When the "pope" is calling for the dismantling of all private arms ownership... You know you've lost the path
(media.patriots.win)
SPICY 🔥🔥🔥
Comments (1003)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
Also, papal infallibility must be specifically invoked. It has only been used 3 times in history.
Exactly (taking your word on the amount). Most people who despise Catholics don't realize the actual practices we follow. Saying Catholicism is bad because of Francis, is like saying the USA is bad because of Obama.
I thought it was twice (the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary), but the point remains that it is very rare
The Orthodox are just as pious if not more when it comes to the Mother of God, but they don't force the doctrine of Immaculate Conception and Assumption. It's OK to leave things unanswered.
That's not the point...but okay
How?
the idea that human infallibility is a thing that can be invoked makes no theological sense
It is not "human infallibility", rather it is the infallibility of the Vicar of Christ while speaking only from the Chair of Peter.
This still means a human being. The only difference being that they claim to represent apostles.
They don't claim to represent the Apostles, but they do claim to hold what has been passed down through Apostolic Succession. (By the way, I always like to clarify that I am not taking a hostile approach to this, just trying to hash out ideas)
I would put it a little differently. After the “fall of man” humans are inherently incapable of the righteousness that is necessary to be in God’s presence. The only thing that can redeem man is faith in God’s redemptive plan. “Faith is credited to us as righteousness”. Christ is the redemptive plan revealed. As far as the pope goes (sorry Catholics), the Catholic Church has developed a lot of bad doctrine over the centuries. The Bible does not give any man infallibility.
Haha I’ll agree for the most part also, the idea that Jesus came, scolded and frequently put religious people in their places, so he can influence a different religion, but this time a little different.
Also, the Catholic Church basically killed off a christians for decades. See: Fox’s Book of Martyrs.
And lastly, magically changing the Sabbath without any sound biblical reasoning to do so
Easiest way to sum up Catholicism for beginners. Picture a family:
God is our Dad and we are His adopted children. We disobeyed Him and turned our back on Him. He never turned His back on us. We went so far away from Him that we can't make it back on our own.
He sacrificed Himself in order to give us a path back to Him. No we have the opportunity to unite ourselves with the Father.
Does this help paint a very basic picture, my friend?
The major point of contention being that God sacrificed his son/himself to give people an opportunity ‘to be reunited’. This doesn’t make sense to me personally when Jesus’s debt paid (in full) for the sins of mankind.
I dont really see many events in the Bible that show God to say one thing but in reality has 24 pages of fine print to go along with what he’s said. Especially since biblically God has been portrayed as laying out specific consequences For actions and following through on those. (ie Dont do this, or this will happen, they do the thing, and God does his thing).
Putting any sort of spiritual health in the hands of a person or man mad organization is really hard to do. Especially with the churches track record. It’s like going back to your husband the 10th time because ‘this time they’ve changed and won’t do it again’
It has nothing to do with that human. All it means is the Holy Spirit protects the truth (church doctrine) by not allowing fallible humans to alter it, so that all can see the truth.
I'll explain it all really quickly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtlsNlEjTUE
Jehovah is Baal. Lucifer is Jesus.
It is the only truth in the Bible. It is hidden in plain sight.
It actually does if you were in any way knowledgeable of theology.
Meh. A theology degree only goes so far I guess?
Feel free to explain how it’s theologically sound
my theology degree doesn’t matter in this conversation simply because of your ‘no u’ argument.
If your idea of ‘it does’ is a conclusion one reaches by interpreting misc. parts of the Bible, I would argue that’s not objective fact.
Right, and the word church, commonly understood in the Bible as referencing a group of people who come together in fellowship. A practice that early Catholicism would kill people for doing (ie reading the Bible for themselves).
In order to get to the Catholic Church from here, one has to make assumptions and interpretations that first off, have no solid historically verifiable lineage, but also takes the entire thing and turns it into something Jesus actively spoke out against.
There were many early churches after Jesus’ resurrection, and theIt goal wasn’t to amass power and control people with a new set of rituals and laws, but to create a network of people connected by thei belief in Christ, but that acts and fellowships in a way that works for them.
If all these churches came from the same starting point, they would have also been a product of what Jesus said to Peter, which is that the foundation for the group of people, ( and groups comprised of people and groups comprised of groups of people, etc) that follow his teachings will come out of the work that Peter will eventually do.