- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The Catholic Church’s teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. In particular, Fundamentalists and other “Bible Christians” often confuse the charism of papal “infallibility” with “impeccability.” They imagine Catholics believe the pope cannot sin. Others, who avoid this elementary blunder, think the pope relies on some sort of amulet or magical incantation when an infallible definition is due.
Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: “He who hears you hears me” (Luke 10:16), and “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” (Matt. 18:18).
Vatican II’s Explanation
Vatican II explained the doctrine of infallibility as follows: “Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they can nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly. This is so, even when they are dispersed around the world, provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among themselves and with Peter’s successor, and while teaching authentically on a matter of faith or morals, they concur in a single viewpoint as the one which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith” (Lumen Gentium 25).
Infallibility belongs in a special way to the pope as head of the bishops (Matt. 16:17–19; John 21:15–17). As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope “enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter.”
The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15–17 (“Feed my sheep . . . “), Luke 22:32 (“I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail”), and Matthew 16:18 (“You are Peter . . . “).
Based on Christ’s Mandate
Christ instructed the Church to preach everything he taught (Matt. 28:19–20) and promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to “guide you into all the truth” (John 16:13). That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individual Catholics might.
As Christians began to more clearly understand the teaching authority of the Church and of the primacy of the pope, they developed a clearer understanding of the pope’s infallibility. This development of the faithful’s understanding has its clear beginnings in the early Church. For example, Cyprian of Carthage, writing about 256, put the question this way, “Would the heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?” (Letters 59 [55], 14). In the fifth century, Augustine succinctly captured the ancient attitude when he remarked, “Rome has spoken; the case is concluded” (Sermons 131, 10).
Some Clarifications
An infallible pronouncement—whether made by the pope alone or by an ecumenical council—usually is made only when some doctrine has been called into question. Most doctrines have never been doubted by the large majority of Catholics.
Pick up a catechism and look at the great number of doctrines, most of which have never been formally defined. But many points have been defined, and not just by the pope alone. There are, in fact, many major topics on which it would be impossible for a pope to make an infallible definition without duplicating one or more infallible pronouncements from ecumenical councils or the ordinary magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church.
At least the outline, if not the references, of the preceding paragraphs should be familiar to literate Catholics, to whom this subject should appear straightforward. It is a different story with “Bible Christians.” For them papal infallibility often seems a muddle because their idea of what it encompasses is often incorrect.
Some ask how popes can be infallible if some of them lived scandalously. This objection of course, illustrates the common confusion between infallibility and impeccability. There is no guarantee that popes won’t sin or give bad example. (The truly remarkable thing is the great degree of sanctity found in the papacy throughout history; the “bad popes” stand out precisely because they are so rare.)
Other people wonder how infallibility could exist if some popes disagreed with others. This, too, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals. A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching.
Even Fundamentalists and Evangelicals who do not have these common misunderstandings often think infallibility means that popes are given some special grace that allows them to teach positively whatever truths need to be known, but that is not quite correct, either. Infallibility is not a substitute for theological study on the part of the pope.
What infallibility does do is prevent a pope from solemnly and formally teaching as “truth” something that is, in fact, error. It does not help him know what is true, nor does it “inspire” him to teach what is true. He has to learn the truth the way we all do—through study—though, to be sure, he has certain advantages because of his position.
Peter Not Infallible?
As a biblical example of papal fallibility, Fundamentalists like to point to Peter’s conduct at Antioch, where he refused to eat with Gentile Christians in order not to offend certain Jews from Palestine (Gal. 2:11–16). For this Paul rebuked him. Did this demonstrate papal infallibility was non-existent? Not at all. Peter’s actions had to do with matters of discipline, not with issues of faith or morals.
Furthermore, the problem was Peter’s actions, not his teaching. Paul acknowledged that Peter very well knew the correct teaching (Gal. 2:12–13). The problem was that he wasn’t living up to his own teaching. Thus, in this instance, Peter was not doing any teaching; much less was he solemnly defining a matter of faith or morals.
Fundamentalists must also acknowledge that Peter did have some kind of infallibility—they cannot deny that he wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament while under protection against writing error. So, if his behavior at Antioch was not incompatible with this kind of infallibility, neither is bad behavior contrary to papal infallibility in general.
Turning to history, critics of the Church cite certain “errors of the popes.” Their argument is really reduced to three cases, those of Popes Liberius, Vigilius, and Honorius, the three cases to which all opponents of papal infallibility turn; because
they are the only cases that do not collapse as soon as they are mentioned. There is no point in giving the details here—any good history of the Church will supply the facts—but it is enough to note that none of the cases meet the requirements outlined by the description of papal infallibility given at Vatican I (cf. Pastor Aeternus 4).Their “Favorite Case”
According to Fundamentalist commentators, their best case lies with Pope Honorius. They say he specifically taught Monothelitism, a heresy that held that Christ had only one will (a divine one), not two wills (a divine one and a human one) as all orthodox Christians hold.
But that’s not at all what Honorius did. Even a quick review of the records shows he simply decided not to make a decision at all. As Ronald Knox explained, “To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was an inopportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the pope is infallible in not defining a doctrine.”
Knox wrote to Arnold Lunn (a future convert who would become a great apologist for the faith—their correspondence is found in the book Difficulties): “Has it ever occurred to you how few are the alleged ‘failures of infallibility’? I mean, if somebody propounded in your presence the thesis that all the kings of England have been impeccable, you would not find yourself murmuring, ‘Oh, well, people said rather unpleasant things about Jane Shore . . . and the best historians seem to think that Charles II spent too much of his time with Nell Gwynn.’ Here have these popes been, fulminating anathema after anathema for centuries—certain in all human probability to contradict themselves or one another over again. Instead of which you get this measly crop of two or three alleged failures!” While Knox’s observation does not establish the truth of papal infallibility, it does show that the historical argument against infallibility is weak.
The rejection of papal infallibility by “Bible Christians” stems from their view of the Church. They do not think Christ established a visible Church, which means they do not believe in a hierarchy of bishops headed by the pope.
This is no place to give an elaborate demonstration of the establishment of a visible Church. But it is simple enough to point out that the New Testament shows the apostles setting up, after their Master’s instructions, a visible organization, and that every Christian writer in the early centuries—in fact, nearly all Christians until the Reformation—fully recognized that Christ set up an ongoing organization.
One example of this ancient belief comes to us from Ignatius of Antioch. In his second-century letter to the church in Smyrna, he wrote, “Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8, 1 [A.D. 110]).
If Christ did set up such an organization, he must have provided for its continuation, for its easy identification (that is, it had to be visible so it could be found), and, since he would be gone from earth, for some method by which it could preserve his teachings intact.
All this was accomplished through the apostolic succession of bishops, and the preservation of the Christian message, in its fullness, was guaranteed through the gift of infallibility, of the Church as a whole, but mainly through its Christ-appointed leaders, the bishops (as a whole) and the pope (as an individual).
It is the Holy Spirit who prevents the pope from officially teaching error, and this charism follows necessarily from the existence of the Church itself. If, as Christ promised, the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church then it must be protected from fundamentally falling into error and thus away from Christ. It must prove itself to be a perfectly steady guide in matters pertaining to salvation.
Of course, infallibility does not include a guarantee that any particular pope won’t “neglect” to teach the truth, or that he will be sinless, or that mere disciplinary decisions will be intelligently made. It would be nice if he were omniscient or impeccable, but his not being so will fail to bring about the destruction of the Church.
But he must be able to teach rightly, since instruction for the sake of salvation is a primary function of the Church. For men to be saved, they must know what is to be believed. They must have a perfectly steady rock to build upon and to trust as the source of solemn Christian teaching. And that’s why papal infallibility exists.
Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18b), this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church. Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true. This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman. As Christ told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke 10:16).
Hi CA,
Christ's body still exists.But it is not based on the worship of a carnal man in a roman palace.
The head of that true church is still Jesus Christ.
The rest is of man and offensive to GodHi CA:
You say:
Quote they can nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
The Apostle Paul stated that his followers should follow him as he follows christ. Christ is our example to follow in his foot steps, but if someone does not follow him, I certainly will not follow;
Quote Mat 15:13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
CA……….So you follow a pope who you think is infalable and can dictates what you all will obey. You allegiance is to ROME Vatican and what ever they dictate for you and your followers do, because you think He is inspired by the most High. But we are told to seek and ask and Knock for ourselves from GOD. WE trust the GOD is quite capable to lead us much more so, then You and your pope ever could. IMO
gene
Quote (Gene @ Sep. 15 2009,16:41) CA……….But we are told to seek and ask and Knock for ourselves from GOD. WE trust the GOD is quite capable to lead us much more so, then You and your pope ever could. IMO gene
Gene,So I'll take that as a yes. You do believe that a burning in the bosom faith apart from reason is sufficient for you. That explains a lot about you.
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,09:16) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
Marty
I hope you don't teach. Jas. 3:1Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,11:36) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,09:16) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
Marty
I hope you don't teach. Jas. 3:1
Hi CA:One cannot go and teach others unless one is first taught himself. Something that I learned in the first five years of my walk with the Lord through many mistakes.
I have studied the scriptures for 29 years, and learned from the many mistakes that I have made, and God has corrected me many a time, and I am thankful because any Father that loves His children will correct them.
God has shown me that He will use me as a Bishop in the church, and in this role, God purge the church of these false doctrines and practices which the Catholic church, for the most part but not all, has initiated.
He will use me in this role not because I have never made mistakes or because there is anything special about me, but because I have endured correction.
And so, the proof is in the pudding.
My desire is God's very best for you, and so, maybe you should take heed to James 3:1 yourself.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,12:57) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,11:36) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,09:16) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
Marty
I hope you don't teach. Jas. 3:1
Hi CA:One cannot go and teach others unless one is first taught himself. Something that I learned in the first five years of my walk with the Lord through many mistakes.
I have studied the scriptures for 29 years, and learned from the many mistakes that I have made, and God has corrected me many a time, and I am thankful because any Father that loves His children will correct them.
God has shown me that He will use me as a Bishop in the church, and in this role, God purge the church of these false doctrines and practices which the Catholic church, for the most part but not all, has initiated.
He will use me in this role not because I have never made mistakes or because there is anything special about me, but because I have endured correction.
And so, the proof is in the pudding.
My desire is God's very best for you, and so, maybe you should take heed to James 3:1 yourself.
Love in Christ,
Marty
You might want to stay away from the Koolaid.As for me. I defer to the Church. So if you hear anything coming out of my posts, it's the Church talking to you…at least I'm doing my level best to keep it that way.
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,19:28) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,12:57) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,11:36) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,09:16) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
Marty
I hope you don't teach. Jas. 3:1
Hi CA:One cannot go and teach others unless one is first taught himself. Something that I learned in the first five years of my walk with the Lord through many mistakes.
I have studied the scriptures for 29 years, and learned from the many mistakes that I have made, and God has corrected me many a time, and I am thankful because any Father that loves His children will correct them.
God has shown me that He will use me as a Bishop in the church, and in this role, God purge the church of these false doctrines and practices which the Catholic church, for the most part but not all, has initiated.
He will use me in this role not because I have never made mistakes or because there is anything special about me, but because I have endured correction.
And so, the proof is in the pudding.
My desire is God's very best for you, and so, maybe you should take heed to James 3:1 yourself.
Love in Christ,
Marty
You might want to stay away from the Koolaid.As for me. I defer to the Church. So if you hear anything coming out of my posts, it's the Church talking to you…at least I'm doing my level best to keep it that way.
Hi CA:And so, you think Koolaid is making me talk this way? Well, we shall see, won't we, because the scripture states that there is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed.
I confessed Jesus as my Lord and not any man, and this is who I will follow, and I am not saying that I cannot be subjected to him through a man, but no not through the pope, because many doctrines of the Catholic church are not scriptual.
Both you and I will be accountable to God for what we teach, and if you are areeing with the Catholic church, by teaching what she is teaching you also will be accountable for what they teach.
Anyway, to each his own.
Love in Christ,
MartyThe Pharisees also were so busy with there rituals and traditions that they believe Jesus.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Sep. 17 2009,09:19) The Pharisees also were so busy with there rituals and traditions that they believe Jesus. Love in Christ,
Marty
Yes, some did believe Jesus and some did not. But I think you're point has evaded us all.Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,06:39) Quote (Gene @ Sep. 15 2009,16:41) CA……….But we are told to seek and ask and Knock for ourselves from GOD. WE trust the GOD is quite capable to lead us much more so, then You and your pope ever could. IMO gene
Gene,So I'll take that as a yes. You do believe that a burning in the bosom faith apart from reason is sufficient for you. That explains a lot about you.
CA……this also explains a lot about you , You confusion is quite obvious to all of us. Making statements that make no sense is truly a Catholic thing right? Scripture Plainly says “BRETHREN YOU HAVE NO NEED OF A TEACHER FOR THE SPIRIT ITSELF WILL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS”. and again in case you don't believe that. This is out of Jesus' own mouth, “DON'T YOU KNOW YOU SHALL (ALL) BE TAUGHT BY GOD. Your reliance on papa and all his false teachings tells us a lot about your lack of understanding of scripture also. IMOgene
Quote (942767 @ Sep. 17 2009,09:14) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,19:28) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,12:57) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 16 2009,11:36) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 16 2009,09:16) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 15 2009,16:05) Quote (942767 @ Sep. 15 2009,11:47) I also can proclaim the Christ's doctrine as infallible inasmuch as it is his doctrine.
Marty,But YOU have no means to assure us that YOU are an infallible source. So you may or may not be trustworthy.
How do you KNOW that what you believe is Christ's doctrine? Did you just pray about it like the Mormons pray about Joseph Smith? Did you get the burning in the bosom like they claim to have?
Hi CA:If my Father confirms what I am teaching, will that be enough to satisfy you or would you need some other assurance?
Don't we have his words written in red?
Also, as part of my morning prayer routine, I pray to my Father asking him to correct me if I am teaching any thing that is not his Word or doing any thing that is not his will.
How do you know that the pope is an infallible source?
Love in Christ,
Marty
I hope you don't teach. Jas. 3:1
Hi CA:One cannot go and teach others unless one is first taught himself. Something that I learned in the first five years of my walk with the Lord through many mistakes.
I have studied the scriptures for 29 years, and learned from the many mistakes that I have made, and God has corrected me many a time, and I am thankful because any Father that loves His children will correct them.
God has shown me that He will use me as a Bishop in the church, and in this role, God purge the church of these false doctrines and practices which the Catholic church, for the most part but not all, has initiated.
He will use me in this role not because I have never made mistakes or because there is anything special about me, but because I have endured correction.
And so, the proof is in the pudding.
My desire is God's very best for you, and so, maybe you should take heed to James 3:1 yourself.
Love in Christ,
Marty
You might want to stay away from the Koolaid.As for me. I defer to the Church. So if you hear anything coming out of my posts, it's the Church talking to you…at least I'm doing my level best to keep it that way.
Hi CA:And so, you think Koolaid is making me talk this way? Well, we shall see, won't we, because the scripture states that there is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed.
I confessed Jesus as my Lord and not any man, and this is who I will follow, and I am not saying that I cannot be subjected to him through a man, but no not through the pope, because many doctrines of the Catholic church are not scriptual.
Both you and I will be accountable to God for what we teach, and if you are areeing with the Catholic church, by teaching what she is teaching you also will be accountable for what they teach.
Anyway, to each his own.
Love in Christ,
Marty
CA believes in his father the Pope he even calls him holy father.I wonder when he prays “Our Father” who is he referring to
Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 18 2009,15:12) CA believes in his father the Pope he even calls him holy father. I wonder when he prays “Our Father” who is he referring to
God is the source of all Fatherhood.A bit jealous, eh? Maybe you other chaps aren't aware of this. But Muslims don't see God as Father. They more see themselves as dogs to a master.
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 18 2009,20:46) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 18 2009,15:12) CA believes in his father the Pope he even calls him holy father. I wonder when he prays “Our Father” who is he referring to
God is the source of all Fatherhood.A bit jealous, eh? Maybe you other chaps aren't aware of this. But Muslims don't see God as Father. They more see themselves as dogs to a master.
So, is the Pope your Father?I ask you is it more actual to say That God is OUR CREATOR or God is our Father
Father is a term of relationship not of physicality. God created us as He did all things in 6 days you will only see God using the term “son” or “Father” in relationship terms not in physical terms. God didn't say to Noah, I am your Father and he was just as much a Father to Noah as he was to Solomon to whom God did call “son”
When Jesus says to some of the Jews their Father is the devil he certainly could have never said your Creator is the devil, right? So Creator is a higher term than Father so Islam always adresses God in the utmost highest terms so their can be no confusion like what has happened in Christianity.
Think about it God loves those close to him like a son and then suddenly people start applying the term in weird ways, they go from taking His miraculous creation of Jesus and calling him son to people assuming fatherhood in human terms and then going a step further and claiming that God's creation is God Himself.
So Islam avoids those types of mistakes and Worships God in the purity of the fact that ultimately God is God and we are men.
Is The Pope your Father?
Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 20 2009,16:12) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 18 2009,20:46) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 18 2009,15:12) CA believes in his father the Pope he even calls him holy father. I wonder when he prays “Our Father” who is he referring to
God is the source of all Fatherhood.A bit jealous, eh? Maybe you other chaps aren't aware of this. But Muslims don't see God as Father. They more see themselves as dogs to a master.
So, is the Pope your Father?I ask you is it more actual to say That God is OUR CREATOR or God is our Father
Father is a term of relationship not of physicality. God created us as He did all things in 6 days you will only see God using the term “son” or “Father” in relationship terms not in physical terms. God didn't say to Noah, I am your Father and he was just as much a Father to Noah as he was to Solomon to whom God did call “son”
When Jesus says to some of the Jews their Father is the devil he certainly could have never said your Creator is the devil, right? So Creator is a higher term than Father so Islam always adresses God in the utmost highest terms so their can be no confusion like what has happened in Christianity.
Think about it God loves those close to him like a son and then suddenly people start applying the term in weird ways, they go from taking His miraculous creation of Jesus and calling him son to people assuming fatherhood in human terms and then going a step further and claiming that God's creation is God Himself.
So Islam avoids those types of mistakes and Worships God in the purity of the fact that ultimately God is God and we are men.
Is The Pope your Father?
Thanks for confirming my previous statement for the rest of everyone else.It is only those who have received the spirit of adoption that can cry out Abba Father!
The Eternal Father is the source of all fatherhood whether it be genetic or spiritual fatherhood. It is only in this that we understand fatherhood. There's your answer.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
