the person in authority goes against God, then we are not obligated to obey that person. Even the Pope stated that if a priest abuses his authority and commits a crime, we should report it to the civil authorities. Catholics should not condone any of the abuses done by a priest. So, our Catechism does not teach us "blind faith." Below is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

CCC 2242: The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."[sup]48[/sup] "We must obey God rather than men":[sup]49[/sup]

This teaching is aligned with what is taught in the Bible. The letter to Hebrews tells us to obey our Church leaders while the Acts of the Apostles also tells us to obey God rather than men. The two verses do not contradict each other. Taken as a whole, it is simply saying that we are to be obedient to authority so long as authority follows God. Even St. Paul tells his converts to follow him, and St. Paul follows God.

There is a reason why God put people in authority and instruct us to be obedient to them. In fact, one of the Ten Commandments says that children are to obey their mother and father. The reason for this is because God is teaching and preparing us to be obedient to Him. Children are told to obey their parents. If children cannot obey their parents, then it is impossible for them to obey God. We are told to obey our leaders. If we cannot obey the leaders sent by God, then how can we learn to obey God?

As for our Church leaders and anyone else placed in authority, the Catechism also has something to say about their role, which is found in CCC 2234 - 2237. What the Catechism has to say about the role as authority is also in line with what the Bible says.

 

[Rach1370]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that we are to submit and be obedient to authority (which includes our Church leaders). This is also found in the Bible (Hebrews 13:17). Because the Holy Bible DOES say that we are to submit and obey our Church leaders, we follow it. However, our Catechism also says that if the person in authority goes against God, then we are not obligated to obey that person. Even the Pope stated that if a priest abuses his authority and commits a crime, we should report it to the civil authorities. Catholics should not condone any of the abuses done by a priest. So, our Catechism does not teach us "blind faith." Below is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

CCC 2242: The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."[sup]48[/sup] "We must obey God rather than men":[sup]49[/sup]

This teaching is aligned with what is taught in the Bible. The letter to Hebrews tells us to obey our Church leaders while the Acts of the Apostles also tells us to obey God rather than men. The two verses do not contradict each other. Taken as a whole, it is simply saying that we are to be obedient to authority so long as authority follows God. Even St. Paul tells his converts to follow him, and St. Paul follows God.

There is a reason why God put people in authority and instruct us to be obedient to them. In fact, one of the Ten Commandments says that children are to obey their mother and father. The reason for this is because God is teaching and preparing us to be obedient to Him. Children are told to obey their parents. If children cannot obey their parents, then it is impossible for them to obey God. We are told to obey our leaders. If we cannot obey the leaders sent by God, then how can we learn to obey God?

As for our Church leaders and anyone else placed in authority, the Catechism also has something to say about their role, which is found in CCC 2234 - 2237. What the Catechism has to say about the role as authority is also in line with what the Bible says.

It's good that a lot of your Catechisms repeat scripture! I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said. Your first paragraphs resonate perfectly with where I am! Yes, we follow our Church leaders while what they teach aligns with scripture.
And yes, children need to obey and honour their parents, all for deeper reasons. But what happens when a parent is abusive?
I think I understand your point, however. We must not be so ready to find dis-qualifiers in our leaders that we cannot respect Biblical authority. Church leadership is an important part of the Church body. My only caution was in placing that authority above all others! I can see you don't do that however, that you indeed carefully weigh things against scripture. God bless!

 

[grandma dolittle]

Rach have you ever looked into the RCC position on the Popes position or purgatory and the fact is that it is based on the word of the Bible. go have a look see.

My position with the wind bags and simpletons is just that and it is true as even some RC are just that as well, as they start flapping there wings in ignorance.

Popes do not take the position of the Pope, it is given to them whether they like it or not and i don't think in truth any of them wanted to become the Pope. like yo pick me pick me! that does not happen.

Wait a minute! Where in the Bible does it talk about purgatory or the Pope's position? I would like to read it? Paul said in 1Timothy2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ. For that reason, I have a problem with praying to Mary and the saints. Paul plainly says that only Jesus can go to the Father for us. When we cannot pray, Paul says in Romans 8:26 that the Holy Spirit makes intersessions for us, not a priest. Jesus says in Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth:for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Therefore, I have a problem calling a priest "father." That is my views backed with scripture. If you will show me the RCC views and back them with scripture, I would appreciate it very much as I am ignorant on many of the RCC teachings.

 

[Rach1370]

Very nicely put Grandma dolittle, thanks! I especially like the verses that back up your words to perfection.

 

[aspen]

Wait a minute! Where in the Bible does it talk about purgatory or the Pope's position? I would like to read it? Paul said in 1Timothy2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ. For that reason, I have a problem with praying to Mary and the saints. Paul plainly says that only Jesus can go to the Father for us. When we cannot pray, Paul says in Romans 8:26 that the Holy Spirit makes intersessions for us, not a priest. Jesus says in Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth:for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Therefore, I have a problem calling a priest "father." That is my views backed with scripture. If you will show me the RCC views and back them with scripture, I would appreciate it very much as I am ignorant on many of the RCC teachings.

Where does it say in scripture that the final authority is scripture?

 

[xBluxTunicx82]

JESUS' WORD IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY!

Aspen, you continually attack EVERY single thing that you disagree with, which must be Christianity in general. You always seek to put out your 'opinion' and then accuse imply ignorance on others who defend their faith. Granted, NOONE knows all truth, but I can see a snake when I see one. I'm watching you, and you should really consider just 'passing over' the things you don't agree with.

There is always at least one on every forum....

 

[neophyte]

JESUS' WORD IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY!

Aspen, you continually attack EVERY single thing that you disagree with, which must be Christianity in general. You always seek to put out your 'opinion' and then accuse imply ignorance on others who defend their faith. Granted, NOONE knows all truth, but I can see a snake when I see one. I'm watching you, and you should really consider just 'passing over' the things you don't agree with.

There is always at least one on every forum....

You're wrong xBlux, Jesus Word tells us His Apostolic Church has the 'final authority ' Matt. 18: 17-18; 1 Tim 3:15;Christ loved His Church more than the Church's Bible Eph. 5: 25- 26 Jesus left us with His Church not with a Bible , later the Church compiled the completed Holy Bible [ which is Universal/ in Greek it means Catholic, remember Jesus commands his apostles'Successors to go and preach throughout the whole world ,universal/Catholic. ]

 

[xBluxTunicx82]

You're wrong xBlux, Jesus Word tells us His Apostolic Church has the 'final authority ' Matt. 18: 17-18; 1 Tim 3:15;Christ loved His Church more than the Church's Bible Eph. 5: 25- 26 Jesus left us with His Church not with a Bible , later the Church compiled the completed Holy Bible [ which is Universal/ in Greek it means Catholic, remember Jesus commands his apostles'Successors to go and preach throughout the whole world ,universal/Catholic. ]

And they preached what they knew, which was exactly what Jesus had taught them. All translations of the bible are fallible, as man is fallible. But we study His Words to know how to live our lives.

 

[neophyte]

And they preached what they knew, which was exactly what Jesus had taught them. All translations of the bible are fallible, as man is fallible. But we study His Words to know how to live our lives.

Hey xBlux, the Words out of the mouth of Jesus to His Apostles are [ fallible ] just as much God-breathed as His Words on paper if not even more God-breathed. His Oral Teaching [ God-breathe] to His nucleus Teaching Apostles of His Church was never in Written form .with the exception of one minor incidence.

 

[rainbows]

All Non-Catholic Approved Bible Translations, Are Forbidden and Condemned, and Heretical​

"This is the goal too of the crafty Bible Societies which renew the old skill of the heretics and ceaselessly force on people of all kinds, even the uneducated, gifts of the Bible. They issue these in large numbers and at great cost, in vernacular (language of the people) translations, which infringe the holy rules of the Church. The commentaries which are included often contain perverse explanations; so, having rejected divine tradition, the doctrine of the Fathers and the authority of the Catholic Church, they all interpret the words of the Lord by their own private judgment, thereby perverting their meaning. As a result, they fall into the greatest errors. Gregory XVI of happy memory, Our superior predecessor, followed the lead of his own predecessors in rejecting these societies in his apostolic letters. It is Our will to condemn them likewise." Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus (On Faith And Religion), Encyclical promulgated on November 9, 1846, #14.

You may want to read this again.

"The commentaries which are included often contain perverse explanations; so, having rejected divine tradition, the doctrine of the Fathers and the authority of the Catholic Church"

There is no other position possible, it is the Catholic Church or fall into the greatest errors.

Reading the Bible essentially outside of the juristiction of the RCC is heresy.

What is your opinion on this?

 

[Selene]

JESUS' WORD IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY!

Aspen, you continually attack EVERY single thing that you disagree with, which must be Christianity in general. You always seek to put out your 'opinion' and then accuse imply ignorance on others who defend their faith. Granted, NOONE knows all truth, but I can see a snake when I see one. I'm watching you, and you should really consider just 'passing over' the things you don't agree with.

There is always at least one on every forum....

The Holy Bible didn't exist until toward the end of the 4th century. In fact, Abraham didn't have any Scripture to guide Him. No one in the Old Testament knew who Christ was. Therefore, Scripture never came first.

 

[aspen]

The Holy Bible didn't exist until toward the end of the 4th century. In fact, Abraham didn't have any Scripture to guide Him. No one in the Old Testament knew who Christ was. Therefore, Scripture never came first.

So true Selene. Apparently, Martin Luther forgot that his idea of the core authority (the Bible, as he determined it) was not in existence when Jesus ascended to Heaven. Yet, according to Matt 16, Jesus established His Church before He died.....

 

[Angelina]

That does not rule out the fact that the ancient Hebrews had oral traditions which were passed down from generation to generation. Even when Abraham encountered God who told him to leave his country, his kinsman and his Father's house. Is this not written in the book of Genesis 12? We know that the first 5 books were written by Moses. Where do you think he got his information about Abraham from???

Abraham did not need a book to guide him because he was speaking to God directly...

No one in the Old Testament knew who Christ was. Therefore, Scripture never came first.

That is incorrect...

Galatians 3:8
And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”

The bible is a historical record and written testimony to the Hebrew and also the Gentile nations of his promise to send his Son and the promised Holy Spirit and redeem what had been lost in the garden...We are at the end of that promise and can look back in awe of God's grace and mercy toward us and all who believe in Jesus by faith...

Shalom!!!

 

[rainbows]

The Holy Bible didn't exist until toward the end of the 4th century. In fact, Abraham didn't have any Scripture to guide Him. No one in the Old Testament knew who Christ was. Therefore, Scripture never came first.

Scripture is the written revelation of Jesus Christ.

The letters Paul and John wrote to the churches comprise
most of the New Testament, these were written well
within the first century.

The Old Testament existed before the Christ arrived.

So by the end of the first century, the Gospel had
been delivered in written and vocal form. The New
Testament existed at the end of the first century
in scattered form and the Old Testament was
complete.

So if you want to examine the source itself
that is, what the apostles said about Jesus.
Use the New Testament.

How did God provide the Ten Commandments
to Moses, was this not in written form on
tablets of stone.

Also, prophecies regarding the coming
messiah were written at least 700 years
before the Catholic Church. So which
came first?

 

[Selene]

Scripture is the written revelation of Jesus Christ.

The letters Paul and John wrote to the churches comprise
most of the New Testament, these were written well
within the first century.

The Old Testament existed before the Christ arrived.

So by the end of the first century, the Gospel had
been delivered in written and vocal form. The New
Testament existed at the end of the first century
in scattered form and the Old Testament was
complete.

So if you want to examine the source itself
that is, what the apostles said about Jesus.
Use the New Testament.

How did God provide the Ten Commandments
to Moses, was this not in written form on
tablets of stone.

Also, prophecies regarding the coming
messiah were written at least 700 years
before the Catholic Church. So which
came first?

God came FIRST. Abraham did not have any Scripture to guide him. In fact, Abraham didn't even have the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments was given to Moses, The New Testament Scripture was not canonized until the 4th century. So, Scripture certainly did not come first. It had always been God who came first.

 

[Rach1370]

Where does it say in scripture that the final authority is scripture?

I think when it comes down to ultimate or final authority, a few things needed to be taken into consideration. God, of course, is the final authority, and we know scripture to be given to us by Him...we are told that all scripture is 'God breathed'. And while God does indeed talk audibly to some people, the ones who experience this are few...usually our 'direct' contact with God comes through the Spirit and his convictions within us.

The problem with putting anything above scripture as final authority comes to us in the handy example of this forum board. How many people would you say, that are here, that claim, absolutely that their interpretation of scripture is the only true one? That person over there claims God actually spoke to him saying this; while the other bloke here says that his pastor/minister/priest said the opposite, so that must be true.

We know from the bible that not all the 'spirits' come from God...that we are to test them. And one things we know for certain...man is fallible and sinful. So how on earth do we reconcile things coming out of man's mouth? There must be some way to know if what that man is preaching is true, or whether that other man really had a message from God, or he's being duped by some other 'spirit'.

We see in Acts, that a group of people, the Bereans, were 'noble'...that before wholeheartedly believing something, they 'searched the scriptures' to see if it were true. This is a great example for all of us. The bible, being God's word, must show the truth, of who he is, who Jesus is, and who we are to live for him. There is nothing wrong in listening to others in authority...be it a priest, pastor or some ministry leader. But before believing them without reservation, we need to 'run it by' the bible...if the message they teach is found in scripture, then their message is one from God. It's a fairly simple thing really, but huge in practical application....because there really is only two things we can be sure of: the bible is God's word, and man, even if meaning well, is fallen. It's like being in a foreign land...Sweden, maybe, and having a translator that speaks a little Swedish, but mostly French. You're really not going to trust every interpretation that comes through that man...not without running it by your handy little 'Swedish to English' book, now are you!!?

 

[Selene]

That does not rule out the fact that the ancient Hebrews had oral traditions which were passed down from generation to generation. Even when Abraham encountered God who told him to leave his country, his kinsman and his Father's house. Is this not written in the book of Genesis 12? We know that the first 5 books were written by Moses. Where do you think he got his information about Abraham from???

Abraham did not need a book to guide him because he was speaking to God directly...

Exactly my point. Oral tradition came before written scripture. Moses did not get this directly from Abraham because Abraham was already dead by the time Moses was born. Oral tradition was passed down from one generation to another UNTIL someone decided to write the oral traditions down.

That is incorrect...

Galatians 3:8
And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”

The bible is a historical record and written testimony to the Hebrew and also the Gentile nations of his promise to send his Son and the promised Holy Spirit and redeem what had been lost in the garden...We are at the end of that promise and can look back in awe of God's grace and mercy toward us and all who believe in Jesus by faith...

Shalom!!!

Nothing in that scripture that you quote says that the people of the Old Testament knew Jesus Christ. Yes, the Gospel was preached to Abraham. Notice the word "preached." The Gosepl was "preached" to Abraham. Abraham did not read any gospel. So, yes, Abraham knew that a Messiah would come because He heard about it from God. He certainly did not READ anything about it from any scripture. Scripture did not exist during Abraham's time. Everything was ORALLY PREACHED to him.

As I said, no one in the Old Testament (not even Abraham) knew that the Messiah would be Jesus Christ. If they did, they would have not rejected Him and all the Jews today would have accepted Him as Lord and the Messiah. The only thing they knew is that the Messiah who was to come will be God (See Isaiah 9:6).

 

[aspen]

I think when it comes down to ultimate or final authority, a few things needed to be taken into consideration. God, of course, is the final authority, and we know scripture to be given to us by Him...we are told that all scripture is 'God breathed'. And while God does indeed talk audibly to some people, the ones who experience this are few...usually our 'direct' contact with God comes through the Spirit and his convictions within us.

The problem with putting anything above scripture as final authority comes to us in the handy example of this forum board. How many people would you say, that are here, that claim, absolutely that their interpretation of scripture is the only true one? That person over there claims God actually spoke to him saying this; while the other bloke here says that his pastor/minister/priest said the opposite, so that must be true.

We know from the bible that not all the 'spirits' come from God...that we are to test them. And one things we know for certain...man is fallible and sinful. So how on earth do we reconcile things coming out of man's mouth? There must be some way to know if what that man is preaching is true, or whether that other man really had a message from God, or he's being duped by some other 'spirit'.

We see in Acts, that a group of people, the Bereans, were 'noble'...that before wholeheartedly believing something, they 'searched the scriptures' to see if it were true. This is a great example for all of us. The bible, being God's word, must show the truth, of who he is, who Jesus is, and who we are to live for him. There is nothing wrong in listening to others in authority...be it a priest, pastor or some ministry leader. But before believing them without reservation, we need to 'run it by' the bible...if the message they teach is found in scripture, then their message is one from God. It's a fairly simple thing really, but huge in practical application....because there really is only two things we can be sure of: the bible is God's word, and man, even if meaning well, is fallen. It's like being in a foreign land...Sweden, maybe, and having a translator that speaks a little Swedish, but mostly French. You're really not going to trust every interpretation that comes through that man...not without running it by your handy little 'Swedish to English' book, now are you!!?

Ok. That is hard enough for people of above higher intelligence - what about people with average or lower intelligence? 3/5 of the population? The Holy family, themselves would be unable to discern the truth from intellectual study.