Posted on 01/24/2007 8:41:04 AM PST by Joseph DeMaistre
I am not Old Reggie. Also, he has been sufficiently flogged for his offense... the Catholics are very good at this sort of thing ;)~
It's what's known as evangelization.
Jesus said, "I and the Father are One." Which is supported under the Trinitarian dogma. So, this would seem to be a moot point, by the Power of God, Christ Ascended into Heaven. What other Power could have brought the Lord into Heaven?
Leaving aside your disbelief in the Assumption of Mary, nobody has ever suggested that she was Assumed by anything other than God's power.
How can it be pitiful, it is not even so much an argument as a statement of fact.
Until Vatican II the laity needed permission from the priest to even read the bible. The constitition did not require the citizenry to seek permission from the government to read it. The constitution, like the Reformation, returned freedom to the people and unbound the chains of tyranny.
The reformation returned scripture to its proper place as the final authority on all matters of doctrine and returned the body of Christ to a proper relationship with God. The reformation returned the gospel to its proper foundation, one of faith and not works.
They had no business studying God's Word themselves!
The illiteracy and impoverished state of the people left them extremely vulnerable to heretics who DID have access to Scripture and fashioned it to teach grave error against the Church. There was no possible means of providing a Bible to every member of the Church, a) because it was practical impossibility) and b) because they couldn't read it even if they wanted to. Thus, it became imperative that the Church keep the Bible out of the hands of the intelligentsia and other "progressives" who sought to defame its contents and drag souls into error. And the extent of heresy that required quelling was ample proof that the Church's concerns were extremely well-founded and prudent.
See post 319.
I suppose 2 Thessalonians Chapter 3 doesn't count?
If I remember correctly, God was counted amongst the pagan's and tax collectors. This verse can not be used to justify anyone's claim to authority. Any claim to authority to justify some claim, is simply a propaganda technique, not a logical operation.
The correct verse that applies to identify a Church is Matt 18:20, "For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them." You cut a verse from a passage that was referring to men gathered for the purpose of accusing each other of sin. The passage can not logically apply to groups of men, both claiming to be "the Church", where the matter of contention requires an examination of the evidence and the application of logic.
The parties involved in the contention have 2 options. They can take the course of Mark 6:11 in recognition that all the evidence and logic shows they have been perfect, the matter of faith has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and go their separate ways. Else they can recognize that the matter is not a matter of faith worth pressing and fractioning the Church over, and act as commanded in John 13:34-35. Mark 6:11,
"And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them."
John 13:34-35,
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
I see no scriptural justification for any man, or group, to claim authority. The commands given in Matt 5:48 and Matt 19:14, apply to the decision of which course to take.
Matt 5:48, "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matt 19:14,
Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
They apply with the following caution. Matt 5:20,
"For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Where do you come up with such nonsense?
You're being inconsistent in your hermeneutics. If the "we" is not applicable to anyone coming after Paul and the other Apostles, then (given the paucity of evidence for that interpretation), it should also be conclusive that none of the teachings of Paul (or Christ) for that matter, are applicable to anyone following them, too.
Kinda like the mob muscling in on each other's territories.
And the extent of heresy that required quelling was ample proof that the Church's concerns were extremely well-founded and prudent.
So you're saying that the extensive mass murders were justified?
LOL!
No. First, look at the verse in context.
14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it,Continue in what you have become convinced of because of the authority of your teachers...
15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures,...The verses that Timothy has known from infancy would be the Hebrew Scriptures, not the New Testament. Some books of the NT had not yet been written when Paul made this statement. The canon of the NT would not be finally settled until several Church councils around the year 400 A.D.
How could the Scriptures be the sole rule of faith when the books of the NT had not yet been canonized, or even written in some cases?
...which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.No doubt.
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,All true. But the passage doesn't say that Scripture is the only thing useful for teaching. If this were implied, the passage would contradict other passages of Scripture which tell us to hold fast to Apostolic writings and traditions; which describe the church as "the pillar and foundation of truth," and Jesus' command to take our disputes "to the Church."
17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
"Thoroughly equipped" simply does not mean that Scripture is the only thing that equips "the man of God" for every good work.
Also, the phrase "the man of God" refers to a priest.
Finally, even assuming your interpretation of the passage, "Scripture alone" would only equip us "for every good work." Yet saving faith is more than good works.
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. – John 6:63
And wherever two or three come together in Jesus' name, we have divergent doctrines.
How many "pillars of truth" are there? One, or many?
How many churches did Christ build? One, or many?
Did Christ command us to take our disputes to His Church, or any church? How then could doctrinal disputes be settled in many churches with divergent doctrines? Or did Jesus not expect us to take our doctrinal disputes to His Church? In which case, what was His purpose in establishing many churches holding contradictory doctrines?
Excellent questions!
More like anarchists trying to turn our government into a socialist dictatorship by fashioning their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution as they wish and turning the people against democracy.
So you're saying that the extensive mass murders were justified?
Certainly not across the board. But the gravity of the situation cannot be denied, even if the implementation was flawed.
We don't know how many tens of thousands of innocent men and women died as a result of the Crusades, either, but I don't think you would wish the Church let the Muslims have their way, do you? Yet the forces of political correctness want you and me to believe that Christianity committed mass murder without cause there, too.
Where do you get that idea?
Pope Leo XIII in 1898 granted an indulgence to anyone who reads the Gospel for at least fifteen minutes a day. Of course other popes before him encouraged reading Scripture as well, including Pope Pius VI who in 1778 sent a letter encouraging the reading of Scripture by the faithful in their own languages, and a included a prayer to the Holy Spirit meant to be said before reading the Bible.
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.