Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 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 |
I had thought I would find possibly a hundred or so, and then I would simply do a subject check on each one, to find out what the Spirit did in each case, put them together into one subject matter, and then the results would tell me exactly what or how the Spirit manifested It’s self in each individual case.
I first had expected to find, that it was in complete harmony with each person who had it, and I thought it would show that the Spirit was always identified by its fruits being the same on certain outward signs.
I had in mind that I would find, several dozen scriptures stating that this person could interpret the word, or several dozen saying the Spirit speaks as one voice, or that it is always love, or gives wisdom or faith or meekness or so on, and I reasoned that by categorizing all of them, I would then be able to see how it manifested it’s self in us.
To my surprise, I found I was wrong on all points, first there were over 250 times the words were used from Acts to Revelations, and when I went through each one of them and picked out the main word that described what the Spirit had imparted in man, I found that there were 145 different words used to identify that sign, or fruit of the Holy Spirit.
Out of those 145 signs, the subject of being “sealed “ was used 5 times, and the same for “prophesy”, “wisdom”, and “faith”.
The next were the words,”Knowledge”, “dwells in us,” and “meekness,” which were used 4 times each. That leaves approximately 113 word descriptions that most of which were used one time each, showing that almost all of the 145 references to the Holy Spirit, were totally different for each use, meaning that you can not identify the Holy Spirit by any one or two or three signs, but they are as different as we are, and it manifest it’s self differently in each person.
Each writer of the epistles wrote with their own personality, and although they are all different perspectives, they are still in the bounds of God’s Spirit.
We non-Catholics have allowed the Catholics to call us diverse, in chaos, confused, in disarray, with no leader ship, and no solid structure, therefore proving we haven’t got the Holy Spirit,.. otherwise we would be in total harmony as they are.
They have structured their church from the top down, saying that the pope and those directly under him, relay God’s will, down to its members, by always having one unified voice in all matters. If this is the case, then there was no need for scripture to tell us that we are responsible for our understanding the word.
This is simply quenching the Holy Spirit by one human being, taking it on him self to determine what the will of God is, then forcing all those under him to agree with his decision, or they are made to feel they are going directly against God.
1 Thess 5: 19. Quench not the Spirit.
Ro 12: 2. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
2 Cor 13: 5. Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
Gal 6: 4. But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. V-5. For every man shall bear his own burden. V-6. Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. V-7. Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
1 Thess 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
The RCC’s, tell us that the hierarchy gives them the truth, then it is up to them to verify it as to it’s authenticity, but what recourse do they have if it turns out to be against the scripture, do you then tell them that God gave them this truth?…that greater minds then you have studied this and came to these conclusions?
That the Bible isn’t the only source of truth?…. Do you ask if they are questioning the authority of the church?…. Or are you polite, and tell them you will bring this up at the next conference, ..or ask then to send your questions to the bishop, and he’ll get back to you?
The point being that if you are an average member of the Catholic Church, it does you no good what so ever to.. “search the scripture, whether these things are so”. This way of doing things, …can be justified by your total unity, that phrase makes everything worthwhile,… but do you know something?…I can find nothing in the word saying that the signs of the Holy Spirit are that they are in full unity on all matters, in fact, … one of the signs of the Holy Spirit is the ability to discern, and with out choice you can have no discernment.
You may also want to remove all scripture that tells you to prove all things.
We are told to be one in Christ, and that we are one in a marriage, 4:31, but do you act exactly as your wife, or vice versa.
My wife and I are one, but total opposites.
He may have. Here is an interesting account of Constantine’s relationship with Arius after the council.
“It should be remembered that he did eventually (years after the Council) support the Arian party. A few years after the Council of Nicea, Arius discovered a new way to interpret the word "homoousius" that agreed with his doctrines. He then asked to be readmitted to communion, but the Church refused. Arius then appealed to the Emperor. Emperor Constantine's favorite sister, Constantia, on her deathbed, implored Constantine to support Arius and he did so. A date was set for the forcing of the Church to readmit Arius, but while he was waiting for Constantine to arrive Arius stopped to relive himself and his bowels burst and he died." (See Arians of the 4th Century, Chapter III, Section II by John Henry Newman)
Divine intervention?
No. That would be a miracle without Mary. Imagine the odds. :-)
I think you'll find I've addressed the issues of purgatory, mariology, saint worship, and the like. That is the precise reason I said what I did. As for why I spend time on the Papacy and Peter in Rome. They are *blatent* examples of the errors that are taught which seem to matter little. They can be understood by people without any real spiritual discernment. Maybe it would be as practical to say that two guys ran thier cars off the road on opposite ends of town. Both were paying attention to anything but the road and Whammo! One got out and claimed to be an emperor and ruler of the world by right, the other got out and said, 'hey, I'm joe six pack.' Which one is more wrong?
You're gonna have to take that up with Southwestern Bell. (you do live in that area? don't ya?)
See, she's strong in the lord.. she can throw mountains. Ya'll little wimpies struggle to throw petros.. LOL
Where? Chapter and verse please.
If you had not stated "An excerpt:", you would be a candidate for the dignan3 "Award for RCC Deception." As it is, your post borders closely on deception - you certainly deceived me. I thought YOU had read all those 277 published letters in Latin of Hosius.
Today, I found the time to visit the website you referenced and learned (to my surprise, SARCASM) that the material you posted was from a RCC! Sean Hyland wrote all those words you pasted (without the benefit of quotes - isn't that a little devious SD?).
So, my comments in #412 and #422 stand. Havoc has amply demonstrated how devious and dishonest your RCC sources are. Let the "Lurker" compare websites and information and decide for themselves - bearing in mind the motives of each - and I believe the evidence is clear - you and pegleg LOSE, SD. (Sorry for the shouting, NOT -:)
No. The Emperor was made Emperor by man. His name was used later to create the false "Donations". Is this what you mean by "used by God"?
No. The Emperor brought Christianity out into the open, where it could flourish and be spread throughout the world, as a part of civilization.
God certainly tolerated the Empereor being emperor. He did nothing to prevent it, and if legend is to be believed he sent his cross as a sign to the Emperor. In Hoc Signo Vinces
I find nothing about the Apostles Creed that was untrue. Why do you ask? Are you under the impression it was developed at the Council of Nicea?
No, but I was under the impression that the Nicene Creed was developed at Nicea. As TRD said, we'll make it easy and just go by the current Nicea-Constantioplean creed found in the liturgy today.
FYI. I believe many great thruths have come from the Early Christian Church, the catholic Church, and the Roman Catholic Church.
That's great. And one of them was the creed formulated in this council of which you wish to make some statement about the Emperor "controlling."
SD
You're right. Christians believe and follow Christ and place their trust in him - as do some of the protestants. The rest of the Protestants, the Mormons and the Catholics follow tradition, philosophy, and men who tell them what the next big thing in religion will be. Christians preach and teach faith and unity in Jesus. The rest preach obedience to the clergy, and thus their doctrine/dogma. Jesus said obey him. That is the message. If you are playin around in other things, you are off message.
And it's my fault that you can't read? Let's examine the evidence. Here is how I started my response.
Let's see what 5 minutes of web time can find. Let's search google.com for "APUD OPERA." Well looke here, first entry.
http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/forgeries/hosius.html
An excerpt:
I then follow with the text I am excerpting ALL IN BOLD. And then I return to the regular font when I take up again my comments. Awfully confusing I know. To read about search engines and to be given a web URL and then the confusing words "Excerpt" and then for some strange reason all of the text is thicker. I am so confused.
Today, I found the time to visit the website you referenced and learned (to my surprise, SARCASM) that the material you posted was from a RCC! Sean Hyland wrote all those words you pasted (without the benefit of quotes - isn't that a little devious SD?).
You know we Catholics are all liars and devious plotting murdering bastards. What did you expect? Did you think I would quote an honest Baptist web site about the quote? If I could find one I would.
So, my comments in #412 and #422 stand. Havoc has amply demonstrated how devious and dishonest your RCC sources are. Let the "Lurker" compare websites and information and decide for themselves - bearing in mind the motives of each - and I believe the evidence is clear - you and pegleg LOSE, SD. (Sorry for the shouting, NOT -:)
Yes, let the Lurker compare web sites. One advances a fanciful version of history with no evidence whatsoever to prove itself. The other uncovers the bogus scholarship synonymous with Baptist scholarship - quoting made up quotes from non-existant works. Yes, let the lurker decide.
SD
That's funny. Matthew forgot to mention that.
Of course, but I find your reading of the same as less than inspired.
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.