Personal interpretation and dogma can we ever know the difference?

[StrawberryJam]

Help me find out how and why we can with using your own logic. Cut and paste bible quotes to support the bible will not help.

I’ve seen them all.

What I am asking is for you to give me a basis for thinking that the Popes have been protected from error in matters of faith or morals.

I am aware of the apologist scriptural support for this. I want something that is not out of the “book” to support this. Feelings don’t count either.

Even if we agree they are protected from error in matters of faith or morals,
Why would Jesus have to come at all?

The priests that were there at his time were guilty of what?
Something different than what we see now?

 

[theblindlead]

I don’t know if this will help but we as Catholics believe that there is this crazy entity called the holy spirit that guides the church. the catholic church has been shooting its self in the foot for the past 2000 years and we are still around and i would attribute this to the holy spirit. So we have a great moral guide in the H.S. now i know that you said no biblical references but this one has to be made Jesus gave peter the power to bind and lose and we as Catholics believe that this power is passed from pope to pope so even if some of our dogmas may feel to you as if they are personal opinion by definition of dogma and infallibility it is impossible for them to be wrong. now i’m aware that what i just posted is very circular reasoning but think about it and if you didn’t receive what you wanted to hear could you be more specific on what doctrines you feel are personal opinions?

 

[fhansen]

Help me find out how and why we can with using your own logic. Cut and paste bible quotes to support the bible will not help.

I’ve seen them all.

What I am asking is for you to give me a basis for thinking that the Popes have been protected from error in matters of faith or morals.

I am aware of the apologist scriptural support for this. I want something that is not out of the “book” to support this. Feelings don’t count either.

Even if we agree they are protected from error in matters of faith or morals,
Why would Jesus have to come at all?

The priests that were there at his time were guilty of what?
Something different than what we see now?

A mixed bag of questions here. For one thing basic Catholic dogma hasn’t changed. Jesus came so the light would enter the world. Then He left to let it have its effect. It wouldn’t do for Him to stay-God “hides” Himself for a reason-so we can have complete freedom to play the game any which way we want. But this new light was a gift the Church was handed to spread to all peoples so it can have its influence, which it has, continuously and progressively, in this world both inside and outside the Church.

And the new light that was shown was pure grace-the light of the Atonement whereby man is reconciled with God as He proves (what He should never have had to prove), His existence, His love, His goodness, and His forgiveness in the life, words, deeds, death and resurrection of a man in so definitive a manner that we can’t ever ignore it altogether-the Cross stands on the landscape of human history now as a permanent fixture-we know its there to challenge us whenever one of us feels up to the challenge of taking an honest look at ourselves and compare that to the model Jesus gave us-all the while assured that forgiveness is surrounding and upholding us to allow this candid look to be endurable.

And the Church is what has kept this Cross standing throughout the centuries. Without the charism of infallibility how could there even be any assurance of knowing the truth of the gospel? What unity of faith has sola scriptura produced? Would Jesus really leave us with a faith, whether in its traditions or in the written word, without establishing an authoritative means to preserve and proclaim it intact?

 

[StrawberryJam]

I have to hand it to you on this. You answered the question and did so within the parameters set without complaint or excuses.

You do realize I am thinking out loud here and not challenging anymore or less than I do with anything else.

I thank you for answering me and not mocking my question.
I thank you for treating me as if I am a human being and not a person who is an object of wrath for existing.

I am looking at every way to be thankful and for some reason, I have a lot to be thankful for.

While I do not agree with some things still, I do agree that it is very pleasant to discuss matters like this in a very civil way. I only hope I do so myself. I certianly strive to.

At this time of year, I feel closer to all of you for the very basic reason that I have spent the time to get to know your faith and feel that we are getting ever closer to that time where we have to really look at the question again.

Did God come in the flesh to us as man?

Did he really care enough about us to do that?

These are the questions that I hope to finally come to some type of peace with.

Many of you along the way have helped me continue asking these things.

I won’t stop seeking yet. I still think there are a few matters that I may not understand fully yet.

Thank you all for the things I have gained this way