Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
That all occurred 1700 years ago, long before the Roman Church asserted its dominance and proclaimed itself the sole arbiter of all matters of faith and morals. Long before the Roman Church slipped into idolatry.
God knew that Adam and Eve would sin.
He ordained the mechanism whereby we would have free will and it would be as plain as possible - and it was plain until nutty Jean Calvin imposed his theological tyranny upon Geneva.
It is not the position of the Catholic Church that one earns one’s salvation. It is not the position of the Catholic Church that one merits God’s grace.
It is merely the position of the Catholic Church that one must reach out one’s hand to God.
I know that you’re on shaky theological grounds and must desperately hold on to what you have. I understand. If the Catholic Church is right, then you are wrong. That’s gotta be tough. Keep swinging, we can take it. After you’re exhausted, maybe the indwelling Holy Spirit will become just a little louder than your other voices.
“Kosta is correct. Without the Catholic Church, you have no more proof that the Bible is the Word of God than you do for the Koran.”
Is the Bible, standing by itself, the Word of God?
If you would, please produce posting evidence that I claimed that of the Roman Catholic Church, as opposed to the Catholic Church. I’d suggest that you are merely muddying the waters here.
I am of the Roman Catholic rite. But I am first and foremost a member of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Please don’t attribute any more error to me than I currently possess.
Then would I be too forward to assume that you are of the camp that believes that the Catholic Church was inerrant and hung onto the Word of God inerrantly until all of a sudden Martin Luther burst upon the scene, and the entire Catholic Church embarked on a fast ship to hell?
Which tradition, Mark, is the correct one? Who wrote Scripture, or in the case of the OT, selected it? Who put the Bible together and said what it is to be Scripture? The Eastern Orthodox or the Roman Catholic?
The original manuscripts, perhaps.
In any case, an agency translating the currently available texts must be employed since they are not clear, neither are they simple. You may choose: a translator of men, or a translator commissioned by Jesus.
Unless your indwelling Holy Spirit provides you with a Urim and Thummim in order to understand what you dig up.
At that point, there was no differentiation. The Orthodox and Roman wings sparred long after the Bible was chosen.
The Orthodox and Roman wings, along with the rest, are more cultural than anything else. The theology is consistent and it is accurate.
Calvinists are not allowed to cavort. That’s entirely too much alliteration for the human body to withstand.
Context counts. From Calvin's Commentary on 1 Timothy 2:4...
Hence we see the childish folly of those who represent this passage to be opposed to predestination. "If God," say they, "wishes all men indiscriminately to be saved, it is false that some are predestined by his eternal purpose to salvation, and others to perdition." They might have had some ground for saying this, if Paul were speaking here about individual men; although even then we should not have wanted the means of replying to their argument; for, although the will of God ought not to be judged from his secret decrees, when he reveals them to us by outward signs, yet it does not therefore follow that he has not determined with himself what he intends to do as to every individual man. But I say nothing on that subject, because it has nothing to do with this passage; for the Apostle simply means, that there is no people and no rank in the world that is excluded from salvation; because God wishes that the gospel should be proclaimed to all without exception. Now the preaching of the gospel gives life; and hence he justly concludes that God invites all equally to partake salvation. But the present discourse relates to classes of men, and not to individual persons; for his sole object is, to include in this number princes and foreign nations. That God wishes the doctrine of salvation to be enjoyed by them as well as others, is evident from the passages already quoted, and from other passages of a similar nature. Not without good reason was it said, "Now, kings, understand," and again, in the same Psalm, "I will give thee the Gentiles for an inheritance, and the ends of the earth for a possession." (Psalm 2:8-10.) In a word, Paul intended to shew that it is our duty to consider, not what kind of persons the princes at that time were, but what God wished them to be. Now the duty arising out of that love which we owe to our neighbor is, to be solicitous and to do our endeavor for the salvation of all whom God includes in his calling, and to testify this by godly prayers. With the same view does he call God our Savior; for whence do we obtain salvation but from the undeserved kindness of God? Now the same God who has already made us partakers of salvation may sometime extend his grace to them also. He who hath already drawn us to him may draw them along with us. The Apostle takes for granted that God will do so, because it had been thus foretold by the predictions of the prophets, concerning all ranks and all nations.""Lastly, he demonstrates that God has at heart the salvation of all, because he invites all to the acknowledgment of his truth. This belongs to that kind of argument in which the cause is proved from the effect; for, if "the gospel is the power of God for salvation to every one that believeth," (Romans 1:16,) it is certain that all those to whom the gospel is addressed are invited to the hope of eternal life. In short, as the calling is a proof of the secret election, so they whom God makes partakers of his gospel are admitted by him to possess salvation; because the gospel reveals to us the righteousness of God, which is a sure entrance into life.
Then why aren't the bibles the same? Why do the Orthodox have more books?
“You may choose: a translator of men, or a translator commissioned by Jesus.”
So then it is the “correct” translation of the original manuscripts that is the Word of God, not the original manuscripts. Why cannot one skilled in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic translate the original manuscripts just as accurately as a professional religious?
“Unless your indwelling Holy Spirit provides you with a Urim and Thummim in order to understand what you dig up.”
This urim and thummim is an accessory provided with the laying on of hands?
God made me a cavorting robot, and who am I to question Him?
BOO!
It was a slow ship from Rome to Laodicea.
Eventually Rome arrived.
It's still there.
They use the same Bible.
You can boo me all you want. I wouldn’t expect anything better.
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.