Universal Bishop - Jesus Christ or the Pope??

[Jude3b]

Universal Bishop - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. See I Peter 2:25. Doesn't that make the Pope the antichrist we read about in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12????
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[spl_cadet]

Universal Bishop - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. See I Peter 2:25. Doesn't that make the Pope the antichrist we read about in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12????
Sincerely, Jude 3b

Not at all. Universal bishop means he has authority over all the bishops. To use an analogy, the pope can be considered the SecDef and Christ the President. Both have full authority over the military, but the pope is subordinate to Christ.

[Twilly Spree]

That's a great way to put it cadet, hmm I'm gonna borrow that next time somebody asks me.

[Jude3b]

Dear Roman Catholics reading this post: Your Catechism claims that:
"The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls" (Pg. 246, #937).
Is the above a true statement?
The Bible states:
"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another..." (Isaiah 42:8)
WHO WILL YOU BELIEVE? Romanism or the Bible?
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[rocketman]

Hey Jude, who says I can't believe both "Romanism" (as you pejoratively call it) and the Bible? The Lord has not given any glory to the Pope. He has simply put him in place to faithfully guide the Church until He returns. Now, would you say that your pastor has care for the souls of the people whom he ministers? Do those souls depend on him for their care and nurturing, without which they would be cut adrift, having no recourse when they come across difficult passages in the Bible or confront difficult life issues? And if he guides them, won't they have a better understanding of their faith? I would personally call that having a "power in the care of souls". And that's exactly what the Pope does.

[seiko]

Not at all. Universal bishop means he has authority over all the bishops. To use an analogy, the pope can be considered the SecDef and Christ the President. Both have full authority over the military, but the pope is subordinate to Christ.

You have the problem that the bible doesnt teach Bishops

[Twilly Spree]

The system of Priest, Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope is merely a way the church is organized. You're trying to blow it way out of proportion.

[seiko]

The system of Priest, Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope is merely a way the church is organized. You're trying to blow it way out of proportion.

Church Organization is a biblical teaching. The Catholic System contradicts it.

[Jude3b]

Hey Rocketman: Where is the scripture to show that the Lord put the "pope" in place to care for the church?
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[NoeticPenguin]

Hey Rocketman: Where is the scripture to show that the Lord put the "pope" in place to care for the church?
Sincerely, Jude 3b
One doesn't need scripture to prove every aspect of Christian life.

I've said it before in other threads; the very idea of "Sola scritura" is self-referentially incoherent.

God is still working his creative-redemptive will through the lives of his people, who are citizens of the Kingdom of God, a community of faith and tradition. Without this community of faith and tradition we wouldn't have the "traditional" doctrines of Trinity, the Dual nature of Christ (fully human, fully devine) and most importantly the very cannon you wish to limit God to.

[rocketman]

Question for you Jude, before I answer yours: Where is the Scripture that indicates that YOUR pastor has any ability to correctly discern and interpret the Scripture? For that matter, how does YOUR pastor know what the correct books in the Bible are?

I would like to know what YOU believe, so that we can have a constructive dialogue. So far, your mass assertions have been ignorant at best, fanatically obsessive at worst.

[Jude3b]

Dear Rocketman:

God's unchanging Word has always been the final authority, never the traditions of men: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (Colossians 2:8).
Christians in New Testament times knew what the final authority was: "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17:11).
Any Pastor of mine, in order to determine if what he had heard was true, would do just like those in the New Testament - and go to the final authority, the written Scriptures.
When you ask about "which books of the Bible, make up the Bible" - your answer is based on "the rules of canonicity" which only accepts as the pure Word of God, the books of the Bible that Jesus himself quoted from (that is our Old Testament as we have it today) and books that were written by the apostles of Jesus and thereby inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.
A MESSAGE TO ALL ROMAN CATHOLICS READING THIS:
JESUS SAID: "...If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings..." (John 14:23-24). God doesn't change (Malachi 3:6) because He is perfect. As you read the Bible my friends you will be forced to decide which you believe is the final authority: God's written Word, or the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic religion. Your decision will become critical as you discover that God's Word and the teachings of Roman Catholicism are diametrically opposed on many doctrines. WILL YOU SIDE WITH THE WORDS OF GOD OR THE TRADITIONS OF MEN????
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "...let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4)

Sincerely, Jude 3b

[Twilly Spree]

I like how you try to not answer the questions set before by ranting and trying to convert us Catholic type folks. I find it funny.

[seiko]

[QUOTE=rocketman]Question for you Jude, before I answer yours: Where is the Scripture that indicates that YOUR pastor has any ability to correctly discern and interpret the Scripture? For that matter, how does YOUR pastor know what the correct books in the Bible are?QUOTE]

I'd like a shot to answer.

I dont have pastor, clergy and laity divide is contary to scripture.

I accept the canon of scripture that has always been accepted from the very beginning.

[rocketman]

Dear Rocketman:

God's unchanging Word has always been the final authority, never the traditions of men: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (Colossians 2:8).
Christians in New Testament times knew what the final authority was: "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17:11).
Any Pastor of mine, in order to determine if what he had heard was true, would do just like those in the New Testament - and go to the final authority, the written Scriptures.
When you ask about "which books of the Bible, make up the Bible" - your answer is based on "the rules of canonicity" which only accepts as the pure Word of God, the books of the Bible that Jesus himself quoted from (that is our Old Testament as we have it today) and books that were written by the apostles of Jesus and thereby inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.
A MESSAGE TO ALL ROMAN CATHOLICS READING THIS:
JESUS SAID: "...If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings..." (John 14:23-24). God doesn't change (Malachi 3:6) because He is perfect. As you read the Bible my friends you will be forced to decide which you believe is the final authority: God's written Word, or the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic religion. Your decision will become critical as you discover that God's Word and the teachings of Roman Catholicism are diametrically opposed on many doctrines. WILL YOU SIDE WITH THE WORDS OF GOD OR THE TRADITIONS OF MEN????
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "...let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4)

Sincerely, Jude 3b

1. I agree, Scripture is the authority. But what IS Scripture? You can't say "This is Scripture because Scripture says it is."

2. If we follow your test for which OT books belong in the Bible, namely, When you ask about "which books of the Bible, make up the Bible" - your answer is based on "the rules of canonicity" which only accepts as the pure Word of God, the books of the Bible that Jesus himself quoted from (that is our Old Testament as we have it today) and books that were written by the apostles of Jesus and thereby inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.

then you must also exclude Ecclisiastes, Song of Songs, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Lamentations, and Nahum, as none of these books are ever quoted by Jesus' or in the writings of the Apostles. You must also include Enoch and the Ascension of Isaiah, since the books are quoted and alluded to in Jude.

[Amazing Rando]

Jude3b, forgive me for saying so, but aren't there better targets for your invectives than Catholics? Why not turn on the LDS or JW's? They're far more contra-biblical than Catholics will ever be. Sure, Catholics do a lot of wierd stuff I don't understand, but the sincere ones are just as Christian as you or I. I'm proud to embrace them as brothers and sisters in Christ.

Please- give up this crusade.

[rocketman]

I'd like a shot to answer.

I dont have pastor, clergy and laity divide is contary to scripture.

I accept the canon of scripture that has always been accepted from the very beginning.

Such as Hermas' The Shepard, the Didache, and some writings of Papias? They were accepted by most of the earliest memebers of the Church, yet later definitively left out.

[themuzicman]

Who is the head of the church? Pope or Christ?

[Rev John Hansen]

Dear Amazing: Religion won't get you to heaven. It doesn't matter if you try to be Mormon instead of Roman Catholic. Or JW instead of Roman Catholic. None of them will take you to heaven. "Thou shalt cll his name JESUS; for he shall save." (Matt. 1:12). "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12). If you are to be save at all, Jesus Christ must save you. There is no other. He is the one and only Savior - not your religions.
"Ye must be born-again" (John 3:7)
Love you all.........

[rocketman]

Who is the head of the church? Pope or Christ?

Christ of course. The Pope is simply His representative and vicar here until He returns, ensuring that the Church has all the truth and will not stray from it.

[seiko]

Such as Hermas' The Shepard, the Didache, and some writings of Papias? They were accepted by most of the earliest memebers of the Church, yet later definitively left out.

I should have added apostolic authority.
I know the shepherd of hermas was popular- as Tertullian i think it was said it should be used for readings for inspiration but not for any doctrine. That I agree. It was never to be considered as apostolic.

1. Apostolic authority
2. reconized by early christians.

[rocketman]

I should have added apostolic authority.
I know the shepherd of hermas was popular- as Tertullian i think it was said it should be used for readings for inspiration but not for any doctrine. That I agree. It was never to be considered as apostolic.

1. Apostolic authority
2. reconized by early christians.

And it was exactly those two criteria that synods of Carthage and Hippo and Popes Damasus and Innocent I used to determined the NT, which is why the writings of Pope Clement, Ignatius, et al., while considered orthodox, were not considered inspired.

But how do you account for the OT, eh? We have already seen that Jude3b's attempt of "If it's not quoted in the NT, it shouldn't be in the OT" is quite faulty, as it excludes 7 books the Protestants call canonical and includes two that aren't canonical by any standard.

[Jude3b]

Dear Rocketman: Your stated, "The pope is the insuring that the church has all the truth." History and the doctrines of the Roman Religion would sure demonstrate that your popes have failed miserably in giving out all the truth.
Your popes cannot agree with the Bible!

And the Roman Catholic people cannot defend the actions of Rome or its doctrines from the Word of God. Romanism is apostate, and not achored to the Word of God.

Sincerely, Jude 3b

[Twilly Spree]

*slams head on desk* Jeez Jude! For someone that hold my confirmation name I find you to be completely ignorant. You completely wave off all of things us Catholics show you. We give you proof as to what we believe, and all you do is spout off nonsensical ramblings.

Yes some past Popes were led astray, all people are. But what Rocket said is correct the Pope's job is to insure we hold to the truth. I think PJP II is doing a good job. And you claim we cannot defend our actions. Well what have we been doing all this time?

Ack! You can only talk in circles Jude! It makes me tired. How is it that I can be a member of a Christian sorority, and they all accept me for who I am. But there are people like you that can never see Catholics for who they really are? Your brothers and sisters in Christ.

[Jude3b]

The fact is that the early church of God had no head on earth. Christ was their head and they all were brothers and sisters. They did have an organization, and Acts 15 is a splendid example of how it operated.
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[Jude3b]

"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another..." (Isaiah 42:8)

[Jawa Man]

Do Catholics consider us Protestants to be heretical, or are we still regarded as part of the Body? And if so, what about the Greek Orthodox church which was excommunicated? Please don't see this as me being offensive, I'm really curious.

And Jude - do you support what Martin Luther did? If so, did you know that he told the Pope he was the only righteous man in Rome? It seems Luther was trying to reform the Catholic church, and really respected the Pope.

[rocketman]

Do Catholics consider us Protestants to be heretical, or are we still regarded as part of the Body? And if so, what about the Greek Orthodox church which was excommunicated? Please don't see this as me being offensive, I'm really curious.


Good question, and one that deserves a good answer. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and those that originally broke off with them are heretics. However, when one is taught incorrect doctrines at a young age, they are not morally culpable for this. It's like Muslims. They aren't getting the full gospel, but they live according to their conscience and the truth they have been given, then Catholic teaching states that salvation is not auotmatically denied to them. Same goes for Protestants. You guys have most of the truth, but some of it's a little skewed. But if you live according to the truth you have been given, the possibility of salvation is not withheld. (This gets into the question of invincible ignorance from this point on, and I'm not going to get into that here.) (All this being said, we would really like to see you in the Catholci Church.)

So, no most protestants today are not heretics. Those who were Catholic and then switched could rightly be considered heretics, although only informally, as no edict is officially given. But, it is generally accepted that if you turn away from the RCC, you are a heretic and de facto excommunicated automatically.

The same above holds for Eastern Orthodox.

[Jawa Man]

What's the point of sending out missionaries, then, like Jesuits and such?

[Jawa Man]

btw, that actually kind of make sense about being judged according to how you live your beliefs. It's even touched on in the Bible.

for whenever Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law unto themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience witnessing with them, and among themselves their thoughts accuse or even defend them),
(Rom 2:14-15)

If this means unbelievers, then they have the ability to be saved without Christ... if they follow the law exactly, though. After all, if they don't receive Jesus' forgiveness of sins, then when they break their own laws they are condemned. Would that be the same in Catholicism?

[Jude3b]

Dear Jawa Man: Yes, I agree that Martin Luther was intent on reforming the Roman Catholic church. I also believe this was true about many other reformers such as John Calvin. What happended to these brothers was very similar to the response everyone gets who would question Romanism. Rome just don't appreciate it!

[Jude3b]

"Christ is the head of the church...." (Ephesians 5:23)

[Jin-Roh]

Jude3b, If you're reading this, I've opened another thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?p=467953#post467953) for you in the locker room.

Surely you do not mind answering a question from a fellow Protestant do you? I'm not trying to be sarcastic here. I'd like to ask you just one question.

[Jude3b]

Christ of course. The Pope is simply His representative and vicar here until He returns, ensuring that the Church has all the truth and will not stray from it.

"For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can alway exercise unhindered." (The Catechism Page 234, #882).

While the Roman Catholic church elevates the pope to the position of "supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful," God's Word reveals that someone else already fills that position: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (John 14:26)

[Jude3b]

According to God's Word, the pope is not the head of the true church of God, the body of Christ. That position is reserved exclusively for the Lord Jesus:
"For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church..." (Eph. 5:23)

Which side will you believe - Roman Catholic traditions of men... or God's Word?

[Joe Gofish]

[QUOTE=Jude3b]Dear Roman Catholics reading this post: Your Catechism claims that:
"The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls" (Pg. 246, #937).
Is the above a true statement?
The Bible states:
"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another..." (Isaiah 42:8)
WHO WILL YOU BELIEVE? Romanism or the Bible?


Amen I say to you. Your quote is:

"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another..." (Isaiah 42:8)


And the statement from Isaiah is the truth. God is the Lord and that is his name. And, God does not give his glory to anyone else.

As you will note in the statement from the Catechism, the Pope does not claim to be the Lord and he does not claim to have the glory due only to God himself. The Pope is the one appointed by God to tend the sheep of the Lord here on Earth in God's absence. This cannot be disputed, as it is in scripture.

Now, to your final question of who I will believe...Romanism or the Bible. Well, I do not know what Romanism is. In fact, that word has no meaning to anyone associated with the Catholic faith. In fact, that word was invented by a fundamentalist that wanted to attack the Catholic Church...still it has no meaning. As to what I believe in, the answer is simple:

I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.

I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made.

For us men and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary , and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son, He is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

That pretty much covers it.

[Joe Gofish]

Dear Rocketman:

God's unchanging Word has always been the final authority, never the traditions of men: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (Colossians 2:8).
Christians in New Testament times knew what the final authority was: "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (Acts 17:11).
Any Pastor of mine, in order to determine if what he had heard was true, would do just like those in the New Testament - and go to the final authority, the written Scriptures.
When you ask about "which books of the Bible, make up the Bible" - your answer is based on "the rules of canonicity" which only accepts as the pure Word of God, the books of the Bible that Jesus himself quoted from (that is our Old Testament as we have it today) and books that were written by the apostles of Jesus and thereby inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.
A MESSAGE TO ALL ROMAN CATHOLICS READING THIS:
JESUS SAID: "...If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings..." (John 14:23-24). God doesn't change (Malachi 3:6) because He is perfect. As you read the Bible my friends you will be forced to decide which you believe is the final authority: God's written Word, or the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic religion. Your decision will become critical as you discover that God's Word and the teachings of Roman Catholicism are diametrically opposed on many doctrines. WILL YOU SIDE WITH THE WORDS OF GOD OR THE TRADITIONS OF MEN????
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "...let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4)

Sincerely, Jude 3b
Jude You need to spend more time reading your bible the bible will tell you that their is "oral teachings also that are to be carried on to the present day try reading 2Thess 2:15, 1 Cor 11:2.Romans 10:1, 1 Peter 1:24=25 These teaching is what the true Church considers Sacred Apostolic Tradition...Jude you need to spend more time in reading your bible and maybe just maybe you can understand 2Peter3:16 and get HELP

[Joe Gofish]

Universal Bishop - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. See I Peter 2:25. Doesn't that make the Pope the antichrist we read about in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12????
Sincerely, Jude 3b

What has made Jude turn into such a hate filled person?

[Shazard]

Christ of course. The Pope is simply His representative and vicar here until He returns, ensuring that the Church has all the truth and will not stray from it.

But even bishops can be judged BY Jesus Words. So should I believe someone in questions of fatih if he fails the test of Scripture? Scripture (as it is words of Jesus) is final authority, and as it is available to me, then I just don't need Pope as I have direct relationship with Jeus Christ? Jesus is not somewhere away and not doing anything anymore. He is very present in my and meny lives of believers, and he is our final authority in questions of faith. We have his words written down and we KNOW that these are Jesus Christ words, and we can check out context of the words and draw teachings, promises and orders from them. So if somebody promises, teaches or orders something that Chrsit didn't than this is not to be considered truth per se. But if somebody teaches promises or orders something AGAINST words of Christ, then I don't care what is his name and who he claims to represent, that is devils words. And as we see that Peter had tendency to speak Satan's words, then we can say - thanks God we have Jesus words to check out what Pope claims and ignore the words if Christs says opposite.
Romans are not able to legitimate their words against somebody who follows Bible as Romans just don't have then base for it except themselves.

[Joe Gofish]

Universal Bishop - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. See I Peter 2:25. Doesn't that make the Pope the antichrist we read about in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12????
Sincerely, Jude 3b
JUDE, THE MORE YOU EXPAND YOUR BIBLICAL KNOWLEDGE..THE MORE WE REALIZE HOW LITTLE YOU KNOW..! GAL 1:3

[Joe Gofish]

Universal Bishop - This title was first assumed by Pope Boniface III in 606 AD. It was the first official claim to supremacy by any pope. It is also a theft from Jesus Christ. See I Peter 2:25. Doesn't that make the Pope the antichrist we read about in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12????
Sincerely, Jude 3b
Jude I called my dad sir for the first 21 years of my life,does that mean he is not my father because i called him by other name,
Where do you get all you crap from ????????????