17 Mar 05
Originally posted by NemesioIt is impossable to avoid sin every person in the World Christian or not sins every day, that is way Jesus says take up your Cross and follow me.
You are not forgiven if you do not continue to avoid the sin.
Sincerity of contrition [b]requires an active part on the sinner
to avoid the sin.
As you continue to deny the Scriptural status of the seven books of
the OT that the Occidental and Oriental Churches, then you actively
and knowingly continue and sin and cannot have truly accepted Jesus.
Nemesio[/b]
But as a Christian we can ask for forgiveness. 1 John 1:9.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by NemesioProve to me then how would you now that thoughs 7 book are a part of the O.T.
You are not forgiven if you do not continue to avoid the sin.
Sincerity of contrition [b]requires an active part on the sinner
to avoid the sin.
As you continue to deny the Scriptural status of the seven books of
the OT that the Occidental and Oriental Churches, then you actively
and knowingly continue and sin and cannot have truly accepted Jesus.
Nemesio[/b]
If you where a Christian yourself you would defend Christ not Catholicism.
To follow Chirst, you can't keep old traditions.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by PhlabibitI am not fighting.
Religion shouldn't be a fight, RB.
P
And how many times have I said that Christ is a personal God, not a religion.
You see it as a fight because you are treated by the Love of Christ, you don't want to give him the Glory of saving you, you want to try to save yourself.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by RBHILL…you don't want to give him the Glory of saving you, you want to try to save yourself.
I am not fighting.
And how many times have I said that Christ is a personal God, not a religion.
You see it as a fight because you are treated by the Love of Christ, you don't want to give him the Glory of saving you, you want to try to save yourself.
Now, this is where I think you go astray, RB. Reading this as a third-party, I see you “bearing witness” about Phlabibit (since you make this statement in a public forum), and I would have to assume that:
(1) You know Phlabibit well enough to know this about him;
(2) Phlabibit has actually said this;
(3) You are supposing that Phlabibit thinks this based on other things he has said; or
(4) You’re just making it up.
Now, if I assume (1) or (2)—on the basis that you certainly just wouldn’t make it up, or that your suppositions must be correct—and I go about repeating it: “You know, Phlabibit said he thinks he can save himself,” and it turns out not to be true, then I would be guilty of “false witness.” So would you.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by RBHILLI see it as a fight since you need to bash Catholics for doing things you don't think are right. Why is Christ so Glory hungry? Why does he get so upset if simple old me won't take him in as a personal savior?
I am not fighting.
And how many times have I said that Christ is a personal God, not a religion.
You see it as a fight because you are treated by the Love of Christ, you don't want to give him the Glory of saving you, you want to try to save yourself.
I don't believe half the things you say, and the other half is usually dead wrong. You make Christ to sound like a self-centard bastard running a private club, not the Son of God who cares about everyone.
And who said I was doing anything on my own? I'm still searching for the truth, something I feel you have not found yet.
P
17 Mar 05
Jesus is the creator of everything and if you think it is self centered for him to want you to worship him fork creating you then it is your problem.
It is a sin to pray to a human "mary"
why would you exalt a human up onto the same level that god is that is totally wrong god chose her to bring jesus into the world because she was untouched and the ideal person so that makes her just as good as god not hardly. she is just one of gods pawns kind of like you or me why would you pray to her.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by GrandMasterAceDon't you think Jesus will take care of it if he has a problem with this? Who put people like you in charge of how Jesus feels?
Jesus is the creator of everything and if you think it is self centered for him to want you to worship him fork creating you then it is your problem.
It is a sin to pray to a human "mary"
why would you exalt a human up onto the same level that god is that is totally wrong god chose her to bring jesus into the world because she was untouched and ...[text shortened]... god not hardly. she is just one of gods pawns kind of like you or me why would you pray to her.
P
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by vistesd
Do you do this on a case-by-case basis? If so, what is your criteria? Do you decide what to believe first, and then read everything through those “glasses?”
Dude, I really could give a pile what you believe. And if you start off a post to someone you've never had a discussion with , with sarcasm in guise of anger, you know where you can put it, right ?
pc
17 Mar 05
1 edit
Originally posted by GrandMasterAceSince to create everything God would have had to create evil and the ability for evil to exist as well as the evil beings that He sends to hell for being evil. That would make Him insane .
Jesus is the creator of everything and if you think it is self centered for him to want you to worship him fork creating you then it is your problem.
It is a sin to pray to a human "mary"
why would you exalt a human up onto th ...[text shortened]... ne of gods pawns kind of like you or me why would you pray to her.
I choose to believe He isn't insane, just a few of his more rabid followers are .
And yes, I said rabid not zealous
17 Mar 05
2 edits
Originally posted by pcaspianGee, you really mis-read me. The fault is mine, obviously, and I apologize. I thought that my comments about my own upbringing made that clear that I intended no sarcasm; but I obviously did not express myself well. Your posts have always seemed to me to be intelligent and informed. But your use of the word “author” made things unclear to me. Some scholars read the Biblical books as solely the work of the respective authors; people argue over whether they accurately present the words of Jesus; people argue over whether or not Biblical inspiration means the texts are inerrant, etc.
Originally posted by vistesd
[b]
Do you do this on a case-by-case basis? If so, what is your criteria? Do you decide what to believe first, and then read everything through those “glasses?”
Dude, I really could give a ...[text shortened]... sm in guise of anger, you know where you can put it, right ?
pc[/b]
Since we read the texts after the historical fact, we look at such things as context, local and global, and weigh and balance verses against each other. I might conclude that your reading is correct or incorrect—or, more likely, I will have to search more and reflect on it.
I really did not understand exactly where you were coming from. And although my questions may have been ill-put, or I used some way-out examples (although I have seen Jewish scholars, for example, read Jesus totally through the lens of the Hebrew Scriptures), I really, really did not intend sarcasm.
I feel badly that I offended you, and I am sorry.
EDIT: Okay, as I read the part of my post that you highlighted, I really do see how terribly worded that was--the "believe" part that is, as I think a case-by-case exegesis may have some validity (as in "Well, you have to look at the particular case" ). I really can't tell you how badly I feel about that.
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by NemesioDid Jesus quote from any of the rejected books, Nemesio?
Recall that you said the above.
Jesus did not quote from all books of the OT, so it is clear that
inspiration is not simply a product of being quoted.
Furthermore, when Jesus DID quote from the OT, 6/7 times
it was from the Septuagint, which gives the Septuagint's
contents a certain status. The Septuagint had the seven books
rejected by the Prot ...[text shortened]... heir excision from the OT canon,
so give it up, RBHILL. You reject 'God's Word.'
Nemesio
17 Mar 05
Originally posted by Darfius1) Obviously since Jesus didn't quote from several of the 'accepted' books, then
Did Jesus quote from any of the rejected books, Nemesio?
his not quoting from the books you reject is not a sufficient criterion by which
to judge.
2) Furthermore, there are many parallel references to the theological notions
expressed in these books which were listed in the link I provided in a previous
discussion about this topic.
3) Jesus almost certainly used the Septuagint and His followers most certainly
did. This gives the Septuagint's contents a overwhelming preference over the
rebelious Protestants who want to reject part of God's Word 1500 years after Jesus.
Please recall that part of the reason for not including these documents was economical,
as it was cheaper to print a book with fewer pages.
4) The Palestinian Jews rejected the seven books in a council in response to
the Christian understanding of the OT Canon. Recall that at that very council
they cursed the name of Jesus, which gives them little credibility as determiners of
Christian Scripture.
5) The OT Canon was ratified by the same Council who ratified the NT Canon.
If you are going to claim that the Holy Spirit was only there for part of the meeting,
you are being absurd.
Nemesio