The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Previous Thread

[SoothingDave]

Here is another one.

A sobering new law that takes effect next week targets the center of Ireland's social life: its 10,000 pubs. Politicians are hoping the Intoxicating Liquor Act of 2003 will reduce heavy drinking, public drunkenness and underage drinking by limiting the number of pints that patrons may drink.

They've already banned smoking in pubs.

SD

[OLD REGGIE]

That would be the normal English language definition, yes. I tend to only discern things that are there, as opposed to discerning things that are not there. But that's just me, the literalist.

Then may I ask for your one pure definition of discern and tell me whether it has any relationship to V. 27 and 28?

1 Corinthians 11:
27: Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
28: Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29: For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.

[Aquinasfan]

Phl 2:12   Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.   Phl 2:13   For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of [his] good pleasure.

Do you believe that God positively wills the damnation of some men from all eternity?

[OLD REGGIE]

A remarkable silence, from you and from all the rest of the "faith alone/OSAS" crowd. That says all I need to hear.

Although I don't qualify by your contrived definition of "faith alone/OSAS" I do recognize that the supposedly "silent" crowd is used to your baiting and is just ignoring it.

[SoothingDave]

Then may I ask for your one pure definition of discern and tell me whether it has any relationship to V. 27 and 28?

Yes you may ask. The definition was given above. One does not discern things that are not present, unless one is taking psychotropic drugs or suffering from a mental imbalance.

These verses do not negate this idea, they are merely a colloquial use of the words. "Cup" is a non-starter, cause it doesn't say what is in the cup. "Bread" is used because that is what the appearance is.

Again, Protestants use their theology to negate or make nonsense of the parts they don't like. I hardly think Paul, a literate man, would deliberatly, knowingly, negate what he was about to say.

SD

[SoothingDave]

Yep, blame the messenger. It's now "baiting" to examine what the other person professes to believe. We have to handle it with kid gloves and avoid looking at the true-life difficult situations which seriously test the theology in question.

When did this start?

SD

[OLD REGGIE]

Oh boy. Did you ping Biblewonk?

Incidentally, none of the Scriptural readings referenced Immaculate Conception or Bodily Assumption. With the sole exception of Luke where is Mary?

[Uri’el-2012]

OBTW
My birthday is this saturday.
chuck

[OLD REGGIE]

Just for possible future reference. We had a neutered male cat when I was a boy who developed terrible urinary problems. We switched to cat food with the lowest ash content we could find in the store, and his problems went away.

I believe urinary problems are common to all male cats. That is why it is important to have him checked yearly. With an indoor cat you may see him having difficulty peeing or hear him crying at the litter box. He may even go outside the box. With an outdoor cat you may miss all signs.

The upshot is all cats and dogs should be seen by the vet at least yearly.

[conservonator]

...where is Mary?

Heaven

[malakhi]

Politicians are hoping the Intoxicating Liquor Act of 2003 will reduce heavy drinking, public drunkenness and underage drinking by limiting the number of pints that patrons may drink.

You can be sure that the O'Flaherty's, O'Connors, MacDermott's, and MacGeraghty's of old would not have put up with these meddlesome bureaucrats.

From the ferocious O'Flaherties, Good Lord protect us -- message on a wall in the Norman town of Galway.

[malakhi]

Happy Birthday! :o)

[SoothingDave]

You can be sure that the O'Flaherty's, O'Connors, MacDermott's, and MacGeraghty's of old would not have put up with these meddlesome bureaucrats.

I have my doubts that they are putting up with it now. When I was there "closing time" was when they locked the door. They didn't stop serving, they just locked the door with you inside. When you wanted to leave, they would let you out and then lock up again.

That being said, they need to get off their duffs and elect somethign other than nannies.

SD

[al_c]

Oh boy. Did you ping Biblewonk?

Dang! I forgot. ;o)

Hey, wonk ... you out there, buddy?

Oh, what the heck ... I may as well ping geezer too. How are you guys doing today?

BTW ... Reggie's talking about #64808.

[OLD REGGIE]

Yes you may ask. The definition was given above. One does not discern things that are not present, unless one is taking psychotropic drugs or suffering from a mental imbalance.

Oh I see. Now can these "things" be an idea, a perception, or must it be a physical object?

Again, Protestants use their theology to negate or make nonsense of the parts they don't like. I hardly think Paul, a literate man, would deliberatly, knowingly, negate what he was about to say.

I have learned you slip into your petulent and insulting mode when you are asked to explain yourself. This is especially so when you know your "explanation" is not complete or accurate.

FWIW your general insult to all Protestants don't apply to me. I am a Catholic! Remember, you told me so. Be a man and address "ALL" when you hurl gratituous insults at an entire group of people.

"Again, Protestants Catholics use their theology to negate or make nonsense of the parts they don't like."

One more time: Will you please give me your definition of Discern?

[OLD REGGIE]

When did this start?

When did you start baiting?

[OLD REGGIE]

Heaven

Fine. Please show me where it is addressed in the Scriptur readings. For that matter, anywhere in Scripture.

[OLD REGGIE]

Don't blame me. I didn't ping anyone. ;-)

[conservonator]

It's not, you know that. What's the problem? Why is this so offensive or of any interest to you?

How much of your remaining life are you going to spend convincing your self that you were just in your decision to leave the Church?

[RnMomof7]

There are plenty of threads on FR where 'chritians' quote the Qu'ran, to make their point, and to show differences between to two faiths sacred writings.

To make a point AGAINST them , not as truth to back up their statements as is done by the non believers here.

I do not consider it an anomaly to do so.

Think again .I followed most of the threads after 9/11 and no one used it as justification or proof of their religious beliefs

I have seen Restornu post from the Book of Mormon and be by the person replying that they do not consider the book of Mormon to be 'scripture'.

To prove is apostasy not to justify or prove Christian teaching

Different belief systems have different 'scriptures'. Since most 'christians', ignore the Tanakh, except for using passages that they think pertain to prophecy, but rely most heavily upon the NT for 'their scripture', it seems only natural to refer then, to the NT when talking to a 'christian'.

You may have a point, but I like millions of believers read and quote it on a regular basis.

In case you have not noted a large amount of the NT is quoted OT.

The OT can seem overwhelming to some because you have to have a familiarity of the history of the Jewish nations to time certain book

The NT only covers 70 years or so.

For example, how would the Christian, Buddhist, or Hindu interact regarding 'their sacred texts' if they were prohibited from talking about each others texts?

Again it is not "talking about them" selectively to prove a spiritual position. Either jesus was a liar or a fool or crazy if he was not God. It is hard to understand why any non believers would quote it as true

Here is a current thread on FR where some 'christians' are quoting the Qu'ran. Perhaps you'd like to stop into that thread and tell the 'christians' that they shouldn't be quoting the Qu'ran unless they convert to islam. Trinity: A False Doctrine<

Are any of the posters saying what I believe is proved by words of the Quran? Are they using the quotes to justify what they believe or are they questioning passages or discrediting them?

I find it funny when a quote is used to prove a point with which you agree from the OT. The words you quote to prove your point are the words of one you deny