Answering John MacArthur, III

Answering John MacArthur, I · part II · part III

POPE & PAPACY Part 3 JOHN MACARTHUR
Blaze25z | 4.XII.2007
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WbF-BZxu6s

I

dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The "only mention of vestments in Scripture is in connexion with the priests of Baal," you said?

As you are an impatient man, maybe you did not read all the laws in Exodus and Leviticus. Aaronite priesthood had very detailed prescriptions for their vestments when in service, precisely as the Catholic priesthood has now. Especially those who are not modernist. Those who are not Bergoglio style.

"But the Aaronite priesthood" you might say, "was in the Old Testament."

The priests of Baal were also during the Old Testament's time. The prohibition against tonsure (shaven head) is also an Old Testament prescription.

Villie Stephanov

Hans-Georg Lundahl
So was JOSHUA 5:2 @ the same time, as well as Isaiah's 11:11 and Jeremiah, " For in These, I delight", says the LORD.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Four years ago, I wrote this, so I must have started seeing the series ....

II

As to Spurgeon's "only mention of vestments in Scripture is in connexion with the priests of Baal," I look up Douay Rheims.

Singular gives me one hit:

"Then Jonathan put on the holy vestment in the seventh month, in the year one hundred and threescore, at the feast day of the tabernacles: and he gathered together an army, and made a great number of arms."
[1 Machabees 10:21]

Plural:

Exodus 28:3, 4; 29:5, 21; 31:10; 35:19, 21; 39:1, 41; 40:13
Leviticus 6:11; 8:2, 30, 31; 16:4, 23, 32; 21:10
Numbers 20:28
Ezechiel 42:14; 44:19
2 Machabees 3:15

None of these mention priests of Baal ... you perhaps meant IV Kings 10:22?

And he said to them that were over the wardrobe: Bring forth garments for all the servants of Baal. And they brought them forth garments.

Oh - KJV has vestments in IV (II) Kings 10:22? Perhaps the word was chosen tendentiously by puritans, trying to smear Catholic clergy?

III

I have problems posting a comment involving Gospel of Matthew ...

Perhaps Blaze25z hates Gospel of St. Matthew as much as Spurgeon does?

EDIT after posting below : or perhaps the problem was just technical.

Let's try posting it in two halves:

1:33 "away with them, says Spurgeon"

He was against Gospel of St Matthew too?

Matthew 4:[18] And Jesus walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea (for they were fishers). [19] And he saith to them: Come ye after me, and I will make you to be fishers of men. [20] And they immediately leaving their nets, followed him.

[21] And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets: and he called them. [22] And they forthwith left their nets and father, and followed him.

5:[1] And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain, and when he was set down, his disciples came unto him.

(disciples distinguished from multitudes)

7:[28] And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine. [29] For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees.

(people or multitude seem to have caught up with them)

9:[8] And the multitude seeing it, feared, and glorified God that gave such power to men. [9] And when Jesus passed on from hence, he saw a man sitting in the custom house, named Matthew; and he saith to him: Follow me. And he rose up and followed him. [10] And it came to pass as he was sitting at meat in the house, behold many publicans and sinners came, and sat down with Jesus and his disciples.

10:[1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not.

13:[34] All these things Jesus spoke in parables to the multitudes: and without parables he did not speak to them. [35] That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.

[36] Then having sent away the multitudes, he came into the house, and his disciples came to him, saying: Expound to us the parable of the cockle of the field.

(again, disciples very clearly distinguished from multitude, and considering they were in a house "his disciples" would mean the 12, not all the believers on that occasion)

And second half:

15:[36] And taking the seven loaves and the fishes, and giving thanks, he brake, and gave to his disciples, and the disciples to the people. [37] And they did all eat, and had their fill. And they took up seven baskets full, of what remained of the fragments. [38] And they that did eat, were four thousand men, beside children and women. [39] And having dismissed the multitude, he went up into a boat, and came into the coasts of Magedan.

Considering the fewness of the loaves and fishes, the disciples would be the twelve, and the food was multiplied in their hands. Again, multitude dismissed and disciples can even share a boat with Him, or come after Him in a second boat: )

16:[5] And when his disciples were come over the water, they had forgotten to take bread.

(Even if they came in more than one boat, they were few enough for all of them to have forgotten bread)

[13] And Jesus came into the quarters of Caesarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? [14] But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. [20] Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.

[21] From that time Jesus began to shew to his disciples, that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the ancients and scribes and chief priests, and be put to death, and the third day rise again. [22] And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, be it far from thee, this shall not be unto thee. [23] Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men. [24] Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.

(Again, the "disciples" do not mean all the multitude of believers, St Peter - who "wasn't yet a saint" - was not speaking up in a huge crowd here.)

17:[1] And after six days Jesus taketh unto him Peter and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart: [2] And he was transfigured before them. And his face did shine as the sun: and his garments became white as snow. [3] And behold there appeared to them Moses and Elias talking with him. [4] And Peter answering, said to Jesus: Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. [5] And as he was yet speaking, behold a bright cloud overshadowed them. And lo, a voice out of the cloud, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear ye him.

[6] And the disciples hearing, fell upon their face, and were very much afraid. [7] And Jesus came and touched them: and said to them, Arise, and fear not. [8] And they lifting up their eyes saw no one but only Jesus. [9] And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying: Tell the vision to no man, till the Son of man be risen from the dead. [10] And his disciples asked him, saying: Why then do the scribes say that Elias must come first?

Here we even have just three men being kind of clergy within the clergy.

18:[1] At that hour the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Who thinkest thou is the greater in the kingdom of heaven?

The disciples are so few they can interrupt each other with agreeing questions - or so few one can speak and it counts as them all speaking, because he knows them (that one would have been St Peter if so).

[21] Then came Peter unto him and said: Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? [22] Jesus saith to him: I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times.

When Jesus told St Peter this, He reserved for him the fullness of the power of absolution.

19:[10] His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.

The disciples are so few only virginal men and men having left their wives are present to speak for them ... this is NOT all of His believers.

[27] Then Peter answering, said to him: Behold we have left all things, and have followed thee: what therefore shall we have?

St. Peter's "we" involves not all believers, but the disciples who have done so (12 at least).

20:[17] And Jesus going up to Jerusalem, took the twelve disciples apart, and said to them: [18] Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests and the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death. [19] And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked, and scourged, and crucified, and the third day he shall rise again. [20] Then came to him the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, adoring and asking something of him.

Again, the 12 form a clergy, since Christ takes them apart.

21:[1] And when they drew nigh to Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto mount Olivet, then Jesus sent two disciples, [2] Saying to them: Go ye into the village that is over against you, and immediately you shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them and bring them to me. [3] And if any man shall say anything to you, say ye, that the Lord hath need of them: and forthwith he will let them go. [4] Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: [5] Tell ye the daughter of Sion: Behold thy king cometh to thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of her that is used to the yoke.

[6] And the disciples going, did as Jesus commanded them.

These disciples are unnamed, probably because not of the twelve, not of the high clergy.

23:[1] Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,

These are therefore distinguished.

[2] Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. [3] All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not. [4] For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men's shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them.

Christ is saying, during the OT, one needed to obey even bad secondary clergy (Pharisees being secondary to priests), not just good clergy. This has implications for NT, when the clergy is no longer the Pharisees.

[10] Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master, Christ.

This is often taken as prohibiting clergy, in light of the rest, arguably it does not.

Here is what Challoner has to say on the subject:

[9] "Call none your father upon earth": Neither be ye called masters. The meaning is that our Father in heaven is incomparably more to be regarded, than any father upon earth: and no master to be followed, who would lead us away from Christ. But this does not hinder but that we are by the law of God to have a due respect both for our parents and spiritual fathers, (1 Cor. 4. 15) and for our masters and teachers.

I think some of the rest of what He is saying to scribes and Pharisees might involve the fact that a clergy is necessary (both testaments), and even Spurgeon was in his way a clergyman, in a way his humblest listener was not.

But I'm going on:

26:[6] And when Jesus was in Bethania, in the house of Simon the leper, [7] There came to him a woman having an alabaster box of precious ointment, and poured it on his head as he was at table. [8] And the disciples seeing it, had indignation, saying: To what purpose is this waste?

Note very well, the disciples are so few they were dining in the house of one person with Christ. NOT all of the believers.

[17] And on the first day of the Azymes, the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the pasch? [18] But Jesus said: Go ye into the city to a certain man, and say to him: the master saith, My time is near at hand, with thee I make the pasch with my disciples. [19] And the disciples did as Jesus appointed to them, and they prepared the pasch. [20] But when it was evening, he sat down with his twelve disciples.

Here we see that "the disciples" was often used as a shorthand for "the twelve disciples" - which were not all of the believers.

Note, this means that the 12 were the ones to whom Christ said the words of institution, which, as we know from other Gospels or St Paul were followed up by "do this in remembrance of me" authorising them to the same celebration.

From this moment on, the Eucharist can be celebrated:

• by the 12
• by anyone the 12 made bishop, like themselves
• by anyone the 12 made priest
• by anyone a bishop other than the 12 made bishop
• by anyone a bishop other than the 12 made priest.

C L E R G Y.

We are called "priests" because we can receive the Eucharist, not because we have each and all power to celebrate it as a sacrifice or as the miracle of Real Presence, which the clergy do.

As dividing the comment into two removed the problem, I'll add an edit into a comment above the difficulty could have been technical.

Though usually, when a comment is too long, it stops and says so, it doesn't roll on and on with no effect.

IV

other dialogue

dweezel theyounger

Thank God for men like John MacArthur.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Say that when the heretic he is converts to Catholicism ...

V

and more

ReformedLou

Christians are supposed to kiss the Pope's ring, and he kisses the Quran? I think not! "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for His wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in Him." Psalm 2:12

Hans-Georg Lundahl

A man who has kissed the Quran is not Pope.

VI

3:12 Spurgeon certainly has the exact same enmity against Catholicism I have always been against, even before becoming Catholic, and he was preserving what Luther and Calvin had preached, but some Lutherans and Anglicans, perhaps even Calvinists even then were forgetting.

If this hatred of Rome is evil, not only Spurgeon is evil, but also the Reformation, based on a hatred of Rome similar to his.

3:22 "she hates the true Church and we can only say the hatred is reciprocated"

Spurgeon on Rome.

I'd consider that truer of the Reformation.

Wonder when you'll fight the Lord's battles against the real errors of the Reformation.

VII

4:18 "Are we going to betray the martyrs?"

What martyrs? Are you referring to those on Martyrs' Mirror, like Clemens Scotus and Albertus Gallus, supposed 8th C. martyrs for opposing Boniface and his papism?

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Can We Have Medieval References for Clemens Scotus and Albertus Gallus?
http://filolohika.blogspot.com/2019/01/can-we-have-medieval-references-for.html

It's too funny all references to them (not featuring saints actually honoured by the Catholics) are from after Reformation. Even if Thieleman J. van Braght was honest who had been brought up in a Protestant environment, I don't think his reference Sebastian Franck was, and he's not clearly giving any older ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Franck

"Are we going to betray the history of our faith?"

What history?

The forgeries of Wylie?

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : History Forger James Aitken Wylie
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2014/12/history-forger-james-aitken-wylie.html

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : To give you an idea of Wylie's proceedings ...
http://filolohika.blogspot.com/2014/12/to-give-you-idea-of-wylies-proceedings.html

Or those of Martyrs' Mirror in which a Germanos of Constantinople is coopted Anabaptist, bc his list of requirements for adult baptism is formulated in a way which doesn't take into account that babies were baptised too?

4:33 "Are we gonna betray the Tyndales, the Luthers and the Calvins?"

At least you are heading for right era : one and a half millennia after Christ.

VIII

5:41 You are referring to news stories ... as if journalism were what it's boosted as.

It takes for Popes and Catholicism people who are not Catholic and it also takes every allegation of abuse as solid fact and often homosexual hebephilia for child abuse, when not such.

6:54 For instance, a man kissing a Quran is not a practising Catholic.

7:01 And a man never saying to anyone known that Dalai Lama needs to become Christian and he is at least sometimes on and off telling him so, is also hardly Catholic if shown so often beside Dalai Lama.

I'm lazy about telling Pearlman he should quit the synagogue and become Christian, but I did once or twice say sth like that or at least indirectly implying it.

IX

7:11 "Abandoning sound doctrine"

Protestantism did so 500 years ago, and Evangelicalism hasn't quite recovered it.

7:34 With Antipope Wojtyla, it's very optimistic to suppose he even made it to Purgatory.

P R O T E S T A N T I S M came up with the idea the dead don't need our prayers and the Church doesn't need infallibly sound doctrine, adding up to people being more and more heretic getting more and more of an assurance on earth of being in heaven after they died ... even in cases where Hell was likelier than Purgatory.

8:07 You get justified by the works of Christ, but you stay justified by doing good works.

Among the works of Christ that justify you are baptism and penance, among your own ones is persistence in prayer, to which the rosary is a good means.

And you get to Heaven by being justified when you die.

No, salvation is not by faith alone.

That is why the Catholic Church condemned the doctrine and the recalcitrant person of Luther.

X

Romans 3:[20] Because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified before him. For by the law is the knowledge of sin.

St Paul is speaking of the Mosaic law. And arguably, as Tyndale's inquisitor observed, about initial justification.

Romans 3:26 Through the forbearance of God, for the shewing of his justice in this time; that he himself may be just, and the justifier of him, who is of the faith of Jesus Christ.

If He is just in His works, He makes those believing in Him just in their works.

Correct reading of verse 28 : For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law.

As to THE law, we are dealing with Mosaic law, or, as Tyndale's Inquisitor James Latomus put it, with the initial fact of becoming justified. This is why infant baptism is possible, provided someone can be baptised in the faith of another.

Romans 3, with Catholic comment:
http://drbo.org/chapter/52003.htm