Posted on 09/18/2010 7:13:15 PM PDT by lightman
Edited on 09/18/2010 7:26:53 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
In a ceremony that started with a public mea culpa and ended with a prolonged standing ovation, three lesbian ministers were officially embraced Saturday by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA).
The three were the Rev. Anita Hill, pastor of St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church in St. Paul . . . .
You wrote:
“That’s odd, as I see many instances of Catholics asking Mary to intercede for things. That is worship in most people’s books.”
Only if they are ignorant and stupid. We ask Mary to pray for us TO GOD. So, even when we ask Mary for prayers we are actually honoring ONLY God as God.
“Mary was an ordinary woman asked to do extraordinary things.”
Exactly! And she still does those things now. All of them through the power of God.
“The only truth is Christ. Not gaudy robed popes. Not layers of priest and bureaucrats created to put a division between man and Christ.”
Okay, let’s use your own logic: If only Christ is truth then scripture is untrue, right? If only Christ is truth, then the Father is not truth, right? No, both scripture and the Father are truth. They share in the same truth that is Christ. And Christ can share Himself in that way with His Church (which scripture - and you claim to believe in scripture - says [the Church] is the bulwark and pillar of the truth; 1 Tim 3). These things are simple, but you don’t seem to understand them at all. Read Ephesians 3:10. Notice how the Church teaches even the angels about the wisdom of God? How could the Church do that if it were not true?
“This all so simple when one reads and seeks to understand Scripture.”
Clearly I understand the scriptures much better than you do.
“No one who reads Scripture can think God had any intention of creating a Pharisee type replacement for what He came to abolish.”
And I don’t believe God created Protestantism. I do believe He founded His Church and that Church is the Catholic Church.
No, she died 2,000 years ago. I would think if you truly believe Scripture you would ask God directly for things. Why do you need an intercessor. Is God not enough? Is not Jesus enough?
Check out Hebrews 3:1 “ Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess.”
And Hebrews 4: “14Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens,[e] Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. 16Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.”
Pretty clear from those passages that we do not need any intercessors to put our needs before Jesus.
I don't understand why Catholics think this isn't good enough for them, and they want to add human created layers between us and the Son of God?
You wrote:
“No, she died 2,000 years ago.”
Her body died, not her soul. The same thing will happen to you and me. Our souls live forever.
“I would think if you truly believe Scripture you would ask God directly for things.”
I would think if you knew anything, you would know we do.
“Why do you need an intercessor.”
We don’t other than Jesus but since Jesus gives us saints to help us why not use them?
“Is God not enough?”
Yes, He is.
“Is not Jesus enough?”
Yes, He is. But Jesus loves us so much that He gave us a family of saints to help bind us to Him. Why not use what God has given us? Do you really need scripture? Gee, isn’t God enough? Do you see how stupid that sounds?
“Check out Hebrews 3:1 “ Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess.””
And we do - even when we petition the saints because we are always cognizant of the fact that God made them saints. They are nothing without Him - just as we are nothing without Him.
“And Hebrews 4: “14Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens,[e] Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. 16Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.””
Again, we know all of this and that is exactly why we have teh saints. Christ is the High Priest who made the saints with His grace.
“Pretty clear from those passages that we do not need any intercessors to put our needs before Jesus.”
Pretty clear from those passages that Jesus is generous with His grace for us and His saints.
“I don’t understand why Catholics think this isn’t good enough for them, and they want to add human created layers between us and the Son of God?”
Since we don’t do that there is no surprise that you don’t udnerstand what doesn’t exist. Maybe you should spend more time studying what we actually believe rather than make up things like a bigot would do. Wouldn’t you be more successful in learning that way? When you study geography do you make up countries that do not exist? When you study scripture do you make up lettesr from Paul that do not exist? Don’t invent doctrines we don’t believe in. If you wish to debate me on the faith, fine, but why make things up that NO ONE believes in? How honest is that?
It's pretty hard to have a reasoned debate with someone when they start out the conversation with a comment like this in #26 of this thread:
“It’s good, honest and refreshing. The truth always is. What it isn’t is hatred. The simple fact is that Protestantism is rebellion. The sort of idiocy in the article is just a logical development in it.”
I usually don't have a problem with the Catholic faith, but when utter falsehoods are posted; one can't just sit back and let them go unchecked.
You wrote:
“It’s pretty hard to have a reasoned debate with someone when they start out the conversation with a comment like this in #26 of this thread:”
What I wrote was true. What you wrote was not. I didn’t make up anything. You did.
“I usually don’t have a problem with the Catholic faith, but when utter falsehoods are posted; one can’t just sit back and let them go unchecked.”
I posted no falsehoods AT ALL. Everything I said is true. If you don’t like it, too bad.
No; you gave a highly charged, incendiary personal opinion in that post.
I normally stay out threads like these because they are a waste of everyone’s time and nothing is gained.
But couldn't hold back after seeing the original post.
As I said previously, the real enemy is the horde of Allah worshipers; that is where energy should be spent.
2 Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
2 Thess 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
You wrote:
“No; you gave a highly charged, incendiary personal opinion in that post.”
What I wrote was true. Whether you think of it as “highly charged, incendiary personal opinion” is immaterial.
“I normally stay out threads like these because they are a waste of everyone’s time and nothing is gained.”
If you believe you are wasting your time, then leave.
“But couldn’t hold back after seeing the original post.”
That was not the original post.
“As I said previously, the real enemy is the horde of Allah worshipers; that is where energy should be spent.”
If the world had not experienced the Protestant Revolution, Islam would not be much of a problem.
“If the world had not experienced the Protestant Revolution, Islam would not be much of a problem.”
Wow, so the spread of Islam is Martin Luther’s fault???
I await the logic of that statement!!!!
You wrote:
“Wow, so the spread of Islam is Martin Luther’s fault???”
Not directly, no. Luther actually supported some efforts against the Turks for instance later in his life. Originally, however, he believed that opposing the Turks was the same as opposing the judgment of God. If you don’t believe me then just read his 1518 explanation of his 95 theses. A decade later Luther was signing a different tune as the Turks started to win major battles around the Med.
“I await the logic of that statement!!!!”
It’s simple. Who led the crusades? Any Protestants? Oh, that’s right, they didn’t exist yet. Who fought the Turks? The Poles, Hungarians, Austrians, Serbians, Slovenians, Croats...have I mentioned any Protestants yet?
What the Muslims fear the most is the Catholic Church. They want to kill the pope not Benny Hinn. They want to blow up the Vatican not the Crystal Cathedral.
If the Protestant Revolution had not happened, every westerner would still be united in religion, philosophy, morals and share a common culture, educated language, history, art, literature and music. You don’t think that would help form a united front against Islam? If you don’t then you don’t understand anything. The best thing that has probably ever happened to Islamic expansionists since the time of the Byzantines exhausting themselves is the Protestant Revolution. A divided West is exactly what they wanted and they got it without having to lift a finger. They just let the Protestants do it for them. And after a brief period of suffering under colonial powers, they’re back in business.
No.
The Catholic Church was a corrupt vessel at the time Luther took the stage.
Luther helped to root out the corruption and rot.
You should thank Luther instead of condemning him.
You wrote:
“No.
The Catholic Church was a corrupt vessel at the time Luther took the stage.”
No. That is a myth - as I posted earlier (I believe in this thread, but I would have to go back and look).
“Luther helped to root out the corruption and rot.”
No. He replaced some corruption with heresies and false practices. He was corrupt. He was a heretic. He was a schismatic.
“You should thank Luther instead of condemning him.”
I will do neither. I have nothing to thank him for. And condemning him is God’s job not mine. It is God’s choice not mine. I instead will simply evaluate Luther as he stood: heretic and schismatic.
So glad that you agree that Catholic priests who molest children were acting outside their writ. Perhaps that is their way of getting into prisons where so many need their services.
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.