Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: HarleyD; Cronos; fortheDeclaration; rzman21

I believe the Trinity is correct. However, it answers a question God did not feel needed an authoritative, single-sentence answer.

God isn’t interested in philosophy. There is no sign God cares about systematic theology.

Many congregations in the SBC hold to the “Baptist Faith and Message” - which is a creed under another name. However, my sympathy is with those who do not.

If a homosexual-accepting Lutheran church says they hold to Luther’s catechism, would it mean anything?

What did Jesus say about false prophets?

“15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.”

They will come in sheep’s clothing - outwardly, they will look like good Christian men. But their lives will reveal their hearts.

That is why the evil Popes - those who murdered, or kept mistresses, and who sought worldly gain - matter. No false prophet is the “Vicar of Christ”, and no church that makes him one is holding true to God.

If you went to a Mormon church, and asked them if they believed Jesus is the Son of God, they would say yes. You would need to know enough about their beliefs to phrase your question very carefully. I spent 7 years living in Utah, and I eventually got fairly good at it.

Creeds can show a church is NOT christian, and to that extent they help. However, I don’t think I would need a creed to figure out that the LDS church is false, or that Universalists or Moonies are not Christians.

And when you deal with a creed as old as the Nicene Creed, you probably need to be a historian to understand how the words were being used at the time it was written.

Take, for example, this:

“And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;”

I’m not stupid, but I’m not entirely certain what it means. If you asked many Mormons if they agreed with this, many would say yes. Indeed, they would take the ‘begotten’ VERY literally - in a way no student of scripture ever would. The LDS church teaches God the Father had sex with Mary...

“In one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.”

Hmmm...I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins, but I believe it is the baptism by Jesus of the believer in the Holy Spirit. Water baptism does not remit squat, since water baptism can be given to someone who has not repented at all. In fact, with infant baptism, it always IS given to someone who has not repented of anything. Jesus said repent and believe, not be baptized and forgiven.


475 posted on 11/08/2011 6:30:17 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

But Creeds state the difference between heresy and orthodoxy.

A lot of the language used especially in the New Testament reflects platonic language. Unlike the Muslims, Christians don’t believe that God dictated the scriptures to the authors word for word.

The concepts St. Paul uses have strong antecedents in Philo of Alexandria who combined Platonism with Judaism. http://books.google.com/books?id=_Jw8AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA448&lpg=PA448&dq=st.+paul+philo&source=bl&ots=0PGN68B0dT&sig=NSfQ9T38RP3s4QiFDh4IwV7-GbU&hl=en&ei=8Oe5Tt3lLZTxggf8m_HzBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&sqi=2&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=st.%20paul%20philo&f=false


476 posted on 11/08/2011 6:49:52 PM PST by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

“Hmmm...I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins, but I believe it is the baptism by Jesus of the believer in the Holy Spirit. Water baptism does not remit squat, since water baptism can be given to someone who has not repented at all. In fact, with infant baptism, it always IS given to someone who has not repented of anything. Jesus said repent and believe, not be baptized and forgiven.”

You twist the scriptures and foist your private interpretation on the text.

Sacraments like baptism are outward signs of God’s inward grace that were instituted or commanded by Christ.
http://www.jesuschristsavior.net/Sacraments.html


477 posted on 11/08/2011 6:54:55 PM PST by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
The problem is that the Son was not begotten in eternity, he was begotten in time (this day have I begotten thee)

A Son begotten in eternally is not co-eternal with the Father.

In the beginning was the Word,(second person of the Trinity) that was who the Son was before He was begotten in time.

483 posted on 11/09/2011 2:50:32 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies ]

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