Catholicism

I didn't really expect you to buy it. I mean, once you put scripture on the same level as tradition it's pretty easy to dismiss, huh?

 

Dude, Peter means rock. His name was changed from Simon to represent this role - it's a valid assumption that's what Jesus meant. You don't have to agree with it, but it's not entirely unreasonable. As far as Popes in general, the Church acknowledges that popes, like bishops, priests, and everyone else, are fallible, but they play a role in representing the Church to the people, and articulating the moral, spiritual, and political positions of the Church. It doesn't replace the relationship with Christ in any way. If you feel it gets in the way, no big deal, but some people find it beneficial.

 

I'm not buying it because Scripture can be interpreted any number of ways, and can "prove" seemingly anything.

 

There's that sarcasm again TFU.

Look, the Bible is one representation of the Word of God - you'll admit that I assume, and you'll also concede that your relationship with God goes beyond what you read in the Book. The Book is, after all, for everyone, but you have personal needs.

Sacred traditions are a core part of the Catholic faith for just that reason. It's another way of connecting with God, and frankly, it's a pretty important one considering that not everyone on earth knows how to read.

 

Look, just ask any scholar. They will tell you that it was most likely James that led the early church, not Peter. So if you want to cling to the theory that Jesus was speaking of Peter as "this rock", then you're gonna also have to believe that it was a false prophecy on Jesus' part.

EDIT: Show me one verse from the Bible that says traditions are to be elevated to such a high place. All you need, all anyone needs, to have a relationsip with God is to pray and read their Bible.

 

Just remember that the bible was not written in english. The many books have been translated form their original languages and compiles into one book(the bible). Many translations have occoured, and many words do not have direct meaning in english.

I have at least three different translations of the bible at my house. Certain passages can been interprted differently with each tanslation. I think this is why the ten commandments appear to be different.

And all of the "thou" "thee" thanguage has been removed in many modern versions. When you questions the meaning of something, look at multiple translations to see it from a different angle.

 

Look, just ask any scholar

Does that include Catholic scholars and non-biased scholars?

 

Any passage about Tradition? How about when Paul tells others to stand fast and hold to the traditions of [their] elders?

 

Well i dont buy that answer, you can leave anything to interpretation but the verse is clear. Jesus was not talking about Peter and that is clear, it cannot be left to interpretation since it is not a parable, prophesy, or some obscure passage.

I want the reason why the catholic church interprets it as being the source for its belief that the pope is the pontifice.

here are verses that oppose that thinking.

Mat 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him].

Mat 23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

1Cr 3:21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

 

"Does that include Catholic scholars and non-biased scholars?"

This includes both Christian and secular scholars.

"Mat 23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."

But I'm supposed to call a Catholic priest "father"? Hmmmm...

 

it cannot be left to interpretation

Just about anything in Scripture can be interpreted in a variety of ways.

Jesus was not talking about Peter and that is clear

If it is so clear, why do so many intelligent people around the world believe otherwise?

This includes both Christian and secular scholars.

And what of Catholic scholars?

 

Yeah, we can just twist scripture until it fits with tradition!

"And what of Catholic scholars?"

What the heck do you think they're gonna say? Like they're not biased at all. I got this information from a secular documentary about the early church.

 

Here Jesus speaks AGAINST tradition.

Mat 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

Mat 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

 

TFU, ignoring the fact that had I the time I probably could find some passages from the Bible that could be interpreted in that fashion, which you would of course claim that I had misinterpreted, you're missing the point. The Bible doesn't have to justify everything we do with our faith. You yourself have facets of your relationship with God that are unique to you. Catholics have some that are unique to them. I make no judgments on whether you approve or participate in them, it's just something we choose to believe?

Here's a question for you, though maybe this is for another thread...Is it right because the Bible says it, or does the Bible say it because it's right?

 

Yeah, we can just twist scripture until it fits with tradition!

It doesn't help if you keep looking at something from a one-sided perspective.

 

"Is it right because the Bible says it, or does the Bible say it because it's right?"

Boy is that a fully loaded question! Neither answer is right, because there are a lot of the stories in the Bible about stuff that isn't condoned by it.

 

A true debater and knowledgable person understands both sides (or mulitple sides, as the case may be) of an issue and competently debate for both sides.

Do you understand why we believe the way we do? Could you speak for Catholic beliefs in a manner that Catholics would approve of? If not, your understanding is lacking, I believe.

"And what of Catholic scholars?"

What the heck do you think they're gonna say? Like they're not biased at all. I got this information from a secular documentary about the early church.

Try to understand our perspectives and beliefs.

 

Here's another question for you TFU - are you deliberately ignoring my requests to drop the sarcasm, or have I not made myself clear enough on that point?

KnightWriter, good luck with this. I honestly don't think these folks are interested in learning anything. They believe they have it all figured out, so there's little point trying to explain what amounts simply to a different interpretation of the ultimately mysterious and unknowable.

 

Do you understand why I believe the way I do? Could you speak for my beliefs in a manner that I would approve of? If not, your understanding is lacking, I believe.

I'm a sarcastic person. Deal with it.

 

Do you understand why I believe the way I do? Could you speak for my beliefs in a manner that I would approve of? If not, your understanding is lacking, I believe.

I can research your beliefs and general protestant beliefs and come to some reasonable conclusions. I certainly cannot speak for you personally, though.

 

You believe that the Catholic Church is too confining for your tastes. With all its rules abd traditions, you feel it doesn't represent what you want in a church. Which is fine, but not everyone agrees with you.

And if you want to get sarcastic, then expexct me to do the same...

 

Do you understand why I believe the way I do? Could you speak for my beliefs in a manner that I would approve of? If not, your understanding is lacking, I believe.

I belive the topic is Catholicism. You started the thread TFU. You should know that. We are talking about Catholic belifs .

 

Okay, I have another serious question.

Why does the Catholic clergy dress up in weird robes and junk?

 

Why does the Catholic clergy dress up in weird robes and junk?

The term you're looking for is "vestments." It's mostly tradition, I think, and I believe it's a symbol of the honor of the priesthood and its duties. Aside from that, I believe priests are required to wear vestments for normal masses, although, of course, an impromptu mass for whatever reason would be a different story.

 

[sarcasm]I've never seen any clergy wear junk of any kind[/sarcasm]