Former Protestant Pastor Helps Shepherd Catholic Converts

[faithcontender]

Thanks Bro. Dallas,

Praise God for all bible believing baptists like you are. I believe we have some little differences but i'm sure the Spirit of Christ binds us because of our common salvation in Christ.

We both share the love for the truth and abhorrence to that which is false.

God bless you more my brother!!!

 

[Frogman]

Thanks for your kind words. I am humbled. I can say, as a baptist, not everyone in my local church always agrees with me. This is because I am not infallible, but the Word of God is.

My God Abundantly Bless you brother in your walk and service to him.

Bro. Dallas

 

[thessalonian]

"Dallas, please be informed that Thess is very challenged on the subject of "accurate details" but is very long on "ranting" without actual substantive objective points being made.

In other words - Thess is often just plain incorrect - at such a level that it really has nothing to do with your denominationial affiliation - his statements are simply in error."

Bob,

I think it you look at what I have said about you and your denomination it is you that is in error and are bearing false witness against me to Dallas. Hey that's one of those ten commandments. I mearly said that they were complacent toward non-trinitarians who called the trinity pagan. I know this to be true because I have had SDA's on boards say these things and other SDA's will just stand by and say nothing. In fact there used to be one on this board who denied the trinity and as I recall you didn't have much to say on her opposition to the doctrine. Nowhere have I said that you or the SDA Church were non-trinitarian. I have at one point asked the question about the SDA Church.

Blessings

 

[Carson Weber]

I am not infallible, but the Word of God is.

Yet, the Word of God is not self-interpreting. As its mouthpiece, and as a fallible individual, your interpretations may be in error. I doubt that God would have left his Church with the propensity to be in error even with regard to the most fundamental dogmas of the Christian faith.

 

[A_Christian]

That is why ALL Christians are EXPECTED to read the the Word and Study the Word and call upon the the Holy Spirit for GOD's insight.

Bishops, including the pope are only human, and in the case of a pope----perhaps alittle power hungary... Thanks be to GOD for His Holy Word and the ONLY standard which GOD Himself gave us and preserved for us.

 

[Frogman]

As I said, I am fallible, but the Word of God is infallible, note:

John 16.12-14:

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

You see, God did not leave it to the whims of men. He provides His very Spirit indwelling. This is the only way to preserve truth. We read, 'he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.'

Men will speak of themselves, men will speak what they hear from men, men don't know things to come.

Does scripture teach us this Spirit of truth will speak whatsoever he hears from the Pope?

Bro. Dallas

 

[Carson Weber]

Hi Dallas,

Jesus' High Priestly prayer at the Last Supper is directed to those who sat with him at supper: those men whom he chose, discipled, and commissioned. The successors to these same men, gathered around Peter, are the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church.

You are simply making the assumption that the charism (gift) of being led into all truth is given to every Christian. Of course, we know that this is not true because Christians everywhere disagree on just about every significant tenet of Christianity.

 

[Frogman]

Carson, I disagree The Bible teaches a personal relationship with Christ. Christ and the Holy Spirit are two persons, but the same, this personal relationship then is through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, [Spirit of Christ]. Men do not disagree because the Word of God is in error [I know you did not say this]. Men disagree because men are governed by lusts of the flesh. Part of this includes pride, part a desire to obtain glory among men.

The Holy Spirit enjoys full agreement in the Godhead. He does not and will not seek self-glorification, but he speaks that which is truth. Whether we obey that which is revealed in the Word of God or not does not change the fact the Scripture teaches this indwelling, and this leadership.

The problem is when regeneration by baptism is taught, folks begin to look for that power in that ordinance. When they cannot find it, then they begin to read into scripture what is not there.

If you will note, the protestant religions borrowed the same form and function of baptism which the Catholic church taught before them. Note also there is a body of believers who have rejected this long before the church in Rome began down it's state church path that has ultimately led her to where she is today.

Bro. Dallas

 

[faithcontender]

Jesus' High Priestly prayer at the Last Supper is directed to those who sat with him at supper: those men whom he chose, discipled, and commissioned. The successors to these same men, gathered around Peter, are the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church.

You are simply making the assumption that the charism (gift) of being led into all truth is given to every Christian. Of course, we know that this is not true because Christians everywhere disagree on just about every significant tenet of Christianity.

The claim of the bishops of the Roman catholic church is the same as the claim of the scribes and pharisses. They claim their lineage from Abraham and Moises but their doctrine and practices are contrary to that of Abraham and Moises'.

If the bishops of Rome are the successors of the apostles then their doctrine and practices are in accord with that of the apostles'. It's in the opposite. In doctrine and practices they are void of the mark of the apostolic churches.

 

[thessalonian]

"The claim of the bishops of the Roman catholic church is the same as the claim of the scribes and pharisses. They claim their lineage from Abraham and Moises but their doctrine and practices are contrary to that of Abraham and Moises'."

Seems you may not have the grasp of the Bible you think you have.

Matthew 23:2
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore WHATSOEVER they bid you observe, [that] OBSERVE AND DO; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Would Jesus command them to do what was false. Can God bind a man to a lie? Therefore there speach was authortative and correct but their actions were hypocritical so they were not to do as they did. Thanks for allowing me to clear that up for us.

 

[thessalonian]

Dallas,

"Does scripture teach us this Spirit of truth will speak whatsoever he hears from the Pope?"

In actuality it is the other way around. The Holy Spirit does not allow the successor of Peter to speak contrary to the Spirit of Truth in circumstances where he is teaching the whole church in a binding fashion.

Matthew 16:19
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and WHATSOEVER thou shalt BIND on earth shall be BOUND in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Funny how the word WHATSOEVER is used here as well as the post above in mt. 23:2. This lacks limitation. But what it says is that the Holy Spirit guided Peter such that what he bound was bindable in heaven. God cannot bind a lie. Therefore when Peter intended to bind, it must have been true. Examples of this are in Acts 2:38, 4,11, and 15. We can go in to the evidence that this binding and loosing was passed on if you like.

 

[faithcontender]

"The claim of the bishops of the Roman catholic church is the same as the claim of the scribes and pharisses. They claim their lineage from Abraham and Moises but their doctrine and practices are contrary to that of Abraham and Moises'."

Seems you may not have the grasp of the Bible you think you have.

Matthew 23:2
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore WHATSOEVER they bid you observe, [that] OBSERVE AND DO; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Would Jesus command them to do what was false. Can God bind a man to a lie? Therefore there speach was authortative and correct but their actions were hypocritical so they were not to do as they did. Thanks for allowing me to clear that up for us.

So you admit that the bishops of Rome are guilty of all these things as the scribes and the pharisses are:

Mark
7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
"The claim of the bishops of the Roman catholic church is the same as the claim of the scribes and pharisses. They claim their lineage from Abraham and Moises but their doctrine and practices are contrary to that of Abraham and Moises'."

Seems you may not have the grasp of the Bible you think you have.

Matthew 23:2
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore WHATSOEVER they bid you observe, [that] OBSERVE AND DO; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Would Jesus command them to do what was false. Can God bind a man to a lie? Therefore there speach was authortative and correct but their actions were hypocritical so they were not to do as they did. Thanks for allowing me to clear that up for us.

FaithContender is exhibiting the authority of a believer in fellowship with Christ.

John 14.23: Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me and keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our abode with him.

Note:

• a man
  Christ says here, if a man, he does not say if a man hears the Pope. He uses a singular representative of any believer, "a" being an indefinite article strengthens the fact that this is not speaking of a 'Pope' or any group of 'bishops'.
  
• we
  Christ says not only himself, but the Father also will 'come to him and make our abode with him. 'we' and 'our' refer back to refer back to Christ and the Father, thus referring back to the Holy Spirit the Spirit of truth that guides into all truth, that is the subject of all this context found in John 14.16-26 and is also supported in other places. Note how the pronouns 'we' and 'our' are plural, again 'him' is singular and referring to an indefinite individual. Therefore, any particular beleiver keeping the words of Christ.
  
  Further, Christ is not commanding them to obey a falsehood. He is commanding them to submit themselves to the authority of these as they currently 'sit' in the seat of Moses. But, this 'seat of Moses' is in passing away and now is passed away. Why? Because it is done away with by the New Covenant. This is in accord with other scripture:
  
  1 John 2.27
  1 Peter 2.13 [What even Peter?]
  Heb. 13.17 [and also the cheif of sinners, Paul]
  
  We are admonished to so submit to those. Well why did Jesus admonish these to submit to those sitting in the seat of Moses? This represents the Political as well as the religious administration in Israel. Moses is a type of Christ [not Mary] because he is the Prophet/Judge. The Law Giver and the deliverer of the people of God.
  
  FaithContender, let me say AMEN! to your post. it is evident you have kept His Words and are being led by the Holy Spirit and as such He is fulfilling His promise to come, He and the Father, and make their abode with you.
  
  What is 'abode'? It is mone [long e] and according to Young's Concordance as found in John 14.23--it means--Home, mansion, permanent place. See how it leads even to eternal salvation and thereby even serves to not only refute this idea of Christ speaking through the Pope, Mary, the bishops, but also refutes the supposed need for purgatory.
  
  Again, Amen! FaithContender.
  
  Bro. Dallas

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Dallas,

"Does scripture teach us this Spirit of truth will speak whatsoever he hears from the Pope?"

In actuality it is the other way around. The Holy Spirit does not allow the successor of Peter to speak contrary to the Spirit of Truth in circumstances where he is teaching the whole church in a binding fashion.

Matthew 16:19
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and WHATSOEVER thou shalt BIND on earth shall be BOUND in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Funny how the word WHATSOEVER is used here as well as the post above in mt. 23:2. This lacks limitation. But what it says is that the Holy Spirit guided Peter such that what he bound was bindable in heaven. God cannot bind a lie. Therefore when Peter intended to bind, it must have been true. Examples of this are in Acts 2:38, 4,11, and 15. We can go in to the evidence that this binding and loosing was passed on if you like.

First of all, by your tradition, Peter cannot be Pope, the Pope has no mother-in-law. So Christ has broken the tradition of your church if he has made Peter a Pope.

Next, you limit this 'binding and loosing' to Peter by your scripture, but you have to do this because it is remaining true to scripture. {That means scripture limits it to Peter here).

Note this however, this authority is then set in the church and not in any fallible man---Lk. 24.49; Acts 1.4;-5 & 8---can you see how this is giving that imagined authority you grant the Pope to the body---the local visible body that was already assembled on the day of Pentecost? Can't you see this? How that promise of the Father in Luke is that fulfilled in Acts 1 and witnessed in Acts 2 and this is not upon that first Pope you celebrate, but upon the local visible body assembled there in Jerusalem according to Acts 1.5. Throw out your traditions and listen to scripture. This local visible body of immersed believers is what was assembled on Pentecost, not a universal body overruled by one man as carnal as any other. This local visible body assembled in Jerusalem is that called out by the preaching of John, organized by Christ, and baptized by the Holy Spirit one time, an historical baptism, accomplished in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost.

Bro. Dallas

 

[faithcontender]

Loud Amen!! Bro Dallas.

The authority is set in the church not in any man. God has given the church the authority.

It is the church who is the ground and pillar of the truth not the pope or the bishops of rome.

Any church leader could commit mistakes. Only the apostles are inspired. God attested to them by signs and wonder.

But the pope and the bishops of Rome not only lacks sign and wonders but the power of godliness.

What they have is only forms of religion without assurance of hope and peace. Only Christ there is complete hope and peace.

 

[JFS]

First of all, by your tradition, Peter cannot be Pope, the Pope has no mother-in-law. So Christ has broken the tradition of your church if he has made Peter a Pope.

Can you show everyone proof of this? Can you show some writen statement that the CC requires all Popes to be single and that this requirement was from the begining of the church?

Next, you limit this 'binding and loosing' to Peter by your scripture, but you have to do this because it is remaining true to scripture. {That means scripture limits it to Peter here).

Show me in scipture that Jesus limited this authority to Peter alone. The history of Christianity would sudgest that this authority went to the office of Peter and to who ever held that office rather than to one man.

God Bless you

John

 

[Frogman]

Christ continues in Matt. 18 until we get to vs 18. In chapter 18 Christ is speaking of disciplilne in the church...note how he does not rest this in the hands of one man either[vss.15-20].

But before you leave Matt. 16 it wouldn't hurt for you to realize how fallible your first Pope is such that the authority you imagine passing to any other from himself cannot be true [vss. 21-23] After rebuking Peter here, Christ immediately turns to the disciples, he does not give any great authority to Peter. Then we go to Matt. 18 where we see Christ saying: Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Is this a statement made only to Peter? Read vs. 1, ch. 18 to see Christ is teaching to the disciples---representatives of the church. Now look at John 20.22-23--here Christ 'breathes on them' This again is not Peter distinguished apart in any way. And why is this 'keys to the kingdom' limited to the church? It is for the preaching of the Gospel. What is meant by this authority Christ placed in the church? It is for disciplinary purposes. Is it ever unto condemnation, such that one upon which the body engages discipline is ever in any way threatened with eternal condemnation? No. Note Rev. 1.18, who possesses the keys of hell and death? It is Christ isn't it.

Now look at who opens and who shutteth and it is said that no man does these things [this is found in Rev. 3.7].


The Pope is a man, no better or no worse than you or me.
Bro. Dallas

 

[JFS]

Isaiah 22
22
"Then I will set (1) the key of the (2) house of David on his shoulder,
When he opens no one will shut,
When he shuts no one will (3) open.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."

I find it amazing how similar the language is in these two verses. It looks to me that Jesus was setting up the authoritative office that Peter was to accupy. That as Christ representative on earth.

The Pope is a man, no better or no worse than you or me.

I agree fully with your statement here but that in no way takes away from the authority of the office.

 

[Frogman]

Is Peter now David's son? The kingdom is Christ's not Peter's. The keys were given to the church the authority to open and close the church is rested in the local visible body only.

You cannot make scripture say Peter is anything but maybe a Baptist, because the first thing he did after the praise the Lord bestowed upon him was to backslide and pretended to chastize the Lord for saying he would suffer. What did Christ call him there?

Bro. Dallas

 

[JFS]

Is Peter now David's son? The kingdom is Christ's not Peter's. The keys were given to the church the authority to open and close the church is rested in the local visible body only.

No. The keys were given to Peter as a symbol of the authority of his office. The keys were not given to the church.

You cannot make scripture say Peter is anything but maybe a Baptist, because the first thing he did after the praise the Lord bestowed upon him was to backslide and pretended to chastize the Lord for saying he would suffer. What did Christ call him there?

I didn't read anywhere in the bible that Jesus took the keys away from Peter because he was a weeny. The character of the person that occupies the office has nothing to do with the authority that office holds. If the president of the USA is of questionable character does that take away from the authority of his office?

God Bless you

John