In Christ Alone (Happy reformation day)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExnTlIM5QgE ^ | Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

[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

[Diamond]

That just about describes the Protestant community, doesn't it? :)

<rim shot!>

Of course if there were as many standards as there are people it would nullify any criticism of the Protestant community as well. If logic is not absolute, then logic cannot be used to prove or disprove anything.

The foundation [of these non-material "abstractions"] is the definition of what A stands for, rather than writing it out; it's a shorthand. Thus instead of redundant long-hand (descirptivie) exposition we use a short-hand (gformula) method to write out the relationship to a conclusion that is demonstrably provable.

What is the mass and size of a definition or an abstraction? Besides, I'm not talking about the laws of physics, I'm talking about the laws of logic. The laws of physics are conceptual statements that describe actual physical and observable phenomena, as in your example of the atoms of a house being the size of football field relative to the size of a neutrino. Scientific truths are contingent whereas logical truths are necessary.

What non-material laws?

The very ones you rely on but cannot account for. I will explain below.

Conventional, of course. Made to order of our physical and chemical makeup. For instanc,e ti si perfectly "logical" that chicken wire fence is atrue barrier for a man, but not for a mouse. The atoms of your house are like a football field for a neutrino top fly through. What is 'logical' to us is determined by our size, shape, that is our material makeup. So our logic is not trasncedental but accidental to our size and shape, and "wiring".

Why don't we take a vote on the law of non-contradiction?

It should be self-evident to you that laws (of any kind) are not physical. But to demonstrate that the laws of logic exist, but are not material and are not the result of observable behavior of object or actions, tell me the last time something was observed in nature that was both itself and not itself at the same time? Never. You can only observe a phenomenon that exists. You can't observe one that does not exist. If something is not itself, then it doesn't exist. In principle, how could the property of that non-existent thing ever be observed? The laws of logic are not dependent upon different peoples' brains, since people's brains are different. They can't be based on human thinking, either, since human thinking is often contradictory.

The laws of logic are conceptual realities. They do not extend into space. They only exist in the mind, and they do not describe physical matter, energy, and motion. The principles of logic are derived using reasoning only, and their validity does not depend on any contingent features of the world. The kind of scientific truths you have been mistaking for the laws of logic are contingent whereas logical truths are necessary.

Cordially,

[metmom]

The Catholic Church holds a very pious faith which has been consistent for at least 19 centuries.

So what?

I am willing to say that neither the first Christians nor the Catholic Church deliberately lied about things, but based their conclusions on their faith, notable exceptions notwithstanding.

On the contrary, you said that the NT was written to make it look like OT prophecy was being fulfilled. That takes deliberate intent to deceive. It doesn't happen by accident.

Catholics don't want to see Protestantism thrashed.

Then they need to stop thrashing Protestantism and then we'll believe you.

They don't believe in God who hates, but who teaches them to love even their enemies, and to pray for them.

You mean like the Catholic church did during the Inquisition? Catholicism's history is rife with examples of an unloving attitude towards *outsiders*.

[MarkBsnr]

Those who spurn the Church of Jesus Christ Almighty and loudly proclaim their own personal salvation are unlikely to achieve it. Their arrogance distances themselves from Christ.

[annalex]

Paul says in Scripture that Scripture is enough

He did not say that, not in 2 Timothy 3:14-17 or anywhere else. He said, "continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it" -- that is, continue in the Tradition, -- and that the scripture (the Septuagint, to be precise) is "inspired" and "able to make you wise for salvation", and that the two together will make you "competent, equipped for every good work". The scripture says exactly what the Church teaches.

[caww]

Although we are indeed joined as family thru Christ...it is such a pleasure and blessing when ones birth family also knows Christ.....Church fellowship and enjoyment certainly is a blessing but family is equal to...if not surpasses in some respects...for seeing us thru life. We choose our church...we do not our families...He chooses them.

[metmom]

I Corinthians 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

Which is why a man cannot accurately read and interpret the Bible without being a Christian. The Bible is about God and His dealings with mankind, not a historical work of fiction, thus it can’t be interpreted as a historical piece of fiction. That would mean missing the entire point of the Bible.

[presently no screen name]

You can see that Mary did not intend to have children from Luke 1:34, "How shall this be done, because I know not man?".

A woman intending to have children with her future husband would not ask how children are made.

Where does it say what you wanted it to say? She very well KNEW how children are made!! I KNOW NOT MAN!!

Here's another incident where you trash Mary. According to you, NOW she is dumb as rocks - in spite of what she said! Who really is the dumb one here?

[MarkBsnr]

Not only do you guys usurp the Judgement of Christ upon yourselves, for yourselves, but for others as well?

Just like the Catholic church does when it says that salvation is found in the Catholic church alone, that outside the Catholic church there is no salvation.

So if you think that the Church founded by Jesus is wrong, then taking that wrongness upon yourself is suddenly salvational? What a wreck of theological thought.

Catholics are then sitting in judgment on non-Catholics concerning their eternal destiny, the very thing Catholics condemn Protestants for.

Why is it that you are so wrong about so many things? The Church does not know about the fates of those who do not know Christ. The Church does believe that those who reject Jesus and His Teachings will be Judged to damnation. Keep coming back; you may eventually become Christian again.

So, it's OK for Catholics to do it but not Protestants?

It's not comparable. Catholics do not supersed Judgement from Christ and Judge themselves instead.

[MarkBsnr]

Muslims are our enemies. How would you show them that you are Christian?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tell them the Gospel.

I see. You quote Isaiah to me to provide support for hate. Congratulations; I quote Christ and you think that Isaiah supersedes Christ. You are quite some Christian.

[caww]

The scripture says exactly what the Church teaches.

Well if you are saying the Catholic church than you are mistaken. The scriptures...from beginning to end are of Christ. The church has oftentimes failed as much as succeeded in equipping believers. The Church does not save us...Christ does...traditions do not save us...Scripture reveals Christ. To say the scriptures say what the church says is not always correct...history, time and tide evidences such.

[MarkBsnr]

You mean over pastors who speak for 2 hours and don;t say anything?

Oh, he said something. He is the father of my wife's best friend back in Indiana and a more disreputable clone of Ian Paisley. I am familiar with the hate speech displayed on the FR RF.

[metmom]

You can see that Mary did not intend to have children from Luke 1:34, "How shall this be done, because I know not man?". A woman intending to have children with her future husband would not ask how children are made.

You can't be serious.

Clearly she DOES have some sort of idea of how babies are made or she wouldn't have asked that blindingly obvious question.

That conversation with the angel was only about her conception of Jesus. It in no way referenced her future plans.

Young's Literal translation says this.....34And Mary said unto the messenger, `How shall this be, seeing a husband I do not know?'

She is clearly revealing her knowledge of how babies come about by commenting that she's a virgin and wondering how she could become pregnant since she has not yet had sex.

[Natural Law]

"The Catholic church clearly teaches the immortality of the soul and it’s eternal punishment in hell for dying in a state of sin."

Great, further evidence that self catechesis is no remedy for poor initial catechesis. What you posted does not mean an eternity of torment and physical pain, in "fire and brimstone", nor does it mean, as you posed, that the damned are "living in hell". It means an eternal separation from God, the greatest punishment is the consequence of damnation.

The Catechism repeatedly reinforces that Faith earns "Eternal Life" and that the wages of sin are death, the opposite of eternal life.

Now stop trying to tell Catholics what we believe and go figure out that convoluted mess that you believe.

[annalex]

The word *trinity* isn't in Scripture and the Catholic church teaches that [...] Your argument that *sola Scriptura* and faith alone aren't in the Bible and contradicts Scripture is laughable in light of all that the Catholic church teaches as true that can't be found in the Bible and outright contradicts it.

Yes, the Church does teach much more than the content of the scripture. I never claimed otherwise. But the Church never adopted the false standard of "Sctripture alone". You did. You, the Protestants, should be measured by the yardstick you claim, Bible Alone.

The standard of the Church is that the scripture is an important part of the teaching of the Church but it is not the whole of it. Therefore, there are things that the Church teaches that are not in the Scripture, not only the Holy Trinity but also the Immaculate Concpetion, the lifelong virginity of Mary, or the infallibility of the Pope in certain matters, etc. We do not teach anything that contradicts the Scripture, but we sure teach things not in it.

The Protestanism, in contrast, does not pass its own yeardstick. According to James 2:14-26, and 2 Tim 3:14-17,among many other passages, the Faith Alone and Bible Alone contradict the scripture, and of course are nto supported by anything in the scripture.

there's no Scripture to tell us that we have to add tradition to Scripture and there's no Scripture that tells us that works save anyone.

2 Thess. 2:14 for the former and Matthew 25:31-46 for the latter, although we do not teach that works alone save.

[metmom]

On that, I agree. It is over the top, and a Catholic Christian does not have to believe that. But the fact that Mary did not understand how was it possible for her to have a child (luke 1:34) is Bibilical evidence that for one reason or another she was under some vows.

WRONG. The fact that Mary did not understand how was it possible for her to have a child (luke 1:34) was because she did not yet have sex, which she states.

All it does is confirm her virginity at the time of conception.

It in no way gives any indication of her future plans, your wishful thinking notwithstanding.

[annalex]

He was emphatically harsh with !!!!TRADITIONS!!!! of man

Yes. So am I. You see me castigate the thelogical charlatanism of Luther and Calvin every day, for that reason. It is a Biblical imperative.

[MarkBsnr]

Can you provide even one post where us "arrogant bozos" declared that our salvation was of our own doing? Where we even one time declared that we were "superseding" the role of Christ in our judgment? I really would like to know, for future reference, of course, just what it is that we say that makes you go off on this kind of rant. Because I cannot for the life of me understand how it is you can arrive at such a disconnection.

I never said that the arrogant bozos declared salvation of their own doing. I said that they are arrogant in deciding that they were saved. You the individual are not Judged for salvation before you stand before Christ. If you declare that salvation now, then you are attempting to usurp Christ's role in Judgement and taking it upon yourself. You have no evidence that you are saved. Christians have hope; bozos have certainty.

[annalex]

Annalex in Wonderland

If you are out to amuse us, why don't you 'splain again how Matthew 25:31-46 agrees with "Faith Alone"?

[metmom]

Boy, there’s a number of references to it, past and future, so are you denying what the bible says now too?

Worse yet, mr. champion of Catholicism himself is denying the clear and plain teachings and doctrine of the Catholic church as found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

So, what about it NL? Is the Catholic church wrong in what the Catechism states?

[1000 silverlings]

There’s people on here who don’t believe in God or the bible,and apparently have no idea what God has said in the bible, and yet spend an exorbitant amount of time here explaining it all to we lesser mortals. You have to wonder what the payoff for them is.