Posted on 12/27/2005 8:38:08 AM PST by Teófilo
Hebrews 9:15 ¶And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, f
or the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament,
they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hebrews 9:15 ¶And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, f
or the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament,
they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hebrews 9:15 ¶And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, f
or the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament,
they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hebrews 9:15 ¶And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, f
or the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament,
they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hebrews 9:15 ¶And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament,
that by means of death, f
or the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament,
they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
rl
They were struck dead because they lied to God.
Acts 5:1 ¶But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,
2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
>There was for instance a petition some years ago by priests asking the Pope to make Mary the 3rd person in the Trinity.<
REFERENCES PLEASE!
I call B.S. as to any credible Catholic petition.
Mary is God, is the Final Dogma of the Holy Catholic Church.
http://www.maryisgod.org/
don't take this up with me take it up with them.
Kind regards
I think the petition might have been for co-redemtrex. which as I read it means being part of the Trinity.
Co- meaning what? with Jesus equal?
Balderdash and pipsqueek my dear man, in any langauge!
Kind regards.
"In the light of the election of an ANTI-MARY Pope and therefore ANTI-CHRIST Pope, in the person of Pope Benedict XVI"
Oh, ya... that falls well within the category of credible and is a "great" reference for vilifying Catholic teachings...
There is NO grey here, and you have yet to make a point.
All your quote form Hebrews 9 does is to state that the sacrifice of the Cross was necessary for salvation. It does nothing to advance your apparent argument, that the teaching of Christ given His disciples prior to His death and resurrection are of no interest to us. In fact, thank you, this is the first time I encounter this particular Protestant exegesis, that simply ignores 90% of the Gospel. It is so good that added it to my collection, which you can view on my profile (scroll to the end).
One can argue what the cardinal sin of Ananias and Sapphira was. The fact that their lie was about withholding a part of the proceeds cannot be irrelevant. Surely if they secretly did some paid work over the weekend and added the wages to the proceeds of the sale, then such a lie would not be punished. But be it as it may, whatever their particular sin was, the episode shows that a committed Christian can subsequently lose his salvation.
I have not said that they are of no interest to us. But it is not doctrinally binding upon us because Jesus has not died yet.
Well, that is exactly the laughable part, that 90% of what Jesus taught, and directly related to men's salvation, you consider not binding.
Is the testament in effect without the death of the testor?
But my amin question remains to you: Do you have any evidence that anyone was aborted from the new birth, and that they were born again, again?
That is not the issue. The issue is that Christ taught His disciples the Christian doctrine prior to His death and resurrection and in anticipation of it. Following His resurrection, He instructed His apostles to teach the rest of the world.
my [main] question remains
See my 295 and 297 for scriptural references to those who initially believed and then lost their faith and were not justified in the end. This is the best I can understand your bizarre wording; if you mean something different, please rephrase yourself.
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.