Excuse me Father.......
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/24/2003
Location: USA
The Roman Catholic church teaches that those in the clergy should be called "father." This is in direct opposition to the words of Christ. He said, "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven" (Matt. 23:9). The pope, cardinals and others expect and receive the homage of men as they bow down to them. Yet, the one who the Roman Catholics say is the first pope, Peter, refused to let men bow down to him (Acts 10:25-26).
The Roman Catholic church teaches that the pope of the vicar of Christ on earth; that he is the head of the church on earth. The Bible declares the church is the body of Christ and that Christ is its head (Eph. 1:22-23). According to Roman Catholic doctrine, then, the body has two heads--a gross perversion. The only earthly organization of the church in the New Testament is local congregations. These congregations existed independently of each other, having their own elders (bishops, pastors) as leaders (1 Pet. 5:1-4; Titus 1:5-9).
Roman Catholicism is a corrupt system. It perverts the teaching of the Bible and robs the Father of His glory.
"Preaching Christ, Warning Every Man"
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 03/29/2003
Location: USA
hogguide, i dont know if you check this anymore but if you do try to research the whole bible on the "father" topic. dont just throw one thing the bible says out there and think that it is right. matt 23:9- and call no man your father on earth, for you have one father who is in heaven.- by your arguements i hope that you never referred to your parent as father. isnt that what the scripture is saying? (sarcasm) i have a verse. 1 cor 4:15- i became your father in christ jesus through the gospel.- sorry that i have that attitude, but it just irritates me to see people talk but not listen. peace.
this is joe...
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 03/29/2003
Location: USA
and sorry to bring up past postings everyone. i was just reading through and hogguide really stood out. peace.
this is joe...
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/28/2002
Location: USA
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
Catholic Answers states:
quote:
So What Did Jesus Mean?
Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love "the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men" (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their grasping after marks of status and prestige.
Could someone to explain to me the difference between the Pharisees pride of position, and those "others" who feel penitents cannot find absolution from their sin except through their office? The Pharisees never claimed the ability to invoke infallibility in all matters of faith and morals. It would seem to me that those of the priestly and Papal offices have assumed even more prestige and power to themselves than even the Pharisees.
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10140 Posts
PM
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
The Papacy never assumed the power - it was given. Matt 16:18.
Astralis
In sempiterna saecula
Links | FAQ
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
Matthew 16 does not say one word about Papacy, nor is Peter called "Father."
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10140 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
I know. The Bible doesn't say one word about Trinity either.
Astralis
In sempiterna saecula
Links | FAQ
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
The focus of this thread is a clear prohibition of Christ to refuse to call men by the title "Father." The issue is not whether it is proper to refer to others as a natural father or acknowledge them as a spiritual father. But the prohibition is VERY PLAIN in that it forbids us to call men "Father" as an official title in reference to their position or status. There can be some points made as to what it does not mean, but the discussion of this verse should largely be about what it does mean. If it was a rebuke to the proud Pharisees for their ostentatious demeanor, then it would apply many times over to the Catholic clergy, for they assume unscriptural power and position for themselves far greater than the Pharisees.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
The scripture states:
quote:
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
The specific prohibition here has a direct reference also to public greetings as "Master," "Rabbi," or "Father." The context has nothing to do at all with natural paternal relationships, therefore it should not even be part of the discussions. In reference to those who may be termed spiritual fathers, the issue is whether the term "Father" should be employed as a regular/public form of address. Paul called himself a spiritual father, but certainly did not ask the Corinthians to address himself with the title of "Father" in a regular form of public or private greeting. The sin that is specifically in view here is the usage of "Father" as a form of greeting or address. The employment of this terminology Jesus identifies as one of the distinct marks of spiritual hypocrisy, pride, and blindness.
It is men such as these that are fools and blind guides. Any man that should wish to elevate himself by the use of such a means of address is affronting the Father in heaven, by assuming powers that belong to Him alone (the power to absolve sin). Any man who wishes to be called by this form of address, is in no spiritual state as to be able to be trusted with the teachings of those things which concern the salvation of souls. This is why Jesus says the proselytes of these men are made two-fold more the children of hell, for they are only further blinded to the light by the dogma of these hypocrites.
quote:
I know. The Bible doesn't say one word about Trinity either.
This is my point exactly-that Papacy cannot be found in this passage, neither in word or concept. The office of Papacy is an erroneous theological conclusion not a scriptural fact. In this there is a distinct difference from it and the doctrine of the Godhead (Biblical term) which is often referred to also as the Trinity (and these three are one). Further there is not the slightest hint in all of the NT that the apostles and elders were addressed formally as "Father."
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/28/2002
Location: USA
So why is it still ok to call people "teacher" or "master." I know we don't use the title "master" much any more, but there was a time (in my memory!) where people would call underage boys "Master So-and-so."
If we use this scripture passage to say we can't call people "father" then we also shouldn't be calling people teacher or master. I'll have to write a letter to the evangelical pastor Chuck Swindall. Every time I hear his radio program it begins with, "Here is a word from our teacher, Chuck Swindall." How unbiblical.
quote:
Paul called himself a spiritual father, but certainly did not ask the Corinthians to address himself with the title of "Father" in a regular form of public or private greeting. The sin that is specifically in view here is the usage of "Father" as a form of greeting or address.
So it is your position then that it is ok for someone to really be our spiritual father, we just can't actual call him that, because then it would be a sin?
Somehow, Thunderstick, I believe that your reading of this passage misses the entire point.
We have but one father, one teacher, one master, and that is Christ. The fathers, teachers, and masters that we have on this earth (and I have had plenty) are fathers, teachers, and masters in as much as they share in Christ's ministry.
Paul, Peter, and John all are recorded in the New Testament as calling their flock their children. I'm guessing they had a more intimate knowledge of Christ's wishes in this regard than you do.
Pax,
Matt
Turris Fortis Mihi Deus
God is my Strong Tower
Catholic Apologetics at
http://albanach.org/apologetics
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10140 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
Thunderstick,
Your irrational approach to Catholicism in this regard is not surprising. People find many things about Catholicism to condemn that are explicitly approved of in the Bible but non-Catholics condemn them because they don't understand and hate the Catholic Church. Your posts above prove this.
Have you ever had a teacher? A professor? Is your pastor now not your teacher? Do you not listen intently to his sermons? Why give him more attention than others in your congregation?
Did Jesus say call no one else teacher?
Astralis
In sempiterna saecula
Links | FAQ
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
OK Admin/albanach
You have focused on what it does not mean (to which I plan to respond). Please tell me where this prohibition does apply. Please be specific like Jesus was, so that we are not talking about vague generalities.
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10140 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
Thunderstick,
Catholic.com thoroughly goes over this and I highly recommend reading it: Call no man father.
Astralis
In sempiterna saecula
Links | FAQ
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/24/2002
quote:
OK Admin/albanach
You have focused on what it does not mean (to which I plan to respond). Please tell me where this prohibition does apply. Please be specific like Jesus was, so that we are not talking about vague generalities.
Figurative over literal. Don't seek titles for the purpose of attaining earthly stature.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/02/2003
quote:
Catholic.com thoroughly goes over this and I highly recommend reading it: Call no man father.
I did read this article, but in my mind it gives very little in the way of explaining the prohibition in a way that could be applied today. The focus in the article is on the sin of the Pharisees. However as I previously pointed out the Catholic clergy claims for itself far more authority, status, and honor than the Pharisees. If this was a rebuke to the Pharisees it would be a scathing denunciation to the Romish clergy. The Pharisees did not have any one individual who claimed infallibility in all matters of faith and morals. They did not expect people to bow down to them or kiss their feet. They only wanted the people to be in awe of their religious attainments, knowledge, and position of office, and then address them with honorary titles.
It is evident that the text is not speaking about paternal earthly fathers. It does not discount the existence of spiritual fathers. It does not discount the fact that men who occupy the office of pastors and teachers and may be referred to as such, for they are referred to as such elsewhere in scripture. The point in view here is that an ostentatious clergy felt that they should be publicly addressed as "Master so and so" or "Father X." The demand that they be addressed with titles of honor that always denoted their distinction of learning and authority from the rest of their brethren is pure hypocrisy; when in fact the position they hold is designed to "serve" their brethren rather than having their brethren serve them. Jesus' words do not advocate disrespect for authority or non-compliance, but rather are addressed to the disciples to show that those who demand such honorary titles of distinction are hypocrititcal in their religion. The scriptures are equally clear on the necessity of the brethren to obey those in rule over them and to show their leaders honor and respect by recognizing the office they hold.
The injunction not to call or address any man as rabbi, master, or father is quite plain and easily understood, in the context in which it is given. The principle behind the command is to prevent brethren from supposing that they can only come to their heavenly Father through an earthly man titled "father." The principle is to prevent men from blindly following other men who assume they are authoritative "masters" in the dispensement of divine knowledge in regards to all matters of faith and morals.
For the record, I am a minister of the gospel, and also refuse to be addressed by such titles as "Reverend." I have a name given me of my parents. I hold an office, but I do not ask that others publicly address me with my office title before my name, though they may refer to as a person who holds such an office. Though I am a preacher and teacher, I do not assume that the other brethren cannot have insight into God's Word that is above my own in some areas. When I read the NT I find the names of the apostles and elders mentioned there, but not once do I find them listed as Master or Father X, though they occupied those offices.
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS