Posted on 05/20/2008 7:45:05 AM PDT by NYer
***Do not look to your own understanding***
Ah, as long as I believe yours.
***You can certainly THINK I’m trying to be my own pope - that certainly does not make it so.***
You present insurmountable evidence.
***Since you do not know me, and we merely cross swords over doctrinal issues (some of them worthy of being divided over), how COULD you see evidence of me being in Christ?***
I certainly don’t.
***The fruit of the Spirit is not visible to the natural eyes nor is it to be mistaken for agreeing with false teaching.***
I have adequate guidelines for the teachings of Christ, thank you. I find them significantly divergant from what little I’ve seen you post.
I pray that the evil in some Catholic haters will be healed.
Paging Rev. Gabriele Amorth.
Either they did not believe in Jesus as Christ or they were Christians.
Do you think they used this 20th century definition in the first century ?
Somebody recently (or was it only in my imagination) put up a nice list of the differences between us. Yeah, yours is the other view. WE would appeal to the wheat and tares (and make a kind of "likeness" between the Kingdom and the Church) and say that HERE and NOW the Church has both. YOU all would say (I think) the Church is the elect, and that we can hardly tell who the elect are (except the saved know they are) so we don't know "where" the Church on earth is.
As to the office of Pope and all, is it right to say that generally your side eschews ANY claim to infallibility of any kind, "Councils have erred," after all (that's from the Articles of Religion of the Anglican Church) and certainly any individual can err. So, theoretically, though not probably, even Sola Scriptura might be an erroneous doctrine.
The pretty part of that is the utter casting of the self on Christ and His grace. But it does seem to make theology tricky and provisional.
But in any event, if my understanding of the idea of error being possible in any human, then I agree that you are not trying to be anybody's Pope. You, in Christ, are taking your best shot.
Is that more or less correct in your view?
That is completely irrelevant.
Do you think first century people knew they had a carotid artery or a duodenum? If they knew of it, it was not by these names.
Yet certainly they did have them.
You are referring to what they called themselves. I am referring to what they were.
Aside from your comment on Sola Scriptura, I think your post is lined up with my view point. My perception of Sola Scriptura is NOT that we have no need of anything beyond Scripture, but that Scripture alone contains what is needed for salvation and godly living. Men with various ways of looking at and understanding Truth can help others comprehend it. This is why preachers, et al. are needed. But the Biblical doctrines are bed rock and I believe there’s no new Truth revealed by men, only revealed Truth being taught and ‘splained to folks - exposited so people comprehend it, know how it applies to life, and are convicted of sin and repent humbly before the Lord.
Oh, it’s just that the Eucharist is commanded by Jesus, but I realize that the understanding of the Protestant version(s) of Scripture supersede Jesus’ commandments. Call us sentimental, but we think that the instructions of Jesus trump anything that you men happen to come up with.
No .. you don't.
You simply choose your own select occasions to obey Christ's literal words.
For you don't do so consistently.
Else, you would never refer to your spiritual leaders ... as "Father".
What do/did you call your male parent?
One day standing before the throne you will need to explain why you spit and make jokes on Christ Crucified.
Just today in Morning Prayer we read 2 Cor. 12:10 "When I am weak, then I am strong." And just before that is"... my power is made perfect in weakness."
Christ crucified is God's power made perfect. The world sees weakness and shame. But what happened there was triumph and power.
Maybe I'm wrong, or we're wrong. But maybe those who do not see this need ministry and compassion.
I will still favor the Dominican custom of having the crucifix carried in before the priest, but turned so that the priest can see the image of the crucified Christ, so that the Friars Preachers will be all the more spurred to preach God's power made perfect, Christ and Him crucified.
May have been a triumph for you...
Just 12 hours prior to His death, He was asking His Father if He could get out of the Crucifixion...
Jesus didn't want to go thru with it...He was sinless and in 12 hours, the shame of the sin of the entire world would come crashing down on Him...
Apparently you guys don't get it...
Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Heb 12:3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.
It was such a great shame for Jesus to take on our sins that we can't comprehend it...
Oh, it’s just that the Eucharist is commanded by Jesus, but I realize that the understanding of the Protestant version(s) of Scripture supersede Jesus’ commandments. Call us sentimental, but we think that the instructions of Jesus trump anything that you men happen to come up with.
No .. you don't.
You simply choose your own select occasions to obey Christ's literal words.
For you don't do so consistently.
Else, you would never refer to your spiritual leaders ... as "Father".
What do/did you call your male parent?
Ahh ... but it's not me who's making the claim that I consistently take Christ at His (literal) word.
Calling a parent “father” violates the literal meaning of the Gospel.
Meanwhile, the literal meaning of the Last Supper is often ignored. In fact, many make Christ a liar on this point.
αισχυνης καταφρονησας
having despised, thought little of, or scorned the shame
I'm guessing we could look at kata-phroneses and see "thinking down", "thinking away from", "considering down". The shame is great but He thinks little of it.
There was shame there, no question. That He thought little of it is part of His glory. The world saw and sees shame, just as the world sees death and an ending when it kills martyrs.
But in the disdain Christ shows for the shame, as in the seeming victimization of martyrs, there is life and honor.
Of course being crucified—being up on the cross—was shameful.
But the crucifixion of Christ, that He might take on the sins of the entire world, is not shameful, but rather heroic and triumphal.
Otherwise you must be ashamed of Christ for doing so. I’m not speaking of shame that it was necessary to save us that He do so, I’m talking about shame that he did it.
Are you ashamed that Christ saved the world?
*****************
Amen.
Neither are we. We make no secret that our interpretation is informed by His Word not restricted to letters.
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.