logical bob
Member
Oh Biblereader, you use up a long post to condemn lots of professing Christians as false teachers and preachers and then you close by warning against those who cause division.
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
logical bob said:Joseph Ratzinger is alleged to have avoided reporting child rape to the proper authorites, moved the rapists to new posts where they would have new opportunities and sought to ensure the silence of their victims. If this is true then he, personally, is an accessory after the fact to child rape.
logical bob said:If the same situation happened in a secular organisation that the chief executive of that organisation would certainly be prosecuted, as would key decision makers like Ratzinger.
logical bob said:I won't comment on your figure of 132 priests. The 132 priests aren't the issue. The issue is with the one man who now claims to be able to infallibly interpret the word of God for all mankind. He has demonstrated personal moral failings which make this claim laughable. Nobody who is personally complicit in the rape of children has any claim to moral or spiritual authority of any kind. How much biblical interpretation do you need to realise that raping children in wrong?
glorydaz said:The church is the body of Christ...we are a priesthood of believers. We go directly to our High Priest, Jesus Christ. We are led and guided by the Holy Spirit within. We find the "fulness of Truth" through Christ...not a building made with hands but a spiritual building comprised of individual members. If we have to filter truth through men it will only come out tainted. This is why we have so much division in the body today....looking to men instead of to Christ.
JamesG said:.
And I have always wanted to ask a Catholic this question. Given the fact that there are many Catholic doctrines that are not found in the Bible per se, but are extrapolations from certain ideas that are found in the Bible, something that is true also in the Protestant denominations; doesn’t the existence of an authoritative interpreter that has produced these extrapolations presuppose that revelation continues to the present day, that it did not stop at the New Testament writings?
JamesG
logical bob said:[
Joseph Ratzinger is alleged to have avoided reporting child rape to the proper authorites, moved the rapists to new posts where they would have new opportunities and sought to ensure the silence of their victims. If this is true then he, personally, is an accessory after the fact to child rape.
rl]
There's a case to answer. It would be great to see that case tested in court.francisdesales said:I see. Alleged = guilty in your world...
Some anti-Catholic can allege something, and suddenly, it's true as truth can be.
People like me would certainly throw the church under the bus if it did indeed circulate a written policy saying abuse should be covered up and kept from the authorities.People like you are all to willing to throw the Church under the bus because of some guy claims he was molested 30 years ago and another claims the now-Pope knew all about it and ignored it.
The allegation is that this policy exists and that the church's actions were based on it. If that can be proved, the church is guilty. If it can't, then it isn't. Slinging mud at other people has no bearing on this.Perhaps if the Church DID take this to court, they could drag the name and reputation of said allegers through the mud and question their OWN reputations, just like a secular defense attorney would likely do in such cases.
If the church doesn't operate by slinging mud at its detractors then why are you taking it upon yourself to do precisely that?But that's not how the Church operates - which, apparently, you disaprove of... I guess mud-slinging would be more to your liking in such cases?
I don't know. The question is, do the most senior Catholics believe it to be wrong enough that those who do it should be punished?Does any Catholic believe "raping children" is right?
You misrepresent me.glorydaz said:I do, indeed, stand by every word I've posted. You are preaching a "works based salvation". That's simply error,.....
Just to clarify what you're saying. When the BBC presents evidence of this, and shows us the Vatican's policy document Crimen Solicitationis, you say this is a lie told because the BBC are pro abortion and pro gay marriage activists.chestertonrules said:It is not true. It is left wing media slander.logical bob said:Joseph Ratzinger is alleged to have avoided reporting child rape to the proper authorites, moved the rapists to new posts where they would have new opportunities and sought to ensure the silence of their victims. If this is true then he, personally, is an accessory after the fact to child rape.
It is spread by pro abortion and pro gay marriage activists.
Just to clarify what you're saying. When the BBC presents evidence of this, and shows us the Vatican's policy document Crimen Solicitationis, you say this is a lie told because the BBC are pro abortion and pro gay marriage activists.[/quote:7pb1onlu]logical bob said:It is not true. It is left wing media slander.chestertonrules said:[quote="logical bob":7pb1onlu]Joseph Ratzinger is alleged to have avoided reporting child rape to the proper authorites, moved the rapists to new posts where they would have new opportunities and sought to ensure the silence of their victims. If this is true then he, personally, is an accessory after the fact to child rape.
It is spread by pro abortion and pro gay marriage activists.
Exactly. The real issue is that gd has no argument - no actual case as to why Paul does not means what he writes in Romans 2.francisdesales said:Thus, as Romans 2 states, our works, IN CHRIST'S Spirit, will allow us to receive the gift of eternal life. Not because we did it alone.
I agree that the thread has strayed off course, and I have participated in that. I plan to start another thread to deal with the dance so many do to avoid Romans 2:7 (and Romans 8).JamesG said:This thread has turned into a thread about salvation and whether or not it can be lost.
Drew said:Exactly. The real issue is that gd has no argument - no actual case as to why Paul does not means what he writes in Romans 2.francisdesales said:Thus, as Romans 2 states, our works, IN CHRIST'S Spirit, will allow us to receive the gift of eternal life. Not because we did it alone.
It is possible that Paul could have chosen to describe a path to salvation that no persons can actually successfully take. This is what many do with Romans 2 - they say that Paul is saying "here is how you would be saved by works if it were possible to be saved by works. But, it isn't".
Well the problem, of course, is that there is simply no actual evidence - no argument - that Paul is speaking hypothetically. And that should send up all sort of red flags.
Imagine if every exegete exercized the right to arbitrarily decide that certain statements are not actually true, but rather express what could be true, but, in fact, is not.
We would get nowhere.
And who do you say that Jesus is?MMarc said:Sadly truth is one of the most relative thing there is.
Truth should not be a doctrine, Christianity has made it so for the last 2000 years and hence the divisions of many denominations, and many ministries today.
Let's make truth a person shall we, let's call truth Jesus.
That if we sincerely believe in Jesus, then even if we don't have all the interpretations then at least we have Jesus.
And conversely, you can't ignore one verse in the middle and form doctrine without it.glorydaz said:You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
glorydaz said:[
I suppose you don't know of any who seek after eternal life by doing good works, do you? The world is full of liberal humanists who do that very thing. Unfortunately for them, without faith in Jesus Christ, their good works will not get them saved. For all have sinned...and one single sin brings down the judgment of God. Which is why Paul makes it clear that we can only be justified by faith. You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
I don't ignore it...it's quite plain what Paul is saying. He is not saying we are saved by our good works. He is saying those who seek after eternal life by doing good works must have faith in order to be justified before God. He makes it plain in Romans 1,2,3,4,5 and 8. We are saved by grace through faith...not by works lest any man should boast. It's made clear throughout scripture.Free said:And who do you say that Jesus is?MMarc said:Sadly truth is one of the most relative thing there is.
Truth should not be a doctrine, Christianity has made it so for the last 2000 years and hence the divisions of many denominations, and many ministries today.
Let's make truth a person shall we, let's call truth Jesus.
That if we sincerely believe in Jesus, then even if we don't have all the interpretations then at least we have Jesus.
And conversely, you can't ignore one verse in the middle and form doctrine without it.glorydaz said:You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
glorydaz said:I suppose you don't know of any who seek after eternal life by doing good works, do you? The world is full of liberal humanists who do that very thing. Unfortunately for them, without faith in Jesus Christ, their good works will not get them saved. For all have sinned...and one single sin brings down the judgment of God. Which is why Paul makes it clear that we can only be justified by faith. You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
Faith is an action word. You are doing something. Doing something is a work. Can you think of other action words that are required of us?glorydaz said:I don't ignore it...it's quite plain what Paul is saying. He is not saying we are saved by our good works. He is saying those who seek after eternal life by doing good works must have faith in order to be justified before God. He makes it plain in Romans 1,2,3,4,5 and 8. We are saved by grace through faith...not by works lest any man should boast. It's made clear throughout scripture.Free said:And who do you say that Jesus is?MMarc said:Sadly truth is one of the most relative thing there is.
Truth should not be a doctrine, Christianity has made it so for the last 2000 years and hence the divisions of many denominations, and many ministries today.
Let's make truth a person shall we, let's call truth Jesus.
That if we sincerely believe in Jesus, then even if we don't have all the interpretations then at least we have Jesus.
And conversely, you can't ignore one verse in the middle and form doctrine without it.glorydaz said:You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
seekandlisten said:[qu
Just a thought to ponder in this whole works vs faith/grace debate people seem to like to discuss, take a moment and think about this.
Which is easier(wide path vs narrow path)
1. Works (action)
2. Faith (believing enough)
If you are doing works in order to receive something you are in a works based salvation plan. If you are doing works as a natural end result of your faith/beliefs it is because, if you grow in love as the bible teaches, you automatically love those around you and wish to help them. You cannot have love 'within' until you can love that which is 'without'.
'Faith without works is dead' is pretty straightforward no? If you feel the need to justify why one is save by grace alone and works are not part of the equation is this not the easy way out? No one has the right to 'choose' their salvation plain and simple as that is not our decision to make if one follows the teaching of the Bible. If you disagree explain to me how one chooses to be 'born from above' without God's say so?
cheers
chestertonrules said:Grace through faith and works.
Works, not as in works of the Law, but as in striving to follow the commandments of Jesus by loving God and neighbor and avoiding sin.
Sin can destroy our faith.
Good works are a consequence of our salvation. They do not, and never will save us. When we are born again our hearts are circumsized by God. When we are filled with the Spirit, God's love is shed abroad in our hearts and the fruit of the Holy Spirit is manifested in our loving others as God loves us. Those with a "dead faith" do not show forth the fruit of the Spirit...that is how we know them.seekandlisten said:glorydaz said:I suppose you don't know of any who seek after eternal life by doing good works, do you? The world is full of liberal humanists who do that very thing. Unfortunately for them, without faith in Jesus Christ, their good works will not get them saved. For all have sinned...and one single sin brings down the judgment of God. Which is why Paul makes it clear that we can only be justified by faith. You can't take a verse out of the middle of a chapter and form a doctrine around it. Well, you can...and you have, but that doesn't make it a fact.
Just a thought to ponder in this whole works vs faith/grace debate people seem to like to discuss, take a moment and think about this.
Which is easier(wide path vs narrow path)
1. Works (action)
2. Faith (believing enough)
If you are doing works in order to receive something you are in a works based salvation plan. If you are doing works as a natural end result of your faith/beliefs it is because, if you grow in love as the bible teaches, you automatically love those around you and wish to help them. You cannot have love 'within' until you can love that which is 'without'.
'Faith without works is dead' is pretty straightforward no? If you feel the need to justify why one is save by grace alone and works are not part of the equation is this not the easy way out? No one has the right to 'choose' their salvation plain and simple as that is not our decision to make if one follows the teaching of the Bible. If you disagree explain to me how one chooses to be 'born from above' without God's say so?
cheers