Posted on 06/30/2011 4:49:27 PM PDT by stfassisi
“(and, it also said “Jews”, but i noted NO ONE objected to that...)”
Because without Christ no one gains Heaven and with the exception of Messianic Jews, Jews do not accept Christ. No one has hope of Heaven unless Christ is their personal Savior. Regardless of any good works they do, great things, membership in a specific denomination - be it Catholic, Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Baptist, or whatever — no assurance of Heaven whatsoever without Christ.
“but, the original statement, did NOT say ALL were enemies. (and, it also said “Jews”, but i noted NO ONE objected to that...)”
That bothered me too, but I chose to respond to the freeper who was offended. Now that you’ve raised the point, I will say this:
IMHO, the Old Covenant is still valid. God is not allah who abrogates itself. A promise by God is valid from when it was made to both the start and end of time.
This from a believer and (admittedly failed) follower of the New Covenant. But I’m trying...
Sorry, I meant flawed, not failed...
If the Jews are to gain Heaven it is through Christ - “For there is no other name under Heaven by which we can be saved.” There is no alternative route for Jews — or anyone else.
No, it is NOT my interpretation at all! And I resent that excuse being thrown into the faces of anyone who refuses to bow the knee to everything that the Roman Catholic Church demands. We are ALL to hold to the clear teachings of Scripture and they are indeed clear enough to anyone who cares to read and study them for themselves. We do not need a "theologian of The Church" leaning over our shoulder to tell us that what we read for ourselves doesn't mean what it clearly does. Are we saved by grace, yes or no? Are we saved by faith, yes or no? Well let's see what Scripture says:
Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
There is no need to have an "interpreter" - unless you don't speak English - to understand what the Bible says about the gift of Eternal Life. There are hundreds more such verses that make the plan of salvation - the Gospel - crystal clear. Please, let's not bother with that tired old "it's your own interpretation" saw. We all can see that God did not leave such a critical doctrine clouded in mystery.
I hope you have a restful night.
I also hope you realize that when I criticize the doctrines of your church, I am not attacking you personally. I fear many here are unable to tell the difference.
Amen, Elendur ... AMEN!
“No, it is NOT my interpretation at all! And I resent that excuse being thrown into the faces of anyone who refuses to bow the knee to everything that the Roman Catholic Church demands. We are ALL to hold to the clear teachings of Scripture and they are indeed clear enough to anyone who cares to read and study them for themselves. We do not need a “theologian of The Church” leaning over our shoulder to tell us that what we read for ourselves doesn’t mean what it clearly does. Are we saved by grace, yes or no? Are we saved by faith, yes or no? Well let’s see what Scripture says:
Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
There is no need to have an “interpreter” - unless you don’t speak English - to understand what the Bible says about the gift of Eternal Life. There are hundreds more such verses that make the plan of salvation - the Gospel - crystal clear. Please, let’s not bother with that tired old “it’s your own interpretation” saw. We all can see that God did not leave such a critical doctrine clouded in mystery.”
AMEN!!
“I also hope you realize that when I criticize the doctrines of your church, I am not attacking you personally. I fear many here are unable to tell the difference.”
Quite true and very well put.
Yup, through Christ. But who is Christ? He is both part and the whole of the Trinity incarnate: Fully man, but also fully God, Himself, and the Holy Spirit.
So a promise by God in the Old Covenant is a promise by Christ. What, He wasn’t born yet? Irrelevant, for Christ is fully God and therefor the Alpha and Omega (in our terms, the start and end, outside of time).
And those OT followers were those who, like Abraham, “believed” and it was “counted to them as righteousness”.
Having said that, Christ came to fulfill the law. There is no alternate route to Heaven for Jews or anyone else - only faith in Him. One cannot reject His son and gain Heaven because one has done good works, lived a good life, has membership in a specific religion/denomination, whatever.
Then, I'm afraid, you will have to condemn one of those adored in this article posted. King Louis IX of France, AKS St. Louis was guilty of the same things against Jews. From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_IX_of_France
Louis IX took very seriously his mission as "lieutenant of God on Earth", with which he had been invested when he was crowned in Rheims. Thus, in order to fulfill his duty, he conducted two crusades, and even though they were unsuccessful, they contributed to his prestige. Contemporaries would not have understood if the king of France did not lead a crusade to the Holy Land. In order to finance his first crusade Louis ordered the expulsion of all Jews engaged in usury and the confiscation of their property, for use in his crusade. However, he did not cancel the debts owed by Christians. One-third of the debts was forgiven, but the other two thirds were to be remitted to the royal treasury. Louis also ordered, at the urging of Pope Gregory IX, the burning in Paris in 1243 of some 12,000 manuscript copies of the Talmud and other Jewish books. Such legislation against the Talmud, not uncommon in the history of Christendom, was due to mediaeval courts' concerns that its production and circulation might weaken the faith of Christian individuals and threaten the Christian basis of society, the protection of which was the duty of any Christian monarch.
Who's then? Certainly you don't claim to speak for the Holy Spirit?
We are ALL to hold to the clear teachings of Scripture
According to...?
and they are indeed clear enough to anyone who cares to read and study them for themselves.
Arians, Nestorians Adoptionists, Gnostics, Docetists, Monarchists, Monophysites, Monothelites, Modalists, Subordinationsts, Donatists, Pelagians, Calvinists, Arminians, Lutherans, Pentecostals, JWs, LDS… All care enough to read and study Scripture for themselves. And arrive at radically different theology, very different views of God and Christ, very different soteriology, yet they all claim the same authority as you.
Every possible conclusion from Scripture has appeared and continues to appear and have followers. Seriously, do we vote?
Are we saved by grace, yes or no? Are we saved by faith, yes or no?
Faith in what? That we were predestined to be Elect? Even those who agree on salvation by grace through faith disagree on what that means - enough to fill thousands of posts on this site alone.
We all can see that God did not leave such a critical doctrine clouded in mystery.
Correct. Because he did not leave it to each individual to arrive at their own theology, He established a Church with authority. Which is the only way to have one faith, one Church.
Otherwise you have what we plainly see all around us today. Many faiths, many beliefs, many churches, many individuals - all claiming the authority of Scripture.
Thanks for your reply and God bless...
“Having said that, Christ came to fulfill the law. There is no alternate route to Heaven for Jews or anyone else - only faith in Him. One cannot reject His son and gain Heaven because one has done good works, lived a good life, has membership in a specific religion/denomination, whatever.”
Works? Useless without faith. A so-called good life in human terms absent God? Less than meaningless.
Christ fulfilled the law. Well, what law? The law of the Old Testament. That in itself validates the Old Testament’s veracity. Otherwise, why would Christ fulfill it?
Christ is God. I follow the New Covenant. Those who faithfully follow the Old also follow Christ, just not in name. Now, that’s a problem. I’ll leave it to God aka Christ aka G-d to sort that out.
The take away: I’d like to convince my Jewish friends that their law has been fulfilled, but I’m not too worried about them in the eternal story.
Jews in general? Those Jews who hate Christ - also know as secular Jews - fulfill neither Covenant. It’s no accident they support secularism, hate Israel (God’s promise), and support he who would subjugate us all. Those who believe in the Old Covenant and therefor God? It’s no accident they align with us in the spiritual war we are embroiled in.
Now, I’m still struggling with all this, and have an ongoing conversation with a Christian minister who knows the Bible inside and out about the issues. We agree Christ is the only way. We agree God doesn’t lie or abrogate Himself (cf islam and allah). This above is my (prob poorly stated) take away right now. That said, explicit and willing belief in Christ by name definitely is the path we should take. No argument there.
I speak as the Holy Spirit has led me to understand the plain Scripture. It is so plain, a child can understand it. It is those who refuse to hear that Spirit of truth - who, by the way, Jesus said he would send for that very reason - and who twist and confuse the Scripture because of their own ignorance or evil intent, to their own destruction. So it is not a matter of "according to", because God made it clear both in his word and by illumination of the indwelling Holy Spirit of all those who come to faith in Christ.
Arians, Nestorians Adoptionists, Gnostics, Docetists, Monarchists, Monophysites, Monothelites, Modalists, Subordinationsts, Donatists, Pelagians, Calvinists, Arminians, Lutherans, Pentecostals, JWs, LDS… All care enough to read and study Scripture for themselves. And arrive at radically different theology, very different views of God and Christ, very different soteriology, yet they all claim the same authority as you.
Smokescreen. There is ONLY one Gospel. The good news that Jesus Christ came to save sinners and that whosoever believes in him will have eternal life. The different theologies about the Gospel don't count since there is only one true Gospel. As to the other points of disagreement, certainly there are differences. There are differences within your OWN church and always have been. The idea that a consensus patrium decided all the doctrines of the Catholic Church is simply a false statement. Some things from some "church doctors" were accepted and others weren't. Some never had unaminous consent and some of those very same people were later kicked out for heresy.
If the Roman Catholic Church is supposed to be "the, one, true church" established by Christ then explain all the false teachings and dogmas and debauchery that happened within that very same organization. Jesus said his church would prevail against the gates of hell so how did Satan get such a foothold within it at times? How come there are STILL deeply grievous and gross sins being committed BY the clergy today against children and other members? That "we are all sinners needing healing" explanation doesn't cut it when you have your highest leaders caught up in terrible crimes. You have a history of even Popes being involved with all kinds of sexual sins and debauchery so how can you claim this one "church" is THAT church Jesus described?
I hope you understand I am not attacking YOU, just that I am trying to explain that what Jesus said would exist HAS to be a spiritual, universal body and simply cannot be one organization alone and especially not one so mired in centuries of unChristian-like conduct.
All the other doctrines outside of the Gospel and what it entails definitely have divergent views, but I think it is not such a problem as you seem to think it is. Yes, some believe we are chosen before time began to be saved and there are Scriptures that seem to say that and there are other Scriptures that say we have free will to believe. I think it is really both and is outside our total comprehension. Does is really matter if they both agree that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ? So what that we don't all agree on how we worship? Do you really think the early churches across the continent all did everything the same in their services? Didn't they have their own customs and traditions? Aren't they ALLOWED that variety? I think what has happened over the years is some people have been convinced that they cannot know anything without THE CHURCH. That they are somehow not allowed to read and study the Bible for themselves and meditate upon it asking God for clarity and understanding. That is a shame because the closeness and intimacy with God can be missed if all we ever do is listen to what someone else says it says. Why pray "canned" prayers? Why not pray like you are talking to the one who loves you more than any human possibly can and who wants what is the BEST for your life?
There certainly is a role for the local church to be the gathering place for like-minded people so that they can edify each other and worship and glorify God together as well as learn his truths together. I think it is wrong to assume there is only one physical "super-church" that we must all join and bow to. The real church of Christ IS that spiritual one, that universal one and God knows those who are his and the gates of hell HAVE never prevailed against it and never will.
God bless you, too.
And all those groups claim it. Do you think the differences there are minor?
explain all the false teachings and dogmas and debauchery that happened within that very same organization.
Not one of these sinners and debauchers are the Church. That's the point. The Church is not any man.
Some things from some "church doctors" were accepted and others weren't. Some never had unaminous consent and some of those very same people were later kicked out for heresy.
And ditto the above.
You have a history of even Popes being involved with all kinds of sexual sins and debauchery
Ditto, ditto, ditto.
I'm curious, if this is your position then no sinner or debaucher can be the authority on Scripture and theology - so much for the Protestant Principle. If you have a problem with sinners, debauched individuals determining teaching then you should have a problem with each individual determining them - not with the Church.
Yes, some believe we are chosen before time began to be saved and there are Scriptures that seem to say that and there are other Scriptures that say we have free will to believe.
This is no little thing. Our faith in it's essence is who we are, who God is, and what our relationship to each other and God is and should be. The basics are radically different if you don't believe in free will and believe God's grace is not freely offered. Huge difference between a just and injust God and between what Christ's ministry was.
There certainly is a role for the local church to be the gathering place for like-minded people so that they can edify each other and worship and glorify God together as well as learn his truths together.
St. Paul was a bit more strict about what the Church is than you. E.g., what it means to not discern the Body in Holy Communion. He didn't teach this as a little disagreement.
I think it is wrong to assume there is only one physical "super-church" that we must all join and bow to.
The Church is the Body of Christ. You don't bow to it, you become One with Christ in the Body of Christ - as Jesus prayed in the garden.
The real church of Christ IS that spiritual one…
It is that, but it is also the Body of Christ, the Communion of Saints. It is apostolic and it has authority for teaching, as St. Paul and Peter and Thomas, etc. did.
It is not each individual, a Bible, and Christ. This is most clearly not what Jesus established or prayed for, for us.
My point is that your view would mean Christ failed from the get-go. You have no more authority than Calvin or the neighborhood Gnostic. There is no reasonable possibility of a Church holding the same basics of faith. It would be as foolish as if the founding fathers had decided to make one nation with each individual determining what the constitution meant. Imagine our nation if they had established that as a nation. Imagine Christianity if Christ had established this individual authority as His Church.
It just fails on its face; the failure is all around us and easily predictable. That's why Jesus did not establish your view of Church.
thanks again for your reply.
ROTFLMAO.
Dang, when arguing against purgatory the Sola Yourselfa crowd says different words in different verses even with clearly different contexts all mean the same thing and translation differences shouldn't be the focus of such a debate. When arguing against Peter as head of His Church, though, Christ using the same word twice in the same sentence suddenly makes translation issues paramount in order to avoid the clear meaning of the sentence. If they don't spin falsehoods about translation issues in that case they'd have to accept the Truth which undermines the core of their "by myself alone, through personal interpretation alone, of the book alone" heresy.
At best the phrase "clear meaning of the Scripture" is a smokescreen intended to make it seem like some degree of clarity exists when the convoluted "Lego Block Method of Scripture Interpretation" is being liberally applied. At worst, it's a deliberate attempt to divert attention away from what is clearly a lie and in no way supported by the Scriptures quoted by a particular Sola Yourselfa adherent.
So your vision of God is a cosmic puppeteer?
So, because, from a human understanding, predestination and freewill seem to be opposites and mutually exclusive, it does not necessarily follow that to God they are such.
Doubletalk.
God already saved you? Do you have evidence?
However, I am charged exercise discipline to draw near to Him daily and in all things, if I am to grow and mature and become the person that He desires I be. Salvation is a gift. Being a servant and growing in Him is a responsibility.
What do you think happens if you don't?
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.