This one isn't mine of course, but it might fit the bill.
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
One of your better ones. :-)
And lest we forget: we who are the Body of Christ, member for member, suffer in and with and through Him until He comes in Glory.
“Take up your cross and follow Me”.
Failing? The Protestant churches are still going strong. It seems that the only reason the Catholic church has changed it's position on so many issues (Vatican II) is that it could no longer snow its adherents as they were being exposed to the Biblical teachings of other denominations. By and large the most strongly Catholic countries are the most impoverished.
They have NEVER trusted Catholics.
I wonder why? Can you say *Inquisition*?
It isn't like the Roman Catholic church didn't give them, or anyone for that matter, enough reasons to not trust it. When you're watching that church condemn and burn at the stake your friends, I'd say that's good enough reason to not trust it.
Good morning!
“Does it enhance or inhibit communication?”
I believe that, both cognitively and affectively, being offensive in almost all cases inhibits authentic communication.
Top of the morning to you
May the road rise up to greet you :-)
Hysteria. Bigotry. Disinformation.
The best way to give the Averys a design suggestion is to go to the website....JamesAvery.com....and there should be a place there to click on. They listen to customers way more
than they listen to us. :D
Sounds like a good idea, though!
This one isn't mine of course, but it might fit the bill.
This one isn't mine of course, but it might fit the bill.
It has been invented and sold for many years.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Well put.
THX THX.
THX THX.
THX THX
BEAUTIFUL.
And I certainly loved the Garden Tomb. One of my 2 favorite places in Jerusalem.
Your first mistake is in accepting google search information as a substitute for a proper education in Church and European history.
Ferdinand had received wide support as the monarch responsible for finally driving Islam out of Western Europe by force of arms. His campaigns were brutal and bloody. During the preceding 700 years a culture had developed among the Conquistadors that the foes of the Reconquista, or war of liberation, were not only not human because they lacked a soul, but were personally responsible for that because they had given their soul to the equivalent of the devil. At a time in history when mercy was a rare commodity even among Christians, there was no shown to the Muslim occupiers. Animal deserved no mercy and the Godless even less. This culture would later be on display in the conquest of the pagan peoples of the New World.
The Reconquista made Ferdinand and his predecessors very influential within Europe. The fall of Grenada posed a problem for Ferdinand. Short of Crossing into North Africa where he would have been soundly defeated he had run out of lands to liberate from Islam. He no longer had a "Christian" reason to expect grants, contributions and the forgiveness of loans from the Crowned heads of Europe in support of hie Holy Crusade. The purging the reconquered lands of the Godless inhabitants was a way to perpetuate his dynasty and in the process convert more property to the royal coffers. All that was asked of the Church was to make a determination if any of the accused were Catholic. All accused were given an opportunity to convert and most did.
"and was the environment into which Martin Luther was born."
Luther's wallowing in antisemitism only demonstrates that he lacked any divine inspiration. Like Ferdinand, Luther was using antisemitism for his own personal benefit. The Holy Spirit would not place new messages into such a dirty vessel.
LOL, I laughed so hard I had a two inch snot bubble. To paraphrase Truman; there are lies, damned lies, and the fervent denials of rabid anti-Catholics"
After reformers within the Catholic church failed there was little reason to suppose that one more council or edict or carefully worded canon law was going to prove efficacious.
If trust was lacking, who would say it was owed?
The message wasn't new. Thank God the Holy Spirit uses dirty vessels every day.
Because he wrote in Greek. The movement to Latin in the Western Church had not yet begun.
Hbr 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, Pretty clear. But there are two judgments. The first judgment is the one of the eternal judgment. Christians do not face that judgment.
Jhn 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
The second judgment is one of works which you have pointed out.
Interesting. My Bible says: 24 Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has passed from death to life.
Very interesting case in point. The NIV says will have eternal life. The KJV says the same as the NAB (above). There is nothing about not being Judged. Christ is looking past their Judgement, since they do believe (with all that comes with true belief).
You made the claim that Christians do not have an obligation to live any differently before God than other people. I would suggest your verses on our judgment would say otherwise.
Perhaps consulting some other versions of Scripture might be of some utility.
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.