Posted on 02/15/2006 6:22:47 AM PST by NYer
1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
Neither of those statements say that a wife sins by not sleeping with her husband, except by your inference, your personal, individual, flawed, interpretation. In fact neither statement even talks about sex ...
So ... what do you think that these passages spek of ... ?
Jesus' brothers were not believers at the time of his death.
Jesus, His mother and His Apostles were all Jews until they died.
Yes ... they were.
well, I read the first as saying that man and women need to work as a team and the second as dealing with prayer.
1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
Neither of those statements say that a wife sins by not sleeping with her husband, except by your inference, your personal, individual, flawed, interpretation. In fact neither statement even talks about sex ...
So ... what do you think that these passages speak of ... ?
well, I read the first as saying that man and women need to work as a team and the second as dealing with prayer.
Is there any for you to report on the 'official' Catholic interpretation of the passages ?
Rote Catholicism does not a participant or expert make. I note that you're like most of the anti-Catholic crowd and unwilling to confess what bizarre sect of protestantism to which you belong.
Were you a true believer in your faith you'd happily share it. But...like your backbone, your faith is evidently small and brittle.
No. In the real sense.
I think Akin has laid out the arguments very well in his article. I would certainly recommend everyone on this thread read it carefully. He dispels the notion that there is one way and one way only for the 14 statements to be whittled down to ten. He points out that *all* religious confessions holding to the Decalogue at all have had to make truncations somewhere in the text, primarily to make the Decalogue easy to memorize. And, most impotantly from the Catholic viewpoint, he makes it clear to non-Catholics that the Church does not "hide" the full text in any way. It's available in every single Catholic Bible in all its "unabbreviated glory," as Akin says, and it is read in its entirety when the text of Exodus 20 is one of the readings at Mass.
"I saw what Jesus Christ teaches about the one true path to Salvation, and how it is diametrically opposed by the teachings of the Catholic Church.
I was baptized as an adult, as Jesus says we must be (as a conscious, public act of obedience to His Word (VERY different from what the Catholics consider a baptism)."
___________________________________
GOD BLESS YOU BROTHER!
My experience was similar, except I left the Episcopal church.
Watch out for the legalistic thinking.
They were not like any other couple; the were the earthly parents of God Incarnate! The wife in this couple was a living, sacred Tabernacle of the Lord, the Ark of the New Covenant, chosen and sanctified to bear the God man. How could St. Joseph even think of having sex with the sacred Ark of the New Covenant? He would have to have been a rash and sacrilegious man to presume to penetrate and impregnate with his own seed the sacred womb which had borne God! And considering Uzzah's terrible fate when he touched the original Ark (II Samuel 6:6-7), Joseph would not have gotten very far had he tried. Yet Scripture portrays him as a reverent man; hardly the type to try something like that.
This is what I am talking about.
Is the Bible innerant?
When was this Canon closed and by what Pope?
Just a simple question. What part of the "deliberate alteration" in the Catholic division of the decalogue would seem to sanction the worshipping of idols?
Would it be: I am the Lord your God. You shall not have strange gods before me.
SD
The books that constitute the Bible were agreed upon in the 4th century -- only when Martin Luther decided to chop and change the Bible did the Council of Trent STOP the sacrilege and declare the canon closed. Interestingly this canon is the same as what the Orthodox (who were in schism with the Western Church at the time) professed.
Thanks for the honest answer. I think this is probably one of the most profound differences we have. According to your response in the RCC you view grace as something you can control through your actions.
No. Grace is something freely given by God to us through the sacraments. Sacraments are not "our actions." They are the Lord's work done through His Body, the Church.
In my faith grace is a free gift from GOD, which is not the result of works.
Same here. Grace is freely given and results in our good works (charity, etc.). Sacraments are not our works. They are God's.
Also, we do not believe we control GOD, but rather we are GOD'S possession.
Again, not a difference. Jesus commanded us to follow his sacraments in order to bring His forgiveness to the world.
Do you believe that if you repent and ask for forgiveness God will redeem you? Is that you controlling God?
Do you ever tell people to get on their knees and ask for Jesus to save them and fill them with the Holy Spirit? Is this you controlling God?
We are no different. God made promises and He keeps them. That is not us controlling God.
SD
What does the preceeding verse;
21: Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.
mean to you?
No one is "saved" until they actually die and are admitted into Heaven. It is presumptuous to look at human history and all who have backslidden and just assume that you are not going to be one of them.
Walk on the path, you know where the path leads. Don't assume you have reached your destination. It's like not starting your TD dance until you are actually in the end zone.
Some people are in a state of grace today who may die out of grace.
Who determines for you what works are sufficient to maintain your state of grace?
Avoid sin. Do good things. Partake of the sacraments.
It's a poorly formed conscience that doesn't know if it is in a state of grace or not.
I understand the seductive allure of the idea that you are "saved" no matter what you do, but that is a beautiful lie.
If it makes you feel good and encourages you to do the good things necessary to stay in grace, it may lead you to salvation. But it's still a lie. Every one who goes off the path because they believed they were "assured" of salvation is a result of this lie.
SD
That's crazy.
Is it?
Paul started preaching on his own. He didn't wait years. You are brainwashed to think that you couldn't read and understand the Bible on your own when you very well could if you were born again.
Perhaps you need to read Cronos's sentence again. He didn't say one could not preach or read the Bible. He is talking about the immensity, the vastness, the ineffibility that is God. If you think you have a full understanding of God, then that only proves you've never even thought about the subject.
Please explain the Trinity in its entirety.
SD
Dave, how does God abort you from the new birth?
1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us,
they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
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.