T
- Status
L
Leeann
Guest
Well…the main difference in trying to assert and teach such a claim with regards to Mary…is that it is dealing with something which could lead to grounds for almost “diefying” another human being…ursurping proper honour and glory from God…which would be “another religion” all together.
In addition, it is a doctrine that Catholics are told “they must” believe and adhere too in order to obtain salvation, because to do otherwise means you are outside of the church’s authority and its claim as to being the “only” true church, the only place through which salvation is obtainable.
Protestants vary in opinion and understanding with (as you’ve listed above) things that don’t reflect on a person’s salvation…meaning if you hold a different view or understanding on these things, it doesn’t affect your relationship with God or your belief of the message of HIS original “doctrine”, which remains intact as the core belief of these denominations and is the “binding” together of His Church of believers.
Boils down to either the supremacy and authority of a “church” that claims the only way is through them and through their doctrines - or - to the divine supremacy and authority of God (Jesus/The HolySpirit) - that the only way to the Father is through His Son.
I do understand what you are saying and I hope this clarifys it a bit for you?
Peace and God Bless
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
“Could”…“almost”…these are significant qualifying words. I appreciate the fact that you are tip-toeing carefully here. Clearly, you are conscious of the fact that the Church does not deify Mary.
Yes, there are certain minimum standards which are necessary to maintain.
But not all Protestants would agree with you that these items don’t affect salvation. That is the problem. Some will say that Baptism is a big deal directly related to salvation; others think it is just a symbolic act that you do after accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Saviour. You’re heading in the direction of needing to clarify the “essential” and “non-essential” doctrines…
This is a false dichotomy and another example of “either-or” thinking. How 'bout this…the supremacy and authority of the Church IS the supremacy and authority of God! The Bible makes this plain enough, and there are MANY passages that I could provide to illustrate this.
The Church’s authority is unique in that it is derived from the authority of the Apostles themselves. Apostolic Authority flows from the Authority of Jesus and the Father.
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-19)
“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ “ (John 20:21)
From this, we can see that God the Father has given all authority to God the Son who in turn bestows this authority upon His own disciples and sends them out to preach the truth to all the world. Thus, we can see that the Apostolic Authority of the Church is God-given. But how closely should the Church be identified with Christ? Jesus Himself specified how we should receive those sent by Christ:
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)
The Apostle John wrote powerfully:
1 John 4:6
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
L
Leeann
Guest
Hi Randy
Originally Posted by Leeann
Well…the main difference in trying to assert and teach such a claim with regards to Mary…is that it is dealing with something which could lead to grounds for almost “diefying” another human being…ursurping proper honour and glory from God…which would be “another religion” all together.
Originally Posted by Leeann
Well…the main difference in trying to assert and teach such a claim with regards to Mary…is that it is dealing with something which could lead to grounds for almost “diefying” another human being…ursurping proper honour and glory from God…which would be “another religion” all together.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
How to use the Catholic Answers Forum Quote Function
If you want to insert your comments into the middle of something you are quoting, you have to manually insert square brackets. Here is the original passage I want to comment on:
You don’t even need two brain cells to see how idiotic the teaching of the eucharist really is. It was so important that Peter, who wrote two epistles, overwhelms the reader with the topic of the eucharist.
In order to show you what you need to do, I have to use a different set of brackets for illustrative purposes only. I’ll use { and } instead of and ] so that you can see where the brackets should be located, and I’ll insert my comments in red text.
{quote}You don’t even need two brain cells to see how idiotic the teaching of the eucharist really is.{/quote} I’m inserting my comments here in red. {quote}It was so important that Peter, who wrote two epistles, overwhelms the reader with the topic of the eucharist.{/quote}Hope this helps.
Now, wherever you see the { or } you have to actually use a square bracket or ]. So the paragraph above comes out like this:
If you want to insert your comments into the middle of something you are quoting, you have to manually insert square brackets. Here is the original passage I want to comment on:
You don’t even need two brain cells to see how idiotic the teaching of the eucharist really is. It was so important that Peter, who wrote two epistles, overwhelms the reader with the topic of the eucharist.
In order to show you what you need to do, I have to use a different set of brackets for illustrative purposes only. I’ll use { and } instead of and ] so that you can see where the brackets should be located, and I’ll insert my comments in red text.
{quote}You don’t even need two brain cells to see how idiotic the teaching of the eucharist really is.{/quote} I’m inserting my comments here in red. {quote}It was so important that Peter, who wrote two epistles, overwhelms the reader with the topic of the eucharist.{/quote}Hope this helps.
Now, wherever you see the { or } you have to actually use a square bracket or ]. So the paragraph above comes out like this:
I’m inserting my comments here in red.
Hope this helps.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Wait for what?
Now that I think about it…both. But originally, I meant that every organization, including the Body of Christ, has standards of adherence to core beliefs.
So, the Holy Spirit might lead a Lutheran to believe that baptism of infants is necessary while He leads a Baptist to believe that baptism of infants is improper and BOTH of these positions is equally true?
(cont.)
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Leann, I’m not sure you understand what a “false dichotomy” is…a false dichotomy is always bad, and while Jesus may have used a dichotomy, He never used a false dichotomy. However, you suggested a false dichotomy when you implied that the authority of the Catholic Church and the authority of God are two different things. They are not. Understanding the authority given by Jesus to His disciples would help you tremendously here.
Thanks…knowing my audience, I use a lot of scripture when discussing apologetics questions with my separated brethren.
Could you provide the context for this reference? Surely you are not referring to the Bereans as practioners of sola scriptura, are you? As for searching the scriptures daily…this can be a good thing done properly. However, the Bible itself warns that there are many passages that are “hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.” (2 Peter 3:16) This is why God established His Church as an infallible guide.
L
Leeann
Guest
(end of response from Leeann)
Randy:
The Church’s authority is unique in that it is derived from the authority of the Apostles themselves. Apostolic Authority flows from the Authority of Jesus and the Father.
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-19)
“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ “ (John 20:21)
From this, we can see that God the Father has given all authority to God the Son who in turn bestows this authority upon His own disciples and sends them out to preach the truth to all the world. ( I love those verses! )
Thus, we can see that the Apostolic Authority of the Church is God-given. ( well I don’t agree…there’s no clear indication that this was the “Catholic church” as we know it today? I read in those verses that HIS Church would be those who believe and put their faith and trust in HIM first and foremost and in the teachings that the Apostles had entrusted to them - at that very time…not doctrines and teachings that would “later” surface and be imposed upon the members with the threat of “anathema” if they don’t comply). But how closely should the Church (again - not specifically the “Catholic church” - but HIS church ) be identified with Christ? Jesus Himself specified how we should receive those sent by Christ:
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)
(Yes…again a beautiful verse…but I cannot see how this verifies the Catholic church’s claims that they are the “true church”. Even at the time Jesus said these words, there were those teaching false doctrines, claiming to have His authority and blending their own heresies amongst His Truth.
The Catholic church has developed their own doctrines over the years…and in the process has managed to dampen down the **power and affect of His blood in **sacrifice…by proclaiming that in someway they were/are **“the one true way to salvation - to God.”/**COLOR]
By their fruits you shall know them.
The Apostle John wrote powerfully:
1 John 4:6
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
Again, by simply quoting what John wrote and claiming that he was referring to the “Catholic church” alone, does not prove anything. Any faith or denom. could make the same claim…that they are indeed “listening to them”.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
Thank you Randy for your insights and response.
Peace and God bless
Randy:
The Church’s authority is unique in that it is derived from the authority of the Apostles themselves. Apostolic Authority flows from the Authority of Jesus and the Father.
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-19)
“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’ “ (John 20:21)
From this, we can see that God the Father has given all authority to God the Son who in turn bestows this authority upon His own disciples and sends them out to preach the truth to all the world. ( I love those verses! )
Thus, we can see that the Apostolic Authority of the Church is God-given. ( well I don’t agree…there’s no clear indication that this was the “Catholic church” as we know it today? I read in those verses that HIS Church would be those who believe and put their faith and trust in HIM first and foremost and in the teachings that the Apostles had entrusted to them - at that very time…not doctrines and teachings that would “later” surface and be imposed upon the members with the threat of “anathema” if they don’t comply). But how closely should the Church (again - not specifically the “Catholic church” - but HIS church ) be identified with Christ? Jesus Himself specified how we should receive those sent by Christ:
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)
(Yes…again a beautiful verse…but I cannot see how this verifies the Catholic church’s claims that they are the “true church”. Even at the time Jesus said these words, there were those teaching false doctrines, claiming to have His authority and blending their own heresies amongst His Truth.
The Catholic church has developed their own doctrines over the years…and in the process has managed to dampen down the **power and affect of His blood in **sacrifice…by proclaiming that in someway they were/are **“the one true way to salvation - to God.”/**COLOR]
By their fruits you shall know them.
The Apostle John wrote powerfully:
1 John 4:6
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
Again, by simply quoting what John wrote and claiming that he was referring to the “Catholic church” alone, does not prove anything. Any faith or denom. could make the same claim…that they are indeed “listening to them”.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
Thank you Randy for your insights and response.
Peace and God bless
L
Leeann
Guest
Just quickly - thanks for the “quotes” information…I’m so terrible at doing it…will attempt to learn it properly from now on…it’s so frustrating and “slow” doing it the other way!
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Sure there is. Let me ask you this: how many churches did Jesus build?
mposed upon the members with the threat of “anathema” if they don’t comply).If you and I read these verses and come up with different interpretations of what they mean, then the Bible cannot be said to be perspicuous (that is, sufficiently clear) so that all may read and understand the message of salvation. This undermines the very idea that the Bible alone is the sole infallible rule of faith for the believer. Moreover, it is evident from the scriptures that that “those who believe and put their faith and trust in HIM first and foremost and in the teaching that the Apostles had entrusted to them - at that very time” were supposed to ALSO be obedient to the teaching authority of those whom Jesus had established as the leaders of His Church. In other words, Jesus built a Church with LEADERS to whom He gave real authority. In effect, Jesus expects us to be obedient to those whom He has put in positions of authority over us. Failure to obey them is failure to obey Him.
The leadership and authority of the Church of Jesus Christ did not die out with the death of the last apostle…it continues to this very day with the bishops of the Church through a process known as Apostolic Succession.
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)
Leann:
(Yes…again a beautiful verse…but I cannot see how this verifies the Catholic church’s claims that they are the “true church”. Even at the time Jesus said these words, there were those teaching false doctrines, claiming to have His authority and blending their own heresies amongst His Truth.) The fact that there are those who teach with false authority does not mean that there are none who teach with genuine authority…it simply means that we must discern which is which.
sacrifice…by proclaiming that in someway they were/are "the one true way to salvation - to God."
By their fruits you shall know them. Absolutely! Your words are more accurate than you know because doctrines are developed…but this is not the same as being invented from scratch. The doctrines concerning the Trinity or the Incarnation, for example, were not fully understood within the lifetimes of the Apostles themselves…today, we have reflected and developed our understanding of these things to some degree under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. However, I say this again: the idea that a doctrine is developed over time does not mean that it was simply invented by the Catholic Church centuries later. The acorn was there in the beginning but only appears as a mature oak in time.
(cont.)
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
That’s fair…however, I quoted from this passage to illustrate what the Apostles understood about themselves…namely, that they spoke with the authority of God. I would go on to connect the dots between the Apostles and the Popes and Bishops of the Catholic Church.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
L
Leeann
Guest
L
Leeann
Guest
Obviously I got THAT wrong…
L
Leeann
Guest
[The doctrines concerning the Trinity or the Incarnation, for] typing typing my comments typing
L
Leeann
Guest
okay…I’ll work on it…somehow
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Leeann,
When you hit the quote button to reply to my post, notice that the words quote and /quote appear at the beginning and end of my post, respectively. (Of course, the square brackets appear also, but if I type them now, they will impact this paragraph.) With me so far? Do you see these words?
To quote me, just leave the original
L
Leeann
Guest
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Better…remember that {quote} and {/quote} need to be nested properly in order to quote a quote of a quote of a quote, etc.
You’ll get there!
You’ll get there!
L
Leeann
Guest
Leeann,
my comment…can’t actually type it in right now as it wouldn’t be appropriate for this site
going to try submitting again…
- Status