P
PbloPicasso
Guest
I’m working on a new song.
“I saw Santa hitting Arius”
“I saw Santa hitting Arius”
- Status
T
T_More
Guest
The “them” would be the Catholic Church my friend. The ones who have been doing world wide preaching long before the WTBS came along. Where do you think all these Catholics came from that JW’s find at doors in their field ministry? When I was a JW, it never occurred to me how arrogant it must come across to Catholics, and non Catholic denominations for that matter, to claim “we are the only ones doing a world wide preaching work”.
Regardless, why can’t you answer the questions I ask? What faith community produced the bible as we know it today? What church is Christ and St Paul talking about in Matthew 16 and 1 Timothy 3:15? Where did it go? Where does Scripture state that it itself is the final authority?
N
ndismyhome
Guest
Regardless - In theological debate, if one takes the position that Jesus is not divine and is created, though the greatest of created beings, he or she is called Arian, not because he or she follows that teacher, but because that idea has taken on that name.
As for the fathers and the New Testament teaching what Arius taught, you have yet to prove anything. Proof texting is easy, deal with the whole argument from a book. For example,.John makes it very clear that Jesus and the Father are not the same, but that they are both God. If you agree with this statement, then you disagree with Arius. He taught that the Father and the Son were not both God.
As for the fathers and the New Testament teaching what Arius taught, you have yet to prove anything. Proof texting is easy, deal with the whole argument from a book. For example,.John makes it very clear that Jesus and the Father are not the same, but that they are both God. If you agree with this statement, then you disagree with Arius. He taught that the Father and the Son were not both God.
H
Hesychios
Guest
[although I abhor violence, I thought it was cute]
Do you think old Saint Nick got coal in his stocking that year?
H
Hesychios
Guest
I just want to point out that Arianism, the real thing from the past, was a lot more complex than just thinking Jesus Christ was a creature not divine.
We oversimplify (and distort) it every time we discuss it in this way. I guess it can’t be helped, since so little is known for sure and precious little can be comfirmed through authentic sources.
We oversimplify (and distort) it every time we discuss it in this way. I guess it can’t be helped, since so little is known for sure and precious little can be comfirmed through authentic sources.
P
PbloPicasso
Guest
I’m sure it didn’t go over well, but as you can see my new avatar, I’m a bit unorthodox about my methods of getting things done.
[although I abhor violence, I thought it was cute]
Do you think old Saint Nick got coal in his stocking that year?
During a goofy squabble with a much younger DRE at my parish, I back the younger man into a corner - figuratively speaking - via email because he sent part of a prior email with a similar conflict. My pastor said I was being a bully, to which I set him straight and sent him the entire email string where the DRE was very rude to me after asking, not telling, him to look at my resume “IF HE HAD A CHANCE” because I was considering applying for jobs in the diocese. Had I known he would be a “donkey as stated in the bible” I would never had sent it to him. I was still excited about my new found return to the Catholic Church and never thought to expect so much resistance. You’d think they’d be encouraging. The pastor apologized to me later. But the part of the reply to calling me a bully included where I told him that if he ever needed someone to defend him and it got violent, he would want me there and not the DRE. I told him I have a proven record of standing up like a man and not hiding like a boy.
P
PbloPicasso
Guest
Hesychios,I just want to point out that Arianism, the real thing from the past, was a lot more complex than just thinking Jesus Christ was a creature not divine.
We oversimplify (and distort) it every time we discuss it in this way. I guess it can’t be helped, since so little is known for sure and precious little can be comfirmed through authentic sources.
You are absolutely right. Arianism turned out to be much more complex in my studies than I realized. I started studying heresies in more detail about 4 years ago after realizing being a fundamentalist was nothing like the early Church. I was a member of the “church of Christ”…Alexander Campbell restoration movement. I’ve been trying to study the Eastern Orhtodox and Catholic conflict ever since. My fear is leaving the Catholic faith again and finding myself all alone in my convictions. I haven’t heard enough convincing arguments to continue towards the Orthodox Church as I initially started. My real conviction is that both sides are wrong and that only together will the truth be completely conveyed. I think both sides are guilty as sin…not the Church as in the real “CHURCH OF CHRIST”, but as in hierarchy.
It does appear that the primacy of the bishop of Rome has developed since the beginning. But the fact it existed prevents me from making the jump. Just as married priest is not a problem to me, I see that the East and the West could live in harmony if they chose to be more charitable. Sometimes we take theology just a bit too far and try to force reality into an idea. Still working on it, but that’s where I’m at in my struggles. Denying either Church would be denying Christ in my strange opinion. I can not say anything bad about the Eastern Orthodox, but I won’t say anything about the Roman or Catholic Church either. I believe that there are many wolves in sheep clothing in both hierarchies as I have discovered in Protestant churches as well. I personally know some of some pretty bad Catholic clergy first hand… And why did I go this route… just thinking out loud.
R
Regardless
Guest
Sorry friend, I don’t get online often.
Do you mean 1 Tim 3:15 or 2 Tim 3:15?
Cause 2 Tim 3:15, 16 shows what were holy writings and scripture was already known in 65 AD. (Even with a couple more to add.) I understand most Christian churches afterwards knew what was true and what was apocrypha. There are several lists from various theologians that pretty much agree with the current Bible in the centuries that followed and the Catholic Councils and later protestant movements confirmed them. Is that right?
And Matthew 16?
I’m sure you’re not talking about vs. 1-12 , where Jesus showed the powerful Jewish clergy (who had been entrusted with God’s word and should have been teaching it) were so bogged down with their traditions and rituals, that they couldn’t even see what the signs of the times meant, or that God’s Kingdom was right in front of them. I’m sure you’re not asking me to speculate on who their modern parallel of that church might be.
(On a side point – what does the CC teach about the events we are seeing around the world now – do they think we are in the last days and are on the watch for God’s Kingdom? Or do they think it is in the unknown future?)
But Matt 16. - You are surely talking about the church in the conversation Jesus had with his apostles from vs 13?
Where Peter was moved to say: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God!”
And Jesus said “on this foundation I will build my church, and the gates of Hades won’t overthrow it.” (such a cool account)
-So the true religion would be built on the fact Jesus was the son of God! - Fair enough. (Note Peter didn’t say: “You are Christ, God the Son”. He must have been an Arian. Ha.)
So this truth would not fail. Nothing could stop the truth Jesus started. Even though satan would soon have the Jews stoning them and then Rome crucifying and burning them –
Sure, It would be an unpopular message. Not fitting with the mainstream. Jesus warned this where John 15:18-20 shows the world would be fond of it’s own, but hate Christians that were no part of it.
So we’re looking for a religion not busy dabbling in politics and fighting in the worlds wars. No wonder the Nazis had to give the ‘Purple triangle’ to these ones and and single them out from the other religions for special treatment as the ones who wouldn’t compromise. (Satans world would have been fond of it’s own)
All the best,
Regardless
T
T_More
Guest
Do you mean 1 Tim 3:15 or 2 Tim 3:15?
**
1 Timothy 3:15 (New International Version)
15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Which church is Paul referring to? And notice that he’s affirming that the church is the pillar and foundation of truth, not scripture alone, or at all for that matter.
In regards to what Christians thought was “apocrypha”, no one knew what was canon until the Catholic Church decided. Why do we not accept the Gospel of Peter, the Shepherd of Hermas or the 1st Letter of Clement to the Corinthians today, as they were known to Christians then and were even used and quoted during worship? And there was not a closed Jewish canon until the Jews responded to the rise of Christianity and rejected the Septuagint. Ask yourself why that is. Read Wisdom chapter 2, my friend. It should be quite telling for you.
**
And Matthew 16?
**Sarcasm? Really? Where did the rituals come from, bud? I think you’ll find liturgucal worship found in the OT. YHWH certainly didn’t seem to have a problem with it. Why? Because the Jews were following his instructions!
Matthew 5:17-48 (New International Version)
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
1st century Christians worhsipped not by sitting around studying Watchtower publications, or even having bible studies. Read the book of Acts with a sincere heart, my friend. What do you think the term “the breaking of the bread” that Luke used means?
**
(On a side point – what does the CC teach about the events we are seeing around the world now – do they think we are in the last days and are on the watch for God’s Kingdom? Or do they think it is in the unknown future?)
The Church teaches that we are in the end times, but whether we are in “the last days” of the end times, it is not for us to know.
But Matt 16. - You are surely talking about the church in the conversation Jesus had with his apostles from vs 13?
Sigh…I don’t what it is about JW’s and confusing modalism and the Trinity. Thomas called Christ “My Lord and My God” in John 20:28, sooo…
Let’s look at what Christ said to Peter,which means Rock in case you didn’t know (underlining mine):
Matthew 16:17-19 (New International Version)
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Regardless, and honest question to you, do you know much about typology? The book of Matthew is written to establish the genealogy of Christ and prove the Davidic line to the Jews and prove His legitimate Kingship, which is why Matthew opens the way that it reads in the first chapter. Since Christ is the fulfillment the Davidic line, the apsotles would’ve recognized the language Christ is using in Matt. 16:17-19 because of Isaiah 22:20-24
Isaiah 22:20-24 (New International Version)
20 “In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 23 I will drive him like a peg into a firm place; he will become a seat[a] of honor for the house of his father. 24 All the glory of his family will hang on him: its offspring and offshoots—all its lesser vessels, from the bowls to all the jars.
A key? A father? What he shuts and opens? Read Matthew 16:17-19 again now.
So this truth would not fail. Nothing could stop the truth Jesus started. Agreed, it would not fail. But JW’s say it was lost and apostatized. So did Jesus lie? Was Satan more powerful and Christ could not protect His own Church?
So we’re looking for a religion not busy dabbling in politics and fighting in the worlds wars. No wonder the Nazis had to give the ‘Purple triangle’ to these ones and and single them out from the other religions for special treatment as the ones who wouldn’t compromise. (Satans world would have been fond of it’s own)
**What we’re looking for is the Church that Christ promised perpetuity to in Matthew 16:17-19 and in Matthew 28
Matthew 28:16-20 (New International Version)
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” **
Why give the commission if they were just going to fail and have Satan overcome it?
- Status