Posted on 03/21/2011 10:34:29 AM PDT by count-your-change
Cvengr states it pretty clearly. The Romans were kind of sticklers on that sort of thing.
Full public disclosure, here.
You are perfectly happy to openly attest to the Divinity of Jesus, right? Jesus Christ was true God and true man, right?
You are equally happy to attest to the reality of the Most Holy Trinity, correct? Of which Jesus is the second person, correct?
C'mon.......you can do it........out with it!!
It's more beautiful than that. I offer this post from a former discussion for more of an explanation.
The rest of your post is pure fairy tale.
The rest of your post is pure fairy tale.
YOUR WRONG- i studied it close..
You might be recalling 1 Peter 3:18-20. There it says Christ was put to death in the flesh and made alive in the spirit (thus after his resurrection) and went to the “spirits in prison” who had been disobedient during the days of Noah.
Thanks for you thoughts! Cheers!
Most can be found in the old and new testament. The difference between Protestants and the RC is “Tradition”. I believe there is reference the new Testament that not everything that Jesus taught could be contained in the Canonized Bible (you can’t find the word Bible in the Scripture, either). The remainder is what is called “Tradition” with a capital “T”. That would be what was passed verbally among the Apostles who passed those verbal teachings from first-hand experience to the Church Fathers. Those are things like who was who at the Crucifixion. Those are what the Magisterium of the Church protects as much as the written Scripture, itself. We’re talking about what the Apostles knew first hand and passed from their mouths to those they taught. So far as I can tell the only thing you won’t find in scripture is the Good Thief’s name. That would have been passed from those at the foot of the crosses to those who believed. I assume you would accept a first-hand account of an eye witness but, if not, then you’ll have to go with the guy on the left or the right, depending on your perspective.
“BEFORE moses was i was”
__________________________________________________________
In your rather rude post you miss the point, Christ said before Moses “I AM”.
When Moses asked God whom shall he say it that sent him to Pharaoh The Lord told him to say it was “I Am” that sent him. Christ used these words to make sure that the people that heard him knew that it was He, the God of the Old Testament, The God of Moses, of Abraham and Pharaoh.
You messed up on probably some of the most important words ever spoken. Christ tells us in no uncertain terms just exactly who He is.
True!
Well, wasn't that around the time of MLB opening day? Maybe he watched the Angels play the Padres.
“Jesus said he, “the son of man” was to “be killed and on the third day raised up (resurrected)”. (Luke 9:22) and Peter confirms that this is exactly what occurred at Acts 10:40,41 saying Christ ‘rose from the dead’. “
This was a physical body resurrection, not a spiritual resurrection.
In the story of the rich man and Lazarus we know that Lazarus was in paradise after his death. In what form, we do not know but we do know that the rich man recognized him.(Luke 16:20)
i wasnt being exact- i believe he did say “I AM”- but it means the same
_____________________________________________________
It does not mean the same thing. “I Am” is the name of God given to Moses by the Lord Himself. So when The Lord uses this name again referring to Himself the crowd was furious. He was not saying that I was alive before Mosses, he was saying that He was “I AM”, or God.
chicken head, you seem to have been cut off from the body of Spell Checker and your old grammar. They really are your friends. Mine too when I try to read what you wrote!
may be fairly dense on on a number of subjects but let’s not read into what was said what is not there.
That evil doer did not turn around or repent and all that was promised was that the man would be resurrected, that resurrection of the “righteous and unrighteous” Paul spoke of at Acts 24:15 that even Paul’s opposers there hoped in.
__________________________________________________________
I doubt that you are dense, but, Christ was not referring to the resurrection. The resurrection was to happen at some time in the future but not tomorrow, not even for Christ was it today or tomorrow but three days. Christ told the thief that he would be in paradise TODAY with Christ. I personally don’t believe that Paradise necessarily refers to Heaven but more of a place to wait for the resurrection. So for this reason I see no conflict.
The today is unnecessary ..the thief knew when Jesus was saying it..he did not need to be told
Deaf too, apparently.
Still having trouble confessing the divinity of Jesus?
I'm not surprised.
Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in the divinity of Jesus, do they now?
lol- ok- im back bad spelling and all— the the pot earlier- i think it was 2 guys came to jesus and said they were sons of abraham, and jesus said before abraham was, i am.. so icould be wrong on the moses part, but i got my bible and looking it up now, so stand by—lol
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.