Posted on 06/15/2010 6:38:10 AM PDT by bkaycee
Amen
BTW, welcome to Free Republic.
And obviously not a Christian either.
And you are wrong about it. Very wrong.
Luther condemned the Anabaptists as heretics for denying Christian baptism.
Being Flesh and Blood and Dying does not nullify the Assumption.
OK, I think its more important to find what Cyril believed vs a forgery claiming to be from him.
Cant's stand the heat, hey? Give me just one verse where Moses mentions Jesus, just one.
You are a newbie, BKC, so just a friendly reminder about this Forum: when you mention another Freeper, it is courtesy to ping the person mentioned; otherwise you are talking about someone behind their back.
As for your comment, being agnostic and the corruption of the scriptures is not a detriment to a discussion unless you can't take a challenge. J
Just FYI.
Consider what’s written in the first book of Moses, in Genesis 3:15. God is addressing the snake after it tempted Adam and Eve to sin: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”
That is perhaps the first time that Scripture speaks of a Messiah who will defeat the one who facilitated sin. This Messiah is Jesus. And this account was probably mentioned by Jesus when he was walking with those two men on the road following His resurrection.
There are numerous other places in Scripture that speak of this Messiah and what He will accomplish; In Jesus all these prophetic writings have been fulfilled.
I will always try to answer your posts to me, kosta. With scripture. It is what I stand on. One man planteth the seed, another watereth. You never know when someone who is searching will find their answers, even on a post to someone else! The Holy Spirit knows. Maranatha
All due respect you should consider these scriptures under this light.
Isaiah 7:14" Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."
Revelation 12 (American Standard Version)
Revelation 12
1" And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman arrayed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars;"
A woman(represents purified form unstained- no sin). Why did brides of old wear(arrayed) white for purity(Sun which means virgin). Mary first daughter of old and new covenant.The crown is literally on Mary represents(The first daughter who had the King of Kings which means she is Queen with and as old and new covenant people. The Crown is the old and new 12(tribes and apostles).
2 "and she was with child; and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in pain to be delivered."
Pierce heart for Mary and old and New Covenant People thru out time. At the same time the woman is standing for the people of God( Israel , The church) and Mary being born from both(A daughter of Israel and first believer in Christ which is his Church-Body of Christ). One in the same seen thru one singularity ( a person) in this vision.
3 "And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his heads seven diadems."
The enemy having the 7 continents(the whole world) Ten horns (means power) money men which the love of is the root of all evil=Which now is the Group of Ten( look up google you will see). Seven diadems= The Seven enemy rulers of the seven continents( the world) unseen ruled by the one ruler of the world system. The enemy who took control in the Garden.
4 "And his tail draweth the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon standeth before the woman that is about to be delivered, that when she is delivered he may devour her child."
This is a combination What happen to Mary and Joseph and Jesus escape slaughter of the innocents from Herod also represents in the same the enemy action against old and new covenant heirs.
5 And she was delivered of a son, a man child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and unto his throne.
Jesus the messiah from Mary the daughter of old and new covenant which is the people of God. Then Christ ascension to his rightful place.
and she was with child; and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in pain to be delivered."
If it is MARY, she is suffering the same effects of sin (PAIN) that EVE was cursed with.
Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children.
Tha's fair, SVITW.
Yes and No since it is a combination of all.
Thats a point to consider.
The whole book(Revelation) is totally amazing.
There's reason it's written the way it is.
Remember as we race towards the end. The angel told Daniel that Book of Daniel would be understood better in the end times.
How much so for Revelation
Seeing the pieces coming today is so real.
“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren and will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him” (Deut. 18:18-19)”(Moses speaking)
The books of Moses who wrote the Pentateuch record other prophecies such as Balaam..”I have seen a star arise out of Jacob”
How about Moses recording the greatest prophecy of all, made to Eve and the Serpent... that the “seed of Eve would have emnity with the seed of the serpent and that her seed would crush the serpent’s head while his heel would be bruised by it”
How about the story Moses records of Abraham offering up to God as a sacrifice, his beloved son Isaac...with God staying his hand, “and providing a ram tangled in a bush” as a suitable sacrifice. Talk about a strong HINT, about what God was going to do some 2000 years later!
So Moses directly prophesied of Jesus as well as recorded instances where God had prophesied directly by words to other men or by symbolism(Abraham on Moriah...renaming the place Jehohvah Gyreh...”God provides”). All written at least 3500 years ago, though Abraham lived some 1500 years before the books were written down.
Abraham had met Melchizidek, the priestly order of whom Jesus belonged to according to Paul. Melchizidek was an enigma, just existing...like God winking in time...then vanishing from the Bible again until Paul mentions him in the NT. Some have argued it was Christ in a pre-incarnate form...who knows, though I suspect the answer will blow our minds someday!
So much for Moses never have spoken of Christ!
We don't know for sure if it's a forgery,much of it seems in line with Blessed Cyril,but it just cannot be authenticated.
If you want to be really technical we can say the same thing about the Gospels-they did not come with a single autograph to authenticate them as positively coming from them.We accept them on faith, based upon witness of the Early Church Fathers
Traditions of the Apostles came first, the Scriptures came next. God gave His Gospel orally first. The Apostles gave it to others orally first. The Scriptures didn't come until AT LEAST ten years later, if we believe that an Aramaic version of Matthew was written in the early 40's. Thus, the first ten years at least saw Christianity spread without any Gospel writings, any Epistles, etc. Later, when these same men of God wrote letters and the narratives of the Gospels, they naturally taught the SAME thing that they taught orally earlier to others. Thus, the oral teachings preceded the written ones, and the written ones did not overturn the oral ones. Nor does it say anywhere that oral teachings are encapsulated completely within the Scriptures. This is a Protestant assumption that is proven incorrect based on the writings of the first Christians.
Nor does it say anywhere that oral teachings are encapsulated completely within the Scriptures. This is a Protestant assumption that is proven incorrect based on the writings of the first Christians.
So what are the Oral traditions that were not written down?
I think that about sums it up.
So, Jesus was wrong when He said "It is written...."?
HE seemed to think that Sola Scriptura was sufficient.
“”So what are the Oral traditions that were not written down?””
Everything was an oral tradition before any Scripture was ever written .Some things are clear in Scripture and some things are not.It is the Church that DEFINES with clarity
The Trinity is an example
The Trinity is not clearly defined in Scripture,thus you have had Arians and modern day Trinity deniers to this day denying this.
If you look to the Church Tradition the Trinity is clear because the Church ALWAYS knew it by Tradition
When did the Church declare that Jesus was God as dogma? At the council of Nicea in 325 AD. Nearly 300 years after Christ’s death, correct? Does that mean that the Church DID NOT already believe this? Of course it did! Jesus was worshiped during the liturgy. People prayed to Him during their daily prayers and through their actions. The Church already KNEW that Jesus was God - the Church DEFINES that He was God infallibly based on the guidance of the Spirit ALREADY AT WORK in the Church. The Church defines dogma to authoritative say what we believe, just like it did with the contents of Scripture. The Church already had a good idea of what it was, but now, they had an authoritative decision.
Here is a few writings from Church Fathers defending traditions...
ST. IRENAEUS OF LYONS (c. 180 AD):
“So forceful are these arguments that no one should henceforth seek the truth from ANY OTHER SOURCE since it would be simple to get it from THE CHURCH ....On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the things pertaining to the Church with utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the TRADITION OF TRUTH ..For how should it be if the Apostles themselves had not left us writing? Would it be necessary [in that case] to follow the course of Tradition which they handed down to those whom they committed the Churches?” (Against the Heresies 3:4:1)
“Though none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the Gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith. ...But when the heretics use Scriptures, as if they were wrong and unauthoritative, and we variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were IGNORANT OF TRADITION. And when we challenge them in turn with that TRADITION, which is FROM THE APOSTLES, which is guarded by the succession of presbyters in the churches, they oppose themselves to TRADITION, saying they are wiser, not only than those presbyters but even than the Apostles! The TRADITION OF THE APOSTLES manifested, on the contrary, in the whole world, is open in every church to all who seeks the truth ...And since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the TRADITION of the greatest and most ancient and universally-known Church founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a TRADITION which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men FROM THOSE APOSTLES.” (Against the Heresies 3:1-3)
“It comes to this, therefore, these men do not consent to either Scripture nor TRADITION.” (Against the Heresies 3:2:2).
ST. BASIL THE GREAT (c. 370)
“Of the dogmas and messages preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the Tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery (i.e., Sacrament; the Liturgy of the Mass). . In respect to piety both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the Gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce [Christian] message to a mere term.” (The Holy Spirit 27:66 [A.D. 375]).
ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (c. 390)
” ‘Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an oral statement or by a letter’ (2 Thess 2:15). Hence it is manifest that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things UNWRITTEN, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore, let us think the TRADITION of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a Tradition, seek no farther.” (Commentary on 2nd Thessalonians NPNF 13:390).
ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO (c. 400)
“Those which we keep, not as being written, but as from TRADITION, if observed by the whole of Christendom, are thereby understood to be committed to us BY THE APOSTLES themselves or plenary Councils, and to be retained as instituted.” (Ep 118).
“But in regard to those observances which we carefully attend and which the whole world keeps, and which derive not from Scripture but from Tradition, we are given to understand that they are recommended and ordained to be kept, either by the Apostles themselves or by plenary [ecumenical] councils, the authority of which is quite vital in the Church” (Letter to Januarius [A.D. 400]).
I am going to busy and traveling over the next few days,dear friend,so I might not be able to respond for awhile
I wish you a Blessed Evening!
If Catholicism's approach to date is any guide, they're anything you need them to be....
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.