Posted on 12/10/2014 6:32:20 AM PST by marshmallow
For the LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.
17 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. 9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. 10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. 11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. 12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. 13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. 26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.
“Sometimes you realize it is not worth the effort to continue a conversation with someone who is constantly redefining words.”
Except no word was redefined. It was the Protestant anti-Catholic who simply was ignorant of the meaning of the word in the context in which it was used.
And I was still right on every point.
“I have told you repeatedly that I dont wear a ring.”
You sure have, and yet I don’t ask you if you do. I asked if you DID. I bet you know the difference between present tense and past tense. Why do you keep saying “now” or “don’t” when the answer is about the past?
“I have shown you where the the brides attendants are spoken of in scripture as well and the grooms attendants.”
No. You showed me something else that you passed off as what I was talking about. I already pointed out that they are not the same thing - as shown by their different roles.
Mary was described in the Bible as 'blessed'. Why all the extras in HER resume'??
“How are the BABY RUTHs today?”
If you had not left yours in the pool you would know.
So now your using that to say that Jesus isn’t God? Will you guys make up your mind. You claim that Mary is the mother of God because Jesus is God. Now you seem to be saying the Jesus isn’t God. Double speak much?
Happy to oblige.
Apostolic tradition, or succession by definition, is the faith handed down from the Apostles, who in turn, received it from Jesus himself. Ergo, any missionary activity undertaken by the Apostles, was as a result of the commission which they received from Jesus. That is the essence of Apostolic tradition. "Tradition" is not the preaching of a gospel which finds no basis in Scripture or which somehow, over the years, became an item of popular culture like the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade. It is the unbroken episcopal lineage which traces itself back to the Apostles and through them, to Jesus.
Philip, being one of the original 12 Apostles, stands at the very heart of that Apostolic tradition. His preaching to the eunuch stands as an excellent example of it.
At various points in history, that episcopal lineage has been ruptured due to disagreements over theology, pastoral practice, scandal and various other issues. As a result, new theologies have been proposed and preached, often using Scripture as their basis but proposed in a manner divorced from the successors of the Apostles.
In summary, the tradition used by Philip, was the tradition of Jesus Himself and imparted to the Apostles at Pentecost through the Holy Spirit.
Here's your chance to prove it...
It sure does!
No. Read the entire passage carefully.
Sorry dude, you say unanimous and people will know it means of one mind.
So catholics have redefined the meaning of the word.
Catholics have Mary outside on their lawns; NOT Jesus on the Cross.
Makes a rational person say...
But she’s DEAD, Jim!
No. I was right - all along.
That is simply insolent denial, for all to see. You were wrong that this was misrepresenting Kenrick;
wrong about hiding what Kenrick was arguing, esp. since you have quoted Luther without even proving the source or a link to what he was arguing;
and thus wrong to presume the source did not know what Kenrick was arguing;
and wrong that Kenrick assenting in the end to the decree of V1 on PI Kenrick refutes my statement that what would be misrepresenting Kenrick would be to invoke him as one who always supported the infallible Roman papacy as V1 declared it,
and wrong to make his denial of Protestant belief the issue,
and wrong to impugn citing a source as an ally to their views when that same source doesnt believe what the author believes, as you yourself have done.
All you got right was that Kenrick was misspelled once, as if that supported not knowing he supported Peter as rock, but which is another example of you focusing on a molehill in avoiding the mountain that refutes an RC argument.
And which attempts are the equivalent of what the RM calls spitwads, thrown by those who throw have no ammunition against educated, articulate, reasoning posters, and thus it is time that his advice should be heeded
Makes me want to RETCH!
Psalm 46:1
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.