Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children
By John-Henry Westen
NEW YORK, December 4, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A review of New Line Cinema's The Nativity story by Fr. Angelo Mary Geiger of the Franciscans of the Immaculate in the United States, points out that the film, which opened December 1, misinterprets scripture from a Catholic perspective.
While Fr. Geiger admits that he found the film is "in general, to be a pious and reverential presentation of the Christmas mystery." He adds however, that "not only does the movie get the Virgin Birth wrong, it thoroughly Protestantizes its portrayal of Our Lady."
In Isaiah 7:14 the Bible predicts the coming of the Messiah saying: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel." Fr. Geiger, in an video blog post, explains that the Catholic Church has taught for over 2000 years that the referenced Scripture showed that Mary would not only conceive the child miraculously, but would give birth to the child miraculously - keeping her physical virginity intact during the birth.
The film, he suggests, in portraying a natural, painful birth of Christ, thus denies the truth of the virginal and miraculous birth of Christ, which, he notes, the Fathers of the Church compared to light passing through glass without breaking it. Fr. Geiger quoted the fourth century St. Augustine on the matter saying. "That same power which brought the body of the young man through closed doors, brought the body of the infant forth from the inviolate womb of the mother."
Fr. Geiger contrasts The Nativity Story with The Passion of the Christ, noting that with the latter, Catholics and Protestants could agree to support it. He suggests, however, that the latter is "a virtual coup against Catholic Mariology".
The characterization of Mary further debases her as Fr. Geiger relates in his review. "Mary in The Nativity lacks depth and stature, and becomes the subject of a treatment on teenage psychology."
Beyond the non-miraculous birth, the biggest let-down for Catholics comes from Director Catherine Hardwicke's own words. Hardwicke explains her rationale in an interview: "We wanted her [Mary] to feel accessible to a young teenager, so she wouldn't seem so far away from their life that it had no meaning for them. I wanted them to see Mary as a girl, as a teenager at first, not perfectly pious from the very first moment. So you see Mary going through stuff with her parents where they say, 'You're going to marry this guy, and these are the rules you have to follow.' Her father is telling her that she's not to have sex with Joseph for a year-and Joseph is standing right there."
Comments Fr. Geiger, "it is rather disconcerting to see Our Blessed Mother portrayed with 'attitude;' asserting herself in a rather anachronistic rebellion against an arranged marriage, choosing her words carefully with her parents, and posing meaningful silences toward those who do not understand her."
Fr. Geiger adds that the film also contains "an overly graphic scene of St. Elizabeth giving birth," which is "just not suitable, in my opinion, for young children to view."
Despite its flaws Fr. Geiger, after viewing the film, also has some good things to say about it. "Today, one must commend any sincere attempt to put Christ back into Christmas, and this film is certainly one of them," he says. "The Nativity Story in no way compares to the masterpiece which is The Passion of the Christ, but it is at least sincere, untainted by cynicism, and a worthy effort by Hollywood to end the prejudice against Christianity in the public square."
And, in addition to a good portrait of St. Joseph, the film offers "at least one cinematic and spiritual triumph" in portraying the Visitation of Mary to St. Elizabeth. "Although the Magnificat is relegated to a kind of epilogue at the movie's end, the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth is otherwise faithful to the scriptures and quite poignant. In a separate scene, the two women experience the concurrent movement of their children in utero and share deeply in each other's joy. I can't think of another piece of celluloid that illustrates the dignity of the unborn child better than this."
See Fr. Geiger's full review here:
http://airmaria.com/
Well, as I'm sure you guessed, I was only really talking about God. I don't know if the saints in Heaven are aware of earthly events or not, but I can't imagine that they would even be interested. Life on earth is an infinitesimally small part of our existence, and I would think that they would be much more interested in their Heavenly lives. Since God doesn't need their help in managing the affairs of mankind on earth, it would actually disappoint me if they were involved. I.e., is Heaven so boring that the saints need to watch and participate in the soap opera down here? :)
We share that same conviction, A8. Thanks.
I think the Reformed Baptist view would be to agree with you that of course God does all the saving, and that the ultimate truth from God's POV is that it takes place via predestination from before the foundations AND that it happened on the cross. In addition, it is also possible to speak of salvation in human terms, and that takes place at the moment of true faith. Hence, we see this expressed in passages such as one of your favorites and mine, Eph. 2:8-9. Grace through faith equals salvation. Believer's baptism is a public recognition of salvation and what God has done for us in these terms. I say "believer's baptism" instead of "adult baptism" because we frequently baptize young children, who have reasonably demonstrated true faith.
FK: "I fully agree with you that the people of God are the people of God from before the beginning. But if part of Baptism is recognizing and celebrating that fact about any individual, I don't see how it can be done without at least an honest profession of faith."
Well, which is it? Are God's people named from the beginning or is it "done with at least an honest profession of faith?" See the problem?
It is both, and as I alluded to above, there are at least three honest ways of looking at the timing of salvation (baptism not being one of them :). Before the foundations, on the cross, or at the point of belief. I believe all are perfectly correct because all work perfectly together. All are required to happen for one to go to Heaven, and all DO happen for the elect. Since the time of Christ, the believer's baptism recognizes that all three are complete.
Baptism is not regeneration. Baptism is a confirmation of God's sign and seal made with His children from before the foundation of the world. Regeneration is God breaking into time and making us aware of that fact.
Yes to all! So, why do you baptize infants? :) I'm just kidding, but I honestly do not understand how baptism can be a confirmation of anything (from our POV) if the faith element of salvation is still missing. Of course, as parents, and as a church body, we WANT the infant to grow into faith and we pledge our Godly efforts to encourage that. It seems to me, though, that to confirm it in a person's infancy is a bit premature. As I'm sure you know, and for the benefit of anyone who doesn't, instead of infant baptism we do a "baby dedication" ceremony. It is really for the adults, especially the parents, and in it we all as a body pledge to be helpful in raising the child as a Christian-to-be. In our church, the "success rate" is quite high, but I wouldn't call it high enough to be able to "confirm" anything at the infant stage.
Plus, and this is no small argument, to require a spoken oath of an individual in order to be made a part of a community, smacks of certain secret societies which is not really a good thing. We can announce our membership and be welcomed into a particular congregation, but this is an act of fraternity. Our adoption into God's family occurred from before time and is an act of paternity.
Paul tells us in Rom 10:9 : "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." So, I'm not really sure what you mean about secret societies. I have always thought that public professions were to be encouraged. When we require a public profession in order to join our church, from the person it is a sign of obedience to God, in our eyes.
And, what you say about adoption is absolutely true. Therefore, I suppose the question becomes "when is it proper to recognize what God Himself has done"? I think the Baptist approach is just to have a little more surety about what it IS that God actually HAS done. :)
Therefore the purpose of baptism is not our declaration to God of faith. Baptism is God's declaration to us of His abiding love.
Yes! For while a declaration of faith is made at the believer's baptism, it is not the first. A prior one must have been made for it to be proper to proceed with the baptism, in our view.
I just ordered what looks to be a great book edited by Gregg Strawbridge, "The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism," although two "g's" in "Gregg" is a little unsettling. 8~)
I'm a big fan of TMQ, a football column on espn.com. The author is Gregg Easterbrook, so two "g's" is OK with me. :) The book you ordered sounds great. Please share when you've had a chance to go through it. The snippet was interesting because at a recent baptism, our pastor, for the first time I can think of, made a special point of noting that children who have not been baptized as believers are technically not members of the church, even if their parents are baptized as believers. Of course, there is zero difference as to their participation in any church activities, even the Supper. I actually didn't know what our church's official position on that was. I will be interested to hear what your book says.
Thank you! :) And thank you for the idea to adopt it.
That is a good distinction. I suppose the question from Reformed Baptists would be how do we know to have that trust since we can never be certain of anyone else's faith but our own? We would say that the Bible gives us many examples of "reasonable expectations" based on a profession of faith.
That is because Calvinist infant baptizers don't want to presume that God has not decreed that this infant is reprobate [i.e. divinely decreed not to receive saving grace, and divinely decreed to be tormented in hell fire eternally]. When they say, "I trust God that my child is a member of His family", that really means only, "I hope that my child is a member of His family." If Calvinists believed that God had promised that through baptism the infant is made a member of God's family, they could say after the child's baptism "I know that my child is now a member of God's family", since if God promises X, one can know X, not just hope that X. But they explicitly refuse to say "I know that my infant is now a member of God's family" because they have no reason to believe that the likelihood of the infant's reprobation is less than the likelihood of the infant's election. When their baptized infants die, they do not know whether the infants go to heaven or hell. They just hope, as one might hope waiting for the lottery numbers to be anounced, that their infant was among the elect and not the reprobate.
-A8
Yes, but what happens when the truth of the thing asserted is fully dependent on its historical accuracy? For example, if David never lived then Jesus' whole lineage and indeed His title "Son of David" would be a complete sham. BTW, I got that stuff on limited inerrancy from Religious Tolerance. It doesn't appear to be particularly friendly to Catholics, but not overly mean either. I just found it randomly, and was curious about to what level Catholics could take the Bible metaphorically.
So apparently, there are many truths now, some diametrically opposed... Where does the Spirit guarantee that every individual will be shown the full truth that God has revealed? God guarantees this truth to the Church as a Body, not as an individual.
No, there are not many truths, just one. But, people apprehend the truth at different rates and times. The Spirit governs all of it. Otherwise, sanctification would not be the lifelong process it is described as in the Bible. And, there is no guarantee that ALL truth will be revealed to anyone during life. That would leave such a person with nothing left to learn. I don't see that as possible. Apparently, this guarantee also does not apply to the Church, since different Apostolic faiths have different beliefs, AND, within the Latin Church anyway, some beliefs (truths) have been modified or changed over time. It appears that "the Church" learns in much the same way as individuals do, as the Spirit wills.
Why in the world are there so many denominations of Protestantism, all claiming to be 'Spirit-led'? What gives?
There really aren't that many among Bible-believing Protestants. Anyone can say he isn't Roman Catholic and start some weird "faith". They have nothing to do with us and we are not responsible for them not being Roman Catholic. There is no "Protestant" hierarchy to determine who may call themselves Protestants. Bible-believing Protestants follow Sola Scriptura and have much in common. Perhaps one of the biggest differences we have is the synergist-monergist problem. Nevertheless, the faiths are fairly compatible on the core elements. As I said above, the Spirit leads as He will.
That is a matter of opinion. The Bible doesn't even make THAT statement - that it tells us EVERYTHING we need to know.
Well then, here's a passage you've never seen before: :)
2 Tim 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
To you, does "thoroughly equipped" somehow not equal "everything we need to know"?
FK: "God's chosen DO have no choice but to follow them: Phil 2:13 : ... for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose."
Where does that say that the "saved" have no choice but to follow God? It only says that God works in us the will to act according to His purpose, not that our will is totally destroyed.
If this referred to the lost, then God would be the author of sin (God working IN the person), and nobody believes that. Secondly, you're watering it down with "God works in us the will to act". That's not what it says. Instead, it says "God who works in you to will and to act". It is a subtle but significant difference, and I understand why you made it. The actual text says that it is God doing the work, not Him working to persuade us. The text has God in charge and in control. The will being "destroyed" is a non-issue because for the believer, the will has already been changed by God. The heart of stone is removed, and a heart of flesh has taken its place. And of course, a remnant of the sin nature remains, even after conversion, hence, we believers still sin from time to time. Therefore, the old will is not completely destroyed, but is almost completely replaced with a new will in favor of Christ. It is not a matter of God forcing against choice, it's a matter of God literally changing our minds.
But notice that this has nothing to do with baptism. It is a red herring. For the Calvinist, the infant just after baptism is no closer to salvation than he or she was before baptism. For the Calvinist, "sign and seal" language has nothing to do with "salvation" because "signing and sealing" does not in any way change one's election/reprobation status. You can sign and seal your infant over and over, but according to Calvinism (wherein baptism is considered non-regenerative), if the infant dies and was reprobate, the infant is going to burn in hell eternally.
-A8
It is the Calvinist infant baptizers who have this problem. They call these baptized infants "God's people", but then allow that some [unknown] percentage of these baptized infants are hated by God [as God hated Esau], having been decreed by God from all eternity not to receive saving grace and so to burn in hell forever. See the problem?
-A8
Notice how 'sola scriptura' is set aside in order to make such statements. In no place does the Bible say that God made a sign and a seal with His children before the foundation of the world.
-A8
If regeneration is merely epistemic [God making us aware of something we already are through baptism], then we are saved at baptism. Otherwise you reduce salvation to awareness [i.e. knowledge], and that is gnosticism. So you have to choose between your epistemic conception of regeneration and your non-salvific conception of baptism.
-A8
For Calvinists, baptism is causally irrelevant to that divine act. For Calvinists, having your infant baptized is like taking your Lotto tickets, and stamping the word "WINNER" on them, in the hopes that they will be winners.
Therefore the purpose of baptism is not our declaration to God of faith. Baptism is God's declaration to us of His abiding love.
Abiding love. But since for the Calvinists God has chosen from before the foundation of the world to withold saving grace from some of these infants, and to damn them to eternal fire, and 'hates' them like He hated Esau, therefore, some of these infants receiving this baptism as a "declaration of His abiding love" are actually hated by God. See the problem? He hates them and He loves them.
-A8
I see you don't understand the concept of love, do you. WHY WOULDN'T they be interested in those of us whom they loved before they went to heaven? And don't forget, God desires that men be saved. If we united our will to God in heaven, then WE desire all men to be saved, as well. Remember Luke 15 and the discussion about the rejoicing in heaven over one person saved?
What exactly is your idea of heaven, in the reformed world?
Regards
The distinction is vital, and I'm sorry you missed it.
Those who are content with the RCC voodoo of baptismal regeneration should perhaps spend more time reading the Bible or even Calvin and the Westminster Confession which all explain precisely why my "trust" is not misplaced nor in vain.
I don't have much time today, so I'll leave you with the Westminster Confession which, with the accompanying Scripture, answers all your questions...
II. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto.[9] III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.[10] IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,[11] but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.[12] V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15] VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered;[16] yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time.[17] VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.[18] ____________ [1] MAT 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [2] 1CO 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. [3] ROM 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also. COL 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. [4] GAL 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. ROM 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. [5] TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. [6] MAR 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. [7] ROM 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. [8] MAT 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [9] MAT 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. JOH 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. MAT 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. [10] HEB 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. 19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. 21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. ACT 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. MAR 7:4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. [11] MAR 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. ACT 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. [12] GEN 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. GAL 3:9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. COL 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. ACT 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. ROM 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 1CO 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. MAT 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. MAR 10:13 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them. LUK 18:15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. [13] LUK 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him. EXO 4:24 And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him. 25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. 26 So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision. [14] ROM 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also. ACT 10:2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. 4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God. 22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee. 31 And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? [15] ACT 8:13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. 23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. [16] JOH 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. [17] GAL 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; EPH 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. ACT 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. [18] TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.I. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church;[2] but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.[8]
I don't have much time today, but I do know that neither Reformed Baptist baptism and Presbyterian infant baptism incorporates the corruption of the idolatry of "baptismal regeneration" which insists the administration of certain invocations and splashing of "holy water" by the priestly class removes original sin and makes someone "acceptable" to God.
This is, as we've seen time and again, just another way for men and magisteriums to maintain control over those who kneel to them.
"...according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time." Isn't that a great sentence?
I'm happy your church is doing those "infant-welcomes into the congregation." Even though some of you guys don't think that child is part of God's family until he tells you so himself, I trust that God has already named him as a son because he is the child of a covenanted family to whom "the promise was made."
And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations." -- Genesis 17:7,9 "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." -- Acts 2:38-39 "She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet." -- Proverbs 31:21 "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee...
-A8
Then we believe it. When the author asserts the historical veracity of something, then so it happened. However, it is not so black and white in determining whether the author IS asserting the historical veracity of something. The Jews were not concerned like we are of such matters.
there are not many truths, just one. But, people apprehend the truth at different rates and times.
LOL! Yes, eventually people become Catholic at different times!
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
My problem with your statement is that some "truths" are diametrically opposed. Opposite. This is not a matter of different rates. We have the "Spirit" leading people in opposite directions, if we would believe every person who said "I am led by the Spirit"... Thus, I see this statement as self-serving. The only way we KNOW we are being led by the Spirit is by our works of love, our obedience to the Commandments (e.g. Acts 5:32 or Mat 7:21)
Apparently, this guarantee also does not apply to the Church, since different Apostolic faiths have different beliefs, AND, within the Latin Church anyway, some beliefs (truths) have been modified or changed over time. It appears that "the Church" learns in much the same way as individuals do, as the Spirit wills.
Nothing is changed over time, it is the understanding that improves, as you say. I still do not think that the Apostles knew the exact and total implications of what we now call "Trinity". They taught it in kernel form, implicitly. But I sincerely doubt that Peter or Paul taught that Jesus is a hypostatic union of God and man, or that the Spirit proceeds from the Father/Son and is equally God, different only in this procession from the Father and the Son.
You are correct that the Church learns more about God as time advances - since the Church IS the community. It consists of theologians and bishops and so forth, who build upon previous generations and attempt to present God's Word and Gospel in a language that has meaning for people of today.
Nevertheless, the faiths are fairly compatible on the core elements. As I said above, the Spirit leads as He will.
I question that. In my experience, no matter the topic, I find Protestants of different groups taking different sides of a theological question: Does Baptism save? What is the Eucharist? Can we baptize infants? Do works have anything to do with salvation? What is the relationship between grace and free will? Can a Christian fall away? I do not see Protestants lining up on these questions into two groups, but they cut across the board.
To you, does "thoroughly equipped" somehow not equal "everything we need to know"?
Yawn. If I had a dollar for everyone who thought that this verse proved anything... Perhaps you should consult the dictionary. Thoroughly equipped doesn't mean EVERYTHING. Nor does this verse even refer to the NT!
Ephesians 4:11-13 gives us ANOTHER means of perfecting the saints - and the Bible is not even mentioned. Thus, the Bible is NOT the sole source of our faith. If it was, Ephesians could not say that God gave the Church preachers, teachers, and evangelists to perfect the saints. You jump to conclusions when you think that "thoroughly" means "everything".
Case in point, FK. HOW did the first Christians get by without a NT the first 25-30 years? Were they not able to become "perfected"? Were they in "limbo" waiting for the Bible that would some day be written to guide them to truth? NO. The CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of the Truth, not the Bible.
If this referred to the lost, then God would be the author of sin
Isn't that what Calvinists believe, although they won't admit it, their theology says the same thing.
Secondly, you're watering it down with "God works in us the will to act". That's not what it says. Instead, it says "God who works in you to will and to act". It is a subtle but significant difference, and I understand why you made it.
"God works in you to will and to act". Yes, that is me doing it, God moving my will to desire to do it. Not sure where you are coming up with your interpretation that I am a puppet and God pulls the strings. God works in me the DESIRE, the WILL to ACT. It doesn't say that God acts. It doesn't say that God desires and I do nothing. That is your paradigm thrust upon the Scriptures.
In your paradigm, man is not even judged, although the bible clearly tells us over and over that man WILL be judged. HOW can man be judged if he is not responsible for his own will to act???
I don't expect an answer, as this question has been asked before many times.
Regards
I've never prayed for a departed. I wouldn't know what to say. :) Is there any Biblical support for the idea that the departed are in discomfort because they are separated from their bodies? Paul seems to say the opposite:
2 Cor 5:6-8 : 6 Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7 We live by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
It doesn't appear that Paul believes there is an intermediate state of any kind. He seems to think that once we physically die, the elect go straight into the presence of our Lord. I like the sound of that, so I think I'll just skip all the suffering and purgation-type stuff. :)
After the second coming, our natural state will be re-established (this is not reincarnation, as our identities remain, and the bodies we get will be our old bodies made new).
I agree that there's no reincarnation here, and it's really more closely a reunification. And, I've always wondered how that's physically going to work out. Will we all look like 18-year-olds? Plus, what sort of bodies do abortion victims get?
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.