Here; Master...
Posted on 02/24/2015 7:04:16 PM PST by redleghunter
The quote is from a protestant source, so you may want to check with them. However, it affirms what Catholics have been saying; the purpose of scripture has always been for liturgical worship.
What? An RC who has no interest in the magisterium? And you ask questions that challenge an argument without having an alternative to how one is to know what is Scripture? So your argument is not that if the consensus of the church is invoked then it must be an affirmation of the church of Rome via its magisterium, and that this means it is to be followed in all things?
Instead, it seems obvious to me that you are avoiding my questions because they challenge that alternative. If you have none, say so, if you do, tell me what it is.
Why must "church" refer to an invisible body, versus Godly people of God which are within the visible body progressively showing general consensus as to what and who is of God. Which the powers that be are to affirm, though it remains that what and who is of God is so regardless of magisterial rejection, as it can be wrong. Or does being the instruments and stewards of Holy Writ mean they are the infallible judges of what and who is of God, and thus they must be followed?
Unless you answer my questions then you are simply a protester that has no real argument, like liberals.
Those are some respectful questions and they deserve a respectful reply. I’m on my cell phone at the moment and I can’t fully respond. I’ll get back to this later, don-o, but we must acknowledge the authority of any entity which could call together these scattered churches into the councils mentioned by MacArthur. Next, we must admit that any message found to be from God is afterwards more authoritative than the entity certifying the authenticity of that message.
Where is the "see no evil" pic? 🙈 🙉 🙊
I am an Orthodox Christian.
The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
Just to clarify my previous comments about a Commander and a messenger coming from a Commander. It was a military commander; imagine a general. The messenger; imagine a courier.
If a courier arrives to you in the midst of a battle with a message supposedly from the commander, you have to authenticate the message that the courier is bringing.
Once you do authenticate the message, the courier isn’t the issue. The issue is that the General has issued an order and that order if written down in front of your eyes.
If the Commander’s message said “Take hill 1782” and the courier says “No, I want you to take hill 597”, that should prompt you to say, “What...are you nuts?” If he replies, “Well, I carried and authenticated that written message from the General to you, so I’m now in charge.”, then you know that he’s gotten himself wrapped around the axle.
Note taking isn't a strong suit of yours is it? If Streicher was hung, that seems fair.
I also note you have implicitly allowed justification by works, which was big of you.
I note you make big claims without proof sans a Nazi's testimony.
You err in attributing the Nazis to the Catholics.
I don't at all, your claim is the Nazis 'followed Luther's plan' for dealing with the Jews. To the extent you posted that 'plan' many key similarities between it and what the Nazis did were missing. OTOH OTC's practices pre and post Luther were much more in line with what ensued. And the OTC wasn't speaking of theory, they had practiced and to the extent possible perfected these practices. Missing from the plans of the OTC but adopted by the Nazis were the use of furnaces to get rid of the evidence. Apparently the OTC figured riverside bonfires would suffice followed by the dumping into the river. Exhumation then burning (after trial) was a key component of OTC 'justice'.
In light of the above and the continued OTC abuse of the Jews during the formative years of the Nazi party, I'm sure the nominal Catholic Hitler figured he had the Catholics in the bag. After all if their hierarchy practiced and condoned AS, how much more so the laity. Hence the appeal to Luther by the propaganda ministry under Goebbels.
Nice rap sheet on your 'witness'. I can see why you as a Catholic would rely on such a person to smear the whole life of a man dead 400 years for reason of an execrable polemic he had published. Anything to divert the eyes from the keeper of the AS 'flame' throughout the centuries, the OTC. Keep exercising your 'shovel ready' job on this subject. Lots of things are buried to the average lurker. Perhaps the non irony challenged can see it in light of a the claim of OTC that had Peter as first Pope but then could have descended into the millenium + long practices it did. And the Saintly men who led the charge.
A job awaits in the 0bama admin for a man of such talent for massaging history.
Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother's sons bow down to thee: cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.
Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years? And the LORD answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words. So the angel that communed with me said unto me, Cry thou, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.
And he took up his parable, and said, Balak the king of Moab hath brought me from Aram, out of the mountains of the east, saying, Come, curse me Jacob, and come, defy Israel. How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? or how shall I defy, whom the Lord hath not defied? For from the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him: lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations. Who can count the dust of Jacob, and the number of the fourth part of Israel? Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his! And Balak said unto Balaam, What hast thou done unto me? I took thee to curse mine enemies, and, behold, thou hast blessed them altogether. And he answered and said, Must I not take heed to speak that which the Lord hath put in my mouth?
For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me.
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
I have denounced Luther's JATL, his contemporaries did the same. None of his 'recommendations' are part of the Lutheran Confessions. Yet, the actions of the OTC throughout its history up to WWII is somehow irrelevant? But a polemic from the 16th century by an author long dead is relevant? Is there a concerted Lutheran cabal that has promoted AS since the LC were published of which no one is aware?
Apparently calling out the OTC for its manifest and historical AS is tantamount to persecution? LOL, perhaps more time should be spent by Catholics boarding up the AS windows on the crystal cathedral of the OTC than concentrating on an AS polemic of a dead man. I'm sure an ecumenical alliance with Muslims will help there. But keep on posting, unvarnished history is a good thing.
Excellent description. Not lost on this old Soldier:)
See #188 above also
Indeed. Right on I must say. All OPORDs and FRAGOs (as you know) have the authentication of the commander after paragraph 5.
Signal, password, and SOI are included as means of authentication in an opord. With the bible, the authentication was accomplished by the churches in possession of particular letters and gospels having the history of those letters as part of the history of those churches.
However, someone called those churches together into the councils that established the authentic books of the New Testament, in particular. That someone must have been a respected party.
I believe those early Christians maintained a connection and were not just random, isolated bodies of believers accidentally bumping into one another every now and then.
I believe that respected authority descended from the leaders of the Church in Jerusalem as seen in Chapter 15 of Acts.
Correct me if I’m in error...You are a retired Army chaplain?
I'm interested in how the Book of Numbers, in the OT, gets taught in the Catholic Church.
I guess that I am an UNorthodox one!
Here; Master...
You could say the same thing about science at the moment. I remember when it was called ‘Newton’s LAW of gravity.’ Then Einstein came along.
It was ever thus. At least, from the standpoint of religion, nobody ever claimed it was anything but faith. When someone holds forth about this tenet or that, the argument is either inspiration, passion, or delusion.
With science, it is fact coming out of the gate. Man I wish we’d go back to the Scientific Method for a change.
Religion is faith, which is belief, which is why it is difficult.
Science shouldn’t be. Either you can construct an experiment that proves your assertions or you can’t. That’s out the window. Homosexuality was proclaimed normative by voice vote of a bunch of psychiatrists/psychologists. Look what that did.
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.