Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
January 25, 2008
ESV Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
In recent days I have spent time in Lima and Sullana Peru and Mexico City and I have discovered that people by nature are the same. Man has a heart that is inclined to selfishness and idolatry. Sin abounds in the remotest parts of the land because the heart is desperately wicked. Thousands bow before statues of Mary and pray to her hoping for answers. I have seen these people stare hopelessly at Mary icons, Jesus icons, and a host of dead saints who will do nothing for them. I have talked with people who pray to the pope and say that they love him. I talked with one lady who said that she knew that Jesus was the Savior, but she loved the pope. Thousands bow before Santa Muerte (holy death angel) in hopes that she will do whatever they ask her. I have seen people bring money, burning cigarettes, beer, whiskey, chocolate, plants, and flowers to Santa Muerte in hopes of her answers. I have seen these people bowing on their knees on the concrete in the middle of public places to worship their idol. Millions of people come into the Basilica in Mexico City and pay their money, confess their sins, and stare hopelessly at relics in hope that their sins will be pardoned. In America countless thousands are chained to baseball games, football games, material possessions, and whatever else their heart of idols can produce to worship.
My heart has broken in these last weeks because the God of heaven is not honored as he ought to be honored. People worship the things that are created rather than worshiping the Creator. God has been gracious to all mankind and yet mankind has hardened their hearts against a loving God. God brings the rain on the just and unjust. God brings the beautiful sunrises and sunsets upon the just and unjust. God gives good gifts unto all and above all things he has given his Son that those who would believe in him would be saved. However, man has taken the good things of God and perverted them unto idols and turned their attention away from God. I get a feel for Jesus as he overlooked Jerusalem or Paul as he beseeched for God to save Israel. When you accept the reality of the truth of the glory of God is breaks your heart that people would turn away from the great and awesome God of heaven to serve lesser things. Moses was outraged by the golden calf, the prophets passionately preached against idolatry, Jesus was angered that the temple was changed in an idolatrous business, and Paul preached to the idolaters of Mars Hill by telling them of the unknown God.
I arrived back at home wondering how I should respond to all the idolatry that I have beheld in these last three weeks. I wondered how our church here in the states should respond to all of the idolatry in the world. What are the options? First, I suppose we could sit around and hope that people chose to get their life together and stop being idolaters. However, I do not know how that could ever happen apart from them hearing the truth. Second, I suppose we could spend a lifetime studying cultural issues and customs in hope that we could somehow learn to relate to the people of other countries. However, the bible is quite clear that all men are the same. Men are dead in sin, shaped in iniquity, and by nature are the enemies of God. Thirdly, we could pay other people or other agencies to go and do a work for us while we remain comfortably in the states. However, there is no way to insure that there will be doctrinal accuracy or integrity. If we only pay other people to take the gospel we will miss out on all of the benefits of being obedient to the mission of God. Lastly, we could seek where God would have us to do a lasting work and then invest our lives there for the glory of God. The gospel has the power to raise the dead in any culture and we must be willing to take the gospel wherever God would have us take it. It is for sure that our church cannot go to every country and reach every people group, so we must determine where God would have us work and seek to be obedient wherever that is.
It seems that some doors are opening in the Spanish speaking countries below us and perhaps God is beginning to reveal where we are to work. There are some options for work to be partnered with in Peru and there could be a couple of options in Mexico. The need is greater than I can express upon this paper for a biblical gospel to be proclaimed in Peru and Mexico. Oh, that God would glorify his great name in Peru and Mexico by using a small little church in a town that does not exist to proclaim his great gospel amongst a people who desperately need the truth.
I give thanks to the LORD for allowing me the privilege of going to these countries and broadening my horizons. The things that I have seen will be forever engraved upon my heart. I will long remember the pastors that I spent time with in Peru and I will never forget Adolfo who translated for me in Mexico. I will relish the time that I spent with Paul Washer and the others. When I think of church I will forever remember being on top of that mountain in Sullana at that church which had no electricity and no roof. I am convinced that heaven was looking down on that little church on top of that mountain and very few people on earth even know that it exist. Oh, God I pray that the things of this world will continue to grow dim and that God’s people will be caught up in his glorious presence.
Because of the truth: Pastor: J. Randall Easter II Timothy 2:19 "Our God is in heaven and does whatever He pleases."(Ps. 115:3) "He predestined us according to the good pleasure of His will."(Eph. 1:5) Those who have been saved have been saved for His glory and they are being made holy for this is the will of God. Are you being made holy? Spurgeon says, "If your religion does not make you holy it will damn you to hell."
***Obviously, much better and more often than
some RC edifice Reps.***
Not in this instance or else the foolish claim that Phillip was operating on his own without the knowledge or authorization of the Church would not have been made.
But truly, I will not respond to "strawmen." I never raised issue with the canon or the canonization process or with Tertullian.
My point was an academic one - whenever the Catholic/Orthodox Church claims that everyone everywhere believed thus and so, that claim is empty because of their own actions (or inactions) in eliminating from the historical record the documents which evidence beliefs the earliest Christians held but that the powers that be in the Church did not hold.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. - Galatians 5:22-23
I am the vine, ye [are] the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. – John 15:5
And my speech and my preaching [was] not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. – I Corinthians 2:1-5
But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. – I Cor 1:24
My response to anyone making such requests is “no dice.” My words are moot and thus, spare – the words of God are powerful and effective. Those of us who love God have a duty to convey them. The sower sows even though the words of God do not always fall on fertile ground (Parable of the Sower, Matthew 13.)
For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it. - Isaiah 55:10-11
So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, [son] of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry [thee] whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. – John 21:15-19
We appear to be the only ones in possession of them.
You may want to try the online NAB at the USCCB site.
” My point was an academic one - whenever the Catholic/Orthodox Church claims that everyone everywhere believed thus and so, that claim is empty because of their own actions (or inactions) in eliminating from the historical record the documents which evidence beliefs the earliest Christians held but that the powers that be in the Church did not hold.”
You clearly misunderstand our point. The Church always and everywhere has believed the same things and worshiped in the same manner with minor variations. Heretics, which have been around since Acts in greater or lesser numbers, have not believed the same things The Church has. That’s why we call them heretics, AG. Thus, what you call the “beliefs of the earliest Christians” evidence of which you say The Church destroyed, were really the beliefs of heretics, not Christians.
WHERE OH WHERE
IS THAT
evidence that Philip was in communion, communication even, . . . even knew the least bit about the ROMAN MAGICSTERICAL that didn't come into existence for another 400 or so years????
Was Philip a time traveler? Where's the evidence of THAT?
Particularly where is the Scriptural evidence of that?
But, really--ANY evidence would be interesting.
We appear to be the only ones in possession of them.
= = =
Ahhhhhhh . . . and a continuation of the valiant effort at
SIT-DOWN COMEDY
yet again appears to leak out from the RC edifice on FR.
with minor variations
= = =
Perhaps MORE true with the EO than the RC edifice . . . however, sufficiently untrue, imho . . . as to be laughable.
actually . . . guffawable.
the_conscience is pulling all this out of a hat. He gives no references, no sources. He opened up with a very orthodox and very apophatic statement, and then proceeded to turn everything upside down.
According to the bible (the way it is written), od gave man wide freedom. He could eat from whichever tree in the Garden, but from one. In other words, God gave man wide, but ultimately limited freedom so that man can make morally right choices with God in mind.
Obviously, God allowed man to sin. The consequences followed but God never stopped offering salvation through repentance. When confronted, Adam blames God for giving the woman and Eve blames the serpent. That is true to this day. To sin was their decision, their free will.
I think the Bible reminds us, whether we believe the story of Genesis or not, that when we abuse our freedom we lose it. That, also, is true to this day.
Yes, we are negating God when we sin. But, that's not our theology, as t_c claims.
The true church may include your church(es), but the Body of Christ is the one and only true church. I know we will never agree on that, Mark.
AMEN!
This realization is at the heart of the Reformation -- declaring God alone to be the single source and means of our salvation.
Isn't it amazing how throughout history the heresies creep in and yet they are always the same heresy -- men; then God.
Mark: No I don’t see any inconsistency
Neither do I, Mark. Christ did rise in order to restore our eternal life. He destoryed the power of death and broke the gates of Hades and let everyone out. But He did not force anyone; nor does He force anyone today. Instead, He offered salvation to all willing to come to Him. This is no different than saying "I opened the door for you, it's up to you to get out."
The Prots not only wait to be lead out, but expect Him to carry our luggage as well!
“”You clearly misunderstand our point. The Church always and everywhere has believed the same things and worshiped in the same manner with minor variations. Heretics, which have been around since Acts in greater or lesser numbers, have not believed the same things The Church has. That’s why we call them heretics, AG. Thus, what you call the “beliefs of the earliest Christians” evidence of which you say The Church destroyed, were really the beliefs of heretics, not Christians.””
Bingo!
One can only imagine how many other groups would be grasping on to even more heretical teachings if the Church had not destroyed them.
It was the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that destroyed what God wanted destroyed!
***WHERE OH WHERE
IS THAT
evidence that Philip was in communion, communication even, . . . even knew the least bit about the ROMAN MAGICSTERICAL that didn’t come into existence for another 400 or so years???? ***
Philip was authorized by the Apostles, led by Peter. Peter later went to Rome, as did Paul.
Why are you so hung up on the Roman Catholic Church. I’d think that you should be hung up on the Catholic Church, period. It is, after all, the gift of Jesus to us all.
***Was Philip a time traveler? Where’s the evidence of THAT? ***
I’m not familiar with time travel or time travelers. You may wish to look elsewhere.
***But, really—ANY evidence would be interesting. ***
Plenty of evidence contained within Scripture. Proofs, even.
***We appear to be the only ones in possession of them.
= = =
Ahhhhhhh . . . and a continuation of the valiant effort at
SIT-DOWN COMEDY
yet again appears to leak out from the RC edifice on FR.***
We’ll try anything to get the heathen to understand the truth. It is the Great Commission, which we take very seriously.
***I know we will never agree on that, Mark.***
Never is a long time; the Holy Spirit leads us to the one Truth of God. Perhaps we may at some point.
Kosta, may we never forget your post. It is Eastern Orthodoxy in a nutshell.
It's sad that the centuries long antagonism between the East and Latin churches seems to be converging in the mysticism that riddled the early church. The great contradiction, of course, is that you toss out the charge of "gnosticism" with every post, while it's the Eastern church that encouraged gnosticism and entombed it within its doctrines and liturgy.
Here's an excellent synopsis by Douglas Wilson regarding our different starting points...
Some years ago some colleagues and I had occasion to criticize various aspects of the Eastern Orthodox Church in print. Aside from all the expected disagreements, and the back and forthing that goes on after such things, a remarkable thing became apparent to us in the exchanges that we had. The Eastern Orthodox do not really know how to argue. And this is said, not as an insult, but simply as an observation. Given the profound differences between East and West, I am not even sure they would take this as a slighting comment. I would not be surprised if they took the western zeal for argumentation as a central part of our problem. By way of contrast, historic Protestants have deep and abiding differences with the Roman Catholic Church which cannot be papered over with ecumenical position papers. But the disagreements that remain between Rome and Geneva still show that the participants on both sides of the debate retain something in common. They are both heirs of the western mind; they both share a common approach to argument. He would be a foolhardy man who maintained that a Jesuit did not know how to argue a theological point. This is not the case at all with the Eastern Orthodox. In order to argue anything, a man has to be able to say this, not that, here, not there, A, not not A. In short, he has to be able to make distinctions. So argumentation depends entirely on this, and distinctions in their turn depend on having an ultimate ground for making distinctions. In the historic Protestant view, the ultimate and greatest distinction that must be maintained at all times is the distinction between the Creator and the creature. This divide is an ontological chasm, which keeps clear the utter and complete differences between necessary and contingent, infinite and finite, Maker and made. This ultimate distinction provides us with the basis we need to justify the process of argument, and is an assumption which Protestants and Catholics share. So the point being made here is not that the Eastern Orthodox do not know how to argue because they did not have debating classes in high school or college. Neither is any question being raised about intelligence or education -- the issue rather is the uses to which intelligence and education are put. In the East, careful debate is not valued, and the reason for this is an idea which had a profound consequence. The Eastern Church blurs the ultimate distinction between Creator and creature with their doctrine of theosis, or deification. That doctrine is critiqued elsewhere in this issue, and so it should be sufficient here simply to point out that when the Eastern Orthodox argue for an ontological union between man and God's energies, they are confusing the one thing that must not be confused. We maintain, in contrast, that our union with Christ is a covenantal union, not a union of natures. Blurring distinctions between Creator and creature leads necessarily to blurring distinctions within the Godhead. The doctrine of the Trinity is foundational to all coherent and sustained thought -- and this doctrine of theosis has to threaten the doctrine of the Trinity in its implications. We in the Church cannot be deified without creating an imbalance in the relations or processions of the divine Persons, and without creating troubling questions about the Church as an aspiring fourth Person in the Quaternity. The implications of this line of thought place the Eastern Church at variance, not only with Scripture, but also with the early ecumenical creeds. But there I go, arguing . . . My point here is not to show that they are wrong in their assumption, but rather that the assumption they make is inconsistent with sustained theological argumentation. This in its turn explains a host of consequences -- the Eastern Orthodox Church is still here because of inertia and authority. It is not really a missionary faith; it does not readily go anywhere where argument might be required. Preaching, proselytizing, apologetics, evangelism -- all these are impossible to conceive apart from argument. Those modern evangelicals who are drawn eastward are not drawn by argument; rather they are attracted by antiquity, beauty, and authority, and repelled by the apparent lack of such things in the monkey house that we call contemporary evangelicalism. But if such a pilgrim asks the question, "How do we know this is true?", the answer is entirely out of argument's reach. In the Eastern view, doctrinal truth is established by the uniform consensus of the Church throughout all time. The only problem with this is that history is not yet done. We do not yet know what the Church throughout all ages has said. Suppose we have another twenty-thousand years ahead of us. We see yet another failure to make distinctions. But in seeing this failure, and any others like it, we have to remember the source of it.""Ideas have very pointed consequences, and very particular destinations. One of the best illustrations of this is the profound differences that have developed between the western Church and the eastern Church. Those differences are not merely "doctrinal," but reveal two completely different mindsets, two different paradigms. And all because ideas have consequences.
The more I read about Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, the more I am persuaded that at the heart of the errors contained in these churches is a love of monasticism. These churches prefer and thus venerate the asexual, monastic life to the life of the family. Which is actually a pretty scary point of view.
It encourages secrecy and brotherhood over transparency and liberty and the family structure God has instituted among His children.
It is the love of an icon over and above the love of that which the icon stands for. It is pretense over substance. Illusion over truth. Vapor over substance. It is believing in the "human choice" and not in God's choice. It is being "turned off" to the words of God.
I pray that God will turn you on to His words, Kosta.
"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." -- John 6:63
Emphasis mine:
Charlesworth lists the following as examples where the New Testament thought was influenced by Enoch: Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 John and Revelation. The scope of influence he says includes the Messiah, the Son of Man, the messianic kingdom, demonology, the future, resurrection, final judgment, the whole eschatological theater, and symbolism.
If belief in some or all of Enoch would make a person "heretic" as you suggest, then Peter, John, Paul, Matthew, Luke, and Jude would all be "heretics" because of their direct and indirect references to Enoch. And all of the above Scriptures would have to be "eliminated" or "destroyed" as stfassisi suggests.
Ditto for Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen and Clement of Alexandria. They would be heretics along with Tertullian and anyone else who found a smidgen of truth in Enoch. And like Tertullian, most of their works would also have to be "eliminated."
Indeed, if Peter were found a heretic for believing Enoch about angels chained under darkness until judgment and citing it in his epistle - then the foundation of Matthew 16 for the supremacy of Rome based on Peter as a rock like Abraham - but now deemed "heretic" - would melt away.
Enoch is a theological "catch 22" for the Catholic Church underscored by hard archeological evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls. The carbon dating of the copies found there show that Enoch was in currency and used and believed at least 200 years before Christ and through the writing of the Gospels and Epistles - all the way up until the Church decided to eliminate it (Philastrius et al.)
BTW, for my Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ reading along here - the word from the scholars is that Enoch was in oblivion to the West at the time of Martin Luther through 1775. Further, that they relied on the Jewish "canon" for the Old Testament and the Jews had since the second century A.D. (Simeon ben Jochai et al) also "eliminated" Enoch because of its clear references to the Messiah as more than the earthy king they expected and other prophesies in Enoch which would have pointed to Jesus Christ as the Messiah.
And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not. - Revelation 10:4
For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it. – Isaiah 55:8-11
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. – John 16:12-13
My reason for posting all this information on Enoch is to make the case that the Catholic Church claim that the church always and everyone believed thus and so is patently empty.
If anyone is interested in reading Enoch, I very strongly recommend Charlesworth's Pseudepigrapha. Most of the other translations predate the Dead Sea Scrolls, do not include manuscript comparisons, 2 and 3 Enoch and scholarly footnotes and commentary.
To God be the glory, not man, never man!
***The Prots not only wait to be lead out, but expect Him to carry our luggage as well!***
Frogmarching into the limousine.
Early Christianity was called “Via”, the Way (in Latin). It is the Way of the Lord, not the comfy chair.
Amen! Christ is the word.
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.