Results 1221 - 1240 of 1443
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Emmaus Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1221 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Emmaus | 49183 | ||
Joe, Here is link which addresses a question about "the current status of the anathemas of Trent" and also a touches on the fact that the anathemas of that Council were canon law anathemas, which differs from biblical anathemas. I must confess it is not a question I loose a lot of sleep over. (I also don't loose any sleep over Protestant anathemas of Catholics, whatever form they take.)But apparently you are not alone in your interest. http://www.cin.org/users/james/questions/q137.htm Emmaus |
||||||
1222 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Emmaus | 49181 | ||
Joe, I don't think I will successfully clarify the issue for you. The best I can say is that the anathemas were against those promoting the dissentions of the day. And the anathema, I am sure you will find this hard to accept) is sometimes called "the charitable anathema", because thay is meant not to be a verdict of eternal damanation ( which can only be decided by God), but a breaking of fellowship in the hope that the one excommunicated will see the error of his ways and repent. This is still done today in Protestant Churches as well as the Catholic Church. Emmaus |
||||||
1223 | A man that won't work | 2 Thess 3:10 | Emmaus | 49177 | ||
Thanks Mommaps. I have responded at your request. Emmaus |
||||||
1224 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Emmaus | 49175 | ||
Joe, Thankfully Joe the buck doesn't stop with you. :-) And as you know, the door swung both ways on condemnations in those days. A few other paragraphs of the Catechism for those on both side who may wish to strive for unity and charity in the present. 817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin: Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers. 818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church." Emmaus |
||||||
1225 | A man that won't work | 2 Thess 3:10 | Emmaus | 49072 | ||
"If any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." 1 Timothy 5:8 "How long will you lie there, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a vagabond, and want like an armed man. " Proverbs 6:9-11 |
||||||
1226 | Primary purpose of the written Gospels | Luke 1:4 | Emmaus | 48822 | ||
Joe, "It seems that some of them were definitely written for that primary purpose." By this do you mean internal catechesis and buidling up, or evangelization or both? And when you say the Jews were the primary recipeients of Matthew do you mean Jewish believers in Christ or the others.? I asked my initial question because it seems to me that many disputes over scripture may grow out of a presumption of belief or failure to disclose by one or more parties whether they are coming from a believeing or non believeing posiiton. And although I have read of those who have been converted merely by the reading of Scripture. But it is a rare situation. It seems more common that those being converted to belief were already somewhere along the path of conversion by the Holy Spirit working through one or more believers and their personal lived and or spoken witness, long before the written Gospel takes hold. In fact they may have read the Gospels more than a few times without receiving the message at all, but the personal encounter with Christ through a personal or community witness opens them up to see what they did not perceive before in the written scripture. It would seem that the preaching of the Gospel in the sense of a personal witness is still the primary means of evangelization in most cases. And only then does the full impact of the written Gospel take hold. I think this also applied in different variation even in family which are raising their children in the faith. Emmaus |
||||||
1227 | The Lord's supper | 1 Cor 10:16 | Emmaus | 48769 | ||
vume, In my Church we believe that Holy Communion is a partaking in the one sacrifice of Christ as our Passover Lamb offered once for all. "Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us, therefore, celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." 1 Cor 5:7-8 24: and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." "In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes." 1 Cor 11:24-26 16: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 1 Cor 10:16 "but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues for ever. Consequently he is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them."Hebrews 7:24-25 "And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth;" Rev 5:6 "Oh, that there were one among you who would shut the doors, that you might not kindle fire upon my altar in vain! I have no pleasure in you, says the LORD of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts." Mal 1:10-11 Emmaus |
||||||
1228 | Priesthood and marriage | Luke 1:5 | Emmaus | 48762 | ||
Janik, The word sometimes translated as "wife" in this passage 1 Cor 9:4 can also be translated as "woman" or "sister" as in a sister in Christ. In fact in this very passage Paul is defending his right to such companionship on missionary travels.And we know he was not talking about a wife for himself. So although one interpreation allows for wife it also allows for the "woman" or "sister" interpretation. Therefore, I stand by my previous statement that scripture is not clear about whether or not Peter's wife was alive when he began his ministry. It is ambiguous. Emmaus |
||||||
1229 | Was Mary a virgin her whole life | Matt 1:25 | Emmaus | 48621 | ||
Hank, Your story about the Immaculate Conception being confused with the Virgin Birth of Jesus is interesting and not uncommon, among Protestants and poorly catechised Catholics who often both mistake the doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception with Jesus's Virgin birth or even Mary's wrongly supposed virgin birth. Not only does it say something about a bad understaning of basic theolgy in both camps, but an even more basic lack of understanding of the English language. Conception and birth are not synonyms, no matter how many seem to make that mistake, even some who have practical and personal experience in themselves concieving and giving birth. Close in space but distant in time. Your story seems to suggest the relative was saying he did not believe in the Virgin Birth of Mary, since his question as you phrased it seems to indicate he thought the Immaculate Conception referred to Jesus' virgin birth and he mistakenly thought you were saying you did not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. You knew what you were saying but he did not. And I must say you handled the situation with great wisdom and charity. Emmaus |
||||||
1230 | Priesthood and marriage | Luke 1:5 | Emmaus | 48535 | ||
Makarios, You may be surprised to learn that there are married Catholic priests. And that celibacy is a discipline which can be changed, not a doctrine of the Catholic faith. As for Peter. Scripture does not make it clear whether or not his wife was still alive when he began his ministry. Emmaus |
||||||
1231 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 48473 | ||
Joe, I never made an assertion. I simply challenged you to defend yours with scripture, which is what happens to me every time I make an assertion with which someone on the forum disagrees. And the demand is usually for something "that says exactly that." My main point was to show the double standard I have encountered and to show that many assertions made by "Sola Scriptura" propnents on this forum can not be defended on their own terms. The point made is that often those pushing "Sola Scriptura" on others, without even being conscious of it, argue from their own traditions and what they have been taught, which is extra-biblical. Which may or may not mean that the assertion is correct. You at least have always acknowledged tradition although understood in some significant ways differently form me and others. I just thought I'd reverse the current a little. Some people may get a little static shock. No sense in picking on the weak ones Joe. You are usually honest, up to the challenge and well versed on more than your own position. Emmaus |
||||||
1232 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 48397 | ||
Joe, In other words you can not defend your assertion from scripture! Emmaus |
||||||
1233 | Sola Scriptura supported by bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 48260 | ||
"The church of Jesus Christ RECOGNIZES what is Scripture." ...Joe! Joe, How about some EXPLICIT scripture which excludes the possibility of the Church recognizing the books outside the Protestant canon for that rather dogmatic statement? Emmaus |
||||||
1234 | Did God created people before Adam | Gen 1:1 | Emmaus | 48256 | ||
Berean. I am not sure if the format I am trying to type this in with translate to the forum format. But here is something to consider. Try looking at Genesis 1 this way. Prologue 1:1 God is Day 1 1:3-5 Day 4 1:14-19 Light and darkness Fixed lights for day and night Day 2 1:6-8 Day 5 1:20-23 Firmament,waters Birds above, fish below above and below Day 3 1:9-13 Day 6 1:24-31 Dry land Animals and man on land Day 7 2:1-3 Epilogue God rests The summary of creation before the more detailed account of man's creation has a logical structure. On days 1, 2 an 3 regions are created. Regions of light and dark, the firmament with waters above and below with the air between, dry land. On days 4,5 and 6 the inhabitants of the regions are created, starting with the fixed objects sun, moon and stars, birds and fish, land animals and man. The vegetation is created with the earth because it does not have the same freedom of movement as the other living creatures. There is clearly a hierarchical order of creation indicated. But Genesis 1 is a sumary. Gensis 2 gets into the specifics of God's most important and highest creation, man. Emmaus |
||||||
1235 | 2 followups, masturbation and 1Cor7:2-5 | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 47860 | ||
Biynah, Jesus made it plain to the Pharisees that not everything in scripture is explicit, but much is implicit. Review his dialogues with them. Other than that, I leave the last word on the matter to you. Emmaus |
||||||
1236 | The cup? | Matt 26:39 | Emmaus | 47830 | ||
Mommaps, So with the fourth cup of consummation on the cross at His death completed His Passover sacrifice of Himself and completed the covenant meal sealing the New Covenant, just as the first Passover meal sealed the Old Covenant. But God continues to keep his saving covenant promises throughout history even now as He did throughout the history of the Old Covenant. And we continue to remember in or covenant meal. The question is: are we willing to do as Christ did and take up the fourth cup? Are we willing, by His grace, to take up our cross and follow Him, as He bid us do, putting to death the sin in our lives and conforming ourselves to Him, making ourselves a holy and living sacrifice to God as Paul says. Emmaus |
||||||
1237 | 2 followups, masturbation and 1Cor7:2-5 | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 47822 | ||
Binyah, It is also a known scientific fact that a woman's desire increases and peaks at the date of ovulation. As the woman has her menstral period the man has nocturnal emmisions. And masturbastion is not a sin confined to men. It, like all sin, is conceived in the heart brought to full fruit in the flesh. But as Jesus said a man who lusts in his heart has already sinned. As for healthy adult males unaffected by the saturation of sexual images in our society, they don't exist. The whole point of such ads and propaganda is to affect healthy adult and adolescent males. Jesus lived in a time when these were not present and was still aware of the lust that grows out of our fallen nature. The issues here, as I see it, is not about mastubation or sexual sin in and of itself. But rather the tendency we all have to rationalize the sins we struggle with and deny they are sin because they are the common practices of many. The common practices of many are often just the sins common to all men and women. My mother used to refer to the Ten Commandments as the top ten list af mankind's favorite activities. It is holiness and conforming ourselves to Christ that goes against our natural tendencies because holiness is not natural, but supernatural and lifts us from our fallen state. And that requires supernatural grace, because we can not do it on our own. The fact is that in all areas of our lives we naturally tend to fall short of holiness and we often look for excuses to explain why we are not sinners, rather than admit we are, that we have stumbled again, and once more pick up our cross and follow after Jesus. This does not imply a lack of sympathy for or understanding of the sinner. The Lord and everyone around me knows that I am a sinner myself. God has compassion for the sinner. But His compassion is too great to leave the sinner in his sin. Rather, he makes the sinner acknowlege his sin, and call for God's assistance. Then God lifts him up from his sin and gives the sinner grace for the journey to holiness under the burden of the cross he is bidden by the Lord Jesus to take up. I think our conversation has run its course since they have restricted this thread. God be with you, Emmaus |
||||||
1238 | Was Mary a virgin her whole life | Matt 1:25 | Emmaus | 47817 | ||
Ray, In this context the local Church is spoken of as a "lady" and mother to her "children" the congregation. John is writing from a location at one local church to another local church. This is to a certain extent similar to the to the image of the Church as the Bride of Christ found elsewhere in John's writings. Where I come from the universal Church is referred to as Holy Mother Church. Emmaus |
||||||
1239 | is masterbation a sin explain thxs | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 47782 | ||
Christlifer2001 A nocturnal emmission is a normal body function. Mastubation is an act of the mind and will carried out by the body. It is an intentionally sterile act that is a cheap counterfeit of somethat that is meant to be an outward expression of lifegiving love and affection to another. It is about narcissitic love of self like every other sin sexual or non sexual. Emmaus I recently heard an interesting comment from a priest about confession of sins of impurity by men. He said that most men would rather confess to adultery with four women than confess to masturbation because they were more ashamed of the later. And every man that I spoke to about this comment afterward agreed that he was proabably right. At least in adultery or fornication you are relating in some manner to another person even if in sin. In the solitary act you relate to nothing and no one but yourself and your lustful imagination. Emmaus |
||||||
1240 | is masterbation a sin explain thxs | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 47763 | ||
inmyheart, Thnk you. I could not have responded better.The other natural acts ChristLife2001 described are normal bodily functions and no sin is connected with them.. Not so masturbation. It is as you described a form of idolatry. Emmaus |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 ] Next > Last [73] >> |