Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Call no man on earth father

Dear non-denom friend. You got me. As in got me interested. =) My old interest is piqued. Though it's way past midnight here, I've decided to write you a response since by responding to me, you in turn deserve a full response from me.

Before we get offtrack, let's stick with one issue first and then move on from there because these carpet bomb techniques can result in me trying to rush off answers all over the place but not answer a question satisfactorily.

Let's start back with the Father issue. I'm going to take your comments related to the Father issue and answer them first before moving on to another issue. I hope this is okay so we can look at each issue systematically before moving on.

You said this:
Now, moving on to the "Call no man father.."... Now Jesus is not referring to the literally tense of "father" as in a man who has biological children.. no not all..
Not that I disagree with you here, but please show me, from Scriptures alone, how you reached the conclusion that Jesus was not talking about biological fathers. I used God's gift of reason to sift the Scriptures to reach that conclusion. You critiqued my approach, demanding chapter and verse. I now ask the same. I believe, if I take the literal approach as you take it, Jesus says this:
Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. -Matt 23:9
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Call NO MAN ON EARTH FATHER. And then he contrasts earthly fathers to the One Father in Heaven. Crystal.

There are no escape clauses, no caveats, no exceptions. Call no man on earth Father, that's it. So, if I'm being an absolute literalist, then I might ask you which part of 'Call no man on earth father' don't you understand? Is it 'call', or 'man' or 'on earth' or 'father'? How did you come to the conclusion, based on the Scriptures alone, that Jesus meant your mother's husband and my mother's husband is somehow exempt?

Good luck on that, BTW =)

Second, and as I've noted in my first response, you totally conveniently forgot about the first part of the the prohibition. To refresh your memory, I present it here to you again:

"But do not be called Teacher; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. "–Matt 23:8-9
You did not interact or explain away how is it that we may call people teachers when Jesus, apparently clearly says that "Do not be called teacher". We must not be selective in our application and make exemptions when we see fit.

How do you reconcile that with the many mentions of the office of teachers with Jesus' apparent prohibition?
Now there were at Antioch, in the church that was there, prophets and teachers: -Acts 13:1

And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? -Cor 12:28-29

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; -Eph 4:11-12

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. -2Pet 2:1 [This verse, talking about false prophets and false teachers necessarily presupposes true prophets and true teachers. Therefore, as there were teachers, the 'Do not be called teachers' cannot be an absolute prohibition]
In New Testament times, as now, there were in fact, teachers. A teacher is a calling and a spiritual gift in the Church. How do you explain this exemption if the prohibition were absolute?

Furthermore, Jesus Himself, before the Ascension, tasked the Apostles in the Great Commission to:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. - Mat 28:19-20

He thus made them teachers. A teacher is someone who teaches. Are the Apostles exempt from that clause?

You're taking the prohibition against calling any man on earth father and applying exclusively to the Catholic priesthood. You conveniently exempt men who have children from this. And then you also conveniently exempt the good men and women who teach. How can this be? Please justify this. It's easier to question than to justify, no? LOL!

What do you suppose Jesus called St. Joseph, for example?

The fact it, as I have explained with numerous Scripture quotations, that the prohibition is not an absolute one. I gave many examples of spiritual fatherhood and of the Apostles calling themselves fathers and calling others their sons which I will not repeat. But if you really need it, tell me your favourite version of the Bible and I'll look up the references for you and include them.

I can, on the other hand conclusively show that Jesus did not mean from this verse that we cannot address human beings in terms of respect.

The Scriptures, inspired by the Holy Spirit, records that men were called father by the authors of Scripture.

In the speech of St. Stephen which I quoted, we find St. Stephen calling the Patriarch Abraham father.
And he said, "Hear me, brethren and fathers! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran - Acts 7:2
Abraham is a man. Abraham is called Father Abraham by several other people as well. For example, in the parable of Lazarus which Jesus Himself told, these words came from Jesus' lips:
"And he cried out and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, -Luke 16:24

But he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!' - Luke 16:30
Abraham is a man.

You then said, in an attempt to explain away St. Stephen's address of the Sanhedrin as fathers, an honorary title, an exalting title perhaps, that:
Again, as I stated before, when Stephen said "Hear me brethren and fathers.." he was addressing literal fathers..
Errr. not buying that at all. I would be happy if you could prove it. And also if you could explain why St. Stephen had more than one father and how both (or more) of them happen to be sitting in the Council. LOL! That would be fun. But if you read Acts 6 in the choosing of the Deacons, you'll note that the Greek speaking Jews (presumably from the diaspora) were complaining against the Hebrew speaking Jews (from Palestine) about their widows getting neglected. In response, the Apostles appoint 7 men, with Greek names, to be Deacons. In fact, one, a certain Nicholas of Antioch, is even a convert to Judaism. It's therefore highly unlikely that St. Stephen would have a literal flesh and blood father in the Sanhedrin. And even if he did, then Jesus could still have just asked him 'Which part of "Call NO MAN ON EARTH FATHER" did you not understand?' Hehe... Unless you can prove from Scripture that there exists such an exemption, then the question is for you too, my friend.

Now look at Acts 22:1. St. Paul is here speaking to a crowd in front of the Temple. Look how he addresses them:
Brothers and fathers, listen now to my defense."-Acts 22:1
Hmmm.... did St. Paul not learn of Jesus prohibition? Was he not reading his Bible like a good boy? LOL! Did he have many fathers and brothers among the crowd too, who happen want to kill him?

St. Stephen and St. Paul use the title here in addressing elders to honour them or address them honorably. So, once again, clearly, from the Scriptures, we can see that Jesus' prohibition against calling anyone of earth Father, calling anyone teacher(including anyone with a Ph.D because doctor is simply Latin for teacher) or master (including people with a Master's degree) is not absolute. Otherwise the NT evangelists and saints, inspired by the same Holy Spirit that descended on Jesus during His Baptism, would not have inspired them to utter such words.

God is not a God of confusion. -1Cor 14:33 Therefore we will not put conflicting words and meanings within the inspired Scriptures.

You also said:
He is talking about someone taking on the TITLE as "Father" as a means to exalt themselves.."Call no one Rabbi because you are all brothers.." Meaning that WE humans are all on the same level (we are brothers), no one is above another as God is above us.
Read the rest of that verse and He clearly explains that.. He is referring to the title of "FATHER" as a means of "Lordship"..You took that out of context completely.
I would ask you to show me where have taken it out of context. I have read the verse, the chapter and the whole book. I find nothing of the sort. On the contrary, I went to great lengths to provide context, including giving the preceding verse of 'Do not be called teacher' (which you did not interact with, BTW). It's as simple as that. Can't call no one father or teacher. Period. If you make exceptions, them prove it from the Bible. If you think my interpretation is wrong, show me, from the Bible. Instead, I see you sticking with that one verse (call no man on Earth father), totally out of context and attacking the Catholic practice without offering any other Scriptural support.

On the issue of using the title father as a means of exalting people, what do you think St. Paul and St. Stephen were doing when they used the title Fathers to address the Sanhedrin and the crowds respectively? It is not a means of exalting or paying due respect to the crowd/Council?

You said:
Now as far the spiritual son, that is not exalting onesself with the title of "father",but as a mentor which is what being a father is and in that context, he was not requesting "father" to be a "title". In my church, I have spiritual mothers, brothers, sisters, and fathers but not in the sense of "HOLY FATHER" as you call the pope or that I exalt them... No not at all.. We are all the same.
The title "Father" that Jesus was talking about is when someone uses that title as a means of lordship-Not a mentor which is what being a father means.



LOL! A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. If I were petty and mean, I could ask you, for example, to prove from the Scriptures where you got the idea that "a mentor which is what being a father means". You'll pardon me if I don't buy that without proof.

And, horror of horrors(!), Dioctionary.com gives, as it's first definition of mentor: "a wise and trusted counselor or teacher". Argghhhh!!!!! Mentors (aka teachers) are going to hell!!!!... Well, no, I'm not going to be petty and mean, so I won't ask that question. I'm pretty nice if you get to know me =) LOL!

Actually, let me tell you that in the Catholic Church, priests are, as you so succinctly put it "a mentor which" encompasses a part of "what being a father means". In the Catholic Church, the use of the title Father to address priests does not in anyway mean or intend to "exalt onesself with the title of "father",but as a mentor which is" a part of the function carried out by a father, part of what "being a father is".

We do not and have never intended to use the title of father on our priests as a means of exalting them to the point that they Lord it over us. Why, the Scriptures prohibit that. I am thrilled that you see it our way too.

And if you know us Catholics, you'll know that anyone trying to Lord anything over them is in for a big pile of doo doo LOL!

Cheers and G'nite.

PS
More answers forthcomin, about the Pope, the Church, non-denominationalism and all that. In fact, it's in draft mode, pics and all but I just can't find the time to put it together. Do be patient. Mahalo!

PPS
A parting shot... couldn't resist!
I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if you were to have countless guardians in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I exhort you, be imitators of me.

For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, and he will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, just as I teach everywhere in every church.
-1Cor 4:14-17

Poor St. Paul. A Father and a Teacher. Yikes! Double whammy. And asking people to imitate him... Sheesh...

16 comments:

frmichaelw said...

Christ is Risen!

Outstanding! I pray you continue in your work. Thank you for such a thorough explanation. I would very much like to use this with your permission of course.

Grace and Peace!

Fr. Michael W.
Chaplain, US Army
CSTC-A
Kabul, Afghanistan

Fr Tim Finigan said...

Andrew - thank you very much for the lovely crucifix that was delivered to me at this evening's blognic in London. I am amazed that you managed to organise this with so little notice of the meeting. I am deeply grateful to you for your kindness and will remember you at Mass tomorrow.

Andrew said...

Dear Fr. Finigan,

I'm very glad you liked it. Thanks and God bless!

Andrew said...

Dear Fr. Michael,

Thanks for visiting and for your kind comments.

I'd be more than honoured if anything in this humble blog may be of any help or service to you whatsoever. Please feel free. The first part of this continuing post can be found here.

May I express my admiration for you and the many chaplains in the services. My parish had the pleasure of having Fr. Ross Naylor, who was chaplain to the Royal Australian Air Force in Afghanistan for a time, say Mass for us. He was stationed in the RAAF overseas base in Butterworth in Penang before being transferred back to Australia recently. Decent and jolly good chap.

Thanks, again Father and God bless you and preserve you.

Non-denomination said...

Oh Andrew, good job on your diligent "studying"... Perhaps, you had to go to your "Father" priests to assist you with your questioned and faulty religion.. No pun intended. Now, I would like to thank you for FURTHER proving my point with this article.. Now that you have talked yourself into a corner, I will let YOU expound on it further..You've had rebuttal after rebuttal yet you have not proven any points. Oh and by the way, I see you took off "I pledge obedience to Pope Benedict.. Vicar of Christ"... Lol... why did you do that? You saw that there was something a bit strange about that didn't you? If that's what you believe then don't change it now that it's been questioned..Hey we all make mistakes. Anyhow, Now.. Call no man father... I will start at the very beginning-Where you quoted me saying "Jesus is not referring to the literal sense of "father" as in a man who has biological children." You know what.. I know how to shut this all down- How about YOU tell Me and your whole entire fan club, what EXACTLY Jesus was instructing when He said "Call no man on earth Father for you have one Father on earth who is in Heaven... Call no man Rabbi for you have one Master and you are all brothers.. Or be called teacher for you have one Teacher, the Christ."? Matt 23:8-11 What do you think God was referring to when He instructed us not to do that? Do you think God speaks for no reason and without purpose? Obviously you do. I see you have posted every single scripture you could find to go against what God is saying here in this verse to further prove your point... yet you have not presented what He meant by it.So dearest Andrew, tell us all what He meant since you know what He DIDN'T mean..I have a very CRYSTAL clear understanding of why He said this and I have told you this, yet for vanity purposes, you are unwilling to see that.. So how about you tell us all since you went to "great lenghts" to retrieve ALL of this "without-a-point" information. We all would gladly appreciate it. No need to make it look pretty with pictures and what have you, I am not impressed..Your fanclub may be though, seeing how they have to depend on you to defend their faith because they don't have their own understanding.They just go with the flow. If I could put pictures and articles on here regarding your Catholic faith, you'd probably shut down your own page.Ciao!

Non-denomination said...

Oh and sorry, I just had to point this out... That picture of John Paul II, what is he doing? Praying to the statue of Jesus on the cross? One word... Idolatry.. You might want to remove that picture if you're trying to make valid biblical points in trying to defend your faulty religion. Just a heads up.

Non-denomination said...

Sorry, I gave you too much credit.. I see you just moved the "I pledge obedience to Pope Benedict..Vicar of Christ." Lol... I had hoped that you had done the right thing..

Andrew said...

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. FYI, I had no need to get anyone's assistance to write this. If you had raised some substantial issue then perhaps one with higher learning needs to be consulted, but this is elementary stuff, so why bother?

Now, I would like to thank you for FURTHER proving my point with this article.. Now that you have talked yourself into a corner, I will let YOU expound on it further..You've had rebuttal after rebuttal yet you have not proven any points.
Because you say something doesn't mean it's so. Any impartial reader will be able to see that your points on the issue of 'call no man father' has been demolished so that not a single stone is left standing.

Oh and by the way, I see you took off "I pledge obedience to Pope Benedict.. Vicar of Christ"... Lol... why did you do that? You saw that there was something a bit strange about that didn't you? If that's what you believe then don't change it now that it's been questioned..
Mayhaps your eyesight, like your wisdom, has deserted you. Why would I alter my confession of faith? It's still there and has always been.

Again, I reiterate that I DO pledge obedience to Pope Benedict XVI, the Vicar of Christ on Earth. This is my faith and I am proud to profess it in Christ Jesus Our Lord.

Hey we all make mistakes.
Good of you to admit it. If you would be so kinds as to continue in that vein.

Anyhow, Now.. Call no man father... I will start at the very beginning-Where you quoted me saying "Jesus is not referring to the literal sense of "father" as in a man who has biological children." You know what..
I do know that. But I'm asking you how you know it from the text? Don't just do prooftexting and eisigesis, try some exegesis for a change.

I know how to shut this all down- How about YOU tell Me and your whole entire fan club, what EXACTLY Jesus was instructing when He said "Call no man on earth Father for you have one Father on earth who is in Heaven... Call no man Rabbi for you have one Master and you are all brothers.. Or be called teacher for you have one Teacher, the Christ."? Matt 23:8-11 What do you think God was referring to when He instructed us not to do that? Do you think God speaks for no reason and without purpose?
Flattery will get you everywhere, but, as much as I would like to claim it, I do not have a fanclub.

Again, There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. In my first post, I had already explained this, so I''m just going to quote it again. Please read carefully this time, ya.

Firstly, the context of Matthew 23 is Jesus’ admonishment of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees who ‘do not do what they preach’. They love to accumulate earthly honours and titles (v7). In a hyperbolic counterpoint, Jesus instructs his disciples to do the opposite of the Pharisees because those who humble themselves will be exalted. That’s the context of the verse.

I then went on to ask whether it can be applied literally and, using the example of the context of the preceding verse of teacher and other examples in the Scriptures, went on to show why it cannot be taken literally but should be understood the way I earlier explained.

Obviously you do. I see you have posted every single scripture you could find to go against what God is saying here in this verse to further prove your point... yet you have not presented what He meant by it.
Haven't you been reading anything I have written at all? You have eyes but you seem not to be able to see. Again, I'm just going to quote what I have previously written here. Try to pay a little attention this time.

So, once again, clearly, from the Scriptures, we can see that Jesus' prohibition against calling anyone of earth Father, calling anyone teacher(including anyone with a Ph.D because doctor is simply Latin for teacher) or master (including people with a Master's degree) is not absolute. Otherwise the NT evangelists and saints, inspired by the same Holy Spirit that descended on Jesus during His Baptism, would not have inspired them to utter such words.

God is not a God of confusion. -1Cor 14:33 Therefore He will not put conflicting words and meanings within the inspired Scriptures.


Scripture cannot contradict Scripture nor can you pit Apostle against Apostle for they were led by the same Spirit when writing Scripture.

Try to understand that. If these verses seem contradictory, we need to reconcile them and I think I have done just that, showing the hyperbolic meaning of the text you quoted and the many exceptions that can be found.

So dearest Andrew, tell us all what He meant since you know what He DIDN'T mean..I have a very CRYSTAL clear understanding of why He said this and I have told you this, yet for vanity purposes, you are unwilling to see that.. So how about you tell us all since you went to "great lenghts" to retrieve ALL of this "without-a-point" information. We all would gladly appreciate it.
Been there, done that. But your crystal seems cracked and fogged up. If you could, minus the hysterics, try to exegesis the text, it would make your claim more plausible. But what you have done is to put one verse down and say: Case closed. The real world doesn't word like that.

No need to make it look pretty with pictures and what have you, I am not impressed..
Dear friend, you are not my only reader and that's my style of writing, long before you appeared. In your own blog, you have post single spaced rants and that would be your prerogative. My style is for my other readers and most importantly, for myself.

Your fanclub may be though, seeing how they have to depend on you to defend their faith because they don't have their own understanding.They just go with the flow.
I'm very sure that Catholics do not need me to defend the Catholic Faith. The Faith has done jolly well without me for 2000 years. As for going with the flow, we Catholics share One Lord, One Faith and One Baptism. It should not be surprising that we share the same faith for we are One Church and the faith has remained the same all this time. Unlike your newly invented faith which is shared by you and can be altered by you at will since you are, effectively, your own Pope, subject only to the God of your own making and imagination (and a strong, if hazy one at that)

If I could put pictures and articles on here regarding your Catholic faith, you'd probably shut down your own page.Ciao!
May I invite you to start your own blog. You may put pictures of anything you want there.

But I assure you that this blog will continue so long as it serves a purpose, Deo volente.

Andrew said...

Oh and sorry, I just had to point this out... That picture of John Paul II, what is he doing? Praying to the statue of Jesus on the cross? One word... Idolatry.. You might want to remove that picture if you're trying to make valid biblical points in trying to defend your faulty religion. Just a heads up.
The photo of the late Pope John Paul the Great of happy memory was taken on Good Friday, a few days before he returned to the Lord Jesus to take up his eternal reward. Because of his illness, he could not travel to the Coliseum and the then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was deputed to lead the Stations of the Cross where the last walk of Jesus to Calvary is commemorated.

Pope John Paul followed the stations in the chapel of his private apartments and grasped the Crucifix, bearing the image of the Crucified Lord in his arms.

That's idolatry for you.

Anonymous said...

Dear Non-denom,

No pun intended? Anyone could see see the pun. may I suggest that before you go criticising other people's religion, perhaps you should reflect on yourself first. As a jew, I personally feel that everyone should live their lives in a good way, to love one YHWH and one another and be kind to others. Obviously you do not show any of those values. What man is a man if he does not make the world a better place. Obviously, you have shown to the world the perfect example of the term "confirmation bias". Anyways, Shalom aleichem שָׁלוֹם עֲלֵיכֶם

no. said...

Wow, Donaaron... Im some what surprised at what you posted but at the same time, not really. It is true God does speak through us but why would God tell a "prophet" something contrary to what His written word says? Does that make sense? I think not. Why would God provide a written manual to people over time with clear and strict intructions on how to receive eternal life just to have some man come in and say, "God told me this and we will not refer to the Bible anymore because that is of old.."-Do you honestly believe, Donaaron that God would seriously confuse people like that? What good is the Bible then if that's the case? Why even use it if supposedly God is speaking through this man who knows whats best for us? C'mon now dude.. Seriously? Man is naturally corrupt and easily corruptible therefore not making him trustworthy-The Father sent His Son as an example and we must walk as Jesus did and not to ever receive anything outside of His word... If you read the Bible, non of the prophets or apostles went outside of God's word.. None of them. The Bible is a guide that points out false teachers and false doctrines..and do you know the best way to find out if a person is a false teacher teaching false doctrines? If what he is saying does not match perfectly with the word of God, then he is a false teacher. It's simple. Now, first I would like to say, I am not being rude nor am I trying to rouse an argument amongst us.. I did not come to this site to piss off Catholics-No not at all, I came here to share that what is being practiced (not just among Catholics, but just about everyone) is contrary to the word of God. Don't you guys want to receive eternal life, do realize how serious this is? If God turns any of us away, that means we will be destoyed and cease to exist. So in saying that, the questions I am asking you guys as well as the issues I am addressing are to make you question who you are really worshipping.. I know it's hard to listen to because you are trying to defend what you believe.. but look at the word of God and see if it matches up with what you are doing.. Simple. There is no guessing with God, when you read His word... YOU KNOW! God said "I am the same today, yesterday and forever." Hebrew 13:8 Which means, God DOES NOT CHANGE! So if that's the case, why would He change His mind regarding the word He sent us to go by? Here's another verse from the Bible.. " I marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ to ANOTHER gospel: 7 Which is NOT another; but there be some that trouble you, and would PERVERT the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an ANGEL from heaven, preach ANY OTHER gospel to you than that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel to you than that you have received, let him be accursed." Galatians 1:6-9. So you see, God has warned us of these things.. He says that if it is not written in the gospel then it is not of God..matter of fact, it's not gospel at all. And by the way, how do you know which bible I'm using or even how many different Bible's I am using? I provide the scriptures.. look them up yourself..

Now moving on to the church being built on a rock. First of all, when Jesus said to do this, He was not talking about a literal rock... He was talking about Himself-He is the rock. God would not allow His church to be led by man, the true church of God is led by the Spirit. Again back to the "Call no man father.." issue, what Jesus meant by that was.. Don't place a man as the HEAD of the church.. The only HEAD is God.. He is the Father, HE is the Teacher, He is the Master.. NO MAN are these things-Only God is. So if a man presents himself as the HEAD of the church and teaches his own doctrines for "salvation"... and you accept him as the HEAD of the church AND practice his doctrines, you have replaced God with this man.. Therefore you are accepting that this man is the "HOLY FATHER", the TEACHER, and the MASTER. Does that make sense? And Donaaron, you are not supposed to put a limit to the word of God.. if you go by the Bible then go by it fully.. not partially.

I'm posting this on here in response to Donaaron on your previous page.. I didn't feel like repeating myself..

Non-denomination said...

The above comment is from me. Now that you have read the above comment, Your scriptural support is flimsy and without strength. The only thing you can defend about your catholic faith is the "call no man father" issue..And it is a very weak defense. And to further prove my point on the "father" thing- "Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you OBEY...?"Romans 6:16.. Andrew you do admit that you obey Pope Benedict... correct? As we all can see, you made that publicly known.. so according to the scripture, you are the Pope's slave. He is your "Holy Father".. Not God, right? Because if God was your Master, you would be HIS slave and obey Him and what HE says.. Which as you know as well as I do, you don't do that.I'll be honest with you, I do "scan" your articles and I missed your answer to that question but your answer still proves partial and flimsy. Jesus was in fact talking about false teachers and hypocrits; but what teachers are hypocrits? Just like the ones the scriptures speaks about.. A teacher who practices what they do not preach.. and He further says... Call no man father or teacher or master because you have ONLY.. Jesus is clearly saying you have just ONE master, teacher, and father..So therefore do not call a man these things.. Right? Ok.. in the bible, where did the scriptures come from? God right? The instructions in the Bible, Andrew, are from God-so God has been the ONLY teacher of these things.. no man came in and said "This is what I think, so put it in the bible.." None of these doctrines or instructions came from a man therefore not making him the teacher of them. NOW.. God has appointed men to teach what has ALREADY been WRITTEN.. which was from God. These men became teachers of the doctrines but not based on their own merit.. but of God's. So if you call a man Father because of what he teaches and it is not the word of God, then you see him as the head-The father. If you call a man teacher based off the doctrines he preaches that is not the word of God, you accept him as the one who shows you the way to life-The teacher. If you call a man master based off of your obedience to him yet he does not walk in line with the Word-then he is your Master. But God is saying that no man is above you therefore proving these types of teachers false "You have only one master and you are all brothers." Matthew 23:8. So no man can say "God told that this is the way to life and we must practice this" and it be conflicting with His word. No way Jose'! Just about every practice that Catholics keep is not biblical and not of God. The praying to Mary-Not biblical; The praying to the Rosary-Not biblical; Believing the Pope is the Christ on earth and the mediator-Not Biblical; Thinking Sunday is the Sabbath-Not biblical; Confessing your sins to a priest in a confessional booth-Not biblical; Forbading priests not to get married-Not biblical; Believing Mary is the coredeemer-Not biblical.So you see, Catholicism is not based off of truth but based off of doctrines made by men.

Non-denomination said...

Also, to get a better understanding between the 2 of us.. you're saying that when Jesus said call no man father, he was saying.. Call no man father who is a hypocrit correct??? To me that was not an answer or rather a complete answer because it was partial.. You did not expound

Mathias said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mathias said...

Hi Andrew,

I'm Mathias from Melaka. Looks like there's another apostle here now, eh? Haha. I came across your blog by accident. First off, I'd like to say that I like your blog very much. Do keep up the good work.:)

Now, to non-denom.,

I've seen people like you everywhere (and have had personal experience with them too), on the streets, on people's doorsteps, and especially on the web (where there are Catholic articles on websites and Youtube videos and what not), attacking the Catholic faith and pronouncing it to be very much astray from Jesus' teachings that unless we repent and join you in your faith, we are all going to Hell for what we are doing.

Isn't it funny when a Christian attacks another Christian when somehow we are all brothers and sisters in the Lord?

I think that you should read more about the Catholic faith (what we do and why we do them), like the offices of the Pope (he is NOT Christ on earth nor the mediator... I also see you avoided bickering about him being the servant of the servants of God) and the Marian devotion (we do not pray to Mary nor to the rosary - haha to think that we pray to the rosary) and truly understand it before proclaiming our practices to be non-biblical and such like. We have been through 2000 years and things are complicated enough to require some serious research. If there's anything that have stood the test of time, I daresay it's us. It is not fair for us therefore when people portray us in a bad light based on what they have been told about us or what they have interpreted from the Bible. Your comments are unnecessarily sowing bad feelings and they tell me that what you know about the Catholic faith is incomplete.

In my opinion, every Christian is essentially the same. We all fear and worship God and we believe that Jesus died for our sins and that he is our Lord and Savior. This alone is enough to enable us to seek common ground and also to be the basis of fruitful dialogues.

I have many responses forming in my mind as I read both Andrew's essay and your comments especially (they kept me shaking my head at your over enthusiastic ignorance). However, as much as I'd like to write them here, I'll not do so because this is not my blog and I'd like to know what Andrew will say.

One thing though. I agree with Andrew that you are choosing Jesus' words and applying it in a biased way against the Catholic church (the part about calling no one on earth father, for example). The Pope is called Holy Father not because he is holy nor because he is lording over us, but because his office as the church's supreme leader is holy and he is as much a father to the whole church as our own fathers are to us.

I hope that you and many others will cease condemning our every move. Truth be told, I'm very tired of people like this. Do let us follow Jesus peacefully - we in our own way, you in yours - if you really cannot tolerate our practices and beliefs. Stop saying we are all wrong and that we should join you in order to save ourselves. Stop assaulting us. (I sometimes think that we qualify for the last beatitude - happy are you when people insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you falsely because of Me)

Andrew, I hope I'm not stepping out of my bounds as an unknown individual comment-er. Pardon me if I had ya.. :)

God bless you and your work here at this blog!

Andrew said...

Hey Matthias,

Welcome and thanks for ur kinds words.

My blog is ur blog. Pls feel free =)