Posted on 01/24/2015 3:23:43 PM PST by NYer
Discuss the message, NOT the messenger.
.
>> “Second; Christ must be RISEN for us to even HAVE any faith!” <<
.
Then how did Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and his descent get their faith?
Try again!
.
.
Obviously he doesn’t know John 6:63!
.
My reading is that the prophets weren't speaking their own words but only whatever God told them to say.
He is a public figure...the Pope of all Christianity....so everyone gets to judge what he says.......Like Obama is the president of all Americans and we all get to comment on what he says.
I see...You don't see the words, 'sin nature', therefore, you can't find it...
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
There's some more sin nature...
Stop by your local Catholic church any day of the week and you can see it happen right before your eyes!!!!!
As I said in post #587, the Greek for 2 Peter 1:20 (found here - also at "BibleHub", literally says the following:
"This first knowing that any prophecy of scripture of its own interpretation not is"Various Bible translation teams have come up with many different interpretations for that text, and in that same post #587 on this thread, I included some of the more common Protestant Bible translations of that particular text, as shown again here:
Some Common Protestant Bible Versions Of "2 Peter 1:20"
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation." - 2 Peter 1:20 - American Standard Version (ASV)
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." - 2 Peter 1:20 - King James Version (KJV)
"But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation." - 2 Peter 1:20 - New American Standard Bible (NASB)
"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation." - 2 Peter 1:20 - Revised Standard Version (RSV) - Protestant Edition)
Indeed, I looked at all of those things. But the context in which that verse appears (the right block on the link provided) is operative to understanding and therefore, my reading of it.
Mar 14:50 And they all forsook him, and fled.
They all left except Peter...On the way to the trial, Peter stayed a ways back to avoid being numbered with Jesus...Peter was fearing for his life and told 3 lies in the process...
John was the only apostle to show up at the crucifixion...Jesus' mother and a bunch of other women were there and off in the distance were some of Jesus' followers...Their names are not given...That's all scripture...
Perhaps you can show some scripture that shows the apostles were at the Crucifixion, besides John...
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.
If it's not you had better show a different source that shows what the apostles taught.
1Co_4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
They can bet their lives that this is not a reference to what is written in their catechism...
Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy
Col_2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
The study of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning.
You fail before you even get started...
The first Bible text you quoted in your post, was, of course, not talking about the crucifixion, and has no bearing whatsoever on that discussion concerning who was actually at the crucifixion.
The Bible does not say that "John was the only apostle to show up at the crucifixion" - you made that up.
A more careful reading of those earlier posts might prove helpful to you. I did not say "the Bible says the apostles were at the crucifixion", I said "the Bible does not say they were not at the crucifixion". They are two different things altogether.
The Bible does not include a comprehensive list of everyone who was at the crucifixion (either close-up, or at a distance on the periphery), any more than it includes a list of everyone who was at the "Sermon on the Mount".
The Second Letter of Peter was a letter, and it did not logically stop at the end of a chapter. If you continue with "Chapter Two - Verse 1" of that letter, you see that the very next sentence Peter writes in that letter is about false teachers, trying to get people to agree with their own (private) false interpretations of what Peter had been talking about, and Peter goes on to counsel them to not listen to those false teachers (and, by implication, their "private", erroneous interpretations of prophecy and teachings), but to listen rather to the Church leaders (like Peter himself) who continued to instruct them in the correct interpretation of the prophecies and teachings.
That is the broader, and more useful context to read those texts in, as I see it.
(With that, I have to say good night to you, as I have to get up pretty early. God bless you, Alamo-Girl.)
John 1:11-14 (KJV) - 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
And another one to ponder. Better take this one literally too.
Matthew 15:5-17 (KJV) - 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. 12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? 13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. 14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. 15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable. 16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? 17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
So you do not live by every word that comes from the mouth of God. The scripture doesn’t say written, or important, or necessary. It says ‘every word’. So if you disregard words that are not written in the bible, you are not following the bible.
And I have yet to see the scripture which says that the bible is the only source of truth.
Love, O2
Must you repent if you fall into sin after being saved? What happens if you don’t? Does being saved have different meanings for different churches?
If being saved means believing Jesus died for you and trying to walk with him and repenting when you sin, knowing that is the way to heaven, then that is not far from what Catholics believe.
Love
O2
If you are; I hope you're named Carmel Icing!
(Cause our Catholic friends already think you're NUTS!!!!)
Yep Elsie, but I can't possibly be nuts. After all, I left the RCC, the most wonderful thing that ever happened to me. Now, free from the bondage of Romanism, I can get away with all kinds of thing they can't, like I don't have to go to mass, I don't have to confess my sins to another sinner to get them forgiven. I can pray directly to God, I don't have to go through a bunch of other people to get to Him. I can get away with the peaceful feeling of knowing I won't go to Hell, and won't have to worry about purgatory. Mom, Els, is there anything else I can get away with now that I am out of it? I love getting away with things. It does my heart good.
:-) :-) :-)
Nope, John is talking about what he himself has written, in that letter, and he doesn't come close to saying that there is nothing else that is true.
1Co_4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
It's a reference to what was written in the letter:
For while one saith, I indeed am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollo; are you not men? What then is Apollo, and what is Paul? [5] The ministers of him whom you have believed; and to every one as the Lord hath given. [6] I have planted, Apollo watered, but God gave the increase. [7] Therefore, neither he that planteth is any thing, nor he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
Throughout the letter, Paul was admonishing his followers not to forget that they were all following Jesus, not the Apostles, and not to think higher of men like Paul and Apollo than Paul had just written to explain.
The bible wasn't completed when this letter was written, so Paul couldn't possible have meant to only believe what hadn't been written yet. I doubt he knew that his letters would end up as several books of the bible.
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.
Topic of this letter is circumcision. Paul was explaining that those preaching that circumcision was required to become a follower of Christ were wrong. Those preachers were following what was in the bible as regards circumcision, and Paul told them not only did they not have to be circumcised, but that they shouldn't be.
It is doubtful that Paul would be saying that only what is in the bible was true, because he just contradicted it. He said, what I preach to you is more true than what is in the bible. Since the New Testament wasn't written yet, he was saying what is NOT written in the bible is the truth.
Love,
O2
Yep, brothers from other mothers. I knew one of you would come up with that, but, we have the same Eternal Father, now and forever.
:-)
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.