'Course, that might be Mack with his Louisville slugger. ;o)
Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
It would have been more precise had I said "The" intent rather than "His" intent.
If I were to move in any direction it would probably be like angelo, to the notion that a God who is One, simply one, makes sense.
Would it be just too hard to admit the bible believers were right when a Damascus type event happens, angelo even said he would set up and re think his faith if something like this happens.
BigMack
If I were struck blind and a voice said, "listen, dumbass, this whole sacramental system is BS. Just read your Bible and have faith" how could I refuse?
SD
Let's say I have milk and cookies. If I drop the cookies on the floor the milk gets spoiled. Likewise, if I spill the milk the cookies grow mold.
Defiling one automatically defiles the other. It must be that somehow they are one and the same.
SD
Were that the case, we would fear the angel of death taking our firstborn. It is a memorial, and a remembrance of the past. In doing so, we form a unity in action with the people of Israel who have observed Passover through the ages. But it is not a unity of time: we do not believe that we are somehow reliving or literally "making-present" the events of the first Passover in Egypt.
If I can't understand the comments, how can I give a rebuttal? So you are on your own today until it gets back to my level of simplicity.
You have all the Catholic intelects out for blood today, all I can do is pray that simple truth trumps over long wordy and high sounding post.
I'll wait till the pact breaks up, and then trie again.
1 Cor 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
(^g^) JH
Hebrews 5:
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
Howdy Becky! It may be spring in Oklahoma, but it hasn't really reached this far north yet. :o(
Boy is that the truth. I was in the Twin Cities over the weekend watching my boys play rugby in a driving snowstorm.
According to whom?
'Course, that might be Mack with his Louisville slugger. ;o)
We just had 39 degrees, wind and rain all weekend. An hour north of here, they had 20 inches of snow!
Honestly, angelo, I would have expected something more substantial from you. When you asked the question, you asked "why do you think." My response is what I think but I believe it is consistent with what the Church has always believed and taught. Would you like me to cite a source? If so, are there particular sources that you would prefer or that you would not accept?
"Listen, you blind dumbass, this whole sacramental system is BS. Just read your Bible and have faith"
Yoohoo. Jesus flesh was not the gift, salvation was. Helloooooo. Anyone home. You've lifted something spiritual, interpreted in carnally and missed the message of the Lord Jesus in the process. We participate in Jesus sacrifice by accepting it as the work of our redemption - we are born again in the doing. The communion is merely a reflection upon that work. To take it unworthily is to be unsaved and eat and drink. This is because it is a statement from the unsaved that Jesus was rightly put to death - it mocks what was done. Moses was denied entry to the promised land and put to death by God for not much more than this sort of rebellious judgmentalism in smacking the stone twice. Is it any wonder that those who partake unworthily might be sick and even die for the same thing.
Gracebeliever has pointed out strong scriptural points. Instead of engaging in philosophical rhetoric, answer the points of scripture. I know you can't because the context of the scriptures he's quoted give your carnal interpretations no quarter. But it will demonstrate your folly for the lurkers.
By the Spirit, brother. Paul had the same teacher the others had. The Spirit of the Lord is the best teacher in the universe and has shown me far more than my fleshly brothers.
You're reading something in here that isn't here. They were not in agreement, that's why Paul went to Jerusalem in the first place and why he spoke to certain of the leaders of the Little Flock in private.
I think we're talking about two different things here.
Then why did the Apostles "loose" themselves from their commission to go into all the world, which they hadn't done as yet, and "bind" themselves to only go to the circumcision? That's because the little flock was still operating under the law program, not the grace program given to Paul to take to the heathern. That's Scriptual, not speculation.
And here, I'm sure of it. You're talking about those being taught by the Apostles while I'm talking about the Apostles themselves. Some of Paul's own flocks were still in the flesh as his own writings bore out. The Catholics of today are Still in the flesh as they are doing the same things Paul was complaining about - putting more emphasis on men than on the word of the Most High. In the case of the Apostles, the devience from teaching was not their doing. In the case of the moderns, the deviance is from the top down. The Apostles settled points between themselves and God by going back to what the Master taught and what the Holy Spirit Highlighted there. You can see this at work in the scriptures.
I guess I believe in bunk then. If you want to operate under the Jewish law system, that's your option and freedom. I choose to live in grace. God says law and grace don't mix. Rom. 4:5,6 and 11:6. I take that as meaning we need to be in one program or the other and not try to blend programs. You're right, God don't sow confusion, man does a good enough job at that with a little help from the Deceiver.
We're not talking about operating under the penalty of the law. But as Paul said, being free of the penalty doesn't make us free to sin at will. If that were the case, all the Apostles wasted a lot of print in warning us to keep ourselves as free from sin as possible - seeking the righteousness of God rather than the ways of the world. Just because you're born again doesn't mean God now thinks it's fine for you to go out and break every commandment and law he set down as things that are displeasing before him - nor does it say it's fine for you to go out and willfully break even one. Being weak is one thing. Willful disobedience is quite another. If God's rules didn't matter anymore, then the warnings against false teachers and false doctrine were a waste of breath and men could just do whatever they pleased - carte blanche, if you will. Don't confuse justification through the law with abiding by the law - they are not one in the same thing. If God defined it as sin, it's sin now as much as it was then. And if the law didn't matter, God would not have promised in latter times to write it on the hearts of His people. What did Jesus say repeatedly in forgiving sin and healing "Go and sin no more." Wow, huh. Get outta here and don't do wrong again. The law tells us a great many things about what God views as sin. Not being under the penalty doesn't mean sin is no longer sin. 'Go and sin no more' is not a lifting of what the definition of sin in it's multiple forms is. The Law is a guide now as much as it was then for helping us to see things that are plainly wrong in God's eyes. God has already ruled on them. So it's not as if we need to go before God and ask if it's sin to be a homo. He didn't free us so we could be as sick as Sodom and as debased as Gamorah. And both history and prophecy yet to be fulfilled address this point.
Who cares what Augustine said about church authority. When you can show Augustine as reliable as the Apostles, I'll give a hoot what Augustine said. You can't do that. And we have scripture that deliniates the authority of offices and of scripture. They don't rise to the level your clergy has raised from whole cloth and the opinions of men.
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.