Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
Also it is apparent that Paul and James are in at least as much authority based on the meeting in Jerusalem.
Amen. And to a certain degree, the Incarnation itself is a God-mandated anthropomorphism. God not only took on the characteristics of humans; He BECAME human for the very reason of experiencing our humanity so as to witness to exactly what He was saving us from -- the immense burden of our sins.
Why else would God do this to His Only Beloved Son if not that our sins are a most severe offense against His Holiness, righteousness and justice? Why does God's love manifest itself in a blood sacrifice, in this brutal manner, if not that it is 'required' by God's justice?
Amen. Our own judicial system didn't just rise up from the foam of happenstance. It's based on the Biblical injunctions of responsibility and redress, acquittal and condemnation, of judgment.
The glory of our salvation is that the responsibility is all ours and the redress is all His. We are acquitted by His standing in our place, taking on the punishment rightly due us, so that we may stand blameless before God.
To misunderstand or ignore the penal substitution of Christ's redemption is to miss the point of the Scriptures entirely. It is the very heart of our salvation and what we give thanks for. It is the way God created His creation to be.
Yep. I was going to say John would have been a better choice than Peter. 8~)
Who can read John and not understand?
Actually, I like Nathanael/Bartholomew. They are listed but looks like they kept their heads down and didn't cause any trouble. I try real hard to emulate them...... sometimes.
I don't think so.
Last I checked (the upper range of the IQ scale):
up to 115 is "normal"
116 - 139 is "superior"
140 - 149 is "gifted"
150 - 200 is "genius"
I haven't seen the list since about 1985, so this may not be exact, but it's close.
Keep in mind, this scale is on a bell curve. So while the upper range may appear quite large numerically, the number of people who actually test in that range is quite low by comparison.
Sola Scritura does not mean there are many paths; it means there is one path and we are to diligently strive to know it.
You continue to miss the point of Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura testifies to the singular truth of God and that that truth is found in Scripture because the Holy Spirit resides there and will instruct the elect. The elect's earthly instruction can be a circuitous route, just like Paul's, but the elect should be "certain that eventually their election by God will catch up to their lives in real time," as b-d once said so well. And the elect will know their election by the indwelling Holy Spirit who guides them through the Scriptures, sanctifies them, comforts them and leads them in righteousness.
Sola Scriptura does not mean everyone understands everything in the blink of an eye. It means we are to search the Scriptures and be confident that therein we will find our salvation.
To deny that the Scriptures contain all we need to know of God is to deny the work of the Holy Spirit.
Yep. It was a time of dispersal. Christ sent the apostles out as sheep to the slaughter. But at every moment, Christ was the only head of His church.
FWIW, I would add that all doctrine, dogma, beliefs must be consistent with what is written in Scripture.
It seems pretty obvious why those on the other side don't "get it". If they did they would have to clean up their own house.
Amen!
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." -- 1 John 4:1
I don't mean to be flip with this, but like I wrote (maybe not to you) a few days ago, I have not studied St. Anselm's theology in sufficient depth in order to discuss it. Regarding the Eucharist as sacrifice, it is one and only, perfect sacrifice of Christ. We do not re-sacrifice, but we bring ourselves to that one sacrifice through the Mass. Our purpose therefore is the same as Christ's purpose, so whether God "demanded" the sacrifice as you insist (there are verses to the contrary, as you are aware), or Christ offered it as an expression of His love to us, -- as is the proper answer, -- the fact that we participate int he Eucharist is neither here or there in that.
And so far, I have not seen "Protestant falsehoods" illustrated on any essential matters.
I made several posts on this thread, most to you, regarding the two falsehoods: the notion that Bible alone is sufficient for all essentials of the faith, and that works are a mere product of faith, which alone saves. On the first falsehood, logic requires that you find a verse that teaches Sola Scriptura; such verse is not in evidence. On the second we have virtually every page of the New Testament exhorting good works, we have clear explanation that we are judged by them, and we have the explicit statement contrary to the Protestant belief of Sola Fide in St. James. If you have more spin in addition to the stuff you had offered on these, or if more books of the Bible have been redacted by the Protestants since last we spoke, be my guest.
I am aware of these, but nowhere does Christ say that the gift of the Holy Ghost will bypass His Church, and when He actually sends Him, the recipients are the apostles (John 20:22) and then, at Pentecost, the disciples in the Upper Room, who comprised the First Church. Acts 2:38 explains that the gift is received by the believer at baptism, that is, again from the Church.
Amen!
See my previous post; it equally applies to these verses you additionally cite.
The Church also teaches us to rely on the superabundant mercy of Christ; however, in this setting I try to argue the scripture and what is the position of the Church, not necessarily my own personal interpretation which sometimes occupied a more narrow area than the entire range of thought allowed by the Church.
Surely you would agree that the crime of abortion is so much greater because it deprives these children of the joy of ordinary baptism Christ prepared for them; even though His mercy extends to them in full in an extraordinary way.
The parable of the publican and a pharisee at prayer comes to mind.
The people you trust are also the ones who wrote the history books. At some point in time, you are trusting that what the priests and historians are telling you is true. That is faith.
If this is how you view the search for truth, it's an example of poor methodology. If it's how you approached your search, I'm dissappointed. If it's how you think I search, it's insulting.
A doctor exhorts us to "breath deeply," but does that mean we breath because we choose to breath or that we could hold our breath and still live?
Or is breathing a reflexive action endemic to our humanity?
If we are reprobate, even any semblance of good works will be for naught and remain "as filthy rags."
If we have been acquitted and redeemed by Christ, we will perform good works because they result from the sanctifying efforts of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Good works are evidence of our salvation; not a requirement for it.
We can argue if baptism itself or the intention of the Church to baptize is efficacious, but my point is not that the faithful never receive the Holy Ghost, but rather that when they do, it comes from the Apostles, St. Peter is this instance, and therefore from the Church.
Again, I am not trying to tell you that you are deprived of the Holy Ghost because you are not Catohlic, -- far from it. I am telling you though that when one speaks against the Apostolic Church in the spirit of rebellion, that this is the time when the Holy Ghost is silent in him, even if some other ghosts might be speaking.
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.