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 |
I have made the statement that she is not, as the implication of your statements would infer, the creator of God. And I stated that whether you intend to state her as the creator of God or not. I'm not letting such a blasphemous inferrance hang out there in the wind for others to abuse. If you have a problem with that, tough!
Well then. You seem to be reserving the right to protest against formulations of doctrine which could be easily misunderstood by the ignorant. I'm glad you feel that way.
I'm sure you are also against such simplistic formulations as "We are saved by faith alone," as the "blasphemous inference" from that statement is that we need only profess a belief and need not actually make any changes in our lives. Just believe.
SD
You, sir, are a liar. Without proof I will no longer reply to these kinds of he said she said bs criticisms. Good day.
Neither should SD define Sola Scriptura on his own terms and then knock it down, (I don't believe it was you I took issue with) yet he did, not once but time after time.
Maybe I was guilty of making less than true statements about it, on the road to understanding what the others here actually believe. And then I reached what I thought was my summit. I actually gave an example of how I thought Sola Scriptra would actually be put into practice by an individual believer. Many of the folks here thought I got it "right" or "mostly right," that is that I was no longer engaging in an unfair caricature. You simply refused to engage me on the point.
SD
Becky
Hey, fellas, that guy Willhelm's book had its imprimatur yanked . That is definitely NOT the book to consult to learn authentic Catholic teaching .
LOL - fell out of favor did he? LOL. Documentation and relevance? His statements are pretty well in line with what SD was arguing. So, Is SD now not sanctioned? Sorry - too stinking funny for me.. rofl
Ha ha ha. Look, I was the one who originally told you that I wouldn't trust the guys work. Where you get off equating what I said with his heresy is beyond me.
SD
I am. That time off did me good. By the way, I'm sorry for jumpin' all over ya last week.
1) Where do you see a 'suffering messiah' indicated in this passage? It says the serpent will strike at his heel, not that he would suffer as a result, or that the strike would even hit him. I think you're reading into this passage something that isn't there.
2) "Read right out of the bible"? No, we still have the passage in our scriptures. I'll remind you for the nth time that the targums are a translation of the Hebrew scripture into Aramaic, not a commentary on scripture. I don't see how your statement here is relevent.
3) I don't think the reason for this passage not being considered messianic has anything to do with the reasons you suggest. If anything, the most plausible explanation to me is that the passage is so vague. If you look at the other messianic passages I listed, it is very clear that they are talking about a messianic figure in a messianic time. I don't think Genesis 3:15 adds anything that the other passages don't already state. Vagueness and redundancy are enough to keep it off the list, IMHO.
I couldn't believe the vikings this week. They look tougher on the sidelines fighting with each other.
The Church has a very grueling process it goes through when candidates for sainthood are proposed. If someone is listed as an official saint then you can be sure that every aspect of that person's life (including writings and behavior) has been picked through with a fine-toothed comb. By declaring sainthood the Church is stating that the person's life was admirable and worthy of emulation and that there is no evidence of sin in that person's life.
You have heard of the term "Devil's Advocate" right? This is an actual position, or role, played by people in the Vatican's "saint making" department. When a person is presented to be made a saint, it is the responsibility of the Devil's advocate to find the sin, find the reasons why so and so is not a saint.
If after this process is complete a candidate emerges with a clean record we can pretty much be assured of their presence in Heaven. Not to mention the binding and loosing power.
SD
Pretty good Al. Hey, "how 'bout those cowboys"?
Yo Dave. Congrats to the Nittany ones. Steelers/Titans tonight. Should be good.
Dave, I've been pointed to the error, and I missed this in the writing. The intent was metaphor at the time of the writing; but, in haste that is not the way it was constructed. So, I'll withdraw my objection to your critique of the style and readress your attention to the content as intended. Sorry for this. If I'd caught it I would have corrected it then; but, it is seen late, so I offer apology - I had no intention of deciet. But, again, I'm normally firing off replies between my duties when I have a spare moment. Most of them get assembled at a rate of a sentence or two every 10 minutes. Not an excuse, merely providing a little insight.
Now that I've eaten my words on my own use of words. Would you care for some Katsup to go with your unbiblical doctrine, or do you wish to further wallow in the contradictions it poses by way of further futile defense. Admitting you're clergy missed the boat is the first step. After that, large amounts of Coffee and cigarettes go with the sessions (CA) LOL.
And then to Titanites, who pointed out the same error or "backtracking"
When you can type everything you mean when under constant distraction, I'll take that from you. Till then, I'll just accept it as the usual cheap shot from you and move on.
Havoc, your apology is accepted, despite your very poor manners. Usually one shows contrition and doesn't try to heap scorn and abuse upon the ones whose forgiveness you are seeking. I leave this out there as another of example of your sickness.
SD
I'm refreshed too. Got some work done, and spent a busy weekend with the kids. Its nice to see everyone again, though! No problem about last week; we all get a little edgy at times.
No one even got my little joke about the Packers. :o( I said they looked a lot better than the week before against the Vikings. But they had a bye!
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.