Posted on 08/10/2014 10:55:09 AM PDT by wmfights
It is quite clear that the leaders of the Reformation continued in the main the basic Roman idea of the church as the successor of Israel as well as being one with Israel. The church, in their viewpoint, varies in details and in administration, but is essentially the same in both Testaments. somewhat to the position of Augustine. This is defined by Berkhof as a denial of the Roman position that the kingdom of God is identical to the visible church, and a return to the concept that it is identical to the invisible church, i.e., the whole company of believers.6 This is essentially the position of amillennial conservatives today.
If you would like to be added to this ping list please mail me.
The Reformers broke from the Roman model, but by failing to return to literal first interpretation they left the door open for error to dominate them just as it has in the Roman Church. In the case of the Reformers instead of institutional exclusivity we see liberalism taking hold.
The common denominator for both is their Amillennialist views.
No comment other than...
sigh.
(Rolls eyes)
where to begin, where to begin?
there are so many errors, I cant possibly deal with them all and do them justice.
let me just comment on the use of the phrase “roman church”. there is no such thing as the roman church and never has been. Catholics believe the Church is:
1. one
2. holy
3. catholic
4. apostolic
it is one since it is the Body of Christ on earth and there is only one Lord, one faith and one baptism.
it is holy in that it is not man made, but a divine institution founded by Jesus Christ Himself and protected and sustained by the Holy Spirit.
it is catholic in that its faith was believed everywhere and throughout the whole 2,000 year NT period.
finally, it is apostolic since it’s teachings are derived from the Apostles who were commissioned directly by Jesus Christ to spread the faith. its existence can be traced directly back to these same Apostles in a direct, unbroken line.
so any author who claims that Catholics believe the Church is “roman”, tells us all we need to know about his knowledge of the Faith.
I did have a question maybe some dispensationalist would be kind enough to answer. am I correct in believing that dispensationalists deny that Jesus Christ’s kingdom exists today and that He is ruling it from Jerusalem?
another question for any dispensationalist who cares to answer it:
Matthew 21:43 “therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it”
who is the “you” in that verse?
who is the nation the kingdom was given to?
another question for any dispensationalist who cares to answer: ( wmfights, I would appreciate you “pinging” the dispensationalists you know to this thread, thank you )
John 8:24 “ I told you that you would die in your sins, for you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he”
was Jesus addressing Jews who were part of Israel in that verse?
will Jews after the flesh, who reject Jesus as Messiah all through history, will they nevertheless be saved since they are part of Israel?
I apologize, I keep writing there will be one question and then I think of another.
No
so you believe the prophecy of 2 Samuel 7:12-16 has been fulfilled?
My experience has been it’s a waste of time to try and have a discussion with those that believe defense of their church is defense of their faith. The questions never end and when things don’t go well they complain to a mod.
FWIW, I think the Orthodox deserve some credit for being consistant. They did not accept The Revelation of Jesus Christ as part of the Canon until the ninth century(?). Once they adopted the sacramental system to salvation they saw how this Book would undermine their systematic theology.
or the reason could be that dispensationalism can’t stand up to scrutiny any more than the other 19th century ism’s :
Mormonism
campbellism
seventh day Adventism
Jehovah witnesses (ism )
for example, someone may point out there was no Orthodox Church in the 9th century, the Catholic Church was whole in both east and west. someone also might point out that the canon of Scripture used by the Greek speaking Catholics included all 27 books of the NT. someone also might point out that the sacramental system started in Acts 2, well before the 9th century.
but some can’t defend the articles they post, waste of time they say.......
Nope
Yep. When scripture is not the final authoring discussion of scripture with them is futile.
I think this is why we will see some of the Reformed rethink their eschatological views. They are seeing Protestant churches around them falling to liberalism and acting in complete defiance of Scripture. Also, the most consistantly conservative churches are Evangelical. They also happen to be Premillennial and as such believe in literal first interpretation.
Oh that’s too funny! Catholics and Mormons hold other writings over scripture, Catholics claim to serve the same god as Muslims and you want to go there? Too funny!
the muslims worship the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? hmm, that is news to me and probably to the muslims as well.
the Catholics hold writings over Scripture? really?? more news to me! which writings do they hold over Scripture? always willing to learn something.
no? peter begs to differ....
Acts 2:29-36
brethren, I may say to you confidently of the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants upon his throne, he foresaw and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and that we all were witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you see and hear. for David did not ascend into the heavens but he himself says, “The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, til I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet.” Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God HAS MADE HIM BOTH LORD AND CHRIST, this Jesus whom you crucified.
It’s the official position of the Catholic Church that Catholics and Muslims serve the same god.
Yep. When scripture is not the final authoring discussion of scripture with them is futile
I’d love to make Scripture the final authority. first, we must know what is Scripture. since Scripture is the final authority, please point me to the Scripture which will tell me which books are Scripture and which are not. or are we going to accept Catholic Tradition? wait......uh oh.
well, I know I was taught the “official position” of the Catholic Church is there is One God in three persons.
I am happy to learn the Muslims believe this as well???
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.