"Scripture is sufficient, certain and infallible." Amen…“And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” [Luke 4:4].

I’ll take the initiative by posting the first text used by that website you posted; they propose that this text teaches ‘infallibility’: “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all thing...more

I’ll take the initiative by posting the first text used by that website you posted; they propose that this text teaches ‘infallibility’:

“And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” [Matthew 28:18-20].

Where’s infallibility here; nothing in this text teaches ‘infallibility’ unless you use the word ‘implies’?less

Hi Rev, I agree that the Bible is the standard by which we test all things and that He [Jesus] doesn’t put any limit on how many times ‘we’ are to forgive our brothers. Here is an interesting thought concerning the seventy times seven; this is the exact time period [490 years] that the LORD gave Israel to among other things accept the Messiah the Prince. After Israel rejected their Messiah t...more

Hi Rev, I agree that the Bible is the standard by which we test all things and that He [Jesus] doesn’t put any limit on how many times ‘we’ are to forgive our brothers. Here is an interesting thought concerning the seventy times seven; this is the exact time period [490 years] that the LORD gave Israel to among other things accept the Messiah the Prince. After Israel rejected their Messiah the gospel went to the Gentiles; it is interesting that Jesus used this figure to make a point…less

Dwights, again; those passages do not teach ‘infallibility’… This dogma is imposed into those texts; if I am wrong let’s actually review them one by one; what do you think? Also, regarding your statement that the popes never ‘taught’ fallible dogmas is false; one defending such a position obviously has to do some theological gymnastics to prove otherwise…

Objectivity, well said...

Steve, have not and will not read that book; it is saturated with ‘left behind theology’… Have you read it?

Dwights, respectfully; I never denied that all men are sinners, what I asked was, “How can one who is abiding in Christ and who is filled with his Spirit continually commit such crimes? If one professed to be a Christian and continually committed such crimes many would deem such a profession to be a fraud...So, again; how could one who abided in Christ and was being led by the Holy Spirit do suc...more

Dwights, respectfully; I never denied that all men are sinners, what I asked was, “How can one who is abiding in Christ and who is filled with his Spirit continually commit such crimes? If one professed to be a Christian and continually committed such crimes many would deem such a profession to be a fraud...So, again; how could one who abided in Christ and was being led by the Holy Spirit do such things?

The Scriptural references used by http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm did not help; they repeatedly used the words [implies] or [intended] which means that the texts used do not explicitly teach ‘infallibility’… Matthew 28:18-20 speaks of the great commission and says nothing of infallibility; in fact, the comments associated with it said, “… [implies], was given to the apostles…but to their successors…” Sorry, but this is not what the text says; I have placed brackets within these comments for emphasis…

Matthew 16:18…Again, the comments say, “[implies] the assurance of the Church’s infallibility…”

John 14-16…The comments say, “…several passages occur which clearly [imply] the promise of infallibility.”

1 Timothy 3:15…Although the comments here do not use the words [implies or intended] it does take passages completely out of context. For example, it correctly says of the Gospel, “…namely, the strictly Divine authority of the Gospel which he and the other Apostles preached…” but then incorrectly assumes that the Biblical gospel and the gospel of Roman Catholicism are one and the same; they are not. By using Galatians 1:8 regarding anathematizing those who preach another gospel I don’t think that the commentator realized that he or she was actually anathematizing the extra biblical dogmas of Rome…

Acts 15:28…Again, we hear, “Finally, the consciousness of corporate infallibility is clearly [signified] in the expression used by the assembled Apostles in the decree of the Council of Jerusalem…” It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you.” Sorry, but again nothing in this text teaches infallibility; unless one uses the word ‘implies’…less

I agree and disagree with Laurie; I agree that we should [by God’s grace] be keeping our lives pure; if I can quote a friend of mine who said, “Prepare as if you’ll live here forever but live each day as if it is your last.” My disagreement is with his ‘left behind’ theology; specifically, the secret rapture and the chronology of the end times that he describes. He says the end day...more

I agree and disagree with Laurie; I agree that we should [by God’s grace] be keeping our lives pure; if I can quote a friend of mine who said, “Prepare as if you’ll live here forever but live each day as if it is your last.” My disagreement is with his ‘left behind’ theology; specifically, the secret rapture and the chronology of the end times that he describes.

He says the end days will begin with the [secret] ‘rapture’, secondly, what follows is the tribulation, and then the antichrist emerges …The Scriptures do not mention a ‘secret’ rapture to begin with and again, his chronology is off… 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 gives a completely different picture:

In verse 1 Paul is speaking of the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our “gathering together unto him” [verse 1] followed by verse 3 which says, “…for that day shall not come [the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ] except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed…” who the Lord consumes with the “brightness of his coming” [verse 8].

So, Paul emphatically teaches that there will be a falling away first, then secondly the antichrist rises, followed by the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our “gathering together unto him” [verse 1]; huge difference…less

Dwights, as I mentioned earlier I only gave a few examples…Yes, I am sure you could give an answer for every pope who failed miserably but one cannot revise the history books…We have yet to see where infallibility is taught in the Scriptures since you have not provided the evidence to support your claims; besides, how can one who is abiding in Christ and who is filled with his Spirit be guilty...more

Dwights, as I mentioned earlier I only gave a few examples…Yes, I am sure you could give an answer for every pope who failed miserably but one cannot revise the history books…We have yet to see where infallibility is taught in the Scriptures since you have not provided the evidence to support your claims; besides, how can one who is abiding in Christ and who is filled with his Spirit be guilty of having children out of wed-lock, committing fornication, stealing, murdering, and accepting cash for appointing religious positions [simony], etc. on a continual bases?

Also, I disagree; the first and second century Christians did not hold to the unbiblical teachings of the Roman Church and it is not the oldest church as you claim since most of the teachings held by Rome are never mentioned in the New Testament…less

"Too bad the Bible is not clear about the requirements for salvation" "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned" [1 Corinthians 2:14].

Dwights, a few thoughts here; first, you have quickly ascribed ‘infallibility’ to your popes without establishing where the New Testament teaches ‘infallibility’…Secondly, several months back I gave a couple of examples of supposedly ‘infallible’ popes having fallen way short of it; if my memory serves me well, I asked if I should continue to give additional examples but you declined...more

Dwights, a few thoughts here; first, you have quickly ascribed ‘infallibility’ to your popes without establishing where the New Testament teaches ‘infallibility’…Secondly, several months back I gave a couple of examples of supposedly ‘infallible’ popes having fallen way short of it; if my memory serves me well, I asked if I should continue to give additional examples but you declined.

One example was Pope Honorius [625-38] who was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council [680-1]. This pope was also condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. So, we have here a supposedly infallible pope condemning another infallible pope…How do you reconcile this?

The Roman Church creates a false dichotomy by saying that infallibility only applies when a pope is speaking ex-cathedra; this however fails the biblical test… The Word of God explicitly states the opposite: “We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not” [1 John 5:18].

If one is abiding in Christ and is filled with his Spirit they will not be guilty of continually having children out of wed-lock, committing fornication, stealing, murdering, and accepting cash for appointing religious positions [simony], etc. as many of the popes have done…less

“Within the church the issue of exclusivity makes some Christians cringe because they do not want to appear to be narrow-minded, unloving, disengaged, arrogant, parochial, and isolated from culture.” I understand the concerns that some believers may have about being labeled narrow-minded, unloving, etc but it is shameful to hear some “cringing” at the exclusive claims of Jesus Christ. W...more

“Within the church the issue of exclusivity makes some Christians cringe because they do not want to appear to be narrow-minded, unloving, disengaged, arrogant, parochial, and isolated from culture.”

I understand the concerns that some believers may have about being labeled narrow-minded, unloving, etc but it is shameful to hear some “cringing” at the exclusive claims of Jesus Christ. We are not called to appease the culture but to share this truth in love; if it is rejected we simply wipe the dust from our feet and move on…

These hyper-sensitive individuals need to pray for courage and the grace needed to proclaim Jesus Christ is the only way. Remember, Jesus said, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels” [Mark 8:38].less

Dwights, the purpose for the original quote was to show Rome’s admission; besides, there is nothing in the context that says it gave the canon or its inspiration… Plus, you have yet to prove that the Church is infallible let alone prove that the Roman Church is the Church that Christ founded; I believe the Holy Scriptures and History prove otherwise… It is funny that you bring up Luthe...more

Dwights, the purpose for the original quote was to show Rome’s admission; besides, there is nothing in the context that says it gave the canon or its inspiration…

Plus, you have yet to prove that the Church is infallible let alone prove that the Roman Church is the Church that Christ founded; I believe the Holy Scriptures and History prove otherwise…

It is funny that you bring up Luther as if he was the first to have supposedly misled others; history also demonstrates that many popes have proven to be anything but infallible…less

Dwights, sorry but the Latin Vulgate is a late 4th century version of the Bible and to quote the council of Trent which met in the 16th century does not help build your case. Also, considering that the Old Testament canon was already in place and that the New Testament epistles were Jewish in origin debunks the Roman stamp of approval. Yes; nice try… Once more; Q: If the Church is the only in...more

Dwights, sorry but the Latin Vulgate is a late 4th century version of the Bible and to quote the council of Trent which met in the 16th century does not help build your case. Also, considering that the Old Testament canon was already in place and that the New Testament epistles were Jewish in origin debunks the Roman stamp of approval. Yes; nice try…

Once more; Q: If the Church is the only infallible interpreter as you claim how did apostasy arise in the Church and how could the clergy [elders] “speak perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” [themselves]?less

Also, your claim that the Church of Rome gave us the canon of Scripture is false; your First Vatican Council stated: “These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical NOT BECAUSE SHE subsequently approved them by HER AUTHORITY after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration...more

Also, your claim that the Church of Rome gave us the canon of Scripture is false; your First Vatican Council stated:


“These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical NOT BECAUSE SHE subsequently approved them by HER AUTHORITY after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and WERE AS SUCH committed to the church” [First Vatican Council, session 3, chapter 2].less

Dwights, I agree when you say, “it is man alone who has twisted those meanings.” Men throughout church history have erred in their understanding of God’s Holy Word and it is interesting that men such as these have been present from the very beginning: Jude 1:4 says, “certain men crept in unawares”, “false brethren unawares brought in” [Galatians 2:4], “they were not of us” [1...more

Dwights, I agree when you say, “it is man alone who has twisted those meanings.” Men throughout church history have erred in their understanding of God’s Holy Word and it is interesting that men such as these have been present from the very beginning:

Jude 1:4 says, “certain men crept in unawares”, “false brethren unawares brought in” [Galatians 2:4], “they were not of us” [1 John 2:19], “in perils among false brethren” [2 Corinthians 11:26], “there shall be false teachers among you” [2 Peter 2:1], “many false prophets are gone out” [1 John 4:1], “such are false apostles, deceitful workers” [2 Corinthians 11:13]…

Jesus speaking to the seven churches in Revelation said, “thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not” [Revelation 2:2], “thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam” [Revelation 2:14], “So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans” [Revelation 2:15], “thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, …to teach and seduce” [Revelation 2:20], “which say they are Jews, and are not” [Revelation 3:9]…

Paul speaking to the clergy [the elders] said, “Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” [Acts 20:30], and he speaking of the antichrist he said, “so that he as God sitteth in the temple [the Church] of God, shewing himself that he is God” [2 Thessalonians 2:4].

So, suffice it to say that men alone have been twisting and contorting God’s Word from the church’s inception. Q: If the Church is the only infallible interpreter as you claim how did apostasy arise in the Church and how could the clergy [elders] “speak perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” [themselves]?less

You tell me; as you mentioned earlier, “it's not just a Protestant vs. Catholic thing; it very often is Protestant vs. Protestant and Catholic vs. Catholic.”

Let’s stop dealing with hypotheticals and get to the point; shall we? ;)

I have not but if the biblical evidence explicitly proves otherwise I could...

Correction, we have yet to seriously share specific passages in order to do any real swaying; that is, we have not gone verse by verse…You asked, “Could you do so today”…Do you mean could I or have I?