Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Hentenza said:Oh pleeeeeze!! Baloney!!!
Read The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. It's a foundational contemporary text in democratic theory, and it rightly credits the church with laying the first seeds in the tree of freedom. Written my an Indian Muslim, no less.
Well, how did fascists and communists get to power? Germany, Austria, Spain, Agentina, the Philippines, Chile, Nicaragua, and Portugal are just a few of the major examples where democratic electoral process has led to fascist or communist victories... and sometimes both.Hey GCC,
I have no problems with the church laying the seeds of freedom. What I have a problem with is "The rise of democracy, did, however, produce fascism and communism around half the globe."
I dont understand.There are no "ex-Catholics", only non-practicing ones.
K, I agree so far, I disagree withYou may be right here, but my challenge to you would be that if you are the discerner and definer of your Faith (i. e., "I will no longer practice my Faith according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, because I know the mission, instruction and demands of Faith better than it has been able to discern"), then.....
NOoooooooo, God IS my ABBA.....you are your own "Pope".
You are serving the role of "papa" yourself that Catholics assent to in their practice of Faith in the authority of Church. You are assenting to your own definition of Faith.
Of COURSE I can understand the gist of the Bible.Unless you became Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Anglican, Baptist (sorry if I left anyone out). Then, in my opinion, you are assenting to a congregationally-defined specific Faith against a broader more loosely defined "generic" practice of Faith.
The question really comes down to - definition of Faith practice. If you believe that you can pick up the Bible and get it - good for you.
Then how come the guy across the pew from you picked up the same Scriptures, and got something different? If he got exactly the same thing in all areas - great, the mystery of the Holy Spirit is alive and well guiding the discernment of your assembly.
No, thats not what I would be.If he initally got something a little different, but then saw his error when presented with your interpretation, then good. He has assented to the authority of your reading, and now you are his "papa" too.
God's not my helper??That's how this stuff works - I believe it to be inescapable. If you are discerning, and not accepting someone elses help and authority in this area - you are the Pope for you.
What foolish men choose to do does not negateWho then is leading who? If there is dissent, the dissenters split and form their own congregation (or fire the preacher). The split then becomes the mechanism for a divergent Faith practice (if there is no difference in discernment, there would have been no split; no firing).
No offence to you Trento.Jesus deposited the Christian Faith in the vessel that is the Apostles, who have passed that Faith on to us. The Church has been the guardian and teacher of that Faith, without compromise to "pleasing the crowd".
OKAYYYY now thats more like it.Admittedly, there have been times when that guardianship was tarnished,
Flesh and blood cannot discern that I guess.but all in all, the institution has survived intact, in spite of the quirks and follies of the men running it. The authority, the "final say" if you will, of that institution is THE OFFICE of the Pope, which is filled by a man - just like you or I. He occupies the same office that was held by Peter, who was given this authority and this office as recored in Scriptures - by Jesus. This is taken on Faith.
Outside of the ones who were chosen toYou are unconcerned in what the first Christians believed ?
Certainly apples and oranges dont you think?Islam is broken up into many denominations and sects as they are like Protestants . No authoritive Church just the Koran to interpret for themselves.
Well, I am an ex-Catholic, but I am a practicing CHRIST-ian.There are no "ex-Catholics", only non-practicing ones.
OH GOOD, gives you something to read while you'reI love your posts SunloverRight on sis
3 times was something like a legal contract in the Jewish culture. It meant that the request/oath was super serious. Here Jesus addresses him as "Simon bar Jonah," (Simon son of Jonah) which again denotes the seriousness of what is going on.John 21:15-19- Jesus reinstates Peter after Peter's lapse of faith when he denied Christ 3 times. I find it interesting that Jesus asks Peter three times if Peter loves him. Also note that Jesus addresses Peter as Simon.
Well, the way I see it is that Jesus was going to ascend to Heaven soon, and He tasked Peter with feeding His sheep. "Sheep" being members of the Church, and Peter entrusted to shepherd them and take care of them. If that is not appointing someone to leadership, I don't know what is.No one can feed Jesus sheep and lambs if they don't love Jesus. Jesus tells Peter to follow Him and feed his sheep. So, what how do you interpret feeding Jesus sheep? How does these verses attest to Peter's supremacy over the other disciples?
Peter's name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the "first" (10:2).Please cite some specifics. Thanks.
So, if I understand this right... Jesus prayed for Peter's faith because Peter was about to deny Jesus? That seems to me then that Jesus prayer failed, which we both know is impossible. I understand it as Jesus knowing Peter would deny Him, and praying for Peter to "turn back" and "strengthen the brethren." Was anyone else tasked to strengthen the brethren? No. A leader strengthens the others in the group.Luke 22:28-32
28You are those who have stood by me in my trials. 29And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, 30so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31"Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. 32But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
33But he replied, "Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death."
34Jesus answered, "I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me."
The context of these verses support the view that Jesus prayed for Peter because Peter was about to deny Jesus not because Peter had supremacy. As a matter of fact in verse 28 and 29 Jesus is specific that He conferring the earthly kingdom to those who stood by Him in His trials. Peter did not stand by Jesus but denied Him 3 times instead.
I honestly do not understand what you mean here. Why would Mary Magdalene know where Jesus was if the apostle Jesus loved is John? I do not see the connection.John 20:1-2
1Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!"
If in fact the apostle that Jesus loved is John, then Mary Magdalene would have known specifically where he was. According to the above verses it appears that Peter was with this apostle. Keep in mind that the apostles scattered after Jesus was arrested so it is reasonable to think that Mary Magdalene might not have known where some had gone. However, it is entirely possible for Mary to have known where John was since Jesus entrusted the care of His mother to John.
They are bits of evidence, which alone do not mean much, but together they show that of the 12, Peter was first in everything... first = leader... leading the others along the way, "blazing the trail," so to speak.I fail to see how any of these would prove Peter's supremacy. Please expand your thoughts here using actual scripture so that we can examine the context.
In isolation, these pieces of evidence are not enough to build a doctrine. I mentioned Peter's name change as evidence of his special role in the Church. In Matt 16, Jesus clarified what the "rock" was all about. Paul had a name change too, that is right, and he also had a very special role!Yes, Jesus did indeed change Simon's name to Peter, however, this fact is not an automatic assumption that Peter was to specifically be supreme over the other disciples.
BTW- Even though Paul was not one of the original 12, Jesus changed his name also.
Yes, very true. But a respectful debate strengthens the reader, writer, and observers, is a good mental exercise, and frankly, time spent discussing Scripture is better than being planted in front of some mindless tv programLOL! We can discussed these until we are blue in the face and not agree.
Also to address sunlover:hentenza said:Briefly, the keys to the kingdom of Heaven refer to spreading the gospel to those who will hear.
In the ancient world, keys to a city = authority. Why? Walled cities were common because back then you needed them, or else the city could be raided at any time. The guy with the keys to the city gate had free access all over the city and was entrusted with authority. Basically, the guy with the keys was the guy in charge.sunlover said:Hi Ps 139,
I think it could very well have been personal,
as far as the keys go only.
Just what does that mean btw, I give to you
the keys of the kingdom of Heaven?
What was Jesus saying to Peter? .
Rev 1 also shows keys as a symbol of authority:On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah;
I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open
I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family;
In his right hand he held seven stars. A sharp two-edged sword came out of his mouth, and his face shone like the sun at its brightest.When I caught sight of him, I fell down at his feet as though dead. He touched me with his right hand and said, "Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last, the one who lives. Once I was dead, but now I am alive forever and ever. I hold the keys to death and the netherworld.
Are you saying that "binding and loosing" somehow refers to the disciples untying their sandals? Did Jesus need to give them this power? Please let me know if I'm misinterpreting you.The terms binding and loosing ties to Jesus command to the apostles to shake the dust of their sandals in those towns that rejected the gospel.
I will not address this - I've already posted multiple explanations from Protestant theologians about how Rock = Peter. HereThe rock in which the church was to be build is the faith in Christ, the chief cornerstone, not in Peter.
That's quite alright... I've been around the block a few times here, I completely understand.BTW- Please excuse my abruptness to your post last night. I was really tired and should not have entered into a serious discussion. Please forgive me.
OH GOOD, gives you something to read while you're
taking it easy LOL.
love you,
when you gonna
come and go DIRT
biking with me?
LOL.
Just kidding, aint been on a
dirt bike in lotta years lol.
We can dream anyhow.
Glad you're feeling better.
Don't overdo.
love,
s
So who listens to "theologians"?
People who would prefer to learn from experts instead of muddle through themselves.So who listens to "theologians"?
rofl.First day back on my butt, doing A OK Sun thanks
I'll buy ya a dirt bike sis, want an armory item?
Amen, always nice to get some helps from thosePeople who would prefer to learn from experts instead of muddle through themselves.
That's like saying 'Who listens to doctors?' when considering health advice.
Theology is a rigerous academic subject that needs to be pursued by rigerously trained experts.
Woo Hoo, it's papa smurf lol.
sunlover said:Amen, always nice to get some helps from those
Greek scholars and so forth.
But the very greatest way to learn is through
meditating on His Word and letting Him
lift the top off and reveal what was under there.
It was there all the time yes.
But God loves to 'reveal' something to us,
as we seek and seek and seek after more of
Him.
imo
People who would prefer to learn from experts instead of muddle through themselves.
That's like saying 'Who listens to doctors?' when considering health advice.
Theology is a rigerous academic subject that needs to be pursued by rigerously trained experts.
Understandable.
On the other hand, I'd be dead if it weren't for doctors and modern medical science. I was in a coma a few years back. Weren't for some quick thinking I'd be quite underground at this point.
Just difference of opinion Gratia, (how rare hereNo doubt. The Scriptures contain great power for all, clergy, theologian, laity, or monastic, who will meditate on their truths.
Where I make a distinction is between the trained theologian who can construct a systematic theology on the basis of sound biblical scholarship, and who thus has the ability and status to challenge the church, and the average layman whose meditations on Scripture are no less (likely more) meaningful but is more likely to find authentic spiritual edification than theological truth.
Just difference of opinion Gratia, (how rare here)
I personally would choose revelation from God over
theologians. But indeed, balance is key in everything.
And I do have a son in his fifth year
of college majoring in religion, bless his heart.
And I believe God sent Him there too, he hasnt
had to pay a cent.
But that's just speaking of druthers.
I do see the benefit of instruction as well.
But instruction PLUS revelation woah!!
NOW you're talking, huh?!
It takes spending time getting to know HIm,
thirsting after Him, reading His Words,
and mostly, obeying Him before one can
truly understand the superiority of this
method of revelation, where one can
hear it right from the author. To hear
His voice whispering in your ear.
That's the difference between the King Davids
and the sunlovers in this world.
...Seek me with ALL of your heart...
THEN you will find me.
Thus saith the Lord
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?