Posted on 10/21/2006 4:52:03 AM PDT by NYer
Like I said....you must have been talking to yourself. I sure don't see what it is you are referring to. I do know, from rereading those posts that you were becoming quite agitated. But most Romans do this when they can find no scripture to back up their false doctrine.
Because we are proud and full of joy to be part of the Church that Jesus established. And we also want others to convert to His Church and be ONE with us like He commanded.
Gathering people into His Church is being EXTREMELY focused on Jesus.
Any heretic can claim to have the Holy Spirit. (And throughout Church history, heretics have claimed to have the Holy Spirit.) The gnosticism that the Church has always condemened as heretical disconnects form and matter, separating "word from witness", and grace from sacrament. In this way gnosticism denies the relation between Apostolic succession and authentic ordination. However, the one ordaining cannot give what he does not have. We know that the Apostles had the authority from Christ, and so we know that those ordained by the Apostles (and those in sacramental succession from the Apostles) have this authority. But those who do not have ordination from the Apostles, what authority do they have to tell us what the Gospel is, what the contents of the NT are, and what the proper interpretation of the Scriptures is? How do we know who has the Spirit? Gnostics claim that we know by a 'burning in our bosom', an entirely subjective experience. Another form of gnosticism claims to test the spirits by comparing a claim to the Scriptures. But this form of gnosticism presumes that it already knows the canon of Scripture, the authoritative interpretation of Scriptures [even though there are 20,000+ Protestant sects], and that there is no living Magesterium. So this form of gnosticism just pushes the subjectivism back a step, to the determination of canon and interpretation. It plucks the canon out of ahistorical thin air, ripping it from the hands of the Apostles and bishops by whose authority it was established and accepted.
The "one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church", has always rejected gnosticism. She determines who has the Spirit by way of succession. (cf. 1 John 4:6). The NT has authority in virtue of the authority of those who wrote it, approved it, and ratified it. Protestantism has no way to determine the NT canon. Each Protestant can determine for himself which texts belong to the NT. Don't like a book in the NT? Rip it out. Wish to add Chicken Soup for the Soul?, just stick it in. Without a living Magesterium, you are your own authority. You get to determine for yourself not only the interpretation of Scripture, but the very texts of Scripture. Just as you can make your own customized teddy bear, or Mini-Cooper, if you are a Protestant, you can make your own customized Bible. Why not? Who is to say what the canon is? You are not under the authority of all those fourth and fifth century bishops, so why do you follow them with respect to the NT canon? You are not under the authority of Luther and Calvin, so they don't determine for you what the canon must be. BUILD YOUR OWN CANON. Just as you can find 'Build your own Bear' stores in the mall, it is merely intellectual inertia and lack of creativity that we have yet to see Protestants open "Build your own Bible" stores in the malls.
-A8
Where's that in the Bible? Are you an ordained bishop?
How so?
I am not a bishop; I'm just telling you what the bishops say. I have no ecclesial authority. But the bishops do. If you think I am misleading you regarding what the bishops teach, feel free to ask the bishops, or to show me where what I am saying differs from the teaching of the bishops.
-A8
Very true. We are most fortunate to be under the authority of Scripture, by the grace of God alone.
"...the restoration of the church is the work of God, and no more depends on the hopes and opinions of men, than the resurrection of the dead, or any other miracle of that description. Here, therefore, we are not to wait for facility of action, either from the will of men, or the temper of the times, but must rush forward through the midst of despair. It is the will of our Master that his gospel be preached. Let us obey his command, and follow whithersoever he calls. What the success will be it is not ours to inquire. Our only duty is to wish for what is best, and beseech it of the Lord in prayer; to strive with all zeal, solicitude, and diligence, to bring about the desired result, and, at the same time, to submit with patience to whatever that result may be." -- John Calvin
I am a member of the Church, just not the one you attend. Again, why all the focus on affiliation rather than Jesus?
According to whose interpretation? That of the Lutherans, Presbyterians, Reformed, Episcopal, Baptist, Pietsts, Menonites, Shakers, Puritans, Amish, Charismatics, Methodist, Assemblies of God, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Four Square, Christ of Christ, Unitarian, etc. etc.???
They all claim to be under the authority of Scripture, but they all disagree with each other. So who is really under the authority of Scripture?
-a8
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Christ did leave us a book.
St. Peter was the chosen one of God to take the gospel to the Gentiles.
"And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God MADE CHOICE among us, that by MY mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Did God change His mind? I think not. St. Peter was above St. Paul in authority in the Church and sent St. Paul out as a helper to spread this message.
"Go thy way, for he [Paul] is a chosen vessel unto me, to BEAR MY NAME BEFORE THE GENTILES, and Kings, and the children of Israel".
What makes him MORE chosen than St. Peter or any of the other Apostles that spread and bore His name before Gentiles and the children of Israel?
Focusing on the identity of the Body of Christ is not mutually exclusive with focusing on Jesus. (The Church is the Body of Christ.) You seem to talk as if Church unity does not matter to Christ. Read Christ's high priestly prayer in John 17.
-A8
I gave you an answer.
I'm not unaware of John 1:1. But I'm still not understanding you. It sounds like you are saying either that Christ Himself wrote the NT, or that Christ (i.e. the Word) did not ascend into heaven. Are you saying either of those, or are you saying something else?
-A8
Well, some must be because God tells us He will not lose any of His sheep and that He will bring them safely home.
Men are known by their fruits. I prefer the fruit of the Reformed faith which, to me, is most faithful to Scripture and most clearly articulates God's revelation of Himself and reassures us most mercifully of our acquittal before God by the finished work of Jesus Christ upon the cross.
Well, speaking of false doctrines, you've called the Trinity a heresy in other threads. Anyone who would call the Trinity a heresy CAN'T possibly believe that Jesus is God.
Well I'm not a member of the catholic church but I am a member of his church. Luke 17:20. The Kingdom of God is within you.
Christ is the NT.
Or Luke 1:1
Those first two words capture the essence of Protestantism: "I prefer".
You go where the 'leaders' believe and teach what is most faithful to what you think Scripture says.
You are your own authority. If you didn't agree with the Reformed folks, you could just go on down the street to the Anabaptists, or up the street to the Lutherans, or just start your own church in your living room. In this way, Protestantism is Church of Self.
-A8
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.