Posted on 06/30/2017 4:43:54 PM PDT by Gamecock
Which manner of adulation would constitute worship in Scripture, yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere “veneration” and worship.
I believe you are also right about it starting while John was still alive.
For instance they will deny that they pray to Mary but i have never been to a Catholic Church so i don`t know.
I do believe that they call every priest father, which Jesus plainly said not to do, but they have a very poor excuse for that.
But i am capable of only one thing at a time.
1 Cor 4
14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
It appears to me that the Catholic`s came by calling the Church leaders father through Paul and not Peter.
The protestants are also very good at playing the word game so we need to look in both directions.
Yes, with Magic Thinking, the utterances of fools are deemed wisdom.
I do so enjoy your posts! Your remind me of an NFL referee ...
Bye bye!
Enjoy your “retreat!”
;^)
I'm appropriating this one, Vet!
May I ask why post 235 was removed, and if I may be allowed to rewrite it without the offending particle?
I consider it very important work.
Oh my! Is there any way to recover that post for my own use? I don’t seem to be able to access it through my cache.
Shoot...No replies again to this line of inquiry. Have you ever received an answer to this?
.
No!
Yehudi means members of the tribe of Yehudah.
Jewish means followers of Phariseeism.
Phariseeism is a man made religion, just as Catholicism is.
Phariseeism was completely denounced by Yeshua during his ministry; in fact that was his ministry; to demolish the unbearable burden of phariseeism.
.
Where does the Bible say any of what you claim, and how do you square your claim of “completely denounced” with Matthew 23:1-3?
.
>> “All the speculation about some hidden strain of Protestantism that existed from the time of Christ...” <<
No, not Protestantism, as there was nothing to protest until the 4th century when Roman catholicism was invented by Eusebius and Constantine.
It was the faith of the Netzer, Yeshua: the Netzerim.
That is what is plainly described in The Acts. They carefully, and completely followed Torah, and sought to teach it to the new Hebrew believers that had been separated from the true worship for centuries.
Literally everything in The Acts is Torah centered. That is the faith of Yeshua.
That is what the apostles taught, and the total reason John penned his first epistle.
Protestantism is just catholics protesting catholicism. They’re both man made at their foundation.
.
.
The entirety of Matthew 23 is a complete denunciation of all that the Pharisees did and taught.
Just count the “woes.”
Verse 3, in the original Hebrew reads “ All therefore whatsoever He (referring to Moses) bids you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after the pharisees’ works: for they say, and do not.”
The remainder of the chapter makes that crystal clear.
Also, note that every miracle that is recorded in the gospels directly violated one of the chosen Takanot of the pharisees. That is not an accident.
.
.
Did you wake up yet?
Your post simply reinforces mine.
The word “Jew” is centuries post-biblical, and grounded in ignorance.
.
That’s a lot to assert with no supporting documentation.
.
The Book of Matthew is not documentation?
Your vacuous denial is comical.
You could try actually reading it.
.
I can go along with all they did, but all they taught is directly contradicting Christ.
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
.
Pardon me, I thought you were responding to a different post.
Try reading the Acts. Is there anything in it that is not Torah?
.
Oh, I have no problem reading it; it's the reading INTO it I have trouble with....
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.