Posted on 11/25/2011 6:55:10 AM PST by marshmallow
Tens of thousands wait for hours in freezing temperatures to kiss belt that Christians believe was worn by Jesus' mother
MOSCOW — Braving freezing cold temperatures and ice-covered sidewalks, tens of thousands of Russians stood in line Wednesday to see and kiss a newly arrived relic of the Virgin Mary in Russia's largest Orthodox cathedral.
The Virgin Mary's Cincture, a belt that Christians believe was worn by Jesus' mother, was brought to Russia last month from Mount Athos, a monastic community in Greece.
Kissing the relic, which is encased in an ornamental box, is believed to help barren women conceive and heal other ailments.
The line of people, mostly women, waiting to enter the golden-domed Christ the Savior Cathedral stretched for 2.5 miles (4 kilometers) along the Moscow River despite temperatures that dropped to below minus 5 Celsius (23 Fahrenheit).
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+9&version=ESV
The man born blind was healed by Jesus without ever having even asked. Matter of fact, he didn’t figure out who Jesus was until AFTER he had been healed.
Whose faith was in operation here?
Spiritual is having a relationship with God in Christ.
Religious is the system of rules and regulations and observances believed by some to have some kind of effect in reaching, or more accurately appeasing God to earn his favor.
Superstitious is having faith that kissing some relic that nobody can prove belonged to Mary in the first place, is going to heal you. Who made that decision that that action was effective? Sounds pretty man made to me.
[Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John]....[Acts]....[Romans through Philemon]...[Hebrews through Revelation]. Peter and the 11....Paul. Prophecy...mystery.
You cannot see the answers to your own questions because you cannot figure out which age is "But Now" that we are living in. Because you cannot understand when "Time Past" ended and "But Now" began. You cannot figure out when it began, why it began, and when it is going to end, and what will happen next, in the "Ages to Come". Eph. Chapter 2 should be your best friend, next to the Book of Acts.
You would not be asking questions like "What Scripture led the Apostles to conclude that GEntiles would not have to be circumcised?". You would first ask "Why did Peter, James, and John give Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that Paul and Barnabas should go to the Gentiles, and not the 12? Weren't THEY told BY JESUS CHRIST to go to ALL THE NATIONS? Who were they that they could GIVE THEIR COMMAND BY JESUS to someone else? Just simple questions like that, to start your brain thinking, and a search would begin, in GOd's Word of truth, not the CCC, for answers. And before you know it, 2 Tim. 2:15 would come alive.
Or not. You can continue to ask questions that will never be answered to your satisfaction, because you are following the gospel of the kingdom for your salvation, "Time Past" and ignoring the gospel of your salvation, "But Now". There is no way to answer questions that you are attempting to make NOW when they are actually THEN. You might as well be asking why don't we bring lambs to slaughter. Or why doesn't everyone drink poison and survive, like Jesus promised those who believed WOULD, SHALL, in Mark. Or why those in early Acts sold everything they had and had all things in common. Why did they do that then? There's a question that should get you thinking.
Or who was Peter preaching to on the day of Pentecost and did he preach the gospel to them, that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day. If he did not, why not? And, just what was this church that 3000 souls were added to on the day of Pentecost? To be added to, it HAD to have already existed. What church WAS this?
So, your questions have been answered. For a kingdom follower in today's age? NO. But for a member of the Body of Christ in today's age? YES. They cannot be answered to your satisfaction if you desire to have answers from "But Now" to conform to "Time Past".
Do you not comprehend what is written or are you purposely trying to create an argument or put me down? Did you notice I suggested that the reader “study the words binding and loosing or bound and loosed in the Talmudic writings”? To a person with average reading comprehension that would indicate the writer is telling the reader to go study the material on their own. The writer would probably be inferring that the reader has the intelligence and the desire to find the truth of what the text is intended to confer.
Millions and millions of people listen to power hungry authoritarian deceivers telling them that there is “extra revealed knowledge” or that they have had appearances by gods or representatives of God. They give their will over to some fallible man who convinces them that he has the “way” and refuse to acknowledge that those men may not be God’s true representatives. Untold millions over the millennium have been led away from the one true God by those who supposedly have “revealed knowledge” only to end up condemned to an eternity separated from the one true God.
There is only one source of information that has been proven over and over again to contain no errors. That source is a compilation of 66 writings that have been compiled in what we call the Bible or Scripture. Even those 66 writings have been translated by fallible men into languages and cultures that are different than the original languages and cultures and which often fail to understand the cultures in which those writings were penned.
I chose the name CynicalBear for a reason. I take nothing at face value and understand the words and actions of people may not have my best interest at heart. In the case of my eternal future that becomes even more important. I’m not going to trust my eternal future to some fallible man or group of men without attempting to understand the meaning and intent of those original writers and the God who inspired them to write. I believe it is paramount that we delve as deeply into the intent of those original writings as is humanly possible to try to understand Gods will for our lives.
Each individual is responsible for their own lives and future both on this earth and for eternity. I choose not to put my trust in anything other then the one true God and the information He provided in those original writings.
Did you notice I suggested that the reader “study the words binding and loosing or bound and loosed in the Talmudic writings”Oh yeah, your claim to be a Talmudic scholar of such discernment that you can, by fiat, reject the teachings of Christianity. That perfect knowledge must come with the office of ELDER that you appointed yourself to. Really impressive. Not.
HH 'NetPope HossB86 says:
If you do, you're worshipping her because nowhere in Scripture are we told to pray to ANYONE other than God.What backwoods Bible College did you gradarate from Hoss? Bob Jones U? Laughable. You are a Trinitarian, right? You adhere to the common creeds of the Christian faith, right? Or do you?
HH 'NetPope HossB86 says:
If you do, you're worshipping her because nowhere in Scripture are we told to pray to ANYONE other than God.What backwoods Bible College did you gradarate from Hoss? Bob Jones U? Laughable. You are a Trinitarian, right? You adhere to the common creeds of the Christian faith, right? Or do you?
John 20:19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled,[c] for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
20 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.”
22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
I am surprised that you did not recognize the passage.
Note here that Jesus tells them “As the Father has sent me, so also I send you.”
What was Jesus sent to do?
Well, He tells them in the very next verse.
“23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
Note also, that they receive the Holy Spirit in a way no one else receives Him.
Paul says in 2 Cor 2 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
See here how Paul paraphrases Jesus. This is how we know that the Apostles understood what their commission was and that they passed that commission on to others. And Paul says that he forgave it in the person of Christ. This is exactly what the Church teaches regarding confession, the priest forgives in the person of Christ.
In Cor 5;18-21, Paul says this....
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
*****Jesus was telling the Apostles that they were basically in charge of establishing the church rules and practices.*****
By George, I think you’ve got it!
And just as the history of the church did not end with the NT, neither did the questions that arose concerning all manner of things.
The councils which followed down through the centuries looked to that first council as their guidepost, their blueprint for how they were to reach their conclusions on what is binding and what is not.
****That council was ecclesiastical in nature and made a decision on how IT(the new church) would address the question of non Jewish believers.. .It answered how the gospel would be presented and what would be expected of the gentile converts.. ****
Yes, exactly, it was the first council of the Church and it answered a doctrinal question and a practical question. That is what the Church has been doing ever since. Building on the foundation of the Apostles commission from Jesus. That is what Apostolic Succession and Unity is All About.
*****That council clearly pointed out that men were no longer saved by the traditions or religious practices of the jews but by grace and that was how it was to be preached.. it addressed how the church leaders would present the gospel and what they could or could not demand of the converts.. it did not rule on the religious practices of the jewish believers****
No, the council says nothing about grace. It was all about how to move forward with the new revelation that Gentiles were to be included in the new covenant. There were converts to Judaism before, and they had to be circumcised under the old covenant.
******it addressed how the church leaders would present the gospel and what they could or could not demand of the converts.. *****
Again, exactly. That is the Church and has been for nearly 2,000 years.
*****Was James the pope??******
No, Peter had the revelation and was the first to receive a Gentile into the new covenant. Paul and Barnabas gave testimony in support of Peter’s vision and how he had interpreted it, and James, leading the others, agreed.
And so it has been done ever since.
Have I ever sinned. YES. Do I still sin? YES. Do I care about my sin displeasing God?See how easy that was? Your odd claim that:
I seriously doubt that you would accept yes or no answers, but most questions can't be answered that way as you should know.Well, wrong on both counts. You answered YES and I accept your answer. Next question, do you agree that SIN is a spiritual illness?
Well said. Hopefully not pearls but well said nonetheless.
****Other than the fact that Peter had just confirmed that Jesus was the “Christ the son of the living God” to which Jesus referred back to when He said “upon this rock I will build my church”.****
CB, you omit the fact that Jesus first says,
“Blessed are you, Simon bar Jonah for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in Heaven. And, I say also to thee, ‘Thou art Peter’ and then says “and, upon this rock, I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.”
Jesus says nothing about what Peter has confirmed, other than to tell him(and by extension us)that God has revealed this to Peter.
It is only YOUR interpretation that Jesus is referring back to Peter’s confession or to Himself, for the reading of that passage does not indicate that.
Jesus asks the question.
Peter replies.
Jesus says that God has revealed this to Peter.
Jesus calls him by his given name, Simon bar Jonah and then uses the name Jesus(God) has given him which is “rock”.
Then Jesus says He will build His Church upon this “rock”.
Then Jesus promises Peter the keys of the Kingdom, which come with the power to bind and loose.
So, it isn’t a bother, it is the Word of God to Catholics.
It is only a bother to protestants.
****Other than the fact that Peter had just confirmed that Jesus was the “Christ the son of the living God” to which Jesus referred back to when He said “upon this rock I will build my church”.****
CB, you omit the fact that Jesus first says,
“Blessed are you, Simon bar Jonah for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in Heaven. And, I say also to thee, ‘Thou art Peter’ and then says “and, upon this rock, I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.”
Jesus says nothing about what Peter has confirmed, other than to tell him(and by extension us)that God has revealed this to Peter.
It is only YOUR interpretation that Jesus is referring back to Peter’s confession or to Himself, for the reading of that passage does not indicate that.
Jesus asks the question.
Peter replies.
Jesus says that God has revealed this to Peter.
Jesus calls him by his given name, Simon bar Jonah and then uses the name Jesus(God) has given him which is “rock”.
Then Jesus says He will build His Church upon this “rock”.
Then Jesus promises Peter the keys of the Kingdom, which come with the power to bind and loose.
So, it isn’t a bother, it is the Word of God to Catholics.
It is only a bother to protestants.
Sorry for the double post.
I am having issues with FR today.
It was all about grace.. the Jews that believed one had to be circumcised.. ( a work of the law) and to keep the the Jewish traditions and laws ..(sacrifices, dietary, laws etc) to be saved.. had to see that one is no longer saved by being a jew and keeping the Torah.. but by grace.. ..it was all about grace
I asked if james as the pope because He ran the 1st church council ..I was trying to be funny..because you asked if THE PEOPLE were bound by the decision.. and of course that would have to be declared by the pope to catholics..
BTW there is no record of Peter being pope.. until hundreds of years after the fact
What had Peter just said?? What words had Peter said that that Jesus said blessed Peter... lets looks...
Luke 9:18And it came to pass, as he was alone praying, his disciples were with him: and he asked them, saying, Whom say the people that I am?
19They answering said, John the Baptist; but some say, Elijah; and others say, that one of the old prophets is risen again. 20He said unto them, But whom say you that I am? Peter answering said, The Christ of God.
Mat 16:Peter's Confession at Caesarea Philippi 13When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14And they said, Some say that you are John the Baptist: some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.
15He said unto them, But whom say you that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mark 27And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am?
28And they answered, John the Baptist: but some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets.
29And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
30And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
I posted all 3 versions from the synoptics because only matthew contains the part catholics like to quote..but all 3 record jesus calling Peter satan.. so apparently they found that exchange that Catholics rest all their faith on as less importance than the rebuke of Peter by Jesus
Anyway Jesus said no one could know that unless the father revealed it.. and that made Peter a very blesses man.. Peter who in seconds would be rebuked and called satan was not the focus of Christ..but his declaration of faith was..that declaration.. that very fact was what the church was to be built on..not a weak man that needed rebukes
What was understood by those hearing it ,and later Augustine was the large stone the church would be built upon is the declaration of Christ as the son of God, and that one can not come to that intellectually or by study..but that the church would be taught the truth by the Father in heaven ...just as Peter was and that Jesus had already taught
Jhn 6:44 — No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day
.
Jhn 6:45 — It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
...Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.Sermons, Volume III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327
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.