Posted on 10/10/2001 10:57:30 AM PDT by malakhi
Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Threads 1-50 | Threads 51-100 | Threads 101-150 |
Thread 151 | Thread 152 | Thread 153 | Thread 154 | Thread 155 | Thread 156 | Thread 157 |
Thread 158 | Thread 159 |
The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 160
Who said that ... Yoda?
Are you suggesting the Pope, by himself can't make an "infallible" pronouncement?. He requires the aggregate of all the Bishops??????
The charism of infalliblilty rests on the Pope alone. He does not act, as Protestants like you seem to think, as a despot, as a radical raving monarch, a sole inventor of doctrine.
The Pope certainly could define a doctrine without the consultation and consent of the bulk of the bishops. But this is not how things work in practice. The Pope solemnly defines beliefs that are already believed by the bishops and the faithful.
SD
Because their beliefs are largely not universal. You would be hard pressed to find folks who believe like the average American fundamentalist in most of the countries of the world. (You certainly won't find "KJV only" types there.) In contrast the Catholic Church is truly universal, professing one faith to all of the world's peoples.
By what authority do you "develop" the definition of any group of Christians?
I don't generally "develop" definitions. I use the ones commonly used in the world. Like in the Air Force they had a definition of someone who was a Christian and not Catholic or Orthodox. A big "P" went on your dog tags. That is the way the world regards Christianity. I didn't "develop" it, I just don't struggle against it.
SD
Hey, I thought we agreed not to use dictionary definitions? ;o)
I've always been a National League fan myself, and was happy when the Brewers moved over. I used to be a Brewers fan back in the '80s and early '90s, but so many years of futility have effectively left me without a team to root for. I mean, what's the point if they don't even have a chance to be competitive? I'd root for the Cardinals, because they are from the Central division, but I still hold a grudge against them for beating the Brewers in the 1982 World Series. I hate Atlanta (the worst World Series in recent memory was between the Braves and the Yankees. How could anyone outside New York or Atlanta root for either of them to win?). Houston can't win a playoff game. Arizona has no history. Since I love the makeup of the NL Central (old teams like the Cubs, Reds, Cardinals and Pirates--not to mention some competitive balance), I guess I'll try to set aside old grudges and root for St. Louis.
My 3 1/2 year old son is a Yankees fan, and has been since he first watched a World Series game with me two years ago. He has a Derek Jeter poster in his room, and can name several of the starting players and their positions.
Any Catholics wanna straighten Pelayo out? Or are ya gonna let em twist?
Bass, this is a very difficult subject because it strikes at the heart of a mystery. We profess Jesus as one person, a union of two natures, human and divine. But we can not fully grasp what this means and these types of controversies are as complicated and convoluted as the free will/determininsm ones.
What Pelayo is emphasising is the divine part of Jesus. If Jesus was God, then there is no way that God could sin, do harm. That is true.
What the others are emphasising is the human part of Jesus, especially how He serves as a role model for us. Havoc almost sounds Pelagian or Jewish in his insistance that Jesus did not "use" his divinity, but rather only his humanity. Proving that we can, by following the will of God, be sinless. If this were strictly true, then the Jews are right.
Others are also focused on the human nature of Jesus in that he faced temptation and avoided sin, he stood up to the same dangers we face every day and did the right thing. If Jesus was not human like us then the Incarnation was a "magic trick" and not real. Jesus must have been able to be really tempted AND have a free choice to sin or not. This is true.
How do we reconcile the fact that Jesus, as human, must have been able to sin with the fact that Jesus, as God, could not have possibly actually sinned? I don't know. I don't know if we can explain it.
SD
Thanks, SD! ;o)
I noticed this in Havoc's reply last night, and was wondering if anyone else would pick up on it.
Replace "Brewers" with "Pirates" and ditto. I did go once this year to check out the new park, but once that wears off...
I hate Atlanta (the worst World Series in recent memory was between the Braves and the Yankees. How could anyone outside New York or Atlanta root for either of them to win?).
Before the current era I used to quip in situations like that that I was "rooting for an earthquake." Hey, it happened once!
SD
You should be ashamed of yourself. I thought you were a better parent that that. :-)
LOL! They could also just cancel the World Series. That happened once, too!
Who said that ... Yoda?
Yoda would have said something like "Into it yet much has entered private interpretation"
It was the addressed person, Havoc
SD
No chapter and verse? That's what I thought.
LOL!
I'd actually like this group of Yankees if they were a National League team, or if the AL dropped the DH. I have a lot of respect for Torre and Cashman, and the way they run the team. Even Steinbrenner has become more acceptable in recent years. I appreciate that he has been unwilling to offer blockbuster A-Rod type contracts. They have been an all-around solid baseball club. They've won on teamwork, not just hitting the long ball. They are consummate professionals. You never hear of the type of nonsense with the Yankees that you do with the Mets for example; Torre wouldn't allow it. I do think they are on the decline right now, and I don't expect them to make it to the World Series this year.
Now that was very good.
How do you know the OT is divinely inspired?
Becky
Becky
Private interpretation has yet to much enter into it.
This should be fun, if we can't legitimately attack his theology, we'll attack his sentence structure and then we can advance to his spelling.
This can open a whole new world in debating huh? :-)
I think you've misunderstood, Jim. I was in no way mocking his word choice or grammar. I reserve that only for the drive-by nitwits.
What I found profound in the statement is the sense of inspiration found by Havoc. This entire thread has been about nothing more than "private interpretation," yet he can't see it.
SD
Becky
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.