There's no chance of you lion, is there?
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 ...
I agree with e-s.
If you’re going to post the Scripture references, don’t be so lazy and post only the reference. Post the passages as well.
We’re not going to go chasing them down for you and do your work for you.
well, the old broken clock theory! LOL!
I've read your postings of your interpretations of Scripture. I will give you credit for grandiose imagination. You have a fine future in science fiction, I'm sure.
What if he posts Gospel passages?
>> “how can the Church be wrong on baptism for 1,500 years??” <<
.
The church essentially ceased to exist in most of the world when the Roman catholic apostasy began in the third century. It came back in the sixteenth century when the Holy Spirit called on Martin Luther.
Everything that Rome has postulated on baptism is clearly wrong, but others likely worshiped scripturally without leaving much written record.
It IS hard to believe, but the Catholic church DID manage to pull it off.
See? That's exactly what following "tradition" will get you. Right, straight into error.
I don’t do interpretation; I read the plain word and believe.
Interpretation is where the error comes from that has you so confused.
MB: Correct. And so does God. What does God call the little cult that you settled in to?
Where is that title found in Scripture? And where did God tell the apostles to name it that?
Then why the need for speculation, conjecture and extrapolation?
>> “Then why the need for speculation, conjecture and extrapolation?” <<
.
Since you’re the one doing it how about you answering your own question.
Good Night! Enjoy your confusion.
There's no chance of you lion, is there?
couple comments: first, you have no clue the Church is the Body of Christ on earth, it is protected by the Holy Spirit and no where in the Bible does it teach it will cease to exist.....gates of hell will not prevail against it. now, you must make up this accusation because if the Church didn’t go into apostasy, you are in apostasy by your own definition! The Holy Spirit i guess did a poor job with Luther, because he was also apostate according to you because he also didn’t understand baptism. Lastly, you do realize the Bible you hold in your hands, the canon was set by apostates? How can you trust their judgement, you might not have the Word of God at all. Joseph Smith would be proud, you agree with him, although he said the apostasy happened in the laste 1st century.
I’ve never figured out how comotose folks do that.
Show me.
so when Jesus said “This is My Body” he meant it’s His Body, right?
This is why there are Catholics and failed Catholics. One Church is found in Scripture. So is Holy. So is Apostle. The term Catholic was applied during the lifetime of John. The Reformation occured 1500 years after the life of Christ. Where is that found in Scripture? For that matter, where is double predestination found in Scripture? Or does your cult not believe in that? If that is so, why are you hanging around with folks who despise non Reformed?
So, the title of the RC church is built out of random snippets of verses taken out of context just like their mass is?
Shoulda figured.
I always read consciously. As opposed to dispensationalists who seem to be in a theological coma.
What can't you grasp about all those texts?
I object to those to publish proofs and illustrate passages of their Christianity with OT passages. Christ was pointed to in the OT, but one cannot generate a complete picture of Jesus from the OT, as many do on FR.
Paul seemed to have done quite a good job establishing the basis of his doctrines from the OT. Obviously there are some exceptions such as conduct of the Eucharist and at Love Feasts. You also can't help but notice that Stephen's sermon was drawn entirely from the OT.
Galatians 1:14-16 "And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles...
Paul sat at the feet of the great rabbis learning as much of the OT as possible.
Acts 17:11-12 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
Even the Bereans were praised because they confirmed what they were to know of Jesus Christ from the testimony of the OT.
So the OT told us all that we need to know of Jesus Christ, and Paul's letters are pretty much formed on that basis. The point being, is that our LORD could be known from OT Revelation, surely David and the Prophets could see our LORD in what was revealed to them, sufficiently to have faith that saved them.
What the NT offers us is the fulfillment portions of the OT teachings. In the testimony of the Gospels we see that our LORD was indeed the one spoken of by the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. Lest you think I trivialize the NT let me be clear here.
I view the NT to be a Holy Spirit inspired commentary on the OT Scriptures. When we read Romans, we are reading the OT, but we now see that the mystery revealed is that the Gospel was given to men of all nations and that the Gentiles are granted in to the promises made to Abraham. When Paul expresses his joy, he articulates the doctrines in light of the mystery revealed.
The key to understanding the Scriptures is by the Revelation of the Paraclete (1 Cor 2:14). The Jews had the OT and didn't see the Messiah. Up until Pentecost, the eleven remaining disciples of Christ who were personally taught by our LORD for three years still didn't understand and even at the Day of His Ascension to His throne in Heaven, they were still looking for an OT styled physical earthly reign. It wasn't until the Gift of the Spirit in the upper room at Pentecost did they then understand and from there were they able to preach the Gospel boldly.
Paul with his superior knowledge of the OT didn't see Christ and was murdering Christians. The difference was not in anything new being written, for the Gospels weren't written until decades after our LORD's death and resurrection. Clearly the Pauline epistles weren't written until after Paul's ministry began so there was no new testament until the canon was being compiled and distributed. What was the difference? The source texts were the Old Testament, and the interpretation and illumination was conducted by the Paraclete, slammed down by God on the road to Damascus - that is why in Acts 13, the Jews and Gentiles heard the same message, but as we read in v45 "the Jews were filled with envy; contradicting and blaspheming, they opposed the things spoken of by Paul" while among the Gentiles "when they heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the LORD (the OT). And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."
The Gentiles heard the OT made alive by the Paraclete as appointed by God, and they believed.
So based on the 1 Corinthians 2:14 Principle, it is not the Sola Scriptura in our salvation, it is the Scriptures + the Holy Spirit.
Same story, now served with a dash of the Spirit.
Assumption of Mary -
The best proof is the papacy founded by Jesus, with Peter as the first Pope. He was given the power to bind and loose and the keys to Heaven. He said that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church.
In other words - Jesus started the papacy and said it wouldn’t fail. If the Pope says we need to believe it then it is so.
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.