Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Christ Alone (Happy reformation day)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExnTlIM5QgE ^ | Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7

In Christ Alone lyrics

Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm

What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand

In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save

?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live

There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again

And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ


TOPICS: Prayer; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: reformation; savedbygrace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 5,851-5,9005,901-5,9505,951-6,000 ... 7,351-7,356 next last
To: metmom; presently no screen name; boatbums

WELL PUT, ALL.

THX.


5,901 posted on 12/26/2010 9:58:20 PM PST by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5898 | View Replies]

To: metmom; Kolokotronis

I think I understand the idea here, let’s see....MY PEOPLE preserved the plays allegedly written by William Shakespear since I speak and read English and have some English ancestors.


5,902 posted on 12/26/2010 11:28:29 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5895 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

For a start then, “The Real Presence”. What is it and when does it happen? You know, beginning, end, how we know this. In a few simple sentences as befits the simple grandson of simple Greek peasants.


5,903 posted on 12/26/2010 11:39:43 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5887 | View Replies]

To: metmom; boatbums
like the Pharisees of old.

Yes, indeed I have seen this as well...and we know what Jesus had to say to them. Not much as they were unteachable.

Additionally, their questions to Jesus were intended to trip Him up in view of the people. They were not interested in the truth. They knew they were losing power over the people which was at the heart of their questions...... Many times they put Jesus in a delima where no matter how he might answer, or if He acted, would be wrong or unacceptable according to the law. The one story of Jesus healing a mans hands on the sabboth is a good example....Jesus never touched Him nor did He proclaim any words which would indicate He was healing the man directly, rather He simply told the man to stick out his hand.... and it was healed.

5,904 posted on 12/27/2010 12:35:42 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5890 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“O.K., I’m game, just which one of “your people” have made which manuscripts available to us today?”

Monks at the Monastery of +Catherine at Sinai and at a number of monasteries at the Holy Mountain. BTW, learn Greek and you can read the Byzantine Text at any Greek Orthodox Church.


5,905 posted on 12/27/2010 4:51:34 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5894 | View Replies]

To: metmom; count-your-change; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums
"And yet I don't recall you telling anyone which you consider the most accurate translation going. Or what the major issues are with the other ones with specific examples of what the problem areas are. Although I could have easily missed it as I don't read every post from every FReeper."

The most accurate? Well, the most accurate of a very bad lot, but I'd say the NKJV so long as one has a good listing of the variant readings. As for what the major issues are, well, mm, with all due respect, we've been talking about them for several years here now. I didn't keep a list of them. I can tell you that anything which translates εστιν as "symbolizes" or "represents" or "signifies" is garbage.

"But yeah,..... we can all see that you're so much better than everyone else. So much superior to all the rest of us peons because of your knowledge of Greek. Even though koine Greek isn't actually modern Greek, but details, details......"

Koine is different from modern Greek and both are different from Byzantine Greek. I have degrees in ancient, koine and Byzantine Greek.

"Alleged to be written? Only alleged? What good would it do you to know the language as you claim, if you apparently don't even trust what was transcribed?"

Yes, only alleged. I say this because there are simply too many variant manuscripts to determine which one, if there is one, was actually written by any given author. For example, do you believe that +Paul wrote Hebrews? If so, why? What about Matthew? Did +Matthew write it? And which version is correct? I suppose it's a safe bet that +John wrote his gospel, but which version? I honestly don't care whether or not the various books of the NT were really written by the authors to whom the works are attributed. I also don't loose any sleep over whether or not the Johannine Comma, for example, is original or spurious. I am not a bible worshiper. Treating the bible like a Mohammedan treats the koran is heresy. My Faith comes from the Holy Spirit as a free gift through The Church.

5,906 posted on 12/27/2010 5:14:23 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5895 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I have said much on this already, with the main point being that it is not historical linkage that is the determining factor for essential authenticity, but manifest faith in the Biblical gospel. The apostles persuaded souls by “manifestation of the truth,” and so must we, in dependence upon God to confirm His word. But when one infallibly defines that they are assuredly infallible according to their infallibly defined formula, implicit assent of faith is required, and nothing need be verified. Even the father’s basically must submit to this, as even non -unanimous consent of them can be defined as being unanimous:

http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/ray4intro.html
http://www.equip.org/articles/apostolic-tradition

Other pertinent issues:
http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/livingtradition.html

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/06/violent-tendency-of-western.html

http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/forgeries.html


5,907 posted on 12/27/2010 5:26:41 AM PST by daniel1212 ( "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5869 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; metmom

Here’s a good and patristic overview for you from +John of Damascus:

“But if you inquire as to how this takes place, it is enough for you to know that it is effected by the Holy Spirit. The manner of the change can in no way be understood. But one can put it well thus, that just as in nature, bread, by eating, and wine and water, by drinking, are changed into the body and blood of the eater and drinker, yet not becoming a different body from the former one; so the bread of the Table, as also the wine and water, are supernaturally changed by the invocation and presence of the Holy Spirit into the Body and Blood of Christ, and are not two, but one and the same.”

This occurs, by the grace of God alone, at this point during the Divine Liturgy:

“Priest (in a low voice): It is proper and right to sing to You, bless You, praise You, thank You and worship You in all places of Your dominion; for You are God ineffable, beyond comprehension, invisible, beyond understanding, existing forever and always the same; You and Your only begotten Son and Your Holy Spirit. You brought us into being out of nothing, and when we fell, You raised us up again. You did not cease doing everything until You led us to heaven and granted us Your kingdom to come. For all these things we thank You and Your only begotten Son and Your Holy Spirit; for all things that we know and do not know, for blessings seen and unseen that have been bestowed upon us. We also thank You for this liturgy which You are pleased to accept from our hands, even though You are surrounded by thousands of Archangels and tens of thousands of Angels, by the Cherubim and Seraphim, six-winged, many-eyed, soaring with their wings,

Priest: Singing the victory hymn, proclaiming, crying out, and saying:

People: Holy, holy, holy, Lord Sabaoth, heaven and earth are filled with Your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna to God in the highest.

Priest (in a low voice): Together with these blessed powers, merciful Master, we also proclaim and say: You are holy and most holy, You and Your only-begotten Son and Your Holy Spirit. You are holy and most holy, and sublime is Your glory. You so loved Your world that You gave Your only begotten Son so that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. He came and fulfilled the divine plan for us. On the night when He was betrayed, or rather when He gave Himself up for the life of the world, He took bread in His holy, pure, and blameless hands, gave thanks, blessed, sanctified, broke, and gave it to His holy disciples and apostles saying:

Priest: Take, eat, this is my Body which is broken for you for the forgiveness of sins.

People: Amen.

Priest (in a low voice): Likewise, after supper, He took the cup, saying:

Priest: Drink of it all of you; this is my Blood of the new Covenant which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.

People: Amen.

Priest (in a low voice): Remembering, therefore, this command of the Savior, and all that came to pass for our sake, the cross, the tomb, the resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven, the enthronement at the right hand of the Father, and the second, glorious coming.

Priest: We offer to You these gifts from Your own gifts in all and for all.

People: We praise You, we bless You, we give thanks to You, and we pray to You, Lord our God.

Priest (in a low voice): Once again we offer to You this spiritual worship without the shedding of blood, and we ask, pray, and entreat You: send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts here presented.

Priest: And make this bread the precious Body of Your Christ.

Amen.

Priest: And that which is in this cup the precious Blood of Your Christ.

Amen.

Priest: Changing them by Your Holy Spirit. Amen. Amen.
Amen.”

+Gregory Palamas wrote in the 14th century: “... by this flesh [of Christ in the Eucharist] our community is raised to heaven; that is where this Bread truly dwells; and we enter into the Holy of Holies by the pure offering of the Body of Christ”

How do we “know” this? It’s a matter of faith, cyc, not knowledge, at least not knowledge of a mundane variety. Christians, the overwhelming majority of Christians including a number of Protestant type Christian groups, have always believed in the Real Presence. Well, I say always, let’s say since the year 100 or so at least (+Ignatius of Antioch). The Church teaches about all sorts of miracles, big and small and personal, which have occurred during the Liturgy and surrounding the Eucharist. They are not really uncommon, cyc. They have actually been experienced by people who are posters on this website. Beyond that, I have no “proof” at all for you.


5,908 posted on 12/27/2010 5:43:29 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5903 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Faith has a basis unlike credulity.
Damascus makes the statement, “.......supernaturally changed by the invocation and presence of the Holy Spirit into the Body and Blood of Christ, and are not two, but one and the same.”

Upon what basis? The words of Christ? Then the Christ is law breaker and his disciples as well.
By divine inspiration? Does Damascus claim such? Are his words more inspiried than the Gospels?

A simple meal of remembrance, and remembrance was its stated purpose, becomes by retrospective elaboration into a mysterious, throw up the hands—no one can understand this! ritual due to insistance that “is” can only mean one thing despite evidence to the contrary.

I don’t ask for proof but simply consistancy with God’s own word.


5,909 posted on 12/27/2010 9:03:41 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5908 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
Had it not been for Tischendorf those manuscripts would still be left going to rot and ruin in the monastery unavailable to anyone.
5,910 posted on 12/27/2010 9:39:19 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5905 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
My Faith comes from the Holy Spirit as a free gift through The Church.

What Christian would deny such?

The interesting implicit assumption in your remarks is that the Church is somehow revelatory without Scripture. All of the Old and New Testaments are merely incidental to the traditions of the Church that followed?

5,911 posted on 12/27/2010 10:01:22 AM PST by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5906 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"...a mysterious, throw up the hands—no one can understand this! ritual due to insistance that “is” can only mean one thing despite evidence to the contrary."

Do you know how the Holy Spirit works? Does your theology set limits on what our Triune God can do? As for "evidence to the contrary", other than the "translations" of propagandists and liars, what "evidence" do you have for your innovative, Western, modernist position? It's modern origin lies in Zwingli's comic book theology that God can't be in two places at once. That, cyc, is a fact. No Christians, before Zwingli believed what you claim to believe. Outside of Christianity, the heresy is much older. In fact, +Ignatius of Antioch, around 100, warned the Christians at Smyrna about groups, not Christians but rather others who followed Simon Magus and any of a number of Gnostic preachers (and even some who claimed to follow +John the Bapstist)who denied the Real Presence:

"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."

"I don’t ask for proof but simply consistancy with God’s own word."

No you don't, cyc. 2000 years of Christianlife has, in overwhelming numbers, accepted the words of Christ as establishing that the bread and wine on the altar table become truly the Body and Blood of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. For 1900 years we have been warned against those who do not. What you want is for submission of Christians to what a tiny, virtually 100% American version of Protestantism holds about the Real Presence. I can assure you that Orthodoxy feels no need at all to convert you to our way of thinking and believing. What we have is available to you. If you reject it, that really is OK with us.

5,912 posted on 12/27/2010 10:05:55 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5909 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"Had it not been for Tischendorf those manuscripts would still be left going to rot and ruin in the monastery unavailable to anyone."

Sort of the same excuse for breaking the Eighth Commandment used to justify the actions of that equally disgusting thief and liar Elgin. At least we have the satisfaction, courtesy of +Paul, of knowing the eternal destination of those two heterodox thieves.

5,913 posted on 12/27/2010 10:15:17 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5910 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
"The interesting implicit assumption in your remarks is that the Church is somehow revelatory without Scripture."

I believe it is. The Church determined what Christians would read for Scripture according to God's Will as determined by The Church. "All of the Old and New Testaments are merely incidental to the traditions of the Church that followed?"

Not incidental at all; quite important, but still part of Holy Tradition, not apart from and opposed to it.

5,914 posted on 12/27/2010 10:18:50 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5911 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Joseph Smith believed the same as well.

The earliest Church Fathers believed Scripture was something more than “quite important”.

But modern Oriental and Latin churches have evolved to the point that Scripture no longer means: God speaking.

It all seems quite ahistorical to me. As if the Church popped up out of time as either the start of the history of the Church or some new dispensation that has no correspondence to the earlier history of the Church as found in Scripture.


5,915 posted on 12/27/2010 10:33:50 AM PST by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5914 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Yes, yes, and the Indians want Manhattan back and the Egyptians want all that gold that left with the Israelite exodus.

Maybe when Greece makes reparations to the peoples used as slaves to build those grandiose works.


5,916 posted on 12/27/2010 10:45:06 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5913 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; metmom; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww
You mean like the Catholic Bible which deliberately mistranslates passages like Genesis 3:15 where the translators replaced the personal pronoun *he* in the Hebrew to *she* to support their idolatrous doctrines of Mary?"

Well, here's Genesis 3:15 from the Septuagint. Which pronoun do you mean? There's no "he" or "she" there, mm, at least in the Greek.

καὶ ἔχθραν θήσω ἀνὰ μέσον σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῆς γυναικὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματός σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῆς αὐτός σου τηρήσει κεφαλήν καὶ σὺ τηρήσεις αὐτοῦ πτέρναν "

"Or perhaps 2 Corinthians 7:10 where the Catholic Bible mistranslates the word "metanoian" as *penance* instead of the correct *repentance*?"

If it says "penance", then you are correct. The translation is wrong. It means repentance, but in the sense of a fundamental change in the way one thinks from a bad way to a good way.

Thr (ROMAN) Catholic doesn't use the Septuagint when it is not favorable to their "special" interpretation.

Look at Douay Rheims. Mom is correct.

5,917 posted on 12/27/2010 12:56:49 PM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5876 | View Replies]

To: the_conscience
"The earliest Church Fathers believed Scripture was something more than “quite important”."

Really? Which ones?

"But modern Oriental and Latin churches have evolved to the point that Scripture no longer means: God speaking."

You may want to read this. Its just a page or so but it will explain fairly well where The Church stands vis a vis the Scripture it canonized for The Church and the various ecclesial groups which have sprung up since the 16th century. http://www.serfes.org/orthodox/scripturesinthechurch.htm

5,918 posted on 12/27/2010 12:56:58 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5915 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; the_conscience; count-your-change; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; ...
"The interesting implicit assumption in your remarks is that the Church is somehow revelatory without Scripture."

I believe it is. The Church determined what Christians would read for Scripture according to God's Will as determined by The Church. "All of the Old and New Testaments are merely incidental to the traditions of the Church that followed?"

Not incidental at all; quite important, but still part of Holy Tradition, not apart from and opposed to it.

And yet all the writers of the NT continually referred to Scripture as the standard by which they operated. They did not reference *tradition* or *the church* when it came to matters of doctrine.

The Bereans were of more noble character because they searched the Scriptures to see if what Paul was saying was true.

If church tradition or hierarchy were the criteria, they would have taken Paul at his word, or checked with Peter or some other apostle. They didn't but rather were commended for searching SCRIPTURE.

There is inherent danger in making Scripture subservient to the *church* or *tradition* no matter how holy someone claims it to be. The written word was written down and because we can go back to those manuscripts, has remained unchanged for thousands of years, unlike tradition.

Relying on tradition and apostolic succession to determine truth is a recipe for disaster. There's no failsafe to keep it pure and all the nonsense about God maintaining that integrity through the church is just that. Nonsense.

Church history and the immorality and corruption so frequently associated with the papacy, gives no one any reason to presume that they are in a decent enough spiritual state to be considered a reliable conduit for God to speak through.

Nor is the present state of the church any evidence of God maintaining it for all these centuries, therefore the Church must be of God. Really? With the secrecy regarding their finances, and the abominable job the Roman Catholic church has done in dealing with its pedophile priests, I find it almost impossible to believe the claim that that organization is indeed the bride of Christ and that He is responsible for its continued existence. There are plenty of other good explanations for why it's still here and they don't invoke God.

Hinduism, Buddhism, islam, animaism, etc, have all been around for centuries as well. By the erroneous appeal to age as the criteria as evidence that its continued existence is the result of God's hand in it, then one could just as easily conclude that God kept those other false religions in existence and maintained them for so long because they are right, too.

5,919 posted on 12/27/2010 1:01:27 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5914 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
Thr (ROMAN) Catholic doesn't use the Septuagint when it is not favorable to their "special" interpretation.

Nor do they use Scripture at all when it is not favorable to their *special* interpretation. For the REALLY *special* interpretations, they refer to the so-called *holy* tradition to usurp Scripture.

And God have mercy on your soul if you reject the Catholic church dictates on any matter of spiritual concern, even when it DOES contradict Scripture.

5,920 posted on 12/27/2010 1:04:54 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5917 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Well, we can start with Jesus Himself. HE continually referenced Scripture and used it to validate Himself.

http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=scripture&version1=47&searchtype=all&bookset=2&limit=bookset

There are also Paul and Peter. Pillars of the church, no?
.

2 Timothy 3
10 You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness, 11my persecutions and sufferings that happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra—which persecutions I endured; yet from them all the Lord rescued me. 12Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

.

2 Peter 3:15-17
15And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.


5,921 posted on 12/27/2010 1:10:55 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5918 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; metmom; annalex; Kolokotronis; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; ...
The Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible says "penence," as does the Old Vulgate (pœnitentiam), but the New Jerusalem and the New Revised Standard Veriosn say "repentance."

Since the D-R is a 16th century English translation of the Old Vulgate, the error was in the Vulgate and it wouldn't be the first one. Numeorus errors form the Vulgate were incorporated into the Textus Receptus and from there into the KJV and other Protestant Bibles.

A significant number of (Roman) Catholics believe any "Catholic" Bible written since the Douay Rheims is the work of the Devil.

5,922 posted on 12/27/2010 1:15:54 PM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5882 | View Replies]

To: metmom; the_conscience; count-your-change; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee

Take a look at this.

http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx

Maybe it will explain where the Orthodox are coming from. I have heard the same sort of argument from the father of my oldest goddaughter. He is a convert from Protestantism, an Orthodox priest and an army chaplain in Afghanistan. Try to remember that your forebears didn’t rebel from us nor, until American evangelicals (why is this not a surprise?) decided we all needed saving in the past 40 years or so, did your religious forebears try to make any trouble for us.


5,923 posted on 12/27/2010 1:18:55 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5919 | View Replies]

To: metmom
"Well, we can start with Jesus Himself. HE continually referenced Scripture and used it to validate Himself."

Don't tell me you think Christ, God, needed to validate Himself? You believe that that is why Christ quoted the Septuagint?

You know, mm, I have for sometime now been suspicious that some Protestant theology is strangely Mohammedan. That's precisely how Mohammedan used both the OT and his own scriptural nonsense. The Mohammedans reduce Christ to the next to the greatest prophet. Do you reduce Him to a mere prophet who needs validation by scripture?. If you don't mean that, you should be more careful about what you say. Think it through.

5,924 posted on 12/27/2010 1:25:19 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5921 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

MY forebearers?

You shouldn’t make assumptions.....


5,925 posted on 12/27/2010 1:25:19 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5923 | View Replies]

To: metmom

If you are a protestant, I assume, safely enough I believe, that your religious (if not genetic) forebears were protestants. If you are not a protestant of some sort, then you are correct and my assumption is wrong.


5,926 posted on 12/27/2010 1:28:24 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5925 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
"A significant number of (Roman) Catholics believe any "Catholic" Bible written since the Douay Rheims is the work of the Devil."

Well that's odd, but there are all sorts of odd religious ideas floating around these days.

5,927 posted on 12/27/2010 1:30:18 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5922 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...
Protestantism strangely Mohammedan?

Don't even go there....

The Catechism of the Catholic Church

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

5,928 posted on 12/27/2010 1:34:26 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5924 | View Replies]

To: metmom; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww

mm, as you know, I am not a Roman Catholic nor am I an apologist for Roman Catholicism. I do not, however, find Roman Catholicism even remotely Mohammedan. I find much of protestantism distressingly so. As for JPII kissing a koran, well, it surprised me but then again I thought then and think now that he was a lousy theologian. Most Orthodox do and did. The quote from the Catechism is an example of the modernist, innovative theology which came out of the Vatican in his years. To say with absolute confidence that “the plan of salvation” (whatever that is) includes Mohammedans, at one level, states the obvious. The created purpose of all mankind is to become like God. This includes atheists, idolators, everyone. But I suspect this section 841 is going beyond that to place Mohammedanism in some special and elevated category. Stuff like this is why so many of us are very concerned about our hierarchs and their talks with the Latins. BXVI, on the other hand, for us is an entirely different matter. Can you imagine him kissing a koran?


5,929 posted on 12/27/2010 1:48:28 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5928 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Ahhh...the reliably spurious letters of Ignatius, contradictory, agenda driven, and written by how many different authors?

I don’t worship the so-called “Church Fathers”.


5,930 posted on 12/27/2010 1:51:22 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5912 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"Ahhh...the reliably spurious letters of Ignatius, contradictory, agenda driven, and written by how many different authors?"

There are a number of what we believe to be spurious. Frankly, I think there is little doubt that some of them are fakes and the product of agendas, especially the letters to Panagia and +John. Even the Latins admit these are fakes. But the letter to the Smyrneans, which I referenced, is pretty generally accepted as being authentic.

"I don’t worship the so-called “Church Fathers”."

Neither do I. I don't worship a book either.

5,931 posted on 12/27/2010 2:06:19 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5930 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...
Your stated reasons for finding Protestantism Mohammedan in nature are totally washed up.

Do you reduce Him to a mere prophet who needs validation by scripture?.

Read the verses at the link and see what Jesus has to say about Himself and His relation to Scripture.

John 5:39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,

5,932 posted on 12/27/2010 2:08:17 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5929 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; count-your-change; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; ...
Neither do I. I don't worship a book either.

I don't know anyone who does.

If you're believing the false accusations of those who are simply reacting to their idolatry exposed by making a counter claim, you'll end up falling for all kinds of deceptions.

Since non-Catholics are accused of worshiping a book simply because it's held as the standard for truth and people believe that it is adequate for knowledge pertaining to salvation, but that *logic* any who follow the pope, or tradition, can likewise be accused of worshiping the pope or tradition.

5,933 posted on 12/27/2010 2:12:33 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5931 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
Since the whole Christian system of theology and Scripture is manmade (with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, we believe), does that make it any less true?

Muslims could ask the same thing about their theology. One's belief in something doesn't render it either true or false. The veracity or falsity of something is not determined by one's belief either way, no matter how confident or comfortable one may be with it.

If God exists, does our own failures and shortcomings in description of Him, negate Him?

Does a novel prove that the story is true?

My only point being that if our understanding of God has undergone revision, that does not necessarily invalidate that understanding. It is possible that we simply understand God better (not completely, of course not, but better than the fishermen and salesmen 2000 years ago). 'Twas my point. The fact that the Church harmonized Scripture to the extent that it has does not invalidate it. It may mean that it has been nudged towards better description than formerly.

5,934 posted on 12/27/2010 2:31:03 PM PST by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5880 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
The NASB, which is the Bible version on the Vatican site, reads:

You may mean the NAB...

5,935 posted on 12/27/2010 2:32:24 PM PST by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5882 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
Yes, only alleged. I say this because there are simply too many variant manuscripts to determine which one, if there is one, was actually written by any given author. For example, do you believe that +Paul wrote Hebrews? If so, why? What about Matthew? Did +Matthew write it? And which version is correct? I suppose it's a safe bet that +John wrote his gospel, but which version? I honestly don't care whether or not the various books of the NT were really written by the authors to whom the works are attributed. I also don't loose any sleep over whether or not the Johannine Comma, for example, is original or spurious. I am not a bible worshiper. Treating the bible like a Mohammedan treats the koran is heresy. My Faith comes from the Holy Spirit as a free gift through The Church.

Oremus. Concede nos famulos tuos, quaesumus, Domine Deus, perpetua mentis et corporis sanitate gaudere, et gloriosae beatae Mariae semper Virginis intercessione, a praesenti liberari tristitia, et aeterna perfrui laetitia. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. R. Amen.

5,936 posted on 12/27/2010 2:42:15 PM PST by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5906 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Read the verses at the link and see what Jesus has to say about Himself and His relation to Scripture.

You may wish to read the passage, and not merely the verse to get the meaning of what Jesus is saying here. Who is He rebuking, why, and how?

5,937 posted on 12/27/2010 2:53:52 PM PST by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5932 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; metmom
Really? Which ones?

See here.

Thanks for your links. I'll check them out later.

5,938 posted on 12/27/2010 3:00:15 PM PST by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5918 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

If any of the letters of Ignatius were really authored by a historical Ignatius (doubtful) they would remain his opinions, nothing more.


5,939 posted on 12/27/2010 3:11:57 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5931 | View Replies]

Comment #5,940 Removed by Moderator

To: count-your-change
"If any of the letters of Ignatius were really authored by a historical Ignatius (doubtful...."

Why do you say doubtful?

"they would remain his opinions, nothing more."

No, they would remain his beliefs, beliefs which have been adopted by the overwhelming number of Christians over the past 1900 years.

5,941 posted on 12/27/2010 3:45:07 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5939 | View Replies]

To: metmom
"You mean like the Catholic Bible which deliberately mistranslates passages like Genesis 3:15"

What evidence do you have that translation errors in the Douay-Rheims Bible were deliberate? Were then the multitude of translation errors in the King James Bible similarly deliberate?

5,942 posted on 12/27/2010 3:47:07 PM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5861 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; MarkBsnr; Religion Moderator

Translations please, as per the RM’s instructions.


5,943 posted on 12/27/2010 3:48:36 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5940 | View Replies]

To: metmom

mm, it’s only Latin. For God’s sake, don’t tell me you don’t understand Latin?????????????????????


5,944 posted on 12/27/2010 3:51:50 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5943 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...

Translating the personal pronoun in Hebrew that says *he* as *she* is a deliberate mistranslation.

I find it inconceivable that anyone could seriously think that the translators simply made a *mistake*, especially since the same mistranslation occurred in both the German Bible that Luther read and the English Douay-Rheims Bible.

If that were the case, the translators would have demonstrated such a level of incompetence in translation that the whole version should be ditched.

It cannot be anything BUT a deliberate mistranslation that doesn’t even deserve the label of *error* or *mistake* and is a far cry from not being sure of the meaning of a word which might have only a slight impact on the meaning of a verse.


5,945 posted on 12/27/2010 4:00:49 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5942 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; MarkBsnr; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...

That’s irrelevant.

The RM has decreed that any posts in a foreign language which are not very common phrases must be translated.

In the last month or so, there have been two Latin posts that were exorcism prayers.

Now, when YOUR side is the one pulling that garbage, you have no basis for complaint or incredulity when expected to comply with the RM’s instructions.

My ability to understand Latin is not the issue, and I’m presuming that being a person of reasonable intelligence, that you understand that not everyone DOES understand Latin, Catholic snobbery notwithstanding. You’re not one of those people who thinks that just because you know something that everyone else should as well, are you?

Or are you going to tell me that you expect that everyone else who reads your posts knows Latin?

You know, common courtesy has really gone by wayside. My grandmothers, who spoke very little English and were not highly educated, at least had the common courtesy to speak English around those who did not understand their mother tongue because they understood that it was insufferably rude to speak a language you knew others did not understand in front of them. The reason being is that they didn’t want the people to think that they were being talked about in a disparaging way.

Now, in the above mentioned cases of the exorcism prayers, that’s exactly what the situation was. They were posted in Latin. Why would you suppose they did that if not to do it n full view of others, expecting that they wouldn’t understand and snickering about it to each other.

The little glitch in the whole thing was that there WERE others who understood Latin and recognized it for what it was.

So that provides the perfect example of why it’s insufferably rude to speak a language you know others don’t understand in front of them.

OK.

So, are you two going to comply with the RM’s instructions, or do you feel that you are exempt because YOU know what it says, which does not make it a commonly known phrase as in *adios* (example provided by the RM)

FWIW, my uneducated, old country grandmothers had more class in their little fingers than most of the snobby Catholics on this forum have in their whole bodies.


5,946 posted on 12/27/2010 4:21:33 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5944 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; metmom

>> “For God’s sake, don’t tell me you don’t understand Latin?” <<

.
For God’s sake?

I think not! - Latin is the language of the occult, not the language of God.
.


5,947 posted on 12/27/2010 4:22:16 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Obamacare is America's kristallnacht !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5944 | View Replies]

Comment #5,948 Removed by Moderator

To: editor-surveyor; MarkBsnr
"I think not! - Latin is the language of the occult, not the language of God."

Sigh...........

5,949 posted on 12/27/2010 4:32:52 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5947 | View Replies]

To: metmom; MarkBsnr; stfassisi; annalex
"The RM has decreed that any posts in a foreign language which are not very common phrases must be translated."

Really. I didn't see that. If that's true, then it speaks volumes about the abysmal level of theological understanding here on FR. In any event, Latin is no more a "foreign language" in a discussion of Christian theology and praxis than is Greek or Hebrew or Slavonic. With all due respect, English is the language which is foreign to Christian theology.

5,950 posted on 12/27/2010 4:38:48 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5946 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 5,851-5,9005,901-5,9505,951-6,000 ... 7,351-7,356 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson