Posted on 07/26/2014 4:41:46 AM PDT by michaelwlf3
Let’s recap what we have so far:
If you have cable TV you will find EWTN.
If you find EWTN, you will understand Trinitarian theology.
If you understand Trinitarian theology, you will be mistaken for a Catholic priest.
If you are mistaken for a Catholic priest, you will be accused of being a child molester.
If you are accused of being a child molester, the Protestant inquisition will harass you.
Don’t let the Protestant inquisition question you. Get Direct TV.
Casting Martin Luther as a “false Christian apostle” sounds a bit judgmental, doesn’t it? Many Protestants would say the Pope is the anti-Christ. So what does one do?
This can only be resolved by scripture. You cannot trust in “traditions” handed down by who may be the anti-Christ now can you? This is a good case for Sola Scriptura.
If one is emotionally attached or otherwisea attached to someone who is demonstrably wicked repented I would not be surprised if one prayed or hoped that they would be forgiven. The LORD is the judge. When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Wickedness can be forgiven by Christ and He will judge who is forgiven and who is not forgiven, not either of us. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: 15 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears. For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: 14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. 15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
No, he does not nourish it. He wears the vestements of a Protestant priest.
You missed the sentence after photo 2 which says “and of Protestant churchs...”
The mormon dude must have some tool to need a special add-on pocket on his jockies to house it!
.
I figured you had already taken care of that. You had already judged Luther's motive, assigned the choice of sin of others to him. The only difference between him and the Popes engaged in the same sin is Luther was excommunicated from the Catholic church. With that setup, it seems AS is only a sin if one isn't a Catholic leader of some sort.
Nice scripture! I don't see your point in relation to Luther, unless you were there and know he didn't repent. Not in line with his other writings.
Again, when will or did the Catholic church shed its anti-semitic practice?
That is hard to do, but you are right, the pastor should do it
Ministerial priests are not to be served.
YES, they should be respected as it is not an easy job to be a man of god, social worker, preacher, psychiatrist, economist etc. all rolled into one. But they are not to be served. We should help them serve God and us.
He is Anglican, hence under that umbrella term of Protestant
He was at the basic level asking for "Protestant" posters such as yourself and others on this thread to be his allies
Secondly, kindly define "evangelical" -- as sometime baptists disagree being included in this listing, also at other times adventists, etc. include themselves in this.
I was talking about "relics", Cronos. Do you not think original autographs wouldn't have been worshiped by some?
I don't think anyone imagines the written word of God existed before creation - written languages are relatively recent (within the last four or five thousand years), but the LOGOS has always existed. Jesus IS the Word made flesh. When we speak of the Bible, the written word of God, we believe that it not just contains Divine revelation, but that it IS inspired, God-breathed, and every word that is in there IS from God to mankind. I don't think we should be in the practice of deciding what is or what isn't. I believe in Verbal Plenary Inspiration:
What whiners! All you have to do is look back to the start of the thread and see it was NOT "prots" who sidetracked this thread (look at post #5, for example). If it is now an "anti-catholic scree", it's because the Catholics here started the screeching and haven't stopped yet!
Moment of truth here, michaelwlf3. Do you fall in with the works-based salvation of false religions or do you preach salvation by grace through faith apart from works? What IS your Gospel?
Plenty of them do here.
“He was at the basic level asking for “Protestant” posters such as yourself and others on this thread to be his allies”
I don’t want Protestants to be my “allies”, I want all of us to be brothers.
Rather, it sounds like the cult you follow is the unscriptural offshoot. Your Soteriology is wrong and so is your understanding of the Divinely-revealed nature of Almighty God.
109. So, then, the Father is holy, the Son is holy, and the Spirit is holy, but they are not three Holies. This is, of course, to be understood as in the Athanasian Creed. The attributes of eternity, omnipotence, etc., are ascribed to each of the Three Persons, and we are then told that there are not three Eternals, etc. Each Person of the Holy Trinity possesses each attribute, but the attributes are all one and cannot be divided any more than the Godhead. Each Person is holy, but there are not, so to say, three separate Holinesses. for there is one Holy God, one Lord. For the true holiness is one, as the true Godhead is one, as that true holiness belonging to the Divine Nature is one.
110. So everything which we esteem holy proclaims that Sole Holiness. Cherubim and Seraphim with unwearied voices praise Him and say: "Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord God of Sabaoth." Isa. vi. 3. They say it, not once, lest you should believe that there is but one; not twice, lest you should exclude the Spirit; they say not holies [in the plural], lest you should imagine that there is plurality, but they repeat thrice and say the same word, that even in a hymn you may understand the distinction of Persons in the Trinity, and the oneness of the Godhead and while they say this they proclaim God.
111. We too find nothing of more worth, whereby we are able to proclaim God, than the calling Him holy. Everything is too low for God, too low for the Lord. And therefore consider from this fact also whether one ought at all to derogate from the Holy Spirit, whose Name is the praise of God. For thus is the Father praised, thus is the Son also praised, in the same manner as the Spirit also is named and praised. The Seraphim utter praise, the whole company of the blessed utter praise, inasmuch as they call God holy, the Son holy, the Spirit holy.
112. How, then, does He not possess all that pertains to God, Who is named by priests in baptism with the Father and the Son, and is invoked in the oblations, is proclaimed by the Seraphim in heaven with the Father and the Son, dwells in the Saints with the Father and the Son, is poured upon the just, is given as the source of inspiration to the prophets? And for this reason in the divine Scripture all is called θεόπνευστος, because God inspires what the Spirit has spoken.
113. Or if they are unwilling to allow that the Holy Spirit has all things which pertain to God, and can do all things, let them say what He has not, and what He cannot do. For like as the Son has all things, and the Father grudges not to give all things to the Son according to His nature, having given to Him that which is greater than all, as the Scripture bears witness, saying: “That which My Father hath given unto Me is greater than all. S. John x. 29. So too the Spirit has of Christ that which is greater than all, because righteousness knows not grudging.
114. So, then, if we attend diligently, we comprehend here also the oneness of the Divine Power. He says: “That which My Father hath given unto Me is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and the Father are One. S. John x. 29, 30. For if we rightly showed above that the Holy Spirit is the Hand of the Father, the same is certainly the Hand of the Father which is the Hand of the Son, since the Same is the Spirit of the Father Who is the Spirit of the Son. Therefore whosoever of us receives eternal life in this Name of the Trinity, as he is not torn from the Father; so he is not torn from the Son, so too he is not torn from the Spirit.
115. Again, from the very fact that the Father is said to have given to the Son, and the Spirit to have received from the Son, as it is written: “He shall glorify Me, for He shall take of Mine, and shall declare it unto you” S. John xvi. 14. (which He seems to have said rather of the office of distributing, than of the prerogative of Divine Power, for those whom the Son redeemed the Spirit also, Who was to sanctify them, received), from those very words, I say, from which they construct their sophistry, the Unity of the Godhead is perceived, not the need of a gift.
116. The Father gave by begetting, not by adoption; He gave as it were that which was contained in the very prerogative of the Divine Nature, not what was lacking as it were by favour of His bounty. And so because the Son acquires persons to Himself as the Father does; so gives life as does the Father, He expressed His equality with the Father in the Unity of Power, saying: “I and the Father are One.” For when He says, “I and the Father,” equality is revealed; when He says, “are One,” Unity is asserted. Equality excludes confusion; Unity excludes separation. Equality distinguishes between the Father and the Son; Unity does not separate the Father and the Son.
117. Therefore, when He says, “I and the Father,” He rejects the Sabellian, for He says that He is one, the Father another; He rejects the Photinian, for He joins Himself with God the Father. With the former words He rejects those, for He said: “I and the Father;” with the latter words He rejects the Arians, for He says: “are One.” Yet in both the former and the latter words He refutes the heretical violence (1) of the Sabellians, for He said: “We are One [Substance],” not “We are One[Person].” And (2) of the Arians, for He said: “I and the Father,” not “the Father and I.” Which was certainly not a sign of rudeness, but of dutifulness and foreknowledge, that we might not think wrongly from the order of the words. For unity knows no order, equality knows no gradation; nor can it be laid to the Son of God that the Teacher Himself of dutifulness should offend against dutifulness by rudeness. (Ambrose: Selected Works and Letters)
“Moment of truth here, michaelwlf3.”
I follow Jesus. Learn what he believed and you’ll know what I believe.
Cop-out answer. Show some courage. Define what you believe Jesus believed. What is the "good news"? Crunch time. You have had days and days of dancing around the point and plenty of opportunity to see what others here have said they believe about what Jesus taught and believed. You claim to BE a "Protestant", what is your gospel?
“You claim to BE a “Protestant”, what is your gospel?”
I never claimed to be a Protestant, I claim to be an Anglican. Make of it what you wish. Others have called me a Protestant, and I see what they mean, but given the choice I would not self identify as one.
If you trust in God the Father, and walk in the footsteps of the Son, guided by the Spirit, you’ll know what to do.
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.