Posted on 12/14/2014 11:57:21 AM PST by ealgeone
The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.
“Luther is a false apostle, the antithesis of a Moses...”
Luther still living rent-free in someone’s head Placemarker
Outside of the rest of your rant is this incredible absurd conclusion that it was,
Not the spirit of Moses, but the Spirit of the LORD
that was provoked, yet the text shows the one who spoke wrongly was the one whose spirit as provoked, and the account clearly says that what Moses was (uncharacteristically) provoked to do was the the reason it went ill with him, being excluded from the promised land.
For rather than obeying and sanctifying the Lord, Moses exalted him and Aaron in saying in his exasperation, "must we fetch you water out of this rock?" And then strikes the rock twice, while the Lord commanded him to simply speak to the rock (which many think represented Christ, who was only to die once).
And you still cannot even be bothered to provide others with the address of Bible texts and translation, even after the RM wanted you to. enticing instead with versus from a Catholic turned Protestant.
Enough of your non-sense and arrogance.
As I explained, it doesn't fit the symmetry of the previous verse. Nonetheless, you compared Luther to Moses, clear as day, and that was an unforced error. Does your language indicate you wish to concede or continue ?
Yeah me too.
Pretty cool how that turned out.
It just jumped out at me...lol
LOL, does your non-sense and arrogance know no bounds? It seems to be blocking your reading comprehension.
When someone makes a point to supply spiritual clarity that would lead to concession in your mind? LOL, you are entertaining...
Daniel1212, very good points, clearly stated.
Continuing following pied pipers down rabbit holes is probably fruitless, but many resist for years and even decades then they see Jesus and His Kingdom in all it's Glory and bow down to our great God, releasing all their bitterness and preconceived notions about God and his true followers as they experience the Holy Spirit drawing them to that priceless Born Again life.
I can't believe that you, of all posters, are concerned with facts.....Anyway, I am aware of the facts...yes, the church did, for a period of time, forbid Catholics to have possession of certain Bibles...there were a bunch of so called Bibles offered to the public which were not accurate and thus became of concern to the church....they were, after all, the ONLY organization on Earth which had the responsibnility to protect Christianity as it was known...
You cannot point to any false postings on my part. You however have redefined being inaccurate.
Just what is your problem? You cannot understand what Scripture is saying, nor despite being carefully explained to you, even the difference btwn using an example of something that happened to a person and that of comparing persons! To think i was actually equating Luther with Moses is absurd! But if Moses could be provoked, how much more Luther.
Add more blindness to blind rage against Luther. No wonder you are a RC.
I went by the Wikipedia for Tarragona and it had a date of 1242. That, of course, does not matter much. The point is, it was the days of Albigensian heresy if I am not mistaken. I fully believe they indeed tried to confiscate the translations “in the Romance language”, which at the time was the only reasonable thing to do unless you want heresies to spread.
They declared an opinion. The de-facto OT canon at the time was the Septuagint, and so it remains even today.
there were, indeed, magnificent libraries in various cities in the world...but these were, in no way, comparable to your local public libraries....the average person did not patronize these facilities because he/she had no need to do so. 95+% of the people in the Roman empire were illiterate. The libraries were pretty much used by the elite, the wealthy, the teachers, the scribes. If you lived near where Christianity was developed chances were near 100% that you never even saw a library. Owning a book of any type was almost unheard of. Scribes, at that time, were professional people who read to you things that you needed to hear, wrote for you things that you wanted to communicate and carried out the communication business of that era. The Synagogues, of course, had scrolls and perhaps a few other written documents and peopple who could read and interpret them. The average person listened to, not read, the various printed documents.
think about it for just a moment and you will be able to understand the situation. All books were extremely rare and expensive because they were hand copied and treasured. Most people could not read because there was virtually nothing to read. Those who could read were those who made a living doing it.
I have no idea why you think that you have provided me with facts when common sense indicates that you are wrong. The reason that you cannot read chinese is that chimese books are not readily available for you to read and therefore you've never taken the time to learn to read them....the same with the people in those days....no books to read therefore no need to waste time learning to read books that weren't available......I'd venture to say that the vast majority of people in Jesus time never even SAW a book....
He did. And he wrote: "all that thou knowest since thy infancy is inspired by God". In Greek. Same language as Septuagint.
They probably didn't have access to your wonderful picture on YOUR site....I copied it though, and if they need it, I'll send it to them...
I notice that you had both...campaign and official....nice!
I know that...suddenly you have become concerned about facts....amazing, a miraculous rebirth....
95% of the people in the Roman empire could not read....the Carpenter's Son got straight "A's"...He was God after all....
The discussion here is based on Christianity...there are NO CHRISTIAN churches older than Catholic....none.
Which is meaningless, if the aim is to include Apocrypha.
The evidence for it's inclusion is more firmly for the opposite conclusion.
Septuagint, Septuagint.
That's your argument?
How utterly ignorant, and asinine (both).
we're discussing early Christians not having access to a bible because of their rarity and cost....and you say that one thousand two hundred twenty nine years later...the Catholic church ordered that certain false editions of the bible not be owned..........is that really a valid arguement????....for the first 1,229 years it was O.K. if you could afford one......that doesn't sound like censorship to me...
The argument is that the language of the Catholic Chruch in the 1st Century was Greek. This is why the New Testament is written all in Greek. Accordingly, the Old Testament was universally known in its Greek form, the Septuagint. This allowed St. Paul to write “all scripture thou knowest since youth is inspired”. If St. Paul meant something less than the entire Septuagint, writing in the language of Septuagint, he would have qualified his statement. For example, Protestant argumentation would have benefited if St. Paul instead wrote “all scripture that Luther likes is inspired”. But for some reason he wrote what he wrote, and not what you want him to have written.
You must have been living in Saudi Arabia....I went to St Rose Catholic grade school in 1944-48, Mother of good Counsel middle school ..1951-52, Catholic Memorial High school 1954-57 and we were ALWAYS encouraged to read the Bible. I agree that we were encouraged to seek assistance in interpreting it and understanding what it means, but I still do.....they had 2,015 years to study and interpret it....I've had 76....they might be better able to explain scripture than I can...
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.