Posted on 02/05/2006 12:36:59 PM PST by Gamecock
"Wow, you mean the "church" was created 1517 after the birth of Christ?":
you know, this is a crucial problem for all those who try to completely throw out the Catholic Church. I have read those who have the line of the 'true' Church going through various groups of heretics.
Far easier, and better to claim that the Church has existed, though tainted with sinners, for 2000 years.
Thomas Acquinas, surely, was a Christian, as were Augustine and countless others. Remember the parable of the weeds in the wheat field.
The question about the church being comprised of the saved is something with which we would agree...all of us I hope. Rnmom has reduced the equation to its simplest form.
The saved are those who believe in Jesus Christ. There are no saved who are unbelievers; there are no unbelievers who are saved.
I do not think the bible supports the notion that baptism confers salvation. An unbelieving atheist gets as much benefit from baptism as does a duck from a good roasting.
Both will be consumed.
By grace we are saved through faith....
Prove it without making any reference to that "ass" or the people within it. Prove that the Bible is the Word of God. You base your faith on a circular argument, quite frankly. Mine is based on the witnesses of the Catholic Church. I accept their proclamation. I don't worship the Church. I recognize it as being sent by God. You do remember that part of Scripture, that "as the Father has sent Me, so I send you (apostles)?
It is God who is responsible for the state of the Cannon and not any man or organization.
Naturally, God is responsible for EVERYTHING. But man is responsible for secondary causes. Did God make you directly type your ridiculous statement above? By allowing you to continue to exist, yes. But you and whatever spirit abides within you is the one that typed those lines.
A quick glance at the bible will show that God works through other people over and over again. He chooses to allow us to participate in His work because He loves us.
And finally, what did the Catholic Church use as a basis for determining Scriptures? Did they not already have a body of teachings and use it as a reference? Anything that matched what they had as a reference was obviously Scripture, anything that made the claim but taught something alien to the Body of teaching was left out. That's how the Canon was formed. We don't believe it came into being like the Koran, delivered by an angel.
Regards
your diagram didn't show up, please try again
Marlowe responded :When they make statements like the one I was responding too, then I'd have to say yes.
Well, that's too bad you felt it necessary to make such a statement. Presuming you think that the Bible is the Word of God, I'd consider the following Word next time you feel so inclined:
O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. Mat 12:34-37
It is one thing to disagree with someone. It is quite different to resort to name-calling. Guard you tongue, brother, and beware of whom appears to abide within you.
Regards
If you are saying that God did not preserve his word, then it is you who must be on the defensive. The word of God has been preserved by God. Period.
We have God's name, which has been preserved for us, do we not? Surely God's word would have been preserved even if it had to have been preserved by a talking jackass.
You want proof? Here's your proof:
...thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. (Psalms 138:2 KJV)
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. (Isaiah 55:11 KJV)
The truth hurts doesn't it?
Would that I could be used by God in the same manner as Baalam's ass.
The fact is that God used Baalam's ass to accomplish his purpose. He used the Catholic Heirarchy in the same way. He hopefully uses me in the same way, although I suspect that Baalam's ass will have played a much more prominent role in the history of the world than either you or I ever will.
I think we've been down this highway before. I am led to believe that an unbeliever is one who REJECTS Christ, knowing His claim. Thus, a person who has never heard of Christ cannot be an "unbeliever" in that sense. Here is the simplest sense of who will be saved:
He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 1 John 5:12
Furthermore:
And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. 1 John 4:16
I do not think the bible supports the notion that baptism confers salvation. An unbelieving atheist gets as much benefit from baptism as does a duck from a good roasting.
Baptism presumes that one is willingly accepting the notion of what it is meant to do - it is a sacrament of faith which erases sin. Being freed from sin is the formula of salvation, is it not? Baptism is for the remission of sin.
Regards
God's Word IS JESUS CHRIST! Christ's teachings were preserved by the Holy Spirit guiding the Apostles. I never said He didn't preserve His Word. Your job is to prove that the BIBLE is God's Word that He preserved, from internal evidence alone. Period.
We have God's name, which has been preserved for us, do we not? Surely God's word would have been preserved even if it had to have been preserved by a talking jackass.
Again, you aren't going to be able to prove much from internal evidence of the bible alone. You are going to need an external community that can vouch for the bible itself. Anyone can write something and call it "God's word" and "God's name". As to the talking jackass, what can I say? Are you saying that no one else can write such a story?
You will not be able to prove that the Scripture is God's Word based on the Book alone. That is my sole point. I am certainly not saying the Bible is not the Word of God. We base our idea that the Bible is God's Word on the proclamation of the Church.
...thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
That proves the Bible is God's Word? You are arguing in a circle. "this book is the word of God because the word found in this book says so."
Do you use that same argument with the Mormons? Muslims?
Regards
And, therefore, faith is the prior, most important, condition.
John came preaching "a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."
The remission is from the "repentance" and not from the baptism. The baptism was the public proclamation of one's repentance.
When Peter spoke "repent and be baptized for the remission of sin" one's hermenutic should force one back to the verse that clarifies the sequence: "A baptism of 'repentance for the remission...'"
It hurts so good
Would that I could be used by God in the same manner as Baalam's ass.
LOL!!! That's precious. I will resist the temptation!
Let me know if you can prove that God's Word is found in Scriptures WITHOUT the witness of the Catholic Church.
Regards
All sacraments are predicated on faith in their utility. And of course, you will agree that this faith is a gift entirely from God.
The remission is from the "repentance" and not from the baptism. The baptism was the public proclamation of one's repentance.
The Spirit came upon Christ during the Baptism - we use the same model and understanding. God acts through the visible sign, as He did through circumsion, or the Jews crossing through the Red Sea (at least that is how Peter saw it).
Yes, Baptism is for the forgiveness of sins. By being baptized, our sins are forgiven ("remissed").
Regards
I'm not sure what you mean by the question.
However, to the non-skeptical mind, one can prove the God origin of scripture via the demonstrated power of prophecy. This is as certain a proof as is the testimony of the early Christians....in some ways a bit more objective.
Thanks for the ping!
The Catholic church (4th century) had nothing to do with the preservation of the Scriptures.
On the contrary they have been attempting to destroy them or discredit them with a false line of texts (Alexanderian)
Really?
Is that why Luther used the Greek Text of Erasmus (Received) and not that of the Catholic Church?
The same text that was placed on the Roman Catholic Index of forbidden books?
Your Old Testament doesn't match our Old Testament.
You accept the Apocrypha books as scripture.
As for the New Testament, there are differences within the Books themselves.
The Roman Catholic bible is not the Christian Bible.
The church discussed in Matthew 16 is the organization that is built on faith in Christ who is the Rock (1Pe.2:8) and the only foundation for the true church (1Cor.3:11).
Those churches are local, not united under any human head or gov't.
The spiritual church (made up of all those who believe in the saving work of Christ) is revealed by Paul, to whom alone it was revealed (Eph.3:3) and who revealed it to Peter (2Pe.3:15-16)
The above must be seen in light of the earlier "everyone that loveth is BORN OF GOD and knoweth God."
Following the johanine authorship, one would go to Jesus' John 3 statements about being born again. They would all conclude in the John 1 statement:
11 He came to His own, F3 and His own F4 did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
The new testament demonstrates that the churches are connected and that there is something similar to a chain of 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.