[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

Already answered. The Magisterium has no authority that it did not steal from the true Christians at the point of the sword and the stroke of the pen.

So, then, your contention is that the apostles---the original Magisterium of Christ's historic Church---"stole" their Christ-given doctrinal authority (Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6) from "the true Christians [whoever they supposedly were] at the point of the sword and the stroke of the pen," is that right?

We can go on like this until the return of Jesus, with you believing in the false teachings the Roman Catholic organization made up in order to gain power, and me believing in the words of Jesus and the actual traditions of His disciples.

We can go on like this until the return of Jesus, with you believing in the false teachings your preferred sectarian anti-Catholic tradition made up in order to rebel against Christ's historic Church (and thus against Christ himself ~ Lk. 10:16; Ac. 9:5), and me believing in the teachings of Jesus as handed down through his one historic Church and the actual apostolic Tradition affirmed and taught by the early Christian Church.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

So, then, your contention is that the apostles---the original Magisterium of Christ's historic Church

Once again, since you have so little understanding, the Apostles are not the Magisterium and Jesus did not create the Roman Catholic organization.

The Magisterium is a creation of the Roman Catholic organization, which was created by the people that had apostasized from the teachings of the Apostles.

The Apostles are no more a part of the Magisterium than Moses is part of the Roman Catholic organization.

You really need to learn real history instead of swallowing the fables of the Roman Catholic organization.

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

...the Apostles are not the Magisterium...

They weren't? So the early Church had no group of authoritative teachers whose binding doctrines were expected to be accepted and followed by all believers? That's what a Magisterium is, and that is precisely what the apostles were. Your comment is therefore unavoidably self-contradictory.

...and Jesus did not create the Roman Catholic organization.

As has already been established, Jesus founded one historic and hierarchical Church, which began to be commonly known as "the Catholic Church around 107 A.D., and which is still commonly known by that name today.

The Magisterium is a creation of the Roman Catholic organization, which was created by the people that had apostasized from the teachings of the Apostles.

Indeed? Go ahead and list the name of even a single group of orthodox Christians during the first millennium of Christian history that believed anything even remotely resembling a distinctly Protestant doctrine.

The Apostles are no more a part of the Magisterium than Moses is part of the Roman Catholic organization.

Already refuted above.

You really need to learn real history...

"real history" = "anything that appears to agree with gen-o's personal anti-Catholic preferences and assumptions"

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

They weren't? So the early Church had no group of authoritative teachers whose binding doctrines were expected to be accepted and followed by all believers? That's what a Magisterium is, and that is precisely what the apostles were.

Even while the Apostles lived, they were unable to keep the heresies from spreading through the Christian churches.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Ecclesiastes 1:9 9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Deuteronomy 31:27 27For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death?

There is no basis in the Roman Catholic organization's claim that the teachings of the Apostles have remained intact when the historical evidence proves that the traditions and beliefs of the Roman Catholic organization in 380 CE were not the same as kept and taught by the Apostles in the first century CE.

If you believe Jesus set up the Roman Catholic organization by speaking in parables, then it is obvious that the clear unmistakable words of Peter state that the Catholic Church would be filled with false teachers.

[Stuu]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

[font="Georgia"] ...declares the atheist. (The irony here would be comical, if it weren't so pathetic.)

I am against any fascist / totalitarian regime that oppresses their people.

Some examples of leaders of such regimes:

Pol Pot
Hitler
Pacelli
Mussolini
Stalin
Mao

Not a single one of these based a regime on the principle of atheism. Some of them required atheism in order to remove other gods and install themselves instead. That's just a substitution of one tyrant for another.

When we have tried a regime based on what I believe in, a secular democracy that applies the teachings of of Spinoza, Einstein, Russell, and Paine, for example, then perhaps you would have the data on which to base a comment on what I would have.

Stuart

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

Even while the Apostles lived, they were unable to keep the heresies from spreading through the Christian churches.

That's why the apostles instructed believers to follow their (the apostles') Magisterial teachings, rather than those promoted by individual laymen such as yourself. It was the authoritative teaching of the Church's Magisterium (the apostles and their ordained successors, the bishops) which defined and defines doctrinal orthodoxy for believers, not the theological opinions of laymen.

There is no basis in the Roman Catholic organization's claim that the teachings of the Apostles have remained intact when the historical evidence proves that the traditions and beliefs of the Roman Catholic organization in 380 CE were not the same as kept and taught by the Apostles in the first century CE.

The Catholic Church in 380 and at every other time has held firmly to apostolic teaching, just as she does today.

If you believe Jesus set up the Roman Catholic organization by speaking in parables, then it is obvious that the clear unmistakable words of Peter state that the Catholic Church would be filled with false teachers.

Already answered.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

the theological opinions of laymen.

Why don't we talk about the theological opinions of laymen.

Jesus did not go to the Magisterium of His day (scribes and Pharisees) to get teachers for His flock, instead He gathered a group of laymen together and taught them the Word of God.

John the Immerser was not part of the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees), but was a layman that went around teaching repentance.

Paul was part of the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees), but rejected everything taught by them in order to accept the teachings of the layman that healed his blindness.

You, want the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees) to teach you their version of the truth, but Jesus said that they make everyone they teach into more a child of hell than they are themselves.

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

Why don't we talk about the theological opinions of laymen. Jesus did not go to the Magisterium of His day (scribes and Pharisees) to get teachers for His flock, instead He gathered a group of laymen together and taught them the Word of God. John the Immerser was not part of the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees), but was a layman that went around teaching repentance. Paul was part of the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees), but rejected everything taught by them in order to accept the teachings of the layman that healed his blindness. You, want the Magisterium (scribes and Pharisees) to teach you their version of the truth, but Jesus said that they make everyone they teach into more a child of hell than they are themselves.

How many logical fallacies can you fit into a single post? Well, let's see: category fallacy, equivocation fallacy, non sequitur fallacy, petitio principii fallacy (begging the question)---at least four, then.

Not to point out the obvious, but two points are immediately apparent:

• You are not Jesus Christ, the infallible Son of God.
• The scribes and pharisees under the Old Covenant are not the apostolic Magisterium of Christ's Church under the New Covenant. Sorry, but here you're comparing apples and...well, doorknobs.

Nice try, but you're way off on this subject.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

The scribes and pharisees under the Old Covenant are not the apostolic Magisterium of Christ's Church under the New Covenant.

The Magisterium is the New Covenant version of the scribes and Pharisees.

You will never know the truth as long as you believe them when they say they are infallible.

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

The Magisterium is the New Covenant version of the scribes and Pharisees.

You're actually equating the apostles with the scribes and pharisees?

You will never know the truth as long as you believe them when they say they are infallible.

QUESTION: Was the apostolic Magisterium of the early Church infallible in its doctrinal teachings, yes or no?



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

You're actually equating the apostles with the scribes and pharisees?

None of the Apostles claim to be part of the Magisterium.

I am equating the false teachers that claim to be part of the Magisterium with the scribes and Pharisees.

Originally Posted by Cruciform

QUESTION: Was the apostolic Magisterium of the early Church infallible in its doctrinal teachings, yes or no?

Everyone that has claimed to be part of the Magisterium is a false teacher and does not follow the teachings of the Apostles.

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

None of the Apostles claim to be part of the Magisterium.

A "magisterium" is an authorized group of authoritative teachers. Therefore, the apostles were the original Magisterium of Christ's historic Church. Are you actually denying that the apostles were the authoritative teachers of the early Christian Church (1 Jn. 4:6; cf. Lk. 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15)?

I am equating the false teachers that claim to be part of the Magisterium with the scribes and Pharisees.

No one has to "claim" to be part of the Church's Magisterium. They're either episcopally ordained to that position, or they're not (for example, you are not). Your reference to them as "false teachers" means less than nothing, since your biblical interpretations and theological opinions carry no binding authority whatsoever. Again, you just don't get a vote.

Everyone that has claimed to be part of the Magisterium is a false teacher and does not follow the teachings of the Apostles.

Already answered.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[Stuu]

Originally Posted by Cruciform

No one has to "claim" to be part of the Church's Magisterium. They're either episcopally ordained to that position, or they're not (for example, you are not). Your reference to them as "false teachers" means less than nothing, since your biblical interpretations and theological opinions carry no binding authority whatsoever. Again, you just don't get a vote.

Let me guess...those who do the ordaining are members of the magisterium. Specifically, the pope appoints bishops.

They may not be False Teachers as defined by the internal rules of the RCC, but they can still be called false teachers, given that false teachers decide who the other false teachers are, and the principal homophobe is the one who tells the other homophobes what the correct goodthink is.

Stuart

[Cruciform]

Originally Posted by Stuu

Let me guess...those who do the ordaining are members of the magisterium. Specifically, the pope appoints bishops. They may not be False Teachers as defined by the internal rules of the RCC, but they can still be called false teachers, given that false teachers decide who the other false teachers are, and the principal homophobe is the one who tells the other homophobes what the correct goodthink is.

Poor Stuu... So many assumptions, so little substance...



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

[Pierac]

EBIONISM (Adoptionism). The earliest and most radical denial of the deity of Christ, Ebionism was taught by a small Jewish-Christian sect in the 1st century. They believed that the power of God came upon a man named Jesus to enable him to fulfill the Messianic role, but that Christ was not God.


Was Peter a EBIONITE?

Mat 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Mat 16:16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Wow, not God! What else did Peter say or teach?

Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--

WOW Acts 2:22 sure fits the bill for... "believed that the power of God came upon a man named Jesus to enable him to fulfill the Messianic role"

"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has caused us to be born-again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).


I'd have to go with Peter was a EBIONITE with a little Luke virgin birth added for flavor!

Luk 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.



Paul