Keeping the versus in their proper context as God intended.
calling Pope Father.. Jesus used term "Father Abraham"
- Thread starter republicanchick
- Start date
Keeping the versus in their proper context as God intended.
glassjester
Well-known member
Yes, I wouldn't disagree with that.
But let's not demand a plain reading of the "Father" prohibition, when in fact, we're interpreting it to mean something other than what it plainly states.
Cruciform
New member
No more so than the anti-Catholics here like yourself, who mindlessly parrot the same old hackneyed and long-discredited anti-Catholic claims and stereotypes. Tell you what, if your hopelessly unworkable approach ever changes, I'll be glad to change my answers.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
There's a shocker!!
The Catholic church, as exemplified by Cruciform's link, is doing everything they possible can to avoid a plain and contextual reading of the passage.
Cruciform
New member
CM actually believes that the entirely non-authoritative opinions of his preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect possesses the binding authority to declare what is and is not the "plainly spoken" meaning of Divine Revelation for the rest of us---despite the glaring fact that his chosen man-made sect is decidedly not that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself (as CM himself has repeatedly admitted), and so simply possesses no doctrinal authority whatsoever. Nice exercise in straightforward sophistry, though.
...just as your posts are intended to support the interpretations of Scripture that you have derived from your preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. See just above.
See the first answer above.
Already decisively answered here. :yawn:
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Post #226
Cruciform
New member
Just another mindlessly parroted anti-Catholic stereotype on your part. Your ignorance is noted.
Rather, your entirely non-authoritative interpretation of the Bible means nothing to me. Big difference there. Besides being utterly unable to come up with anything but fallacious pseudo-arguments such as the ignorant Ad Hominem Fallacy above, your comments indicate that you're also simply a liar (Prov. 19:5). May God help you.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Once again, I accept that you concede that you have nothing of value or interest to add to the conversation.
Cruciform
New member
Once again, I accept that you concede that you have no valid counter-argument---let alone an actual disproof---of the content of Post #226 above, which thus stands exactly as posted.
republicanchick
New member
If you were convinced through logic and Church history and prayer that the RCC was the Church Christ founded, would you then accept calling priests Father?
___
Matthew 23:9 KJV -
republicanchick
New member
some Christians do not believe in taking the Bible absolutely literally in EVERYTHING it says
the notion of Bible-only is ridiculous.. if 4 no other reason than this: Not all truth (reality, e tc)can be contained in a mere book...
in other words GOD cannot be contained by a book
He is not finite
as books are
__
republicanchick
New member
all this time & energy spent over WORDS
Why, you people remind me of liberals...
_
Why, you people remind me of liberals...
_
No. It is wrong regardless of the church you attend.
Cruciform
New member
...which is nothing more than the hopelessly non-authoritative opinion of CM's chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, and so simply falls flat.
Actually is just obedience to God.
Cruciform
New member
"obedience to God" = "whatever happens to agree with the hopelessly non-authoritative opinion of CM's chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect"
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
It's far far simpler than that. God sends His Jesus to redeem us. Jesus says don't call your spiritual leaders father. Therefore, I don't call spiritual leaders father. Jesus speaks, I obey. Simple.