Upon this rock/Keys

In any organization, when an authority is established, that authority doesn't end with the death of the person holding that authority. E.g. when David died his authority was passed on to Solomon......, Aaron's authority was passed on to his son....the US constitution establishes offices - those authority of those offices doesn't end with the person holding that office.
Yep I agree you institution is no different to the world, it is not of God. RCs prove that deep down they know this and this is why they constantly compare it to the world.
 
You did not answer my question, but are stalling with that "civil union" jazz: were the three marriages my husband performed while he was an active pastor in our LCMS church valid or not, since he is not Roman Catholic?
romish answered in post 139
 
But God DID found the Lutheran Church? Is THAT your assertion? If God did NOT found the Lutheran Church, why are you Lutheran?

Jesus founded THE Christian church. And what my church teaches is much closer to what the early church taught than what YOUR church teaches now.
He did? My understanding was that he breathed the Holy Spirit not on ALL disciples, but only on those particular disciples who were present in the room.

And the rest received it at Pentecost.
In Matthew 28, the commission to preach, teach, baptize and make disciples is given only to the 11. This is then extended directly by God to Paul later on. When you read the Scriptures, particularly the book of Acts, you see that the apostles begin passing this commission on to their successors by the laying on of hands. This commission is not given in general to all believers.

But when they died others carried on these tasks. Please show me from the Bible where someone cannot be an overseer in a church unless and until another overseer/bishop lays hands on him.
Yes it is valid, so long as it involves baptized Christians. Protestants are not bound by Sacramental Form when it concerns the Sacrament of Marriage. When Protestants want to convert, this is actually a hindrance sometimes--if they divorced and got remarried. It would just make things simpler if the RCC didn't recognize Protestant marriages, but no such luck. So in answer to your question, yes, the marriage is valid, assuming the couple is freely entering the marriage, etc.

Oh, no such luck, huh? IF the RCC didn't recognize Protestant marriages....so, you would rather that your church NOT recognize Protestant marriages??? Is that it?

But thanks for finally answering.
If you knew Catholic theology you would know that Church teaching is that the couple themselves performs the Sacrament.

I know your church teaches that Marriage is a sacrament. Ours does not, though it believes it is sacred.
The priest is just a witness. In fact, for the first 1200 years, the Church was not even directly involved in the Sacrament. The Church only became involved when it was necessary to bring order to what was a chaotic situation. The point is that it is that----it is not necessary to have a validly ordained Catholic priest perform the ceremony. Even in the modern RCC, the bishop can delegate a lay person to witness the marriage if there is no deacon or priest available in the area.
Thank you for finally answering my question.
 
This is Protestant wishful thinking^

The power of binding and loosing was always claimed by the Pharisees.

In the New Testament.
In this sense Jesus, when appointing his disciples to be his successors, used the familiar formula (Matt. xvi. 19, xviii. 18). By these words he virtually invested them with the same authority as that which he found belonging to the scribes and Pharisees who "bind heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders, but will not move them with one of their fingers";
This has to be one of the most bizarre arguments I've seen to date. Although it does seem to fit right in with most Catholic doctrines. It never ceases to amaze me how often someone will look to what the Pharisees claimed, taught, or did instead of what Christ taught, or did. To be fair, the mystery of iniquity was already creeping into the church long before anyone came up with these labels, and organized the church into a going religious concern.

Jesus teaches that his burden is light, his yoke is easy, and the facts which you have chosen to ignore refute your preference for Pharisaic binding and loosening due to the fact that the elementary Greek grammar dictates that the past perfect preterit literally means that what they are binding or loosening has already been bound or loosened in heaven. Again, it is God who does the binding and loosening, not the Pharisees regardless of their protestations to the contrary.

In a way, I have to hand it to an avowed Catholic who actually comes right out and admits that they're getting their ideas from the enemies of Christ. At least you can see and admit it.

However, this spotlights another disturbing issue which is the question of whether or not the Pharisees knew Jesus was the messiah. Some have claimed that they were deceived, but I've come to the conclusion that this can't be the case, and pilgrim's post proves this is the case with Catholicism as well. It's it a knowing willful open rebellion against Christ. It can only be Satanic in origin.
 
In any organization, when an authority is established, that authority doesn't end with the death of the person holding that authority. .the US constitution establishes offices - those authority of those offices doesn't end with the person holding that office.
Historical facts refute this claim. For example, the authority to initiate war, make laws, etc. resides within the legislative branch of the US government, yet it has been the President who has been doing this for decades. One President after another has been issuing executive orders for decades which have the power of law. Likewise, the Supreme Court has also been legislating from the bench for decades as well.

When someone stops doing their job, they not only have no authority, the position they hold has no authority. That authority can only be exercised by them. Saying they have authority doesn't make it so.
 
This has to be one of the most bizarre arguments I've seen to date. Although it does seem to fit right in with most Catholic doctrines. It never ceases to amaze me how often someone will look to what the Pharisees claimed, taught, or did instead of what Christ taught, or did. To be fair, the mystery of iniquity was already creeping into the church long before anyone came up with these labels, and organized the church into a going religious concern.

Jesus teaches that his burden is light, his yoke is easy, and the facts which you have chosen to ignore refute your preference for Pharisaic binding and loosening due to the fact that the elementary Greek grammar dictates that the past perfect preterit literally means that what they are binding or loosening has already been bound or loosened in heaven. Again, it is God who does the binding and loosening, not the Pharisees regardless of their protestations to the contrary.

In a way, I have to hand it to an avowed Catholic who actually comes right out and admits that they're getting their ideas from the enemies of Christ. At least you can see and admit it.

However, this spotlights another disturbing issue which is the question of whether or not the Pharisees knew Jesus was the messiah. Some have claimed that they were deceived, but I've come to the conclusion that this can't be the case, and pilgrim's post proves this is the case with Catholicism as well. It's it a knowing willful open rebellion against Christ. It can only be Satanic in origin.
BIzarre? Its what the Jewish people understand what "binding/loosing" means. Who cares what you think it means.
 
That's a false test. If you had an official interpreter the bible would be officially interpreted. It's not. You ignore scripture that says we can handle the word of God accurately.

2 Timothy 4:3-4

For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers
and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.

Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the LORD with all your heart,

on your own intelligence do not rely;

In all your ways be mindful of him,

and he will make straight your paths.​
 

2 Timothy 4:3-4

For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers
and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.

Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the LORD with all your heart,

on your own intelligence do not rely;

In all your ways be mindful of him,

and he will make straight your paths.​
All good verses. And? Go back and read 2 Tim 2:15.
 
BIzarre? Its what the Jewish people understand what "binding/loosing" means. Who cares what you think it means.
He has a good point. What matters is what Jesus thinks and teaches--not what the Pharisees thought and taught. Most were enemies of Jesus Christ. And Jesus lambasted them for "teaching for doctrine the commandments if men."
 
Yes, incredibly bizarre.
Its what the Jewish people understand what "binding/loosing" means.
Strawman argument. No one is denying the meaning or usage of these terms at all. Please read what I'm actually posting. The issue isn't the meaning of these terms, but the fact that what is being loosened or bound originates with God, not humanity. The Pharisees didn't see it that way, nor does the Catholic church according to your understanding.
Who cares what you think it means.
No one that I can see which is why I posted the actual scripture along with the fact that "having been loosed" and "having been bound" do not follow from what will be loosed or bound. Plain simple grammar which doesn't seem to be relevant to your anachronistic Catholic doctrine. This is what allows cults like the RCC to come up with doctrines which are the antithesis of the inspired word of God.

Obviously, you only care what you think it means which isn't logically meaningful to begin with.

Matthew says they bind what is bound in heaven, and loosen what is loosened in heaven, but you think this means that Peter can bind or loosen whatever he pleases with Celestial approval.

Again, even Jesus didn't have this power which kinda throws a wrench into your theory pilgrim.
 

2 Timothy 4:3-4

For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers
and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.

Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the LORD with all your heart,

on your own intelligence do not rely;

In all your ways be mindful of him,

and he will make straight your paths.​
Well, this describes the RCC to a "t." It teaches myths about itself, about Mary, and a non-existent place called "purgatory." But some Catholics would rather have their ears tickled than hear the truth, from God's holy word.
 
Back
Top