Would you prefer perhaps to reignite the religious wars of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Data?
I think that you missed the jumpers point: "How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith"
jumper is talking about the phenomena where certain things are pushed, take place, etc, by "whatever" authority (i.e. even in a single church or collective, by certain pastors, church leaders, etc) and yet many feel intimidated and refuse to speak up. He is saying this phenomena impacts all of wider Christendom, and the particulars in RC Church are one example of that, not the only one.
At least, that's how I read it. Maybe Jumper can confirm or otherwise explain.
But can I recommend none of us pulling out the "I'm the better Christian and my view is more orthodox than your, so suck it, my beloved Christian brother who I will lord that self-righteous and self-designated authority over by proclaiming how right I am and how wrong you are!" stick?
Thank you Fractal for your response. That is exactly what I'm saying. If, as I believe is a central tenant of the Christian faith, we are one body, this affects us all. We are told to morn with those who morn and to rejoice with those who are joyful. I am not RC but I grieve at the travails that segment of the Body is going thru. Mainstream Protestant churches are really no different, just that their struggles are not this weeks headline.
Back in the day, NBC news had a team report called the Huntley-Brinkley Report. At the end of each episode they had an editorial comment (imagine separating news from editorials? Hmmm). During "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland John Chancelor did a commentary and concluded with this line - "so on one side we have the Catholics and on the other side are the Protestants....I just have to wonder, where are all the Christians?" I am not a "member" of any denomination because I believe denominationalism and schism's to be counter-Biblical, but I attend and support and participate in worship regularly. I count as my brother any who will humble themselves, acknowledge their sinful nature and sin filled life, ask God for forgiveness and accept that Jesus is the means by which God provides that redemptive grace and mercy.
So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
My position has been consistent in all my arguments. I have been arguing one thing. That thing has been relevant in all cases.
Maybe try reading what I type instead of arguing to "win" and "be right". You're not going to get to bulldoze your way through this discussion, so you can pretend you came out "victorious". Respond to my point, or don't respond.
To make it clearer, if your only argument is that something is unbiblical, then you don't have an argument, because as you refuse to admit you agree, you know that plenty of things that aren't in the Bible aren't inherently bad because the Bible isn't exhaustive.
Would you prefer perhaps to reignite the religious wars of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Data?
I think that you missed the jumpers point: "How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith"
jumper is talking about the phenomena where certain things are pushed, take place, etc, by "whatever" authority (i.e. even in a single church or collective, by certain pastors, church leaders, etc) and yet many feel intimidated and refuse to speak up. He is saying this phenomena impacts all of wider Christendom, and the particulars in RC Church are one example of that, not the only one.
At least, that's how I read it. Maybe Jumper can confirm or otherwise explain.
But can I recommend none of us pulling out the "I'm the better Christian and my view is more orthodox than your, so suck it, my beloved Christian brother who I will lord that self-righteous and self-designated authority over by proclaiming how right I am and how wrong you are!" stick?
Thank you Fractal for your response. That is exactly what I'm saying. If, as I believe is a central tenant of the Christian faith, we are one body, this affects us all. We are told to morn with those who morn and to rejoice with those who are joyful. I am not RC but I grieve at the travails that segment of the Body is going thru. Mainstream Protestant churches are really no different, just that their struggles are not this weeks headline.
Back in the day, NBC news had a team report called the Huntley-Brinkley Report. At the end of each episode they had an editorial comment (imagine separating news from editorials? Hmmm). During "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland John Chancelor did a commentary and concluded with this line - "so on one side we have the Catholics and on the other side are the Protestants....I just have to wonder, where are all the Christians?" I am not a "member" of any denomination because I believe denominationalism and schism's to be counter-Biblical, but I attend and support and participate in worship regularly. I count as my brother any who will humble themselves, acknowledge their sinful nature and sin filled life, ask God for forgiveness and accept that Jesus is the means by which God provides that redemptive grace and mercy.
The Church also wouldn't consider itself a denomination and would consider other denominations counter-Biblical.
The real question is are their claims right about their own authority.
Although I'm sure you've considered it before, if not, it's worth considering.
So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
That's all I have to say on the matter.
I'm sure you agree the Bible is not exhaustive, yes?
Well, grilled cheese is also unbiblical… it's just not in there!
But we wouldn't say that makes it inherently bad or wrong, would we?
I'll admit, the analogy isn't perfect, as I'm comparing important matters of the faith to a grilled cheese, but I think it makes my point well enough.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
My position has been consistent in all my arguments. I have been arguing one thing. That thing has been relevant in all cases.
Maybe try reading what I type instead of arguing to "win" and "be right". You're not going to get to bulldoze your way through this discussion, so you can pretend you came out "victorious". Respond to my point, or don't respond.
To make it clearer, if your only argument is that something is unbiblical, then you don't have an argument, because as you refuse to admit you agree, you know that plenty of things that aren't in the Bible aren't inherently bad because the Bible isn't exhaustive.