@Wharton
jeager106 said:
↑
Do you agree that the RCC Pope is directed by God and is God's human channel
to Catholics on earth?
The pope is the final teacher with authority. No more. No less. BTW, there has been only one infallible statement made by a pope.
Does the RCC claim to be the only path to salvation?
No.
Does the RCC make claims that they are the ONLY way to salvation?
No.
Why is this so different from what claims you make about J.W.'s and their doctrine?
I don't have a problem with your "teachers with authority," just what they teach. (Quote)
Catholicism's Ever-Changing Doctrine
Athanasian Creed (ca. 400 AD), wherein one might read:
"Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and entire, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. . . This is the Catholic faith' unless everyone believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." (Denzinger 39, 30)
"Outside the Church nobody will be saved. (Extra ecclesiam nemo salvatur)" (Origen, In Jesu Nave hom. 3,5)
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved . . ." (Lat
Re: concerns that J.W.'s change dogma. I see that as clarification when new discoveries are
made about translation errors of the past and there are many. Most notably about
eternal life, living in heaven if a "good Christian", and the notion of Hell, Damnation and
the Trinity.
People seem to have a problem with the GB but not the Pope? I don't get that at all.
The RCC has changed dogma much over it's long history but they say it's merely
a clarification of dogma.
"Dogmas, as divine truths revealed by God, are eternal and unchangeable. That is why a dogma can never be "re-defined." Yet, in this work you will notice that most of these dogmas have been solemnly defined and/or pronounced more than once. These are not "re-definitions." Rather, they are further definitions and/or clarifications which buttress aspects of a dogma that have come under some form of denial or attack. The content of these denials/attacks was often not anticipated in the preceding pronouncements. Hence, each further definition is a MORE PRECISE definition of the dogma. It is never the opposite. It is never an expansion or widening, and thus changing, of what the dogma holds. It is never an evolution as to the content and substance of a dogma. The reason this is so is, again, because dogmas are immutable. Truth cannot change."(Adam S. Miller,
Op. Cit., p. 3)
Just word play.
Those that three words; "Truth cannot change." Sure it can is sure as hell :>) can
change.
"The only permanent in life is change."