Posted on 01/15/2013 8:22:47 AM PST by marshmallow
Scripture disagrees with you.
John 20:[22] When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.
Matthew 16:[15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?
[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
see 33 above
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
You are aware that Yah'shua was/is/and Is that the corporate charter for the rabid
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
anti-semitic syncretic organization ?
will always be a Jew.
Attacking the messenger, not the message.
Par for the course.
It is always a Personal Attack, They do not have scriptural support for their Tradition. See 33 above for an outrageous attack. They seem to have the succor of the RM. Bless you Mom.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
whether direct or by innuendo.
The irony about which has authority is that the RCC claims that it has authority over Scripture because it *wrote* it, and that the RCC is the final authority.
But the problem is, the RCC cannot confer authority to itself. That is meaningless. The only thing that can give the RCC authority is something else outside the RCC which has greater authority.
So then they appeal to the authority of Scripture to give them authority over it. Thus they are by default recognizing the authority of Scripture over the church.
It’s simply not possible to claim to be more authoritative than something and then appeal to that thing to give you authority.
Amen ! Sister.shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
I believe this Personal Attack
Please review.
is directed toward myself.
It is indeed an interesting game some try to play claiming that an attack on a Church with a billion members cannot not be personal but any attack on the doctrines of a Church of one adherent cannot be anything other than personal. The reasonable man would conclude that this is only a ploy to manipulate the forum rules to their benefit to permit them to waive the bloody shirt of their self-perceived martyrdom.
We have seen aspects of this same sort of mental aberration with other subjects. But you are correct in understanding that the advocates of the same-sex marriage fantasy, are perfectly happy with the idea of destroying traditional Faith based concepts, to vindicate their own perverse perspective.
Since most people blanch at the idea of confronting hate spewing fanatics, they intimidate a great many of our neighbors, who should know better. As the saying used to be, all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
William Flax
You seem confused.shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachBut this is not a unique nor uncommon occurrence.
It seems to happen quite often.It could be purposeful misdirection or exogenous confusion.
1 Peter 5:8
I believe the statement was made by someone else.
"The Pope condemns communism and the acceptance of homosexuality ...."
"And in response, folks on a supposedly conservative forum condemn the Pope and the Church!"
It is astonishing, but then some of these folks are transparently anti-Christian in spite of what they claim to the contrary.Why else would they attack Christians for comparing the Queer Agenda to Communism?
It's always the same crowd who are busy spreading divisions among conservative Christians rather than condemning evil, too.
For example, the article entitled, "Accepting Evangelicals" - the new 'evangelicals' who back same sex marriage", received few comments with the anti-Catholic crowd conspicuously absent from those condemning the Queer Agenda and groups who go along with that agenda.
This nearby article entitled, "Vatican Article Likens Gay Marriage to Communism", though, is full of comments attacking the Christians who stand up against queers and communists.
Obviously, those who constantly work to spread divisions among Christians don't care about queers marrying one another, Communists, King Barry burning the First Amendment, or anything else corrupting society.
All they care about is spreading anti-Christian garbage, especially anti-Catholic lies and slogans from their favorite comic book author and his associates. Their goal is to spread divisions among Christians who dare to publicly stand up to the anti-Christian machinery the democrat fascists have put in place.
People who constantly try to cause divisions among Christian conservatives are exactly like the fascist crowd they pretend to disagree with. They're working for King Barry's fascist agenda every bit as much as those who openly attack Christians. Their own narcissistic false teaching thrives in a relativistic pagan society and falls apart in a society where Conservative Christian values are the norm.
Whether they're just so stupid they've become useful idiots or they're deliberate fifth column propagandists makes no difference. Either way, they further the Anti-Christian, Anti-Conservative, agenda by helping to fragment those who resist the fascist anti-Christ scum now running the country.
When an election rolls around, those who now pass their time attacking Catholics switch gears and start spewing reasons to sit out the election. When the election is over, they're right back at spreading divisions among Christians. There's no way around the fact that they're dedicated to keeping Christians from working together to resist tyranny and evil.
In all fairness, and while I can’t address every branch LifeWay has grown, I know from personal experience LifeWay is far more concerned about the sales figures in their stores than they are about staying in line with SBC thought and doctrine.
In fact, IIRC, the LifeWay board and Jerry Falwell had more than a few disagreements over various things Falwell preached and I seriously doubt it was Falwell who was not solidly in line with Southern Baptist teaching.
My intent was not to pick on “LifeWay”, but to point out an odd juxtaposition ...
The Signal/Noise Ratio can get quite low around here sometimes, and some noise sources are well known and well documented. Incidentally, I do NOT count as a “noise source” all sources with which I disagree. FWIW.
What does this have to do with the current subject that’s at hand on this thread here? You lost me with that statement.
You threw me when you inserted the word "Roman". That was not in post #33. But in any case, my post #61 should help clarify that the Catholic Church was indeed established by Jesus Christ.
Acts 15:8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts. Isn’t that interesting!
Matthew 16:[15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?
[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.
And just after that He said to Peter.
Matthew 16:23 >font color=red>Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
Isn’t that interesting!
Jesus did not call St. Peter Lucifer or the devil.
Jesus when talking to Peter.
Matthew 16:23 Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan (Satana)!
Jesus when talking to the Lucifer.
Matthew 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan (Satana): for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Isn’t that interesting!
What is this, St. Groundhog's Day? We went through this exact discussion exactly one week ago on a different thread.
Satana, “Satan,” derives from the Aramaic root sata, and means “to slip,” “to slide,” “to deceive,” “to miss the mark,” and “to cause one to be misled or go astray.” In Aramaic, calling an individual a “satan” means that the person is going astray or misleads. If Jesus had intended to refer to St. Peter as the devil the words he could have used were Lucifer, Beelzebub, Ahriman, Mephistopheles, or Phosphoros.
Peace be with you
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.