Posted on 12/22/2013 1:46:25 PM PST by piusv
What church has stood (and still is standing strong) staunchly against
abortion
euthanasia
contraception
homosexuality/same sex marriage
embryonic stem cell research
The Catholic Church is not melting down as you say.
The problem is not with the Catholic Church per se, but with this particular Pope and his incredible statements.
I will give you Orthodox, but baptist? There’s no organized baptist church with a structure, doctrine and heirarchy. Baptist are another of the some 35,000 protestant denominations and they all worship differently. No requirement to attend Church, no sacraments. No one in a position of authority. All protestants are on their own to interpret the Bible exactly they way they feel like interpreting it.
The way I view things today is that basically, ON CORE BELIEFS - Christ was the Son of God, He was born of a Virgin, He suffered and died for us, a Resurrection of the Dead, a Last Judgement, Life after death, the Personality of Evil in Satan and his minions,basic moral valaues, most Christians pretty much are on the same wavelength.
Baptists believe in the Bible, they believe in everything above, oppose immorality and abortion, and are good Christians.
Right now, are mutual enemy is godless socialism, Islam, and materialistic militant atheism.
You have a very backwards reading of the NT. The reason the NT doesn't emphasize "Jews" in connection to receiving the Gospel is that the big shock to everyone was how many Gentiles were coming into a predominantly Jewish organization. Acts 15, for example, makes no sense unless you take into account that each and every member of the Jerusalem council was a Torah-observant Jew.
Let us look at Paul’s life to see how he lived out the New Covenant on a practical day-to-day basis: He went to synagogue on Shabbat (Acts 13:14, 17:1-2, etc.) and when he could find no synagogue building, sought out other Jews to pray (16:13). He took a Nazrite vow on his journey long before he knew of a problem in Jerusalem (18:18). He hurried back to Jerusalem to take part in the Shavuot (Pentecost) pilgrimage feast (20:16). He returned with the intent purpose of not only giving alms to the poor, but also to make phosphoras, sacrificial offerings in the Temple (24:17)–undoubtedly including the ones required to fulfill his Nazrite vow (Num. 6:14-17). He was willing to buy sacrifices in bulk to help four other guys complete their own Nazrite vows in order to demonstrate that he was not “teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to the customs” (Acts 21:20-26). He insisted under oath to the Sanhedrin that he was still a Pharisee (23:6) and to Festus that he had done nothing either against the Law of the Jews or the temple (25:8).
Paul’s entire post-conversion life is utterly incompatible with a man who believed that the Torah had been abolished by the coming of Christ or that keeping the Torah’s commands or maintaining Jewish identity were incompatible with life under the Gospel.
Your objection to Messianic Judaism well illustrates why we won't call ourselves Christians, however. You believe that God sent the King of the Jews to the Jewish people, prophesyed through Jewish prophets in the Jewish language and cultural symbols for thousands of years, Who then sent out Jewish emissaries (apostles) to the Jews first and only then to the Gentiles . . . to tell Jews to stop being Jewish.
Gentilizing to Jews is every bit as much a false gospel as Judaizing to Gentiles, as evidenced by Paul's rejection of it in Acts 21 and his whole life before and after that point--and it's a false gospel that Christianity as a whole has bought into and used the secular state to enforce since the Council of Nicea (I've got a nice series called Judenrein Christianity detailing this if you wish to have documentation).
Since Christianity has defined itself not simply as pan-cultural Judaism, but instead as a new religion that actively demands the assimilation of Jews, I want no Jew ever to become a Christian.
I want every Jew to one day know the Redeemer of Israel.
There is a difference between the two.
I pray for the day when Christianity jettisons the last remnants of its 4th Century anti-Semitism and says, "Just as American Christians can remain culturally American, and Japanese Christians can remain culturally Japanese, and Nigerian Christians can remain culturally Nigerian, Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah can and must remain Jewish."
Shalom.
“Baptists believe in the Bible, they believe in everything above, oppose immorality and abortion, and are good Christians”
Yes but just like some that call themselves Catholic, you have baptists that might say they don’t believe in abortion but they turn right around and vote for the most radical, immoral president in American history. If someone condones it they have no problem with it. And that’s how I view any person that calls themselves Christian and votes for Obama or any other Godless democrat. All hypocrites in my my book.
I already believe that, and to be honest with you, I can't think of a moment in my adult life when I didn't believe that.
Nevertheless, it continues to break my heart when I go in to speak to a church and someone inevitably comes up to me and says, "Hey, my mother's Jewish," or "My grandmother's Jewish."
Despite all the progress that has been made, that just goes to show that in the end, even philo-Judaic churches put into their heads, "You're no longer a Jew--you're a Christian (read: Gentile) like us now."
I keep getting asked, "Why don't more Jews believe in Jesus?"
Answer: "Because you keep turning the ones that do into Gentiles. And you do it without even intending to, without even thinking about it. And that's why I don't want any Jew ever to become a Christian."
Shalom.
John was a mere teenager at the time and had no "household". The original says "εις τα ιδια" -- "to his own"; the word "home" is not there.
There is nothing reductionist is saying that Mary, same as her Son, had a full range of human emotions.
This theory would not explain the settling (by the Gospel of John and in the Acts) on "the Jews" denoting not merely people of Jewish ethnicity but specifically the Pharisees, unconverted Jews in general, and Jews scheming to kill Jesus and His disciples in particular.
Paul’s entire post-conversion life is utterly incompatible with a man who believed that the Torah had been abolished by the coming of Christ or that keeping the Torah’s commands or maintaining Jewish identity were incompatible with life under the Gospel.
No one Catholic is saying that the Torah was "abolished" or Jewish distinctive habits are "incompatible". Rather, the Torah is fulfilled in the Gospel of Grace, and can only be understood through it, and the circumcision and the kashrut are of no relevance. Certainly you are familiar with the verses written by St. Paul to that effect.
Gentilizing to Jews is every bit as much a false gospel
You mean Jewish converts? Have they not read "there is no distinction of the Jew and the Greek" (Romans 10:12, similar Galatians 3:28)? Or you mean Jews by religion? If so, I am sure it would, but in general conversion to Christianity is not an easy step for anyone; it is after all dying to self.
Since Christianity has defined itself [...] as a new religion that actively demands the assimilation of Jews
Ethnocultural Jewishness is of no relevance, but conversion to Catholic or Orthodox Christianity is certainly required of everyone, Jew or Greek.
After much reflection in my earlier years, Annalex, I'm fairly convinced that when John uses the expression "the Jews" that he is referring to the leadership of both Sadducee and Pharisee. Obviously, he didn't mean "of Jewish descent", because that would be talking about himself also.
I'm also convinced that the Apostle Paul AFTER his conversion, AFTER his guidance gained from the Council of Jerusalem, and AFTER having spent his calling in telling Gentiles to turn to Christ Jesus without having to obey the Jewish law, that he himself saw no contradiction with continued observance of his Jewish traditions. Buggman is right. Paul clearly went through the Nazirite vows on his return to Jerusalem. He saw no contradiction in maintaining his Jewishness EXCEPT when it came to Peter's hypocrisy in pretending he was not associating with Gentiles.
Did Jesus or His Blessed Mother ever experience envy, lust, gluttony, wrath, pride, etc?
It’s a terrible sign when Protestants agree with a pope’s teaching of the Blessed Mother.
The above statement has never been true; it still isn't.
Catholics have Mary and Mormons have the Spirit Mother Goddess thingie. I’ll just stick with my bible.
Romans 3:23 would like a word with you.
The Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The Pope is Jesus’ representative on earth and was give the duty to protect His church and guide His church. Popes have been doing this for 2,000 years. The biggest contribution was of course giving the world the Bible. Have a nice night.
Really? The Bible starts with Genesis; who was the pope in the Garden of Eden?
The Bible is a gift from the Holy Ghost, not the popes.
One reason why we Catholics now have a mass on Saturday evening is a reflection of that. The Eucharist would follow the meal. But after the connection with the synagogue was broken, the Eucharist took on the form described by Justin Martyr, with psalms and reading from the Torah, and later the apostolic writings, followed by the Lord’s Supper. Hard to tell when it was pushed all into the first day of the week.
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.