Posted on 11/06/2014 2:29:33 PM PST by NYer
In June of this year, the largest Presbyterian denomination in America voted to allow their clergy to perform same-sex “marriages” within the church, thus joining the ranks of other Protestant denominations, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Episcopalian Church, and United Church of Christ.
This “evolution” of theology and “modernizing” of church doctrine is a trend that I predict we’ll continue to see in non-Catholic Christian circles for years to come, and not just with marriage. Today, nearly all Protestant denominations support and even advocate the use of artificial birth control, and many allow at least some level of support for abortion.
Of course, not all Protestants are willing to “move with the times”, so to speak; there remains, especially among the more conservative groups, quite a bit of dissent. However, it cannot be denied that many modern day Protestant denominations are falling further into the depths of secularism.
While it pains me to see Christians turning their backs on the sanctity of life and marriage, I have to admit that whenever the media lights up with news of another Protestant church endorsing an otherwise wholly unchristian act, I find myself entirely unsurprised.
The reason for my utter lack of shock lies, interestingly enough, within two of the critical tenants of Protestant Theology: the doctrines of sola scriptura (scripture alone) and sola fide (faith alone).
As Catholics, the Bible is not our sole source of authority, nor was the Catholic Church based upon it. In fact, what we now call “The Bible” — the collected Old Testament and New Testament writings — was put together by the Church herself, and is meant to enrich and support our doctrine and Tradition.
(Consider too that the Gospel is the written testimony of the teachings of the apostles, which, due to apostolic tradition and the God-given teaching authority of the Church, precedes the written text. Thus, any authority of the Scriptures is derived from the recognition of the Church.)
Yet, the Protestant Reformation severed the Tradition from the Bible, and put all other authorities beneath it. By doing so, they created a type of religious relativism (unwittingly, I’m sure) that opened the door for an “anything goes” mentality. So long, of course, as it can be found — or not found — in the scriptures.
For years, sola scriptura was a major weapon against Catholic theology, claiming that our practices were either absent or directly forbidden by Sacred Scripture. However, since the latter part of the 20th century, the charges that “Jesus never said (x)” or “That’s not in the Bible” have turned on themselves and have now become, “Jesus never said (x) was wrong, so that means (x) must be okay.”
This idea blends well with many in my generation, the millennials, who wish to hold on to some shred of spirituality but cannot bring themselves to relinquish the desires of the flesh. It is also a base notion of “Progressive Christianity”, which is basically the feel-good parts of following Christ without any actual sacrifice.
The same problem goes for sola fide. Though the only place in the Bible where the words “faith” and “alone” appear next to one another is in James 2:24 (“See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone”), it still remains a significant tenant of Protestant Christianity. However, much like sola scriptura, it has seemingly evolved into an even more bastardized version of itself that states, “As long as I’m a good person and believe in Jesus, I’m okay.”
Now, understand, I’m not among the ilk who believe that Protestants can’t go to Heaven, though the path is significantly more challenging (and not in a “take up your cross” kind of way). I do believe, however, that Christianity was never meant go in this direction. And I certainly believe that, should things continue in the manner they’re going for the modern-day Protestants, they’ll eventually have nothing left to call Christian at all.
Of course, perhaps that’s the only logical conclusion Protestantism could possibly come to. It is, after all, a theologically incomplete Christianity; and perhaps that is why it has such difficulty standing the test of time. Consider the continuous splintering Protestantism has seen since the days of Luther, that continues today. Sooner or later, it will be dust; and displaced Christians will be left with two choices: return to Holy Catholic Church or give themselves to the world.
I have answered twice already, but I will try again. And I will use your NIV translation, even though it has problems.
Keep in mind that Christ is the MAIN topic of this whole passage. It is about HIS coming, that timing, and HIS work.
Daniel 9:25 Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One[CHRIST], the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One[Christ] will be put to death and will have nothing.
[begin parenthetical statement about what would follow after Christ’s death regarding Daniel’s people of whom Daniel was praying]
The people of the ruler[Titus] who will come will destroy the city[Jerusalem] and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. [end parenthetical statement]
27 He[Christ] will confirm a covenant[New Testament] with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’[after 3.5 years of ministry] he[Christ] will put an end to sacrifice and offering[Christ became our sacrifice].
[here is where the NIV translators made things less clear than most literal translations , there are no “he” to carry through as the NIV shows]And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Here is the ESV “ And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator”
While this whole passage primary fulfillment is talking about the Messiah’s advent and the destruction of Jerusalem, there is also some mirror prophecy stuff going on related to Jerusalem and the Muslims (Caliph Omar). I don’t have the time or inclination to go that deep here.
I already quoted you the passage once, but I will again here.
Zechariah 9:9-10King James Version (KJV)
9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.
So the question remains, How does Jerusalem extend to the ends of the earth, and what is the river and the seas mentioned?
“Ever hear of the New Jerusalem?”
This is the problem. Futurists on the one hand act like New Jerusalem/Zion/daughter of Zion are entirely different entities from old Jerusalem. On the other hand they treat them as necessarily the same thing.
New Jerusalem, if you take the Revelation description as LITERAL, which they are want to do, still would not fit the Zachariah description. But the Zachariah description is not by any means the only New Jerusalem descriptor which is a problem.
The real problem is, most of the teachers do not understand the kingdom of God at all. In fact they don’t even know what Jesus taught. I have tried this with some. I ask them point blank, “Summarize in ten words or less what Jesus taught?” Answers go all over the place. Scripture answers that specifically 15 times. “The gospel of the kingdom”
Mat 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom...
Acts 28:31 “Preaching the kingdom of God...”
etc. etc.
“>>Try it. Bible study is good for you.<<
Snide much? “
I did put in a smiley. I was just funning with you. Nothing hostile or degrading intended.
I almost missed your Daniel 7 post. I had to go back through. I really suggest you use a better translation. Try something more true to the literal original text like KJV, NASB, or even the ESV.
The little horn you are asking about is the papal system. The great words he speaks against the most high are blasphemies of infallibility etc., and the wearing out of the saints is described in Foxe’s book of Martyrs. The exact duration of this time period is described in seven places in scripture and is fulfilled precisely in the papacy.
Daniel 9:27 And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week, and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.
Who now is the desolate one?
But what obedience to that Lord means, and the basis for it, can be two different things. See here .
“Revelation is about the fall of the Roman Empire — code word Babylon in Revelation.”
Oh really?
When did Roman Empire put a mark on everyone’s hand or head (in the entire world), so that they couldn’t buy or sell without the mark?
When where the judgements of God poured out on the Roman Empire? When did a star fall from heaven into the sea? When did one third of the creatures in the sea die due to this? When were one third of the ships on the sea destroyed?
When were the “locusts” from the bottomless pit (the abode of fallen angels) released to torment the wicked for five months? When did the four angels slay one third of the population of the entire earth?
Who were the two witnesses and when were they slain in the streets of Jerusalem? When was this holiday that people from all tongues and nations sent each other gifts to celebrate the witnesses’ demise? When was the associated earthquake that killed 1/10 of the population of Jerusalem?
If you want me to believe Revelation was about the fall of the Roman Empire, then surely you can pinpoint when all of those prophecies from Revelation were fulfilled.
dominion - supreme authority.
NOTHING in that passage says it's Jerusalem alone. In fact we know that He will rule over the entire world. But it will be from Jerusalem and all nations will go to Jerusalem to worship.
Zechariah 14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
There are 7 years left of the 490 years that Daniel prophesied for the nation of Israel. That seven years is the time from the signing of the peace treaty to the return of Christ to destroy the nations. At the end of that seven years the New Jerusalem will be established in the land of Israel with Christ as the world ruler.
Second I said "Baptist" not SBC.
But in post #35 you were refuting the statement that "The Protestant denominations that have stuck to sola fide and sola scriptura, such as ..the Southern Baptist Convention.. have not succumbed to the devolution of doctrine or practice ," by asserting, Not true, the Baptists are ordaining women and celebrating same sex unions
Thus you were trying to refute the statement that the SBC has not succumbed to gay "marriage" by failing to make the distinction chajin made, as "Baptist" is a large label.
“RCs should be ashamed at such a spurious hit piece”
Just because some guy publishes a piece does not mean he speaks for the entire RC church. I think that Protestants (we’re all monolithic, doncha know!) and Catholics both need to take these sorts of posts with a grain of salt.
This guy is writing as an individual. If there is any shame it’s on the part of this individual and maybe, perhaps, those who take him too seriously.
I refuse to condemn all Catholics, just because a few Catholics act like idiots. I would hope that the vast majority of Catholics feel the same way of Protestants.
We obviously have differences - since we are different versions of Christianity - but I seriously doubt those differences make our souls unsalvageable no matter who shows up for judgement.
I think a better place to start is to assume you’re going to hell, and use whatever tools and beliefs you have to try to change your fate. I’m sure for most of us, the fact that we may be Protestant or Catholic is by far the least of the reasons why we deserve a trip to the underworld. If that was the only factor, humanity would be in pretty good shape, I think.
Words mean things, I realize they don’t to prots, but to the rest of the world they actually do.
I goofed somehow on that post. That should have been Daniel 8 not Daniel 7.
I generally compare all translations to the original Greek or Hebrew and use the one that most directly mirrors those. Sometimes I will actually post the direct translation without regard to correct word order of the English.
Oh those pesky details! LOL
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
The Catholic Church teaches Mariology as part of the gospel of salvation. Can you find the apostles teaching that or are we to consider the Catholics that preach that accursed?
WaWaWaWaWaWaWa...Thin skinned whiners ought to curl up for a while with their blanky...
LOL, it's never a good sign when a Catholic writer uses the word "ilk", even (as in this case) when it's in reference to his fellow Catholics!
“or are we to consider the Catholics that preach that accursed?”
You go ahead and feel free to believe or be accursed, however you like it. I consider it above my pay grade.
Mormonism isn’t Christianity. The life, death, and resurrection is all part of Christianity. If they don’t accept all that as true, they’re not Christian.
Mormonism isn’t Christianity. The life, death, and resurrection is all part of Christianity. If they don’t accept all that as true, they’re not Christian.
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.