Posted on 04/30/2010 8:03:48 AM PDT by Quix
.
|
7 “When you pray, don’t babble on and on as people of other religions do. They think their prayers are answered merely by repeating their words again and again. 8 Don’t be like them, for your Father knows exactly what you need even before you ask him! 9 Pray like this: Our Father in heaven, --New Living Translation 7And when you pray, do not heap up phrases (multiply words, repeating the same ones over and over) as the Gentiles do, for they think they will be heard for their much speaking. [I Kings 18:25-29.] 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. 9Pray, therefore, like this: 15But if you do not forgive others their trespasses [their [j]reckless and willful sins, [k]leaving them, letting them go, and [l]giving up resentment], neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses. --Amplified Pray with Simplicity 5"And when you come before God, don't turn that into a theatrical production either. All these people making a regular show out of their prayers, hoping for stardom! Do you think God sits in a box seat? 6"Here's what I want you to do: Find a quiet, secluded place so you won't be tempted to role-play before God. Just be there as simply and honestly as you can manage. The focus will shift from you to God, and you will begin to sense his grace. 7-13"The world is full of so-called prayer warriors who are prayer-ignorant. They're full of formulas and programs and advice, peddling techniques for getting what you want from God. Don't fall for that nonsense. This is your Father you are dealing with, and he knows better than you what you need. With a God like this loving you, you can pray very simply. Like this: 16-18"When you practice some appetite-denying discipline to better concentrate on God, don't make a production out of it. It might turn you into a small-time celebrity but it won't make you a saint. If you 'go into training' inwardly, act normal outwardly. Shampoo and comb your hair, brush your teeth, wash your face. God doesn't require attention-getting devices. He won't overlook what you are doing; he'll reward you well. |
Mark Kirby: O Mother of Good Counsel, I am all thine, Most Holy Mary, There is no part of my life that is not open to thee, I want to be completely transparent with thee, Praying in this way, I can be at rest, |
.
.
.
That’s all well and good, I offered to stipulate to the 40% and that still makes Catholicism by FAR the largest group of devout Christians in the world.
We are aware of mother in law, yet not of Peter’s wife.
Paul is attempting to get acceptance for his apostleship here. He is emotionally appealing for the same acceptance, rights and privileges that he sees the rest of the Apostles getting. He is complaining that the rest of the Apostles have the right to not work, the right to take family along, and all the things that he sees the Jerusalem Apostles have that he does not have. This passage is evidence that at least some of them were married and had families, yet it is never clear which ones, and, forgive me if I misrecollect, but there are no families mentioned on the evangelical journeys, are there?
“”Forgiveness is forgiveness.””
Not quite that easy ,dear sister,our sins have consequences beyond just yourself ,it effects fellow man and nature surrounding man, so your sin has effect on others beyond yourself,thus another need for reparation
Remember the devil’s sin of pride? The whole heavens were disrupted due to this sin.
When you sin you not only have offended God but your sin has stained fellow man as well who might for example react bitterly towards others as a result of your sin
Goot run -time for Adoration
Novelty indeed, unless one has that very special leather belt hanging in their closet.
“Is there any doubt that Jim Jones (The People's Temple) or David Koresh (Branch Davidians) was a logical and expected development of the thinking that came from the Reformation?”
Not necessarily, there was plenty of craziness going on under the rubric Catholic that we can find precedent there for Jones and Koresh and this long before the Reformation.
Was the Reformation successful? Only to some degree as the reformers thought they could do just that.. reform the way the management ran the enterprise rather than question whether it was legitimate in the first instance.
That the Reformation nourished a greater freedom to investigate the Scriptures is probably its most valuable legacy.
“Regarless of what the Reformation was protesting against, a separate topic, the results of the Reformation have given us the LDS, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Heaven's Gate.”
None the three has ever tried to put a torch to my feet and the past willingness of the Catholic church to do so when it had the ability tells me that last statement is utter nonsense.
“Already have. We can speak to the motivations of certain individuals, we can speak to the motivations of those that made it succeed, we can speak to the rewards of those in power afterwards, and we can speak to the modern results of the Reformation.”
Where is the speaking to the moral depravity that cried out for a reformation? It's there in those history books.
And the latest $2 billion plus clergy scandal shows that novelty may not always be bad.
Got it, ALL translations of Scripture have Jesus Christ giving Peter the keys to Heaven and, surprise, surprise, Protestants have figured out a way to say that this wasn't all that significant.
Not being a member of any Protestant church, there is no way I think or agree that this not of significance. Peter used the keys and open the way to heaven on Pentecost in his sermon. So did all the other apostles in turn. To be a follower of the Apostles in this way one should do just as the Apostles did and proclaim the Good News! That's the sum of it, take it or leave it. It didn't make Peter a Pope or infallible, although what he proclaimed was infallible because it was the Holy Spirit moving him to speak the words of God to the people.
OUCH!!! Mark!
It's completely clear to me that the divine Word — i.e., the divine Logos of the Beginning of Creation (of heaven and earth) — a/k/a Jesus Christ, only-begotten Son of the Father, Alpha and Omega — is absolutely irreducible to a configuration on ink dots on a white page, even if that configuration spells "word" (logos).
But perhaps I am belaboring the point.
BTW, what's "YOPIOS?"
You know what? If that’s what you believe and it’s working for you, that’s great. I really don’t care; as I said earlier, I’m done with this thread.
For: Let's play with squares and rectangles.
IF you are a square, you are a rectangle.
BUT that is NOT the same as
If you are NOT a square, you are not a rectangle.
So, looking at the logic, Saying "if you are not in the
body you are not saved"
is NOT the same as saying
If you are in the body you are saved.
So the quotes you provided do not support your contention.
What a mumble-jumble of logic! Come on, you can do better than that :-)
I have some memory of talking about Mount Sinai in comparing it with other Holy "nouns" and what is proper in treating such, but I'm not sure. The last thing I remember our talking about was the Scholastic approach to what God can and cannot do, as has been discussed earlier here. About that, now I think I have a much better idea of what you are talking about. On this thread you made a couple of summary statements with which I fully agreed.
The closest thing to a theological statement about this that I've heard is that Mary's will is united to Christ's -- as we pray ours will be. ......... In her is "now" fulfilled, we hold, what is promised to all the blessed in the "future."
That kind of surprises me. I would have thought the Catholic view is that Mary's will is united to Christ's in a wholly unique way such that we will never know. I surmise that because right now I thought the view is that Mary has a very unique working role with God AS OPPOSED to the rest of the departed. For example, none of us could "aspire" to dispensing graces because we will never have the relationship with God that Mary is said to have now. Likewise, none of us could ever aspire to the level of "Queen of Heaven", etc. I would have thought that this separation is directly related to the relationship Mary has with God as opposed to our own.
BUT there is the kind of concreteness, this sense that things are not MERELY what they seem. To be the God-bearer, in our concrete and creation-affirming way of doing business, can't be JUST a matter of being kind of a surrogate mother as the gentiles are trying to make regular motherhood.
And naturally my immediate thought is: "But why not?" :) Of course it was unique and special as special gets, but I don't understand how this elevates Mary in comparison to other mother-child bonding. Not being a mother, I can only guess that this special bond is greatly related to the fact that the child came from the mother and is a part of her. Since certainly Catholicism does NOT hold that Mary contributed an ounce to Christ's divinity, I don't see how THAT sort of bonding (bonding above and beyond "normal" bonding) can be asserted to be between Christ and Mary. Even later, we do not see bonding related to Christ's divinity given the scene where Mary questions Jesus for staying back to preach at age 12. There, Mary treated Jesus as any other loving mother would: "You scared the daylights out of us, what were you thinking???" :)
Further, even if we granted this special bonding for the sake of argument, is this somehow completely separate from the concept of the union of the wills with God? IOW, I don't see how it can be said that Mary has this special bonding with Christ, BUT we can nevertheless have a same union of wills with God that she has. Thinking of the role she is said to be playing in Heaven, I would have thought that her special place in Catholicism would be predicated on both her bond with Christ and her union of wills being unique.
Mad Dawg: Agreed.
Both of you! Take the verse for exactly what it says, especially since you both agree with it! Forget the stupid, unneeded, nit-picking, and strange way of agreeing with one another.
Certainly it is. Metmom just provided you with clarity...
1 Corinthians 9:5Matthew 8:14
When Jesus came into Peter’s house, he saw Peter’s mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever.
Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? (Cephas is Syriac for Peter)
Once again a Bible-believing Christian posts the unambiguous words of God and once again RC apologists do not understand them.
There's no introspection in Rome; no sense of "maybe we didn't get this right because our beliefs clearly contradict the word of God." No discernment. No rightly dividing the word. No comprehension.
WELL PUT.
MY FEELING, too.
THX.
Once again a Bible-believing Christian posts the unambiguous words of God and once again RC apologists do not understand them.
There’s no introspection in Rome; no sense of “maybe we didn’t get this right because our beliefs clearly contradict the word of God.” No discernment. No rightly dividing the word. No comprehension.
- -
INDEED.
There is no PURGAtory in the scripture..purgatory is an idea of men to make themselves holy and worthy ..it is mans way not Gods., Jesus nor the apostles ever taught it , but they did teach the perfect love and mercy found in Christ.
Psa 103:10 — He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.
.11 — For as the heaven is high above the earth, [so] great is his mercy toward them that fear him.
12 — As far as the east is from the west, [so] far hath he removed our transgressions from us.
Isa 43:25 — I, [even] I, [am] he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.
Jer 31:34 — And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Mic 7:18 — Who [is] a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage?he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth [in] mercy.
1Jo 1:7 — But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1Jo 2:1 — My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
Eph1: 6To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. 7In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Rom 3:25 — Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 4:7 — [Saying], Blessed [are] they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Rom 4:8 — Blessed [is] the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
I could go on and on..Christ paid the price for my sin , 100% of it
MD Do you know the definition for mercy?
And these were few and far between.
Not necessarily, there was plenty of craziness going on under the rubric Catholic that we can find precedent there for Jones and Koresh and this long before the Reformation.
Do you have examples?
Was the Reformation successful? Only to some degree as the reformers thought they could do just that.. reform the way the management ran the enterprise rather than question whether it was legitimate in the first instance.
Since the Church was founded by Christ and He promised that He would be with it always, how legitimate is the questioning of its validity?
None the three has ever tried to put a torch to my feet and the past willingness of the Catholic church to do so when it had the ability tells me that last statement is utter nonsense.
Hmm. The main Reform groups, with the exception of the Baptists were rather bloody, themselves. The history of early Protestantism in the United States is rather fascinating.
Where is the speaking to the moral depravity that cried out for a reformation? It's there in those history books. And the latest $2 billion plus clergy scandal shows that novelty may not always be bad.
Certainly the moral depravity was there then and is now. You may have noticed my posts on the subject of the USCCB and a number of its bishops. But the Church's policy is to be morally correct even though many of its officials are not. You may have noticed that we have not changed our stance on, for instance, abortion for nearly 2000 years.
Look, use the following symbols, for brevity: "S->R" means "IF S THEN R." Use "~S" to mean "NOT S". Use 'T' to mean True. and 'F' to mean false. Then we can construct 4 propositions:
| Symbol | Example | Truth Value |
|
| 1 | S->R | IF a Square, THEN a Rectangle. | T |
| 2 | ~S->~R | IF NOT a Square THEN NOT a Rectangle. | F |
| 3 | R->S | IF a Rectangle THEN a Square. | F |
| 4 | ~R->~S | IF NOT a Rectangle THEN NOT a Square. | T |
She didn't seem to get why that didn't work, hence the rectangles and squares.
It's only jumbled if you're not used to working our the implications of various statements
This thread is supposed to be some kind of RESEARCH?????
I am simply not going to get into it with you about the scriptural support for purgatory. We see it, you all don't. Okay. Whatever.
We also find a promise to the Church in the Bible which you all do not find. Okay. Whatever.
Also we do not hide behind Scripture to avoid looking at things. What precisely was wrong in my 'man-talk'? Let's talk about that.
Christ paid the price for my sin , 100% of it
No disagreement there.
But your theory is that a crabby, envious, spiteful person who, despite making a sincere invitation to have Christ enter his heart and life still finds it hard to stop visiting prostitutes will upon his entry to heaven just love the place.
MD Do you know the definition for mercy?
Aw, come on. Why do we play games?
If I recall correctly, Rnmomof7 said she used to teach catechism. If I’m mistaken, oh well.
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.