Posted on 03/28/2015 7:24:04 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
What was it specifically, in the article that you felt denigrates everyone else?
So, if this is correct, then He can be killed again, correct? Flesh and Blood deteriorates and grows old and dies. Flesh and Blood do poorly against a bullet. You have portrayed a weak Jesus. I do not.
How about because he also said “I am the door”.
How about that for starters. Do Catholics wiggle and fidget when Protestants quote verses they don't like or Catholic History they'd just as soon forget?
According to whose authority? Why do you say that?
But he ate food with them. He talked with them, walked with them on the Road to Emmaus.
That takes a physical body.
But, yes, he was able to pass through locked doors, remember he is still God.
Catholics must also believe He is stone as well.
Are you unable able to discuss the article on it’s merits?
By whose authority did you use to say it was an excellent article?
I find no merits in the article. If there were any, I'd certainly give it a go.
You want the real truth?
Today Protestantism and Episcopalianism as are many mainline Evangelical denominations in a state of evil rut by claiming scriptural warrant for the ordination of married gays and lesbian pastors. But the rot had its inception from the very beginnings of Protestantism where it soon collapsed into warring offshoots and factions.
Thus one can hopscotch across town through half a dozen corner street Bible-Christian churches: a First Baptist; a First AME; a First Presbyterian; a First Methodist; a First Unitarian; a first Emmanuel (Please no “Seconds”) until one settles in a congregation that is more in line with her/her interpretations of scripture. In short, every Tom, Dick, and Harry and their “milkmaid” (a term used by Luther himself) gets a freelance hand to know the Word of God and ironically from a Bible whose canonical texts were first infallibly authenticated under Petrine authority in the Synod of Rome AD 382.
Protestants should at least concede a point which Martin Luther, their religion’s founder, also conceded, namely, that the Catholic Church safeguarded and identified the Bible: He wrote: “We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics – (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it.”
That infallibility and the authority to teach ONE truth as Christ commanded in His Great Commission to “go Forth and TEACH all nations” This is to teach ONE truth and assured to Peter:
“And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”
However, here in the US and elsewhere we have low-information shallow Bible Christians flooding the pews of the Joel Osteens and Moonies of this world, all lapping up the vapid rubbish spewed by these charlatans while they make a nice living for themselves and their families. We have seen this with the Rev. Schullers and Billy Grahams preaching their own vapid nonsense.
For example, Easter Service becomes a sunrise picnic on the beach holding hands and doing an early morning Kumabaya. At the times Protestant Churches borrow Catholic ritual like Stations of the Cross and imitate the display of the Creche, a practice started by St. Francis.
In the meantime while prominent Protestant theologians convert to Catholicism, shallow Bible Christians are left stranded in the pews while the more educated among them converted to Catholicism. A few examples of note will suffice.
1. Ulf Ekman, the founder of Scandinavia’s biggest Bible school, with a congregation of some 4000 individuals, converted to Catholicism because his theological inquiry confirmed for him the indispensability of the Catholic sacraments.
2. Francis J. Beckwith, a “born-again” evangelical, a tenured professor at Baptist-affiliated Baylor University in Waco, Tex, was the president of the Evangelical Theological Society, an association of 4,300 Protestant theologians resigned and joined the Catholic Church. One blogger likened it to Hulk Hogan’s defection from the World Wrestling Federation to the rival World Championship Wrestling league.
3. Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, was a pre-eminent Lutheran theologian in America. He knew his Bible-text and history like no other Protestant. When he converted to Catholicism he said, “I have long believed that the Roman Catholic Church is the fullest expression of the church of Christ through time.”
The Bible Christians here on FR are reduced playing neophyte “internet” theologian by telling us how Paul tried to “correct” Peter etc., or this or that, or attacking the Eucharist, or the Sacraments; or Marian devotions with incoherent and out-of-context reference to scripture.
This is the shallow nonsense of Bible Christians and why now scores of Protestant theologians have decamped at great personal sacrifice and consider Protestantism awash in sheer rubbish.
Thus the early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes,
“[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it” (Early Christian Doctrines, 37).
Don’t take my word. Here’s one original source. St. Irenaeus:
“It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about” (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).
In the year 110 A.D., not even fifteen years after the book of Revelation was written, while on his way to execution St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote: “Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic church”. The Church believes that when the bishops speak as teachers, Christ speaks; for he said to them: “He who hears you, hears me; and he who rejects you, rejects me” (Lk 10, 16).
St. Paul in his letters also warns the faithful to hold fast to the tradition they received: “We command you, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to avoid any brother who wanders from the straight path and does not follow the tradition you received from us” (2 Th 3, 6).
In short, there is Catholicism and every other form of heretical belief under the sun.
For a comprehensive treatise on the Bible and its various Protestant variations for those seeking an escape from the shallow prison of Bible Christians,
See Graham Green and a convert to Catholicism:
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm
Nope, not when they make up easily dismissed lies and falsehoods, mislead, obfuscate or ignore logic and reason. Nope no fidgeting aTall.
It is a glorified body but a body nonetheless. It was the same body (flesh and blood) that was in the tomb that was resurrected. If not, why was the tomb empty? It is a body that ate food, contains the nail marks and can be touched by others. I am unaware of anyone who believes in the Resurrection who denied that the resurrected Body was flesh and blood.
What did you expect Him to do? He wished to meet with them. He did so in a way that was not disconcerting to them and wanted them to recognize Him. What other way would you expect for Him to do this??? Catholics make so much out of so little and miss the MAIN message. Sort of like straining for a gnat and swallowing a camel, but I guess that was literal as well.
Then why do you feel compelled to make such comments?
“Romanists can’t write an article about their interpretations without at the exact same time denigrating everyone else.”
The first word you typed, “Romanists”, is a denigration of Catholics.
There is so many half truths to that posting it would take far more time to unknot it than I wish to invest.
I feel compelled to meet error with truth. The better question is why do you feel compelled to accept Salvations assessment of the article and reject mine?
Yes, when the Books in the Bible were authenticated as the true written Word of God based upon infallible Petrine Authority in AD 382 in he Synod of Rome (these books did not fall from the skies and self assemble themselves), apparently up until the Protestant Reformation ELEVEN centuries later, the Catholic Church’s teaching was less than infallible. Somehow that infallibility for teaching ONE truth suddenly disappeared along the way.
“No, and He’s not made of flesh and blood anymore. He is Spirit.”
As they were talking about these things, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you!” But they were startled and frightened and thought they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. - Luke 24
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.