Posted on 06/11/2011 11:02:23 AM PDT by Amerisrael
Hi There,
Thanks for the links..I will research!
Sounds like you have your hands full! Be well and best to you and your family!
Tara..
Only *Jesus Christ* has the power to forgive sins...
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”- Mark 7:7
“And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” -Mark 7:9
“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” -Mark 7:13
“Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” -Colossians 2:8
Quix, I did what you suggested in this post. I “read back 5-7 sections worth” of it to see if I “could find—or not—that the Vatican cultists—RC’s personal and other anti-Proddy assaults to be the most obnoxiously over the line of any on the thread.”
I didn’t find any that fit your description.
However, I did see in your own post some pretty high-octane words you used to give your opinion of the postings—on this thread—of “RC’S” such as:
haughty, venomous, hostile, raging, arrogant, anti-Proddy assaults, obnoxiously over the line, jerk dept, personal and anti-Proddy assaults, and relentless fierce intensity”.
It seems that this particular post in itself has some of the characteristics used to describe “RC” postings.
Please offer the #’s of the posts that you think deserve the descriptions in your post that I’ve noted above.
I guess you failed to understand what I am saying....
Jesus Christ paid for it all, for all time....Once a person has repented of there sins and accepted Christ as thier Saviour they are *Saved*
Teaching what Christ commanded:
Loving GOD with all your heart, mind and soul
Loving your neighbor as yourself..
Those are the two greatest commandments..
We the Church are to enjoy a life in Christ, to bring the GOOD News to all nations...
Jesus did not command:
Confession to a *Priest*
I told you..I am the *Church* just like you..So I do not worry about Hell, because Jesus overcame the grave and through him so have I......
Again, you need to understand that *Apostasy* is in the Church, with Church leaders...
1 Timothy 4:1-2, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.”
Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.”
Timothy 4:3-4 Paul says, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”
I want to start by thanking you for the polite reply. Too often on the religion forum, other posters (and I!) let anger control our responses, and the anger of man doesn’t advance the cause of Christ.
We will continue to disagree. The setting of John 6 is that the men who just ate miraculously (6.1-14) have followed to get another meal: “15 Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself.”
...22On the next day the crowd...saw that Jesus was not there...they themselves got into the boats and went to Capernaum, seeking Jesus.
25When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” 26Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you.”
He then discusses the bread of life. Not the Last Supper, not the Eucharist, but the bread of life, in context of those who came for physical food, and were missing the spiritual food.
“35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.”
He isn’t talking about physical hunger, but spiritual hunger, and the spiritual bread that will fill the spiritual hunger. Yet he knows that his followers do not believe!
“41So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”
Their problem is NOT that he is talking about drinking blood (forbidden to a Jew) or eating his flesh (forbidden to everyone), but that he is claiming to be from heaven, not earth.
Again he explains: “47Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever.”
The bread they seek is physical, like on the previous day, but Jesus is pointing out the need for spiritual hunger, and a spiritual bread to satisfy it.
“And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 52The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
They are still focusing on the physical, and Jesus makes it even more outlandish, so that (if they had eyes to see) they would understand that it is the spirit that gives life. He then mixes metaphors:
“56Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
This is only a hard saying to those who are blind to the spirit. He is pushing them harder, so that their choice will be made clearer. For many do not believe...
“”Do you take offense at this? 62Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)”
And having pushed hard, Jesus provokes the response he desired. His disciples reveal their inner selves. Some reveal it to death, and turn away. But others reveal it to life: “68Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”
OK. Do I expect you to agree with me, and look in the Yellow Pages for the nearest Baptist church?
No. I think almost no one makes life changing decisions based on reading the Internet. And I honestly don’t care all that much if you wish to believe that the bread in some manner becomes the flesh of Jesus. God will judge you for your heart, and me for mine. I’ll be content if I can just explain clearly why a Baptist believes what a Baptist does about this passage.
In the end, we are saved by knowing God, and accepting His grace by faith in His promises. Either one of us can be wrong abut the theology of the Last Supper, but God will judge us for our heart, and our desire to follow Him.
I don’t want to make it too broad. Someone who believes Jesus is just a prophet, or that he is a created being elevated to godhood, or any one of many serious errors about who God is, will be damned. But Catholics and Baptists both believe that Jesus is eternally God. We baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We both await the second coming.
There are obviously large issues that separate us. I do not want to minimize those. Lots of folks have died for those differences, although those deaths bring shame to the name of Jesus, IMHO. But there are huge battles ahead with forces of darkness that hate Jesus Christ, and it it worth remembering how much we agree on, while discussing areas where we disagree.
I’m going to need to prepare for tomorrow’s Sunday School lesson. May God bless you tonight and tomorrow.
Just a hint ... do you suppose that the masculine gender of petros might have had something to do with Peter being a man ... ???
I mean, did you expect Jesus to give him his new name, "Petra" ... why not "Roberta" or "Juliette" or "Danielle"? The gender difference between "Petros" and "petra" simply reflects Jesus' conversion of "petra" into a masculine proper name. Nothing more.
Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immovable rock.
Wrong. Petros is used in a couple of places in classical Greek poetry to mean "pebble". It's not used that way in Scripture or any other Koine Greek literature.
This is why CHRIST is referred as the *Bridgegroom* coming for his *BRIDE* the *CHURCH* the rock (petra, feminine gender)
The Bible doesn't call the church a "rock" anywhere to my knowledge.
And the priest, as the “representative of Christ,” assumed the right to “absolve” the sins of the sinner or — as an alternative — require acts of penance, often in the form of monetary gifts to the Church.
Document this charge, please -- of simoniacal extortion in the confessional; forgiveness on payment of a fee. Find a historian with some actual credentials who says it happened. Find me a primary source. AFAIK, not even Luther at his most venomous ever lodged such an accusation.
The Church had characterized her as being godlike
Really? Where is this alleged "characterization"?
Thereby, the Church deemed her worthy of worship.
The word "worship" originally meant the same thing as "honor". Of course we honor Mary. Scripture quotes her saying, under inspiration, "All generations to come shall call me blessed". Do you?
If you mean the Church deemed Mary worthy of the same kind and degree of worship offered to God, prove that charge.
And exalting the Cathari? The Cathari?? Really? Reworking them as devout proto-Protestants, when in fact they practiced homosexuality (the slang term "bugger" comes from the same source as "Bulgar", which refers to the origins of Catharism in Bulgaria), rejected marriage, frowned on procreation, sometimes practiced ritual suicide, and endorsed numerous heresies, including dualism (a good God and a bad God), gnostic Platonism ("matter bad, spirit good"), and even reincarnation?
But, hey, at least they weren't like those awful Catholics, right?
Nothing in that sentence accurately reflects Catholic teaching.
I think that I actually do.
We the Church are to enjoy a life in Christ, to bring the GOOD News to all nations...
The Great Commission was actually only given to the Apostles, not to the general body of believers.
Jesus did not command: Confession to a *Priest*
I guess that the NT especially of Matthew 16 is not considered to be Scripture by your lot?
Jesse boy could breathe life into Adam who would then proceed to administer a “Wood-shedding” to known “Heretics”.
Wow, what Bible are you reading? Re-read Leviticus 16, the Yom Kippur liturgy. Note that, after killing the animal, the High Priest has to enter into the Holy of Holies and offer the blood to God by splashing it on the "mercy seat". That is still part of the sacrifice, in fact it is a required part of the sacrifice!
Now compare it with Hebrews 9, paying special attention to verses 24-28. Scripture states clearly that the true Holy-of-Holies is in heaven, and Jesus is there now, offering to God not the blood of bulls and goats, but his own Blood. Since the true Holy-of-Holies is in heaven, it is in eternity -- outside of time. Everything there, including Jesus' sacrificial offering to the Father, is "ongoing and perpetual".
Not in the Catholic Church - it is with individual churches of men.
1 Timothy 4:1-2, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.”
Take that up with Martin Luther.
Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.”
Take that up with Ulrich Zwingli.
Timothy 4:3-4 Paul says, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”
Take that up with Jean Cauvin.
By the way, if you want to understand the Word of God, you might want to pay more attention to the word of God than to individual men.
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
Ephesians 4/11
Where is the confession of sins in Matthew 16????
"23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, [Notice the contrast - the old high priest had to enter repeatedly with blood, but that is DIFFERENT from the New Covenant] 26for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him."
So WOW! What Bible are you reading, where the New Covenant is unchanged from the Old!
In the New Covenant, Christ appeared "once for all" "thus securing an eternal redemption", unlike the Old Covenant, where the High Priest "enters the holy places every year with blood not his own".
The sacrifice of Jesus bought eternal redemption, being far greater than "the blood of calves and goats".
As the writer of Hebrews had already pointed out:
8For he finds fault with them when he says:
"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more."
13In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete.
Also, where is Jesus now?
“1Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man.”
Enlarge on this please....are we not to witness for Christ as His Spirit leads us, which includes presenting the Gospel message? I see no distinctitons in scripture which would tell us not to.. or appointed to the Apostles alone.
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.