Posted on 03/17/2016 7:49:46 AM PDT by ebb tide
All right, I’ve been quietly reading to this point, but now I must speak.
Do you have ANY understanding of the doctrine of justification outside of the bounds of the RCC? There is NO presumption here for the person who believes that CHRIST’S sacrifice that we celebrate this coming Friday provided us the garment for the wedding feast (eternal life). The commenter never stated he/she had never sinned. Before you attack me for the same, let me say, along with St. Paul that I am the CHIEF OF SINNERS; it’s just that Christ’s blood and God’s grace to me are sufficient to cover my sins.
When I stand at judgment and Satan (the Accuser) accuses me before the Throne of Almighty God, Jesus will step forward and speak (since He is the Word) on my behalf and my sins, “though they be as scarlet, shall be white as snow.” The verdict will be NOT GUILTY on the basis of Jesus’ sacrifice for me and ALL other believers.
Because of Christ’s sacrifice, the coming of the Holy Spirit that I received through Baptism, the forgiveness of sins I receive each week in the Lord’s Supper, I KNOW that I will be in heaven, provided I don’t walk away from Christ’s promises.
How sad to be so completely uncertain of your fate, and how completely unnecessary.
yeah, right, up until Trent they just guessed their way through....sheesh.
try real hard to name someone else who led more people away from Christ's church than did Luther....
Your error is in conflating The Ekklesia with the man-made-by-power-hungry religious leaders Church in Rome.
“try real hard to name someone else who led more people away from Christ’s church than did Luther.... “
Blessed Father Luther opened the door to the Gospel for hundreds of millions.
So very many of your “popes” have stood in the way of the truth.
Blessed Father Luther opened the door to the Gospel for hundreds of millions.
So very many of your “popes” have stood in the way of the truth.
Yep
Nonsense...no Pope ever stood in the way of the TRUTH...but some certainly did stand in the way of false writings and biblical versions at certain times in history. The truth was ALWAYS there but because most people couldn't read, it was unavailable to many. Before the printing press, books, including Bibles, were EXTRAORDINARILY expensive because they were hand written masterpieces. They were available to libraries, royalty, and the very rich. The printing press put the Bible within reach of almost everyone....Luther didn't, Gutenberg did.
We’ll never know will we. However, we do it was at Trent that the rcc officially proclaimed the contents of it’s Bible.
Why don’t you get back to your original claim about Luther sending people to hell.
I’m still waiting for any facts to support that. Whatcha got terycarl?
I said it was fact free. It was. Do you want to backfill some facts now?
But that would require an objective examination of the words, attitudes and actions toward the Jews by both Luther, popes and Rome, but it convenient for myopic RC rage against Protestantism to personify the latter in the person of Luther, and construe him in the worse possible light. To objectively examine both the words, attitudes and actions toward the Jews by both Luther, popes and Rome must include examining the merit of the charges against Jews, and yet what the Christian response should be, which both Luther and Rome acted contrary to.
And in so doing one must determine whether the charge would be Anti-Semitism or Anti-Judaism, meaning whether the attitude toward the Jews was due to their beliefs and behavior that flowed from it, or whether it was based on race.
Would criticizing the Jews for strongly opposing gospel preaching and attributing their suffering to being Divine judgment be antisemitism?
Should characterizing a race as being overall gluttons and liars be considered sinful racism?
The same holds true for racism today. Is opposition to those of Middle Easter ethnicity or blacks moving into an area due to belief in white (or Latino) supremacy, or due to what their culture typically manifests? I myself am a minority where I live, and see liberal conceited "yuppies" (who overall want pets rather than kids) as more of a threat to the mostly working, family-orientated community with its many Christians, but not because of race. Protestantism
In addition, in order for the hypocritical anti-Luther tirade to have much polemical value against Protestantism as a whole, not only must it be shown that such is not hypocritical in the light of papal and RC attitudes and actions, but Protestantism looks to him as a pope, or that the faults of a founder impugn or invalidate any claims to the validity of any of his distinctive teaching.
That Luther was guilty of an inexcusable attitude words and counsel against Jews is admitted by many evangelicals, such as Michael Brown, even though we do not hold the same, not operate under the papal model, and are the strongest supported of the Jews and their state. I believe a special love for the Jewish people, who are yet beloved for their father's sake, is a normal mark of regeneration.
But certain self-righteous RCs seem to demand we treat Luther as a Hitler and never liken Rome's attitude and actions toward the Jews to that of Luther, or or apologize for it, even though unlike us, their one basic duty is to simply follow their pastors.
The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lamp posts that light the path.”
– or –
“The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts.”
St. John Chrysostom attributed.1
“I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish.”
St. John Chrysostom, Extract from St. John Chrysostom, Homily III on Acts 1:12.2
“The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
St. Athanasius, Council of Nicaea, AD 325 attributed.3
“The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”
Saint John Eudes, attributed.4
the Orthodox church is fully Catholic.
Are you saying the pope is the head of the Greek Orthodox Church?
The Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic church, from which the Orthodox church is in schism....they have a leader but both Roman and Orthodox branches are fully Catholic. When the reunion takes place, probably fairly soon, the Pope will AGAIN be the head of all Catholics, Eastern and Western.
Oh come on now. Greek Orthodox consider the five cities as equals: Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople (Istanbul), Alexandria, and Rome. They even call the head man at Alexandria a "pope", where the term originated (it didn't originate in Rome). Are you saying that the Greek Orthodox Church is going to give up their belief in Christ being head of the Church and take up Rome's nutty popes?
Now believe it or not, I think it is possible when the AntiChrist comes it is possible that the other 4 cities will worship the pope of Rome as Christ, but this will be Satan himself and the very latter days, fulfilling Revelation, but I cant see the Greek Orthodox Church propping up ole Frank over Jesus. lol
The Roman church, like the Eastern church, believe that Christ is he head of the church. The Patriarch and the Pope are merely leaders of their respective groups. The Pope is considered the Vicar of Christ, that is, the titular head of CHRISTIANITY on Earth....Christ is certainly in charge, but by naming Peter as the titular head, ans declaring that what he bound on Earth would be bound in Heaven and what he loosed on Earth would be loosed in Heaven, He gave the Pope the authority to sort of act in His behalf as the head of the church.
It must be really convenient to be a Catholic, just believe in things that make no sense and there is no evidence for.
The Greek Orthodox has never been part of the RCC and up to now have had no desire to worship anybody but Christ as Christ.
What Christ referred to as the rock was obeying the first commandment of putting God first as Peter said, and helping others to see that. If anyone does that the gates of hell cannot prevail against them because God will always be with them. Any church organization can be toppled, as we saw with Rome itself, the rock is not the organization. The RCC has now adopted Obama's agenda and is headed to destruction, to be burned with fire, as the bible says. That is certainly not the rock.
Peter had no primacy with the apostles. John was the apostle Jesus loved. Peter was possessed by Satan when he cut the ear and had to be exorcised by Christ. John was the apostle who received the great honer of recording Jesus' Revelation, not the bishop of Rome. John stood with Jesus at the cross, Peter fled and denied Christ thrice. John became the son of Mary at the cross. Peter was the most talkative of the apostles, sure, but the leader?...no. Remember in school the most talkative kids usually weren't the best students. Peter was a great man, sure, Jesus chose him as one of the twelve. No apostle had primacy though over the other apostles, not even John, and certainly not Peter.
Peter was never in Rome anyway. An impostor recorded by Eusebius was in Rome pretending to be Peter, his name was Simon Magus. Rome was Paul's mission, not Peter's. Peter died of old age as Jesus said he would, in Jerusalem. His ossuary was found there in the 1950s.
Sure they were, for about 1,100 years...that's why they call it a schism and not a revolution an in Protestant. The rest of your post is interesting and certainly proves that you have a vivid imagination....
You're the one with the imagination. The schism was in communion only and went on the whole time the Roman Catholic Church came into being until the schism was finalized in 1054. The RCC never owned or ran the Greek Orthodox Church, and the Greek Orthodox certainly have never used any Roman Catholic bible. Between the formation of the Roman Catholic Church and 1054, bishops of Rome and popes kept claiming they had power over the earth and the other churches, and the other churches said "no you don't". They were never united. Eastern Orthodox then never even recognized Peter as Rome's first pope. They were right about that!
The rest of your post is interesting and certainly proves that you have a vivid imagination....
Renowned Catholic archaeologist Milik confirmed Peter's ossuary in Jerusalem. The rest is biblical.
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.