Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
I’ll get back to you in, like, 6 months when I’ve digested this......
Dog, Nice post.. But I think you got clergyness on the brain, Paul knew all about clergyness.. he came from that gross error.. You suppose he did this or that for reasons of "commission".. When the boy got his commission from GOD directly.. He needed no verification the others needed verification of his "spirit", and got it.. they were still quite jewish in their thinking..
After considering your post.. I, so far, believe you are spinning the events a certain way when it didt happen that way at all, I think.. I say spinning not in a negative way.. Maybe observing would be a better word.. Anyway Galatians shows Paul fighting against JEWS probably christian Jews spinning christ into jewish law.. and customs (read traditions).. Paul knew jewishness better than them.. that were trying to pervert the Gospel to ceremony and tradition.. much as many prostys try to do.. With varying success I might add..
I can in Galatians see religious jews(probably) trying to inflict clergy ceremony and tradition on the Galatians.. PAUL however, him just being SAVED from all that, reacted beautifully.. SLAPPing all that down..
HAVE YOU EVER Been to South America?
I even have a memory of it happening in the Vatican—St Peter’s when I visited in 1973.
Indeed, Paul was the most educated and religiously zealous of all the apostles .... before Christ opened his eyes.
***History has proven you wrong in a long list of ways.***
Name some.
***You still have not even rationalized away the many thousands of RC reps who DO prostrate themselves before Mary routinely!***
Name some. I thought that your last claim was hundreds of thousands or more likely millions. They should be easy to spot and easier to name.
***Yet I read hereon the audacity to claim ACCURACY???***
And bereft of the benefit of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, yet.
***You have yet to deal with the substantive points I made about the Eunuch.***
You made insubstantive points about the Eunuch. Phillip was duefully made a priest of the Church by the laying on of hands by the council of bishops (the Apostles) BEFORE he met the Eunuch.
These are the substantive points.
***Running and hiding from them and assaulting instead is not dealing with the points at all—much less honestly and rationally.***
We stand on a mountain top in full daylight for all to see.
Knowing your giftings really helps you focus on what you can or should do with them. Lots of people don’t even believe they have any. How sad. God has given each of us gifts to use to edify, heal, minister, etc. to the Body.
Well, if we are, hubby’s deeds have already earned him many, many jewels for his crown. He has a servant’s heart and he has more integrity in his little finger than most people have in their whole hands. This man is a treasure. He’s not afraid to humble himself before God (or me) and admit his faults and renounce his sins. You won’t find a finer man anywhere. I was so blessed...
***We are adopted into His family. That can be rescinded.
Not by a Christian or a Christian God it can’t. When one adopts, one is making a commitment. If you made the commitment to adopt a child, would it ever be the Christian thing to do to “unadopt” that child? The child might turn out to be very troublesome, but it would take an act on your part to give up (to quit), and rescind the adoption. (The child doesn’t get a say once it’s done.) I don’t see how a Christian could do that. I don’t think our God would do that either.***
I appreciate your last statement.
However, you are wrong about the child not being able to rescind his/her adoption. The child can petition for it to be rescinded.
Now, it wouldn’t be nice to reject a good parent, or a good God, but not all people are nice.
*** I have been told that the priest has full discretion as to whether to grant absolution or not. For example, if a priest knows that Fred is an alcoholic, and Fred comes into confession and has obviously been drinking, then the priest can and SHOULD deny forgiveness and absolution. I have not been told that this kind of thing happens very often, however, the power is still there and that’s what I was talking about.***
If something like that is obvious, then it is true. But the priest who denies absolution because of some petty motive such as dislike for the individual, is, I believe, overruled by the Holy Spirit and forgiveness is given if the individual is truly repentent.
***Most FR Catholics I have spoken with, but not all, have said that it IS God who does the actual forgiving, but that the priest has the power to “block” the request from going through according to this passage.***
Of course, it is God. A man cannot stop God from doing as He will, either. If the man is truly repentent, the priest cannot ‘block’ the way.
***Let’s say that your car dies on you and you have it towed to your favorite mechanic, me. I examine the car and then I tell you “I promise I will have it fixed for you by tomorrow”. You come back the next day and I smile and tell you that the repairs went fine. You hop in and turn the key but nothing happens. Then you get out and ask me what’s going on. I smile again and say that I actually didn’t touch your car, but I have assembled all the tools you’ll need to fix it yourself. According to you I fully kept my promise to fix your car.***
Slow day? No, the analogy doesn’t work. Jesus is the WAY, the Truth and the Life. The Way. The Journey. Not the limousine. It is up to us to make that journey - and He makes it possible - it is impossible otherwise.
***Just for fun, let’s extend the analogy. :) Now, let’s say that the next time I actually do fix your car, just as I promised. You thank me and ask if my work is guaranteed. I say “Absolutely” and then hand you a certificate which says “Eternal Guarantee”. Well, after a while your car breaks down again and you bring it back. You present the “Eternal Guarantee” and expect me to fix it for free. I say “No way. You see, the Eternal Guarantee is only good until the next time your car breaks down. As soon as it breaks down, the Eternal Guarantee expires. Therefore, if you want it fixed you will have to pay full price” (confession/penance). Under Apostolic thought you have no problem with this and think it is perfectly fair. :)***
Eternal salvation is not a car wreck and the Guarantee comes with conditions - the Sermon on the Mount is a good place to start.
***While God does not call for it, He nonetheless knows that we are still going to sin because of the remnant of the old man. So, we give thanks that John tells us:***
You mean old man Adam? You bet. If the Reformed truly believe that they are following the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and they still sin, then the Holy Spirit is guiding the Reformed to sin. We don’t go there because we believe that God is not the author of sin. Man misses the target of God - this is sin.
***Only a weak God can fail. Only a God who is not omnipotent can fail. If your above is representative of Apostolic belief, then it also proves the belief that man can and DOES thwart God’s will. That is, the only explanation of God failing would be at the hands of man. Is this really the God whom you know?**
The God that we are familiar with has given free will to all. Including the free will to reject Him. If His will is that we have free will, then God does not fail.
The Reformed seem awful hung up on control issues.
***Personally, I’ll take God’s ‘failures’ over man’s successes any day or night.***
The Jews, as a nation, refused to accept Christ. Maybe you could become Jewish.
***1. He IS looking for Biblical ‘excuse’ to save people and NOT Biblical ‘excuse’ to damn them. HIS MERCY DOES triumph over even His justice. ***
Sounds reasonable and true.
***2. ALL AUTHENTIC BELIEVERS—in confessed up, repented up, right-standing with God—have the capaity IN SOME MYSTERIOUS SENSE AND IN SOME CONTEXTS, CONTINGENCIES—to pronounce forgiveness over others which God will pay attention to. ***
Are you saying that I could forgive, e.g. Quix’s sins?
***IN ANY CASE, I PRONOUNCE FORGIVENESS for all their sins—past, present, future***
How can sins be forgiven in the future?
***Regardless, I’m going to go on praying/pronouncing forgiveness over anyone whom Holy Spirit prompts me to pray thusly over. ***
How do the prompts occur?
***Ok, let the bashings and flame assaults begin—if God so instructs you! LOL.***
I just got this email...
***Protestantism is a feel-good religon. Man-made, for and by men (and women of coruse). It is tailored to make everyone feel snug and safe no matter what they do. ***
Smug, too.
***It appeals to our fallen nature. It is a deception, and the root of deception is known to all of us.***
I liken it to an imitation of Adam’s sin of eating from the tree of good and evil. In his case, he ate of the fruit. In their case, they pretend to.
***I know some things about Him, but I also know Him on a personal basis BECAUSE He is a personal God.***
He is further above us than we are above the rotifers. Infinitely further. How is the personal touch carried out?
***The independence of man demands that God be pushed away and put into an unknowable box.***
We contend that the Reformation has attempted to elevate man to the point where not only does he invent his own God, he elevates himself to the point where he has his own personal God.
***It has long been my belief that the personal relationship an Apostolic has is not with God at all. It is with the Church. The Church is the real center of the Apostolic faith, imo.***
The Church is the teaching institution. We must all learn and therefore we need to go to the Church for learning, instruction, and for receiving the Sacraments. The priest is a religious leader of the people, but only one of the people. That’s why it is so important that we celebrate Mass with the priest facing with the people, up to God, rather than the Protestant lecture hall.
***However, He DOES speak to me and I certainly speak to Him all the time. Our relationship is deeply personal. I tell Him things I wouldn’t tell anyone else because I trust Him, not because I “have to”. ***
How does the speech work? Is it an actual voice, or is it subconscious?
***If God had designed our faith to be provable to all men, to whatever standard they demanded, then all men would believe.***
How many people saw Christ in the flesh, saw miracles, heard Him teach and still didn’t believe? Just more evidence for the free will of men.
***The truth of facts is not dependent on who or how many people agree with the facts.***
Agreed. But believing something very strongly does not make it true either.
Why do you think he mentions the two visits to Cephas, the right hand of fellowship?
And then Acts 15:22 certainly admits, if it does not require, the interpretation that Paul was sent (here it's pempo, not apostello - which is interesting, huh?) by the council.
You're going to love this (not): I think that one simply cannot avoid, the Church cannot avoid having "religious" (and therefore clergy-ish/clerical?) aspects any more than an Incarnate IHS could avoid urination and still be truly human. (Or for a less offensive example, let us not that the evangelist helpfully tells us that after He fasted for 40 days He was "an hungered, yeah Howdy!"
(that particular text rarely makes it out of the archives ....)
Look at how A-G says she's not even non-denominational! (Wouldn't that mean she's denominational? CAN there be a tertium quid) and Paul mentions disparagingly those who claim to be "of Christ". The assertion of an invisible Church is reminiscent to me of docetism, or something in that ball-park. HE wasn't REALLY incarnate ..... The REAL Church couldn't POSSIBLY have the problems that trammel and disgrace the children of men when they get together ....
I think I would venture in this direction - that just as in IHS human nature is transformed, so in Him and in His Spirit the almost (if not entirely) inevitable structures of religion will appear ( but in a transformed way -- guided by the promised Spirit) in His Church.
And, I don't see a contradiction between Paul rebuking Peter to his face and still acknowledging his (alleged by my side) unique place in the ek-klesia.
Gotta go commit idolatry and abase myself before someone who preposterously claims to have been ordained by a successor to the apostles, right after I get finished worshipping Mary by means of vain repetitions.
Thanks for the conversation. YOU GOTTA read the Kittle article, you just gotta!
Furthest south I’ve been is Mexico City.
I saw no Mary worship there.
I’ve seen many telecasts from the Vatican and I’ve seen no Mary worship there either. Maybe I just didn’t get that part of the instruction book when I was baptized.
I think “more likely millions” is a pretty safe guesstimate given South America.
BTW, dozens or a few hundreds here and there would be more than sufficient cause for concern.
You made insubstantive points about the Eunuch. Phillip was duefully made a priest of the Church by the laying on of hands by the council of bishops (the Apostles) BEFORE he met the Eunuch.
= =
I realize that the chronic edifice blindness may be obscuring the obvious here . . .
However, the above assertion has nothing to do with my point.
I am used to lots of folks dodging my points, BTW.
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.