The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

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

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[SoothingDave]

I don't know if they are all professionals. But there are a good number because God's people recognize the need for such people to spread the Truth, and support these fine men.

"He who has the most lawyers needs the most lawyers." (Old Reggie)

How about another quote? "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

SD

[JHavard]

You haven't established in scripture that any man has been given the Place of Christ at the head of the Church in any capacity - regardless of what you wish to make it look as though Peter might be - or anyone else for that matter. Jesus didn't pick a successor because no one can succeed Him. He isn't dead. Long live the King!

I wish I had said that. Your right, if Christ were dead, then we would need a new king, but since he is alive, he is always with us. JH

[SoothingDave]

Pretty shakey ground to build the "history" of the Papacy on????????????????????

If I were to accept Havoc's ideas that what wasn't "fraud" was legend, and hence fiction. I do not accept those ideas.

I was merely attempting to point out that what is legend is not necessarily false. Let alone "fiction," which implies an author setting out to purpposely tell things which are not true.

SD

[SoothingDave]

I wish I had said that. Your right, if Christ were dead, then we would need a new king, but since he is alive, he is always with us.

First, congratulations on helping Havoc kill that strawman. Way to go.

Second, look up "vicar." It would help you and he to understand this simple concept.

SD

[malakhi]

The Millennial Kingdom ended in 1066. The event was the Battle of Hastings.

That's it! Now, "William" means "strong helmet". And "Æthelred" means "noble counsel". We all know that Britain was peopled by the lost tribes of Israel. So the martial William the Conquerer is the antichrist who makes war on the saints:

Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. (Revelation 13:7)

Further,

And authority was given it over every tribe and people and tongue and nation

Which clearly prophecies the world dominance of England and the English language.

King Æthelred, "noble counsel", was himself prophecied in scripture:

Listen now to my voice; I will give you counsel, and God be with you! (Exodus 18:19)

Now, William was a Norman, the "Men of the North":

evil looms out of the north, and great destruction. (Jeremiah 6:1)

Thus says the LORD:
"Behold, a people is coming from the north country,
a great nation is stirring from the farthest parts of the earth.
They lay hold on bow and spear,
they are cruel and have no mercy,
the sound of them is like the roaring sea;
they ride upon horses,
set in array as a man for battle,
against you, O daughter of Zion!" (Jeremiah 6:22-23)

Thus says the LORD:
Behold, waters are rising out of the north,
and shall become an overflowing torrent;
they shall overflow the land and all that fills it,
the city and those who dwell in it.
Men shall cry out,
and every inhabitant of the land shall wail. (Jeremiah 47:2)

For out of the north a nation has come up against her, which shall make her land a desolation, and none shall dwell in it; both man and beast shall flee away...
For behold, I am stirring up and bringing against Babylon a company of great nations, from the north country; and they shall array themselves against her; from there she shall be taken. Their arrows are like a skilled warrior who does not return empty-handed. (Jeremiah 50:3,9)

See, its all right there in scripture, if one is really looking for truth, instead of defending the errors of old.

[malakhi]

Why don't you go back over the posts and find something from each one of us that you disagree with and then tell us how much we smell? Seems as though thats your ministry. Pathetic as it might be.

I think he's smelling the roquefort.

[ksen]

But I am not going to get into a war of historians with the likes of people who would make such statements as truth based on uninspired men of old with their own axes to grind.

You mean like basing your(I mean the generic "your" not necessarily you in particular) idea that Jesus came back at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD based on the observations of Josephus?

-ksen

[JHavard]

Somewhat. I wanted to hear what you would have to say. Remember JHavard accusing the entire Internet as being a Catholic front? Anyway.

How's about if we narrow it down to you?

Are you really who you have tried to project yourself as being? When we simply take you at your word, that you have a private business, and you're just a good old boy who likes beer and hunting, and you just have all day to kill time, is this who you really are?

You never did answer me from before, are you receiving any kind of financial support or payment from the Catholic Church or their associates?

Do you believe that the ends justify the means? JH

[vmatt]

You have the dubious distinction of being the first to reply to the disregarding of an Apostle of God, my beloved Paul, by a person who rejects the blood of the only begotten Son of God. Let that be the start of my "pathetic" ministry to you brother as God is witness.

Your ministry is one of self-absorption. I'm not interested. But thanx for asking.

It's too late, words mean something and yours have been eternally recorded. See how this works? Instead of defending my beloved Paul and the Savior, you chose to attack me and question the pathos of my testimony. Pathetic indeed.

31835 posted on 3/5/02 7:58 AM Pacific by Invincibly Ignorant

[malakhi]

You are so darned exactly literal!!!

Words mean things. Precision is important. You can't just make it say whatever you want it to say. The problem with so many of these so-called 'prophecies' of Jesus is that they don't make sense when read closely and in context.

[SoothingDave]

Are you really who you have tried to project yourself as being? When we simply take you at your word, that you have a private business, and you're just a good old boy who likes beer and hunting, and you just have all day to kill time, is this who you really are?

I never said I hunt. I support the rights of others to hunt, but do not personally do so.

I am real, and I spend too much time here answering the misconceptions of people who should know better.

You never did answer me from before, are you receiving any kind of financial support or payment from the Catholic Church or their associates?

LOL. That's not how the Church works. You support it, not the other way around.

Do you believe that the ends justify the means?

The fact that you think enough of me to ask the question is a lot. After nearly a year of conversing with people here, you are still the same paranoid person who believes all Catholics lie all the time. It's sad.

SD

[malakhi]

To admit that Jesus is not God and you are wrong, is that about it angelo?

Unlike you, Mack, I don't believe that our salvation hinges on whether or not we accept Jesus as divine savior. If a non-Jew believes that Jesus is God, it doesn't matter to me, so long as he lives righteously.

In regards to this discussion, I'd be happy for a concession that almah means "young woman".

Now, Mack, would you agree that what you'd like from me is to admit that I am wrong and that Jesus is God? How is this any different (vís-a-vís my own religious faith) than what you suggest I am trying to get Steven to do?

[vmatt]

You mean like basing your(I mean the generic "your" not necessarily you in particular) idea that Jesus came back at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD based on the observations of Josephus?

Not true, I base the return of Christ on scripture alone. I use Josephus merely as background and is subject to error. The correct interpretation of "this generation" and "some standing here" as well as many others have gone forth as witness of the truth and you reject it at your own risk. I will not continually repeat myself nor spend time defending myself. By the way, you have insulted the great Apostle of God, John, by calling uninspired "historians" his "contemporaries". That is my "pathetic" ministry to you my friend.

[malakhi]

I think he just wants us to recognize that the prophetic text used for the Virgin Birth is on shaky ground linguistically. That doesn't mean the Virgin Birth didn't happen, or that Jesus isn't God. He just doesn't like seeing his Bible used in a misleading way anymore than Havoc likes the way I use the Bible to show Peter as Pope.

Thank you, Dave, that is exactly it.

[malakhi]

No that wouldn't be enough. He'd want me to visit his "convert to Judaism" link. :-)

Only if you really wanted to, Steven! ;o)

As I've stated previously, there is no need for any non-Jew to convert to Judaism in order to be 'saved'. I expect that all of the Christians who post here are complying with the Seven Laws of Noah that are the standard for gentile righteousness. There is no need for any non-Jew to undertake obedience to all of the Law, unless they feel strongly called to do so.

Now, if your mother were Jewish, I'd probably be on you a little more! ;o)

[ksen]

By the way, you have insulted the great Apostle of God, John, by calling uninspired "historians" his "contemporaries".

How is saying that Irenaeus and Polycarp were contemporaries of John, meaning they were alive at about the same time John was, an insult to John? Do you have a different definition of "contemporary"?

-ksen

[SoothingDave]

How is saying that Irenaeus and Polycarp were contemporaries of John, meaning they were alive at about the same time John was, an insult to John? Do you have a different definition of "contemporary"?

He must not be taking "contemporary" literally. ;-)

(Here's where your Latin comes in con="with" and temp="time.")

SD

[ksen]

angelo, do you have a link to an online Talmud? If not can you recommend a good hard copy?

Oh, and what translation of the TANAKH do you use? Or are you using the original Hebrew?

Thanks.

-ksen

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Now, Mack, would you agree that what you'd like from me is to admit that I am wrong and that Jesus is God?

No, you have made your choice, you have rejected Jesus as your Lord.

BigMack

[Invincibly Ignorant]

It's too late, words mean something and yours have been eternally recorded. See how this works? Instead of defending my beloved Paul and the Savior, you chose to attack me and question the pathos of my testimony. Pathetic indeed.

Ya right. Was that some kind of private revelation you got that angelo doesn't believe Paul's words? I wish I were as discerning as you. I guess some people are just gifted at observing the obvious. You know what else is obvious? The dribble you spout and then have the guts to believe that somehow its annointed. I got an idea. Gather with believers someday and gain some perspective.