Posted on 01/25/2014 11:26:41 AM PST by Gamecock
ping to 104
Okay, I can play the "deep intellectual Aquinas game", too. If you do NOT NOT consider Aquinas to be "deep intellectual and theological thinking", then it explains your odd odd answers.
All this just because some men are woken up by God and leave your organization? What if they are right?
You raise a good point. I frankly do not know if the Scriptures are definitive where the "eternal life" with Christ will be spent. There are hints here and there, perhaps metaphorical pictures given, but no real fist-pounding clarity.
My remark was meant to address the time we depart earth physically and are united with Him, not that longer spell of ultimate destination. Paul makes some remarks about being here "...at home in the body..." means that "...we are absent from the Lord." Is this a clue that while on earth, He has a place for us elsewhere? Doesn't this imply that He is "dwelling" elsewhere? Or is that just until He returns and reigns? Don't know. Paul's letter to the Hebrews mentions a citizenship in the heavenly Jerusalem. Metaphor or reality? Not sure. Your thoughts?
Oh, my. You have a number of mixed messages in your remarks. You don’t trust television ministers simply because you cannot tell by whose authority they teach? You don’t compare their message to anything solid, but simply ask that they teach by some “other” authority? Who gave the “authority” to the “other authority”? Themselves?
If you wish a real discussion about this matter, then I am willing to engage. If these are just remarks to dismiss me, then I will consider myself dismissed and stop here. But, what you are getting at is a very involved, protracted discussion and not simply snippets of a party line, from either side.
I was raised Catholic, left the Church and came back to it after a careful study of scripture and protestant theology. I will pray for you as well.
>> “but the genuine apostles could ordain/appoint bishops/elders, and those bishops/elders ordain/appoint other bishops/elders, until this day in an unbroken chain of doctrinal unity and truth.” <<
.
Ordination of teachers does nothing to preserve truth.
The word is the sole source of Yehova’s truth. Yeshua emphasized that fact by placing the phrase “it is written” at the beginning of every teaching he ever presented. He totally condemned all traditions, and stated that one’s righteousness had to exceed that of those promoting traditions to be able to see the kingdom of Yehova.
>> “There was no gap. There were churches in every generation.” <<
.
There was a huge gap!
From the crushing of Yeshua’s Way in the early 4th century by Constantine’s systematic persecution of all that followed Torah, there is a clear gap that is more than a millennium long. Rome crushed the worship of Yeshua, replacing it with gussied-up sun god worship declared to be Christianity.
We can all play the narses game, but where does it lead?
Do you have an abundant supply of childish graphics to post?
It’ll take a ton of them :o)
Or play the editor-surveyor games that lead away from the True Church and into the land of desolation.
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;
Creatorem caeli et terrae.
Et in Jesum Christum,
Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum;
qui conceptus est
de Spiritu Sancto,
natus ex Maria virgine;
passus sub Pontio Pilato,
crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus;
descendit ad inferos;
tertia die resurrexit a mortuis;
ascendit ad caelos;
sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis;
inde venturus est
iudicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum;
sanctam ecclesiam catholicam;
sanctorum communionem;
remissionem peccatorum;
carnis resurrectionem;
vitam aeternam. Amen.
In English:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ,
his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived
by the power of the Holy Spirit,
and born of the Virgin Mary,
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
He descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
he will come again
to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen
Which hell did he descend into? Gehanna? Sheol?
That is a line I’ve long been puzzled by.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a5p1.htm
PART ONE
THE PROFESSION OF FAITH
SECTION TWO
THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
CHAPTER TWO
I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY SON OF GOD
ARTICLE 5
“HE DESCENDED INTO HELL. ON THE THIRD DAY HE ROSE AGAIN”
631 Jesus “descended into the lower parts of the earth. He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens.”476 The Apostles’ Creed confesses in the same article Christ’s descent into hell and his Resurrection from the dead on the third day, because in his Passover it was precisely out of the depths of death that he made life spring forth:
Christ, that Morning Star, who came back from the dead, and shed his peaceful light on all mankind, your Son who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.477
Paragraph 1. Christ Descended into Hell
632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection.478 This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.479
633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.480 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:481 “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.”482 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.483
634 “The gospel was preached even to the dead.”484 The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfilment. This is the last phase of Jesus’ messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ’s redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.
635 Christ went down into the depths of death so that “the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.”485 Jesus, “the Author of life”, by dying destroyed “him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage.”486 Henceforth the risen Christ holds “the keys of Death and Hades”, so that “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth.”487
Today a great silence reigns on earth, a great silence and a great stillness. A great silence because the King is asleep. The earth trembled and is still because God has fallen asleep in the flesh and he has raised up all who have slept ever since the world began. . . He has gone to search for Adam, our first father, as for a lost sheep. Greatly desiring to visit those who live in darkness and in the shadow of death, he has gone to free from sorrow Adam in his bonds and Eve, captive with him - He who is both their God and the son of Eve. . . “I am your God, who for your sake have become your son. . . I order you, O sleeper, to awake. I did not create you to be a prisoner in hell. Rise from the dead, for I am the life of the dead.”488
IN BRIEF
636 By the expression “He descended into hell”, the Apostles’ Creed confesses that Jesus did really die and through his death for us conquered death and the devil “who has the power of death” (Heb 2:14).
637 In his human soul united to his divine person, the dead Christ went down to the realm of the dead. He opened heaven’s gates for the just who had gone before him.
476 Eph 4:9-10.
477 Roman Missal, Easter Vigil 18, Exsultet.
478 Acts 3:15; Rom 8:11; 1 Cor 15:20; cf. Heb 13:20.
479 Cf. 1 Pet 3:18-19.
480 Cf. Phil 2:10; Acts 2:24; Rev 1:18; Eph 4:9; Pss 6:6; 88:11-13.
481 Cf. Ps 89:49; 1 Sam 28:19; Ezek 32:17-32; Lk 16:22-26.
482 Roman Catechism I, 6, 3.
483 Cf. Council of Rome (745): DS 587; Benedict XII, Cum dudum (1341): DS 1011; Clement VI, Super quibusdam (1351): DS 1077; Council of Toledo IV (625): DS 485; Mt 27:52-53.
484 1 Pet 4:6.
485 Jn 5:25; cf. Mt 12:40; Rom 10:7; Eph 4:9.
486 Heb 2:14-15; cf. Acts 3:15.
487 Rev 1:18; Phil 2:10.
488 Ancient Homily for Holy Saturday: PG 43, 440A, 452C; LH, Holy Saturday, OR.
As for what the True Church teaches, it is all available, go to the Catechism and learn, or not.
Again, what do you care sweetie? You and your cult of one knows all, and needs no one, right?
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Testimonies from ex-Roman Catholic Priests, editor-surveyor wrote:
From the crushing of Yeshua’s Way in the early 4th century by Constantine’s systematic persecution of all that followed Torah, there is a clear gap that is more than a millennium long. Rome crushed the worship of Yeshua, replacing it with gussied-up sun god worship declared to be Christianity.
Yep, that is the “gospel” according to editor-surveyor and his “cult of one”. Just another Sunday on the FR Religion Forum, where one after another “cult leaders of one”* attack the Catholic Church. A sad ritual, but it appears well established here.
(*When asked the “cult leaders of one” claim they follow the Bible, not any denomination. Odd, but they almost all claim that. Then they agree with each other that the Catholic Church is wrong, evil and satanic - but nothing else.)
If these are just remarks to dismiss me, then I will consider myself dismissed and stop here.Oh please. You really should.
Thank you for that response.
It makes sense now. :)
Matthew 7:6. He appears to have made up his mind let him live with the consequences.
Indeed!
Is this part of the kindness that you learned from Aquinas and his deep intellectual and theological training? We notice this about RCs, that it is more about bluster and strutting, than about reasoned truth.
Besides, what is this "Protestant Theology" you speak of? How "careful" can one be in examining that, unless it is clearly defined?
What are the differences? For instance; Is Romanist replacement theology better than some other versions, since it is equipped with priesthood caste? What of those who aver that [replacement] aspect of various theologies altogether?
On second thought, never mind, I'm not in the least interested in anything you would have to say concerning it, for I have heard enough from you and many others here, to be able to predict well enough what the answers would be like. We all seen them, thousands of times, all of us who have been following the discussions, these issues for long years now...
I've been to the other side of the Mountain. The Lord has indeed carried me over, already. I am one of the most fortunate of souls, in that He sought me, and He bought me (with a price), before I ever darkened any door leading into Freeper-lands...
At this point, any after-the-fact prayers offered by the proudly "religious" are but as dung, with neither myself nor the Lord much interested, or needful of them.
Do us both a favor though, if you would. Spare me the repetitious, Romanist boilerplate promotional pleadings and bleats. I have heard them all, already, thousands of times, and at some time or another, have thoroughly investigated each and every one of them.
Scarcely any of those are as they are *advertised* to be. There is a pattern there, though, one of half-truths, category error, wishful thinking, special pleading, cherry-picking of "quotes", isolation of various scripture passages, etc. It turns into quite a maze. It's as if it designed to be that way. Funny how that works. I'm not all that surprised that many are bedazzled by it.
Yet I had "the prize" in hand already, prior to the searching through-the-maze, which investigation into claims of Romanist Supremacy and the like (choose which area of theological disagreement which all other "ecclesiastical communities" outside of "Rome" hold, which Rome claims her own self singular master of) which one wishes to investigate --- it all runs through similar twisting pathways, in pattern-form, with the same junctures of misrepresentation all throughout.
Being that I'm now in possession of "the genuine article", I can not let go of that and turn it in for credit/rebate towards some shiny, Romish replacement model --- by which I mean, hawk your wares elsewhere. Spare us also of the public announcement of how you'll be doing all this "praying" for me.
It is not needed, for I have been carried far beyond your reach, even by the hand of the Almighty, as He has shown me personally which He shall, at some time in my own personal future, do with deliberate action on His own part, reach, grasp, and take me to Himself with a mighty hand, even His own.
Having all of that, being well enough equipped in all things, leaves me not interested in much of anything which Roman Catholicism would wish to sell, or convince me of, in regards to their own "identity", and what that in their own view should mean to me (or anyone). Inevitiblely if not immedietly from the onset, it turns to such as I must unilaterally submit myself to them and their theologies (mentioned in the plural here, deliberately, for sake of accuracy) in all things.
They (Romanists) do seem to mistake themselves for being God, and with specialists pleadings plea that down to being merely His "vicar". Well okey-doke, but who needs a valet or a chaperone, when one arrives on foot, alone perhaps, but with engraved invitation from the King Himself, in hand? Who is it that can stand in the door and block access, or add their own "requirements for entry" to those who hold such engraved invitations? You? Some [Roman] Catholic theologian, perhaps?
I've faced the best of them, and remain unconvinced of anything other than Romanism is as short-sighted, and in effect, occasionally produces results as blasphemous as that which the Sanhedrin whom they in all earnestness seek to replace did produce, putting themselves in Moses's seat, which they now call Peter's, and claim is their own singular birthright, as much for sake of the geographical accident, of the church of Rome having been built over Peter's dead body.
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.