Posted on 08/07/2010 3:38:50 PM PDT by Salvation
It's difficult to accept that it has taken over 2800 posts for these to accept that Evangelicals are crossing the Tiber and entering the Catholic Church instituted by Christ to serve as the fountain of His graces. Those who have made their prideful and presumptuous assertions in these 2800 posts will be held accountable by Jesus for misleading His flock.
...but those who pretend to bring down Christ’s condemnation on others are not “prideful and presumptuous”?
Good point — bringing down, by that I assume you mean calling on Christ to bring troubles, right? That is wrong and if I have, I apologize.
Actually, your posts have been islands of theological sobriety.
And then you toss them. Or move on. Salvation is too important to be tied with unbelievers.
And if others disagree with you, they toss your guys.
Doctrine by democratic vote.
That’s my point: we both have human authority who determine doctrine and/or its interpretation. The only difference, authority-wise is in the structure by which those authorities are determined.
No, it is the Ethiopian Orthodox/Coptic church that I am referring to. However, in researching your question, I must admit error wrt Adoptionism - It is not the "official" stance (which is trinitarian), but rather a school of thought within it. It is a rather large school of thought, by my reckoning, as I have read Ethiopian documentation extensively - and it is an error I came by honestly in that pursuit... Perhaps evidence of practice being more relevant than dogmatic declaration.
I am not mistaken wrt canon, though. The Ethiopian church's full canon includes some 75-80 books, while their actual canon adds Enoch, and Jasher, and has a decidedly different Maccabees (Machabyan I, II, III) than the books that you, no doubt, revere.
Thanks for your reply, that helps.
From what I can find on the Ethiopian Orthodox/Coptic church, it is neither part of the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church, and hasn’t been so since it rejected the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in AD 451. It has its own separate leadership, administration and theology.
Sorry for the delay answering this question. My online time has been very limited over the past week.
The question is how do I define grace?
Grace, to me, is God’s love and mercy. God’s love led Him to our creation and God’s mercy led Him to gain our salvation.
When I speak of increasing grace, I speak of God’s grace increasing in us. We cannot increase His grace, as He is already perfection. When we pray, go to church and participate in the Sacraments, we increase His grace in us so that we may be perfect too.
Jesus spoke of storing up treasure in heaven. He spoke of rewards in heaven verses rewards on earth. Our eyes are to be on those things and not the things of this world. Yet, we live in this world and are to do what we can to make present His kingdom here.
It is like the parable of the talents, where three men are given talents by their master. One receives five, the other, two and the third, one. Two of the men invest their talents and increase what they have. The third hides it, afraid to do more than hoard it in order to return to the master exactly what he had been given.
The investment is grace. We are to act. To give and not just take. We are to increase God’s grace in ourselves so as to share it with others. It grows in us when we keep ourselves close to God. And it is through His word and His church that we remain branches on the vine which bear fruit rather than branches which shrivel up and break off.
It is like the parable of the yeast. Grace is like yeast, when it is mixed up in the dough, the dough grows and becomes the bread that feeds many.
Or like the parable of the mustard seed. The mustard seed is tiny, but the bush which grows from it is huge and supports much life.
Thanks for that information. So yet another schism exists. The entire Coptic church is a red-headed stepchild - Yet their claim on "apostolic succession" is genuine. Funny how that works... The "authority" is there. It is among the most historic of "sees," and well documented. I guess succession ain't all it is cracked up to be, huh.
There’s lots of schisms, Luther was a priest too, but the Church remains.
There’s more to it than apostolic succession.
“”It says that SHE shall crush the serpents head, not HE. They translated the personal pronoun *he* to *she*. They mistranslated the verse. They used the wrong word.””
No they did NOT because the correct INTERPRETATION is what matters as was shown to you in the link I provided in post #2649 that refers to offspring of Eve agreed by scripture scholars-which can only be the New Eve being only Mary which historical Christianity consistently says and Biblical typology proves
From Saint Irenaues..
In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin (for in Paradise they were both naked, and were not ashamed, inasmuch as they, having been created a short time previously, had no understanding of the procreation of children: for it was necessary that they should first come to adult age, and then multiply from that time onward), having become disobedient, was made the cause of death, both to herself and to the entire human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed [to her], and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race. And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man, the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back-reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen; s so that the former ties be cancelled by the latter, that the latter may set the former again at liberty Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was He who regenerated them into the Gospel of life, and not they Him. And thus also it was that the knot of Eves disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:22 (A.D. 180).
For as Eve was seduced by the word of an angel to flee from God, having rebelled against His Word, so Mary by the word of an angel received the glad tidings that she would bear God by obeying his Word. The former was seduced to disobey God, but the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. As the human race was subjected to death through [the act of] a virgin, so it was saved by a virgin. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:19,1 (A.D. 180).
There is plenty of typology to support this as well..
Mary is the New Eve
Old Testament Eve- Verses New Testament Mary
Created without original sin, Gen 2:22-25 = Created without original sin, Luke 1:28,42
There was a virgin, Gen 2:22-25 = There is a virgin, Luke 1:27-34
There was a tree, Gen 2:16-17 = There was a cross made from a tree, Matt 27:31-35
There was a fallen angel, Gen 3:1-13 = There was a loyal angel, Luke 1:26-38
A satanic serpent tempted her, Gen 3:4-6 = A satanic dragon threatened her, Rev 12:4-6,13-17
There was pride, Gen 3:4-7 = There was humility, Luke 1:38
There was disobedience, Gen 3:4-7 = There was obedience, Luke 1:38
There was a fall, Gen 3:16-20 = There was redemption, John 19:34
Death came through Eve, Gen 3:17-19 = Life Himself came through Mary, John 10:28
She was mentioned in Genesis 3:2-22 = She was mentioned in Genesis 3:15
Could not approach the tree of life Gen 3:24 = Approached the Tree of Life, John 19:25
An angel kept her out of Eden, Gen 3:24 = An angel protected her, Rev 12:7-9
Prophecy of the coming of Christ, Gen 3:15 = The Incarnation of Christ, Luke 2:7
Firstborn was a man child, Gen 4:1 = Firstborn was a man child, Luke 2:7, Rev 12:5
Firstborn became a sinner, Gen 4:1-8 = Firstborn was the Savior, Luke 2:34
The mother of all the living, Gen 3:20 = The spiritual mother of all the living, John 19:27
Good luck finding certifiable books of Genesis written in Hebrew,there are only fragments from 2 bc. What we have is mostly written in Greek from the 4th century.So greek has everything to do with it
Everyone I know uses the 4th century Greek as the starting point.
I saw a great quote that said “Protestants strain for the extravagant while denying the obvious.” I think it’s true.
I’m very happy to be Catholic. We are so totally connected to the past of the Church and so totally involved with the future of the Church. It’s all one glorious piece to us and the fabric all hangs together beautifully.
I’ve lost patience for people who want to pull a thread out here and there and try to pick at it. Understanding the real history of the Church allows one to recognize the Truth.
Great post. You are quite right.
Unfortunately, saying this 100 times in 100 different ways still doesn’t get through. Ronald Reagan said, “Don’t be afraid to see what you see.” And we know there are none so blind as those who will not see.
Some people refuse to see. All we can do is pray for them.
True,but there may be others who read what we write that it does get through.
Yeah and it looks like that ole’ fisherman (Pope Benedict)is getting quite a haul pretty soon! He’s caught quite a few Anglicans and Episcopals (sp?)in his ‘net’. Many of them are coming over because of stuff happening in the Anglican Communion such as: with openly gay bishops and female bishops, among some other issues!
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.