Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
INDEED.
Mary had nothing to do with Salvation. She needed a Savior, also. She wasn’t saved when Jesus was born.
God uses vessels on earth to accomplish His Will. Like He used Abraham, Joseph, Jacob, Issac, Esther, Moses, David, John The Baptist, Peter, Paul etc., etc. Mary was a vessel.
Not the Biblical understanding I have the least bit of respect for.
Roman Pontiff did not attend the Council of Nicea in Turkey. It was convoked by the Emperor Constantine who was building his new capital in Turkey.
Easter had alway been celebrated. The issue was whether to celebrate only on Sunday, or according to the lunar calendar where the day of the week changes from year to year. Sunday had long been the regular day of worship for Christians. Constantine convoked council in hopes of preventing war between Church factions. He was not yet fully a member of the Church and did not take part in the theological discussions.
No. The Church has always encouraged vigorous debate following St. Paul's direction that Christians must "give reason for what you believe." The Catholic Church invented the university system and the accompanying academic freedom. However, prior the the Protestant/Enlightenment rejection of historical proof and linear logic, there was a difference in debate. Pursuit of truth was considered necessary and the debater was required to provide proofs of his position. The idea that "freedom of speech" includes the right of willful lying is a modern falsehood. The Catholic belief is that error has no rights.
Constantine was a Roman Pontiff as were all Roman Emperors since prior to 300 BCE through ~385 CE. Emperor Constantine was baptized on his deathbed by a heretic. Easter was created by the council of Nicea rejecting the YHvH commanded Feast of Passover. You ignore the Albigensians (Over the twenty year period of this campaign an estimated 200,000 to 1,000,000 people were killed). John Huss, a Bohemian preacher of reformation, was burned at the stake on July 6, 1415. The Crusades in the Middle East also spilled over into conquest of Eastern This just a short list; check out Innocent III; he murdered millions You seem to vincibly ignorant.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Pope Martin V issued a bull on 17 March 1420 which proclaimed a crusade "for the
destruction of the Wycliffites, Hussites and all other heretics in Bohemia".
Orthodox Christians by Roman Catholics and attempted suppression of the Orthodox Church.
The Waldenses were as well persecuted by the Catholic Church, but survive up to this day.
Quix wrote:
“Seems to me you’re waving a lot of scholarship aside about the Scriptures about Christ’s blood siblings.”
And you’re not?
A lot of things have been written since 1517, in other words, things that were not written while in fear of, indebted to, or in service of, Rome. Now, I grant you that most of this stuff cannot be found in your average American Bible bookstore, and perhaps not even on the net. And there is plenty of it that was not written in English and much of it remains untranslated from German and Latin. But that doesn’t mean it is not valid and well thought out in the fear of God.
By the way, which scholarship am I waving off? Name it.
And before you get too wrapped up in this, realize two things. First, I reluctantly entered into this and I don’t take a position here, because this is an adiaphoron. If you don’t understand the term and what its significance, then perhaps your knowledge of reformation theology is wanting. That it is an adiaphoron also means that I disagree completely with Rome, and what they have done by proclaiming uncertainty certain, and where they have taken their teachings about Mary. They have built their falsehood on a foundation of uncertainty. Second, I am trying to refocus people’s efforts to that which needs to be addressed, and can be verified by the clear words of Scripture. Go after Rome for what Rome truly is guilty of. And defend sola scriptura! For in its defense opinion counts nothing, whether of the pope or of any individual.
I will also repeat, I am not going to stay with this topic long. It is not worth the effort. It is an adiaphoron!!!!!!!! I will let the obsessees, both Roman and contrary, fight it out. Although what the victory could possibly be I have no idea.
pnsn wrote:
“She needed a Savior, also. She wasn’t saved when Jesus was born.”
Did I say that? No.
Do you read posts? Your turn to answer.
Ahhhhhhhhh
So the NIV scholars used their whims and personal opinions in translating those verses?
And Petersen the same in The Message?
LOL.
Cheers.
I look forward to more in the future as well.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
ME TOO!!
Quix wrote:
“So the NIV scholars used their whims and personal opinions in translating those verses?”
No. I didn’t say that. And it was hardly whims. They read the verses through the tinted lenses of exclusively Calvinist/Arminian theology. Look at the list of the contributers. Look also at how the NIV is going the way of all flesh. It is an endangered species. The KJV will outlive the NIV even with its antiquated, but in general, accurate translation. Calvinist/Arminian theology has a habit of turning Gospel into Law. That is one of the chief problems with the NIV (along with the whole idea of “dynamic equivalence”).
Petersen and “The Message” I don’t know. But neither did/do I know “The Living Bible,” which from the title, I would guess, is a similar item.
Cheers to you too.
BTW,
I think the snootiness over
adiaphoron
trashed a lot of your graciousness in my eyes.
It’a pet peeve of mine . . . I strongly believe that rare words on public forums like this one need a definition in their first usage in a thread. Otherwise, it’s just a vain-glorious rather haughty kind of linguistic upsmanship to use them.
Then to make some sort of egregious emphasis about such a term as a measure of someone else’s knowledge or scholarship is wayyyyy over the top unnecessary and ostentaciously elitist.
What rubbish.
For those scratching their heads about the term:
n. (pl. -ra), matter of indifference; Theology, religious observance left to conscience; amoral matter. adiaphorism, n. belief in doctrine of adiaphora. adiaphorist, n. adiaphoristic, adj. applied to certain controversies on religious observances. adiaphorous, adj. neutral; indifferent, neither right nor wrong (of conduct, etc.)
Many of us hereon do NOT PRETEND to be Bible scholars in any formal sense of the word.
Some of us have read a lot. Some, like me, have taken several courses at a Bible school or college. Some have not done that.
Many have read their Bibles prayerfully daily for years. Holy Spirit has given them vast insights into the truths of Scripture.
I’ll take farmer Joe’s insights from such a walk with God over a Harvard professor’s any day.
I think it’s wonderful that more formal Bible scholars and laymen like myself can be iron sharpening iron hereon.
Snooty flinging of rare terms about without their definitions is not admirable; not loving; not gracious.
Well put.
THx.
Quix, from Wiki:
“Although often called a paraphrase, The Message is instead a translation from the original languages. It is a highly idiomatic translation, and as such falls on the extreme dynamic end of the dynamic and formal equivalence spectrum.”
So, yes, yuck. The old expression for such a thing used to be “too clever by half.”
“Sorry, blue-duncan, your argument is with the great theologians of the Reformation.”
I don’t have an argument with any of them. To me, the disinterested witness of a historian who was contemporary with the events and privy to the contemporaneous Roman reports from Jerusalem is more believable than later sympathetic spiritualized longings for an idealized mother.
In your words: Well put!
“I think that you can agree with me that Martin Luther was no friend either of the pope or the Roman magisterium.”
That may be the case but he was a friend of the Roman Catholic Church and wanted to reform it not leave it. His argument was not with the doctrine of Mary, but justification by faith alone.
imho, that’s just more snootiness.
Holy Spirit has greatly used THE MESSAGE in my life to draw me closer to God. PRAISE GOD FOR THAT.
Petersen himself insists that folks use other translations in their Bible study.
Every person I know who walks closer to God than average has found great blessings from The Lord in their reading of THE MESSAGE.
So—rail, rant, deride away.
God clearly has a different opinion.
Thanks for your kind words.
Dear Quix, if you go back and read my posts, I explained the term several times. Besides which, I see you had no difficulty in finding a suitable definition. People look up the terms other people use all the time. I do. So, if you call my use of that term snootiness, haughty, linguistic upmanship, elitist ... I guess that is up to you. That is the term. What can I say?
You also wrote:
“Snooty flinging of rare terms about without their definitions is not admirable; not loving; not gracious.”
Dare I say that this is a subjective and rather emotional response ... one better, perhaps, said in another way.
You’re a smart guy. But you, like all the rest of us, don’t know everything. You seem to have little fear of wandering into areas of theology and history where, maybe, just maybe, there are some things you aren’t aware of. Sometimes these things have been pointed out to you, gently and graciously.
Think what you will. Do as you will.
Proof is in the pudding.
Ever notice how when one posts an article or commentary regarding a decent Bible study, how immediately out of the woodwork, every type of accusing vermin seem to appear?
It’s almost a barometer of how truthful the article really was, for the adversarial attacks to commence so abruptly and without any wisdom to encourage fellowship with God through faith in Christ.
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.