Posted on 05/31/2013 2:44:05 PM PDT by NYer
Was Christ dying on the Cross "appropriate"?
Yes, he did get a sinless human nature. Otherwise he could not serve as the substitutionary sacrifice. He was as Adam was before the fall.
That's not quite RCC theology.
What were the vows they took and how does a conversion to Catholicism violate them? Hahn was ordained at Trinity Presbyterian a "progressive" reformed church that has recently required their clergy to take new, revised vows. How does that fit your idea of ordination vows? Were you aware that Assemblies of God have no ordination requirements for Youth pastors.
Peace be with you
Self Alone interpretation always leads to a direct or indirect denial of the Deity of Jesus Christ sooner or later.
People who start by only accepting the "Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture" are destined to develop doctrines that contradict one another. Contradictions like waking up one morning and deciding that what they had preached as Scripture Alone based Truth for four centuries didn't matter and began to teach the exact opposite with regard to murdering your children in the womb.
Everyone not Catholic just woke up one day and decided Superslick Christian Liberty Grease was a far better basis for what they teach than Scripture Alone and ever since they've reversed themselves on one thing after another. Whatever is popular in the society they're in the Protestant and Protestant derived groups will approve of before too long. Whether it's contraception or queers marrying one another, they'll find a way to apply a bit of Superslick CLG and give the wallets in the pews what they want.
People who accept the doctrines that lead to teaching one thing as truth based on the Bible one day, and the exact opposite the next, are denying Scripture and by doing so denying Christ Himself. They've been deceived into accepting the worship of their own, Most High and Holy Self, the same deception Eve fell for, rather than worshiping Christ and following in His footsteps.
So now you are claiming the ability to infallibly interpret Scripture?
>> “If Mary had other children then Jesus Christ didn’t die sinless.” <<
.
Never before in the history of the internet has such a false and stupid comment been posted!
Just the implication that Mary could ever have been sinless is the vilest of blasphemy, since it makes Yeshua, and his apostles and the scriptures they wrote liars, but to deny her children is vile hateful evil.
So, Jesus Christ was free to violate the Ten Commandments and still be considered sinless?
Interesting.
So who do you think Jesus was praying to, himself??? Your ignorance of scripture is astounding...
No, Scripture says Jesus had "brothers", which could have been cousins and half brothers. It does not say that Mary was their natural mother or that she had any other children.
Nothing in any scripture supports the idea of “interpretation” of scripture.
Interpretation, in every instance is the act of turning the plain truth into a lie.
Scripture is to be read aloud, and thereby understood and remembered. (”Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God”)
The only way anyone could be a half-brother of Yeshua is if Mary is their mother. (or do you believe that the HS caused others to conceive?)
Mixed with your nonsense is a shadow of the Truth. The Word of God is indeed intended to be heard. That is why Jesus, the Apostles and St. Paul had a verbal ministry and why the Bible was only compiled by the Church as a Lectionary to identify which writings were suitable to be read during the Liturgy of the Word in the Catholic Mass.
Within that same Mass and within the Liturgy of the Word is a Homily whose purpose is to interpret and explain what was heard. That is not dissimilar to the practices of even the most bizarre Protestant sects.
Peace be to you
BBBBBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTT!!!!!
The right answer was Jesus' half brothers were the biological sons of Joseph from his first wife. But we do have a lovely parting gift for you.
Joseph was of no relation to Yeshua, thus had he any children of other women (which he did not, he was a Godly and upright man) they would be of no relation to Yeshua.
Were I you, I would be fearfully confessing and repenting the murmering against Yahova’s servent Joseph.
If I could go through Scripture and figure out that the arguments people use to "prove" Mary had other children is baseless garbage anyone can.
Those who insist Mary had other children are under a strong delusion and don't even want to know the Truth.
It's like a huge herd of Ray Charles clones, all blind, wearing hip shades, each sitting at their own little piano with a huge smile, and swaying in time with the music as they each belt out their own favorite tune.
Under Jewish law and tradition an adopted son was a closer relation than a biological relation. An adoption was forever, but a biological child could be disinherited. It is a foretelling of the Gentiles becoming the adopted children of God. It is only modern culture that puts such an emphasis on biological paternity.
Were you me you would have no need.
The plain words of the gospels declare that Mary had many children.
The strong delusion is your own! Deny the scriptures at your own peril. There is no basis to believe anything else.
You’ll have to work that out with Yehova; I can’t help 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.