# I don't care who the new Pope is



## Mako22

The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural


----------



## barryl

Woodsman69 said:


> The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural


x 2 !!!


----------



## bigdawg25

k, but the point is that 1.2 billion catholics are waiting for a new pope; and that in itself makes it a single largest religious body under one leader.


----------



## hummdaddy

bigdawg25 said:


> k, but the point is that 1.2 billion catholics are waiting for a new pope; and that in itself makes it a single largest religious body under one leader.



oh don't bust his bubble


----------



## hummdaddy

bigdawg25 said:


> k, but the point is that 1.2 billion catholics are waiting for a new pope; and that in itself makes it a single largest religious body under one leader.



oh don't bust his bubble

my wife cares and is waiting anxiously


----------



## bigdawg25

hummdaddy said:


> oh don't bust his bubble
> 
> my wife cares and is waiting anxiously



 I am pretty non religious usually, but this time around I am waiting too because I feel that this new papacy will shake up the church amidst all the scandals.


----------



## ThePaleRyder

Woodsman69 said:


> The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural



Don't you really mean, "You couldn't care less"?  Or did you already "care more"?  

And really - who gives a flying flip about that nonsense.  The Pope is just a dude that gets paid a good sum of money, and actually never has to do any work at all........because he is merely a figurehead who plays the game really well and has the best image.  Does "corporate suit" or "politician" come to mind?  Seriously, that is all he is (or they are).


----------



## bigdawg25

ThePaleRyder said:


> Don't you really mean, "You couldn't care less"?  Or did you already "care more"?
> 
> And really - who gives a flying flip about that nonsense.  T*he Pope is just a dude that gets paid a good sum of money, and actually never has to do any work at all*........because he is merely a figurehead who plays the game really well and has the best image.  Does "corporate suit" or "politician" come to mind?  Seriously, that is all he is (or they are).



what you just described is the job profile of every Pastor, Minister or bishop of all the church denominations.....just to keep things equal, lets throw all of them out then.


----------



## ThePaleRyder

bigdawg25 said:


> what you just described is the job profile of every Pastor, Minister or bishop of all the church denominations.....just to keep things equal, lets throw all of them out then.



Uh...yeah.  LOL
Figureheads are just "blowhards" that make a living off of their ego, are they not?
Folks literally pay them money to get smoke blown up their posterior sphincter...plain and simple.  Who is the ho', and who is the john?


----------



## Artfuldodger

I care, I might want to convert. At least Catholics understand it takes more to being a Christian than believing in OSAS.


----------



## panfried0419

Artfuldodger said:


> I care, I might want to convert. At least Catholics understand it takes more to being a Christian than believing in OSAS.


Amen!!!!


----------



## centerpin fan

The Stupid is strong in this thread.


----------



## panfried0419

centerpin fan said:


> The Stupid is strong in this thread.



Then get out of it


----------



## centerpin fan

panfried0419 said:


> Then get out of it



No.


----------



## panfried0419

Woodsman69 said:


> The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural



So what do you call your pastor, preacher, or reverend???


----------



## Ronnie T

This particular forum..............

> Spiritual Help and Religion Discussions > Christianity & Judaism 

........... is a pretty clean cut spiritual forum.  Not the place for unholy chatter.  Discussing, disagreeing and debating Christianity and Judaism are fine, but so far this thread is doing neither.


----------



## Artfuldodger

If the Pope is voted on and so hard to pick, can we really say the choice is inspired by God?


----------



## centerpin fan

Artfuldodger said:


> If the Pope is voted on and so hard to pick, can we really say the choice is inspired by God?



There is precedent for it:

_And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.” 26 And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles._ -- Acts 1


----------



## formula1

*Re:*

Agreed.  Have you ever wondered why we never heard of Matthias again, at least in scripture?


----------



## Artfuldodger

centerpin fan said:


> There is precedent for it:
> 
> _And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.” 26 And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles._ -- Acts 1



Then why does it take so long and more than one person? Why do they vote if all are inspired? Shouldn't they all be inspired equally? Will they ever fall to political correctness?


----------



## Ronnie T

Artfuldodger said:


> Then why does it take so long and more than one person? Why do they vote if all are inspired? Shouldn't they all be inspired equally? Will they ever fall to political correctness?



Good point.  Do a blind vote, as they did for Justus, and Matthias.  Leave it totally to chance (rather, totally to God for the choice).

Don't know if any of us have that sort of faith these days.


----------



## dawg2

Artfuldodger said:


> If the Pope is voted on and so hard to pick, can we really say the choice is inspired by God?


It is no different than saying the Bible (insert any version) is the inspired word of God.

It is no different than saying a preacher/elder/deacon/priest (insert denomination) is inspired by God.

It is no different than saying a true Christian is inspired by God.

Et cetera...


----------



## dawg2

Woodsman69 said:


> The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural



You must care.  You started a thread.


----------



## bullethead

Artfuldodger said:


> Then why does it take so long and more than one person? Why do they vote if all are inspired? Shouldn't they all be inspired equally? Will they ever fall to political correctness?



If inspired by all the same God the "vote" would always be unanimous.


----------



## rjcruiser

Ronnie T said:


> Good point.  Do a blind vote, as they did for Justus, and Matthias.  Leave it totally to chance (rather, totally to God for the choice).
> 
> Don't know if any of us have that sort of faith these days.



There's a reason that the last time lots were cast was in Acts 1 and it has nothing to do with faith.



dawg2 said:


> You must care.  You started a thread.


----------



## stringmusic

centerpin fan said:


> The Stupid is strong in this thread.



Yep


----------



## bigdawg25

Artfuldodger said:


> I care, I might want to convert. At least Catholics understand it takes more to being a Christian than believing in OSAS.



Amen to that; I care too because I will go back someday too, I just don't know when.


----------



## rjcruiser

Well...maybe the white smoke now coming out of the chimney will not only signal the fact of a new pope....but that this thread is done for as well.


----------



## bigdawg25

ThePaleRyder said:


> Uh...yeah.  LOL
> Figureheads are just "blowhards" that make a living off of their ego, are they not?
> Folks literally pay them money to get smoke blown up their posterior sphincter...plain and simple.  Who is the ho', and who is the john?



I know what you are alluding to, and let me just say that millions of "normal" church going Catholics are deeply disturbed by all those scandals not only because its their priests who did it, but they all indirectly funded their legal defense in last two decades against legitimate complaints. I hope that in future enough amends are made so disillusioned folks like me become at peace with catholic church.


----------



## Mako22

dawg2 said:


> You must care.  You started a thread.



No I don't and no they didn't or was I supposed to yes they did ( I can't remember what we arguing about anymore).


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> Well...maybe the white smoke now coming out of the chimney will not only signal the fact of a new pope....but that this thread is done for as well.



not so soon  once we know who is elected then we can go back to fighting over who else could have been a better choice.


----------



## dawg2

Woodsman69 said:


> No I don't and no they didn't or was I supposed to yes they did ( I can't remember what we arguing about anymore).



Yes they did


----------



## Artfuldodger

rjcruiser said:


> There's a reason that the last time lots were cast was in Acts 1 and it has nothing to do with faith.



Is casting lots voting or more like a dice? Would the reason of not doing it anymore, the because of the dwelling of the Holy Spirit?


----------



## centerpin fan

Woodsman69 said:


> No I don't and no they didn't or was I supposed to yes they did ( I can't remember what we arguing about anymore).



Post of the Year


----------



## Artfuldodger

dawg2 said:


> It is no different than saying the Bible (insert any version) is the inspired word of God.
> 
> It is no different than saying a preacher/elder/deacon/priest (insert denomination) is inspired by God.
> 
> It is no different than saying a true Christian is inspired by God.
> 
> Et cetera...



The only thing that threw me off was the voting. Now maybe they do use dice to cast their lot, then it would be divine intervention. A person becomes a Christrian without a committee.


----------



## dawg2

Artfuldodger said:


> The only thing that threw me off was the voting. Now maybe they do use dice to cast their lot, then it would be divine intervention. A person becomes a Christrian without a committee.



Why would that throw you off?  The Bible was a vote on inspired books.  Many preachers are "voted" in for a church.  A vote is a safe way of keeping personal prejudices from infiltrating a decision.  Once that prejudice dictates a direction, more often than not the direction is more man (singular) inspired than God inspired.


----------



## Ronnie T

rjcruiser said:


> There's a reason that the last time lots were cast was in Acts 1 and it has nothing to do with faith.



    After thinking about it a moment, I agree.


----------



## Artfuldodger

dawg2 said:


> Why would that throw you off?  The Bible was a vote on inspired books.  Many preachers are "voted" in for a church.  A vote is a safe way of keeping personal prejudices from infiltrating a decision.  Once that prejudice dictates a direction, more often than not the direction is more man (singular) inspired than God inspired.



Cleromancy is a form of divination using sortition, casting of lots, or casting bones or stones, in which an outcome is determined by means that normally would be considered random, such as the rolling of dice, but are sometimes believed to reveal the will of God, or other supernatural entities.

I would only consider voting the same as casting lots if one was to say every vote was 100% inspired by God. I would also consider it a strange way for God to intervene.


----------



## bigdawg25

we have the first pope outside Europe in the modern world. I hope this is the change we all crave so much.

I know some folks are prejudiced against catholic church, some due to past historic divides, many due to all the current scandals. I just want to remind them the good stuff the church does for millions of folks everyday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QYeST_9FUg


----------



## bullethead

Hopefully he picks the name Peter.


----------



## centerpin fan

*CARDINAL JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO*: Bergoglio, 76, has spent nearly his entire career at home in Argentina, overseeing churches and shoe-leather priests. The archbishop of Buenos Aires reportedly got the second-most votes after Joseph Ratzinger in the 2005 papal election, and he has long specialized in the kind of pastoral work that some say is an essential skill for the next pope. In a lifetime of teaching and leading priests in Latin America, which has the largest share of the world's Catholics, Bergoglio has shown a keen political sensibility as well as the kind of self-effacing humility that fellow cardinals value highly. Bergoglio is known for modernizing an Argentine church that had been among the most conservative in Latin America.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-10-08-16-36

I expected a younger guy.


----------



## rjcruiser

Ronnie T said:


> After thinking about it a moment, I agree.







Artfuldodger said:


> Is casting lots voting or more like a dice? Would the reason of not doing it anymore, the because of the dwelling of the Holy Spirit?



Casting lots is more like dice...or a game of "chance."

and

Yes.

So, off topic, but it brings about a deeper question...did the OT Saints have the Holy Spirit living inside of them?  If not, when did they receive the Holy Spirit? or are they in Heaven still without the Holy Spirit?


----------



## rjcruiser

centerpin fan said:


> Bergoglio is known for modernizing an Argentine church that had been among the most conservative in Latin America.



What does that mean?  He has a looser interpretation of certain Biblical teachings such as birth control and/or homosexuality?


----------



## bigdawg25

centerpin fan said:


> I expected a younger guy.



Me too but maybe they just want someone to clean up this mess rather then a long papacy; or maybe they couldnt come around someone else, and they went with him as a compromise; we wont know until one of those Italian cardinals go to Italian tabloids and mouth everything off .

BTW, his name choice is very interesting too.


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> What does that mean?  He has a looser interpretation of certain Biblical teachings such as birth control and/or homosexuality?



Oh no in catholic context modernity doesn't mean those things....I think he didnt like the prosperity of bishops in these poor areas as being out of touch, and he will bring more austerity to the church, just like the way he had given up his huge home as a cardinal to live in a simpler way.


----------



## centerpin fan

rjcruiser said:


> What does that mean?  He has a looser interpretation of certain Biblical teachings such as birth control and/or homosexuality?



I'm not sure, but that's kind of how I interpreted that.  If the media is ecstatic about the new pope, that will confirm it.


----------



## centerpin fan

bigdawg25 said:


> Me too but maybe they just want someone to clean up this mess rather then a long papacy; or maybe they couldnt come around someone else, and they went with him as a compromise; we wont know until one of those Italian cardinals go to Italian tabloids and mouth everything off .



I expected Scherer, the Brazilian guy.  Maybe he's in the "on deck" circle.


----------



## bigdawg25

centerpin fan said:


> I'm not sure, but that's kind of how I interpreted that.  If the media is ecstatic about the new pope, that will confirm it.



he is a conservative Jesuit...I am pretty sure he is not the reformer the kind you are thinking. In my case, I am glad he is not that kind of reformer because then I would have lost complete faith on holy spirit, god and church.


----------



## rjcruiser

Reason I ask is because of some of the names that were being thrown around are much more "modern."  Also, was listening to Rush on the way to pick up the kids from school today and he had an interesting caller on that said if it was a more liberal pope, that the Church would no longer exist as it is today because of the controversy.

Not sure I'd go that far...and I'm not part of the Catholic Church...but I've seen how liberalism has affected so many other denominations and it starts off great, but never seems to end well.


----------



## bigdawg25

centerpin fan said:


> I expected Scherer, the Brazilian guy.  Maybe he's in the "on deck" circle.



well I was rooting for the Canadian cardinal Marc Ouellet because I had read his writings before and I thought he was a good theologian; but he was always the dark horse and only had an outside chance in this.


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> Reason I ask is because of some of the names that were being thrown around are much more "modern."  Also, was listening to Rush on the way to pick up the kids from school today and he had an interesting caller on that said if it was a more liberal pope, that the Church would no longer exist as it is today because of the controversy.
> 
> Not sure I'd go that far...and I'm not part of the Catholic Church...but I've seen how liberalism has affected so many other denominations and it starts off great, but never seems to end well.



yeah, I want the church to "change" in that remove many of the trappings and become more down to earth; get more cardinals in Americas and africa rather then 30 some from italy, largely stuff along those lines. 

I dont like media pushing the idea that "modernizing" means having female bishops, gay marriages and gay priests .


----------



## dawg2

centerpin fan said:


> *CARDINAL JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO*: Bergoglio, 76, has spent nearly his entire career at home in Argentina, overseeing churches and shoe-leather priests. The archbishop of Buenos Aires reportedly got the second-most votes after Joseph Ratzinger in the 2005 papal election, and he has long specialized in the kind of pastoral work that some say is an essential skill for the next pope. In a lifetime of teaching and leading priests in Latin America, which has the largest share of the world's Catholics, Bergoglio has shown a keen political sensibility as well as the kind of self-effacing humility that fellow cardinals value highly. Bergoglio is known for modernizing an Argentine church that had been among the most conservative in Latin America.
> 
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-10-08-16-36
> 
> I expected a younger guy.


You left out: Jesuit


----------



## dawg2

Artfuldodger said:


> Cleromancy is a form of divination using sortition, casting of lots, or casting bones or stones, in which an outcome is determined by means that normally would be considered random, such as the rolling of dice, but are sometimes believed to reveal the will of God, or other supernatural entities.
> 
> I would only consider voting the same as casting lots if one was to say every vote was 100% inspired by God. I would also consider it a strange way for God to intervene.



I said "vote" not throw chicken bones on the floor and see which way they point.  It is a little more complicated than "spin the bottle."


----------



## stringmusic

bigdawg25 said:


> he is a conservative Jesuit...I am pretty sure he is not the reformer the kind you are thinking. In my case, I am glad he is not that kind of reformer because then I would have lost complete faith on holy spirit, god and church.



Does your faith in God hindge on how the Pope conducts a church?


----------



## StriperAddict

stringmusic said:


> Does your faith in God hindge on how the Pope conducts a church?


 
Excellent question for all our RC brethren


----------



## bigdawg25

stringmusic said:


> Does your faith in God hindge on how the Pope conducts a church?



Its a complicated question, but let me try and explain.

I dont have faith in men, but rather a part of me has faith in the guidance of holy spirit which guides men to make right decisions. Now, by that logic in this context, I believe that cardinals are guided to make a right choice concerning selecting a pope. If the holy spirit guides them to select someone who doesnt believe in sanctity of life, heterosexual marriage and a bunch of things which are clearly contrary to what the scripture says; then that can mean only two things:

1) scripture is wrong, 

or 2) guidance via holy spirit doesnt exist, and by that extension, the christian god as we know it doesnt exist either.


----------



## StriperAddict

bigdawg25 said:


> Its a complicated question, but let me try and explain.
> 
> I dont have faith in men, but rather a part of me has faith in the guidance of holy spirit which guides men to make right decisions. Now, by that logic in this context, I believe that cardinals are guided to make a right choice concerning selecting a pope. If the holy spirit guides them to select someone who doesnt believe in sanctity of life, heterosexual marriage and a bunch of things which are clearly contrary to what the scripture says; then that can mean only two things:
> 
> 1) scripture is wrong,
> 
> or 2) guidance via holy spirit doesnt exist, and by that extension, the christian god as we know it doesnt exist either.


 
Your conclusions are way off base.  
Men, pastors, evangelicals, deacons, elders are falliable. If it was not so, we wouldn't need a Savior.

But if you really will draw that conclusion, your words are prophetic... the bible speaks of a great "falling away", of those who let such events crush what "beliefs" they hold.  
And for the record, a faulty pope should have little to do with your understanding of "by grace through faith" are you saved (Eph 3), since the pope is not the source of salvation.

Jesus is Lord, and Head of the Church.


----------



## rjcruiser

bigdawg25 said:


> Its a complicated question, but let me try and explain.
> 
> I dont have faith in men, but rather a part of me has faith in the guidance of holy spirit which guides men to make right decisions. Now, by that logic in this context, I believe that cardinals are guided to make a right choice concerning selecting a pope. If the holy spirit guides them to select someone who doesnt believe in sanctity of life, heterosexual marriage and a bunch of things which are clearly contrary to what the scripture says; then that can mean only two things:
> 
> 1) scripture is wrong,
> 
> or 2) guidance via holy spirit doesnt exist, and by that extension, the christian god as we know it doesnt exist either.



I'll venture a third.

3) the men making the decision are not guided by the Holy Spirit


It has happened before in many non-Catholic denominations and has caused me to lose faith in the leadership of those denominations.  One of the many reasons I'm not necesarily found of them...but I do see a purpose that the can serve.


----------



## dawg2

bullethead said:


> Hopefully he picks the name Peter.



Why?


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> I'll venture a third.
> 
> 3) the men making the decision are not guided by the Holy Spirit
> 
> 
> It has happened before in many non-Catholic denominations and has caused me to lose faith in the leadership of those denominations.  One of the many reasons I'm not necesarily found of them...but I do see a purpose that the can serve.



I can certainly see some denominations and think that they werent guided by holy spirit at all. But if we think that way, then who is to say when holy spirit works and when it doesn't give any inspiration.


----------



## bigdawg25

StriperAddict said:


> Your conclusions are way off base.
> Men, pastors, evangelicals, deacons, elders are falliable. If it was not so, we wouldn't need a Savior.
> 
> But if you really will draw that conclusion, your words are prophetic... the bible speaks of a great "falling away", of those who let such events crush what "beliefs" they hold.
> And for the record, a faulty pope should have little to do with your understanding of "by grace through faith" are you saved (Eph 3), since the pope is not the source of salvation.
> 
> Jesus is Lord, and Head of the Church.



Individual men can make mistakes, but I think as an organization, holy spirit continuously guides them in right direction. 

Actually this debate is largely theoretical at this point; because no matter what media believes in, I am certain that issues like pro-choice or gay marriage are not going accepted by the catholic church atleast in next 50 yrs i.e. my lifetime.


----------



## bullethead

dawg2 said:


> Why?



Ya gotta do your Papal prophesy homework Dawg!!!!!


----------



## bigdawg25

bullethead said:


> Ya gotta do your Papal prophesy homework Dawg!!!!!



A helping hand:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes


----------



## dawg2

bullethead said:


> Ya gotta do your Papal prophesy homework Dawg!!!!!



I am familiar with what you are referencing.  No more accurate than Nostradamus.


----------



## rjcruiser

bigdawg25 said:


> I can certainly see some denominations and think that they werent guided by holy spirit at all. But if we think that way, then who is to say when holy spirit works and when it doesn't give any inspiration.



When the decision made is obviously contradictory to scripture.

In this case, I'd say you're okay.  Had they picked Dolan....


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> *When the decision made is obviously contradictory to scripture.
> *
> In this case, I'd say you're okay.  Had they picked Dolan....



yeah that's what I am using as my reference point too. Hopefully such a day for catholic church may never come, however whenever I see those liberal denominations like episcopals, I wonder how much and how quickly they changed from their old positions 30 yrs ago to what they believe now.


----------



## Artfuldodger

stringmusic said:


> Does your faith in God hindge on how the Pope conducts a church?



Excellent question for everyone of us. Just remove Pope and insert, Preacher. Our faith in God is our salvation but we must at some point trust man. Who taught you about Jesus? Who taught you right from wrong? Who taught your Sunday School Class? Did you ever go to VBS? Does your church belong to a giant organization? Were the apostles men? The Bible was written by inspired men. We don't know who is divinely inspired in every situation but we should believe the Holy spirit has some input.
Man is fallible but it's no reason to abandon every leader & teacher.
I view the Holy Spirit as a guide and Comforter instead of a dictator. He doesn't make the Cardinals or me vote a certain way. He gives us free will. We can use his guidance or not and that is why Christians are still fallible.


----------



## sea trout

i'm a catholic reading this thread and it seems like half or more than half of y'all writing in this thread don't like the catholic ways and/or traditions.

why? whats the deal?


----------



## dawg2

sea trout said:


> i'm a catholic reading this thread and it seems like half or more than half of y'all writing in this thread don't like the catholic ways and/or traditions.
> 
> why? whats the deal?



That is a whole different thread and we really don't need it.


----------



## bigdawg25

sea trout said:


> i'm a catholic reading this thread and it seems like half or more than half of y'all writing in this thread don't like the catholic ways and/or traditions.
> 
> why? whats the deal?



Its just ignorance Sea trout.....people dont like what they think is the catholic church; once they know the real one, they will see that underneath all the superficial differences, catholic church is still quite mainstream institution.


----------



## sea trout

dawg2 said:


> That is a whole different thread and we really don't need it.



no this is not a different thread!!!!
i'm explaining the vibe i get from THIS ONE!
thanks and have a good'un!!!!!


----------



## bigdawg25

Artfuldodger said:


> Excellent question for everyone of us. Just remove Pope and insert, Preacher. Our faith in God is our salvation but we must at some point trust man. Who taught you about Jesus? Who taught you right from wrong? Who taught your Sunday School Class? Did you ever go to VBS? Does your church belong to a giant organization? Were the apostles men? The Bible was written by inspired men. We don't know who is divinely inspired in every situation but we should believe the Holy spirit has some input.
> Man is fallible but it's no reason to abandon every leader & teacher.
> I view the Holy Spirit as a guide and Comforter instead of a dictator. He doesn't make the Cardinals or me vote a certain way. He gives us free will. We can use his guidance or not and that is why Christians are still fallible.



exactly. On a related note, I sometimes I still ponder on a question you asked in some other thread where in context for having 30,000 different denominations; you asked why do holy spirit guide all of us so differently?
if ever you find a satisfactory answer to that then you should post it up for all of us.


----------



## Artfuldodger

bigdawg25 said:


> exactly. On a related note, I sometimes I still ponder on a question you asked in some other thread where in context for having 30,000 different denominations; you asked why do holy spirit guide all of us so differently?
> if ever you find a satisfactory answer to that then you should post it up for all of us.



I can tell we use the same logic, are you left handed?
I totally got your answer to: Does your faith in God hinge on how the Pope conducts a church?

One question to you and others is related to you saying some denominations have changed in 30 years. I would say all denominations have changed in 30 years.
My question is, if God never changes(except his mind), why do churches?
The denomination I remember the most as changing is the Holiness Church. The Holiness Church of today is nothing like the Holiness Church of my youth. Do Churches have to change to appease the audiences of today? Is it really bad if they do? It's a new day, why not a new way?


----------



## gordon 2

Ronnie T said:


> Good point.  Do a blind vote, as they did for Justus, and Matthias.  Leave it totally to chance (rather, totally to God for the choice).
> 
> Don't know if any of us have that sort of faith these days.



Perhaps it was not to chance at all. Perhaps Justus and Matthias were twins in the church? Perhaps...

And we know that even bishops are not immaculate vessels, but the Spirit poured from one to the other and the other to one, the  church receives a finer, simpler and lively direction.


----------



## Artfuldodger

sea trout said:


> no this is not a different thread!!!!
> i'm explaining the vibe i get from THIS ONE!
> thanks and have a good'un!!!!!



Amen, let's hash it out right here. I can feel it myself on this thread. In fact the OP reeked of it. If we can't work out our differences, someone else will, divide and conquer, The Devil.
I do not agree with all of the Catholic dogma. I do not need a human mediator. Mary is the mother of Jesus, not God. I don't believe Jesus is God. I'm not sure Mary was a virgin. Mary didn't ascend into Heaven.
Other than those few small differences, I could easily be a Catholic.


----------



## dawg2

Artfuldodger said:


> Amen, let's hash it out right here. I can feel it myself on this thread. In fact the OP reeked of it. If we can't work out our differences, someone else will, divide and conquer, The Devil.
> I do not agree with all of the Catholic dogma. I do not need a human mediator. Mary is the mother of Jesus, not God. I don't believe Jesus is God. I'm not sure Mary was a virgin. Mary didn't ascend into Heaven.
> Other than those few small differences, I could easily be a Catholic.



That is what Muslims believe too.


----------



## Lukikus2

Woodsman69 said:


> The media keeps reporting that the "world" is waiting to hear who the new Pope is. I could care less who the new Pope is and I'm not sitting around waiting for smoke to come out of a smoke stack. I have one mediator between me and God: the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is scriptural


----------



## bigdawg25

Artfuldodger said:


> I can tell we use the same logic, are you left handed?
> I totally got your answer to: Does your faith in God hinge on how the Pope conducts a church?
> 
> One question to you and others is related to you saying some denominations have changed in 30 years. I would say all denominations have changed in 30 years.
> My question is, if God never changes(except his mind), why do churches?
> The denomination I remember the most as changing is the Holiness Church. The Holiness Church of today is nothing like the Holiness Church of my youth. *Do Churches have to change to appease the audiences of today? Is it really bad if they do? It's a new day, why not a new way?*



Yeah I have noticed that we sometimes think in the same way, and ask almost the same questions. I am naturally a left hander who after much effort as a kid learned to write with my right; but I play all the sports and shoot a gun with the left hand.

you know what, I actually think that churches ideally shouldn't be in the business of expanding their congregation and, by that extension, stand by a few things they truly believe in disregarding its effects on church membership. This is easier said then done, because in reality a church with no membership cannot function. So I dont know what a real world solution to this is because we as people will change, and churches will change along with it, whether I like it or not.


----------



## Artfuldodger

dawg2 said:


> That is what Muslims believe too.



But I don't think they believe Jesus died on a cross and was resurrected by his Father(God). They don't even believe Jesus was the "Son of God."
They don't even follow the basic John 3:16 which is all it takes to enter Heaven.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called;
(one Spirit)
Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
(one Lord)
Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
(one God)
I like the fact that God is over all, through all, and in all. That gives me great comfort.


----------



## Artfuldodger

bigdawg25 said:


> Yeah I have noticed that we sometimes think in the same way, and ask almost the same questions. I am naturally a left hander who after much effort as a kid learned to write with my right; but I play all the sports and shoot a gun with the left hand.
> 
> you know what, I actually think that churches ideally shouldn't be in the business of expanding their congregation and, by that extension, stand by a few things they truly believe in disregarding its effects on church membership. This is easier said then done, because in reality a church with no membership cannot function. So I dont know what a real world solution to this is because we as people will change, and churches will change along with it, whether I like it or not.



What I would hate to believe is that recruitment is motivated in any way by monetary gain.


----------



## BrotherBadger

stringmusic said:


> Does your faith in God hindge on how the Pope conducts a church?



No. I've found most american RCs(myself included) tend to take a more independent stance when it comes to the Pope. He is the head of my Church, but he is not perfect nor do i agree with everything he says/does.



bigdawg25 said:


> A helping hand:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes



Meh, if someone follows that, they probably believe the legend of St Paul outside the walls as well(which gives us about another 13 popes til the end of the world).




Artfuldodger said:


> Amen, let's hash it out right here. I can feel it myself on this thread. In fact the OP reeked of it. If we can't work out our differences, someone else will, divide and conquer, The Devil.
> I do not agree with all of the Catholic dogma. I do not need a human mediator. Mary is the mother of Jesus, not God. I don't believe Jesus is God. I'm not sure Mary was a virgin. Mary didn't ascend into Heaven.
> *Other than those few small differences, I could easily be a Catholic.*



Most Catholics(like most protestants in their own churchs, i assume) don't see eye to eye with the church on everything. You and I probably agree on most things.



Artfuldodger said:


> I care,_ I might want to convert. _At least Catholics understand it takes more to being a Christian than believing in OSAS.



We have fish frys on fridays during lent(and in heavily RC areas of the country, fish frys on friday are a year round thing), we wear ashes on Ash Wednesday and(depending on how old world your individual church is) we have a festival on the Saint's day of the Saint your church is named after. We don't eat meat on Fridays during lent(but that can be subsituted for other forms of abstenence if needed), Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Fasting on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday is required. That is really the main cultural differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants. If you are seriously interested, feel free to PM me with any questions you may have about Catholicism.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I would say all denominations have changed in 30 years.
> My question is, if God never changes(except his mind), why do churches?
> The denomination I remember the most as changing is the Holiness Church. The Holiness Church of today is nothing like the Holiness Church of my youth.



The Holiness church branched off from the methodist...before they broke away could you imagine the two worshipping together?
 God has not changed and man has and will continue, but no matter what denomination, God can reach through all the obstacles man puts in front of him and save souls!As long as the Gospel is still going out somewhere and being recieved by lost souls where they be Baptist,Methodist,Presbyterian,Catholic, or some new denomination we haven't heard of yet, Gods salvation will get through, it is personal and one on one, and we all eperience it a little different, but I will take mine to the grave and trust eternity on it, not for what a preacher told me, but for the relationship with God He has given me since.


----------



## tcward

I am just glad this pope thing is over! Show something else on TV for crying out loud!!


----------



## centerpin fan

I like what I'm hearing about this new pope.  He sounds like a good man.


----------



## StriperAddict

bigdawg25 said:


> Individual men can make mistakes, but I think as an organization, holy spirit continuously guides them in right direction.
> 
> Actually this debate is largely theoretical at this point; because no matter what media believes in, I am certain that issues like pro-choice or gay marriage are not going accepted by the catholic church atleast in next 50 yrs i.e. my lifetime.


 
Yes but you suggested you'd base your faith in a man called pope to the point of loosing your faith if he doesn't measure up. 
*1 Corinthians 3:4* 
For when one says, “I am *of* *Paul*,” and another, “I am *of* Apollos,” are you not _mere_ men?


The man is off base according to the bible anyway... he has already asked for Mary's help, not God's, in his officiation prayer(s)/speech!  

Revelation 22:8-9
I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, <SUP class=crossreference value='(B)'></SUP>_I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel_ who showed me these things. 
But <SUP class=crossreference value='(C)'></SUP>he said to me, “_Do not do that_. I am a <SUP class=crossreference value='(D)'></SUP>fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of <SUP class=crossreference value='(E)'></SUP>this book. _Worship God_.”


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> Worship God



Aren't there a few verses where even Jesus tells us to worship the Father. We should prey to the Father in Jesus name. Jesus prayed to the Father. Jesus taught the Kingdom of God.


----------



## dawg2

centerpin fan said:


> I like what I'm hearing about this new pope.  He sounds like a good man.



He is a Jesuit and I always respected Jesuits.  Very smart and they will force you to THINK.


----------



## bigdawg25

dawg2 said:


> He is a Jesuit and I always respected Jesuits.  Very smart and they will force you to THINK.



A Jesuit who holds a chemistry and chemical engineer degree. It was high time we get somebody with science degrees.


----------



## gordon 2

dawg2 said:


> He is a Jesuit and I always respected Jesuits.  Very smart and they will force you to THINK.



And the simple reasons for this is that they( Jesuits) are all about "doing" and "service to others", justice and Christ Jesus... without embelishment... Like us of lesser or more charisma they are not perfect... but they walk the talk, and talk the walk from experience, litterally.


----------



## rjcruiser

sea trout said:


> no this is not a different thread!!!!
> i'm explaining the vibe i get from THIS ONE!
> thanks and have a good'un!!!!!



I was kinda getting that vibe too....but I have tried hard to keep it from getting that way.  Even though our belief's are different, I think we can still be respectful in this thread.



bigdawg25 said:


> you know what, I actually think that churches ideally shouldn't be in the business of expanding their congregation and, by that extension, stand by a few things they truly believe in disregarding its effects on church membership. This is easier said then done, because in reality a church with no membership cannot function. So I dont know what a real world solution to this is because we as people will change, and churches will change along with it, whether I like it or not.



I agree with the first part...and disagree with the last.  God's Word will never change.  He will always have a Church.  No matter how many or how few, there will always be people striving to know God's Will and following His Word.

I heard an interesting quote on the radio from a non-Christian today...and I agree with it.

"The Church (any church) should not change for the people, the people should change for the Church."

And that is true.  If you don't like the belief held by the church/Bible, change the way you believe or realize that you'll be condemned by the Bible.  Don't think that you as a finite person can change the Word of God.


----------



## Artfuldodger

bigdawg25 said:


> A Jesuit who holds a chemistry and chemical engineer degree. It was high time we get somebody with science degrees.



Well being in the engineering field, I too welcome him. Maybe he can reconcile God & science better.


----------



## Artfuldodger

gordon 2 said:


> And the simple reasons for this is that they( Jesuits) are all about "doing" and "service to others", justice and Christ Jesus... without embelishment... Like us of lesser or more charisma they are not perfect... but they walk the talk, and talk the walk from experience, litterally.



But the Trappist make better Beer & cheese.


----------



## Artfuldodger

rjcruiser said:


> I was kinda getting that vibe too....but I have tried hard to keep it from getting that way.  Even though our belief's are different, I think we can still be respectful in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with the first part...and disagree with the last.  God's Word will never change.  He will always have a Church.  No matter how many or how few, there will always be people striving to know God's Will and following His Word.
> 
> I heard an interesting quote on the radio from a non-Christian today...and I agree with it.
> 
> "The Church (any church) should not change for the people, the people should change for the Church."
> 
> And that is true.  If you don't like the belief held by the church/Bible, change the way you believe or realize that you'll be condemned by the Bible.  Don't think that you as a finite person can change the Word of God.



I personally feel this way about every organization religious or not.I hate to see change for the wrong reasons. I hate to see forced change as in equal rights, women, gays, or whatever. I'm pretty liberal on most social issues but it should be a natural change, not forced by public opinion or the media. 
I have no problem with a black Pope, women members in the Augusta National, who Chick Filet hires, who can join the Masons or Boy Scouts, but it should be by each organizations choice, not our opinion.


----------



## hummdaddy

Artfuldodger said:


> I personally feel this way about every organization religious or not.I hate to see change for the wrong reasons. I hate to see forced change as in equal rights, women, gays, or whatever. I'm pretty liberal on most social issues but it should be a natural change, not forced by public opinion or the media.
> I have no problem with a black Pope, women members in the Augusta National, who Chick Filet hires, who can join the Masons or Boy Scouts, but it should be by each organizations choice, not our opinion.



but your opinion rules the world


----------



## Lukikus2

rjcruiser said:


> I was kinda getting that vibe too....but I have tried hard to keep it from getting that way.  Even though our belief's are different, I think we can still be respectful in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with the first part...and disagree with the last.  God's Word will never change.  He will always have a Church.  No matter how many or how few, there will always be people striving to know God's Will and following His Word.
> 
> I heard an interesting quote on the radio from a non-Christian today...and I agree with it.
> 
> "The Church (any church) should not change for the people, the people should change for the Church."
> 
> And that is true.  If you don't like the belief held by the church/Bible, change the way you believe or realize that you'll be condemned by the Bible.  *Don't think that you as a finite person can change the Word of God.[/*QUOTE]


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> Yes but you suggested you'd base your faith in a man called pope to the point of loosing your faith if he doesn't measure up.
> *1 Corinthians 3:4*
> For when one says, “I am *of* *Paul*,” and another, “I am *of* Apollos,” are you not _mere_ men?
> 
> 
> The man is off base according to the bible anyway... he has already asked for Mary's help, not God's, in his officiation prayer(s)/speech!
> 
> Revelation 22:8-9
> I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, <SUP class=crossreference value='(B)'></SUP>_I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel_ who showed me these things.
> But <SUP class=crossreference value='(C)'></SUP>he said to me, “_Do not do that_. I am a <SUP class=crossreference value='(D)'></SUP>fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of <SUP class=crossreference value='(E)'></SUP>this book. _Worship God_.”



I'm not reading where he said he based his faith on the Pope. 
Where do we draw the line as to who is channeling the Holy Spirit, guided by the Holy Spirit, or is using their own free will? Apostiles, the Pope, Paul, Protestant Preachers, every born again Christian, and most importantly the "Bible writers" and all of the various interpreters?
I'm talking about following and getting guidance from ordained men of the cloth. I'm not talking about worshipping a man.

I would agree and this is my most different belief from the Catholics, why worship Mary if in fact that is what they are doing? I can't agree with every Catholic belief. I don't need to confess my sins to to a Priest. I don't need another Mediator.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hummdaddy said:


> but your opinion rules the world



My personal opinion or public opinion? My opinion is a natural change vs forced change. I don't see that happening with quota hires, forced racial diversity, & popular persuasion of gays in the Scouts.

I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do?


----------



## bigdawg25

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not reading where he said he based his faith on the Pope.
> Where do we draw the line as to who is channeling the Holy Spirit, guided by the Holy Spirit, or is using their own free will? Apostiles, the Pope, Paul, Protestant Preachers, every born again Christian, and most importantly the "Bible writers" and all of the various interpreters?
> I'm talking about following and getting guidance from ordained men of the cloth. I'm not talking about worshipping a man.
> 
> I would agree and this is my most different belief from the Catholics, why worship Mary if in fact that is what they are doing? I can't agree with every Catholic belief. I don't need to confess my sins to to a Priest. I don't need another Mediator.



Yeah, I never meant that the faith is based on Pope or any other person; I just meant that whether folks know it or not, they place faith on the guidance of holy spirit in directing men who run churches to go down a right path. everything we know about god or religion comes from scriptures written by men, so there is innate faith involved in either those men or in holy spirit that none of them told us lies or did anything for malicious reasons. In absence of such level of trust, I dont know how there is any basis for faith or religion.


----------



## panfried0419

Artfuldoger is the only one who has made any sense in any of the spiritual discussion threads! Amen brother!!!!


----------



## Artfuldodger

rjcruiser said:


> I was kinda getting that vibe too....but I have tried hard to keep it from getting that way.  Even though our belief's are different, I think we can still be respectful in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with the first part...and disagree with the last.  God's Word will never change.  He will always have a Church.  No matter how many or how few, there will always be people striving to know God's Will and following His Word.
> 
> I heard an interesting quote on the radio from a non-Christian today...and I agree with it.
> 
> "The Church (any church) should not change for the people, the people should change for the Church."
> 
> And that is true.  If you don't like the belief held by the church/Bible, change the way you believe or realize that you'll be condemned by the Bible.  Don't think that you as a finite person can change the Word of God.



I would agree unless the Church has already succumbed to the followers. The Church should stay true to their Creed. The members can look for another Church if they don't feel comfortable with the Churches creed. I would not expect any Church to change their Creed to have someone like me as a member. 
But the sad thing is they do change and they have changed. How many times has the Catholic Church changed their beliefs on birth control, etc. 
Why did the Protestants protest and leave the Catholic Church? That was really a change. Mormans changed their beliefs on black members. JW's change their beliefs more than I do. If I change my beliefs I can look elsewhere, churches shouldn't.
Even Baptists, Methodists, & Holiness Churches change. I would have never thought I'd have seen the day women wore pants to Church. Crocs will probably be allowed soon.


----------



## Mako22

dawg2 said:


> He is a Jesuit and I always respected Jesuits.  Very smart and they will force you to THINK.



Jesuit = spy


----------



## rjcruiser

Artfuldodger said:


> Why did the Protestants protest and leave the Catholic Church? That was really a change.



Protestants left the RCC because of the Reformation.  Reformation happened because they thought the RCC had strayed from the truth taught in scripture. (No...not trying to get into a discussion about the Reformation here....don't want to go there.)

Was that change? or like hitting the "reset" button on your phone to get back to the factory settings?



			
				Artfuldodger said:
			
		

> Even Baptists, Methodists, & Holiness Churches change. I would have never thought I'd have seen the day women wore pants to Church. Crocs will probably be allowed soon.



Pants/Crocs...I don't think I'd classify that as change.  I'm talking both Doctrine and spiritual teachings.  But I've seen change in doctrinal positions from many denominations...which are always (well...I think always) a straying from the truth (ie women pastors, non-literal 6 day creation, not subscribing to the inerrancy of scripture, not subscribing to the Doctrine of the Trinity )


----------



## Artfuldodger

When we talk about following the leadership of the Pope i'm reminded how we follow the direction of the local preacher of our local Churches. Example: Local preacher says not to go to stores and restaurants on Sunday, congregation obliges. New preacher comes in and he is OK with going to stores on Sunday. So in a since we do follow guidance from who is in a leadership position.


----------



## dawg2

Woodsman69 said:


> Jesuit = spy



Spy for who?  You talking about the 1500's?  LOL


----------



## rjcruiser

Artfuldodger said:


> When we talk about following the leadership of the Pope i'm reminded how we follow the direction of the local preacher of our local Churches. Example: Local preacher says not to go to stores and restaurants on Sunday, congregation obliges. New preacher comes in and he is OK with going to stores on Sunday. So in a since we do follow guidance from who is in a leadership position.



I think the difference between the RCC and their view of the Pope and the FBC and their view of the Pastor is that the RCC holds the Pope's teachings to be infallible.


Edit to add:  Mods...Dawg2...if you feel this thread or my posts are getting too close to the fine line of stepping on the ant bed...please delete it.  My intent is not to stir up the the nest that has been stirred up plenty in the past.


----------



## gordon 2

Artfuldodger said:


> When we talk about following the leadership of the Pope i'm reminded how we follow the direction of the local preacher of our local Churches. Example: Local preacher says not to go to stores and restaurants on Sunday, congregation obliges. New preacher comes in and he is OK with going to stores on Sunday. So in a since we do follow guidance from who is in a leadership position.



Art you like to make straw men. No one follows the leadership of the Pope, but all can differ to the office if we need to. All preachers are at least one card short of a full deck... (Hi, Ronnie T. LOL) so we need faith. What I'm understanding here is a question" How do we know to walk righteously?" And the answer is by faith.

The office of the Papacy brings to bare all the church as the body of Christ to his office. That office is the last word on various issues... The pope, the man is just that a preacher, and  at least one spiritual card short of a full deck. But his office is the last word. The talk and the walk stops there.

In a social setting a four star general can tell a buck private most anything, and the private can tell the general to take a flying flip and go back to his rat nest, bla, bla, bla,,,. But from and in an official setting...in the execution of his duties the General can say the same thing... and the private soldier better take heed-- or else!!!!!!! 

Sometimes leadership is not what we think it is. The general  like the Pope in his official capacity is drawing on the history, and "the big picture"... and the pastor and the priest is more like the corporal or the sarge ( often airborne and parachuted behind lines alone) or his few helpers coming upon 250 people like you Art and like me cowering in our spiritual bunkers....

 Now I hope you see that leadership is for the medicines we need.  Sometimes our family doctor has to refer to specialists. The office of the Papacy for catholics and many others is just that. But we don't hang on every word a pope sings... they(popes) are not our politics or our presidents--there is finer cloth to touch in our Lord, and even if we only have the tread of a hem. Faith is where it's at.

(PS, some mornings I operate with less than half a deck. But inspite of this the Lord always provides. Faith is the salve of all my pains. LOL) Also, I noticed I type peachers for preachers lately. Now is that a freudian typo?


----------



## bigdawg25

rjcruiser said:


> *I think the difference between the RCC and their view of the Pope and the FBC and their view of the Pastor is that the RCC holds the Pope's teachings to be infallible.*
> 
> 
> Edit to add:  Mods...Dawg2...if you feel this thread or my posts are getting too close to the fine line of stepping on the ant bed...please delete it.  My intent is not to stir up the the nest that has been stirred up plenty in the past.



Rjcruiser: papal infallibility is something around which folks have a lot of questions about; and I am glad you asked it. This is a relatively new thing in RCC and it wasnt even defined until 1870s. Not everything a pope says or does has infallibility; He chooses to invoke papal infallibility extremely rarely, and on the occasions he did, those things were already pretty well known. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Instances_of_infallible_declarations


----------



## rjcruiser

bigdawg25 said:


> Rjcruiser: papal infallibility is something around which folks have a lot of questions about; and I am glad you asked it. This is a relatively new thing in RCC and it wasnt even defined until 1870s. Not everything a pope says or does has infallibility; He chooses to invoke papal infallibility extremely rarely, and on the occasions he did, those things were already pretty well known. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Instances_of_infallible_declarations



Right...I know...and that is why I said in the quote above that it is the Pope's teachings (and I guess I should've only said some) that are infallible...not the man himself.  But as a Protestant, there was only one human that was infallible...and that was Jesus Christ.  The Word of God is also infallible and inerrant....so yes, other men were able to teach/transcribe infallible Words of God.  That being said, I believe that the canon is closed....therefore, there is no more that can come from anyone (including the Pope) that is infallible or inerrant.

Also, there are writings and support that would infer Papal infallibility from before the time it was more defined in 1870.  Now...I understand...that just because someone said something/wrote something, it doesn't make it the belief of the RCC....but that is one of the reasons that many (including the reformers) distance themselves from the RCC.


----------



## Madman

Artfuldodger said:


> My question is, if God never changes(except his mind), why do churches?



Artful,

I can only speak to what I saw in the Episcopal Church, liberal professors teaching in Liberal seminaries turning out liberal priests, sheparding Biblically ignorant sheep.

But what we have to remember is all of that is just a symptom of the problem.  I believe the problem is Biblical, ignorance.  How many people do you know that are in one or more "grounded" bible studies?  How many men do you know understand hermeneutics and systematic theology?
How many men do you know spend time daily on their knees asking God, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to reveal the Truth to them?

Read Chronicles and Samuel, about King David and how the Israelites had forgotten how to handle and transport the Ark of the Covenant, it got men killed, and we think we are better equipped to handle His Word when we have stayed away from His teachings for so long.  

As Don Francisco wrote, we are "running helter-skelter with our fingers in our ears." 

I believe in our pursuit of religion we lose God.

We need to be praying for Christ's bride, the Church, all denominations, we should have been praying in our own churches and during our prayer time that God would reveal   who the Pope should be.

We should be praying as Christ did "that we would be of one mind as he and the Father are."


----------



## gordon 2

rjcruiser said:


> Right...I know...and that is why I said in the quote above that it is the Pope's teachings (and I guess I should've only said some) that are infallible...not the man himself.  But as a Protestant, there was only one human that was infallible...and that was Jesus Christ.  The Word of God is also infallible and inerrant....so yes, other men were able to teach/transcribe infallible Words of God.  That being said, I believe that the canon is closed....therefore, there is no more that can come from anyone (including the Pope) that is infallible or inerrant.
> 
> Also, there are writings and support that would infer Papal infallibility from before the time it was more defined in 1870.  Now...I understand...that just because someone said something/wrote something, it doesn't make it the belief of the RCC....but that is one of the reasons that many (including the reformers) distance themselves from the RCC.



Many reformers  in the past and their followers to this day build straw men and called it the Pope, or the RCC and proceeded to burn it. Many catholics make out protestants to be strawmen and burn them also, inspite of Papal authority directed especially to catholics that all christians, no matter what denomination, can go to heaven or can be saved. Human beings, the part of it which they have created for themselves, are a piece of work... when you think of it...

 I understand papal infalability as arbitration in serving the needs of the faithful in regard to giving an adaquate or good witness to what they believe and why and a prompting to do, to act as people grafted to the tree of life.

The papacy serves the faithful. It is not a lordship.  The papacy will find from midrash and human history, scripture, from the Gospel, church history, church fathers, church experience, and prayer what is in Christ or not... regards simple and complex issues that are meant to be helpful to  all christians in their walk of faith.

Canon is there. But when we walk in faith like we go hunting do we go with our mind focused on hunting and or our minds on pleasing the regulation book of the game wardens and their interpretations? ( We'll never please the game wardens, the minute we get out of our cars or trucks...in the woods during hunting season...we are to the mercy of the law...) besides we can argue with the game wardens on rules and regulations till we get blue in the face... and we'll never be ahead....and to our original purpose. We'll argue over wording and intent, over its, fors and to and wherebys and  that the word all don't mean all all the time, that this canon was meant for that people at that time, and not ours, that bla, bla, bla.... in the meantime we're not hunting...and to its wholesomeness.


----------



## Artfuldodger

gordon 2 said:


> Art you like to make straw men. No one follows the leadership of the Pope, but all can differ to the office if we need to. All preachers are at least one card short of a full deck... (Hi, Ronnie T. LOL) so we need faith. What I'm understanding here is a question" How do we know to walk righteously?" And the answer is by faith.
> 
> The office of the Papacy brings to bare all the church as the body of Christ to his office. That office is the last word on various issues... The pope, the man is just that a preacher, and  at least one spiritual card short of a full deck. But his office is the last word. The talk and the walk stops there.
> 
> In a social setting a four star general can tell a buck private most anything, and the private can tell the general to take a flying flip and go back to his rat nest, bla, bla, bla,,,. But from and in an official setting...in the execution of his duties the General can say the same thing... and the private soldier better take heed-- or else!!!!!!!
> 
> Sometimes leadership is not what we think it is. The general  like the Pope in his official capacity is drawing on the history, and "the big picture"... and the pastor and the priest is more like the corporal or the sarge ( often airborne and parachuted behind lines alone) or his few helpers coming upon 250 people like you Art and like me cowering in our spiritual bunkers....
> 
> Now I hope you see that leadership is for the medicines we need.  Sometimes our family doctor has to refer to specialists. The office of the Papacy for catholics and many others is just that. But we don't hang on every word a pope sings... they(popes) are not our politics or our presidents--there is finer cloth to touch in our Lord, and even if we only have the tread of a hem. Faith is where it's at.
> 
> (PS, some mornings I operate with less than half a deck. But inspite of this the Lord always provides. Faith is the salve of all my pains. LOL) Also, I noticed I type peachers for preachers lately. Now is that a freudian typo?



My only argument is to show that in a lot of ways Protestants are no different from Catholics in having and following leadership. Most local Churches are part of a bigger organization. They vote on things. They change things. The argument in not on whether the changes are good or bad. Change is inevitable. Whether we as Christians like it or not it will happen. I predict that in the future gays will have more rights and will be more socially aceptable. I've seen the same thing happen with equal rights and women's rights. I'm not trying to show that it is right or wrong, just how it is.
I can see changes in my lifetime on how Christians have changed as to what is acceptable or not. 
I'm trying to show unity not division between the two Churches and to show the importance of who the Pope is even if you aren't Catholic. I have no way of knowing who is channeling the Holy Spirit or who is just being guided by the Holy Spirit. I personally believe we are just guided by the Holy Spirit including preachers, me, and the Pope.


----------



## StriperAddict

Artfuldodger said:


> I have no way of knowing who is channeling the Holy Spirit or who is just being guided by the Holy Spirit.


If you belong to Christ then it's your privelage to know...


Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not reading where he said he based his faith on the Pope.
> Where do we draw the line as to who is channeling the Holy Spirit, guided by the Holy Spirit, or is using their own free will? Apostiles, the Pope, Paul, Protestant Preachers, every born again Christian, and most importantly the "Bible writers" and all of the various interpreters?
> I'm talking about following and getting guidance from ordained men of the cloth. I'm not talking about worshipping a man.


 
Both the above come as a matter of trust, but I'd say it is essential for the one who has called on the Lord to know Him and His word intimately. In this way you can rest assured you won't stumble by false teachings or other so called "gospels".

Brother, I pray for you and many to know that hidden Person at work in your life, through your life. There lies the greatest gift of all... that we have been made a New Creation in Christ because of the cross, and live unto Him with all joy by faith.  I've said it many times: it's His work within that will bring you to completion, as your spirit man is already complete.  This is the work of Him that hammers our pride and selfishness into the dust, not something taught by man's wisdom, or by religious rules/laws. What the law (or man) cannot do, God did.  It's all a free mercy gift by the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world.  

I hesitate to comment further about any one man or leader in the faith.  I don't hold any to a greater stature than is their gift(s) bestowed on them by heavenly Providence.  But as to their doctrine, I'll let the scriptures speak:

*Titus 2:10* 
not pilfering, but showing all good faith so that they will adorn the *doctrine* of God our Savior in every respect.

and
*2 Timothy 4:2-4 *

*<SUP class=versenum>2 </SUP>preach <SUP class=crossreference value='(A)'></SUP>the word; be ready in season and out of season; <SUP class=crossreference value='(B)'></SUP>reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great <SUP class=crossreference value='(C)'></SUP>patience and instruction. *

*<SUP class=versenum>3 </SUP>For <SUP class=crossreference value='(D)'></SUP>the time will come when they will not endure <SUP class=crossreference value='(E)'></SUP>sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, *

*<SUP class=versenum>4 </SUP>and <SUP class=crossreference value='(F)'></SUP>will turn away their ears from the truth and <SUP class=crossreference value='(G)'></SUP>will turn aside to myths.*



And the promise...  
*John 8:31-32*


<SUP class=versenum>31 </SUP>So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “<SUP class=crossreference value='(A)'></SUP>If 
you continue in My word, _then_ you are truly <SUP class=crossreference value='(B)'></SUP>disciples of Mine; 
<SUP class=versenum>32 </SUP>and <SUP class=crossreference value='(C)'></SUP>you will know the truth, and <SUP class=crossreference value='(D)'></SUP>the truth will make you free.”


----------



## Artfuldodger

StriperAddict said:


> come as a matter of trust, but I'd say it is essential for the one who has called on the Lord to know Him and His word intimately. In this way you can rest assured you won't stumble by false teachings or other so called "gospels".
> 
> Brother, I pray for you and many to know that hidden Person at work in your life, through your life. There lies the greatest gift of all... that we have been made a New Creation in Christ because of the cross, and live unto Him with all joy by faith.  I've said it many times: it's His work within that will bring you to completion, as your spirit man is already complete.  This is the work of Him that hammers our pride and selfishness into the dust, not something taught by man's wisdom, or by religious rules/laws. What the law (or man) cannot do, God did.  It's all a free mercy gift by the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world.
> 
> I hesitate to comment further about any one man or leader in the faith.  I don't hold any to a greater stature than is their gift(s) bestowed on them by heavenly Providence.  But as to their doctrine, I'll let the scriptures speak:
> 
> *Titus 2:10*
> not pilfering, but showing all good faith so that they will adorn the *doctrine* of God our Savior in every respect.



You made some very good points. I have put way too much faith in man including elders instead of following the Holy Spirit. Since I can easily be lead astray, I  need a daily renewal of the Holy Spirit.
That being said at some point in our Christian journey, we have to trust Church elders. Paul was teaching Titus how to be an elder. Even though Titus was a Christian who had the Holy Spirit, he still had to learn to be a good leader. It takes a little bit of himself and a whole lot of the Holy Spirit.

Please explain your reference to Titus 2:10 as it is on how Christian slaves should act. Are you comparing it to us being slaves of God?
In Titus 2 Paul is teaching Titus how the people of Crete should live, old & young men & women, and the Christian slaves. It's a good verse and we can relate to it although it's not advice specifically written for an elder to follow.


----------



## gordon 2

Artfuldodger said:


> My only argument is to show that in a lot of ways Protestants are no different from Catholics in having and following leadership. Most local Churches are part of a bigger organization. They vote on things. They change things. The argument in not on whether the changes are good or bad. Change is inevitable. Whether we as Christians like it or not it will happen. I predict that in the future gays will have more rights and will be more socially aceptable. I've seen the same thing happen with equal rights and women's rights. I'm not trying to show that it is right or wrong, just how it is.
> I can see changes in my lifetime on how Christians have changed as to what is acceptable or not.
> I'm trying to show unity not division between the two Churches and to show the importance of who the Pope is even if you aren't Catholic. I have no way of knowing who is channeling the Holy Spirit or who is just being guided by the Holy Spirit. I personally believe we are just guided by the Holy Spirit including preachers, me, and the Pope.



...do you remember when Isreal our brother... was praying and asking all to pray for the life of his grand-dauther( I think this is who she is.)? And do you remember that a few weeks after his asking for prayers and pleading in prayer that God be with her doctors, he found out that the God had been all along with his grand-dauther's hospital, its leaders, social workers, doctors, nurses, maids, janitors...etc... 

For baptism love is everywhere--it is a wise water our baptism. It is given to and by many hands. Praise God.


----------



## Artfuldodger

As StriperAddict said: We  receive and manifest various gifts of ministry and service within the congregation, as the Holy Spirit wills and gives. I believe the sanctifying work of the Spirit is a daily exercise. We receive the Holy Spirit upon baptism. It's up to the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit to grant gifts as he sees fit. 
God was with all of those hospital people but we should still pray for help & guidance. 
Still I personally have know way of knowing what gifts the Holy Spirit has given to a certain individual. That is up to the Holy Spirit. I understand that the Pope, preachers, elders, me, you are all equal and capable of anything the Holy Spirit gives us the power to do. 
There are many verses on "daily renewal of the Holy Spirit."
I wish I had grown up in a Church with more emphasis on the Holy Spirit. Jesus has done his part and went back to Heaven. He told his Father to leave us a Comforter. I'm glad he did. The Holy Spirit doesn't want any glory and guides us towards God. This is also what Jesus did.  
I can't remember who on this thread brought it up but it's about worshiping God. Jesus died for our sins, the Holy Spirit guides us, but they both point to worshiping the Father.
This is related to choosing a Pope, preacher, elder how? They are all men. They are all guided by the Holy Spirit. They are all fallible just as we all are. Study for yourself to separate the real teachers from the false teachers. But please don't give up on the true "men of God" preachers for they might have special guidance from the Holy Spirit in a certain area that you don't possess.


----------



## Artfuldodger

panfried0419 said:


> Artfuldoger is the only one who has made any sense in any of the spiritual discussion threads! Amen brother!!!!



Thanks for those words of encouragement. It is a fine line as to reading the Bible with non-denominational blinders on and listening to Elders. It takes both. If you hear an elder preach something don't take his word for it. God might have guided him to preach it but he is also guiding you to make sure it's the truth. I'm amazed at how much I took for granted before putting on my non-denominational blinders and truly reading the scriptures.
There is a possibility I have it just as wrong as the next Christian so make sure you read, study, pray, seek, renew with the Holy Spirit, and continue on your lifelong Sanctification process.


----------



## StriperAddict

Artfuldodger said:


> You made some very good points. I have put way too much faith in man including elders instead of following the Holy Spirit. Since I can easily be lead astray, I  need a daily renewal of the Holy Spirit.
> That being said at some point in our Christian journey, we have to trust Church elders. Paul was teaching Titus how to be an elder. Even though Titus was a Christian who had the Holy Spirit, he still had to learn to be a good leader. It takes a little bit of himself and a whole lot of the Holy Spirit.
> 
> Please explain your reference to Titus 2:10 as it is on how Christian slaves should act. Are you comparing it to us being slaves of God?
> In Titus 2 Paul is teaching Titus how the people of Crete should live, old & young men & women, and the Christian slaves. It's a good verse and we can relate to it although it's not advice specifically written for an elder to follow.



The Titus verse says "adorn the *doctrine* of God our Savior in every respect". I don't believe this is for "slaves" in the physical sense, but the spiritual... perhaps.  And the reason I chose this verse was to emphasize that the doctrine of God, namely, the Gospel, will continue to lead any and all into truth, given that a heart is open.  And as Christ Jesus is the embodiment of truth, we can glean from Him in the Spirit what we cannot, necessarily, from man.  

Paul made no trip to Rome when he penned the pages of the "book of Romans", yet he did due diligence by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to describe the Gospel quite clearly to its citizens, and the world.  It has saved me from countless errors and the religious (dead) laws of man that have no place following our resurrected Lord.  IMO.  

Art, pray for guidance, wisdom and understanding as you open the scriptures, our loving Lord will work with you and in you to set His counsel and His love alive.  "They look unto Him and are radiant, and their faces shall never be ashamed" - Psalms
Now if this new pontiff has this effect on folks, so be it...  but based on un-scriptural practise of bowing to the blessed mother, I have no association with the man, nor his doctrine.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I have no association with him either as I don't bow to the blessed mother. I don't follow the doctrine of "oneness" or "election" either but have family members who do. I still consider his role important to bring new followers to Christ as I do my family members who follow different beliefs than me.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Thinking about Mary mother of Jesus again.  Jesus received his human genetics from Mary. Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God.
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ.
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ.

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/mary-mother-of-god


----------



## Artfuldodger

Does ones Salvation rest of Jesus' sacrifice and God's grace or our weird indoctrinations? If we are saved by God's grace then does it really matter if we get the doctrines wrong? If one doesn't believe Jesus is God or Mary is divine  or "Oneness" instead of "Trinity" or "Baptized in the name of the Trinity instead of Jesus only" or "sprinkled" instead of "dunked", or"Catholic" instead of "Protestant?"

If the new Pope takes all the wealth of the Catholic Church and gives it to the poor, wouldn't he do more to follow the teachings of Jesus than talk about birth control?


----------



## dawg2

Artfuldodger said:


> Thinking about Mary mother of Jesus again. If Mary has diety doesn't that change the Trinity to a Quadity? Jesus received his human genetics from Mary. Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God.
> Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ.
> Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ.
> I can see the logic of this belief but why would that make Mary divine?
> The Holy Spirit dwelling in me doesn't make me divine.
> 
> http://www.catholic.com/tracts/mary-mother-of-god



Mary is not a deity.


----------



## Artfuldodger

dawg2 said:


> Mary is not a deity.



I was only referring to some peoples beliefs, not mine or yours. It matters not to our salvation if Mary was sinless, remained a virgin, ascended into Heaven, or assumed into Heaven: (Other humans have assumed into Heaven), or if Mary is an Intercessor. Mary's salvation is between her and God.  
I'm not as most Protestants who hold that Mary is just a surrogate mother. She is a special person chosen by God.
There are other special people chosen by God mentioned in the Bible. I just don't hold the same views of Mary as the Catholic Church.
The main idea is that it matters not for Salvation. Grace & Love takes care of that.
(I went back an edited my post as it could be perceived as offensive)


----------



## gemcgrew

On a lighter note, I did receive this picture today.


----------



## gordon 2

OH Yea... I tell you something...! You are flirting with your de-predestination by posting a pict. of black smoke on a Texas football stadium... saying "No quarterback yet."


----------

