Cruciform
New member
I agree. Likewise with Matthew 23:9. Why, then, do you insist on interpreting it in a woodenly literalistic fashion, without attention to the meaning of Scripture as a whole? :think:
Last edited:
calling Pope Father.. Jesus used term "Father Abraham"
- Thread starter republicanchick
- Start date
Cruciform
New member
Post #193
Because Matthew is most definitely NOT metaphorical. Jesus is speaking to a different audience at a different time. Jesus made the same point three times in Matthew do not call our spiritual leaders Rabbi, Father or Instructor (depending on the translation you pick up).
No, He was not. Read the passage as a whole and it is not metaphorical.
God's Truth
New member
I still believe Jesus was speaking literally. Again, those who do not believe Jesus will not cut off their hands, and those who do believe Jesus will just stop sinning. No hands being cut off by anyone, and no eyes being plucked out. However, Jesus is telling us the importance of stop sinning. There is nothing about leaders.
glassjester
Well-known member
GT,
You claim to believe Christians should call literally no one on Earth "Father."
And somehow, at the same time, believe some people on Earth can be called "Father."
These two beliefs are mutually exclusive. I suspect you know that.
You claim to believe Christians should call literally no one on Earth "Father."
And somehow, at the same time, believe some people on Earth can be called "Father."
These two beliefs are mutually exclusive. I suspect you know that.
God's Truth
New member
You are leaving out the part about Jesus saying they are BROTHERS.
Obey Jesus, and then you will get understanding---that is what Jesus says.
glassjester
Well-known member
Alright.
God's Truth
New member
Your answer is wrong. It is poorly reasoned. It is based on proof texts pulled out of context. It is a theological disaster the RCC should be ashamed to offer as an official reaching.
Cruciform
New member
...according to the entirely non-authoritative assumptions and opinions that you have derived from your favored recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway... :yawn:
everready
New member
Do you mean this sect?
FOX's BOOK of MARTYRS
Chapter I -- History of Christian Martyrs to the First General Persecutions Under Nero
Chapter II -- The Ten Primitive Persecutions
Chapter III -- Persecutions of the Christians in Persia
Chapter IV -- Papal Persecutions
Chapter V -- An Account of the Inquisition
Chapter VI -- An Account of the Persecutions in Italy, Under the Papacy
Chapter VII -- An Account of the Life and Persecutions of John Wickliffe
Chapter VIII -- An Account of the Persecutions in Bohemia Under the Papacy
Chapter IX -- An Account of the Life and Persecutions of Martin Luther
Chapter X -- General Persecutions in Germany
Chapter XI -- An Account of the Persecutions in the Netherlands
Chapter XII -- The Life and Story of the True Servant and Martyr of God, William Tyndale
Chapter XIII -- An Account of the Life of John Calvin
Chapter XIV -- Prior to the Reign of Queen Mary I
Chapter XV -- An Account of the Persecutions in Scotland During the Reign of King Henry VIII
Chapter XVI -- Persecutions in England During the Reign of Queen Mary
Chapter XVII -- Rise and Progress of the Protestant Religion in Ireland; with an Account of the Barbarous Massacre of 1641
Chapter XVIII -- The Rise, Progress, Persecutions, and Sufferings of the Quakers
Chapter XIX -- An Account of the Life and Persecutions of John Bunyan
Chapter XX -- An Account of the Life of John Wesley
Chapter XXI -- Persecutions of the French Protestants in the South of France, During the Years 1814 and 1820
Chapter XXII -- The Beginnings of American Foreign Missions
http://biblebelievers.com/foxes/findex.htm
everready
Does anyone know whether or not "Cruciform" is nothing more than a computer?
The answers would indicate that that is what IT is, all one usually gets is "You have already been decisively answered in Post #XXX. which takes you to a RCC site of already written articles and pulled from a menu as on a phone, push X for----
I see no human personality, thought or reasoning, just pre-programed replies.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Yes, a complete waste of time, and worthy of the ignore function.
Again stating that you do not believe Jesus or God when they speak plainly. That is what it always comes down to with you. When anybody posts actual scripture, you reply with a link to what Catholics say about what they think scripture says. You do not believe God's word as He left it for us, you only believe the entirely man-made opinions of your sect.
Right, it was hundreds of years before the Cats would allow their followers to even have a Bible, what you say is correct.
That is why Cruciform is out of his element when actual Scriptures are posted or quoted, he only knows what the RCC has written, the Bible means nothing to him.
glassjester
Well-known member
The fact of the matter is, you don't believe the plain reading of that particular verse either. So what it comes down to is - what makes your interpretation the right one?