Posted on 01/14/2011 5:57:52 PM PST by topcat54
Evangelical book catalogs promote books such as Planet Earth: The Final Chapter, The Great Escape, and the Left Behind series. Bumper stickers warn us that the vehicle’s occupants may disappear at any moment. It is clear that there is a preoccupation with the idea of a secret rapture. Perhaps this has become more pronounced recently due to the expectation of a new millennium and the fears regarding potential Y2K problems. Perhaps psychologically people are especially receptive to the idea of an imminent, secret rapture at the present time. Additionally, many Christians are not aware that any other position relative to the second coming of Jesus Christ exists. Even in Reformed circles there are numerous people reading these books. Many of these people are unaware that this viewpoint conflicts with Scripture and Reformed Theology.
(Excerpt) Read more at reformed.org ...
At least we get to see the rational from which they speak. Much does go round and round though...
Now that's funny coming from people who hit the deck whenever in close proximity to an idol of Mary
Odd. I don't know of any idols of Mary. Who are you referring to?
or carry around a St. Christopher talisman hanging from their rear view mirror...
Let's see. The dude who was brought back to life by touching Elisha's bones was obviously an idol worshiper. The woman whose constant menstrual flow was cured by reaching out and touching Jesus' cloak as He walked by - she was into Santaria, right? Peter's shadow curing the sick was devil worship; I see. And handkerchiefs and aprons touched to Paul that were carried off and touched to the sick cured them. More devil worship. And totally unScriptural, too.
And according to the bible, you are already seated in heavenly places...
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
This is allegory only. Unless you think that the LaZBoy Throne in the Hall of Sunday Sports Worship is heavenly.
I'll bet you guys pray to statues and pictures of yourselves...Would certainly fit right in with your theology...
We've been discussing on and off for years. I can't seem to get you to understand Christianity.
Yup. Just like a bug hitting the windshield.
Mark...it gets confusing when you don’t distinguish if you are speaking of the Catholic church...rather you refer to “church” in such a way that it could mean any church...including false churches.
You are right saying that there is a difference in how vocabulary is used among the various churches, and why I’m asking that you define the catholic church when you are referencing church and or the body of believers as a whole, which is the church.
The current format does suit the current content.
Unless fully armed; full of the Grace of God and not in a sinful state. satan is powerful enough to take Jesus on a trip and actually tempt Him. he is powerful enough to take on Michael the Archangel and 2/3 of the angels in a war in Heaven.
If you think that you can so tritely and completely oppose satan in a blithe fashion, remember 1 Peter 5. The devil stalks about like a roaring lion seeking whom he can devour. Notice the metaphor lion. Not kitten or guinea pig or worm.
The power to defeat satan does not rest with men but with God. His Grace is what will enable us to resist him, nothing less.
Sin no longer has power over us.
"For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." -- Romans 6:14
As long as you stay under Grace.
No. 1) There was never any possibility that Christ could fail against Satan (or all our Christianity would be a lie.)
I never said that Jesus would fail. I said that it took all that Jesus had. Why? He fasted for 40 days and 40 nights and He was hungry. Weak, starved.
And 2) Christ was contending with Satan for all His sheep. Just consider how much sin that entails. It is beneficial to us to see that resisting the devil by atoning for sins is not such an easy task. And yet, Jesus did just that, thereby increasing our gratitude of His work on the cross and leading us to glorify God all the more.
And provided an example for us - we are to resist satan but we cannot do it without Him.
My statements stand. Without Grace, we are the lion's lunch.
The short answer: NO. Satan has zero power over us — unless we give him power over us by falling for his blandishments....
Does Mark really think the Son of God — Logos, Alpha and Omega — quails before the supposed power of the Father of Lies?
Why not reread the passage?
1 1 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. 2 He fasted for forty days and forty nights, 2 and afterwards he was hungry.
P 3 The tempter approached and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command that these stones become loaves of bread." 4 3 He said in reply, "It is written: 'One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.'" 5 4 Then the devil took him to the holy city, and made him stand on the parapet of the temple, 6 and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down. For it is written: 'He will command his angels concerning you and 'with their hands they will support you, lest you dash your foot against a stone.'" 7 Jesus answered him, "Again it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord, your God, to the test.'" 8 Then the devil took him up to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their magnificence, 9 and he said to him, "All these I shall give to you, if you will prostrate yourself and worship me." 5
10 At this, Jesus said to him, "Get away, Satan! It is written: 'The Lord, your God, shall you worship and him alone shall you serve.'" 11 Then the devil left him and, behold, angels came and ministered to him.
By your logic, there was no point in saying that Jesus fasted for 40 days and 40 nights and he was hungry. Can God be hungry? Or that satan flew Jesus around the world (instead of vice versa) and tempted Him. Does satan have enough power to tempt Jesus? Can God be tempted? If Jesus was tempted, does that not indicate something? Can you tempt God? At the end, the angels came and ministered to Him. What? What does that mean? Does God need somebody to minister to Him? Does that even make sense, unless we have the illustration of Jesus the man. Note the parallel with the Passion - at the end, He cries out. In the Garden, He is tempted to do His best to avoid Crucifixion.
Scripture says tempt. I never said that He would fail, but that it took all He had to overcome that temptation, just like in three years - in the Garden.
How about having a go at defending the Cathar heresy from Scripture? You've posted several of your own, I believe.
Yes I did, thank you. All three of the Synoptic Gospels say it. Appreciate the help.
Scripture cannot be infallible
I was trying to reconcile your denial of the infallibility of Scripture with what Rome has historically held
It has to do with not only the words but with the interpretation of them. If I can defend a heresy using only Scriptural quotations, then the idea that the Bible cannot teach wrong is rendered invalid.
But even this is a matter of interpretation, that of what infallible means. Your definition is different from saying that its substance is inerrant, and or that its truth is pure, and which is how Scripture is treated within Scripture, while your definition would disallow anything that can be abused from being infallible, which disallows any authority from being infallible. And yet it presumes that Rome's claim to infallibility cannot be a misuse of history, tradition and Scripture.
Moreover, if you only simply rely on infallible declarations for certainty, then you are very very restricted, and uncertain about much, as no one knows for sure how many infallible teaching there are, or all of what parts of encyclicals are binding, and both need some degree of interpretation by non-infallible magisterium at some level. Like Scripture, the source could be pure but that does not necessarily prevent misconstruance. Meanwhile, the sedevacantists teach error (according to Rome) using nothing than writings of Rome, and can do so simply using infallible statements.
Yet Holy Writ — being progressively established as Divine by its enduring heavenly qualities — is the only objective authority declared therein to be wholly inspired of God. (2Tim. 3:16) And which shows authority being established by conformity and complementarity in faith, holiness and teaching to what God had prior established, along with Divine attestation in proportion its authority, such as seen most manifestly with Moses, Jesus and the apostles who instituted covenant and added new teachings. While Scripture and authority can be abused, such competition is needed as part of the test, as salvific truth is found by those who honestly seek Him with the whole heart, (Jer. 29:13) of a humble and contrite spirit, (Is. 66:2) which is the only kind that can know Him.
And even so, these words may be taken out of context and used to come up with different conclusions, beliefs and theologies.
As said, misuse of authority does not negate it. The Pharisees misused Scripture and their authority derived from it and Jesus reproved them by Scripture. But you validate an entity using Scripture and other sources to validate itself as infallible.
your fellow RCs basically tell us that it is (capital C) and the rest need to submit to her
Which ones?
You mean which ones tell us that the RCC is the one true Church? And that we need to submit to her? Surely you know which ones do not is the question.
The Church is not headquartered in Rome.
Surely you know the the word “Rome” is used because it is representative of the RCC, and “Rome has spoken, the matter is settled” (Augustine) is often quoted by Roman Catholics.
If you are referring to the need for a interpreter, as my 2190 post points out, “infallible” pronouncements themselves need some interpretation.
This does lead to somewhat of an agreement inasmuch as somebody needs to interpret these words - either the Church Magisterium or somebody else, often in the comfort of their own home.
That the assuredly infallible magisterium (“AIM” for future use) does not prevent the need for fallible interpretation is what should see agreement.
But the problem is not that the interpretation of these words may be infallible in themselves, but the formulaic assured status Rome infallibly claims she has as the uniquely supreme interpreter.
We believe that that is the responsibility of the Church - the teaching (and therefore interpreting) body given it by Christ.
It is, but Rome's claim is based upon her infallible declaration that she is who she says she is, according to her AIM, which is infallibly declared to be infallible when speaking in accordance with her infallibly declared formula. And which presumes that she is worthy of the implicit trust that she requires.
mb: You would never kill anyone for any reason?
Total red herring. That has absolutely nothing to do with the torture and murder allegedly in the name of Christ which the Catholic church perpetrated on people.
I see. When Protestants do it, it's okay. When the Church did it, it's torture and murder allegedly in the name of Christ. Hint: you have to look no further than the American colonies
Was it Christlike of the Catholic church to torture and kill those who it labeled as heretics against itself? Was it obedient to the teachings of Jesus, or any other writer of the NT?
cyc was kind enough to point them out to me.
I believe in the Faith handed down from Jesus to the Apostles and from thence to us.
Catholic church history is little to write home about and gives precious little evidence of following the Sermon on the Mount as even starters.
Yup. Father Damien was actually running a smuggling ring and needed a front.
Jesus said that if we love Him, we’ll obey His commandments.
I thought that you told me that the Gospels were for the Jews. When did you convert to Judaism?
Where is the commandment to persecute those who don’t fall in line with the Catholic church?
With Jesus, you mean?
One or two of them.
Just who is supposed to be doing the convincing here?
Well, Jesus convinced a little band of fallible men, the Holy Spirit convinced them and the rest of the folks in the upper room, and, with the promise to stay with them, is with we Christians to this day. I'm not sure who is convincing your bunch.
The church through torture and persecution?
Does Cotton Mather ring a bell?
Or the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment?
I know a few people who'd be convicted here, for sure.
What methods does God Himself use to bring people to himself?
A lapdog for the harpies might say that He hijacks their souls.
How can the church justify doing anything else?
You're right. Hijacking is wrong.
How about having a go at staying on topic?
I believe you, trust me, I do.
Now, I realize that that may be a foreign concept for FRoman Catholics, since they are forever having to explain to others how the church didn’t mean what it said, but learn to take things at face value. It will make life much easier for all.
Well, if you jettison your Bible completely, since it is a Catholic document, I'll agree that it would make life easier for those of us who try to counter heresies.
In reading your posting history? Boredom.
mb: Yes I did, thank you. All three of the Synoptic Gospels say it. Appreciate the help.
Where? Book, chapter, and verse, please.
How do you know? Who's privy to the information on where they ended up? Did someone tell you? Who? That's interesting. Not believing in a doctrine that wasn't articulated for centuries is enough to damn them? Do you have Scriptural support for that?
Is it getting shrill in here? The Faith is the Faith. Outside of the Faith, we cannot go. I said that they were lost. I did not say that they were damned.
I meant what I said, mm. Now, I realize that that may be a foreign concept to heretical and failed Catholics, since they are forever having to explain why they claim people say things that they don't say and rarely if ever retract their accusations.
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.