This thread is straying from topic a lot - I hope it doesn’t get closed.
I’ll accept that - Fred Phelps calls himself a Baptist, but I am sure the minister at the local First Baptist Church would want nothing to do with him. Then there’s Northern Baptists, Southern Baptists, Landmark Baptists (who we’re sort of talking about here), etc.
Have not met Fred. I contend for an unbroken trail of New Testament Style churches in every generation since the Church at Jerusalem–the one Jesus told: On This Rock I will build my Church…He also told the same group He would never leave them nor forsake them. That erases Joseph Smith etal.
I’ll also accept that the pamphlet suffers from sloppy scholarship, rather than intellectual dishonesty.
Agree.
And there is this passage: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18 (from the King James Version, used by most Baptists). If you don’t believe in apostolic succession, what do you believe, now, is Peter’s “Church”? At least the Landmark Baptists try to make a connection - you’ve got to give them an “A” for effort.
Yep, this is the pivotal, foundational statement on which the apostolic see headed by Peter stands or falls. If this scripture makes Peter the Rock on which the Church is built, then all others are apostate, heretical usurpers. If Jesus is referring to the fact that He is that Rock, the chief cornerstone, the Rock of offense, disallowed by the builders, then there is an authority problem–a serious problem. There is something counterfeit here. Jesus was calling Peter a pebble–not terribly significant compared to Jesus, The Christ, The Son of the Living God ( the Solid Rock).
Otherwise, it’s, basically, just you, your Bible, and the Holy Spirit - a lot of people believe that, but, the problem with that is, first of all, if it were sound, you wouldn’t have the “seven Popes on every manure pile” problem, and, second, there’s that pesky “Church” it keeps talking about. Or is it the Pastor who receives special guidance from the Holy Spirit in his proclamation of the Word of God? If that’s it, why can Rev. Bob be guided by the Spirit in teaching matters of faith, but not the Pope?
I believe in church–the assembly, local and visible only. I do not believe in a Mother Church with a Pontifex maximus…
Enlighten me about 7 popes in the … pile–is there penance to pursue this?.
So the choices I see are either: (a) a Church that can be connected to Peter and the apostles (the Catholic view); (b) there was a great apostasy (Mormon view - ignores the “gates of Hell” clause); or (c) individual guidance (ignores the mention of the Church).
Would Orthodox agree with (a)? Why? (b)already addressed, (c)not enough definition. I would offer a (d) The Church that Jesus is building with the Holy Spirit and His individual sheep. Yea, each one sovereign, independent, answering only to Jesus–no vicar nor hiearchy needed or necessary.
Or, am I misunderstanding you?
