re: Commie Pope Francis Tells 60 Minutes that Conservativism Is “A Suicidal Attitude”

quote:

---

Seems like the board is in near-unanimous agreement that the Pope is an actual marxist.

---

"Seems like"??

quote:

---

Can anyone produce quotes or changes to Church teaching that demonstrate this?

---

You been paying attention, baw?

I’m so done with this POS Marxist pope.

frick that dude.

quote:

---

This makes me think that you don't understand what sola scriptura actually means.
We know exactly what it means. It means that United Methodists can be practicing homosexuals and still be pastors and still get to Heaven, according to Sola Scriptura and how these Methodists interpret the Bible.

---

No, it doesn't. The United Methodists (the majority at this point, though there are still many who have remained faithful to God's word on these issues) have abandoned the Scriptures as their authority and have adopted a false view of love, tolerance, and inclusivity as their rule or standard, interpreting the Bible according to this higher authority. So no, it's not just about interpretation and hermeneutics but what is the highest goal or standard of authority.

Sola scriptura--as I keep saying--is about authority. It's about holding ourselves and other Christians to the standard of the truth of God's word above all else, for His glory alone (soli deo gloria).

quote:

---

We know that when you point to them and say "But you are reading it wrong", they are pointing back at you accusing you of the exact same thing.

Then you counter with "But you are not using proper hermeneutics to interpret the Bible". Then the Methodists accuse you of the exact same thing.

---

Anyone can say whatever they want, but it's God's word alone that must be the judge of all of our words. What's foundational to all of this is understanding who God is, what His character and attributes are. These are basic things that are clear in the Scriptures that there is little debate on. Anyone who claims the name of Christian must believe some very basic things about God which are stated in the creeds of the church but are drawn from the Scriptures, themselves, primary of which is that God is the essence and origin of Truth and He cannot lie. If God can lie, then we cannot trust anything the Bible (or any form/method of revelation from God) says anyway, so all discussion is moot and truly relative; God would be pretty much completely unknowable and we wouldn't be able to know what was true and what was false on a foundational level.

Once we establish and agree that Truth comes from God, that He cannot lie, and that He has revealed things through revelation that we should know, then we have to realize that what is in the Scriptures (at the very least, if we agree that the Bible is God's word, whatever else might be out there) cannot contradict itself if it is really God's word. If it can contradict itself, then God is speaking against Himself (lying). But since we've established that God cannot lie, if the Bible is God's word, then it cannot contradict itself, and if it cannot contradict itself, then where there are passages or verses where there is an apparent contradiction, we have to interpret it in a way that harmonizes with the rest of the Bible and doesn't create other contradictions elsewhere.

The problem I see with the UMC and other denominations that embrace these liberal viewpoints is that they don't have a high regard for the word of God as God's holy and infallible word. The first thing all false teachers (and enemies of Christ) do is attack the word of God ("has God really said?"), and the most common way liberals do this in our age is by spiritualizing the text, taking it completely out of its context, or ignoring the rest of what the Bible has to say on that issue (it can't contradict itself, after all). Rejecting that the Bible is the infallible and inerrant word of God is the main culprit here. The number of Americans--including identifying Christians--that believe that the Bible is the literal word of God and true continues to decline each year. The view that the Bible is written by fallible men with a fallible message with errors strewn throughout and is full of fables, myths, and other untrue messages written by primitive people continues to grow each year.

So no, it isn't strictly about interpretation. It's about authority and the very nature of what the Scriptures are. Those who reject that the Bible is God's word are not going to view it with the reverence and care that it deserves and are more likely to make it say absolutely whatever they want it to say to fit whatever prior beliefs that they have.

quote:

---

To both denominations I would remind them that according to Bible Alone as originally defined, anybody could open a Bible and discern ultimate Truth.

---

Sola scriptura is about authority to interpret the Scriptures correctly, not to believe anything one wants to believe about them. The doctrine doesn't allow the Bible to be a buffet that people can pick and choose what they want from it. It means that the Bible alone is the sole infallible rule for faith and life for the Christian. We are to be governed ultimately by God's word, seeking to truly understand it rightly, not imposing our own sinful desires onto it.

quote:

---

You didn't need knowledge of any secret teachings like hermeneutics. The Gnostics taught that one needed knowledge of the Secret teachings to get to the Truth. You guys are the New Gnostics.

---

In addition to not understanding sola scriptura, it seems you don't understand hermeneutics, either

It's not a secret code. It's just reading the text as it was intended to be understood. God spoke using human authors who wrote in human language. If you can understand typical man-made writings you can understand--at least conceptually--what the Bible is saying. Reading the Bible within its own context with the understanding that it's God's word and cannot contradict itself is really the only prerequisite you need in order to rightly interpret it for most issues. God gave His revelation to the common man in a public way. He didn't give it secretly or in an unverifiable way like the Catholics seem to claim with oral traditions that were not documented and weren't believed (at least not with historical evidence) in most cases until hundreds of years after Christ's ascension. Undocumented oral tradition is more Gnostic than what I'm claiming.

Sola scriptura--as I keep saying--is about authority. It's about holding ourselves and other Christians to the standard of the truth of God's word above all else, for His glory alone.

Bear repeating.

Sola Scriptura = Divine Authority

RCC Oath of Fidelity = Man's Authority

It's as simple as that.


RCC 'Oath of Fidelity' (excerpt):

quote:

---

I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals.

Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.

---

He is a commie and an apostate. A stain.

quote:

---

Ive gone thru 8 Popes in my lifetime, and without question, the one we have now is, by far, the worst. This POS will not see Heaven.

---

My mother is a devout Catholic. I am also technically Catholic (baptized and confirmed in the Catholic church), but find myself attend more protestant services (wife is protestant). About 10 years ago in a conversation with my mother I said the Pope was a useless socialist who was tearing a the fabric of the Catholic church. I thought she was going to have a stroke right in front of me because of such blasphemy! I'm pretty sure she said many prayers for me that sleepless night and for weeks on end after that comment.

Fast forward to today and she despises the Pope with a fire far hotter than any issues I may have with the Pope. No longer does she revere the Pope as nearly infallible simply because of his status. The media/social media has help push MANY people away from Christianity at an alarming rate. But the Pope is doing the Catholic Church no favors whatsoever. His leadership is not bringing any many new Catholics. All it is really doing is pushing away many current (now former) Catholics.

OK, you got me, Liberator. No more hi-jacking this thread from me.

Kind of like committing suicide because a priest molested you?

quote:

---

I'm still not going to answer them in a post on tigerdroppings, because the answers are all there on the Catholic Answers website. You can find the answers there, and those articles can express the answers better than I can.

---

Fair enough. But it would be helpful if you could articulate these matters in your own words. After all, one of the knocks on RC’s is that they blindly accept the teachings of the church without any in depth understanding. Obviously, the same is applicable to most Protestants- which is why I make it a point to try to understand what I believe, and why.

quote:

---

Your idea about how you and I can join together on the same team arguing against the United Methodists is a great idea. We are on the same team

---

I think we can and should team up on multiple fronts- atheism, abortion, woke culture, false religions like Islam, JWs, and LDS (and any rogue denomination that twists the Word to fit their agenda), and defending our God given rights and traditional American values, just to name a few.

quote:

---

BUT, the problem is that the Methodist won't accept my answer, which is that I believe that the UMC is wrong on the Homosexual issue because The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church says that the UMC is wrong

---

No doubt. They most likely won’t accept mine either. But really loving our neighbors as ourselves, is evidenced by speaking the truth in love. And may God have mercy on us all. Many will not listen, immediately. But, I have to believe that at least some will come around; when they look up and realize that the vast majority of Christendom is proclaiming a unified, biblical message that condemns their heretical views.

quote:

---

The Catechism's position on this is based on Scripture, and on what the Apostles handed down to the Early Church.

---

Amen!

quote:

---

The problem is that when two Protestants have a debate on this topic, there is no Church hierarchy or teaching authority that is appointed to settle the debate, so the debate will never be settled.

---

I agree. That’s a problem. But, it’s been a problem since the 1st century. Schisms have always been an unfortunate part of Christianity (ask our Eastern Orthodox brothers). The only thing that has really solved any problems, has been the Word of God. While fallible men’s interpretations have changed- the Author’s intent has not.

quote:

---

The Methodist and the Prodigal Son will each claim that their position is correct based on the Holy Spirit's guidance and inspiration as the Bible Alone is analyzed to find the Truth.

---

Here is something that I can disagree with. I, personally, don’t claim Holy Spirit inspiration in my interpretation of scripture. I claim to understand English, and how scripture has been translated from Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, into English. I readily admit that I lean heavily on those who are more educated than I, and I tend to judge their interpretations on their faithfulness to the overarching meta narrative of Scripture (which, I believe, is apparent to all). More easily understood- I judge their interpretations based on their apparent intentions. And, I weigh that against the interpretations of the very early church fathers, as well as the very words of the apostles themselves. I don’t pretend that some things aren’t harder to understand than others, but I believe that the basic message of the Bible is consistent throughout. And I pray that His grace and mercy covers us all. At bottom, I recognize that my salvation is dependent upon Him alone. But, I also believe that He gives us responsibilities (as a good Father does), and that among those responsibilities, is to do our absolute best to read and understand the instructions that He has given us- with love and charity to those who have come to different conclusions. At the end of it all, I pray that His grace and mercy covers all of us who have, despite our best efforts, come to a wrong conclusion.

quote:

---

Having a Church Hierarchy and Teaching Authority is a good thing

---

I agree, 100%. But, it has to absolutely coincide with the clear teaching of scripture. Which, admittedly, is far more difficult than I made it sound.

quote:

---

Protestantism is based on the fundamental principle that the Catholic Church is wrong to have a Teaching Authority, because anybody can read his own Bible and discover God's Plan for Human Sexuality right in there - Bible Alone

---

Meh. I understand your point- but, I don’t think the problem is with Rome having “a” teaching authority. I think the problem is with Rome claiming “the only” teaching authority; especially in light of certain controversial and extra-biblical dogmas, and a long line of clearly fallible Popes (the Pornocracy comes to mind). If Rome didn’t have a questionable history- I think we’d be wading through much clearer waters. I’m not saying this is a definitive reason to challenge Rome’s claim of Sola Ecclesia (as God has always used fallible men to accomplish His will and purpose), but it certainly lends credence to the reasoning behind the reformation.

quote:

---

So, we still end up with the Methodist and the Prodigal Son pointing at each other saying the same thing simultaneously "You are wrong. What? No. YOU are the one who is wrong, not me."

---

Yes, of course. As it has been since (probably before) the Council of Jerusalem, in which the earliest church convened and made decisions that affected all of Christianity forever more. (I find this example to be the strongest case for the authority of the church- except that James clearly presided over the council, and the debate was over the meaning of the words that we now recognize as the New Testament) But, you are well within reason to point out the flaws of this doctrine being mishandled by those with ill intentions. To which I readily agree.

quote:

---

If I chime in with a suggestion to just follow the Roman Catholic Catechism, neither side of the debate will agree to that (even though it is a great idea). The Catechism deals extensively with God's Plan for Human Sexuality.

---

We are in agreement here. But, when speaking to a (clearly misinformed ) Protestant, it obviously will do no good to quote the catechism (except to show it’s coherence with the Word), you only need to point them to the consistent teaching of the scripture. I understand that the catechism and the scriptures agree in this case, but, if you want to save that which is lost- you often need to meet them where they’re at.

quote:

---

I linked the answer to one of your questions. Catholic Answers has lots of articles on that question.

---

I haven’t read all of it yet. I often read both the Catholic perspective, and the Reformed perspective, on any given topic; as I see them much in the same light that I see the liberal left and the conservative right (this analogy only depicts opposition of views- and of each other, not a likeness of one to the other). They are diametrically opposed to each other, and bent on the other’s demise. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Logically, because that’s what we see (propaganda) from people who hold extreme positions, and biblically because God judges each of us according to our hearts and deeds; while clearly having instructed us to love each other- and I don’t see the love between RC’s and Reformed Christians. I love you, brother. Thank you so much for continuing to have this conversation with me. I think the benefits go far beyond just you and me. But, even if it’s just you and me- it’s worth it. Thanks again.

it’s time for America to crank up Sash demonstrations. the church is dead. and not because of evangelicals in Tioga or Hesse. you allowed it to happen. congrats