The Papacy and Islam

Bearean Beacon ^ | Richard Bennett and Robert J. Nicholson

[kawaii]

then exemplify the holy spirits presence and explain why it’d jump ship from group to group when Christ promised it would correct the errors not abandon them.

[kawaii]

i mean that God demanded and specified the place of worship and it’s design, and the sort of folk who would aid in making sure it was a place of worship.

lest you forget Christ went to the temple and was angry at THE MONEY CHANGERS and specifically NOT THE PRIESTS ON HAND.

[kawaii]

im still waiting for the complete list of Christians with zero breaks.

Protestants like to think hundreds of years worth of folk were abandoned by the holy spirit and damned to hell.

that sounds like god right?!?!

or maybe it’s something else entirely that made up that premise

[kawaii]

but when praying to god for success in offesnive war are the prayers really going to God?

are the folks who suggest generations of Christians were in fact damned even though Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit (and thus are denying the capability of the Holy Spirit) REALLY worshipping God?

Or are they worshiping someone or thing that denies God’s omnipotence.

[kawaii]

your suggestion that wolves who distort both 1500 years of Christianity as well as Holy Scripture is more revolting, and I never expected anything but propaganda from you.

[kawaii]

They didn't speak Greek either.

Oh sure that's why all the New Testament copies are in greek (not aramaic or hebrew btw). because the apostle (all 70) couldn't speak greek?

[kawaii]

read revelation since protestants are so keen on it.

btw it was uncontestably the offcicial represenatives of the jewish religion who rallied for Christ death.

if you’d read the old testament once in a while you might notice that all of this was prophesized.

[Kolokotronis]

“The idea that the Church is merely the “set of all believers” was unheard of until the 16th century. That should help us rightly interpret the passages in Scripture that speak of the Church.”

A, your references to +Ignatius of Antioch certainly ought to settle the question of what the early Church believed The Church is, at least from an historical perspective. As you point out, the notion that there is some sort of “invisible” Church is simply unknown until the Protestant Reformation, again at least from an historical perspective. One will search the writings of the Fathers and the acts of the Councils in vain for anything like an invisible Church concept.

I suspect that the idea arose after the reformers broke with the Latin Church which, at least then (and even into my lifetime) and for about 5 centuries before that, was quite adamant that there was no salvation outside of the Latin Church; indeed it taught that there was no salvation absent submission to the universal immediate jurisdiction of the Pope. In the East one doesn’t see this idea as firmly and universally accepted. In other words, among the Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox there was not and is not any consensus that theosis/salvation is found only within the bounds of The Church. This is not to say that in the East we say that theosis is found outside The Church. We say simply that we know it is found within The Church, don’t know if it is found outside and can’t presume to limit the economy of salvation. For Orthodoxy, membership in The Church/theosis is not necessarily a closed system.

But the reformers were acting within the context of a Latin system and mindset which condemned to hell anyone who wasn’t “in” The Church, and the Latin Church at that. Since they were clearly not “in” and since being “in” was the sine qua non of salvation, they certainly had to come up with something and thus this idea of an invisible church came up. Apparently the reformers were as convinced as the Latins that membership in a “church”, if not The Church as the Latins would have it, was indeed necessary for salvation.

So the issue was and is where salvation is found. Where the reformers went off the rails, in my opinion, was in the thoroughly innovative idea of what constituted The Church. Interestingly, in the East, especially by the 7th century, but earlier too, one reads comments from members of The Church about bishops, priests, monks and laity who were members of hierarchial, ecclesial, eucharistic assemblies which were not part of The Church. These writers were quite clear that they did not accept that the eucharist, or any of the sacraments of these "ecclesial groups" was in any way valid or efficacious...but they never wrote that these people were ipso facto damned.

Bottom line, The Church, the Ecclesia, is a visible, hierarchial, Eucharistic institution within which we can be saved. There is no other "Church" or "church". To say otherwise is simply a 16th century innovation. To say with certitude however that theosis is NOT found outside the visible institution of the Ecclesia (let alone that it is only found in communion with the Pope of Rome) is simply itself outside the 2000 year old consensus patrum.

[adiaireton8]

What is really being asked is not whether God is one and the same no matter what we think, but whether we all worship the same idea of Who true God is.

Even that doesn't really get at it, in my opinion, because I don't worship an idea of God; I worship God through (or by way of) my idea or concept of God.

I would say that we all worship a different divine idea,

I think there are many, myself included, who would take issue with the claim that we worship a "divine idea", meaning, our idea of the divine. If what we are worshipping is our idea of God, then unless our idea of God is identical to God, we are not worshipping God. My idea of God is developing, since I am learning more and more about God. But God is not developing. Therefore, my idea of God is not God.

Since idolatry is possible, therefore it is possible to worship something other than God. But the question seems to be: what is it that distinguishes worship of the true God (even with deficient concepts of God) from idolatry?

And it seems to me that one's worship is idolatry if within one's concept of that which one is worshipping is createdness or contingency. In other words, from Romans 1 we know that all men can know (and at some level do know) that God is the creator of all things, both from the evidence given by nature and from within our own hearts. Therefore, when we take something that is (in our conception of it) created or contingent, and we worship it (treating it as if it is the Creator which we know at this deeper level), we are engaged in idolatry. Romans 1 helps us distinguish worship of the true God (even with a deficient concept of God) from idolatry, by showing us that we know God first (not necessarily in the order of time, but in the order of reasoning), through His creation as the eternal, all-powerful and righteous Creator. Therefore, if our conception of what we are worshipping contains createdness (i.e. non-eternality, contingency, having come into being, not being the Creator of all things, injustice), then we are not worshipping God but an idol (whether real or fictional).

Given all this, it seems to me that Jews and Muslims worship the one true God, because their concept of God (though in other respect deficient) treats God as the all-powerful and eternal Creator of all things who will judge all men justly at the final judgment.

-A8

[kawaii]

well said kolo.

[Quix]

I see God as the innovator.

He often seems to resort to such when individuals and human groups become set in concrete in adverse ways and respects.

[Quix]

I can’t think of a single Biblical promise of Holy Spirit not abandoning any human group.

He has not abandoned anyone who’s not abaondoned Him—and that pretty fircely and tenaciously. His Spirit will not always strive with man but He IS pretty tenacious.

Human organizations are something else. He will lift His anointing from individuals and groups somewhat in a flash depending. Bukt that’s not the same thing as abandoning them to satan. He works diligently to bring folks back around to the greatest intimacy with God they are open to.

[Quix]

Protestants like to think hundreds of years worth of folk were abandoned by the holy spirit and damned to hell.

HOGWAH TO THE MAX [HTTM]!!!

Mindreading all Proties as a group is likely worse than individually. It's at least as offensive and wholesale wrong.

Many of us are earnest believers doing what we can in growing toward Loving God wholesale and others as ourselves.

The idea that God would abandon anyone is at least a deep grief to us. We would never enjoy or like such a thing. Accusing us of that is a hideous lie.

Certainly we would take no pleasure in even imgaining someone being condemned to hell. Another hideous lie.

We would prefer that all come to repentance.

Putting such words in our fingers or such attitudes in our hearts is CTTM--CHEEKINESS TO THE MAX, in this case. Shame, shame.

[Quix]

What brazen off the wall balderdash.

[Quix]

Unheard of until the 16th century?

I think now.

There are Scriptural passages indicating such a perspective.

[Quix]

Given all this, it seems to me that Jews and Muslims worship the one true God, because their concept of God (though in other respect deficient) treats God as the all-powerful and eternal Creator of all things who will judge all men justly at the final judgment.
= = =

I am a bit . . . torn in my construction on the Muslim realities vis a vis the above.

I believe that the Muslims worship essentially a demonic moon god co-opted for political reasons by Muhammed in the beginning of his acquisitive wars of conquest etc.

However, God declares in Scripture that those who earnestly, diligently SEEK HIM, SHALL FIND HIM. And, the Muslims do ‘construe’ it that they ARE worshipping the God of Abraham.

So, like one’s hairdresser, I suspect God alone knows whether a given individual muslim is SEEKING HIM or off track devoted to the demonic moon god that pretends to be Almighty God.

Then there is that issue of being responsible for the light one has been given so far, to walk in.

[Quix]

I think now = I think NOT

[Alamo-Girl]

One last post before my company arrives.

Truly I believe many Christians enjoy and yet do not appreciate the ministry of the Holy Spirit since Christ was enfleshed, resurrected and ascended.

Jesus baptizes us with the Holy Spirit; mortal men do not baptize with the Holy Spirit. Rather, they baptize with water in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. They commend but God attends.

Moreover, the Holy Spirit indwells us personally. His indwelling makes us a new creature, i.e. begins our new life.

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire: - Matt 3:11

And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. – John 1:33

[Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. – John 14:17

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? – I Cor 6:19

And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. – II Cr 6:16

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. – Romans 8:9

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. – John 3:5-6

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. – John 1:12-13

Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. – John 15:4

If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? – Luke 11:13

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: - Matt 28:19

And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? – Acts 11:15-17

So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. - I Cr 3:7

Physical things – such as the implements of the Temple, sacrifices, the Ark of the Covenant - can become Holy to God, i.e. consecrated to Him. Likewise groups of people, e.g. Levites, may be consecrated to Him. But that is not the same thing as the baptism or indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is God Himself abiding in us and we in Him.

[Quix]

Excellent as usual.

Thx.

Strongly agree. Great list of Scriptures.

The best precious anointed, God blessed and infused intimacy with your guests.

LUB

[HarleyD]

I didn’t realize Greek was the standard language of Jerusalem at the time of Christ; especially given the mixture of Roman soldiers and fervent Hebrews. I guess one learns something new every day. I can go back to bed now.