how is it explicit?I know something all Protestants have in common. They don’t have a Pope.
It’s cute because that’s one of the most explicit doctrines in the whole Bible
It’s “sola scriptura but not wholla da scriptura.”“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” is pretty clear. St. Peter could change the Bible if he wanted to.
Where’s your sola scriptura now?
And you interpret this to mean the Pope? That is interpretation. One of the things I find interesting is that the comon Christian does not know the difference between interpretation with aplication, and explicit teachings of scripture. For example: the present topic would be an interpretation that would be applied to the doctrine of papal supremacy. Chapel veils, as you have come to call them in the west, are explicit teachings of scripture.
Mormans are not classified as Protestants proper by most people. Some even question if they are Christians, partially because they deny Christ’s divinity.
Let me see, Peter is named the Rock on which the Church is to be built. Peter is promised the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against this Church. Peter is given the Keys to the Kingdom. Peter is told what he binds on earth is bound in Heaven, and what he binds on earth is bound in Heaven.
And so you confirm that it is implicit by use of history.
Their are Catholics who deny the virgin birth of Christ. Some are seminary Profs.
Hi, Vern. I think the Unitarians are more akin to a social club, since you find almost the same variety of beliefs there. If they had a catechism, what would it say? Could there even be agreement on God’s nature or His manner of working amongst man?
No, it is explicit in scripture.
When they deny the virgin birth of Christ, they cease to be Catholic. They may call themselves what they will, but they cannot actually be Catholic and deny the tenents of the Faith.
The Unitarians are a good example of the Kharisma of Infallibility. If Protestants had it, there would be no Unitarians.
Try this: When God moves within an individual as part of His covenant, he makes a radical change within that person. Consider simply the name changes. Abram to Abraham. Sarai to Sarah. Isaac to Israel. Simon to Cepha. What has been revealed to us in type, if not in name, as the first Pope is Christ’s appointment of Cepha as the foundation of His church in Matthew 16:18. That, and giving Cepha the power to bind “whatever” on earth and in Heaven - Apostolic succession for example. However you view Christ’s “whatever”, you must admit that it has been stunningly effective within the world’s oldest organization.
And for a lot of Protestants, Christianity appears to consist in little more than spewing vomit on Catholics. With this difference: This website is devoted to Catholic apologetics. We don’t go to Protestant websites and attack them. We merely defend Catholicism when they come here and attack us.Indeed ? And how would you know that ?
Maybe you’re confusing uniformity with unity in the Holy Spirit. They are not the same at all. If you are right, then an awful lot of Catholic polemic on these fora & against Protestants is a waste of time.
For a lot of Catholics, Christianity appears to consist in little more than spewing vomit on Protestants
And yet in the last two hundred years since Vatican I and the definition of that false hood look at what has taken place in the Catholic Church.