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 ...
II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion;[2] and of their children:[3] and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,[4] the house and family of God,[5] out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.[6] III. Unto this catholic visible Church Christ has given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, in this life, to the end of the world: and does, by His own presence and Spirit, according to His promise, make them effectual thereunto.[7] IV. This catholic Church has been sometimes more, sometimes less visible.[8] And particular Churches, which are members thereof, are more or less pure, according as the doctrine of the Gospel is taught and embraced, ordinances administered, and public worship performed more or less purely in them.[9] V. The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error;[10] and some have so degenerated, as to become no Churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan.[11] Nevertheless, there shall be always a Church on earth to worship God according to His will.[12] VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.[13] Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.[14]I. The catholic or universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that fills all in all.[1]
Calvin completely took Augustinian writings out of context and built a theology of double predestination out of sand. Whose understanding is faulty?
Fixed it for you.
Fixed? How about naming some.
Name some.
Yes he was.
Those secular authorities have an area where they are permitted to exercise power, As you said “Caesar’s things”, but it was constrained by God”s law so it was only a relative power and authority hence Paul uses the word “tetagmenai” which means to set in a certain order, to assign a place.
Peter said Christians were to “obey God as ruler rather than men” when that God permitted authority overstepped it’s bounds.(Acts:29)
Paul called the secular authorities God’s “servant, diakonos, ministers” to the extent that it did enforce good conduct and order. Paul thus could call upon the Roman government, no matter how evil it was in other ways, for protection.
The approval seems to have been from the authorities for the good Christian conduct not the other direction.
“Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it,”
Oh. You mean like the heretical statement that Scripture is a “Catholic document”? Clue for you: it’s God’s word.
Not heretical. Accurate.
Bug, meet windshield. Again.
Looks like I'm going to have to invest in more Windex.
I gave you Martin Luther’s writings on predestination.
Here’s the Anglican’s affirmation of the same in the 39 Articles...
http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2010/05/39-articles-teach-double-predestination.html
Likewise there are reformed Methodists and Pentecostals. Google them yourself.
No, but senators like Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Schumer, and Gillibrand are, to name a few.
They threw their weight in behind the abortion effort and still do. They are culpable.
Read Augustine’s “Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints.” It’s free online. This perspective was church doctrine until the Roman church asserted itself over all other churches.
To the shame of the body of Christ.
Thankfully, the Reformation recovered the truth of Christ risen.
Your spamming the threads with nearly 20 repeats of the same post is easy to ignore.
Post whatever you like. No one is reading it except your cabal.
And maybe not even them.
Mr Blackitt: Look at them, bloody Catholics. Filling the bloody world up with bloody people they can't afford to bloody feed.
Mrs Blackitt: What are we dear?
Mr Blackitt: Protestant, and fiercely proud of it...
Mrs Blackitt: Why do they have so many children...?
Mr Blackitt: Because every time they have sexual intercourse they have to have a baby.
Mrs Blackitt: But it's the same with us, Harry.
Mr Blackitt: What d'you mean...?
Mrs Blackitt: Well I mean we've got two children and we've had sexual intercourse twice.
Mr Blackitt: That's not the point... We *could* have it any time we wanted.
Mrs Blackitt: Really?
Mr Blackitt: Oh yes. And, what's more, because we don't believe in all that Papist claptrap we can take precautions.
Mrs Blackitt: What, you mean lock the door...?
Mr Blackitt: No no, I mean, because we are members of the Protestant Reformed Church which successfully challenged the autocratic power of the Papacy in the mid-sixteenth century, we can wear little rubber devices to prevent issue.
Mrs Blackitt: What do you mean?
Mr Blackitt: I could, if I wanted, have sexual intercourse with you...
Mrs Blackitt: Oh, yes... Harry...
Mr Blackitt: And by wearing a rubber sheath over my old feller I could ensure that when I came off... you would not be impregnated.
Mrs Blackitt: Ooh!
Mr Blackitt: That's what being a Protestant's all about. That's why it's the church for me. That's why it's the church for anyone who respects the individual and the individual's right to decide for him or herself. When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in 1517, he may not have realised the full significance of what he was doing. But four hundred years later, thanks to him, my dear, I can wear whatever I want on my John Thomas. And Protestantism doesn't stop at the simple condom. Oh no! I can wear French Ticklers if I want.
Mrs Blackitt: You what?
Mr Blackitt: French Ticklers... Black Mambos... Crocodile Ribs... Sheaths that are designed not only to protect but also to enhance the stimulation of sexual congress...
Mrs Blackitt: Have you got one?
Mr Blackitt: Have I got one? Well no... But I can go down the road any time I want and walk into Harry's and hold my head up high, and say in a loud steady voice: 'Harry I want you to sell me a *condom*. In fact today I think I'll have a French Tickler, for I am a Protestant...'
Mrs Blackitt: Well why don't you?
Mr Blackitt: But they... [He points at the stream of children still pouring past the house.]... they cannot. Because their church never made the great leap out of the Middle Ages, and the domination of alien episcopal supremacy!
Nope, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition...
” But we have no way of telling who is actually condemned to hell.”
But isn’t that exactly what is being done here, “telling who is actually condemned to hell”? Those who die in a state of mortal sin?
“1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.”
If I misunderstand either your statement or the Catechism, please inform how so.
But this isn't what the early church fathers taught nor what the Church says it teaches. Scripture is infallible. All other writings are not so. You could argue that the Church is the only ones who can correctly interpret what the infallible scriptures says. But then that begs the question as to how they can come up with their various notions of Mary, the Eucharist, relics, etc. when there is none of this in scripture.
The fact is the Catholic Church has included works of other authors that was not considered infallible-relying upon documents subject to error, to justify erroneous positions. It would be the same as if Augustine quoted Jerome giving it the same status as the infallible scriptures. This would never have occured to them.
I haven't dealt with those clowns in a long while. They are yet another piece of work.
QuotationWhen attributing, you do not have to show every place a work, long out of copyright, was quoted. The usage guidelines by Catholic.com are referring to their own unique composition in which the quote is featured, not the quotations of works themselves no longer covered by copyright. Your approach would be like someone citing a quote of Sir Winston Churchill featured in a Washington Post editorial and being accused of infringement of copyright. Not so. The WaPo may quote Churchill in an editorial, but it has no copyright of that quote that appears in their copyrighted editorial.
Individuals are permitted to make brief quotations from the material on this site, in keeping with the "fair use" provisions of copyright law. In such cases, proper attribution must be made.
Attribution
When a given text does not have an author byline, Catholic Answers should be listed as the author.
lol. Amen.
The RCC claims what it does not possess. They boast they wrote the Scriptures (which they didn't) and then they ignore them. They say the head of the church on earth is a fallible old man in a dress when the only head of Christ's church on earth is Jesus Christ. They follow "another Christ" and pray to a "co-redeemer."
All the spam in the world can't negate those mind-numbing errors.
Quix; you'd better get a hand on your friends. Just like Lenin, aren't they: spy on your friends today, for tomorrow they are your enemies. We have been telling you this all along. You don't have to be their lapdog and useful idiot any more.
metmom-Aside from the fact that everyone on this forum knows how totally wrong that statement is...
Amen. I wonder what the traditions were of Adam when God gave the command not to eat the fruit of the tree? In fact, if someone want to say that Adam didn't write it down and that it was past down by word of mouth, here would be a case of where "tradition" failed. ;O)
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.