Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT 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 |
Absolutely! One of the things that I've always appreciated about Orthodoxy is the emphasis that is placed on learning your theology from the Liturgical prayers and hymns. They really are the "work of the people," and a much better way to learn about the faith than theological texts that are often dry. The hymns can teach better the truths of the heart. Christ Bless.
Please don’t sell yourself short. Your replies have always been well thought out and seem to be made in a good spirit, even though I disagree with most of the conclusions you reach. ;^)
The Council of Jerusalem was held before Paul wrote Galatians. "C of J" was held in 50 AD and Galatians was written after that, 54 or 55 AD. I believe Galatians referred to the N. Galatia due to IMO, overwhelming evidence and the fact that the Church has held to this date since it was written. Recently, it has been asserted that Galatians was written to the S. Galatians which would put the letter slightly before the "C of J" - but that has not been proved nor widely accepted and until it is, I'll keep to the original date.
That is true, but the event that Paul relates to the Galatians happened in Antioch:
Galatians 2:11
[11] But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
The event is also recorded in Acts 15:1-2 which took place when they were in Antioch (Acts 14:26-27). As a matter of fact it was that episode that precipitated the Jerusalem Council.
The Greek word "sunupokrinomai" in Galatians 2:13 is translated in various English editions as "acting hypocritically," "acted insincerely," and "dissembled". In my Bible (NAB), it states: And the rest of the Jews [also] acted hypocritically along with him, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy". I don't know if we want to argue about which Bible is correct? I think our "religious glasses" might color our judgement a bit and have us lean to the word which best defends our belief in what the passage means. I guess to you, I am playing down the meaning of the passage as I don't believe Peter was acting deceptively - not sure where to go with this.
I’m with you. It is bad when any Christian acts hypocritically, as we all do at times. The only reason I think we point out Peter’s is because he is the alleged first Pope. That’s probably not fair to Peter, despite all of his faults, he was the only Apostle to walk on the water with Christ. I am willing to let that point go.
They were trying to keep a sacred religious tradition that (in their jewish belief) declared them the chosen of God. The Torah had a pretty long history and up to this point, the apostles still conformed to Jewish law - and they knew they were saved - as did Jesus conform to Mosaic Law - had the apostles came out right away and forbid circumcision, etc., the Jews would have rejected Jesus as Savior directly. Adhering to Mosaic Law only became a problem when the Gentiles were starting to hear the Gospel and the Jewish Christians were insisting that the Gentiles obey Mosaic Law. I read this letter and (along with the history of Peter's stand at the Council of Jerusalem and his baptism of Cornelius' household) as Peter and Paul did not differ in their opinion of Mosaic Law, just their actions - Paul is more decisive and seized a perfect moment and Peter was possibly more concerned with offending others... I also believe that the action to stop Mosaic Law was to ensure the oneness of the new Church - the Gentiles would never submit to circumcision and it was just easier to stop the entire practice and preach that salvation cannot be obtained through or with Mosaic Law. I don't know any Christian that thinks they have to add to the completeness of Christ's salvation? Not sure what you are talking about.
I don’t know if I agree with your take on the Apostles’ views on the Mosaic Law. I will have to mull it over some more.
There are plenty of Christians that believe they have to add something to the Salvation that is complete in Christ. If you are involved in keeping the Law in order for you to not lose your Salvation, then you are adding to Christ’s work. If you believe that it is Christ that initially provides the Salvation, but it is kept, or maintained, by works then you have a works-salvation. It is based on you and not Christ.
Badly worded on my part, sorry! I believe that there are laws to be obeyed in order keep salvation and not lose it through inaction or complacency or succumbing to our unfortunate propensity to sin - they are the 10 Commandments.
The 10 Commandments are more than what is listed in Exodus 20. I will ping angelo on this post to see if he can add anything to this. All the laws given in the five books of Moses are amplifications on what it meant to keep the 10 Commandments. If you are going to try to keep the Commandments, then you are bound to keep everything that God made a part of them.
I agree, the 7 Sacraments that I believe in have, in and of themselves, no saving action since Christ died to save us. However, they are the means of blessings as they help keep us on the path to God. More fully, "His solemn oath by which the Christian community becomes the sons and daughters of God, is expressed in seven specific sacramental oaths. These sacred oaths, the sacraments, are the means by which God binds human beings to the Divine Family". I know, I know, flame me! But this is what I believe.
No flames here. You believe what you believe. What happens if YOU don’t keep the Sacraments? What happens if YOU don’t attend Mass, what happens if YOU don’t go to confession, what happens if YOU don’t partake of the Eucharist, what happens if YOU don’t get baptized, etc.? If your Salvation is dependent upon YOU performing these actions, then your Salvation is dependent upon YOU. The Salvation that I believe in is dependent upon Christ alone.
Exactly. I would say that Paul was doing just that in the latter part of Galatians. He was telling them to keep the 10 Commandments. He doesn't say it is a good idea to keep them, he says straight out that we must keep them. If they were not necessary, why mention them at all?
Where does Paul say that we must keep the 10 Commandments in order to go to Heaven? I don’t think you can find it, because it is not there.
That certainly is true except I think following the law is more than beneficial. God gave us a concience and free will for some reason... if we do not exercise it/them according to his will, I believe we can lose salvation.
Again, that makes Salvation dependent upon YOU, and YOUR actions. Jesus provided a better Salvation than that.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. (Rom 1:18-23)
When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (Rom 2:1-16
Thanks for the Scriptures. I think you will find that this passage reinforces the fact that everyone will be without excuse when they come before the Judgement Seat. They won’t be able to tell God that they didn’t know those things they were doing were wrong, because the Law was written in their hearts so that they really did know those sins were wrong.
I'm tired!
I appreciate the time it took you to compose that response. If you decide to respond to this one, please feel free to take your time. I’ll try not to pester you. ;^)
I saw this in a different post of yours. Please allow me to respond.
No Creed or set of beliefs, no nuthin! I don't even know what the heck I'm debating sometimes because I don't understand the faith of the person I'm debating!
Check out my #29627. That creed from 1120 A.D. pretty much sums up what I believe and what the two churches that I have been a member of believe. BTW, you can consider me an IFBB along with Becky and Mack.
-ksen
I don't mean to sound like a smart-aleck, BUT ;^), why isn't the Bible emphasized as THE place to learn your Theology?
-ksen
Becky
BigMack
We believe in one God, the Father, eternally existing, who is a Spirit, a personal Being of supreme intelligence, knowledge, love, justice, power and authority. He, through Jesus Christ, is the Creator of the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. He is the Source of life and the One for whom human life exists. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, who is the Word and has eternally existed. We believe that He is the Messiah, the Christ, the divine Son of the living God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born in the human flesh of the virgin Mary. We believe that it is by Him that God created all things and that without Him was not anything made that was made. We believe in the Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of God and of Christ Jesus. The Holy Spirit is the power of God and the Spirit of life eternal.
Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation
Heard of them, but don't know much about them.
Either that or since I was provoked into calling someone an idiot they don't wanna play anymore. :-)
-ksen
They've got a database of Shoah survivors that's absolutely amazing. You will be able to isolate on a survivor and watch an interview of the survivor along with old photos and photos of their current extended family. They've got close to 100,000 Shoah survivors in the database.
Actually they've got 50,000 but their goal is a hundred thousand before they all die off.
You noticed that too? When it comes to revising history, Big Brother's got nothing on the RCC.
-ksen
Because I was responding to trad_anglican within the context of his question, and was thinking of Scripture as a given. My apologies. When we try to express our thoughts on what the Gospel and the Scripture means, we often either quote theologians of our respective communities or engage in traditional theology ourselves by applying our logic and reason in an attempt to describe what Scripture is telling us.
I believe that in general the "understanding of the heart," as opposed to the "understanding of the mind," is thus given short shrift. While God may use our mind, He dwells in our hearts. I believe the less rational language of poetry and hymn and prayer can thus often express deeper truths about God's ways than logical analysis. This is one of the main problems I have with "strict textual analysis" of Scripture - and of poetry as well. It can often treat the subject of examination like a frog in a biology experiment - "let's tie it down and cut it open to see if we can figure what makes it live."
One final thought. For those familiar with them, which includes trad_anglican and myself, it is common knowledge that the hymns and Liturgical prayers of our Churches are often composed entirely of passages from Scripture. Thus we can take as a given Scripture's preeminent place when speaking of such things. Thanks for the question! :-)
Christ Bless.
What's the use in the Governments having Laws if the Priests or the Church think they are above them? The RCC put itself above the laws of the civil authorities - the which no NT figure ever did. It is a unique happenstance. Shall we say that Satanists shall not be subject to civil authorities because they have laws themselves and want to self govern them. I don't think so. As I said a long time ago, this issue stems from the fraud of the decretals and a Church wanting to be above the law. It's time that the RCC submitted to the law like everyone else.
Yawn! Wake me up if something really changes.
I hadn't thought about either the issue of the Body of Christ in the Upper Room not being the Glorified Body, or of the Last Supper not being the first Eucharist because Christ's work was not yet finished. I'm not sure either really applies, but I'll have to spend more time with the question. Certainly, God is not bound by the flow of linear time. I'm reminded of the prefiguring of the Eucharist in the feeding of the multitudes.I thought about this over the weekend, and concluded that there has to be numerical identity between the Eucharist and the body of Christ, simply because the Eucharist is literally (really) the body of Christ. Thus, to the best of my knowledge, the Eucharist of the last supper was not the glorified body of Christ. My conclusion was informed by an example from Aquinas that Arthur McGowan posted to me last year -- that if the Apostles had celebrated the Eucharist on Holy Saturday, it would not have contained Christ's human soul, only his body, blood and divinity.
-ksen
Just curious. This quote was pre-Roman/Orthodox split. So which catholic "big C" church was St. Ignatius of Antioch reffering to?
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.