Infallible?



Q. How can anyone actually believe that a mere man could be infallible?

A. Of course, an atheist would never accept this, but anyone who believes in a Creator God could easily accept that God can do anything He chooses to do. Wouldn’t you agree? So, anyone who believes in an all powerful God could accept that it would be theoretically possible for God to cause a man to be infallible.

But, that does not mean that He would choose to make a man infallible. So, then we could ask,

“Has He ever made any mere man infallible in the past?” And the answer to that question is

“Yes”.

But here we are only left with Jews and Christians, perhaps Muslims, but I don’t know for sure, who believe that God has made many different men infallible down through the ages. Anyone and everyone who believes Sacred Scripture is the infallible word of God can agree that God did inspire all of the authors to write these books and teach the truth infallibly.

Of course, this does not prove that the pope is infallible but we can also see that God has no problem with leading His people infallibly through a mere and sinful man.

Advertisements

15 Responses

  1. Dear bfhu and whoever may be concerned,

    God can inspire whoever he will. On the day of Pentecost, the Apostles stood up and preached the wonderful works of God in languages they did not know. This is evidence of word for word inspiration. The Scriptures tell us “20 knowing this first, that no prophecy OF SCRIPTURE is of any private interpretation,[b] 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God[c] spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1: 20-21; NKJV).”

    We know that God may inspire whomever He will. However, the same passage from Peter’s second epistle warns, “1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as THERE WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU, who will SECRETLY BRING IN DESTRUCTIVE HERESIES, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. 2 And MANY WILL FOLLOW THEIR DESTRUCTIVE WAYS, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. 3 By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does[d] not slumber (2 Peter 2: 1-3; NKJV).” The warning is that there will be those among the Church who claim to speak for God and to teach God’s truth, but who lie.

    Peter said that he was concerned for them and that he would ensure that they would be reminded of the true things even after his death. He wrote, “13 Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, 14 knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. 15 Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease 2 Peter 1: 13-15; NKJV).” He did this by writing his epistles. So did Paul and the other Bible writers. We know that this is what he had in mind because he has no power to inspire the Popes, only God can do that. Moreover, Peter did not prophesy that God would set up a leader or Pope that would keep them from going astray. Note also that Peter did not mention that they should listen to him because he is the Pope, or “His Holiness,” or “Holy Father,” but rather said, “…a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1: 1; NKJV).”

    However, as Paul prophesied in 1 Corinthians 13: 8-11, the gift of prophesy was temporary.

    “8 Love never fails (come to an end). But WHETHER THERE ARE PROPHESIES, THEY WILL FAIL (come to an end, rather than be proven false.); whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and WE PROPHESY IN PART. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then THAT WHICH IS IN PART WILL BE DONE AWAY.
    11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I PUT AWAY childish things.”

    In context, he is speaking of the miraculous gifts, which they had been bickering over. He says that love is better than those gifts. He says when that thing which is perfect has come (most probably the completed Scriptures), then those gifts will cease, but the law of love remains forever, for God is love.

    Daniel also prophesied of this in chapter 9 of his book:

    “20 Now while I was speaking, praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God, 21 yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering. 22 And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, “O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you skill to understand. 23 At the beginning of your supplications the command went out, and I have come to tell you, for you are greatly beloved; therefore consider the matter, and understand the vision:
    24 “ Seventy weeks[a] are determined
    For your people and for your holy city,
    To finish the transgression,
    To make an end of[b] sins,
    To make reconciliation for iniquity,
    To bring in everlasting righteousness,
    TO SEAL UP VISION AND PROPHESY,
    And to anoint the Most Holy.
    25 “ Know therefore and understand,
    That from the going forth of the command
    To restore and build Jerusalem
    Until Messiah the Prince,
    There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;
    The street[c] shall be built again, and the wall,[d]
    Even in troublesome times.
    26 “ And after the sixty-two weeks
    Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
    And the people of the prince who is to come
    Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
    The end of it shall be with a flood,
    And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
    27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
    But in the middle of the week
    He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
    And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
    Even until the consummation, which is determined,
    Is poured out on the desolate.”

    Please note that this prophesy took place within the same period that he gave for the crucifixion of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in the First Century.

    It is also true that the first “Ecumenical Council” was to testify to the Word of God to the exclusion of what was not His Word. They did not include any “Traditions” as being a part of the canon. The purpose was to protect the church from entertaining false teachings. It was attempting to establish that which was definitely from God to the exclusion of all other things.

    If they intended to say that there were other sources of God’s truth other than the Scriptures, they did not mention those, and thus they failed miserably. They did not make clear what was and what was not the Word of God. If they taught that there were other sources of God’s truth out there without establishing what those sources were, then they left each individual member of the Church to his or her own devices to discern what those sources are. They left the Church vulnerable to any false teaching that may have been out there.

    However, they did not intend to include any other source as being from God. They intended to set forth what they considered God’s Word to the exclusion of all other things. This means that the Ecumenical Councils rejected your so-called “Traditions”.

    Lastly, we have just as much reason to believe that Joseph Smith and Charles Russell spoke for God, as we have to believe that any of the “Popes” spoke for God. If they were quoting Scripture, we know they were speaking God’s Word; otherwise, we must compare what they say to the Scriptures, as the Bereans did and were commended by the Holy Spirit (Acts 17: 10-12).

    Much more could be said. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.

    Sincerely,

    Joe

    • Dear Joe,

      I agree with all the scripture but I reject your interpretations of some of them. For instance:

      God can inspire whoever he will. On the day of Pentecost, the Apostles stood up and preached the wonderful works of God in languages they did not know. This is evidence of word for word inspiration. The Scriptures tell us “20 knowing this first, that no prophecy OF SCRIPTURE is of any private interpretation,[b] 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God[c] spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1: 20-21; NKJV).”

      BFHU: Exactly!

      We know that God may inspire whomever He will. However, the same passage from Peter’s second epistle warns, “1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as THERE WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU, who will SECRETLY BRING IN DESTRUCTIVE HERESIES, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. 2 And MANY WILL FOLLOW THEIR DESTRUCTIVE WAYS, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. 3 By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does[d] not slumber (2 Peter 2: 1-3; NKJV).” The warning is that there will be those among the Church who claim to speak for God and to teach God’s truth, but who lie.

      BFHU: I agree and the understanding is clear.

      Peter said that he was concerned for them and that he would ensure that they would be reminded of the true things even after his death. He wrote, “13 Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, 14 knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. 15 Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease 2 Peter 1: 13-15; NKJV).”

      BFHU: We certainly agree with all of Scripture properly translated. But, I see you have chosen a translation more inclined to your interpretation.As you can see below.

      NASB:15And I will also be diligent that at any time after my departure you will be able to call these things to mind.

      NIV: 15And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.

      KJV: 15Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.
      Young’s Literal Trans: 15and I will be diligent that also at every time ye have, after my outgoing, power to make to yourselves the remembrance of these things.

      He did this by writing his epistles. So did Paul and the other Bible writers. We know that this is what he had in mind because he has no power to inspire the Popes, only God can do that.

      BFHU: That is not what scripture actually says. This is how you are interpreting it. It could also be interpreted that Peter would teach them so well they would be able to remember what he had taught them.

      Moreover, Peter did not prophesy that God would set up a leader or Pope that would keep them from going astray. Note also that Peter did not mention that they should listen to him because he is the Pope, or “His Holiness,” or “Holy Father,” but rather said, “…a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1: 1; NKJV).”

      BFHU: How do you Know? Just because it is not in the scripture does NOT MEAN Peter did not explain and ordain the man to take his place as the leader of the Church. Everything Peter said is not in scripture. I am sure you agree. And so since Scripture nowhere says that Scripture ALONE contains ALL Christian truth, I am free to reject your interpretation or the following argument from silence regarding the papacy.

      The argument from silence (also called argumentum ex silentio in Latin) is generally a conclusion based on silence or lack of contrary evidence.[1] In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the deduction from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it.[2] When used as a logical proof in pure reasoning, the argument is classed among the fallacies, but an argument from silence can be a convincing form of abductive reasoning.

      • Dear bfhu,

        Why then did they write the Scriptures at all? Why did the first Ecumenical Council effectively exclude any oral or written “Tradition” from being God’s Word?

        If the Papacy were a real and religiously important doctrine from God, and the Scriptures do not mention such doctrine, then the Scriptures cannot be capable of making me complete or thoroughly equipping me unto every good work (2 Timothy 3: 16-17). But since I know that the Scriptures are from God, and the Scriptures tell me that the Scriptures are able to make me perfect, thoroughly equipped unto every good work (2 Timothy 3: 16-17), I can conclude that there is no important doctrine that is not thoroughly taught within the pages of The Holy Bible. Therefore, there is no Pope established by God.

        In addition, according to my studies, history demonstrates that the bishops of the early Ecumenical Councils rejected the notion of a Pope. Later, fewer and fewer bishops had reign over larger and larger territories. Then the bishop of Constantinople was given equal authority over the churches of the East as the bishop of Rome had over the churches of the West, but neither of these bishops had authority over the other. Finally, the bishop of Rome was able to usurp absolute authority of the Roman Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire.

        Thank you for your thoughts and consideration.

        Sincerely,

        Joe

  2. Hello bfhu: Again I quote: “By their fruits ye shall know them”
    The Pope (to cut a long story short) needs God’s salvation as much as any other man on the street. His postion as a spiritual leader who puts forth infallible decrees is certainly not credible, given recent disclosures on the fact that he initiated legislation to protect paedophiles for decades.
    The authors of “Far From Rome Near to God” (The testimonies of 50 converted R.C. Priests) would agree also, that this Pope (any Pope) needs to be born again of the grace of God.
    Again we return to the sin question: All the great prophets in the Old Testament; all the apostles and followers of Jesus in the New Testament – not one is described as ‘a sinner’ – in their regenerate state. When David sinned – it was a ‘one off’ which he deeply regretted and which cost him dearly. He subsequently prayed: “Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.” (Psalm 51v11&12) That request was granted!
    The Lord is able to save – and He is able to restore –
    But men must first of all acknowledge that they are sinners before they are saved. If I am sinking or drowning, I cannot be rescued if I don’t acknowlege the danger I’m in – and accept help.
    “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Mark 8v36&37)

  3. Ready
    This whole comment is a pack of lies, distortions and inuendo and your own personal or denominational brand of interpretation, which I am sure you have been taught by others..As with Joe’s comment above I embrace all the Scripture quotations but reject your interpretation.

  4. Dear Joe,
    The first Church council took place in Acts 15. Prove to us that any Ecumenical council, (which one, what year, what document, quotation) excluded oral or written Tradition from being God’s word????

    The Scriptures were written and canonized by the Catholic Church. They are legitimately interpreted by the Catholic Church. If it were possible from a person to sit down and read a translation of the New Testament nearly 2000 years after it was written and interpret it correctly every time, then everyone who tries that would come up with the same interpretation. But the fact that there are thousands of denominations and all manner of various interpretations of the same passages of scripture proves that this does not work. God is not a God of confusion.

    The Bible is a collection of writings of various kinds for the edification of the faithful. IT IS NOT A BOOK OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. If it were then the things NOT said would be a whole lot more important.
    But it never was meant to contain every thing there is to know about the Christian Faith. If it was then why didn’t someone write it down in Scripture?

    • Dear Bfhu,

      “All Scripture is breathed by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God might be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto every good work (1 Timothy 3: 16-17).”

      The Scriptures give us all that we need to be pleasing to God.

      “6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder OF THOSE WHO DILIGENTLY SEEK HIM (Hebrews 11: 6, NKJV).”

      God does not write the Scriptures the way you would demand because He wants those who diligently seek him.

      Also, “9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason GOD WILL SEND THEM STRONG DELUSION, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thessalonians 2: 9-12; NKJV).”

      Because He wants those who diligently seek Him and Love His Truth, he sends a strong delusion into the world that they may believe the lie. He does not intend to make it impossible for you to believe the lie, He wants you to choose to love the Truth. This is one reason why He did not write the Bible the way you demand. Nevertheless, the Scriptures are definitely full of the things one needs to prove the doctrines of the faith and to protect us from believing the lie. It is definitely capable of making the man of God complete and of thoroughly equipping him unto every good work (2 Timothy 3: 16-17).

      Much more could be said. Thank you for your time.

      Sincerely,

      Joe

  5. Dear bfhu,

    First, you claim to be the True church of God. This is the entire dispute. Your claim that Acts 15 contains a record of the first Roman Catholic Church Council is just untrue. There was no Roman Catholic Church at that time. It is also untrue that the Roman Catholic Church wrote the Bible.

    The Apostles and their close companions wrote the New Testament (which is our authority in the New Covenant) and commanded that a man who desires the office of a bishop MUST BE, AND MUST CONTINUE TO BE, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE BEFORE BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE OFFICE (1 Timothy 3: 1-2). They also warned of those who would forbid men to marry and to abstain from eating certain foods (1 Timothy 4: 1-3). The Popes and the other Roman Catholic bishops do not qualify to be bishops according to God, and they do fit the description of those whom the Bible authors warned us.

    The men of Acts 15 that you mention came together of their own accord and looked to what God had already said and done to come to their conclusions. Note that they looked to the Scriptures and to what they had personally witnessed God accomplish. They did not merely trust what some man claimed was so. Note that the things Peter testified to were witnessed by six other Jewish Christians of good report. Those eyewitnesses were available for cross-examination when the issue first arose back in chapter 11 and likely at least some in chapter 15. The issue was probably well settled and established back in chapter 11.

    This is not what the later Ecumenical Councils that began in the fourth century did. They came together at the commandment of the Roman Emperor, and they judged using the available evidence and logical reasoning to discern what was God’s Word to the exclusion of other things. If they were not attempting to exclude anything from being God’s Word, what were they doing? If they merely said, “this is God’s Word ALSO,” then there was no statement about what was NOT God’s Word. If that is the case, then everyone else in the world would be legitimately allowed to teach and to include anything they wanted as being “from God,” as long as they included the books that the “Council” said was from God “ALSO”.

    However, that is exactly what they came together to stop from happening. There were many false teachers and false doctrine popping up, and the unlearned were not able to discern what was true from what was untrue. They intended to establish what was true to the exclusion of all other things so that the “church” would be able to know that ANYTHING ELSE that someone presented to them was NOT God’s Word.

    Notice this as well, if there were a Pope who could not err when teaching the entire church, why did all of those bishops come together and throw their two cents in? That would be vanity of vanities. If the Pope could simply say, “These books are the Word of God,” and that would be that, there would be no need for any council. However, they did not believe in a Pope, so they needed the testimony of as many “bishops” as possible.

    This is logical. Please accept this.

    Much more could be said. Non-biblical sources for my information will have to wait, as it is not in front of me, although I am quite sure that you know of what I speak.

    May the Lord bless your continued study.

    Sincerely,

    Joe

  6. Thank you for your opinion.

  7. Dear bfhu, It is regrettable that you describe my last comment as a “pack of lies, distortions & inuendo.” The truth is – I always pray about my responses. HonestIy, I have been taught NOTHING by others – this is also the truth. Here I am, sitting at a computer, alone in rural Ireland – Apart from my husband, I have fellowship with no one locally who believes as I do, because my neighbours (and I love them) are for the 99% part Roman Catholic. Most of the latter no longer attend mass because of the terrible things that have happened here – this is also the truth.
    The Lord reveals His truth to me through His Word every day and those times I spend in His Presence are precious to me. This morning He gave me these words:
    “But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.” (1John 2v27)

    • Dear Ready,
      I realize that many Catholics and Catholic Priests have committed abominations. But that does not mean that our Catholic Faith teaches people to sin in these ways, excuses it, encourages it, or winks at it. Some people sin. Other people look the other way. Our Faith does not in any way condone evil.

      I do not know where you got those ideas if you did not read them somewhere or were not taught them. If you got those ideas from nothing other than the Bible then I would like to know how that was possible. They sound like run of the mill anti-Catholic bilge.

      You may have a pure heart and believe these things are true and so are trying to reveal what you believe to be true to Catholics. But what you said is NOT True. It is slander.

      It is very easy to have “pure” church when there are only a couple of “members” or even a hundred. Then if some of the members don’t live up to your standards Protestants break off and start a new and purer church until Satan gets a little victory, then another break in order to purify the church. The Catholic Church sails or limps along through time with all aboard who stay, saints and sinners alike. The good the bad and the ugly. We don’t have the luxury of starting a new Church. Jesus wants us all to be one. We obey Him.

      What document did the Pope initiate to Protect Pedophiles? Please provide a link and quote. You must be reading something other that Scripture to come up with this. This is a lie. You have unwittingly been taught by others. This is just one example.

      The book you talk about, Far From Rome Near to God, once again you have been “taught” by weak men unable to keep their vows. It is far easier to be a Protestant than a Catholic and even more difficult to be a Catholic Priest. How do you know they are not just trying to justify themselves. What credibility would you give a book by fallen away Protestant who embraced atheism in a book called Far from Christianity Near to Truth?

      I acknowledge that you are honestly trying to rescue Catholics by posting comments on this site. But you have your own site, you have enough comments here. Please refrain from using this site to do Protestant apologetics. if you actually have a question I would be happy to answer it. But don’t pretend to have a question as an excuse to proselytize.

  8. Dear bfhu,

    I would like to reply to a comment you posted. I tried to go to the site of the post but was unable to. You said:

    “Q. If popes and bishops are necessary then why were there none in the early church?

    A. In the early Church there were all three ordained offices of the Catholic Church that we have today (Deacons, Priests, Bishops). They were called by different names but the offices were in existence and are designated in Acts 6:5 and Acts 15 at the first Church Council and elsewhere in the New Testament.

    Q. Then why have I never seen that in Acts 15 before? I have read it many times.

    A. You surely saw it but just missed the significance of the information you were reading.

    First, we have Peter at the council who stood up and settled the dispute, made the POPE or Vicar of Christ in Matthew 16:17-19.

    Then, also present at the first Church Council were the apostles who became the first BISHOPS ( Gr. Episkopos) in the Church. There are many other New Testament passages that mention the office of bishop or overseer.

    Next we see PRIESTS, called elders in the New Testament because this is the strict English translation of the Greek presbuteros. However, our English word Priest is etymologically derived from the Greek word presbuteros.

    And finally we have DEACONS. Stephen and others in Acts 6 and qualifications of deacons in I Timothy 3:8-12. There are many other NT passages also that talk about deacons.”

    There are many things that can and should be said concerning this post, however, because of time constraint, I will have to be brief.

    First, I would like to remind you of my comments concerning the fact that Peter was not made the Pope or the Vicar of Christ in Matthew 16: 17-18. The One Church (Matthew 16: 18) is founded on One foundation (1 Corinthians 3: 10-11), the One Rock (Isaiah 44:8) who is Christ (1 Corinthians 3: 10-11). Peter is said to be a rock, but not of the quality that is used as a foundation stone, as Christ most certainly is, since just five verses later (Matthew 16: 23) Jesus calls Peter Satan.

    Concerning Peter settling the matter discussed in Acts 15, the passage is not about Peter or his authority. It is about God’s authority. Please look more carefully and notice that Peter is taking note of what God did and that was what settled the matter. Peter did not settle the matter, God did. Peter did not get a special revelation at that point; rather, he remembered what God had done in his presence and noted the significance.

    Concerning the Apostles being the first bishops, this is an assumption on your part. Not all of the Apostles were bishops as not all of them were married. 1 Timothy 3: 1-2 tells us plainly that a man must already be married to one wife and continue to be married to her in order to be considered for the office of bishopric. Paul was not a bishop because he was not married, while Peter states that he is a “fellow elder” in 1 Peter 5:1, and John refers to himself as the Elder in 2 John 1:1 and 3 John 1:1.

    Was Peter a priest? Yes, just as all Christians are a Kingdom of priests (Revelation 1: 4-6, and 1 Peter 2: 4-5), but not because he says that he is an elder. The Bible uses the term elder in many different ways. When speaking of the New Testament office of an elder, it is referring to a bishop. Yes, the New Testament uses these terms interchangeably along with the term overseer, pastor or shepherd. They are all terms for the same office. Apostles, deacons and evangelists are three other offices that are important to note. It will take me some time to put together an adequate lesson to teach this.

    Lord willing, we will finish this discussion later.

    Sincerely,

    Joe

  9. Dear Bfhu,
    First of all, I have no wish to hurt anyone – least of all you, as I believe that you are a sincere person.
    The truth is – people I know very well have been hurt by abuse. While I also believe that most clergy would not be guilty in this regard, I also believe that the Roman Catholic system has protected people who were responsible for it – this has been proven here in Ireland, because of resignations and admissions.
    Not true – but slander? I have been on the receiving end of people’s misery, concerning their own personal experiences of abuse by “brothers” in a Roman Catholic establishment.
    This abuse has been massively widespread in ireland.
    This is not sensationalism – this is the truth. There are many people whose stories have never been told – one broken lady has told her story to me. Her life was destroyed by the cruelty of nuns and when she went to a Priest for help – abuse here too. But I believe that the Lord (and only He) can heal her.
    Another man I know (now in his 60’s) wakens with
    nighmares re. abuse he had as an orphan boy. His wife persuaded him to write about it, which is good therapy.
    As you have requested – I will say no more on this matter here – God knows and sees the hearts of men and women. The only reason I brought it up was to reveal the truth that: “by their fruits ye shall know them…” I believe that it would also be a sin for me not to have mentioned this issue at all, given that it is causing a spiritual earthquake here in my own country.

    • Dear Ready,
      We had our earthquake of abuse scandal ongoing for nearly 10 years now. Neither I nor the Catholic Church deny the horror of this evil perpetrated on those who were most vulnerable both here in the US and elsewhere around the world. May Our Lord save their souls.

      Our Enemy has unfortunately been victorious in many lives. This is the Smoke of Satan. Every priest and even Protestant pastors have targets on their souls for Satan to attack because he can wound hundreds and thousands by the fall of one Christian leader.

  10. Dear Bfhu and whoever may be concerned,

    I wanted to repost the below and ask you to consider the fact that the early Ecumenical Council’s called together by the Emperor of Rome were intended to establish what was God’s inspired revelation of Truth to the exclusion of all other things. Notice that they did not say, “Let’s ask the Pope!” and they did not say, “Let’s consult the ‘Traditions’!” This is because those things did not exist, they were later fabrications. They did not look to such things as their authority. They looked to the Scriptures. They gave their testimony as to what are the Scriptures inspired by God and they considered these God’s Word and the standard of religious Truth to the exclusion of all other things.

    1. Joseph Duran, on June 23, 2010 at 8:33 pm Said:
    Dear bfhu,
    First, you claim to be the True church of God. This is the entire dispute. Your claim that Acts 15 contains a record of the first Roman Catholic Church Council is just untrue. There was no Roman Catholic Church at that time. It is also untrue that the Roman Catholic Church wrote the Bible.
    The Apostles and their close companions wrote the New Testament (which is our authority in the New Covenant) and commanded that a man who desires the office of a bishop MUST BE, AND MUST CONTINUE TO BE, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE BEFORE BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE OFFICE (1 Timothy 3: 1-2). They also warned of those who would forbid men to marry and to abstain from eating certain foods (1 Timothy 4: 1-3). The Popes and the other Roman Catholic bishops do not qualify to be bishops according to God, and they do fit the description of those whom the Bible authors warned us.
    The men of Acts 15 that you mention came together of their own accord and looked to what God had already said and done to come to their conclusions. Note that they looked to the Scriptures and to what they had personally witnessed God accomplish. They did not merely trust what some man claimed was so. Note that the things Peter testified to were witnessed by six other Jewish Christians of good report. Those eyewitnesses were available for cross-examination when the issue first arose back in chapter 11 and likely at least some in chapter 15. The issue was probably well settled and established back in chapter 11.
    This is not what the later Ecumenical Councils that began in the fourth century did. They came together at the commandment of the Roman Emperor, and they judged using the available evidence and logical reasoning to discern what was God’s Word to the exclusion of other things. If they were not attempting to exclude anything from being God’s Word, what were they doing? If they merely said, “this is God’s Word ALSO,” then there was no statement about what was NOT God’s Word. If that is the case, then everyone else in the world would be legitimately allowed to teach and to include anything they wanted as being “from God,” as long as they included the books that the “Council” said was from God “ALSO”.
    However, that is exactly what they came together to stop from happening. There were many false teachers and false doctrine popping up, and the unlearned were not able to discern what was true from what was untrue. They intended to establish what was true to the exclusion of all other things so that the “church” would be able to know that ANYTHING ELSE that someone presented to them was NOT God’s Word.
    Notice this as well, if there were a Pope who could not err when teaching the entire church, why did all of those bishops come together and throw their two cents in? That would be vanity of vanities. If the Pope could simply say, “These books are the Word of God,” and that would be that, there would be no need for any council. However, they did not believe in a Pope, so they needed the testimony of as many “bishops” as possible.
    This is logical. Please accept this.
    Much more could be said. Non-biblical sources for my information will have to wait, as it is not in front of me, although I am quite sure that you know of what I speak.
    May the Lord bless your continued study.
    Sincerely,
    Joe

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: