| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
“Some Campbellites only accept Luke and Acts.”
It seems some in this thread only accept the gospels.
You might say that. However, if we rely on the Gospels, Acts, and Paul, we would not say that.
Paul in his letter to Corinth encourages those who want to be married to marry.
And Timothy encourages bishops to marry.
Discounting lots of books there in the NT. Don’t you think the holy spirit had anything to do with what books were to be included in the Bible?
The Gospels, like Jesus, are the cornerstone. The other books of the Bible depend on Jesus, just like we Christians do.
I’ve been around different threads. I’ve steered clear of some contentious threads as I focused on being open to any different impressions the Lord might grant.
I now find myself very impressed with St Augustine of Hippo.
Thank you, ROE. I kept a decent Lent, and I hope to avoid having FR be so very important as it was to me before.
Paul champions celibacy except for those who are too weak to handle it.
Like a wristwatch on George Washington’s arm because he just had to have some way of telling time?
Who is?
Don’t you think the holy spirit had anything to do with what books were to be included in the Bible?
Sure did; it also involved locking a bunch of bishops up in a room over half a dozen Councils. I believe that the fact that Holy Spirit kept them from killing each other is also significant.
Quite a character, that's for sure. I trust that you are tracing the rather convoluted path that his faith traveled...
Not sure I'm following this example. Can you explain?
You forget about Johannes Mentelin, who produced the first printed German Bible in 1466, about 70 years before Luther did his work (in fact, 18 years before Luther was born).
Years ago, as a young adult, I read his Confessions. I accidentally bought them in a collection of classics that I purchased from too good a salesman. Later, as a young Christian I was fascinated with his “city of God” and of the writer of Hebrews’ search “for a city.”
There are some personal elements of this that attract me, and my only sadness is that there are no avenues for me in my denomination to search this out.
IIRC Mentelin’s Bible was in Early New High German and not modern German. Modern German basically began with Luther’s Bible. On the other hand, the KJV translators had the advantage of Shakespeare’s development of modern English.
I'd probably rewrite that in the positive.
"Paul champions marriage except for those who can handle celibacy."
:>)
Nope, Scripture indicates that He does not. We are Judged by our deeds, our misdeeds, and our failures to act.
Could you please provide your scriptural reference? I believe there are a number of passages that says contrary besides the one I just quoted from Peter. I could have used these among many others:
Paul-Eph 4:22-24 to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.
John-1Jn 2:6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
James-Jas 3:13 Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.
As far as judgment goes, Christians are judged not for punshiment but for rewards. I would suggest, although this is my personal belief, that rewards are meaningless except that they glorify Christ which should be our chief goal.
Galatians 2:7 On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews. 8For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews.
Not to mention that in the book of Revelation when Jesus is addressing the churches in chapters 2 and 3, there is NO mention of a church at Rome, NO mention of anyone appointed to be sole leader of it, NO mention of Peter, nothing.
That would be quite an oversight on the Lord's part if the papacy had really been established.
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.