Posted on 05/20/2015 2:41:37 PM PDT by NYer
Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa. Hahahahahaaaaaaaa.
What a hoot!
The very people who are blind to Scripture talk to us Christians about being "programmed" and cherry picking verses. Is that anything like naming someone as the leader of the largest cult in the history of the world, and calling him "Papa", based on one illogical assumptions in definition of a single Scripture?
Yet, they can't seem to do more than protest when called on the carpet and confronted with that actual truth of Scripture.
Take off those Rome colored glasses, my FRiend! Try Scripture instead of Romes' unSCriptural dictates...
The article quoted numerous scriptures. It is said that you commented before reading it, or perhaps understanding it.
May God not allow you to be cursed by Catholixs for your beliefs.
You have to ask yourself, is the RCC teaching angels how to pray to the saints? Is the RCC teaching angels that Mary is a co-redemptrix with Christ? And that the only way to get to Christ and the Father is through Mary? What is the RCC teaching the angels about salvation? And the finished work of Christ?
So? What about it?
Does quoting Scripture by default mean the person is correct?
Does it mean that Prots are supposed to think, *OMG, he quoted Scripture!!!! I have to believe it now!!!*?
Guess again.
Show me this hate. Can you?
The catechism does note that the creation account in Genesis is to be viewed symbolically.....not a literal six day creation.
The Catechism explains that "Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine work, concluded by the rest of the seventh day" (CCC 337),
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution
If you can't/don't believe in a literal six-day creation, then how could you believe Jesus rose on the third day?
Me thinks Tim Staples isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
And some Catholics think he’s solid.
Maybe a solid Catholic....
However, it does explain a lot.
I've noticed for some time that if all those professing Christians really believed that souls were going to hell by the second, certain things would probably look a lot different. (In other words, my observation is related to one of the deeper reasons for my current tagline.)
Good point. All we know though is that He did.
The ENTIRE book of Ephesians is your friend here, St. Thomas.
"To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
NEXT VERSE, VERY IMPORTANT HERE
"According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord."
What is the "eternal purpose"? Eph. 1:9,10 tells us. "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath PURPOSED IN HIMSELF..."
"That in the dispensation (I know you hate this word, but hey, it's here, it's not going anyplace) of the fullness of times he might GATHER TOGETHER IN ONE ALL THINGS IN CHRIST, BOTH WHICH ARE IN HEAVEN, AND WHICH ARE ON EARTH; EVEN IN HIM."
So why does He say He purposed this?
Eph. 2:7 tells us.
"That IN THE AGES TO COME He MIGHT SHEW THE EXCEEDING RICHES OF HIS GRACE IN HIS KINDNESS TOWARD US THROUGH CHRIST JESUS."
OH, so it's His GRACE that will be displayed in the ages to come? And what is this grace that He talks about? Do we know? Yes we do.
Eph. 2:8,9: "FOR BY GRACE ARE YE SAVED THROUGH FAITH; AND THAT NOT OF YOURSELVES; IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD; NOT OF WORKS, LEST ANY MAN SHOULD BOAST."
So, there it is. Exactly what God purposed, to whom He purposed it, and WHY He purposed it.
But there's a problem here: GRACE. Does your Church teach Eph. 2:8,9? The Church the Body of Christ does. Does your Church believe that and that alone saves you? The Church the Body of Christ does. If you are teaching or being taught anything other than what GOD HAS PURPOSED, how do you possibly think you are going to be teaching His angels? Really....?
False dichotomy from a prot, no surprise here.
“The catechism does note that the creation account in Genesis is to be viewed symbolically.....not a literal six day creation.”
No, the CCC says that Genesis is filled with poetic/symbolic language. That in itself in no way is an exclusive juxtaposition to the idea of a literal six days of creation.
Also, you didn’t answer my question and gave an answer to a question no one asked. I asked the following: “Show me this hate. Can you?”
You did not show me any “hatred” for Genesis in Catholic teaching.
“If you can’t/don’t believe in a literal six-day creation, then how could you believe Jesus rose on the third day?”
If you can believe in Jesus rising from the dead, why can you not believe He gave His flesh for men to eat? Logically you can really only answer in a couple of ways - and those ways will always boil down to how you choose to interpret scripture.
Does God have feathers?
If they can be persuaded to turn their attention to the Bible for still another moment, I wonder how people in this thread interpret Ephesians 3:10 and its context, maybe verses 8-12 or whatever the complete sentence is. Although I myself am not a church (perish the thought), I can imagine myself wondering what God might be showing the principalities and powers through me. If I can't be a good example, at least I can be a horrible warning.
What imaginings have come out of Rome!
There is ZERO evidence for ANY of these BOASTFUL ideas!
Mormons do this; but then they tend to ADD a little bit more to it.
I just HATE when that happens!
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved, in which the priest himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine; the bread (changed) into His body by the divine power of transubstantiation, and the wine into the blood, so that to accomplish the mystery of unity we ourselves receive from His (nature) what He Himself received from ours." Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215)
Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema. Vatican 1, Ses. 4, Cp. 1
I just HATE when that happens!
Augustine, sermon:
"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327
Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.
Augustine, sermon:
For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)
Augustine, sermon:
And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289
Augustine, sermon:
Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95
Augustine, sermon:
...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193
Augustine, Psalm LXI:
Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)
Augustine, in Retractions,
In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.
Really?
This from "This is my Body" boy?
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.