Posted on 02/24/2010 9:36:26 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
LOL.
Tell me, Dear Heart . . .
GIVEN that God saw fit to use that kind of lanugage, who are you to tell HIM not to?
Isn’t that a bit prissy?
I’ve always found that even in the KJV there lurked a very real and DOWN TO EARTH [without being tarnished by it]
ALMIGHTY GOD who was touched with the feelings of our infirmities.
Yeah, I love the language of the KJV. It has a loftiness and elegance that’s wonderful and enriching in it’s own way.
But in that even, it’s not AS true to the original as the MESSAGE IS in a lot of passages.
One of the things I’ve persistently loved about visitations to Heaven . . . e.g. Roland Buck, Jesse DuPlantis et al . . .
every last one of them relates how unaffectacious, ‘lofty’ folks are in Heaven—including Christ and even The Father. Very matter of fact. Very straight-forward while still gracious etc. Very pragmatic, real.
I begin to get uncomfortable & very wary when RELIGIOUS TYPES start layering on the pomp and circumstance.
The Marian heresy is probably the worst error that church is caught up in. It systematically moves Christians from seeking Jesus to seeking Mary.
I AGREE RATHER WHOLESALE.
I don't see it that way obviously. I don't have trouble with the 'older' english, I had a good classical education including Latin. The vernacular in Scripture or worship style doesn't appeal to me. I said you can have it, if it appeals to you and you prosper using it, Hallelujah!.
I begin to get uncomfortable & very wary when RELIGIOUS TYPES start layering on the pomp and circumstance.
The choice of translation would enter into the realm of Christian liberty. As I said, you can have it.
I can identify with the Ephesians passage in personal spiritual and mind and heart felt experience. I associate the Eph passage very much with the mechanics of the workings between the three persons of the Godhead, just as I can witness the synchronicity of my recent studies and their lapses in this discussion.
Perhaps I am more sensitive to the explicit meanings in the words being used as I’ve been recently absorbed in word studies in Biblical epistemology, but I do perceive God intends for us to have these things available to our full understanding.
The contrapositive also provides enormous grounds for antichristian doctrines in various distorted contexts. There are probably for greater number of philosophers and theologians who are not Christian, but who might be theists, who argue God is unknowable.
No sweat extending grace back at ya.
Just wanted to suggest . . . what I did. LOL
I think . . . hazard haunts on those boundaries.
And that there’s something in the flesh that glories in the pomp and circumstance . . . seductively, artificially . . . it’s not per se, reliably GOD’S GLORY flowering in such.
Just a hobby horse of mine as I guess your hobby horse is somewhat the opposite.
Which is quite tolerable to me.
Blessings to you and yours this weekend.
I don't doubt that Satan has his minions both witting and unwitting. I reject them all. Since I am not responsible for the conversion of anyone, this is out of my purview. My job is to spread the Gospel, the Holy Spirit will take care of His part. He has a much better record than I do, He always bats 1.000.
Amen!
I will declare your righteousness And your works, For they will not profit you. When you cry out, Let your collection of idols deliver you. But the wind will carry them all away, A breath will take them. But he who puts his trust in Me shall possess the land, And shall inherit My holy mountain.” -- Isaiah 57:11-13"And of whom have you been afraid, or feared, That you have lied And not remembered Me, Nor taken it to your heart? Is it not because I have held My peace from of old That you do not fear Me?
I like xone’s point which asks, if I may paraphrase “so, if they want to believe in three modes instead of the trinity we believe in, as long as they affirm that Christ is the way, should we let them be”? And I agree — if Uri or Iscool or roamer_1 truly and sincerely believe in what they believe in, that’s their free choice. We can explain why we believe what we believe and so can they. I won’t insult them for that belief and I hope they extend the same courtesy in return.
And that’s the tricky thing that we need to remember. As a Catholic, I see the multi-font, BOLD statements hurling every name possible at me and accusing me of believing something I don’t and that someone calls themselves Protestant or prot... whatever... often enough and one can end up believing that all Protestants are like that (on the attack). Answering the question posed by this thread I wouldn’t consider someone who disagrees with Church doctrine in his/her quiet, civil way as an “anti-Catholic”. Even a JW or a Mormon who tells me what he believes and in a nice way why he believes I’m wrong is not an “anti-Catholic”, far less a Trinitarian Christian debating on infant baptism or any other post. We can agree to disagree.
No, not in the 19th century when it was proclaimed, but on reading the history, we find that IC has been proclaimed since the early Church and even the Orthodox hold to the idea. The Orthodox, however, IMHO, have a better way of handling this, a less legalistic way. The Western Church as a whole — and that includes mainstream Lutherans, Anglicans, Reformed and to an extent Baptists tend to be far more legalistic than the East.
post 227 and thereabouts
I agree entirely.
You left out the part about me thinking they are incorrect in your paraphrase.
That doesn't solve doctrinal issues or promote Christian Unity.
Who shall be called The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. – Isaiah 9:6
Who shall be called The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. – Isaiah 9:6
AMEN! AMEN!
Insisting on Scriptural citation for doctrine isn't legalism.
we find that IC has been proclaimed
That isn't the royal 'we'. If IC was the outlook of the earlty church and substatiated in the Scripture, it would have been used when the heresies the Catholic Church has said it fights first arose, not many centuries later. Scripture IS silent, hence the use of Tradition.
Please accept their usage.
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.