Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
Why would you want to know?
Look, you were caught with two accounts. Anyone following these posts can see that. And since both accounts signed up in 2000, you’ve been breaking the rules for nine years.
Fess up, drop one account and join the discussion honestly.
Or don’t.
For the record, before you changed your tag hours ago...
_______________________________
In Christ Alone (Happy reformation day)
Monday, November 22, 2010 7:05:34 PM · 2,939 of 3,000
metmom to getoffmylawn; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...
2,911 posted on Monday, November 22, 2010 8:09:50 PM by getoffmylawn (aka Cool Breeze)
Just curious...
Why do you have two FR accounts?
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:coolbreeze/index?brevity=full;tab=comments
It was said to C.S. Lewis...”We read so that we may KNOW we are not alone.” .....His future wife echoed those words to him as their relationship began to unfold. She was speaking of “relationship”...he was all about knowledge. Thru her and his experiences with her we have many of his “works” today. “The Four Loves”....etc. His work about pain..as he watched his beloved fade away.
We cannot live life in a vacuum on books and literature alone...it is as we communicate with one another “life” does indeed come alive. It is the same with Christ...we can read til our hearts desire but without a relationship with Him where we share with Him what we have read and how we live...”knowledge, in what we read,” alone simply “puffs one up”...arrogance then unfolds...and love is lost.
Isn't that convenient? :) Yet there is nothing in the Five Books of Moses to suggest God gave Moses his eternal Law to show Moses and the Hebrews the need for a Christ-like savior. The OT God calls himself the savior of his people because that's what he did: he took them out of bondage and gave them a promised land.
In return he demanded that people obey his Law forever, and worship only him. And if they didn't, he unleashed all sorts of evil on them, Zeus style. The OT God demanded obedience and he was loving to those who obeyed him and terrible to those who didn't. No need for another savior.
That is why the high priest made the sin-offering for the people once a year in the Holy of Holies
And the OT says that was acceptable to God, and is in fact part of the eternal Torah, the 613 mitzvot, which is to be observed forever, which God wrote before the foundation of the world (according to mishnah).
And the OT God gave the seven Noachide Laws for the Gentiles and that is the only thing the Gentiles need (according to the OT). They are not and never have been under the Law. But at the same time, the seven laws given were sufficient for the Gentles, and no additional "salvation" or savior is called for in the Torah.
Like Scripture says, the law was made to show us point-blank how sinful we really are
We are sinful by design, or else God is not in control.
Besides, do you really think the perfection of God, the holiness of God is attainable by man alone?
Man was not created to be divine, so why should he be perfect (holy)?
We are all sinners and if Christ had never come for us, we would all be rightfully condemned to eternal separation from God
By design.
He came to earth as a man, lived that perfect life, and willingly gave that life as a sacrifice, a propitiation, for our sins. It satisfied his demand for justice, his insistence on holiness and perfection and his command that "without the shedding of blood, there can be no remission of sins."
An innocent man dying for the sins of the world is not justice but injustice no matter how you turn it around. And if God insisted on holiness and perfection of man, why didn't he just make man holy and perfect, and the world eternally blissful, and spared himself and the world all the blood, guts, holocausts and suffering?
Obviously, Paul thinks the incense is a substitute for the slaughtered offering (see Leviticus 7), and uses the word thysia. It was the burnt sacrifice, the smell of the victim's flesh that is allegedly "pleasing" to God.
Ahhh...the $64,000 question, you think you're the first? Of course it seems unjust and it WOULD be had it been any other person but God himself, incarnate, in the flesh. But it was the only way - by design - like you say.
I fully believe that on the day we meet him either we will ask him, he will answer and we will be able to grasp the weight of the answer or we will have no need for a Q&A because it will all make sense. Until then some things we must accept on faith. Sucks for some people, but that's the way the cookie bounces, as they say. :o)
Some people would call all free thinkers, including the Founding Fathers, "socialists". That's your only argument? Accusing a conservative retired military officer of 20-plus years of honorable service of being a "socialist" because he rejects superstition and blind belief, but is willing to listen to reason and acknowledge evidence when presented? Despicable.
I believe the poster was attempting to draw some connection between John 20:19 and the manner of Jesus birth when there is none.
Why would that be attempted? I must assume because of a tale even the Catholic Church recognizes as spurious is accepted as fact by the poster.
“The reason for the belief has to do with the supernatural nature of Incarnation and Resurrection as such”
Sounds more like getting lost in the jungles of speculative analogies and never finding the way out.
Your point is?
Well, that's one theory; the other one is that it doesn't mean he is.
But in Gods hands He brings good from the bad
No, at least in the OT he exerts punishment and unleashes evil on his idolatrous children until they learn their lesson...;til next time.
He is good when he is obeyed and he is nasty when he is not. At least in the OT.
It is His way
If it's his way then the world must be exactly how he wanted it to be—sinful and wicked. Genesis 6:6 disagrees with you.
We just don’t have the clear understanding or vision to it as so
But enough "vision" to "see" that we don't have enough vision?
But works are not the “only” thing that matters...matter they do but not apart from Christ. And besides the good we do is as “filthy rags” when they stand alone
Tha's your belief and I respect that, but don't expect me to believe you. Why would a,loving God make "filthy rags" or as Luther said "dung covered with a while sheet"? I would imagine God would make it clean and not just cover it...
Since you mentioned it and imply that you do.
That's a fair statemnt. No one can object to your beliefs.
Very likely. Religions are prone to that, these threads being perfect examples of that.
But don't think the Protestants are not in it. Take for example Christmas being on December 25th? It ain't biblical but the Prots accept it. I have yet to read a Protestant thread that calls Christmas a spurious and a speculative date. :)
“And if God insisted on holiness and perfection of man, why didn’t he just make man holy and perfect, and the world eternally blissful, and spared himself and the world all the blood, guts, holocausts and suffering?”
Do you ask that rhetorically or with the expectation of an answer? and yes, it matters.
I don’t exclude Protestants but one group doesn’t claim to speak for all and it’s really too diverse to lump together.
As for the Christmas date I’ve written about much of the popular versions being unrelated to the actual Biblical narrative and the general reaction has been, ‘It don’t matter!’.
And that is true of Protestants as well.
Actually, the question was mine, and yes I wrote that as an invitation to those who have "eyes" and "ears" to let me in on the secret. :)
Obviously. It was Paul’s heathen passions for burning flesh welling up inside to make that statement.
Going around in circles produce dizzy comments - yours can attest to that.
Giving accolades, titles, i.e., co-redeemer to Mary is the same as the Catholics did when they voted for Obama as their messiah.
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.