Posted on 01/01/2012 3:02:56 PM PST by rzman21
No. But if you don’t care about looking like a fool for posting threads without knowing the content of the article, that’s your business. It’s no skin off my back.
Carry on.
No apology forthcoming or deserved. I have yet to see a verse that designates an apostles as a priest.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
The article does not qualify for the caucus label because it mentions the beliefs of non-members who therefore have an interest in speaking for themselves.
That’s what the Evangelicals on FR do best. Make everything personal.
And so they shall be during the millennium and after.
>>The Catholic/Orthodox priesthood is not a priesthood in the same sense as the Levitical priesthood, and every Mass/Divine Liturgy is a participation in the one sacrifice on Calvary.<<
We don’t “participate in the one sacrifice”. We benefit from it. He made that sacrifice once for all not to be needed or repeated ever again.
As for going to the propaganda sites you use I’ll simply decline the invitation. Any organization that adheres to the Mariology nonsense has told me enough of their error to not be interested in further false teachings.
I didn’t see the Protestant reference until later so I understand.
LOLOL! But your standard, ubiquitous "Protestant" bashing should be allowed to proceed? Is this the ONLY reason you signed up?
Are you saying that you did not read the main article with all the Scritural references?
He made that sacrifice once for all not to be needed or repeated ever again.
>>It isn’t.
But then you are relying on a reinterpretation of scripture in the light of Nominalist philosophy done by one Martin Luther 1500 years after Christ died on the cross.
So what you call error, I call the truth. Let God be the judge!
Isn’t Catholic bashing what you guys are all about? All of FR is the Protestant caucus.
Isn’t Catholic bashing what you guys are all about? All of FR is the Protestant caucus. I call it apologetics.
Ah, yes, when you can't present a convincing counterargument, start accusing your opponent of lacking the correct "philosophy" and intellect to properly "interpret" Scripture. Honey, the obfuscation is ALL yours!
Give me the book chapter and verse of just one. If you can’t admit it and move on.
It’s your church who claims to “participate” in Christ’s sacrifice.
>>But then you are relying on a reinterpretation of scripture in the light of Nominalist philosophy<<
You haven’t shown yet any “reinterpretation of scripture”.
When the other side isn’t interested in listening to arguments, then what’s the point of arguing?
It cuts both ways. Let’s face it you have your ways, and we have ours. So the only thing that happens here is a mutual monologue.
I reject your interpretation of scripture, and you reject mine.
What’s wrong with us talking about our faith without including Protestants on controversial matters where we disagree?
You haven’t shown yet any “reinterpretation of scripture”.
>>I have repeatedly every time I have cited the Church Fathers, but you dismiss them every time because they disagree with your sect’s late-date interpretation of the Bible.
Convenient. What’s the point in having any sort of dialog?
By the way some of you guys react, anything that disputes Catholic Church teaching is seen as "bashing". Y'all should learn to tell the difference. Here's a little tip: if it's "apologetics" and your reasoning is sound, you won't have to refer to the opposing side in insulting and personal terms. Only when a person is unable to give a sound answer in return, and he/she is a "sore loser", is he unable to resist throwing personal jabs and global recriminations.
I know you are new here, so perhaps you haven't realized this yet, but there are many very learned and knowledgeable folks on this site and some find it hard to suffer fools gladly. A person's motivation can usually be seen by the way they respond, who they respond to and what articles they post. Just be aware of this and post accordingly. You can't "get away with" much here.
And, no, all of Free Republic is NOT a Protestant caucus. If you looked at all the religion forum threads on any given day, the majority are Catholic-based. You have just been fortunate enough to experience the unashamedly and unaplogetically NON-Catholic contingent here and we hate to let false statements get by without at least a response. What you see as a monopoly, is just a strong, Christ-centered, Christ-loving and Gospel preaching group that seeks to honor and glorify God and unafraid to speak the truth.
You mean be able to post a thread critical of another religion and no one from that religion is allowed to counter false statements or present an alternate view? Thank God, Jim Robinson didn't want a site like that. That's why Free Republic is NOT a branch of the Vatican. Now you guys can post threads all day long "talking about your faith" - and you certainly do take advantage of that, but fair is fair, so can other groups. But when you start discussing other faiths in a negative way, they should be allowed to speak to it. FR is an international website. Would YOU like it if Protestants posted threads critical of Catholicism that were closed to Catholics to rebut? Aren't there enough websites out on the Net already that are sectarian?
The role of the priesthood in scripture was to offer sacrifices.. That is what a priest does in scripture.. God set aside one tribe to be priests, they were not granted any land as God was their inheritance .
The greek have a couple words for priest
hiereus
1) a priest, one who offers sacrifices and in general in busied with sacred rites
a) referring to priests of Gentiles or the Jews,
2) metaph. of Christians, because, purified by the blood of Christ and brought into close intercourse with God, they devote their life to him alone and to Christ
and archiereus
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) chief priest, high priest
2) the high priests, these comprise in addition to one holding the high priestly office, both those who had previously discharged it and although disposed, continued to have great power in the State, as well as the members of the families from which high priest were created, provided that they had much influence in public affairs.
3) Used of Christ because by undergoing a bloody death he offered himself as an expiatory sacrifice to God, and has entered into the heavenly sanctuary where he continually intercedes on our behalf. Neither role is given in scripture for the new church ..
Christ fulfilled the role of Priest on the cross.. there is no more sacrifice for sin
He is now our High Priest..
Elders is a leadership role, not a roll of sacrificer .
You see the scriptural division in passages like this:
Mark 15;1And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.
Young's Literal Translation Acts 4:5 And it came to pass upon the morrow, there were gathered together of them the rulers, and elders, and scribes, to Jerusalem,
Even the Douay-Rheims Bible does not translate that as priests.. Acts 4:5 And it came to pass on the morrow, that their princes, and ancients, and scribes, were gathered together in Jerusalem;
A poor translation from the greek, but non the less even they did not translate it as priest.
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.