Posted on 05/22/2015 8:54:09 PM PDT by imardmd1
Excerpted:
What Catholic mysticism does is reject the Bible as the sole and sufficient and perfect revelation of God and tries to delve beyond the Bible, even beyond thought of any kind, and find God through mystical “intuition.” In other words, it is a rejection of the God of the Bible. It says that God cannot be known by doctrine and cannot be described in words. He can only be experienced through mysticism. This is a blatant denial of the Bible’s claim to be the very Word of God.
This opens the practitioner to demonic delusion. He is left with no perfect objective revelation of God, no divinely-revealed authority by which he can test his mystical experiences and intuitions. He is left with an idol of his own vain imagination (Jeremiah 17:9) and a doctrine of devils.
< snip >
She (Sue Monk Kidd) determined that she was willing to lose her marriage, if necessary.
"I would not, could not forfeit my journey for my marriage or for the sake of religious acceptance or success as a ‘Christian writer.’ I would keep moving in my own way to the strains of feminine music that sifted up inside me, not just moving but embracing the dance. ... I felt the crumbling of the old patriarchal foundation our marriage had rested upon in such hidden and subtle ways. Though both of us would always need to compromise, there was no more sacrificing myself, no more revolving around him, no more looking to him for validation, trying to be what I thought he needed me to be. My life, my time, my decisions became newly my own" (pp. 98, 125).
(Excerpt) Read more at wayoflife.org ...
USAF, retired.
Someone sent this to me
Baptist Perpetuity in 1805
February 19, 2015 westkybaptist History
“The origin of the Baptists can be found no where, unless it be conceded, that it was at Jordan or Enon . . . . The Hussites, in the fifteenth century, the Wickliffites, in the fourteeth and the Petrobrussians, in the twelfth, and the Waldenses, were all Baptists . . . . The consequences of this whole is this: The Baptists have no origin short of the apostles. They arose in the days of John the Baptist, and increased largely in the days of our blessed Saviour, when he showed himself unto Israel, and the days of his apostles, and have existed, under the severest persecutions, with intervals of prosperity, every since . . . . In this short history of the Baptists, we see the continued accomplishment of one of Christ’s promissory predictions, which is, Matt. 16:18, ‘The gates of hell shall not prevail against the church.’ ”
Daniel Merrill
(Daniel Merrill was a minister among the Congregationalists, but in 1805 he became convinced of the truth of scriptural baptism and became a Baptist. He was ordained to the Baptist ministry at Sedgwick, Maine on May 15, 1805. Shortly after his ordination he preached a series of seven sermons on the Mode and Subjects of Baptism which was published that year. He later added a eighth sermon to this series entitled “A Miniature History of the Baptists”. The tenth edition was published in 1812. The above quote is further proof that Baptists believed in church perpetuity, based upon Matthew 16:18, long before the days of J.R. Graves or G.H. Orchard.)
IF Jesus uttered those words (Mark WROTE them, after all; and he was not around during Jesus’ time), they sound almost allegorical, just as He spoke in parables.
Let’s take a look at Mark’s words:
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”
Taken literally, that means ANYONE who does not embrace Christianity will be condemned. Think of that: Untold billions of people throughout the ages have not embraced Christianity, and likewise billions likely never even heard of it. And you suggest that God condemns the? I thought God was merciful. It’s not much of a merciful God that condemns on a whim those whom he has created.
“And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
So, by your logic, one must casts out demons, speak in tongues, play with snakes, guzzle poison, and cure the ill simply by touching them in order to be saved. Miss just ONE of those and you cannot be saved. (Your quote said WILL accompany, not MAY accompany or MIGHT accompany; and the quote did not say cast out demons OR speak in tongues, etc., it said AND; thus ALL of the qualifiers must be present before one is saved.)
Thus, if one believes, and is baptized, but does not speak in tongues, AND play with snakes, AND cast out demons, AND drink poison, AND cure any and all disease and infirmity merely by touch, one is NOT saved (because the qualifiers are not met), and thus is condemned? Well, if that’s the case, everyone is condemned, because even the Southern Baptists don’t and can’t do all that.
Ah, but did Mark leave you an out? Mark said these fantastic acts must be done “In my name...” (”my” necessarily implying Jesus). So, even if a “believer” utters the phrase “In Jesus’ name I drink this cyanide,” and DIES, the out is that he wasn’t sincere enough in his beliefs, eh? How convenient to explain away the fable that is taken literally, and not figuratively as all fables and parables are intended.
I believe in prayer. And I believe that praying FOR people CAN be effective (though, of course, not all our prayers are answered, are they?).
As for baptism, it is a symbolic act. Logically, I do not believe it is necessary that one actually be baptized (i.e., dunked in water, or have water poured on them, both to the accompaniment of some words) in order to be saved. The God I believe in would not be so heartless, or so petty, as to condemn the non-baptized.
And I don’t buy that either
Ah, yes; the old stand-by: Trot out the Inquisition and auto-da-fe.
The Inquisition and its attendant auto-da-fe were crimes of the highest order. There was and is no excuse for them, and I have ALWAYS roundly condemned them.
However, you do know, I assume, that Catholics were not the only practitioners of such terrors? Protestants matched the Catholics noose for noose and pyre for pyre. Both thought the other heretical.
And let’s not even mention islam, which has practiced with happy abandon such barbarity since its inception, and it continues to do so to this very day (at least the Christians — and I include Catholics in that, even though I know some Southern Baptists who do not consider Catholics to be Christians — have gone beyond that, at least for now).
There is enough condemnation due all the way around.
Believe it or not, I LOVE to weed the garden .... I meditate a LOT about my sinful condition and I weed by pulling up by the roots ... two thought processes that go along perfectly with each other
How's the hospital visitation going ?
I love it! You assume that our temporal time exists in heaven! If so, God himself is restrained by it.
Since you obviously assume our temporal time exists in heaven, is it based on a 24-hour day? Does it have daylight savings time? Does it have multiple time zones?
Does heaven also have the four seasons? Does heaven have climatic zones, as well? Does heaven have an equator? An Arctic? A Frigid Zone and a Temperate Zone? Is there humidity?
Is winter in heaven as !@#$%^& as it is here on earth? Or, do all God’s children become snowflakes in winter and tulips in spring?
Please tell me what your heaven is like. For some reason I don’t think I’d like your heaven too much. For some reason I think your heaven is probably like Shreveport.
I got back about April 15. I haven't visited the hospital yet, but I will resume in June. You know who we get a chance to preach to, right? 😄😱😊
Yes, I do .... that was the reason for the question
LOL. I figured as much. Got to tweak the opposition. 😂😎 OK, getting late here, so good night.
In my culture, women have quite a lot to say about whether their eggs are fertilized.
What else is there to say? “Trinity” is not found in the Bible. Are you OK with that, or should I ask?
Wrong from the start.
It's not a matter of *embracing Christianity* that saves anyone.
It's turning to Christ and embracing and receiving HIM.
John 1:10-13 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
Think of that: Untold billions of people throughout the ages have not embraced Christianity, and likewise billions likely never even heard of it.
Catholics are in no position to criticize there in light of their catechism.
Here, right from the Vatican....
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
Right there, the Catholic church condemns to hell those who have heard of the Catholic church and won't join it.
On your planet, maybe, but no, no woman ultimately has any say.
Some may try to prevent it but that’s not always effective.
And some women try and try and never get pregnant.
Where’s the consent there?
"some women try and try"
Hmm. Hmmmmm.
I don't remember much of the details, but looking now at Wikipedia's account:
=========
"Admiral Fletcher, in overall command aboard Yorktown, and benefiting from PBY sighting reports from the early morning, ordered Spruance to launch against the Japanese as soon as was practical, while initially holding Yorktown in reserve in case any other Japanese carriers were found.[78] (Fletcher's directions to Spruance were relayed via Nimitz who, unlike Yamamoto, had remained ashore.)"
"Spruance judged that, though the range was extreme, a strike could succeed and gave the order to launch the attack at around 06:00. He then left Halsey's Chief of Staff, Captain Miles Browning, to work out the details and oversee the launch, which did not go smoothly. The first plane was only able to take off from Spruance's carriers Enterprise and Hornet a few minutes after 07:00. Fletcher, upon completing his own scouting flights, followed suit at 08:00 from Yorktown."
"Spruance ordered the striking aircraft to proceed to target immediately, rather than waste time waiting for the strike force to assemble, since neutralizing enemy carriers was the key to the survival of his own task force."
=========
AND THEN:
=========
"By chance, at the same time VT-3 was sighted by the Japanese, three squadrons of SBDs from Enterprise and Yorktown (VB-6, VS-6 and VB-3, respectively) were approaching from the southwest and northeast."
=========
"By chance" indeed! I say, by God's hand guiding Sruance's tining against the Satanic heathen their machinations were fatally undone from then on, a turning point of the war, eh? And then:
=========
"McClusky's decision to continue the search and his judgment, in the opinion of Admiral Chester Nimitz, "decided the fate of our carrier task force and our forces at Midway ..."[93] All three American dive-bomber squadrons (VB-6, VS-6 and VB-3) arrived almost simultaneously at the perfect time, locations and altitudes to attack.[94] Most of the Japanese CAP was focusing on the torpedo planes of VT-3 and were out of position, armed Japanese strike aircraft filled the hangar decks, fuel hoses snaked across the decks as refueling operations were hastily being completed, and the repeated change of ordnance meant that bombs and torpedoes were stacked around the hangars, rather than stowed safely in the magazines,[95] making the Japanese carriers extraordinarily vulnerable."
At the end of that day:
"As darkness fell, both sides took stock and made tentative plans for continuing the action. Admiral Fletcher, obliged to abandon the derelict Yorktown and feeling he could not adequately command from a cruiser, ceded operational command to Spruance."
=========
Here is my remembered "lone observer" from a long-ago (July 5th, 2003) FR post about Spruance:
=========
"In the afternoon of 4 June, Spruance refused to launch his aircraft until the last carrier, HIRYU, was definitely located. At about 1400 hours Lieutenant Sam Adams - of VS-5 from YORKTOWN - located her. As soon as this was done, Spruance launched SBD's from both ENTERPRISE and HORNET. ENTERPRISE found her shortly after 1700 hours and left her a burning hulk in just a few minutes. HORNET's SBD's got there after ENTERPRISE had attacked and went after the vessels in her screen."
=========
(BTW, Spruance was the US Ambassador to the Philippines in the mid-50s --)
********
My FRiend and Bro, on this Memorial Day we stand far in the shadow of such magnificent Christians who gave us our nation. May God chasten and forgive the burgeoning elements of our population who have chosen such abominable leaders as we have today, and restore sanity and personal accountability to our public and private affairs!
I guess ROME could have left these words out.
It had control of the manuscripts.
Did GOD really say...
I assume?
Ha ha; that is rich!Then YOU make an assumption about GOD being restained?
Even Job knew when to shut his piehole!
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.