Posted on 01/14/2011 5:57:52 PM PST by topcat54
Evangelical book catalogs promote books such as Planet Earth: The Final Chapter, The Great Escape, and the Left Behind series. Bumper stickers warn us that the vehicle’s occupants may disappear at any moment. It is clear that there is a preoccupation with the idea of a secret rapture. Perhaps this has become more pronounced recently due to the expectation of a new millennium and the fears regarding potential Y2K problems. Perhaps psychologically people are especially receptive to the idea of an imminent, secret rapture at the present time. Additionally, many Christians are not aware that any other position relative to the second coming of Jesus Christ exists. Even in Reformed circles there are numerous people reading these books. Many of these people are unaware that this viewpoint conflicts with Scripture and Reformed Theology.
(Excerpt) Read more at reformed.org ...
A simple google search of golden statues of Mary provides plenty of images from which to choose.
There is no shortage of pictures.
So it’s not a cow. It’s not at the base of Mt. Sinai.
Big deal.
A golden statue that people bow down and pray to is a golden statue that people bow down and pray to no matter what the image is of and where it’s located.
Yep, right there along with the buddhas and other pagan gods
Kosta, by his own admission, does not know if God exists.
However, his constant referrals to God in conjunction his derision of believers as believing in pink unicorns, etc, doesn’t leave much doubt about where he stands in practice.
IMO, taking the official position of *I don’t know if God exists* combined with the aforementioned actions, leaves one to conclude that the practical difference is just a matter of semantic hair splitting.
Actions speak louder than words.
In other words, your Christianity is all about you, not Christ.
While I INITIALLY left for personal reasons, when I left for good it WAS because of theological ones. If you happened to also read my statements, you'll recall that once I was born again, which had nothing to do with my church attendance, but rather circumstances in my life (which I don't believe I ever shared) it was AFTER I was born again, that I had the desire to attend church that I started attending the Catholic parish that was my home parish. It was the the theological differences between what the RCC taught and what I read in Scripture that led me to find another church that taught closer to the Bible.
Okay; God spoke to you on your own road to Damascus and ultimately, you Judged your way to the church of your choosing. Ultimately, your choice is your choice. It has nothing to do with God.
And believe me, I had no clue about OPC, predestination, the whole church history and Reformation stuff that I've learned here. It was must me and reading the Word of God.
And coming to your own conclusions, or those of somebody else's.
I have no idea what you're referring to here.
Did you not state that the Gospels were for the Jews and Paul was the instruction manual for Christians, or words to that effect?
After seeing Roman Catholic church history, I'm forced to come to that conclusion that it never did either.
As you keep posting, it is all about you.
Well, I did think that was pretty funny.
I would say that he writes idiotically on theology, not that he is an idiot.
Given the number of times Dawkins has returned to pontificate upon theology, it's a rather impressive feat of you, to have separated the written idiocy from the personal. Bravo.
Hardly.
Do you not agree that the most important thing for a believe is to grow in the faith and knowledge of "to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ," (Eph 4:13)
Do you consider it an obligation or a preference? How would you suggest someone do so?
Okay; God spoke to you on your own road to Damascus and ultimately, you Judged your way to the church of your choosing. Ultimately, your choice is your choice. It has nothing to do with God.
And you know exactly what about my decision making process? Are you reading my mind and attributing motives?
Do you think Saul is the only one God had to smack upside the head to get their attention? Do you think that God would not lead a person to where He wants them to be?
God leads individuals where He wants them for His purpose. Twisting what I've stated to misrepresent my motives and actions, is not very honorable of you.
So, you propose what then? That I go about doing what someone else is telling me I should do? If I decided to listen to someone else, would that still not be doing it out of my own self-interest? Would that not also leave that open to the accusation that it's ultimately all about me?
Did you not state that the Gospels were for the Jews and Paul was the instruction manual for Christians, or words to that effect?
Not that I recall.
He posts idiotically on theology, that is true.
Frail, thin, short, and lightly bearded, with ruthless, penetrating eyes, he was humorless and short-tempered. The slightest criticism enraged him.
The description of his demeanour seems accurate, yet every statue of him I've ever seen has him as very above average height. Why is this? Are the Reformers attempting to make up for shortfalls in his theology? Does he come up short in the brains department? Does he not measure up to Christianity? Is there less than meets the eye? Perhaps there is no more than a tiny tidbit inside a gigantic ego.
Do we have 30 foot towering statues of Mary which dwarf those around, if her description is short? What are the children of the Reformation afraid of, if their icon is short?
So it’s not a cow. It’s not at the base of Mt. Sinai.
Is the golden calf now at the base of Mt. Sinai?
A golden statue that people bow down and pray to is a golden statue that people bow down and pray to no matter what the image is of and where it’s located.
What about statues of short people that are portrayed as being taller than everyone around them?
That does not make him atheist. That makes him agnostic. There is a difference. You may apologize at leisure.
However, his constant referrals to God in conjunction his derision of believers as believing in pink unicorns, etc, doesn’t leave much doubt about where he stands in practice.
I've never heard him refer to Christians as believing pink unicorns, but I have seen him posting on rather esoteric beliefs being portrayed as knowledge and comparing that to belief in pink unicorns. I think that the children of the Reformation may come under that description.
Actions speak louder than words.
True. Failure is as failure does.
And it is not limited to non Catholics.
Hardly.
Your posts indicate otherwise.
Do you consider it an obligation or a preference? How would you suggest someone do so?
To go to the Church - the pillar and foundation of truth according to Paul. If you walk away, then you have spurned your obligation in favour of your preference.
And you know exactly what about my decision making process? Are you reading my mind and attributing motives?
You and I have posted on many threads together and in parallel. Hardly mindreading; you have posted freely.
Do you think Saul is the only one God had to smack upside the head to get their attention? Do you think that God would not lead a person to where He wants them to be?
Leading does not guarantee following any more than inheritance guarantees collection. The "Christian" scene is proof enough of this.
So, you propose what then? That I go about doing what someone else is telling me I should do? If I decided to listen to someone else, would that still not be doing it out of my own self-interest? Would that not also leave that open to the accusation that it's ultimately all about me?
I would ask you to read up on the Cappadocian Fathers before I attempt to answer that for you. Or the Imitation of Christ.
God leads individuals where He wants them for His purpose. Twisting what I've stated to misrepresent my motives and actions, is not very honorable of you.
I twist nothing. I can only see what you post. Again, God leading does not mean that you are following. Satan is the brightest and most beautiful angel.
Did you not state that the Gospels were for the Jews and Paul was the instruction manual for Christians, or words to that effect?
Not that I recall.
Then may I ask what your opinion is of the Gospels versus the epistles of Paul?
I thought Free Rebublic was a Pro-God site? The posts I’ve read are an affront to God. Some are not believers, and that’s fine, but to out right oppose and defame who God is quite another matter....so how come those who have made their position quite clear not been banned for doing so?
Amen. Atheists and agnostics will never understand the nature of God unless God enlightens them. For these people, and all non-Christians, they are to be pity and prayed for that God would open their eyes and ears.
For self-proclaimed Christians, God expects us to come to the right understanding of who He is and He has given us His Spirit to do so. We bring God's judgment down upon ourselves when we ignore or refuse a truth about God and His nature. It's not that we will lose our salvation but we stifle our growth and can ship wreck our faith. We become "stuck" in our Christian walk and will see little fruit in our lives.
I feel the problem lie more with Christians then with non-believers.
bttt
Fascinating. If you cannot lose your salvation, what does the amount or quality of fruit in your life actually mean? What effect will it have?
I feel the problem lie more with Christians then with non-believers.
The problem is with all men, not just self proclaimed Christians.
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.