I've been reading your posts.
Posted on 12/23/2011 12:33:44 PM PST by rzman21
My friend. Give up on Scholasticism. It is ossified Christianity.
Why are you so afraid of scripture?
>>You can quote scripture all you like, but all you have is your private interpretation of scripture without the benefit of the Holy Spirit.<<
Do Catholics think the Holy Spirit’s initials are CC or something?
Is your communion the Body and Blood of Christ? Or is it some sort of optional symbolic gesture?
I only answer condescending frivolous questions once.
In other words, it is optional and symbolic, not Real and required, to your beliefs. Thank you for confirming it.
You will have to crack open a Bible and study up on what "taking communion as directed by the Bible" means if you wish to do it the way Jesus directed.
Already have, thanks. Almighty God is consistent. It is the imaginations of men, directed by the great apostacies of the Reformation and Restoration and self-reinforced by the god in the mirror which lead away from Him.
Line up a hundred "standard" Christians and you'll count 110 different beliefs.
I'm sorry you are so closed minded and hostile to the simple message of the Gospel that you have to try to make your point with an ad hominem straw man attack.
In other words, you have no answer for the (correct) description of "standard Christianity" (your term) and have to resort to this, a very inaccurate use of the term 'ad hominem'. I don't have to resort to ad hominem attacks; you accuse yourself in your posts very nicely.
Merry Christmas to you in this season of the celebration of the birth of Jes...er, ah, well, that is the Eucharist.
At least your lack of knowledge of Scripture and the Church is not blamed on having been Catholic, as some here do.
Once again the RCC pollutes the truth of scripture. The RCC tries to convince people that it’s the “source” of truth. It is NOT. Christ is. Misuse of the term “pillar and ground of truth” is another way the RCC tries to control the masses and retain power.
The Greek word for pillar stulos which mean post, something that supports. The Greek word for ground used is hedraioma which means a support. Paul is saying that the church is to uphold the truth that has already been established. He is not saying the church is in any way the “source” of truth or the repository of truth.
Not so fast. Paul says ground and pillar of truth. Where does 'ground' fit into your little essay? Or are you pulling a Luther and ignoring Scripture that you don't like because it messes with whatever you wish to believe this morning? As well, you have also incorrectly described the role of the Church and keep referring to the RCC. After all the instruction we have given you, why do you persist?
The church is built on the foundation of Christ. In John 14:6 Jesus tells us that He alone is the “truth”.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
The RCC tries to teach that the “church” is a building or an institution. It is not, the church is the people, those “called out” from the world to promote and preserve the truth taught in the gospels. It’s the “church” the people, those “called out” who are the “pillar and ground” of truth. The “upholders” of the truth that is Jesus and what He taught.
A favourite tactic of the antiChristians is to ignore verse that they don't like and to point to verse that they do like and pretend that the first category does not exist. You have my admiration on at least being consistent on that front. More "RCC" strawman incorrectly described and deflecting from the actual truth of the matter.
He also said that scripture was sufficient.
2 Timothy 3: 16-17 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work"
Sufficient for what? Salvation? It does not say that. Why not read it again and find out what it really does say? It does not say that Scripture is sufficient for anything.
>>Your presumption here is that you are qualified to pronounce sound doctrine and nobody else is, including the Church that Jesus Created and the Holy Spirit commissioned at Pentecost.<<
Pronounce doctrine? You have go to be kidding me. The RCC is NOT in any way given the ability to “pronounce doctrine”. Doctrine was pronounced by Christ and the Holy Spirit through the apostles and doctrine was settled. This whole attitude of “pronouncing doctrine” is nonsense and amounts to “adding to scripture”.
1 Corinthians 4:14 I write not these things to confound you; but I admonish you as my dearest children. 15 For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you. 16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ. 17 For this cause have I sent to you Timothy, who is my dearest son and faithful in the Lord; who will put you in mind of my ways, which are in Christ Jesus; as I teach every where in every church.
You will notice that Paul was NOT telling the “church” to “pronounce doctrine” but to “be ye followers”. He was even sending Timothy to “put them in mind” of Pauls ways of “following Christ”. You’ll also note that he was teaching the church.
The nonsensical position of the RCC that they are to “pronounce doctrine” is anathema to what Paul was teaching.
Still hung up on the term Roman Catholic? I find those who are, are also erroneous on the bigger things, like Christianity.
No matter, let us see what you have written. Ah. You are writing about the teachings of the Church to the faithful. Yet in the same passage, you wax lyrical about the Church not being able to pronounce doctrine. Let us examine that. You do seemingly admit that the Church is the teaching body. Okay, but what about doctrine. Trinitarian beliefs were not even close to defined until Nicea. Does your position refuse to admit the Trinity? Or that the Church settles doctrine? Was Arius right? Was Nestorius right? How about Simon Magus? Montanus? Sabellius? Pelagius? Eutyches? The Iconoclasts? Luther? Zwingli? Calvin? Aimee Semple Macpherson? Joseph Smith? Jim Jones? Cynical Bear?
The Apostles called Christ the foundation not the RCC.
1 Cor. 3:9-11 “For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, you are God's building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
We have the Church founded by Christ and commissioned by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (handed down to us from the Apostles), or we have the church of the god in the mirror who interprets Scripture for you.
I prefer Christianity, not the church of one.
I've been reading your posts.
You've been hanging out with us too long bb. :)
Regular Freemasonry requires that its candidates believe in a Supreme Being, but the interpretation of this term is subject to the conscience of the candidate. Consequently, Freemasonry accepts men from a range of faiths, including (but not limited to) Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and Sikhism. As a result, Freemasonry uses Volume of the Sacred Law (VSL) as a generic term for a religious book. As UGLE-based Freemasonry also requires that a VSL be present on the Altar, many Lodges have multiple VSLs available, and a candidate can be obligated on his book of choice.
This is correct. The usual Blue Lodge has the Bible, although I have been in a Jewish lodge. The problem that the Church has with Freemasonry is that there is an equivalence indicated amongst beliefs in that one may believe in anything at all. One may simply say Creator and that passes. I do not believe that any 'Christian' that thinks that any religious belief is equivalent to, and therefore a suitable substitute for, Christianity, is truly Christian.
Since the early 19th century, in the irregular Continental European tradition (meaning irregular to those Grand Lodges in amity with the United Grand Lodge of England), a very broad interpretation has been given to a non-dogmatic Supreme Being; in the tradition of Baruch Spinoza and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe – or views of The Ultimate Cosmic Oneness – along with Western atheistic idealism and agnosticism.
Exactly. I will not speak ill of the Masons, but I agree with the Church that it is not compatible with Christianity as the traditional Faith defines it.
“And as most of what Roman Catholics believe and practice”
We are very free in what is not doctrinal to pray as we wish and to devote ourselves to God as we wish. Provided we are in alignment with what the Church teaches, there is nothing wrong with this freedom. Paul himself exhorts his freedom in Christ.
“Catholics disagreement is quite wide and substantial”
Again, Catholics may disagree on a great deal of things without encountering doctrinal disagreement.
Standing ovation, sir. You have described things very well.
“The Greek word for ground used is hedraioma which means a support.” There’s that word “support” again. Not “define” or “establish” or “proclaim” as in “make it up” but “support”. Christians (the church) are to uphold and support the truth of scripture not create, establish or create truth as the RCC attempts to do.
>> Trinitarian beliefs were not even close to defined until Nicea.<<
That’s about as much total nonsense as claiming you understand the trinity. All throughout scripture it is stated that there are three person and that all three are one. Jesus said “I and my Father are one”. The arrogance of the RCC claiming they are the ones who “proclaimed it” is beyond astounding. Explicitly stated an implicit truth does not make it an RCC “proclamation” or give it credit.
>> We have the Church founded by Christ and commissioned by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (handed down to us from the Apostles),<<
As per RCC “proclamation”. The RCC “proclaiming” they are the “church” is no more valid than Smith “proclaiming” himself a prophet.
Huh?
The disciples themselves talk about her.
And in GLOWING terms; too!
Let this mind be in you...
And how did Jesus speak of His mother.
(Biblical quotes will be fine...)
Where is this found in the bible? I don’t see this teaching anywhere.
(Do I really need to comment?)
You can leave the thread now, as you have been left in the dust...
They're home; listening to speakers from the last General Conference.
There are UNorthodox ones?
Welcome to MORMONism 101
While we are waiting to start; enjoy the artwork on our walls.
If some of it seems shifty to you, just look at it real close and it will stop moving,
but another location will then start to crawl on you.
Do NOT think our DOCTRINE is this way!
“The Greek word for ground used is hedraioma which means a support.” There’s that word “support” again. Not “define” or “establish” or “proclaim” as in “make it up” but “support”. Christians (the church) are to uphold and support the truth of scripture not create, establish or create truth as the RCC attempts to do.
The term for 'ground' is edraiōma which construes 'basis'. Not just 'support'.
>> Trinitarian beliefs were not even close to defined until Nicea.<<
That’s about as much total nonsense as claiming you understand the trinity. All throughout scripture it is stated that there are three person and that all three are one. Jesus said “I and my Father are one”. The arrogance of the RCC claiming they are the ones who “proclaimed it” is beyond astounding. Explicitly stated an implicit truth does not make it an RCC “proclamation” or give it credit.
Still hung up on the Roman Catholics? One trick pony here.
You cannot even support your own statements. Without John, there is no real argument for the divinity of Jesus. You have never presented any Scripture which indicates the divinity of the Holy Spirit. You have no basis for anything that you hold that you have posted. Your position seems to be: anything non RCC, and it should be obvious.
>> We have the Church founded by Christ and commissioned by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (handed down to us from the Apostles),<<
As per RCC “proclamation”. The RCC “proclaiming” they are the “church” is no more valid than Smith “proclaiming” himself a prophet.
What a magnificent obsession. The truth of the matter is found in Scripture and in the writings of the Church Fathers. Not in the blatherings of the misdirected man who finds his god in the mirror.
And this was SAID during a PASSOVER meal; which everyone there KNEW is was ONCE as year.
ALL of christianity has twisted it to mean something else.
Now that you accept the things I've bound together; let me instruct you now in some of my traditions.
I know that GOD hates when that happens!!
Praise God in his sanctuary;
praise him in his mighty heavens.
Praise him for his acts of power;
praise him for his surpassing greatness.
Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet,
praise him with the harp and lyre,
praise him with timbrel and dancing,
praise him with the strings and pipe,
praise him with the clash of cymbals,
praise him with resounding cymbals.
Let everything that has breath praise the LORD.
Praise the LORD.
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.