Yuku free message boards

Let's take this one step further and consider the role of the pope and the government of the Vatican.

From Wikipedia:

Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano),^[10] is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both area and population.

So the Vatican is considered a sovereign territory.

From that same article:

The government of Vatican City has a unique structure. The Pope is the sovereign of the state. Legislative authority is vested in the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State, a body of cardinals appointed by the Pope for five-year periods. Executive power is in the hands of the President of that commission, assisted by the General Secretary and Deputy General Secretary. The state's foreign relations are entrusted to the Holy See's Secretariat of State and diplomatic service. Nevertheless, the pope has full and absolute executive, legislative and judicial power over Vatican City. He is currently the only absolute monarch in Europe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican

By any definition of "king", the pope would fit the bill. Just as a king has full and absolute executive, legislative, and judicial power, so does the pope. Thus the pope is indeed the king of a sovereign territory.

Likewise, like any king, the pope issues this-and-that mandate and ruling on a regular basis. Using jerryrose's argumentation, those dictates and mandates have God's stamp of approval, due to the fact that the pope is a king.

In fact, let's not stop there. The pope isn't just any ol' king, he claims to be the Vicar of Christ Himself. And his kingly rule doesn't actually just stop at the borders of Vatican City, it reaches out to the entire Roman Catholic Church worldwide. A king indeed. And beyond that, he claims that his rule didn't just start with him, but can be traced back all the way to Peter, who allegedly received that authority from Christ Himself here on Earth. Again, a king according to the definition of what a "king" is.

So, jerry, does the pope and the Roman Catholic Church have God's stamp of approval?

jerryrose wrote:

---

Pro 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

You've been taking tips from Mitex, haven't you? KJV-Onlyists are quick to bring up that verse when they can't answer a question.

jerryrose wrote:

---

Your question is a foolish one you already know the answer to and you ask it in hypocrisy...not seeking the truth, but testing me as if I am some one.

You're the one claiming that the KJV has God's stamp of approval by virtue of the fact that it was commissioned and mandated by a king. You are. Not me.

I'm simply pointing out other instances of earthly kings and their pronouncements/mandates. You're the one cherry picking which kingly edicts you choose to follow and which you don't.

If anybody here reeks of hypocrisy, that would be you.

Physician, heal thyself.

Oh, and BTW, you're not "some one". You're just another immature KJVOist, like all the others who have visited this board thinking they had the "knock-out punch". But when things don't go their way and their arguments fall flat on their face, they eventually leave with their tails tucked between their legs. Just like you will eventually do.

jerryrose wrote:

---

I am telling you what the Bible says about the relation between the kings of the earth and the King of kings.

BINGO! And that includes King Henry VIII, does it not?

That includes the pope, does it not? (Who, by any definition, is a king.)

Wanna keep going with this? Hey, I'm the Energizer Bunny. I keep going and going and going and going... I can go as long as you can, KJVOist.

And making accusations based on nothing but solely your words....

Actually, they're your words. But like most KJVOists, you don't like being confronted by your own words.

Let me guess: You're not going to "answer a fool according to his folly", right? Mitex is training you well, young Padawan.

BrianT wrote:

---

If that scripture meant what you want it to mean, then everything that every king has ever done personally or ordered to be done by others must be considered "perfect". Do you believe this is the case?

Therein lies Jerry's conundrum. If everything a king does is "perfect", then it's either perfectly good or perfectly evil. Obviously Henry VIII's actions weren't perfectly good, but likewise weren't perfectly evil. Jerry obviously won't proclaim all that Henry VIII did as perfectly evil, thus he must choose "perfectly good". But he won't do that, either, because that would require Jerry to proclaim the Church of England to have God's exclusive stamp of approval. And so another KJVOist walks a tightrope, avoiding the left and the right, pretending they don't exist because he refuses to see them. (I personally would suggest Jerry see a good optometrist. I can recommend one if Jerry requests it.)

The same applies to the pope. Nobody would say that the Catholic Church has no virtue at all. The Catholic Church, falling under the control of a king (the pope), obviously has some good to it. But it has some evil as well. And so it doesn't do either one "perfectly".

Jerry, like all KJVOists, has painted himself into a corner. But he'll never admit it. Just watch. His next response will be a masterpiece of convolution and obfuscation. The Padawan truly is learning from the Jedi.

Mitex would be proud.

(Of course Jerry can take the typical KJVOist way out by claiming that not everything a king does is perfect and infallible, only some things. Just like Rome does with its ex cathedra doctrine of papal infallibility. But then Romanism and KJVOism go hand-in-hand. [Likewise I doubt he'll inform us as to just how to determine which actions a king takes are "good" versus which are "bad". Always the greased pig, the KJVOist is.])

I have to make one correction, though. I'm not just any Energizer Bunny. I'm the rechargeable kind.