Posted on 03/26/2005 6:26:53 PM PST by Destro
That is because I win all my arguments - unlike others who throw insults and run I post links, evidence, sources - maybe a little off color remark here and there but arguing with me requires an eEncyclopedia of knowledge. If you got the brass - go for it.
"What damn Westerners never got until they chucked God out the window all together is that the Church can not have 2 masters - the Church can not run the state and save souls."
Got a news flash for you the Church never saved anybody, Christ saves. Ever heard of the miracle of the 'veil' being rent from the top to the bottom while Christ hung upon the cross. We alllllll have access to Christ without needing a man.
Then why did Jesus bother with Apostles? Your form of Christianity has more in common with clergy less Islam than with historic Christianity.
"21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit." John 20:21-22 (New International Version)
"Give the things you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses to trustworthy persons who are capable of teaching also others" (2 Tim 2:2).
- Such mission of "maintaining the deposit" (1Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:14) must be exercised by the successors of the Apostles who have been charged through the imposition of hands ( 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6; 1 Tim 5:22). Those who are responsible bear the title of "vigilants" (in Greek "episcopi", from which the word "bishop" comes) or "elder" (in Greek "presbiteri"). Also the letters of Saint James (5:14) and of Saint Peter (1 Pet 5:1-14) testify to the existence of "presbyters" as heads of the communities.
As a matter of fact, all this shows us a time very near to Christ: summer of the year 56 for the letter of James and approximately the year 58 for 1 Tim. The Acts of the Apostles speak twice about the rite of the imposition of hands (Acts 6:6 and 13:3; cf also 14:23), testifying to the presence of "presbyters" at Ephesus in the year 58 (At 20:17). They were also called "episcopi" (Acts 20:28). The letter of 1 Peter used the letters to Titus and to Timothy; the letter itself made reference to the letter to the Hebrews which was written before the destruction of the temple in the year 70. Therefore it seems that the writings which speak about "presbyters" were redacted exactly when James, Paul and Peter were still alive.
"Then why did Jesus bother with Apostles? Your form of Christianity has more in common with clergy less Islam than with historic Christianity."
Apostles were messengers "sent out" to teach Christ not Church! There are 7 churches spoken about, and only two are found not wanting! Pronouncing damnation upon anybody shows your form of Christianity. There is only one named with damnation along with a few of his servants, and if you had read man was never given that power.
"Give the things you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses to trustworthy persons who are capable of teaching also others" (2 Tim 2:2).
The key seems to be "trustworthy persons" capable of teaching. Peter taught Christ saves, and not MAN.
You seem to be more interested in PROCESS than what the message is.
When I was there, the people in the generation of power were all church-goers. Mothers of small children did not work (but were watching the USA, where motherhood was shameful and women were shamed for staying home). A child of a single mom was formally called a Halbweisen (half-orphan) and deserving of social services, pity, and hence SHAME. So it didn't happen very often.
As I was leaving, the EC was formed (while Swizerland is not in the EC, social trends don't stop at invisible lines). I think that this overhaul of politics also overhauled the civil and social fabric of the continent.
10 years down the line and you have the religious generation in their late 60s or older. Now it is THEY who are shamed. Marriage is thought of as worthless. Religion is thought to be backward and superstitious.
All these changes came very quickly. They won't stay. But what will become of a continent who chose not to see the mistakes of the USA's secularization and liberalization?
I had been hoping for their sake that they would see the bad and the good of our feminist leanings (which have comfortably receded, thank G-d, here), and only take the good. [Allowing competent women to enjoy any field they like is GOOD. Encouraging mothers of children to leave them in daycare and go to work is BAD.] Alas. They weren't paying attention.
They revere only pseudointellectualism. A fine house of cards you can build on that.
Yes, I have to agree with you on that one.
Islam is a scourge.
I don't argue this from the point of view of faith - but of history. You argue it from the point of view of an ideology - its should be this way or t hat - but in reality the history tells that the Christian movement did indeed create a Church hierarchical structure.
Orthodox Christianity is historical Christianity. Protestantism is a Johnny come lately interpretation of the faith in terms of history.
"I don't argue this from the point of view of faith - but of history. You argue it from the point of view of an ideology - its should be this way or t hat - but in reality the history tells that the Christian movement did indeed create a Church hierarchical structure."
I will agree 10000000% the "Christian movement" created a Church hierarchial structure NOT CHRIST. NOW if that structure is only interested in the process then they are not teaching Christ they are playing Christ.
History shows (History being the study of primary source documents) that the Apostles created the Church's hierarchial structure based on the writtings found in the New Testament.
Agian you are arguing ideology over facts - and again you are insertinga line of argument a historian can not comment on.
I stand by this statement: "History shows (History being the study of primary source documents) that the Apostles created the Church's hierarchial structure based on the writtings found in the New Testament."
Do you accept this comment of mine is based on historical fact? I understand you may not agree with my exact words but the therum is sound history. If not please let me know why not based on history.
"When the Pope calls one and they come, that'll make it legit"
And as soon as the Pope gets the Latin Church cleaned up and embraces Orthodoxy, we'll be glad to come! :) A Happy Easter to you.
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.