Ya think? : )
Posted on 01/12/2003 2:44:07 PM PST by Remedy
That is so true; in much the same way that it is impossible to be physically strong if you don't eat, to draw a parallel. There has been a trememdous change in many Catholic churches though. I am Episcopalian, but have worked closely with many Catholics in Bible studies and various ministries and these were very spiritual and Biblically grounded folks. The same situation exists throughout much of the Episcopal church. You have those who are devoted to Christ, read their Bibles and "study to show themselves approved unto God," and those whose idea of being good Episcopalians or good Catholics is going to church, paying the "pew rent" and being members in good standing of the "right" groups within the church. I have often heard it said that the Catholic church was the "whore of Babylon" but I never believed that. I believe that it is rather those of ANY denomination who subscribe to a brand of "churchianity" to the exclusion of true faith in Christ.
Hehehe....isn't it neat how FReepers converge in so many ways. We are definitely a little out of the ordinary I would say.
Ya think? : )
I really have no idea why the Catholic Church doesn't promote more Bible reading. I like reading the Bible (and I'm Catholic)
Ironically, this is true even if the atheists are right.
Some day ALL will know the truth.
OH MY GOD!
"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God...and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." (John 1:1-2, 14)
Christ has always been, even before the world was made and because God anticipated the choice that man would make to turn from Him, He made provision for his redemption. The faithful under the old covenant did not experience Him in the same way, but they believed in God's promises. God spoke to His people throughout time and those who believed trusted His way. Job, the oldest book in the Bible, was not written in Job's time. For many generations, people did not have the written Word and yet God spoke to them. He gave them what they needed upon which to base their faith. In that context, this statement of Job's is quite profound and revealing:
"I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth." (Job 19:25)
Neither did Abraham have the benefit of the written Scriptures and yet when God told him that he would have a son in his old age with his wife well past the age of child-bearing the scripture says that
"he believed God and He counted it to him as righteousness." (Genesis 15:6)
"For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness..." (Romans 10:10)
Later when God asked Abraham to take his only son, the son of that promise, and offer him up as a sacrifice, he obeyed. I expect that on his way to the mountain that God had showed him that he agonized over the testing of his faith as any parent would, and yet deep in the heart of Abraham he knew that the God who had fulfilled His promise in the birth of Isaac had also promised that He would make of Isaac a great nation through which all the nations of the earth would be blessed (the promise of the coming of Christ), a promise which could not be fulfilled if Isaac were dead. So Abraham went forth to do God's will having faith that God was good for His word and would do something even if it meant raising Isaac form the dead.
Though the King James version is not the best translation from the original in many instances, there is one verse here where it is absolutely right. When Isaac questioned his father of the whereabouts of the lamb for the burnt offering, Abraham said:
"...God will provide himself a lamb..." (Genesis 22:8a)
David also recognized God's hand of deliverance:
"For great [is] thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell." (psalm 86:13)
I think this is one place the Catholics have it right (insofar as Catholic doctrine is different than much of protestant doctrine). In the writings of Dante and C.S. Lewis I see this picture of hell as various "levels", not all of which are equal. Dante paints the upper levels of hell as being almost carefree, albeit still separated from God. The writings of the Old Testament are filled with promise and hope of redemption and some level of recognition of the savior "slain before the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8b). When Christ was crucified he descended to the place of the dead and released those who had died in faith. On the day of Pentecost when Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke of the fulfillment of the prophecies in the death and resurrection of Christ he quoted these words of David:
"I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." (Acts 2:25-27)
Finally, Christ Himself speaks to John in Revelation 1:18 saying:
"I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."
It is reasonable to draw from these verses, and many others, that part of Jesus' work of the cross was to descend to the dead and release those whose faith had been their righteousness.
Here is something to think about. Now mind you, I am not offering this as a theological doctrine, but merely as a "what if".
As I mentioned in a previous post, there were many generations of people who did not have the benefit of the written scriptures, yet God spoke to them. This was before the time of the Israelites as the chosen people. So why did God choose Israel? Was it because there was something special about them or because God only wanted certain people to be saved? Of course not. Maybe the only thing that made them special was that some of them were listening and nobody else was and because of that God set them apart and fulfilled His Word through them.In that respect it might even be said that many other peoples had rejected Christ even before the birth of Jesus.
Don't like that? Here's another more widely held view, though I don't think it is mutually exclusive. He taught us to go into all the world and preach the gospel, the great comission, and Christians have been doing exactly that since the beginning. That makes US His messengers and there is virtually no place in the world untouched by the gospel except by choice. Do I believe that someone is condemned to hell who lives under a tyrannical ruler but seeks the truth? No I don't, because God says that those who seek Him will find Him if they search for Him with all their heart. (Jer. 29:13) That's the key. There is a part of all of us that knows our Creator and we can either seek Him and His truth in which case He will reveal Himself in some way or through someone, or we can turn away from Him and seek our own way, continuing to follow the path of original sin by trying to be god of our own lives.
Absolutely! And for those whose hearts and minds are open there may be the added benefit of seeing these liberal fools as the agents of Satan that they are.
That is making the assumption that such a person recognizes that he is condemned and needs salvation. Many are blinded by pride or by false teaching. Look at how our own society has been infected by humanism/socialism/liberalism; all deny the true God by their very nature.
Anyway, the libs have recently begun scoffing at the Jews. (Of course, Lieberman will still ride high. After all, he is a Jew--but an excommunicated one!)
If there were a lifetime achievement award for sucking, Phil Donahue would get my vote. As the father of the daytime talk show, Phil Donahue is the Marco Polo of trash TV and the reason that modern presidential elections are won by the candidate who causes the most autoerotic secretions by women watching Oprah. It was Phil Donahue who birthed a television format where one day his audience could watch an abortion and the next day stick a dollar in the crotch of a Chippendale dancer. In its 29-year-run (1967-1996), there were nearly 7,000 Phil Donahue shows. Shows that brought to the surface a subclass of human existence so vile and ignorant that it should have been left unnoticed, free to rot away in oblivion. But Phil Donahue needed ratings. Phil Donahue had an agenda. An agenda so radically leftwing that it made Thomas Eagleton look sane in comparison.I couldn't have said it better Nathan, Boom Boom sucks bigtime.Since 1996, Donahue has mercifully been removed from the scene, overwhelmed by the spin-off monsters he created. Thanks to Phil Donahue, the likes of Rosie, Springer, Jones, and Oprah pollute our airwaves with their mindless dribble. So I am amused and repulsed at the news that Phil is set to step back in front of the camera to remove any doubt—if some existed—that he is an asinine, conceited, obnoxious mass of human tissue. To the unaware or uninitiated Phil Donahue may come across as an earnest liberal who is confident in his beliefs. But there is a fine line between being confident and obnoxious, and Phil Donahue has been on the wrong side of that line for a long time.
How liberal is Donahue? He once said, "I don't know if there's an issue the ACLU takes I disagree with." Like most liberals, Donahue touts tolerance while parading his intolerance before the world. Complaining of Catholicism, Donahue charged, "The Church has always thrived on ignorance and oppression." One would think he was applying for a position at Bob Jones University. I'm surprised he didn't accuse the Church of being a cult...oh, that's right, he did accuse it of being a cult. Anyway, if any institution or ideology can be accused of thriving on ignorance and oppression it is the institutional ideology of Phil Donahue's style of liberalism.
Of the military, Phil opines, "Supporting the military ought to mean supporting our uniform personnel, improving their housing and their lifestyles...instead of buying all these things that go boom, that make profits for Fortune 500 companies."
Isn't the purpose of the military to defend us? What better way to do that than by blowing up shit? In a Phil Donahue military our bombers will drop flower petals and our missiles will be de-targeted from those non-existent threats of China, North Korea, and Iraq and aimed at the real threat to America; the Fortune 500 companies. And while you're at it, Phil, how about retargeting some of those big-boom missiles toward the homes of daytime talk show hosts.
The 'things that go boom' phrase is classic Donahue. He has been using that line for decades and it exposes his outright hostility to all things military. In a 1988 exchange with Pat Buchanan, Phil said, "You and the Reagan ideologues have spent us into oblivion—our children are going to have to pay this bill—and you step forward, like some religious figure saying, 'more bombs, more bullets’." Phil, I cannot believe that out of 100,000 sperm, you were the quickest. As is so often the case, you didn't have a clue then as to what you were talking about, and I’m certain your new show will prove you don't have a clue now. You are living proof that if an imbecile is given a microphone and put in front of a camera, someone somewhere will take them seriously.
Need a clue as to how close to the insane asylum Phil Donahue is? Phil said of Ralph Nader, "I believe he is America's No. 1 private citizen of the 20th century." Okay, Phil, so real heroes like the Wright Brothers, Jonas Salk, Albert Einstein and Edwin Hubble all take a back seat to the guy who became a millionaire destroying the Corvair. These men were true geniuses who through their work changed the entire course of history for the betterment of mankind. And Ralph Nader? If Nader and Donahue had been spreading their brand of socialism in the early 20th century they would have attacked the Wright Brother's machine as too dangerous to fly, the polio vaccine as too risky to use, Hubble's research as a waste of money better spent on a single-payer health care system, and the many accomplishments of Albert Einstein would have been ignored as Donahue attacked him for being infatuated with things that go boom.
I believe that you, Phil Donahue, bear a great deal of responsibility for the tawdriness of television talk shows, the sensationalism of the evening news, the coarsening of our culture, and the erosion of standards of decency in television programming. So in my book, that puts you damn near the bottom on the list of America's private citizens of the 20th century. Down there with Ralph Nader, Leopold and Lobe, and the guy who decided the Brady Bunch Variety Show should see the light of day. I long for the day your head goes boom.
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.