Posted on 09/24/2015 5:23:26 PM PDT by ebb tide
“This scripturally false.”
You are correct. Thank you, Bayard.
The whole purpose of our Lord Jesus Christ, The Incarnation, was one of dialogue with those He loved and came to save.
That is the consensus among many...And while that idea would appeal to many thru out the world it would be more evidence to bible believers that the pope is the precursor to the anti-Christ as the false Prophet...
He is absolutely terrible.
If one reads the small print the Catholic religion puts out, one will see that the Catholic religion claims IT is 'the Christ'...It is the body, the head which makes the Catholic religion God itself...
They claim the Catholic religion is the Kingdom of God spoken of in the scriptures...
You can only have a personal relationship with the Catholic Church...There is no such thing as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ...
While the Catholic religion is very religious, there's nothing Christian about it...
The whole purpose of our Lord Jesus Christ, The Incarnation, was one of dialogue with those He loved and came to save.
No. Now you got it wrong. Jesus Monologued. I'm saying that obviously false positions make a poor argument against Pope Francis.
Francis also had ample opportunity before Congress to offer a Psalm or two. If he did not want to mention abortion 'by name' he could have recited this:
Psalm 106:
36 They served their idols, Which became a snare to them. 37 They even sacrificed their sons And their daughters to demons, 38 And shed innocent blood, The blood of their sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with blood. 39 Thus they were defiled by their own works, And played the harlot by their own deeds.
Who would declare such and how would it be done?
Seems this site has some authoritative materials they cite:
Moses was not a politician. He was sent by G-d to deliver Benei Yisra'el and teach them the Torah. Moses' title is not "liberator" but rather "teacher" and "law giver."
I hate it when people try to secularize Moses, the man whom G-d spoke to face-to-face.
Paul had already "preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection" (Acts 17:18)
Except the narrator gives to us what Paul actually said before the people at the Areopagus. He did not say the word "Jesus Christ" before the men in the Areopagus. the Narrator mentions that Paul was preaching about Jesus, and so He was, but even Paul mentioned sayings of philosophers to prove his point. He did not however use words that would be unintelligible to his listeners
Regardless of the reaction, a believer is to give the simple gospel, as per the gospel charge. (Mk. 16:16)
I agree the we are to preach the Gospel. I disagree that the premise above that Pope Francis not mentioning explicitly the name Jesus Christ does not do that.
Once again, even the word Gospel imply's a statement of good news. Its news about Christ. It is not only just simply an unintelligible name.
The pope at least advocated the Golden Rule. But which presumes a foundational moral code that sets down what one should want down to them under love for God being primary. And having failed that man needs salvation, of God/Christ's expense and credit, which is the most important message.
You wrote a whole lot there, but you missed that the Pope was actually referencing (Mt 7:12) and the very words of Jesus as a point of common reference.
I agree that proclaiming Jesus is primary. That we are all called to repent. I disagree that Pope Francis missed those connections in his message to Congress.
No. I’ll stick with pointing out how wrong Francis and you are.
You do no good to your efforts by using false conclusions to convince.
Mat 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
How pathetic that people circle around a mere man and wait—in vain, more or less—for him to dole out a smidgen of Jesus to them. Protestants do it, too, with their revered pastors.
Personally I mark this man Francis as a false teacher. Nothing but gobbledygook comes out of his garbled speech (Italian is no esoteric language). John the Baptizer went to Herod and confronted him for his wickedness and got killed for it. Jesus never got along with the rulers of his time because they were of this world.
Frauds glad-hand wicked men. God’s righteous servants deliver TRUTH to them!
Once again, even the word Gospel imply's a statement of good news. Its news about Christ. It is not only just simply an unintelligible name.
So the Lord's Name is somehow "unintelligible" to members of Congress? That is an absurd presumption, particularly at this place and time in history. The problem at this point is not a deficiency of knowledge but rather a deliberate rejection of His teachings.
Capital punishment is approved by the Catholic Church only in instances where it is the only way to keep the public safe. In general Catholic doctrine is against capital punishment for the same reason they are against abortion, the sanctity of life.
Here is an excerpt
new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. . . . I renew the appeal I made . . . for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.
—Pope John Paul II Papal Mass, St. Louis, Missouri, January 27, 1999
Twenty-five years ago, our Conference of bishops first called for an end to the death penalty. We renew this call to seize a new moment and new momentum. This is a time to teach clearly, encourage reflection, and call for common action in the Catholic community to bring about an end to the use of the death penalty in our land.
—USCCB, A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death
No matter how heinous the crime, if society can protect itself without ending a human life, it should do so.
—USCCB, A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death
While the Old Testament includes some passages about taking the life of one who kills, the Old Testament and the teaching of Christ in the New Testament call us to protect life, practice mercy, and reject vengeance.
—USCCB, A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death
When Cain killed Abel, God did not end Cain’s life. Instead, he sent Cain into exile, not only sparing his life but protecting it by putting a mark on Cain, lest anyone should kill him at sight (Gn 4:15).
—USCCB, A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death
When the state, in our names and with our taxes, ends a human life despite having non-lethal alternatives, it suggests that society can overcome violence with violence. The use of the death penalty ought to be abandoned not only for what it does to those who are executed, but for what it does to all of society.
—USCCB, A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death
Our faith and Catholic teaching offer a moral framework for choices about the use of the death penalty. A principled Catholic response to crime and punishment is rooted in our convictions about good and evil, sin and redemption, justice and mercy. It is also shaped by our commitment to the life and dignity of every human person, and the common good. The opening chapters of the Book of Genesis teach that every life is a precious gift from God (see Genesis 2:7, 21-23). This gift must be respected and protected.
Nor did he even state how/why the Lord died. But the narration first says he preached unto them Jesus [which would be of His life and mission] and the resurrection. And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus," to address them as a group in a supplemental way.
Thus, rather than preaching of a mystery man who was raised to be their future judge, the reasonable inference is that Paul had preached Christ to them. And his approx. 260 word message in the Areopagus, which might not be complete, dealt with their fundamental issue of religious worship and idolatry, pointing them to worship the one true God, who raised up this risen Man that Paul preached, as He would judge them. And this preaching of the resurrection of the dead (not simply Christ's but theirs) was like addressing an association of skeptics .
To assert that the "Pope chose to emulate Paul speaking to the men of Athens" when he could not even clearly charge them with idolatry and warn them of being judged by God - even if by a (then) unnamed risen Man - even once in an approx. 3400 word address (as if Paul could even abstain in far less), is absurd. Instead, the prolixity of the pope to pols was a bland message with and buzz words about stuff they themselves basically overall profess.
If there is much of any pointed rebuke, it is the warning against those who "see only good or evil; or, if you will, the righteous and sinners," which, with his typical ambiguity, could even be seen to implicitly attack men like Paul and others who typically set men in either one of the two categories. Liberals paint with ultimate gray (outside their politically correct temple-speak) as it means no absolutes and hence no standards.
even Paul mentioned sayings of philosophers to prove his point.
One valid sentence of a philosopher here, in support of the religious them of worship, and eternal judgment, while the pope rambled on about this life now, on immigration, "human dignity," poverty and the environment, alluding that most dire threat of "Climate Change." As if he was addressing saved souls. Which he needs himself.
Perhaps his best line was affirming those who "do an honest day's work" who "in their own quiet way sustain the life of society.
Indeed. You cannot depose the pope without his approval.
USCCB stands for United States Communist Catholic Bishops.
It has no teaching, nor disciplinary authority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.