Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Christ Alone (Happy reformation day)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExnTlIM5QgE ^ | Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

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


TOPICS: Prayer; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: reformation; savedbygrace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 6,081-6,1006,101-6,1206,121-6,140 ... 7,341-7,356 next last
To: bkaycee; metmom
Odd, that He would leave us with such a wrong impression

If you read the scripture according to waht the Protestat charlatans teach about it, you can end up with all kinds of impressions and God is not going to help you. "Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?".

6,101 posted on 12/28/2010 6:44:42 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5523 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Last Supper, First Sacrifice.


6,102 posted on 12/28/2010 6:48:20 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6047 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE; boatbums; metmom
Did Paul exclude Mary! [in Romans 3:23]

Yes he did. In the same passage, even though you did not cite that part, he says "there is none that seeketh after God" and "The venom of asps is under their lips" and "Their feet swift to shed blood". I don't think that applies to a lot of people, not just Mary.

6,103 posted on 12/28/2010 6:48:34 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5524 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; OLD REGGIE; presently no screen name; bkaycee; metmom; RnMomof7
if Mary was indeed a life-long dedicated virgin, etc., then why does the Bible not say that?

It does say that. "I know not man".

why is there a need to invent an entirely new narrative to jive with the idea of Mary's perpetual virginity?

No one invented anything. The Church always taught that Mary was virgin all her life.

6,104 posted on 12/28/2010 6:52:21 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5540 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; RnMomof7; editor-surveyor; presently no screen name; metmom
You seem to be going on an assumption that I am the kind of person who thinks works have NO place in my faith. I get the impression that you, along with many other Roman Catholics - based on repetitive comments - that sola fide means we have a license to live in sin with no need for a changed life for the better

No, I do not think that. I know that Protestants in actuality live out their faith in good works much like any other Christians. I understand that to a believer good works come naturally. What I do say is that the doctrine of "faith alone" is false and harmful and it does not advance the salvation of anyone. It was really invented by Luther to avoid sacramental life of the Church, not to give people license to sin. Your natural faith is often good; the acquired reflexes of "faith alone" damage your natural faith. Some survive that; others lose their faith altogether.

Go back to worrying every moment that you may not make it

Why should I worry? I am secure in the lap of the Church as any man can be.

6,105 posted on 12/28/2010 7:03:52 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5541 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

When He ate that what Catholics call a sacrament that He instituted at the Last Supper (the first communion), did it at that time turn into the literal body and blood of Christ?


6,106 posted on 12/28/2010 7:16:51 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6083 | View Replies]

To: annalex
They are alive.

Lost argument Annalex....the Apostles and Peter are not here on earth...they died a physical death and are home with the Lord.

One can "believe" the departed are accessible to us...and the enemy of men's souls delights to assist in that masquerade as it keeps Christ off His rightful throne as the only mediator between God and man. But "believing' does not mean it's reality.

There are many false assumptions made today on mans ability to speak or be enticed into the spiritual realm. But know this..whosoever attempts so is on a slippery slope that leads away from Christ...just a matter of time.

6,107 posted on 12/28/2010 7:21:03 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6086 | View Replies]

To: metmom

In terms of the Holy Eucharist, the bread and wine became the consecrated host.

I’m going to assume you were taught what this means when you were catechized.


6,108 posted on 12/28/2010 7:24:35 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6106 | View Replies]

To: annalex; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; count-your-change; ...

No. Dying here on earth.

Or are you going to apply the usual hypocritical Catholic double standard of interpreting one phrase in a passage of Scripture as literal, the next phrase as figurative, the next phrase as metaphorical, the next phrase literal again, etc.?

If Catholics are going to insist on the literal meaning of the body and blood statements, then in the spirit of honest interpretation done with integrity and consistency, then ALL of the passage must be interpreted in the same sense.

This business the Catholic church does of interpreting one section one way and another one a different way all in the name of supporting Catholic doctrine is inherently dishonest to the core.

If Catholicism is going to demand a literal word for word interpretation of the body and blood statements, that they in actuality become the literal physical flesh and blood of Christ and that people have to actually, literally eat the actual literal flesh and blood of Jesus, in the interest of honesty and integrity, the sections that say that he who eats will never die, MUST mean that physical death does not occur.

It is the height of intellectual dishonesty to insist that it refers only to spiritual death when the demand is made for the rest of the passage to be taken literally and physically, and not spiritually.


6,109 posted on 12/28/2010 7:29:27 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6086 | View Replies]

To: annalex; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; count-your-change; ...

Everyone who has died a physical death is alive somewhere.

Even those who never ate communion as you say must be done.

Try again.


6,110 posted on 12/28/2010 7:31:43 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6086 | View Replies]

To: metmom

ABSOLUTELY INDEED:


No. Dying here on earth.

Or are you going to apply the usual hypocritical Catholic double standard of interpreting one phrase in a passage of Scripture as literal, the next phrase as figurative, the next phrase as metaphorical, the next phrase literal again, etc.?

If Catholics are going to insist on the literal meaning of the body and blood statements, then in the spirit of honest interpretation done with integrity and consistency, then ALL of the passage must be interpreted in the same sense.

This business the Catholic church does of interpreting one section one way and another one a different way all in the name of supporting Catholic doctrine is inherently dishonest to the core.

If Catholicism is going to demand a literal word for word interpretation of the body and blood statements, that they in actuality become the literal physical flesh and blood of Christ and that people have to actually, literally eat the actual literal flesh and blood of Jesus, in the interest of honesty and integrity, the sections that say that he who eats will never die, MUST mean that physical death does not occur.

It is the height of intellectual dishonesty to insist that it refers only to spiritual death when the demand is made for the rest of the passage to be taken literally and physically, and not spiritually.


6,111 posted on 12/28/2010 7:37:24 PM PST by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6109 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Exactly Metmom...but catholics continue to use the “but they are alive” approach to justify what they so desperately want to hold onto. It’s like getting a kid to unlock his fist from the candy in his hand....and come to dinner where the food is nourishing to his body.


6,112 posted on 12/28/2010 7:38:05 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6110 | View Replies]

To: annalex; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; count-your-change; ...
Sure I can, because it is a knowledge possessed by the Church, which is not expressed in the scripture.

Then it's meaningless.

If it's not in Scripture, it's not infallible. It's merely the opinion of men.

I really don't care much what a bunch of corrupt, immoral, charlatans who claimed some sort of special spiritual insight due to the positions they awarded themselves thought.

The actions and behavior of the Catholic church for the majority of its history shows a dearth of spiritual insight and leading.

They ought to just hang a sign above the door of the Vatican that says *Ichabod*. There is no godliness there.

When they can get their act together and start acting like the Christ they claim to represent, then they'll gain some credibility and might have something worth saying and listening to.

But until they clean house and do it publicly and decisively, they have nothing to say.

6,113 posted on 12/28/2010 7:40:29 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6098 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Same as before, Matthew 1:18, 25 MAY be interpreted your way but just as easily they simply mean what they say, that Mary was pregnant before she got married and not by Joseph.

I never said it didn't say that.

It does say, however, that after she gave birth, she and Joseph had sex.

Why do you keep *answering* comments people never made?

6,114 posted on 12/28/2010 7:43:07 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6099 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I should also correct the formulation of your question by referring to the words of institution. IIt was words of the Savior by which He instituted the Sacrament.


6,115 posted on 12/28/2010 7:46:43 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6106 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Did the bread and wine become the literal flesh and blood of Jesus at the Last Supper when Christ instituted it with His disciples and did they eat it as the actual literal flesh and blood as the Catholic church teaches?

Did Christ eat and drink His own body and blood in violation of the OT Law that forbade it?


6,116 posted on 12/28/2010 7:47:05 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6108 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Did the bread and wine become the literal flesh and blood of Jesus at the Last Supper when Christ instituted it with His disciples and did they eat it as the actual literal flesh and blood as the Catholic church teaches?

Did Christ eat and drink His own body and blood in violation of the OT Law that forbade it?


6,117 posted on 12/28/2010 7:48:54 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6115 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Even though some still say the creeds, for many outside the Church, the meaning of Communion of Saints has been lost.


6,118 posted on 12/28/2010 7:49:52 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6086 | View Replies]

To: metmom; annalex

“Sure I can, because it is a knowledge possessed by the Church, which is not expressed in the scripture.”

Where did this “knowledge” come from? I ask. And When?


6,119 posted on 12/28/2010 7:49:58 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6113 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
Leviticus 3:17 It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, that you eat neither fat nor blood."

Leviticus 7:26 & 27 Moreover, you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places. Whoever eats any blood, that person shall be cut off from his people."

Leviticus 17:10-16 10"If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. 11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. 12Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.

13"Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. 14For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off. 15 And every person who eats what dies of itself or what is torn by beasts, whether he is a native or a sojourner, shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and be unclean until the evening; then he shall be clean. 16But if he does not wash them or bathe his flesh, he shall bear his iniquity."

Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.

Did Jesus break the OT law by eating His own flesh and blood at the time of the Last Supper?

6,120 posted on 12/28/2010 7:57:29 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6115 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 6,081-6,1006,101-6,1206,121-6,140 ... 7,341-7,356 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson