[ATLian]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

My question is, which is better? Papal inflammability or Biblical?

What exactly does your question mean? Are you asking who is we should believe is "more infallible" between the Bible and the Pope? I put "more infallible" in quotes because infallibility is an absolute, so you can't be more infallible than another infallible thing.

The Bible is clearly not infallible. Evidence of Biblical contradictions are too many to even start listing. Maybe you can argue that god is infallible, but not the Bible. Papal infallibility refers to matters to do with god. Since he's god's spokesman on earth, Catholics believe he cannot be wrong on that. But he can be wrong on other matters. If the Pope tells you to buy Enron shares, then the shares collapse, that's OK, it's not a violation of his infallibility. If however he tells you that abortion is a mortal sin, then that's an absolute and he's not wrong on that.

Reggie, once you're done laughing, please correct me if I'm wrong.

[reggie_woic]

right on ATLian.
like i said, there are strict conditions to his infallibility.
we teach that ITS (the papacy) infallibility has to be in exercise as a shepherd
of christians and it has to deal with church morals.

[toobig]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Inflammability is the inability to err. According to many Theists, God cannot err.

The concept of God never erring has been transposed into His word, that according to Christians, is Himself expressed.

The man representing God therefore has been endowed with powers never to err. This man in the person of the Pope never committed any error, neither by commission nor omission, during the days when secular scientists were persecuted for lying against the truth. The papacy still holds to the doctrine of the pope's inflammability though they have dropped that of Biblical inflammability.

The protestants on the other hand, still hold that the Bible as an express word from God is Inflammable. SDAs still frontier this dogma to greater heights, maintaining that the Bible is the only rule of faith.

My question is, which is better? Papal inflammability or Biblical?

both papal inflammability and God......
N/b...dont be too much into releigion politics.Believe your believes and believe in One LIving GOd........
Otherwise,yull never sort out the wrangles thats sucks yu

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

In this regard, we cant trust the scriptures because the clause interpretated by you to mean Church's infallibility could be interpretated differently by another.

We might end up shifting back to the whole 'scripture vs tradition' debate. The clause isn't a scholastic interpretation, it was an interpretation passed down and carefully preserved by Tradition. Only one interpretation can be right, and scholastic interpretations usually result in stalemates.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Early Christian testaments could be subject to same errors that maybe apparent in the New Testament of the Bible.

If you can't trust the Early Christians, then you can't trust the Bible, it's that plain and simple.

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by reggie_woic

.
we teach that ITS (the papacy) infallibility has to be in exercise as a shepherd
of christians and it has to deal with church morals.

According to the 1st Vatican Council, infallibility also has to do with doctrinal statements.

[al-zalzalah]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

My question is, which is better? Papal inflammability or Biblical?

neither. both are prone to error.

[Genuwine]

Originally Posted by simbi-nyaima

in catholic dogma the doctrine of papal infallibility is largely derived from the statement that jesus made to his disciples, i think in mathews that 'whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven'. i however believe that is not the correct interpretation of the scripture

what the doctrine teaches is that the doctrine of papal infallibility DOES NOT imply that the pope is without sin or cannot make a mistake.

The doctrine of papal infallibility is a relatively modern one, not formally approved or consistently maintained by the catholic church until the vatican council that gathered in 1869-1870. It is one of the most controversial and most widely misunderstood teachings of the roman catholic church.

Even the most staunch defenders of the papacy and of the Roman catholic church understand that infallibility applies to teachings of the pope only when he is speaking ex cathedra, i.e on behalf of the whole church and in ways that are consistent with its councils, and with the collective wisdom of its cardinals and bishops as the truth has been revealed to them over time.

Further, infallibility applies only when the pope is speaking about matters of (note very carefully) FAITH or MORALS , eg. When the vatican press office issues a statement of the pope concerning a hotly contested, political issue, such statements are not regarded as being infallible, or even authoritative for all christians. The catholic church holds that the teaching authority of the pope is based solidly in scripture, eg. John 14:16-17.

And such infallible proclamations are highly uncommon. Accordingly, there has only been one occasion since the council proclamation when a pope has made an infallible statement. Around 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed the assumption of Mary into heaven as a dogma of faith.