[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
But let’s just do a short one in the interim:
I don’t think the pope should allow himself to be addressed as “Holy Father”, let alone Most Holy Father, because it is a term used to address my Heavenly Father, and NEVER used to refer to any man. How does your papa have the audacity to appropriate it for himself?[/quote]
The name Holy Father or Most Holy Father is not a piece of doctrine. Can you please give me a piece of actual doctrine next time?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Isn’t that what’s supposed to happen to heretics?
[/quote]
No. Not sure where you got that idea.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
But let’s just do a short one in the interim:
I don’t think the pope should allow himself to be addressed as “Holy Father”, let alone Most Holy Father, because it is a term used to address my Heavenly Father, and NEVER used to refer to any man. How does your papa have the audacity to appropriate it for himself?[/quote]
The name Holy Father or Most Holy Father is not a piece of doctrine. Can you please give me a piece of actual doctrine next time?[/quote]
So you disavow this practice?
I said I would be willing to go back and work some more on Mt 16 and the subject of justification, but we might do something in the interim. I do think though that this has to do with apostolic succession- the pope is the current vicar is he not?
Also, doctrine, for a non-RC, really just means a systematic teaching of bible truth. As you know, we see little reason to construct a whole huge vocabulary of words like dogma, etc. The subject of humility actually does relate to the larger bible doctrine of the nature of man, as well as the nature of Christ. Since the pope claims he is His vicar on earth, what I have asked above certainly does relate to doctrine.
[Added last paragraph]
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
So you disavow this practice?[/quote]
Are you proposing a false choice? Either Holy Father is doctrine or I disavow the use of the name?
That’s fine.
Many people are vicars. I’m not following.
A systematic teaching of truth is called Catechism, not doctrine.
So, you’re saying you don’t make distinctions between different things. Sounds like modernism.
[quote]The subject of humility actually does relate to the larger bible doctrine of the nature of man, as well as the nature of Christ. Since the pope claims he is His vicar on earth, what I have asked above certainly does relate to doctrine.
[Added last paragraph][/quote]
Yes, that maybe so. However, Holy Father is still not RC doctrine.
However, if you wish to know why we call the Pope (which means Holy Father) Holy Father it’s because it’s a term of endearment from His sheep that he feeds (John 21:16-17). If you wish to find something in the Bible to confirm it, St. Paul says, “I became your father in Christ Jesus,” in 1 Cor. 4:15.
Plus, I’m sure you got upset at Jesus when he called Abraham father. And, the Christians when they called King David father.
Other References:
Phil. 2:22
1 Thess. 2:11
Philemon 10
Heb. 12:7 & 9
1 John 2:1, 13 & 14
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
So, you’re saying you don’t make distinctions between different things. Sounds like modernism.
[/quote]
The vast majority of the time, the vocabulary already contained in the bible is adequate. Doing it this way helps to keep people from making up stuff.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:However, if you wish to know why we call the Pope (which means Holy Father) Holy Father it’s because it’s a term of endearment from His sheep that he feeds (John 21:16-17). If you wish to find something in the Bible to confirm it, St. Paul says, “I became your father in Christ Jesus,” in 1 Cor. 4:15.
Plus, I’m sure you got upset at Jesus when he called Abraham father. And, the Christians when they called King David father.
Other References:
[/quote]
You have given the pat answer which can be easily found on the net in many places. However, you have skirted my question. Only ONE place in Scripture is the term “Holy Father” used. And you know why it’s capitalized too. How does he dare use it? You know Jesus is NOT referring to His father in the faith, or an ancestral father.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
So, you’re saying you don’t make distinctions between different things. Sounds like modernism.
[/quote]
The vast majority of the time, the vocabulary already contained in the bible is adequate. Doing it this way helps to keep people from making up stuff.[/quote]
What are you talking about? Now, I just think you’re equivocating.
If we’re going to have strange rules so that we can’t make things up (because you know only using the Bible really stopped all those heresies), I say we use the longest used vocabulary and language the Bible has used, theological Latin.
What are you getting at?
You asked me why we use the term Holy Father, I explained why. That is not skirting your question. That is a lack of reading comprehension on y your part.
Because in English we capitalize titles of honor, like Doctor of the Church, and Mother of God, and Queen of the Universe and Heaven, and Most Gracious Advocate, and Catholic Church, and Redeemer. Protestants put way too much focus on capitalization. Watch this: doctor of the church, mother of god, queen of the universe and heaven, most gracious advocate, holy catholic church, and redeemer. See, with the lowercase of these words I still mean the same thing as when they were capitalized. The fact that we capitalize certain things and not other things is mere stylization. Sometimes I go old school and capitalize only proper nouns, like I’ll be writing a sentence and I’ll say Providence, and they rest of the sentence is in lowercase. I’m not talking about the great Capital City, I’m talking about the Providence of our lord. <— see lower case, but I still mean Jesus. Also, another thing I find strange about the English stylization of words is the word “I”. Pretty much only English capitalizes that word. I won’t make conjecture as to why it is capitalized.
You mean, how dare do Jesus’ sheep use it? Because it’s an honorary title. I just said this, you seemed to skip over it.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
I came into this thread because you wanted to move our conversation here. Now you’re stuck with me.
[/quote]
Yes, and you didn’t want to actually have our conversation. You just presented non-sequitors. My question still stands:
How do we know which books are in the Bible?
Catholic Drinking:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:Catholic Drinking: The Lost Art of Catholic Drinking [/quote]That is biblical drinking Chris. Like most stereotypes, there is some truth here about SOME protestants, but there are zillions who drink in peaceful drama free moderation.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
You asked me why we use the term Holy Father, I explained why. That is not skirting your question. That is a lack of reading comprehension on y your part.
You mean, how dare do Jesus’ sheep use it? Because it’s an honorary title. I just said this, you seemed to skip over it.[/quote]
Your answer is pat in the sense that you did not address the specifics of my question. Unless you actually mean to say it has no significance that the term “Holy” being attached to “Father” as an address only ONE TIME in Scripture has no significance. Did you not know I was referring to this special usage?
Yes, for a man to appropriate the title Jesus used for His heavenly Father, and then adding “Most” to the front, certainly would be claiming an honor.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
I came into this thread because you wanted to move our conversation here. Now you’re stuck with me.
[/quote]
Yes, and you didn’t want to actually have our conversation. You just presented non-sequitors. My question still stands:
How do we know which books are in the Bible?[/quote]
If my answers had no relevance, why bother going on for pages? I don’t plan on going back to the subject of the canon with you. I offered you 30+ links if you wanted to study it from a protestant viewpoint.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If we’re going to have strange rules so that we can’t make things up (because you know only using the Bible really stopped all those heresies), I say we use the longest used vocabulary and language the Bible has used, theological Latin.[/quote]
Heresy is primarily about how you use the words. I could just as easily use your RC vocabulary and make heresy.
Use Latin? Then everyone would have to study Latin before they could learn any bible doctrine. The beauty of Scripture is it’s own vocabulary is largely adequate to teach anything.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Yes, yes we know. Narrow statement about Catholics overlays all Catholics, narrow statement about Protestants stays narrow. We know the rules of the game.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
You asked me why we use the term Holy Father, I explained why. That is not skirting your question. That is a lack of reading comprehension on y your part.
You mean, how dare do Jesus’ sheep use it? Because it’s an honorary title. I just said this, you seemed to skip over it.[/quote]
Your answer is pat in the sense that you did not address the specifics of my question. Unless you actually mean to say it has no significance that the term “Holy” being attached to “Father” as an address only ONE TIME in Scripture has no significance. Did you not know I was referring to this special usage? [/quote]
It’s not used in the same way, now I know you’re equivocating. There is a distinction between the title the Pope is given and the title for God the Father.
Who cares if it is used one time in scripture, what does that have to do with anything? Yes, I know exactly why you bring this up. It’s been a few days since my Calvinist days, but I remember. 
Still equivocating, the Pope didn’t give, or appropriate, himself the title, Catholics did in honor of him being our Most Holy Father (as in priests are our spiritual fathers, and bishops are greater fathers then them, and the pope being first among equals over the entire church is the most holy father).
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
I came into this thread because you wanted to move our conversation here. Now you’re stuck with me.
[/quote]
Yes, and you didn’t want to actually have our conversation. You just presented non-sequitors. My question still stands:
How do we know which books are in the Bible?[/quote]
If my answers had no relevance, why bother going on for pages? I don’t plan on going back to the subject of the canon with you. I offered you 30+ links if you wanted to study it from a protestant viewpoint. [/quote]
So you admit you never answered the question. Because you don’t have a valid and sound answer.
Regards,
P.S. The point of debate is not to load the other person with something to study, that is your burden. Your burden is to give a sound answer, which you failed. So I can only come to the conclusion that I won be default: you never gave an answer. Sad when your opponent forfeits. Guess I must be to intellectual for you. Too above your capabilities.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If we’re going to have strange rules so that we can’t make things up (because you know only using the Bible really stopped all those heresies), I say we use the longest used vocabulary and language the Bible has used, theological Latin.[/quote]
Heresy is primarily about how you use the words. I could just as easily use your RC vocabulary and make heresy.
Use Latin? Then everyone would have to study Latin before they could learn any bible doctrine. The beauty of Scripture is it’s own vocabulary is largely adequate to teach anything.[/quote]
Yes, so stop making ridiculous rules. Define your definitions, make distinctions and move on. Doctrine is not the same thing as a systematic teaching of biblical truth.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
I was educated for a time at a Jesuit institution, but I now disavow that association.
I came into this thread because you wanted to move our conversation here. Now you’re stuck with me.
Both you and Pat have implied I know nothing of your doctrine, yet we have discussed Peter, as well as Paul’s teaching on the law and justification. We will get back to Mt 16:18, so study up. Although KingKai has already taken it past your capabilities. It’s interesting I state RC doctrine of salvation is “another gospel”, and Pat immediately gives me a verse on works. I guess he knows I know what the issue is. I guess I know something huh?
But let’s just do a short one in the interim:
I don’t think the pope should allow himself to be addressed as “Holy Father”, let alone Most Holy Father, because it is a term used to address my Heavenly Father, and NEVER used to refer to any man. How does your papa have the audacity to appropriate it for himself?[/quote]
That is not a Catholic doctrine. Seems like your hung up on minutia. You said you have issues with Catholic doctrine. BC asked you to name one, explain it correctly and then explain your issue with it.
The pope cannot control how he is referred. The name he chose for himself is Pope Benedict XVI. Seems like you don’t know any Catholic doctrine.
Put up or shut up, Chen.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
So, you’re saying you don’t make distinctions between different things. Sounds like modernism.
[/quote]
The vast majority of the time, the vocabulary already contained in the bible is adequate. Doing it this way helps to keep people from making up stuff.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:However, if you wish to know why we call the Pope (which means Holy Father) Holy Father it’s because it’s a term of endearment from His sheep that he feeds (John 21:16-17). If you wish to find something in the Bible to confirm it, St. Paul says, “I became your father in Christ Jesus,” in 1 Cor. 4:15.
Plus, I’m sure you got upset at Jesus when he called Abraham father. And, the Christians when they called King David father.
Other References:
[/quote]
You have given the pat answer which can be easily found on the net in many places. However, you have skirted my question. Only ONE place in Scripture is the term “Holy Father” used. And you know why it’s capitalized too. How does he dare use it? You know Jesus is NOT referring to His father in the faith, or an ancestral father.[/quote]
No place in scripture uses that term in a proper translation. There over 800 major errors in the KJV.
The term ‘Father’ is used in many places in life. Never the less, it’s not a Catholic Doctrine. I am waiting on a Catholic doctrine. Not the many ways the pope can be referred too.
Seriously, is this all you got?
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
Although KingKai has already taken it past your capabilities. It’s interesting I state RC doctrine of salvation is “another gospel”, and Pat immediately gives me a verse on works.
[/quote]
Yep, KingKai definitely handed you your own ass. And apparently you have no answer to my admonitions…
Faith alone can’t save you. For even satan beleives.
[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If we’re going to have strange rules so that we can’t make things up (because you know only using the Bible really stopped all those heresies), I say we use the longest used vocabulary and language the Bible has used, theological Latin.[/quote]
Heresy is primarily about how you use the words. I could just as easily use your RC vocabulary and make heresy.
Use Latin? Then everyone would have to study Latin before they could learn any bible doctrine. The beauty of Scripture is it’s own vocabulary is largely adequate to teach anything.[/quote]
Well, do you know any doctrine or not? Apparently, not.