World Leaders Must Be Infallible Also

Hibernian

Well-known member
How is: "A bachelor is an unmarried man" not infallible? It's a tautology!
The Pope is not infallible.

The bachelor is not married.

I know that when members of the Roman Catholic Church try to defend themselves, in reality they mock their own theology. They make a laugh out of what they cannot understand.

And the reason is because if you ask them how they know that the Roman Catholic church is the true Church, they will say it's because because because because because because because because because because because because because because because.
 
Last edited:

Hibernian

Well-known member
Let's get back to the real theme of the thread.

When we look at the countries in Europe and in the West in General we can see secular structures like democracy, elections, etc but when we look at the Vatican what we really see is something secular, (man made) but that's not what the Vatican is claiming. Let's ask which other political leader is claiming to be the Vicar of Christ. Which other political leader is claiming to make infallible statements? When we all know that politicians make mistakes, and lie all the time. Yet we can see that leaders in the world are not lying because they're not claiming to be the Vicar of Christ, and they're not claiming to receive infallible revelation from God. Which political leader must you address as his Holiness? Which political leader must you address as Holy Father?

So the question now is:

Who is the real liar?
 
Last edited:

Hibernian

Well-known member
The reason why Roman Catholics are incapable of defending their own theology is because for hundreds and hundreds of years they never needed to, because the Pope had a stake ready to burn them at, and the Pope had purgatory for hundreds and hundreds of years awaiting them, and the Pope had the inquisition and torture. And the Pope had a lot of papal Bull (no pun intended).That's why when we arrived at today Roman Catholics are clueless. .

They never really needed to know. All they really needed to do was to accept.
 
Last edited:

mica

Well-known member
The reason why Roman Catholics are incapable of defending their own theology is because for hundreds and hundreds of years they never needed to, because the Pope had a stake ready to burn them at, and the Pope had purgatory for hundreds and hundreds of years awaiting them, and the Pope had the inquisition and torture. And the Pope had a lot of papal Bull (no pun intended).That's why when we arrived at today Roman Catholics are clueless. .

They never really needed to know. All they really needed to do was to accept.
in school our catechism (Baltimore 3 or 4 / maybe both) said we didn't need to read the Bible, that they'd teach us what we needed to know. Really? yep, the RCC men didn't want us reading God's word on our own. It was easier back then to keep us under its thumb but with the internet and a number of good bible teachers on TV and youtube people can easily access it.

If God didn't want us to read His word He wouldn't have given us His written word.
 

jonathan_hili

Well-known member
This is a theological website and we're on the Roman Catholic forum
If by infallible, you mean a condition by which someone cannot be in error (which is what I take the word to mean), then people are infallible all the time when they state tautologies.
 

jonathan_hili

Well-known member
The Pope is not infallible.

The bachelor is not married.

I know that when members of the Roman Catholic Church try to defend themselves, in reality they mock their own theology. They make a laugh out of what they cannot understand.

And the reason is because if you ask them how they know that the Roman Catholic church is the true Church, they will say it's because because because because because because because because because because because because because because because.
That's funny that you ask for the reason why Catholics think the Catholic Church is the true Church and you're displeased because they say "because... because..." - that is, they give you reasons??? What do you expect them to say?
 

jonathan_hili

Well-known member
Let's get back to the real theme of the thread.

When we look at the countries in Europe and in the West in General we can see secular structures like democracy, elections, etc but when we look at the Vatican what we really see is something secular, (man made) but that's not what the Vatican is claiming. Let's ask which other political leader is claiming to be the Vicar of Christ. Which other political leader is claiming to make infallible statements? When we all know that politicians make mistakes, and lie all the time. Yet we can see that leaders in the world are not lying because they're not claiming to be the Vicar of Christ, and they're not claiming to receive infallible revelation from God. Which political leader must you address as his Holiness? Which political leader must you address as Holy Father?

So the question now is:

Who is the real liar?
This is too funny now, Hibernian. You do realise that the pope's status as the head of a state is purely accidental and didn't arise until the Middle Ages? It could also end one day in the future.

Again, I'm not sure how it follows that just because the pope is the head of Vatican state it follows that he is a liar?
 

Hibernian

Well-known member
in school our catechism (Baltimore 3 or 4 / maybe both) said we didn't need to read the Bible, that they'd teach us what we needed to know. Really? yep, the RCC men didn't want us reading God's word on our own. It was easier back then to keep us under its thumb but with the internet and a number of good bible teachers on TV and youtube people can easily access it.

If God didn't want us to read His word He wouldn't have given us His written word.
Roman Catholics have to decide to simply go independent of their church and to seek God on their own initiative. Fear of the pope and fear of their church is what prevents them from doing that. And of course the pope knows very well that the refutation of his heresies are found in the Bible, but that's also the reason why he claims to be the one who has the exclusive right to teach it. And by doing that he eliminates the power of real and true biblical understanding - the Holy Spirit. The one who he has replaced with his church.
 

Beloved Daughter

Well-known member
This is too funny now, Hibernian. You do realise that the pope's status as the head of a state is purely accidental and didn't arise until the Middle Ages? It could also end one day in the future.

Again, I'm not sure how it follows that just because the pope is the head of Vatican state it follows that he is a liar?

The actions of Pope JP2, Benedict XVI, and Francis proves these lies. I don't think I need to bring up any others, but of course, I can, as you know very well.
 

Hibernian

Well-known member
This is too funny now, Hibernian. You do realise that the pope's status as the head of a state is purely accidental and didn't arise until the Middle Ages? It could also end one day in the future.

Again, I'm not sure how it follows that just because the pope is the head of Vatican state it follows that he is a liar?
The governments of other secular States can be traced back to a certain time in history also but the differentce is of course that they are not the vicars of Christ , and they're not infallible and they're not making all kinds of strange and weird pseudo-theological statements.
 

jonathan_hili

Well-known member
The governments of other secular States can be traced back to a certain time in history also but the differentce is of course that they are not the vicars of Christ , and they're not infallible and they're not making all kinds of strange and weird pseudo-theological statements.
I don't really get what you mean. As I've said, the pope's head of Vatican state is an accident of history and not essential to his office. And what's a pseudo-theological statement?
 

RayneBeau

Well-known member
in school our catechism (Baltimore 3 or 4 / maybe both) said we didn't need to read the Bible, that they'd teach us what we needed to know. Really? yep, the RCC men didn't want us reading God's word on our own. It was easier back then to keep us under its thumb but with the internet and a number of good bible teachers on TV and youtube people can easily access it.

If God didn't want us to read His word He wouldn't have given us His written word.
It was the same in my elementary school also Mica. In fact we were emphatically taught that reading the Bible was a sin. So, like generations of American Roman Catholics we memorized it's doctrinal formulations, as well as all kinds of different definitions for words used in Roman Catholic indoctrination programs, along with daunting lists of Roman Catholic sacraments, mortal and venial sins, virtues, various graces and the many and varied Commandments of the Roman Catholic Church. Actually we may have been the last generation of little innocent children to have that Baltimore Catechism shoved down our throats every single day, because actually the Baltimore Catechism was 'dead-in-the-water' just before Vatican II, in which the very language of Roman Catholic "religious education" changed.
 
Top