Shepherds

Kathryn,

Read the Old Testament if you want to know what the Jewish people
understood it to mean to bind and to loose.

You mean my challenge will not be accepted ?

And I'm not tempting God either, I'm appealing to the "Church".

 

The doctrine that the Pope is some sort of super-shepherd is a new teaching in the Church Catholic not supported by scripture. It was refuted a long ago(1537) in the treatise "Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope":

 

Frank -- What a CROCK!!!

One, Theological BIAS. Mat. 15:8,9.

There was no "theological bias" like you have today with hundreds of rebellious Protestant sects acting as if they are smarter and more honest to the Scriptures than the Early Church was. There was ONE FAITH, not thousands!! Get your history straight. And those outside the Faith were called HERETICS, pure and simple.

Two, Shoddy scholarship. Acts 17:11.

Impossible. If it were possible to have such, then Jesus lied when He promised that the Holy Spirit would lead the Church into all truth, didn't He?

Three, Rebellion against God. Judges 21:27

THAT is a PROTESTANT distinctive. Protest-ant means to protest against something -- i.e., the Church which our Lord established on earth upon St. Peter.

Four, To receive the accolades of men. Mat.7,23.

HOGWASH. If they had done that they would not have been martyred by the hundreds. Totally silly and faceatious statement.

Five, Hated truth. II Thes. 2:9-11.

"And they went out from among us BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT OF US..." THOSE are the ones who hated the truth, the ones who LEFT THE CHURCH.

Your answers have absolutely no validity and furthermore, are a deep offense to the veracity of Christ's promises to the Church as well as to the character of these men who were willing to die for the Gospel.

By the way, which church fathers are you referencing? Do all or them agree with your asseertion? Why are there opinions more important than the original inspired language?

I didn't say their opinions. I said that they understood the nuances and tenses of the Greek FAR BETTER THAN YOU DO because they spoke it. It was the "lingua fraca" of the day, not something they had to learn.

Furthermore, they were taught by the apostles themselves and handed down what they were taught. You Protestants cannot say that. You are 16 centuries removed from the apostles. That is enough to introduce considerable error into your theology.

The important question is, What did God say? Now, take the original inspired text and defend your position. I will be waiting!

God said that the "pillar and foundation of the truth" is the Church, NOT FRANK.

 

Of course the Protestants at the Reformation say Peter is the same as all the Apostles. They have to say that. According to the Bible Jesus however didn't think so. He didn't treat Peter as they others. No one has responded to my question above:

No one has addressed this yet. I started another thread for this but as yet no one has responded there either. God has at key critical points in our Salvation History renamed certain people and given them a job and a plan. He did so with Peter, Israel, Isaac, Sarah, and Abraham. He also said what He would do with each of these people in His plan when he changed their names. To understand the New Testament we need to understand the Old Testament.

God Bless

 

Isaiah 51:1
Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock [whence] ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit [whence] ye are digged.

Isaiah 51:2
Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah [that] bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.

Great! Pretty clear where we are to look to, the Rock. I also understand no one is ever named rock in the Old Testament, but God. No pebbles or stones either. Abraham and Sarah are our parents in faith. Important names here all given by God.

What do you think of Ecclesiasticus 50:1-31.
Simon the high priest, the son of Onias is talked about. He sure sounds like an Old Testament precursor of Simon Peter. Of course it is one of the books that the Protestants removed from the Bible in the Reformation, so they will not understand the significance.

God Bless

 

Catholic Convert:

The idea that the so called "church fathers" as you say, although you have not identifed them, understood the Greek langauge better than those of today is unsubstantiated OPINION. What really matters is what did the Holy Spirit say, not what the " church fathers", uninspired men, think he said or what they want it to mean. Furthermore, you have not identified whom you are speaking about. You have not provided any evidence to even suggest this conclusion. However, it fits in well with the rest of your UNSUPPORTED OPINIONS.

Moreover,, I am not a protestant. Again, unsubstantiated opinion or bias. I am neither Protestant, Catholic, or Jew. Isaiah 56:5;62:2, Acts 11:26. Of course,I would not expect you to get to close to those scriptures being Catholic.
In rebuttal to the Biblical answers as to why men do not understand the Bible correctly.
You replied that the possible scritural answers were crock. However, JESUS did not see it as you do. He stated we can and must know the truth. LUKE 10:25-28. The Bible says by inspiration, ¶And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26  He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27  And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28  And he said unto him, Thou hast answered RIGHT: this do, and thou shalt live. Also, Eph. 5:17, John 8:32. I am assuming you understand the word RIGHT.

You offered an impressive array of responsess to the miriad of answers to the question. The only real crock is your subjective, unsupported, unscriptural drivel . In other words, no objective standard of proof. I Thes. 5:21.

You have not established anything about the church. You ASSUME it is the Roman Catholic Church. Once again, no objective standard of proof.

I do believe that the church of ACTS 2 is the pillar and ground of the truth. I Tim. 3:15.
The Bible says Jesus has ALL authority. Mat. 28:18-20. You claim the church does. once again, just unfounded bias and conjecture. The church is the PILLAR AND SUPPORT OF TRUTH, NOT THE SOURCE OR AUTHORITY FOR IT!. Read John 17:17, John 1:1, Pet. 1:22-25. The church of the new tesatament is obligated or duty bound to practice the expressed will of God, not the edicts of councils or uninspired men. There is NO AUTHORITY TO DO SO. Col. 1:18, I Cor. 3:11.

The bootom line is some will follow the dcotriens of men, some will not. This is the choice we have. Joshua 24:15. I chose the word of God, not the doctrines and commandments of men.

 

Thessalonian:

1.You have labeled me a Protestant. I would like for you to prove this assertion.
2. You claim I am a Campbellite. Prove your assertion.

You could not prove either assertion if your life depended on it. This is the same religious rhetorric people use when they cannot defend their position OBJECTIVELY. They, like you, make broad generalizations, Tell others what they believe or what they are religiously, or name call. For you to tell me what I am spiritually is ignorant arrogance on your part. Numbers one and two demonstrate this.

Thessalonian, I challange you to present objective proof for numbers 1 and 2, not make unsubstantiated accusations.

If a man calls himself a Catholic, Lutheran, etc. I will refer to him as such. I prefer the name Christian, and Christ's name alone. I have no need for any ist or ism of man. Is.62;2;56:5, Acts 11:26. The word of God is sufficient for me. II Tim. 3;16,17.

Jesus said I can know the truth. I believe him. John 8:32. Perhaps, you do not believe it. That is of no consequence to me. I will either stand or fall by the static standard of truth, not any other measure or subjective standard. John 12:48.

It is obvious from your slanderous accusations that the name of Christ is not good enough for you. But, then, that is your problem. The other problem you have is finding what you purport to be in the scriptures. You can search today, tomorrow and until the Lord comes, with the mind of Einstein and you will not find any support for your claims in this post in the scriptures. NONE!

I am not talking to the wall. However, I am talking to one who is ignnorant of pristine new testament Christianity.

 

(Kathryn)

Yes, what the Church binds and looses is already done in heaven. The
Church has the authority to bind and to loose according to God's will.

(Singer)

Use the powers of your "Church" to loose my blind eyes of Protestantism
tendencies and bind me into the confines of Catholicism ( according to God's
Will.)

(Kathryn)

Read the Old Testament if you want to know what the Jewish people understood it to
mean to bind and to loose.

Kathryn, we're not talking about the Jewish people of the old testament here.
I'm giving you or your church the opportunity to use the authority that you say
they have to bind and loose according to God's will. If it is God's will that
a man should come in to the Catholic faith , then display for the viewers here;
the powers that are at your disposal. I don't think I've ever minced words in
my posts, and I will definitely tell you if I feel a pull toward Catholicism.

 

Singer:

The Church acknowledges and respects your freewill. The Holy Spirit respects your freewill. God Himself created you with freewill. If you freely want to belong to the Catholic Church, go to your local parish and ask for instructions on what it is all about. You will be welcome.

God Bless

 

The Church acknowledges and respects your freewill. The Holy Spirit respects
your freewill. God Himself created you with freewill. If you freely want to belong
to the Catholic Church, go to your local parish and ask for instructions on what
it is all about. You will be welcome.

Kathryn, my spiritual choices are to either accept or reject Jesus Christ.
My choice of churches is more or less a secular thing and not one of the two
options that will either lead me to heaven or hell. I am not lost if I reject
Catholicism but I am lost if I do not" have the Son". 1 John 5:11,12 shows us
the two choices of mankind. (To have the Son or not having the Son).

St.John 3:18 shows those same two choices. "He that believeth on him is
not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because
he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

Catholicism does not even enter in and the RCC does not have the power
to cause me to accept their teachings. (bind and loose). I don't need to visit
the local parish to find out what it's all about...I have learned well that it is
an exclusive sect much likeI grew up in (2x2) and they were wrong in their
selective nature as the RCC is.

The RCC does not have the power you say it does .

 

Here is a Psalm we all know, about how the Lord is our Shepherd. It tells how He leads us beside the still waters, restores our soul, feeds us at his table among our enemies, anoints our heads with oil, leads us as sheep, takes care of our spiritual needs, etc. Seems like a good job description for Jesus Christ's shepherds to follow as Jesus Christ's representatives on earth.

Psalm 23

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul:
he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for
his name’s sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the
shadow of death, I will fear no evil:
for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they
comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me in the
presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my
head with oil; my cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all
the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house
of the Lord for ever.

God Bless

 

Kathryn,
I share with you in admiration of the 23rd Psalm. It does not take a Catholic
to receive the blessings from that beautiful promise.

However, you're not giving me an answer to the bind and loose thing, so
I accept that you do not have one.

The POWER is in the blood, sister......and it was shed for me (according to the bible).
Everyone has the right to make that same claim. Do so today.

Singer

 

Singer:

I have answered you twice.

God Bless

 

I have answered you twice.

Yes, one was "Read the O.T." and the second was "See 23rd Psalm".

That's an answer?

 

Singer:

The 23rd Psalm was not addressed to you. It was a post to this thread. I answered you twice already. You dismissed my answers and then claimed I didn't answer you.

Nobody is binding or loosening you. You have freewill. You should be careful however who you put your soul in the hands of, and not be so cavalier about it. If you really believe a church or organization is not of God, don't give them permission to claim your soul, just because you think you are already saved. I don't think God looks too kindly on that sort of thing. You can ridicule me for saying this, but your soul should be respected, just as your body should be respected as a temple of the Holy Spirit.

God Bless

 

I won't ridicule you for that, Kathryn, but I will pray for you.