Protestants: please stop using the label "Bible-believing"

[Tanner9188]

The Bible establishes Peter as the head of the true Church. The Popes are the modern-day Peters. Please explain how you can deny this truth and still say you are “Bible-believing”.

The Pope; head of the church?
The title pope, once used with far greater latitude (see below, section V), is at present employed solely to denote the Bishop of Rome, who, in virtue of his position as successor of St. Peter, is** the chief pastor of the whole Church, the Vicar of Christ upon earth.** newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

“…yet for us there is {but} one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we {exist} for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we {exist} through Him…” - 1 Corinthians 8

This would include all things; the church and even Peter.

Christ and the apostles claim that Jesus is “Head of the church of God”. Is the Catholic Church a separate church from the church of God where Christ is the head? I don’t know; but you weigh the evidences and decide based on what Scripture teaches.

Matthew 10:25 - (Jesus speaking)
"It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master. If they have called the head of the house Beelzebul, how much more {will they malign} **the members of his household! **

Luke 13:25 (Jesus Speaking)
"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then **He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ **

John 10:11 - (Jesus Speaking)
“I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.”

There are more, but 3 should suffice on what Jesus knows of Himself and so should you.
For the Scripture teaches where 2-3 witnesses agree, then what; it is true?

The apostles say:
Ephesians 1 - (Paul)
In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, {that is,} the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. (Includes the church) In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation–having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance,

Philippians 2 - (Paul)
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I love Paul because he makes sure he didn’t leave out a thing “under the earth”…LOL
This will include the Popes.

Colossians 1:15-18 - (Paul)
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, {both} in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 **He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. **

The Father means everything; no exceptions.

What about the Apostle Peter?
1 Peter 2 -
“…He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. 25 For you were continually straying like sheep, but now **you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.” **

As you may know there are many more of the “more familiar” passages I could have cited.
Given the history of the Papacy; its questionable origin and evolution over time; the Pope has become to Catholics, the Vicar of Christ.

Does Christ need a Head on earth? No! Did He and the apostles say and agree that He is the Head? Yes! Who can take His place legitimately? No one. Did Peter believe He was the head of the church, rather he recognized Jesus as the head. So where do we get this notion of Pope? It has to be after 312 or 313 A.D.; exact date I don’t know. When was it officially recognized, officially recognized, by the Catholic Church?

Food for thought; don’t take my word on it; search the Scripture to see if these things are true. God Bless all of you!
Tanner

 

[RevDrNorth]

This is relativism of the highest order - as applied to God’s revealed truth. No?

Will Jesus pardon the sins of all Buddhists because they have “scriptural, linguistic, historical and logical reasons” for their beliefs?

That is silly and illogical! I did not say both things (RCC & Bible Believing) were true. I am saying that both a RCC and a “bible believing Christian” (refer to OP) hold to the idea that the two propositions in the original post are true or false based on each of their interpretions of scripture, linguistics, logical, history, etc. It might help you to read each side’s arguments and interpretations of meaning behind words and so on.

First, salvation does not depend on whether Peter was the first Pope and future Popes were successors. Second, while I have great respect for the Pope and might even see him in some “first among equals” sense" (like the Patriarch of Constantinople or the Archbishop of Canterbury) I do not see him with the sweeping authority given to him by the RCC.

Nonetheless, I respect the RCC’s right to interpret the Pope as having that kind of authority and position. I do not believe it is scripturally supported (tired old arguments with which we will get nowhere rehashing here for the millioneth time).

The position I took in my post that ]"I would say they do this because they have scriptural, linguistic, historical and logical reasons for denying one or both of your assertions. You believe you have the scriptural, linguistic, historical, and logical reasons for believing that both of your assertions are correct" is the most logical based on the fact that both groups will not come to an agreement that the other is correct AND have substantial reasoning to support their positions. It is also charitable.

 

[po18guy]

The Pope; head of the church?
The title pope, once used with far greater latitude (see below, section V), is at present employed solely to denote the Bishop of Rome, who, in virtue of his position as successor of St. Peter, is** the chief pastor of the whole Church, the Vicar of Christ upon earth.** newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

“…yet for us there is {but} one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we {exist} for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we {exist} through Him…” - 1 Corinthians 8

This would include all things; the church and even Peter.

Christ and the apostles claim that Jesus is “Head of the church of God”. Is the Catholic Church a separate church from the church of God where Christ is the head? I don’t know; but you weigh the evidences and decide based on what Scripture teaches.

Matthew 10:25 - (Jesus speaking)
"It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master. If they have called the head of the house Beelzebul, how much more {will they malign} **the members of his household! **

Luke 13:25 (Jesus Speaking)
"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then **He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ **

John 10:11 - (Jesus Speaking)
“I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.”

There are more, but 3 should suffice on what Jesus knows of Himself and so should you.
For the Scripture teaches where 2-3 witnesses agree, then what; it is true?

The apostles say:
Ephesians 1 - (Paul)
In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, {that is,} the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. (Includes the church) In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation–having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance,

Philippians 2 - (Paul)
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I love Paul because he makes sure he didn’t leave out a thing “under the earth”…LOL
This will include the Popes.

Colossians 1:15-18 - (Paul)
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, {both} in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 **He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. **

The Father means everything; no exceptions.

What about the Apostle Peter?
1 Peter 2 -
“…He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. 25 For you were continually straying like sheep, but now **you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.” **

As you may know there are many more of the “more familiar” passages I could have cited.
Given the history of the Papacy; its questionable origin and evolution over time; the Pope has become to Catholics, the Vicar of Christ.

Does Christ need a Head on earth? No! Did He and the apostles say and agree that He is the Head? Yes! Who can take His place legitimately? No one. Did Peter believe He was the head of the church, rather he recognized Jesus as the head. So where do we get this notion of Pope? It has to be after 312 or 313 A.D.; exact date I don’t know. When was it officially recognized, officially recognized, by the Catholic Church?

Food for thought; don’t take my word on it; search the Scripture to see if these things are true. God Bless all of you!
Tanner

You have your bible to quote from only because the Church took Jesus’ advice and elected successors to Peter - only because the Holy Spirit lead the Church councils to perpetuate the Church and form the canon of scripture.

I have no idea what all of your scripture quotes have to do with any of this. There are many times as much establishing Peter as prime, and authorizing the Church to appoint successors to him. Every organization needs a leader. Without a leader, you would have 60,000 denominations instead of 30,000. How is that better?

 

[TristanCross]

Is it bad to believe in the Bible? Are you not Bible believing?

 

[juliamajor]

Robbinson- Try www.hebrewcatholics.org

 

[juliamajor]

Is it bad to believe in the Bible? Are you not Bible believing?

Please don’t get sanctimonious .I’ve been hearing from the Fundamentalists and Evangelicals for a long time that I will be making an appearance in the nether world.because I’m Catholic- and not Christian. You really don’t understand get what the phrase “outside of the church, yada,yada”. But you have nothing to worry about .You have what we call invincible ignorance

 

[juliamajor]

So, Catholics tell me I’m going to hell for being a Protestant. I find this funny, because I have the Spirit of God working in me. Proof? I confess Christ as Savior, believe in the One True Triune God, am convicted by the Holy Spirit when I sin, read the Holy Bible, pray, etc…
IYeah- We do the same stuff.Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are veryfunny.

 

[po18guy]

That is silly and illogical! I did not say both things (RCC & Bible Believing) were true. I am saying that both a RCC and a “bible believing Christian” (refer to OP) hold to the idea that the two propositions in the original post are true or false based on each of their interpretions of scripture, linguistics, logical, history, etc. It might help you to read each side’s arguments and interpretations of meaning behind words and so on.

But, “bible believing” covers everything from the Mormons to the Branch Davidians to the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Because of this, is it not almost a meaningless term, since the bible long ago fell prey to private interpretation?

First, salvation does not depend on whether Peter was the first Pope and future Popes were successors. Second, while I have great respect for the Pope and might even see him in some “first among equals” sense" (like the Patriarch of Constantinople or the Archbishop of Canterbury) I do not see him with the sweeping authority given to him by the RCC.

First, I do not judge what Christ did in placing Peter in charge of the Church. I follow it, as do all faithful Catholics. Second, no other Church traces back to Christ, unless it goes through the Catholic Church. No other. This is important.

Nonetheless, I respect the RCC’s right to interpret the Pope as having that kind of authority and position.

The Pope’s authority is from Christ through His Church. You simply reject it. You can prove your allegation by simply showing that the Pope is wrong on faith or morals.

I do not believe it is scripturally supported.

Christ established a Church, not a bible. The Church then compiled the bible. The bible is incomplete and tells you so in several places (Luke 3:18, John 20:30, John 21:25, Acts 2:40, 1 Corinthians 11:34 for example). When you attempt to reverse engineer completeness from incompleteness, you end up producing many variations of what are supposed to be the same thing.

The position I took in my post that ]"I would say they do this because they have scriptural, linguistic, historical and logical reasons for denying one or both of your assertions. You believe you have the scriptural, linguistic, historical, and logical reasons for believing that both of your assertions are correct" is the most logical based on the fact that both groups will not come to an agreement that the other is correct AND have substantial reasoning to support their positions. It is also charitable.

But, your entire point hinges on correct interpretation of scripture. What is your authority to interpret scripture? Why do you think that your interpretation is correct and that of the hundreds of other denominations is wrong?

Christ gave His Church unprecedented authority on both earth and in Heaven. No other person, no other organization has that authority. That is in every bible. Amen!

 

[po18guy]

Is it bad to believe in the Bible? Are you not Bible believing?

#1. Regarding your signature: No Catholic has the authority to judge where you spend eternity. The Church teaches that even those in imperfect communion with Christ’s Church have the possibility of salvation. You are blessed by this, as the Church has the authority to bind and loose on earth and in Heaven. Amen!

#2. What do you mean “believe in the Bible”? The Mormons do. The Jehovah’s Witnesses do. The Branch Davidians do. Since they are all bible believers, you must also believe that Christ was joking when he said the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church; that sinful souls cease to exist at death; that only 144,000 are going to Heaven; that the end of the earth is right there on your calendar. Is that what you mean by “bible believing”?

• OR -

Does the bible need correct, authoritative interpretation? Ah, there’s the rub…

 

[TristanCross]

Juliamajor,

You will not go to hell for being Catholic. Don’t let anyone tell you such a thing. In fact, laugh when they do. I do. It’s great being persecuted for Christ’s sake

I think it’s fine calling ourselves Bible believers. Because we are. Me and you. You and me. Catholic and Protestant. I’m not sure about Catholics to Protestants, but I love my Catholic brethren as much as my Protestant brethren. We’re all in the same family, no? You’re a Christian and my book.

God bless

 

[Tanner9188]

Juliamajor,

You will not go to hell for being Catholic. Don’t let anyone tell you such a thing. In fact, laugh when they do. I do. It’s great being persecuted for Christ’s sake

I think it’s fine calling ourselves Bible believers. Because we are. Me and you. You and me. Catholic and Protestant. I’m not sure about Catholics to Protestants, but I love my Catholic brethren as much as my Protestant brethren. We’re all in the same family, no? You’re a Christian and my book.

God bless

ECT - TristanCross?
leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9405/articles/mission.html

 

[Tanner9188]

You have your bible to quote from only because the Church took Jesus’ advice and elected successors to Peter - only because the Holy Spirit lead the Church councils to perpetuate the Church and form the canon of scripture.

I have no idea what all of your scripture quotes have to do with any of this. There are many times as much establishing Peter as prime, and authorizing the Church to appoint successors to him. Every organization needs a leader. Without a leader, you would have 60,000 denominations instead of 30,000. How is that better?

Unfortunately; you are not open to the truth. I have a Bible because He used men, just like He did all the prophets and ALL the apostles to lay the foundation of the church, which Jesus builds, to make sure His Word would be known and understood by His children. God is not a respecter of persons and could have, and probably did, use both godly and ungodly men under the strict influence of the Holy Spirit.

Rather than wasting time on frivolous posts; perhaps it would be better spent reading the Word of God. I don’t know.

God bless you!

 

[ufamtobie]

Just because someone is a member of one or the other church does not make him a Christian. Membership and the Lordship of Jesus Christ do not necessarily have to go in line.
I do however consider these churches Christian for the same reasons I consider the CC Christian… There are true Christians in them.
It does not mean that all are truly followers of Jesus Christ, but it means that there are some.

Janet, if you truly believe that the Catholic Church is a Christian Church, then why did you leave the CATHOLIC church?

Or are you just a seed that is blowing in the wind landing here and there, and one who tries to find a church that fits your needs and likes?

Ufam Tobie

 

[Janet1983]

Janet, if you truly believe that the Catholic Church is a Christian Church, then why did you leave the CATHOLIC church?

Or are you just a seed that is blowing in the wind landing here and there, and one who tries to find a church that fits your needs and likes?

Ufam Tobie

Ufamtobie,

I do believe the CC to be Christian because there are Christians in the CC.
I for my part however cannot stay a catholic with good conscience as I deny major teachings of the CC after I had been part of the CC (and an integral part of my parish) for more than 20 years. If it had not been for those teachings I would have stayed in the CC, I cannot however justify these in front of others and in front of myself.
Even though I strongly assume that there are people in the CC who are true Christians and who follow the Lord I cannot possibly be part of this church any longer.

In Him,
Janet

 

[Robbinson]

Ufamtobie,

I do believe the CC to be Christian because there are Christians in the CC.
I for my part however cannot stay a catholic with good conscience as I deny major teachings of the CC after I had been part of the CC (and an integral part of my parish) for more than 20 years. If it had not been for those teachings I would have stayed in the CC, I cannot however justify these in front of others and in front of myself.
Even though I strongly assume that there are people in the CC who are true Christians and who follow the Lord I cannot possibly be part of this church any longer.

In Him,
Janet

Hi Janet - perhaps this can/should be a different thread, but can you identify some of the teachings which pulled you away from the Catholic church? I ask, as I am a Protestant very much being drawn to the Catholic Church and I’ve spent, as you might imagine, a fair amount of time studying, praying about, and searching the scriptures relating to Catholic doctrine.

Thanks in advance.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[ufamtobie]

QUOTE=Janet1983;5635994]Ufamtobie,

I do believe the CC to be Christian because there are Christians in the CC.
I for my part however cannot stay a catholic with good conscience as I deny major teachings of the CC after I had been part of the CC (and an integral part of my parish) for more than 20 years. If it had not been for those teachings I would have stayed in the CC, I cannot however justify these in front of others and in front of myself.
Even though I strongly assume that there are people in the CC who are true Christians and who follow the Lord I cannot possibly be part of this church any longer.

In Him,
Janet

Janet,

Tell me what are the major teachings of the Catholic Church that you deny?

Ufam Tobie

 

[ufamtobie]

Are you trying to be funny? Without the celibacy there is not way to climb up within the hierarchy of the CC…
And I got a question: What about all of those kids that are born to live without a father because their dad is a priest? Experts talk about several thousand children in Germany alone.
And what about the US… look at this:
childrenofpriests.org

Janet,

please read Luke 14: 26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

A Catholic Priest, is a true disciple don’t you think, for they abandoned everything to follow Christ.

Ufam Tobie

 

[Tanner9188]

Janet,

please read Luke 14: 26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

A Catholic Priest, is a true disciple don’t you think, for they abandoned everything to follow Christ.

Ufam Tobie

The Bible of the Bible-believers do not recognize the legitimacy of a priest of the Catholic order anyway. Christ did away with the priesthood in Hebrews 7-8-9 and replaced it with Himself as Our High Priest and all of His children as a royal priesthood set apart for Jesus.

A Catholic priest by his own worldly nature; proves he is not a true disciple of Christ.

Search the Word of God; it is all recorded there for anyone who is seeking the truth.

God bless you all.

 

[RNRobert]

The Bible of the Bible-believers do not recognize the legitimacy of a priest of the Catholic order anyway. Christ did away with the priesthood in Hebrews 7-8-9 and replaced it with Himself as Our High Priest and all of His children as a royal priesthood set apart for Jesus.

A Catholic priest by his own worldly nature; proves he is not a true disciple of Christ.

Search the Word of God; it is all recorded there for anyone who is seeking the truth.

God bless you all.

I disagree. The Lord told Moses that the Israelites would be a “priestly kingdom” (Exodus 19:6), yet he still established a priesthood with Aaron and his sons. And while Christians are a “kingly priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9), there is still an ordained priesthood that serves with Jesus the high priest. I would also point out that not only the Catholic Church, but the Orthodox Churches of the East have an ordained priesthood as well. It wasn’t until Luther’s revolt of 1517 that Christians sects rejected the priesthood.

And I did search the Word of God- it is what led me out of the division and confusion of Protestantism and into the Catholic Church that Christ founded.

 

[Tomster]

The Bible of the Bible-believers do not recognize the legitimacy of a priest of the Catholic order anyway. Christ did away with the priesthood in Hebrews 7-8-9 and replaced it with Himself as Our High Priest and all of His children as a royal priesthood set apart for Jesus.

A Catholic priest by his own worldly nature; proves he is not a true disciple of Christ.

Search the Word of God; it is all recorded there for anyone who is seeking the truth.

God bless you all.

Wrong again Sola Tanner. The Catholic priesthood is a participation of the priesthood of Christ, the one true Priest, living and operating in each of His ministers.