Skip to comments.Why Evangelicals are Returning to Rome
Posted on 05/02/2008 2:09:51 PM PDT by Augustinian monk
click here to read article
Applause. The Church influenced governments; they were not a branch of it.
No, actually, many members of the Church were a part of the nobile ruling class as well.
but the ecclesiastics were, as a rule, the only learned men, and the higher clergy, bishops and abbots, belonged to the class of the nobles.
Church leaders such as bishops and archbishops sat on the king's council and played leading roles in government (emphasis added). Bishops, who were often wealthy and came from noble families, ruled over groups of parishes called "diocese."
Stop kicking against the pricks!
You really should go back and read your old posts to find out what you posted and what you didnt.
Well, what part about John 3:36 don't you understand?
[ ***No, I never stated that, I have stated that you cannot be saved by what is stated in those passages. To perform those acts you must have the grace of God in you, which comes by faith.*** ]
Are you saying that you must have faith first, and then you acquire the Grace of God?
I am saying that you cannot add works to faith.
[ ***And how many more hail Marys? Far more than the our Fathers, so your deception is obvious.*** ]
Deception? Who am I deceiving? You? God? What under Heaven are you talking about?
Anyone reading your wearisome posts!
Now, you want to make an issue of the 'our Father's' but don't mention the 'hail Mary's' that go with it, five to one!
So, Mary gets more prayer than God the Father does!
[ ***And let us see what Paul says about praying: 1 Thess 5: 17 Pray without ceasing. That doesnt mean vain repetitions, which is condemned in Matthew 6.*** ]
So, you dont follow Pauls exhortation and the reason is that when you pray you dont babble, right? But when I pray, that is babbling. And you know all this about me how?
No, I don't babble, which is what the Rosary is.
So, if anyone prays using the Rosary, that is exactly what it is, just saying endless prayers by repetition.
[ ***The Rosary is an abomination that encourages prayers to the devil known as the Queen of Heaven mentioned in Jer.44.*** ]
I didnt know that the Mother of God is a devil. Nice religion. The Mary that I have in my Scripture was a nice little Jewish girl who bore Our Lord. What religion did you say that you followed?
There is no Mother of God!
Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ, not the Mother of God.
God doesn't have a mother.
I am a Christian.
[ ***Like I said, show from the context that John 3:36 isnt saying that if you dont believe in Christ you will face the wrath of God? You cant, so all youve shown yourself to be is a truth denier.*** ]
Scripture instructs us far more than little snippets. Scripture says that you must believe; it also says what you must do and the consequences if you dont. That is why our Bibles are whole and therefore our Christianity is whole; abridged Bibles and mutilated verse obviously spawn abridged and mutilated religion. As you keep showing.
No, this isn't about 'snippets' this is about clear scripture which you have rejected by running to verses to deny what the word of God says, that if you don't believe on Christ, you will face the wrath of God.
Your good works have nothing to do with your salvation and if you attempt to add anything to it, you have rejected the grace of God (Rom.4, Gal.3)
[ ***The common people read and spoke in their own native language, which wasnt Latin. As for what language Jesus used, I know He didnt use Latin!*** [
The common people couldnt read. Are you that unlearned of historical times?
What makes you think they couldn't read during the Lord's time?
Literacy levels have always been high among the Jewish people who learn to read the Old Testament scriptures.
What language did Jesus use?
He used the language of the common people.
[ ***Gee, what a brilliant analogy! Did you think that one up all by yourself.*** ]
I tried to make it easy for you.
Well, it just showed your own mental limitations.
[ ***I didnt just give you a single quote, I gave you two that showed that the Roman Catholic religion was part of medieval governments.*** Wikipedia does not count unless backed up by more sound references. High school teachers who brag that they post things not found in high school textbooks are not sound references either. You have proven nothing here. ]
Actually, the issue is the facts and both were correct.
So your whining about the source is just some more of your blowing smoke to hide the fact that you are ignorant of everything you have attempted to discuss.
[ ***Really? II havent seen much on the way of facts, but I have seen alot of overblown rhetoric by someone who thinks he is alot smarter than he is. *** ]
Your statements, although you think that they have the force of fact, are merely your statements. Repeating them and occasionally referring to suspect websites do not give them the status of facts.
No, actually they are facts, but your comments are just so much empty rhetoric.
[ ***Another person can judge another persons soul by their words and actions.*** The only Judge that I recognize is the Lord God Almighty. The only entity other than Him that claims the same is the brightest angel. I do not suspect that you are God. ]
As I said, it isn't me that is judging you, but the Scriptures that you have denied, they condemn you.
[ ***You have rejected the grace of God and you will burn.*** Give Fred Phelps all my best, if you would. ]
Just stating a simple scriptural fact as stated very clearly in Jn.3:36 and Rev.20.
[ ***My advice to you is to enjoy the taste of water while you can now, since when you enter into eternity, you will never taste it again *** My advice to you is read Matthew 7 and try to understand it. ]
My advice to you is, since you are determined to reject the grace of God, is to enjoy the blessings of God while you can, because eternity is a long time!
And as it is appointed unto to man once to die but after this is the judgement (Heb.9:27)
Rev.20: 11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
That is the future for all of those who reject the grace of God, as you clearly have.
Now, stop wasting my time.
Wikipedia is written by anonymous sources who submit articles. Facts taken from wiki are suspect at best. Id rely on some other sources.
I have, note for example Schaff.
And he supports what I said regarding the power of the RCC in the Middle ages aka, Dark Ages.
[ ***Latin was not the common peoples language for hundreds of years before the 1600s. It was only used by the intellectuals. *** ]
Try to follow the bouncing ball. Latin was the universal language of communication until it was replaced by French.
And try keeping focused on the issue, which was the language of the common people, which was not Latin.
[ ***And the reason English replaced all of the languages of the world as the major language was the influence of the King James Bible spreading throughout the British Empire. *** ]
English replaced French as the univeral world language when the British Empire became the greatest empire in the world. There was some competition from the Spanish, Portuguese, German, Dutch and Russian empires. But the biggest reason was not the KJV; it was the military one. English was the language of the conquerors, just as Latin was the language of the Romans.
That's correct, and where the British Empire took over, the Bible followed and literacy with it.
***The Gospel is found in 1Cor.15:3-5, which you reject, since one must accept it by faith and not add works to it (Eph.2:8-9, Rom.4:4-5). ***
Try as I might, I cannot find the Gospel according to Paul. I find Gospels according Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but not Paul.
Your first reference is from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, the second from his letter to the Ephesians and the third from his letter to the Romans.
My Bible has a page that begins the New Testament Gospels and another page that separates them from the New Testament letters. Has yours gone astray? How can you share what you don’t have?
At any rate, I prefer the words of Jesus to misinterpretations of Paul.
Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me believes not only in me but also in the one who sent me,
and whoever sees me sees the one who sent me.
I came into the world as light, so that everyone who believes in me might not remain in darkness.
And if anyone hears my words and does not observe them, I do not condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save the world.
Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words has something to judge him: the word that I spoke, it will condemn him on the last day,
because I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and speak.
And I know that his commandment is eternal life. So what I say, I say as the Father told me.”
You reject the words of Jesus, preferring the words of men. So be it. You do have something to Judge you.
***Christians do share the Gospel with heathen and the ungrateful, as I have been sharing it with you, but you still reject it!***
How can you share what you do not have?
***Applause. The Church influenced governments; they were not a branch of it.
No, actually, many members of the Church were a part of the nobile ruling class as well. ***
A branch of the Government is a department or ministry such as Defense, the Treasury or the IRS. I realize that as one less travelled, you may not appreciate the difference and the ramifications therein.
There have been priests and ministers elected to government here in the US; does that make the Church a branch of the House or Senate?
***Church leaders such as bishops and archbishops sat on the king’s council and played leading roles in government***
Does not every President of the US include religious amongst his advisors? Yet the US Government is not a branch of any Church.
***Bishops, who were often wealthy and came from noble families, ruled over groups of parishes called “diocese.”***
What religious or political formation do you come from that you are unfamiliar with Catholic organization?
***Stop kicking against the pricks!***
When they are heathens, blasphemers or apostate, they need all the kicking I can give them.
***Well, what part about John 3:36 don’t you understand?
What we do understand is that we are to obey Him - His every word. I don’t detect a lot of obedience; I do detect a lot of hate.
***I am saying that you cannot add works to faith.
So you not only disagree with Jesus, you disagree with Paul and James both.
First, Jesus teaches of the necessity of Grace as the only way to salvation. Man can not work to earn salvation. This is clear. However, He also makes it clear that cooperation with this grace that God gives is necessary. For example, Jesus says in John 15:4-6:
John 15: 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. 5 I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned.
Thus, Jesus clearly teaches that God is the source of anything good that we do. If we try to do things on our own, outside Gods grace, it will avail us nothing towards salvation. Next, Jesus teaches on the necessity of us bearing much fruit. Some will try to argue that here Jesus is just mentioning that bearing fruit is only the evidence of salvation, not part of salvation. No doubt good fruit is evidence that one is in Gods grace, but that is not the main part of what Jesus is speaking about. If the man bears bad fruit, that is the criteria which Jesus says will cast him into the fire. That is the criteria that shows whether we abide in him. (BTW, if we look back in John 6:56-57, about abiding it also alludes to the grace of the Eucharist. But that is another topic). What are some of the fruit that is necessary to abide in him? Jesus continues:
7If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples. 9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love. 10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. 11 These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. 12 This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.
Notice the criteria that God gives for remaining in his grace. It says that we must bear fruit. What kind of fruit? His words must abide in our lives (v. 7). If not, we are not abiding in him, and are subject to the casting into the fire. And what are some of the words in this very context? The words that he uses here are that we must keep his commands. Thus, we can only abide in him and his love if we keep the commands (v. 10). We can only be his friends if we do his commands (v.14). Thus, having a personal relationship with him, by his own words, is keeping his commandments. Criteria is given to remain in his grace. Otherwise, as Jesus already said, we will get cast into the fire (v. 6).
John 15:5-14 shows us that God is the source of all good fruit. We must believe in him and trust in him for salvation. We can not work to earn salvation; Nevertheless, as faithful sons we must keep his commandments. If we do not bear fruit (i.e. for example, by breaking the commandments), we can be cast to the fire.
The law, in and of itself, does not save anyone. When Paul speaks of works of the law that do not save, the Catholic affirms that (per Gal. 3:10, Gal. 2:16, Rom. 3:20, 28) as well. The Catholic view is that God justifies us exclusively by his grace. We are put into a relationship with him, which is based on sonship, grace, and mercy. The rigid requirements of the law were put to death by Christ on the cross, per Col. 2:16. However, once within the realm of grace, obedience is still necessary to maintain salvation. The fact that although one is not under the works of the law (Gal. 3:10, Rom. 3:28) there is still a law of the Spirit and Christ (Rom. 8:2, Gal. 6:2). We are released from the rigid requirements of the law (See Romans 7:6, Col. 2:13-14, Eph. 2:15) but now we serve in the new law of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6, Rom. 8:2). It does not mean that the law is done away with. God must circumcise our hearts (Rom. 2:27) and we must approach him humbly and recognize our total dependence on him. Paul warns that if one lives in the life of the flesh (even if one is an adopted child) he will not inherit the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21). If one manifests the fruit of the Spirit one indeed will inherit this kingdom (Gal. 5:22-23). This can be done only through the power of the Spirit (Gal. 5:16, 24). Although one can not work to earn salvation, once inside God’s grace, one must bear fruit in his life to get the end of salvation. If one sows instead disobedience, one’s end is eternal damnation (Gal. 6:7-9). Thus, once one is justified by God, the Catholic view is that grace empowered obedience is necessary to maintain ones state of justification. Works , obedience and infused righteousness, is not only a necessary fruit of ones justification, but is also a cause of it.
***Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ, not the Mother of God.***
Interesting. Do you not believe that Jesus Christ is God? I think that we’re getting somewhere. Can you identify which heresy you follow from this list?
Sabellianism: Sabellianism is named for its founder Sabellius (fl. 2nd century). It is sometimes referred to as modalistic monarchianism. The father, son, and holy ghost are three modes, roles, or faces of a single person, God. This, of course, implies that Jesus Christ was purely divine, without humanness, and therefore could not truly have suffered or died.
Docetism: The name comes from the Greek word dokesis, meaning “to seem.” Along the same lines as Sabellianism, Docetism says that Christ was not a real human being and did not have a real human body. He only seemed to be human to us. In a nutshell...
Christ only (no Jesus)
Monophysitism: Monophysite comes from the Greek words for “one body.” This heresy says that Jesus Christ was a joining of the eternal Logos with the human person Jesus, which occured at incarnation. He therefore is two separate natures joined in one body. Monophysitism is very much alive in several present-day Egyptian and Middle Eastern sects of Christianity.
> Jesus Christ
Adoptionism: Adoptionism says that Jesus was a human being who was “adopted” by God at his conception, at which point he developed a divine nature. Later versions sometimes suggest that he was adopted later, such as when he was baptized by John the Baptist.
Jesus > Christ
Nestorianism: Supposedly, Nestorius, Patriarch of Antioch (fl. 410), believed that Jesus Christ had two natures — man and God — which remained separate throughout his period on earth. This is not really what Nestor said (although he did deny virgin birth) but the name stuck. You can still find a few Nestorian churches in Iran.
Apollinarianism: Named for Apollinaris of Laodicea (fl. 350), this heresy says that Jesus Christ was not a real man, but not totally divine either. Apollinarians suggested that he had a human body and a human soul, but his mind was taken over by the eternal Logos.
Arianism: Arianism is named after Arius (c. 250 - c. 336), a priest in Alexandria. This is considered the most serious heresy. Jesus Christ was thought of as a special creation by God for man’s salvation. Arianism was the form of Christianity that the Goths adhered to, and it was popular in all the areas they conquered, including Italy, Spain, and Africa.
Socianism: A version of Arianism called Socianism (from the Latin socius, meaning “companion), simply says that Jesus was an extraordinary man. This heresy still lives on in two very different forms, the Unitarians and the Jehova’s Witnesses.
Jesus only (no Christ)
***The common people couldnt read. Are you that unlearned of historical times?
What makes you think they couldn’t read during the Lord’s time?
Literacy levels have always been high among the Jewish people who learn to read the Old Testament scriptures.***
You do like moving on when you have lost the argument, don’t you. We were speaking of the 99% illiterate peoples of the West and their relation to reading the Bible in the 1000s. Now we’re moving to the OT Jews? The Greek or the Hebrew Bible?
http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/illitera.html says that at most 3% of Jews were literate at the time of Christ and that was because of great improvements under the Romans which led to greater wealth and leisure.
***What language did Jesus use?
He used the language of the common people.***
***I tried to make it easy for you.
Well, it just showed your own mental limitations.***
It’s soooo hard to speak up and talk down at the same time.
***No, actually they are facts, but your comments are just so much empty rhetoric.***
You must show your statements to be true, not merely repost them or jump to different statements when caught. Otherwise, they remain just unsubstantiated words.
***As I said, it isn’t me that is judging you, but the Scriptures that you have denied, they condemn you.***
Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. Bibiolatry, and a very indicative case of it. In any case, you have posted a number of times that you can judge me and that you are. Statements of opposite things in juxtaposition. Are you merely forgetful or are you posting prevarication? A third possibility: lost in theology, educated beyond understanding. Provincial, anyway.
***My advice to you is, since you are determined to reject the grace of God, is to enjoy the blessings of God while you can, because eternity is a long time! ***
I wonder at your final reward, since your theology differs so significantly from Christianity, as does your Bible.
***Now, stop wasting my time.
You are doing an admirable job all by yourself.
***Wikipedia is written by anonymous sources who submit articles. Facts taken from wiki are suspect at best. Id rely on some other sources.
I have, note for example Schaff.
And he supports what I said regarding the power of the RCC in the Middle ages aka, Dark Ages. ***
So does that other purulent anti Catholic bigot Ian Paisley.
***And try keeping focused on the issue, which was the language of the common people, which was not Latin. ***
The common people couldn’t read. Focus, focus.
***That’s correct, and where the British Empire took over, the Bible followed and literacy with it.***
It was not strict cause and effect and the time span was several hundred years. Literacy in 1600s England - at the time when the Empire and wealth were flourishing was only 30% for men and 10% for women.
Rather, wealth and leisure were increasing and only those in history up until recently who were literate were those with the wealth and leisure to be able to pursue it.
First, you attack the source, which is typical when you can't deal with the facts.
Second, Latin stopped being the spoken language of the common people long before the 1600's-try to keep up.
Third, the increase in literacy levels came with the increase of Bibles in the peoples own spoken language
And along with the King James, most homes in the Colonies and later the U.S. had Pilgrims Progress and Fox's Book of Martyrs.
Now don't waste my time anymore with your useless posts.
The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can render a reason.
Old French (9th-13th centuries). The dialects of Northern Gaul developed into separate language (Langue d’oil, see below) with a grammar of its own. The first written materials in it date from the Strasbourg Oaths of 842. The Old French literature flourished since the 10th century (chansons de geste etc.). French in this period was already taught in the neighboring countries (especially in Germany). In 11th-13th centuries it was the dominant language of the English administration (see more in the Romance Influences on English). It was, also, the language of the crusaders in the Levantine countries.
Middle French (14th-15th centuries). This period was marked by changes both in the pronunciation and in the grammar. A common literary language, based on the dialect of Île de France (the region of Paris), was promoted by the writers. French was replacing Latin in the texts of the public administration in France.
***First, you attack the source, which is typical when you can’t deal with the facts.***
First, Wiki is written by anyone and therefore a suspect source especially for rigourous or intellectually challenging subjects.
Second, you cited Schaff as a source on the role of the Church. Schaff is anti Catholic; you may do as well to quote another anti Catholic such as Ian Paisley. If you have Church sources to back up your statements, then I will indeed accept them.
***Second, Latin stopped being the spoken language of the common people long before the 1600’s-try to keep up.***
You keep switching back and forth between claims of Jewish literacy at the time of Christ, medieval literacy, and more modern literacy. The common people before the 1600s were illiterate, period. Even England, the most literate land in the world, only had 30% literacy for men and 10% literacy for women - the clergy, the nobles and the merchants. The US was far behind and arguably has never caught up to England to this day.
***Third, the increase in literacy levels came with the increase of Bibles in the peoples own spoken language***
Well after - the primary cause was the increase in wealth and leisure which mirrors the increase in literary rates in cities like Athens, Sparta, Rome, Alexandria, Babylon, Constantinople and eventually the cities in the West. These other examples did not have Bibles and yet mirrored the same outcome.
***And along with the King James, most homes in the Colonies and later the U.S. had Pilgrims Progress and Fox’s Book of Martyrs.***
You have proof of Pilgrims Progress and Fox? In what years? I realize that these fictional books extolling personal martyrdom were popular, but I’d like to see some proofs please.
***Now don’t waste my time anymore with your useless posts.***
Are you saying that you quite adequately waste your own time and don’t need my contributions?
***The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can render a reason. ***
2 Pet 2:
There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves.
Many will follow their licentious ways, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled.
In their greed they will exploit you with fabrications, but from of old their condemnation has not been idle and their destruction does not sleep.
If you like, I can post yet another list of heresies that those people who reject the Church of Jesus Christ choose to select from for their personal theologies, like the menu at a Chinese restaurant.
Nice. Google is your friend. You have confirmed that French eventually replaced Latin as the universal language and (eventually I suppose) you will find out that English replaced French.
You still haven’t answered my question as to what language you think Jesus spoke.
The rise of literacy in Europe was closely tied to great social transformations, notably the Protestant Reformation, which brought individual study of the Bible, and the development of modern science.
23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Enjoy the water while you can!
Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered to fight against the one riding the horse and against his army.
The beast was caught and with it the false prophet who had performed in its sight the signs by which he led astray those who had accepted the mark of the beast and those who had worshiped its image. The two were thrown alive into the fiery pool burning with sulfur.
I trust that you are planning on having a beastly time in your afterlife.
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.