Posted on 01/12/2014 5:53:46 AM PST by knarf
There is a huge misunderstanding of the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words that have been translated “hell”. A beginning to understanding the significance of those words can be found here: http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html
They have to do that projection thing in order to sustain the deceit that the RCC has them under. It’s evident in all cult members when confronted with truth from scripture.
I doubt we can even get close to understanding their thoughts other than what the Holy Spirit gives us.
And there is a profound statement of truth. Does one accept pope Peanut Butter's word or does one accept Paul's? Make the choice, my FRiends...for it is God who is causing your choice.
Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past,
Thank the Roman Catholic Church for SAVING all the text!
The things you've described help me to understand some of what I've read and have seen watching others along my winding way.
Perhaps it's because His Body-Church has been sliced up into many pieces that what I find there has seemed incomplete and the many practitioners usually feuding with each other.
Whatever the reasons for how things are now, on a surface level only Satan's goals seem to be advanced by this division and the prideful conflicts.
None the less, like I heard a TV evangelist say yesterday, Jesus has a simply amazing way, if we ask, of turning our messes into His Message, thus turning our lives around and turning us into a beacon to/for Him and His Glory.
Doesn't your position put you at odds with many or most your fellow Protestants?
And yet you call Catholicism the cult. It would appear to me, that any honest Protestant would call your religion out as a cult as well.
That's pretty rich, coming from a group of people that all have different beliefs and interpretations of scripture.
That’s pretty rich, coming from a group of people that all have different beliefs and interpretations of scripture.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Actually, it’s pathetic. Y’aal can’t even agree and it’s your own faith group!
I'd love to see you and ES have a little talk about which day is the Sabbath, whether Easter is a feast of God or a feast of Satan, why there are no more dinosaurs around, whether sex-tape of unmarried people are wrong or A-OK...How many years Jesus was on earth, whether fish is kosher...Oh, you guys have lot to talk about.
“Both men of God and writings of God were essentially established as being of God due to their enduring Heavenly qualities and effects...”
Very true. However, this does not solve the problem of disunity on what those holy books were, and this leads to error and heresy, leading to the critical Arian heresy. This is not small stuff, but gets to the central tenets of what Christianity is and what Christians believe.
“...ask yourself how 1st century souls knew that Jesus was the Christ, or that Isaiah etc. was inspired. Don’t forgot to answer it.”
This gets to the point of Tradition and Apostolic Succession. After those who were fortunate and blessed enough to actually see Jesus Christ teach and fulfill his crucifixion and resurrection, we had the Apostles.
Both in Biblical evidence and in historic evidence of the Early Church we see both of those give fairly compelling evidence to support the Catholic Church. There is nearly unanimous consent to the episcopal, hierarchical and visible nature of the Church which Christ promised the gates of hell would not prevail against.
‘St. Clement, bishop of Rome, teaches apostolic succession, around 80 A.D. (Epistle to Corinthians, 42:4-5, 44:1-3), and St. Irenaeus is a very strong witness to, and advocate of this tradition in the last two decades of the 2nd century (Against Heresies, 3:3:1,4, 4:26:2, 5:20:1,
Eusebius, the first historian of the Church, in his History of the Church, begins by saying that one of the “chief matters” to be dealt with in his work is “the lines of succession from the holy apostles’
There is obviously development of the Church, but it looks much like the Catholic Church in hierarchy and in doctrine. With respect, and I say this in a loving respect to you as a Christian brother, it definitely doesn’t look like the Protestant Churches of modern day. There is little unity in structure and constant division. There is split after split in doctrine. As a former Protestant, I’ve been there and seen the division, the splitting of churches into 2 or even 3.
Traveling on the road...”...Love the Lord Thy God, with all of your heart, mind and strength...and love your neighbor as you would want to be loved...”
Loving God and our neighbor is our path. In the spirit of unity, as we have differences, let’s remember that in the end, that we do have much we agree on. Our Salvation is only through Jesus, The Holy Trinity, The Resurrection and the coming unimaginable Mercy that we truly don’t deserve.
Still basing my comments on a misconception.
They would argue that Rome was not simply used to fulfill God's purposes, but was the instrument and steward of Scripture (the NT) and and as the inheritor of promises of Divine presence and preservation, she only has historical descent as the steward of Divine revelation.
But not only, but as writings are of God, and what they mean, are both subject to interpretation (thus 10 billion Prot. churches), then an infallible, incontestable magisterium was/is required, and promised, to whom all must submit, and in the light of history etc., then Rome is it.
Without even arguing against the church of Rome today being essentially the same as the of Scripture, can you (as RCs have not) tell me what is wrong with the premise behind this stewardship=infallibility/incontestable authority argument?
Still beating yourself in the head with a baseball bat????
“Thanks be to Yehova that is far from reality!”
Oh get off it someone had to translate it into Latin. If the rest of the world wants to take the time and learn Greek and Hebrew that’s fine but I’d prefer it in my own tongue.
Besides have you tried learning Greek? It’s all Greek to me as the saying goes.
True Protestants? Yes. Certain religious groups identifyed by sloppy Roman Catholic definitions, no.
If not, why do you never try to "correct" them to your way of thinking, in the way that you do Catholics?
Seeing that you have been here very long you are certainly no expert on my posting habits. But a minimal search on your part will uncover spirited conversations with my dear Baptist, Methodist and various other brethren and sisters.
I'd love to see you and ES have a little talk about which day is the Sabbath, whether Easter is a feast of God or a feast of Satan, why there are no more dinosaurs around, whether sex-tape of unmarried people are wrong or A-OK...How many years Jesus was on earth, whether fish is kosher...Oh, you guys have lot to talk about.
Matters not, since these are not items true (classical) Protestants lose sleep over. Stop trying to create controversy where there is none.
Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ.
Those other things listed can fall into the *disputable matters* category, that Paul discussed in Romans 14.
I do not demand that everyone agree lockstep with all the theological details I adhere to. There is legitimate leeway for disagreement on issues not related to salvation.
Part of it is recognition that people are at different places in their walk with God. If their theology needs to be straightened out, yes, there is a place for pointing it out but ultimately, it is GOD’S responsibility and He will take care of it in HIS time.
I don’t need to go beating someone over the head to force compliance to a statement of faith that I agree with.
There simply may be other issues in their lives that need more attention by the Holy Spirit than whether they agree about what day of the week to worship on or whether someone should eat kosher or not.
The Catholic church certainly is in no position to point fingers about differing opinions on theological matters. What with the syncretism that exists in so many third world countries, where local religions, witchcraft, and voodoo are blended with Catholicism and the Church doesn’t do anything about it, it’s hypocritical for Catholics to point fingers about theological differences.
They seem pretty intent on cleaning up everybody else’s house and not their own.
Yeah! By their own admission they testify that scripture is infallible and that infallible scripture testifies against them or anyone being ifallible other than God.
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.