Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | Victor529 | 156213 | ||
Thank you for your lengthy answer; I am not your 'son'; if you ever say anything wise enough to warrant me esteeming you as a spiritual father figure I will let you know. The expression ‘divines’ is completely unacceptable to me and is blasphemous. My dictionary defines divine as: Of, relating to, proceding from or of the nature of God Above the nature of man, superhuman, godlike, celestial When I see fit to call a committee of dead Anabaptists “divineâ€, I will let you know. Frankly, if infant baptism was good enough for the Church of the Catacombs and the bona fide Reformers, Calvin and Luther, then it is good enough for me. I fail to see why my quote has been awarded an insulting 'sic' but would point out there are innumerable errors in your posting: ‘It is a simple matter to research via web’, you need a ‘the’ in there pal. '[T]he Christians of the held to sound', is garbled. The following does not stand alone as a sentence, it is a fragment and belongs in the preceding sentence: ‘Although I would not call him a "Roman Catholic" bishop.’ ‘[T]he Bishops of Rome had already begun the process of "ceasing" full political control’ is ridiculous and is the opposite of what you want to say. ‘This depends on who you ask’, should be 'whom' you ask. What do you mean by ‘The “Roman Catholic†Church reaffirmed the position at the Council of Orange.' You state elsewhere that the Roman Catholic Church did not exist until the East and West were divided; make your mind up. How about stating which Council of Orange so I can check it out ‘on web’; there were two Councils of Orange held in A.D. 441 and 529. ‘[P]retty soundly Pauline’, is just bad English. ‘[B]ut a be better term might be Monergism’, what is a butter bee? You have no idea how to use commas properly and use an impressive 47. You regularly end your sentences without any full stop launching into your next sentence. I don’t wish to cause offence if you are dyslexic or didn’t have much of an education through no fault of your own, but this is just too much. Augustine was obviously of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox mould because his writings show he believed in the episcopate, a literal Eucharist, the Pope of Rome, faith AND tradition, and virtually every belief of modern Roman Catholicism except he doesn't go overboard on Mary. I suspect your issue with the Catholic Church's rejection of 'faith alone' is the reason you call them semi-Pelagian. Is the Eastern Orthodox Church Pelagian / semi-Pelagian as it knows nothing of ‘faith alone.’ I have a Theological Dictionary which states Semi-Pelagianism was a French variation on Pelagianism that held that ‘the human will both deserved and made God’s grace efficacious.’ There was nothing remotely resembling such a statement made by the Council of Trent. I note there were a grand total of two popes named Pelagius. This is hardly the ‘many’ you claim, particularly when compared with the 23 Johns or 16 Benedicts. Pelagius I, was the cause of Origen rightfully being declared a heretic. Neither pope seems to have any link whatsoever with the heresies of Pelagius. Origen in fact explained humanity’s inclination to evil by a pre-corporeal fall through sin. So it would appear Pelagius I was a champion for the orthodox cause regarding the doctrine of original sin. You write: 'To the extent to which the Christians of the held to sound Biblical doctrine, that is the extent to which I would agree with them.' Please, please, do not let this mean to the extent to which they agree with your befuddled ramblings. |
||||||
2 | inherit the sin of Adam | Ps 51:5 | Wild Olive Shoot | 156225 | ||
Victor, What was that all about? As a brother in Christ, I believe you know better than that. If being referred to as “son†is that insulting to you, don’t you think it would have been better to simply ask Doc to refrain from using that when addressing you. Rather than taking off in what most would deem a tirade of juvenility, deserving of a title of immaturity, don’t you think it would have been more mature and appropriate to ask that title not be used to address you? Don’t you think it would have been more appropriately “Christ-like†to respond in a manner befitting a Christian? I’m sure in hindsight you realize that. So I won’t dwell on it much longer. Though still a youngster in “forum years†(since I’ve only been around 4 months) I’ve had the opportunity to discern, at least with the more avid users, those who indeed tend to help and those who attempt to be harmful. Doc has been one of those (one of many) I have had the opportunity to learn from. Have I always agreed with him? I don’t believe so. But that’s not to say he was wrong or right, simply take it for what it says. There are many on this forum that disagree in one aspect or another with a different forum member. There are some who take the low road and insult and try to make the other look a fool. But I see there are those who also take the high road and with love and kindness, display their differences with respect as to the other individual’s thoughts. I’ve also seen that there are cases in which harshness is used and at first I didn’t care for that. But I’ve come to find that sometimes, it is necessary. In any case, I hope you realize that there are some who would like for you to continue to participate in the forum. But you should want to for the purpose of self-edification as well as helping others. You can’t expect anyone to take what you say as being credible when you disrespect forum members as you have with Doc. And if you felt offended at first, you should have pointed that out and not attempted to offend in retaliation. That’s just not right and you know it. In case you overlooked it, please read Mark’s post to you # 156215. That is sound advice my friend. I hope you put it into practice. WOS |
||||||