Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
To the contrary. The two (and St. peter included with St. James) did not historically get along as well. Thye represented two divergent branches of Christianity.
His sacrifice applies to all whom are willing to come to Him, follow Him, and imitate Him.
Isn't it amazing how many times this has been said, by members of Apostolic Churches, and some people still don't understand this basic fundamental teaching of our faith? Is this rocket science?
Regards
Are you sure? I do not recall any Catholic or Othodox saying that. You are confusing "Jesus paying for all of our sins" and "Jesus actions applied to the individual". Jesus died for all sins, past, present and future of ALL men! Not just the self-proclaimed saved. However, it becomes clear that men must repent to apply Christ's work to their own individual self. God offers His salvation freely to all, since He desires all men to be saved. God leads men to repent, God gives men the power to repent. Some do, and some don't. Those that do repent of PAST sins are forgiven - they have Jesus' work applied to their souls. And Jesus CONTINUES to intercede for our sake and the sake of those who have NOT repented yet. IF Christ's sins take away all sins without man's repentance, then why does Jesus intercede TODAY for us?
I am certain this has been said before...
Regards
Au contraire, A-G. God is just to those who "worketh good" and to those who "doeth evil." He is just no matter what, always. If in His eyes we are evil, it is because we are evil and not because He "hates" us or because He "prefers" someone else over us.
That's what I get for not proofreading...
If Christ's work takes...
Regards
Exactly!
Incessant prayer qualifies as "vain repetitions?"
More like a "raw nerve." :)
Without free will there can be no free choice.
Thank you for your insights!
The Historical record is what it is. It was your sect that first merged with the state and then used the power of the state to persecute Christians. It took about 1200 for the Reformers to catch up to your example.
Really? Your own link seems to prove you wrong.
But you didn't finished that sentence. Surprisingly, you left off half the definition... biased or prejudiced in favor of a person, group, side, etc., over another, as in a controversy: a partial witness
Well, you conveniently left out the synonyms and antonyms on the same page. Imagine that!
—Synonyms 1. unfinished, imperfect, limited. 2. one-sided, unfair, unjust
So "partial" is a good thing
Yeah? Which part? Unfinished? Imperfect? Limited? One-sided? Unfair? Unjust?
If you were on trial and you discovered that the judge is partial would that put to at ease? If you found out that the jury is partial, would you claim that justice is served? If a witness was believed to be partial would you say that is good? Do you not know what impartial means? The Antonyms of partial are:
—Antonyms 1, 3. complete. 2. unbiased, fair.
Which do you think is closer to God? Unfinished, imperfect, limited, one-sided, unfair, unjust OR complete, perfect, unbiased, fair?
We were speaking of God as a Perfect Judge, not of 1000 silverings' chicken dumplings she is extremely partial to (by her own admission). I don't want my Judge to be partial, but just—equally to all.
You, on the other hand, want none of impartiality but someone who will be on your side no matter how guilty you may be. Partiality and equal justice for all is mutually exclusive.
The more I think of what you are saying the more it seems to me that Protestantism may favor prejudice as something "good." And, that is a very disturbing realization.
That is nonsense. The earliest Church, before it had any associations with the state authorities, was fighting heresies and heretics tooth and nail at the cost of exposing themselves and their own persecution. Obviously you are not familiar with the writings of the Apostolic and Church Fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries directed specifically against Heresies, against deviant or deformed Christians.
Don't flatter yourself.
Post 7,018 is a sad reminder that twisting words does not make things right. Neither does boasting.
See post 7,052.
To whatever extent Christians have disagreements amongst themselves - it is carnal, not Spiritual.
For ye are yet carnal: for whereas [there is] among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I [am] of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
Who then is Paul, and who [is] Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. – I Cor 3:1-7
That includes beliefs that glory in apostolic succession, kosta50.
Christ is not divided.
Christ is not divided. To whatever extent Christians have disagreements amongst themselves - it is carnal, not Spiritual.
That could very well be; but it could also be from following the evil spirit who appears as the Angel of Light.
But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." -- 2 Corinthians 10:17
My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism [James 2:1]
May God bless you and guide you, dear kosta50.
For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. - James 2:1-10
Again, the bottom line is this: if we try to live by the Law, God will let us and we will fail. The ones who never heard of Christ or the Law will be judged by the law written in their hearts. The ones who are in Christ Jesus are free from the Law. No one can be “good enough” – if even one could, then Christ died for nothing.
Maranatha, Jesus!
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.