- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pope Leo: If You Promote War You’re Not A Christian
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:28 am to FooManChoo
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:28 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Here is my original statement in the thread, which you replied to: "It's not surprising that the Pope would make such anti-biblical statements. Popes have gone their own way since at least the early middle ages."
I was condemning the Pope's statement as anti-biblical, and affirmed my belief that this is not an isolated example of a Pope going away from what the Bible teaches.
I know that it's inconvenient for Catholics to have a succession of Popes in recent times that say the most absurd, anti-biblical and anti-historical things in light of how it's necessary to submit to the Pope as the head of the church with "full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church" for salvation.
I disagree with your conclusory statements here. There is an alternative and reasonable reading of the rather vague statement of the Pope. Read exactly what he says - he doesn't mention either Trump or the war in Iran. Pope says that a national leader who is a warmonger is not a Christian and I agree with that. Putin is a warmonger and not a Christian. Putin is the best example.
You do agree that the Just War Doctrine is binding on Christian leaders? The RCC Catechism teaches this, also. Pope made no statement intended to contradict the Catechism.
2
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:31 am to FooManChoo
quote:
but it's clear that not all war is evil inherently.
You are deviously arguing a fact not in evidence because Pope never said "all war is inherently evil."
You are twisting words again to serve as a platform to bash Roman Catholicism, which is your main reason for being on Tigerdroppings.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:33 am to Champagne
quote:You realize that Protestants like myself are not all stupid, right? We aren't ignoring Christ's words, but we explain them in light of other numerous and clear passages of Scripture. That's how interpretation is always supposed to be done. We call it "the analogy of faith"
Absolutely not so by any objective measure of what the whole of the Bible teaches, including words preached by Jesus Christ Himself.
quote:The only objective standard is the Bible, and that's what we're debating.
I contend that it's misleading for you to continue to preach that Eternal Security is clearly taught in the Holy Bible when it is quite clear by any objective reading of Scripture that your contention is inaccurate.
The person I responded to asked for biblical support for the doctrine, and I have several passages to support it.
I noticed that you didn't bother to explain why any of those passages I listed do not actually support eternal security. You only responded with the equivalent of "nuh-uh".
If you want to debate this, feel free to join in and explain why my understanding of all these passages is incorrect. Just saying "it's objectively true that you are wrong" isn't really a valid response, as I see it, if you aren't willing to support it
quote:What I believe does not require unanimity within Protestantism. Protestantism isn't even one homogenous group anyway, as you Catholics like to pretend that it is.
You should be intellectually honest by saying that the Doctrine of Eternal Security is believed by many Protestant Denominations, but, opposed by many other Protestant Denominations. The reason why the issue is contentious is because the Bible itself contains passages that seem to support both sides of the argument.
Let's be intellectually honest, Foo. You know that Protestants don't agree on the Doctrine of Eternal Security.
I'm not arguing as Protestant, but as a Christian who believes the Bible teaches eternal security. You are free to disagree--that's the notion of liberty of conscience that Rome rejects--but I'm not claiming that this doctrine must be accepted by everyone in order to be true.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:33 am to LuckyTiger
Did he define “promote”?
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:35 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I'm not arguing as Protestant, but as a Christian who believes the Bible teaches eternal security. You are free to disagree--that's the notion of liberty of conscience that Rome rejects--but I'm not claiming that this doctrine must be accepted by everyone in order to be true.
No need to argue. I'm glad that we agreed that the Doctrine of Eternal Security is not accepted as Truth by many Protestant denominations.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:36 am to LuckyTiger
Promoting war?
I haven’t seen anyone doing that.
Doing what needs to be done, yes
I haven’t seen anyone doing that.
Doing what needs to be done, yes
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:44 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Did he define “promote”?
No, he didn't and that is Pope's error. Pope seems to be inclined to continue making vague statements on current events that only lead to confusion. Pope is head of the RCC and he speaks for an independent country, the Vatican.
Pope is politically a Leftist, so, whenever he speaks in vague terms about current events, he's going to sound like a Leftist, which will please Barack Obama but anger many Americans.
Pope Francis started this practice of Pope's saying confusing Leftist things for all the world to hear, and it appears that Pope Leo will continue this practice. A BIG MISTAKE, I say. Pope should focus on Theology, not Politics of the World, when he speaks for all the world to hear.
Pope Leo will alienate and anger many Americans if he continues to speak publically and sound like a political Leftist.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:47 am to Champagne
quote:
Results of my research into your non-denomination.
1) It is a denomination that was founded in the year 1965 A.D. The denomination is called the Calvary Chapel Association.
2) There are exactly two CCA churches in the state of Louisiana - one in Baton Rouge and one in Lafayette.
3) Belief in the Rapture.
4) Belief in the Doctrine of Eternal Security.
5) Belief in the Doctrine of the Trinity
Does this describe your church and your personal theology?
The church uses Calvary in its name but the teaching are not based in Calvinism. Calvary in the church name Grace Calvary simply refers to the site/hill where Jesus Christ was crucified.
The current pastor (Josh Blevins) at Grace Calvary Church is teaching and preaching what I would consider to be an acceptable and proper interpretation of the Holy scriptures.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 9:49 am to FooManChoo
We agree on one thing and disagree on another.
We agree on Just War doctrine as binding on national leaders of all stripes.
We disagree that the Popes since the Middle Ages have promulgated lots of anti-biblical ideas. Your conclusion is based upon your own analysis using your own rules and interpretations of Scripture passages. The Popes, on the other hand, would tell you that they did the same thing - they reached conclusions different from yours using their rules and interpretations.
As for me, Foo, when it comes to deciding on a debate between you and Thomas Aquinas, I will probably side with Aquinas.
We agree on Just War doctrine as binding on national leaders of all stripes.
We disagree that the Popes since the Middle Ages have promulgated lots of anti-biblical ideas. Your conclusion is based upon your own analysis using your own rules and interpretations of Scripture passages. The Popes, on the other hand, would tell you that they did the same thing - they reached conclusions different from yours using their rules and interpretations.
As for me, Foo, when it comes to deciding on a debate between you and Thomas Aquinas, I will probably side with Aquinas.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 10:47 am to Champagne
quote:I know you want to give the benefit of the doubt to the Pope, but the best case scenario is that he just wasn't careful with his words. As the head of the church and someone who is very influential in religion and politics, he needs to be more careful. You can't deny that.
I disagree with your conclusory statements here. There is an alternative and reasonable reading of the rather vague statement of the Pope. Read exactly what he says - he doesn't mention either Trump or the war in Iran. Pope says that a national leader who is a warmonger is not a Christian and I agree with that. Putin is a warmonger and not a Christian. Putin is the best example.
I disagree that his comment was "vague", though. He may have not been as precise as he should have been, but he flat out said you can't be a Christian and promote war. If he was referring only to "war mongers", then he should have been more clear about that, but it seemed that he was condemning war generally as anti-Christian, which fits the recent narrative that Popes have given, such as Francis saying there is no such thing as a just war, and Leo also recently condemned the idea of Just War Theory as outdated, with more generally pacifist statements like God hates all war.
quote:I don't believe that just war doctrine is binding on the conscience of any Christian, but that it's consistent with the teachings of Scripture.
You do agree that the Just War Doctrine is binding on Christian leaders?
quote:His intention (to contradict) is irrelevant to whether or not he did, or at least introduce tension between himself and the Catechism.
The RCC Catechism teaches this, also. Pope made no statement intended to contradict the Catechism.
When the Catechism teaches the basics of Just War Theory as a framework that is good and the way war should be understood in the faith, and then the Pope comes out and says that framework is "outdated" in an encyclical, that introduces real tension.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 10:51 am to Champagne
quote:This is factually not true. I'm not the only person in this thread that read his statement the way I did. Other self-professed Catholics are bashing him for what he said, so I'm not twisting anything.
You are deviously arguing a fact not in evidence because Pope never said "all war is inherently evil."
You are twisting words again to serve as a platform to bash Roman Catholicism, which is your main reason for being on Tigerdroppings
I'm explaining the logical conclusion of his statement. If Just War Theory is "outdated", and if it's true that you cannot be a Christian and "promote war", then he is saying that war must be inherently evil. The point of Just War Theory is to explain how war can be waged in a biblically lawful, good, and God-honoring way. If the Pope says it's an "outdated" theory, then he's going against what that theory is intended to do. And when he says that you can't be a Christian and promote war, that is such a broad and general statement by itself that it calls into question any sense of moral war-waging.
That's why I said what I said. No twisting, just application of what the Pope said.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 12:35 pm to Champagne
quote:That's not technically what I said. I said that no Christian's conscience is bound by Just War Theory. However, that really is a technicality. I believe Just War Theory accurately teaches biblical views on violence and conflict, which is helpful for applying biblical principles to real-world scenarios. I personally think all national leaders should abide by Just War Theory, I just don't like the language of "binding" from a religious standpoint, because only God, through His Word, can bind consciences.
We agree on one thing and disagree on another.
We agree on Just War doctrine as binding on national leaders of all stripes.
quote:The difference is that I don't claim a level of infallibility that the Pope does, or even a level of authority that must be submitted to, even in fallible situations.
We disagree that the Popes since the Middle Ages have promulgated lots of anti-biblical ideas. Your conclusion is based upon your own analysis using your own rules and interpretations of Scripture passages. The Popes, on the other hand, would tell you that they did the same thing - they reached conclusions different from yours using their rules and interpretations.
Even so, there have been plenty of anti-biblical ideas pushed and enforced by Popes since the Middle Ages, such as when Pope Martin V enforced the withholding of the cup from the laity during the Eucharist. He enforced the decree Cum in nonnullis, which forbade the laity from receiving eucharistic wine, and allowed it for priests alone. That directly contradicts the teaching from Scripture which commands and demonstrates the the people had access to both the bread and the cup.
There were many others touching on support for papal infallibility, the Mass as a propitiatory sacrifice, and the bodily assumption of Mary, but I'm sure you'll disagree about those as being non-biblical.
quote:I'm sure you would, and I'm certainly not arguing against either of them when it comes to Just War Theory.
As for me, Foo, when it comes to deciding on a debate between you and Thomas Aquinas, I will probably side with Aquinas.
Posted on 6/12/26 at 10:18 pm to FooManChoo
Foo, we agree that the Just War Doctrine/Theory is binding on Christian leaders.
You know that the Pope is infallible only on theological pronouncements. The last time a Pope said something that is infallible was in 1950, so, none of a Pope's political opinions are infallible.
This issue of being "infallible" seems to bother a lot of folks. Have folks considered that when their own church pastor is delivering a sermon, he or she considers the theology that they preach to be "infallible"? Foo, when you talk about how Eternal Security is the Truth, aren't you also telling us that your opinion on this issue is Infallible?
Let me ask you - you preach day and night here on Political Talk - you preach endlessly and with total conviction that you preach the Truth. Would you consider your preaching to be Infallible? If not, why not? I mean, why would you preach your Theology around here if you didn't think your opinion is Infallible.
If you deny that you think your opinions on Theology are Infallible, then, why do you want us to believe your preaching, if you don't think it's Infallible. If you don't think you're infallible then you admit you could be wrong.
Pope Foo - Are you Infallible when you Preach your Covenanter Theology?
You know that the Pope is infallible only on theological pronouncements. The last time a Pope said something that is infallible was in 1950, so, none of a Pope's political opinions are infallible.
This issue of being "infallible" seems to bother a lot of folks. Have folks considered that when their own church pastor is delivering a sermon, he or she considers the theology that they preach to be "infallible"? Foo, when you talk about how Eternal Security is the Truth, aren't you also telling us that your opinion on this issue is Infallible?
Let me ask you - you preach day and night here on Political Talk - you preach endlessly and with total conviction that you preach the Truth. Would you consider your preaching to be Infallible? If not, why not? I mean, why would you preach your Theology around here if you didn't think your opinion is Infallible.
If you deny that you think your opinions on Theology are Infallible, then, why do you want us to believe your preaching, if you don't think it's Infallible. If you don't think you're infallible then you admit you could be wrong.
Pope Foo - Are you Infallible when you Preach your Covenanter Theology?
This post was edited on 6/13/26 at 8:17 am
Posted on 6/12/26 at 11:00 pm to Champagne
quote:
Pope Foo - Are you Infallible when you Preach your Covenant Theology?
#protectedbytheholyspiritthankyoujebus
Posted on 6/12/26 at 11:03 pm to LuckyTiger
Oddly, I never hear this dude complain about the slaughter of Christians in Africa by Muslims
Or the slaughter of UK white people by Muslims. Let DJT take out a high target Jihadist and it’s “disgraceful”.
Or the slaughter of UK white people by Muslims. Let DJT take out a high target Jihadist and it’s “disgraceful”.
Posted on 6/13/26 at 2:53 am to LuckyTiger
What happened to Papal Infallibility? Popes have condoned war on multiple occasions.
Posted on 6/13/26 at 3:03 am to LsuNav
So, the Pope believe Jesus isn't a warrior? Has he ever read the Bible? Jesus leads a vast spiritual army in the Book of Revelation to victory over all evildoers. He is a warrior who makes demons tremble.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:48 am to Champagne
quote:It seems like you don’t understand what infallibility refers to.
You know that the Pope is infallible only on theological pronouncements. The last time a Pope said something that is infallible was in 1950, so, none of a Pope's political opinions are infallible.
This issue of being "infallible" seems to bother a lot of folks. Have folks considered that when their own church pastor is delivering a sermon, he or she considers the theology that they preach to be "infallible"? Foo, when you talk about how Eternal Security is the Truth, aren't you also telling us that your opinion on this issue is Infallible?
Let me ask you - you preach day and night here on Political Talk - you preach endlessly and with total conviction that you preach the Truth. Would you consider your preaching to be Infallible? If not, why not? I mean, why would you preach your Theology around here if you didn't think your opinion is Infallible.
If you deny that you think your opinions on Theology are Infallible, then, why do you want us to believe your preaching, if you don't think it's Infallible. If you don't think you're infallible then you admit you could be wrong.
Pope Foo - Are you Infallible when you Preach your Covenanter Theology?
Infallibility is the inability to be in or provide error. I believe that only God cannot lie or speak falsely, so therefore only God’s Word is infallible.
When I speak God’s Word, I am a fallible person speaking God’s infallible truth. I can err but God cannot. I can err, my pastor can err, and the Pope can err, but the Word of God is perfect.
So no, when I share my beliefs about God’s Word, I do not ever consider myself infallible.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:54 am to FooManChoo
quote:
So no, when I share my beliefs about God’s Word, I do not ever consider myself infallible.
I dont believe you
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:04 am to gaetti15
I know I’m not Catholic enough for your standards but my 9 year old gets to be a candle bearer today. It’s so cute watching him try not to smile when he walks down the aisle.
Idk why your judgment grates me so much. You might be the only poster who gets to me! Quite the feat.
Idk why your judgment grates me so much. You might be the only poster who gets to me! Quite the feat.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News