| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/07/2013 8:58:03 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 01/16/2013 8:57:49 AM PST by marshmallow
General audience, Benedict XVI defines the Incarnation as "something unimaginable, the face of God can be seen, the process that began with Abraham is fulfilled." The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, he asks "for the great gift" to "proclaim together that Jesus is the Savior of the world."
Vatican City (AsiaNews) - "The desire to know the face of God is in every man, even the atheists," but this desire is only realized by following Christ, in whom, in the Incarnation, "something unimaginable took place, the journey that began with Abraham is fulfilled. He is the Son, the fullness of all Revelation; the mediator who shows us the face of God. "
And "to proclaim together that Jesus is the Saviour of the world" Benedict XVI asked for incessant prayers for "the great gift" of Christian unity in the forthcoming week, which begins on the 18th of this month.
Previously, in his catechesis, he again reflected on the meaning of Christmas, in a commentary on John's Gospel in which the apostle Philip asks Jesus to show them the Father. The answer of Jesus, "introduces us to the heart of the Church's Christological faith; For the Lord says: "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" (Jn 14:9).This expression summarizes the novelty of the New Testament, the novelty that appeared in the cave of Bethlehem: God can be seen, he showed his face is visible in Jesus Christ".
The theme of "seeking the face of God" is present throughout the Old Testament, so much so that the Hebrew term "face", occurs no less than 400 times, 100 of which refer to God." The of Jewish religion which the religion forbids all images, "for God can not be depicted," and "can not be reduced to an object," tells us that "God...
(Excerpt) Read more at asianews.it ...
As always, spot on! Thank you boatbums.
ejn {PREP} pivstei {N-DSF} zw’ {V-PAI-1S} th’/ {T-DSF} tou’ {T-GSM} uiJou’ {N-GSM} tou’ {T-GSM} qeou’ {N-GSM} tou’ {T-GSM} ajgaphvsantov? {V-AAP-GSM} me {P-1AS} kai; {CONJ} paradovnto? {V-2AAP-GSM} eJauto;n {F-3ASM} uJpe;r {PREP} ejmou’. {P-1GS}
in faith (en pistai) I am living (zw) that (tn) the Son’s (tou uiou) the God’s (tou theou) loving me (agapnsanto)and (kai) giving (paradonto) himself (heauton) over me (huper emou).
In faith I am living that the Son’s the God’s loving me and giving himself for me.
Paul is describing the faith he lives by.
The Faith that is about the Son of God loving me and giving himself for me.
The “of” or “in” that is being argued about is a genitive article (tou). It is possessive and there is NO word present that means “of” or “in”. Tou is both the article + the sense of possession since it is genitive case.
So it reads: In faith I am living — THAT (faith about) God’s Son’s loving me and giving himself over me.
This is made certain by the use of the dative case with both faith (pistei) and that (te). It is also verified by Son, God, loving, me, and giving ALL being genitive. JMHO.
If God can do anything, can God make anything too heavy for Him to lift?
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
I don’t recall anywhere that CB said that he was not capable of falling into error.
Matter of fact, it’s the one’s who think they’re immune from falling into error because they’re part of a group who are in the bigger danger.
Those who are aware of their susceptibility will be constantly referring back to Scripture to make sure they’re on track.
And who is he mocking and where?
Just that. He obfuscates.
For example:
Cynical bear what are your beliefs about water baptism? Do you think the mode should by sprinkling, immersing, or some other mode or combination of modes?
See post 1005.
Show me scripture where either one affects one’s salvation.
CynicalBear responded: Show me scripture where either one affects one’s salvation.
See what I mean, boatbums.....Just dodges and obfuscates.
That's what I call "every wind of doctrine."
CynicalBear responded: Show me scripture where either one affects one’s salvation.
See what I mean, boatbums.....Just dodges and obfuscates.
That's what I call "every wind of doctrine."
Well.... um.... you see.. ahhh.... it's like this.....
Well.... um.... you see.. ahhh.... it's like this.....
Tell me how being a self-created house church guards against error.
No. Because they can compare his STATEMENTS to Scripture. Why add the middle man of doctrinal statements? There's no guarantee THOSE aren't in error. Then people are stuck comparing doctrinal statements for constancy, and the comparing CB's comments to BOTH Scripture and Doctrinal statements.
Better to just go right to the source; authoritative Scripture.
No. Because they can compare his STATEMENTS to Scripture. Why add the middle man of doctrinal statements? There's no guarantee THOSE aren't in error. Then people are stuck comparing doctrinal statements for constancy, and the comparing CB's comments to BOTH Scripture and Doctrinal statements.
Better to just go right to the source; authoritative Scripture.
Do you claim to be infallible in your interpretation of any and all verses in the Bible? Or do you think that there are some ideas you may have developed about certain verses which just might be..... (gasp).... wrong?
Take heed lest you fall.
The EXACT same arguments Catholics use to justify their magisterium and *sacred tradition*.
All those things you posited to be a problem with DB as an individual can be applied to whole groups or denominations. They are NOT exempt from the same problems with interpretation which an individual is.
I’ll put it a different way. Two men have accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior. One is baptized by sprinkling; the other is baptized by immersion. Which one is saved?
Self created you say!! What other things do you believe simply by conjecture?
HD:Would you like me to post where someone won't admit to the Trinity? Same thing.
Oh, absolutely not the same thing.
It's just that manipulation thing again.
Not engaging in your attempts to label people does not mean an answer. You can't presume the answer you want to hear because someone is wise to what's going on and won't engage.
HD:Would you like me to post where someone won't admit to the Trinity? Same thing.
Oh, absolutely not the same thing.
It's just that manipulation thing again.
Not engaging in your attempts to label people does not mean an answer. You can't presume the answer you want to hear because someone is wise to what's going on and won't engage.
So, are you saying that mode makes no difference? I said to choose: sprinking, immersion, some other mode or combination of modes.
You appear to be choosing "combination of modes". Is that correct?
But it doesn't mention any doctrines about the Trinity.....
The rest of the verses REFER to doctrine but do not state exactly what it is.
God teaches us doctrine through His word but not everyone is taught it.
Really? The Holy Spirit doesn't lead us all into truth through His word?
That's an interesting concept.
He does not like it when we say things that are not true about Him.
No kidding. That's why we go back to His word...
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.