C
Christian7801
Guest
I wasn’t saying anything concerning the early church; I was just pointing out God can use whatever tools He wishes…my apologies.
- Status
C
Christian7801
Guest
We have to love both God and brother (neighbor) in order to be in obedience to His commandments.
1 John 2:3 “Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments.”
If we do not keep His commandments, then we do not “know” God.
1 John 2:4 “He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”
John states that we are liars, if we say that we know Him but we fail to keep His commandments.
What happens to all liars?
Revelation 21:8 “But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
All liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone.
In order to know God, and to love God, and to abide in Him, we must keep His commandments.
If we say that we know God but we do not keep His commandments, then we are liars.
If we say that we love God but we do not keep His commandments, then we are liars.
If we say that we abide in Christ but we do not keep His commandments, then we are liars.
If we say that we love God, but we do not love our neighbor, then we do not love God and we are liars.
All liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone.
Matthew 19:17 “if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
This is not a suggestion; Jesus states that you must obey the commandments if you want to enter eternal life.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power”
It is mandatory to obey God’s commandments (the gospel of Jesus Christ) in order to inherit eternal life. If we do not obey them, then we will be punished with everlasting destruction.
1 John 3:6 “Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.”
1 John 2:3-5 “Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him.”
Pax,
SHW
Jesus defined “Abiding in Christ” when He likened Himself to a grapevine and believers to its branches:John 15:4 “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in Me”. That picture illustrates the vital union that exists between Christians and Jesus.
The word “abide” basically means “to remain.” Every Christian remains inseparably linked to Christ in all areas of his/her life. Christians depend on Him for grace and the power to obey. We look obediently to His Word for instruction on how to live out our Christian faith. We offer Him our deepest adoration and praise and we submit ourselves to His authority over our lives. Christians thankfully know Jesus is the source and sustainer of their lives.
Abiding in Christ evidences true salvation. The Apostle John alluded to that when he referred to false professors who: 1 John 2:19 “went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all are not of us”.
People with genuine faith will remain; they won’t and can’t defect; they won’t and can’t deny Christ or abandon His truth. Jesus reiterated the importance of abiding as a sign of real faith when He said, “If you abide in My Word, then you are truly disciples of Mine” (John 8:31).
A
AmbroseSJ
Guest
Howie01 said:
So, you can take a little snippet from Scripture and from that alone, you get Sacred Scripture?? Do you have any idea in how many other places in apocryphal gospels, supposed writings of “Apostles” and many other sources ALSO contain those words? Do you believe anything from antiquity that uses expressions “thus says the Lord” should be a part of the Bible?
Try to make sense. That’s no reason to accept the canon of the Bible. The Timothy quote mentions only that Scriptures exist, but not what they are. How can you use that quote to define what Scriptures are? The Peter quote is actually an argument against private judgment,
and which only admits that Paul wrote letters, but does not say they are to be reckoned with Scriptures.You haven’t made any case for why you accept the Bible as we have it, except that the Church told you so. You accept this doctrine of the Church. But then right away start making up you own non-biblical Doctrines like private judgment. That is exactly what St. Peter is writing against in you second quote. There is nothing in the Bible enshrining the doctrine of private judgment. Yet it is SO IMPORTANT that it can be used to dismiss all Church Doctrines at will! Why is something so important NOT in the Bible, and why do you accept non-Biblical teachings? Are these YOUR private judgments?
H
Howie01
Guest
No, as I told you, the church preserved the manuscripts, but what I can get from Scripture is that “God breathed {out}” Scripture.
List all of them, please, and I’ll check what you list.
No.
I thought you disdained “private interpretation,” and now you’re interpreting what Scripture says?
Be that as it may, the Timothy quote tells me that “all Scripture is theopneustos," or God-breathed.
My friend, you disdain “private interpretation,” so how can you possibly know for certain anything about what that quote says?
Again, how do you know? You disdain “private interpretation” of scripture; therefore, that leaves you only with the ability to believe what Scripture says on the word of others.
That’s obviously not true as we hold to different canons.
I accept that the church preserved the manuscripts, but I don’t hold to the canon Trent “infallibly” defined.
How would know what’s biblical, or non-biblical with any certainty? You disdain “private interpretation?”
How do you know that’s what Peter’s writing against unless you’re engaging in “private interpretation?”
And if you’re doing that, why are you engaging in that which you disdain???
How do you know???
S
sodak
Guest
No on many counts. The Catholic version did not add any, the reformers removed several books from the Bible.
How do you know that the Holy Spirit was the author? Because the Bible says so? Isn’t that circular reasoning? There has to be a better reason.
There are many versions of the Bible in print, many are substantially different from each other. How do you pick the right one? That’s not a rhetorical (or trivial) question.
No. The Apocrypha are books separate from the Bible. If you are referring to the Deuterocanon, this is a part of Scripture as well, determined by the same authority that determined the Canon. I don’t see how you can accept the Canon and reject the Deuterocanon. That’s inconsistent.Isn’t it also true that, what is known as the Apocrypha, a reaction to the reformers, and is known to be uninspired because it is with error geographically and historically and doesn’t the author of 2 Maccabees state that it is uninspired?
Seems like a straw-man argument since God can use both the good and the wicked to get us the Bible; IMO.
Many Catholics, myself included, consider referring to the Deuterocanon as Apocrypha as insulting.
A
AmbroseSJ
Guest
Why did you decide to change my words ‘private judgment’ to ‘private interpretation?’ They don’t mean the same thing. You note that you hold to a different canon, although that is hardly to the point, nor does it address how you can be so sure of the canon you do have apart from Church doctrine. You evade answering the question with real proof or reasoning to at least justify the soundness of your private judgment as being superior to the Church’s doctrine. If you applied the same rigorous methods of private judgment to the Scriptures as you do to Church Doctrine, and not allowed yourself to be carried away by personal prejudice and long familiarity with the Bible, you would have nothing to recommend Scriptures either.
The only way you can accept the Scriptures as the Word of God, is because that is what the Church has always taught. Its a Church Doctrine that you believe for no other reason than that it comes from the Church. You still haven’t disproved this.
H
Howie01
Guest
C’mon, Ambrose.
Tell me now how you wholeheartedly endorse my “private interpretation,” while rejecting my “private judgment.”
There was no “infallibly” defined Catholic “doctrine” of the canon until Trent.
I haven’t evaded any of your questions Ambrose.
The early church preserved the manuscripts, assembled a proto and a deuteron canon, and as memory serves me, theologians were free to reject books from the deutero, which history records were always disputed concerning their “inspiration” until Trent, and no one knew Trent was “infallible” until VI.
Sour grapes, Ambrose, IMO.
That would be true had there been an “infallible” definition of the canon prior to Trent; however, since there was none, your argument, IMO, is nothing but hot air, motivated by an intense anger and hatred towards the reformers, and those whose private judgment agrees with the reformers.
S
SHW
Guest
Sorry, Howie, but Trent just declared “officially” that the original Bible Canons decided back in the late 4th and early 5th centuries would continue “exactly” as before and this official declaration was done in response to the Protestant revolt and their “removal” of books from the Bible which didn’t suit their “new” doctrinal stances.
http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/1.2/marapril_story2.html
Pax,
SHW
S
SHW
Guest
Hello,
I agree that “abide” means “remain.” First a person has to “become” a Christian in order to “remain” one!
Note that Jesus said, “If you “remain” in My Word, then you are truly disciples of Mine.”
If you do not remain (abide) in His Word (which means to obey His gospel) after you first profess belief in Him, then you are no longer His disciple. You were abiding in His Word, but now you’re not! Loss of justification is the result because you are no longer attached to the Vine. (John 15:4-6) This is why salvation is a process and not a one-time event. No one knows with absolute certainty if he will abide in Christ until he dies. And, if you do not abide in His Word until death, then you receive the vengeance of God instead of the crown of eternal life. (2 Timothy 2:12, Matthew 24:11-13)
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 "when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction "
This is why Peter warns the faithful: "1 Peter 5:8 “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.”
If the devil devours you, you are no longer saved.
Mark 4:13-20 "And He said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? 14 The sower sows the word. 15 And these are the ones by the wayside where the word is sown. When they hear, Satan comes immediately and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts. 16 These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17 and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble. 18 Now these are the ones sown among thorns; they are the ones who hear the word, 19 and the cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things entering in choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. 20 But these are the ones sown on good ground, those who hear the word, accept it, and bear fruit: some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred.”
Many persons profess Christ at first. But they do not remain (abide) in Him until their deaths. Unless you remain in Christ until you die, you will not produce good fruit. If you do not produce good fruit, then you are not saved.
Christians have plenty of chances to deny Christ by their works and thereby lose eternal life.
Titus 1:16 “They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.”
If you do not do good works but do bad works instead or if you do no works at all, then you deny Christ. If you deny Him by your bad works or lack of works then He will deny you before His Father in heaven.
Matthew 10:33 “But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.”
Believe me, if He denies you before His Father in heaven, then you do not inherit eternal life.
Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’”
When Jesus declares that He never knew you before His Father in heaven, then you do not inherit eternal life.
Pax,
SWH
S
SHW
Guest
Since Jesus chose to become the Passover Paschal Lamb which must be literally eaten in accordance with Jewish Law for the remission of sins, then His Last Supper Sacrifice is indeed part of His “redemptive” plan. (Ezra 6:19-21, Mark 14:12, John 1:29) Who are we to judge the “order” of His salvific plan concerning the Last Supper offering of Himself and His offering of Himself on the cross? I won’t be the one to question Him!
As for your judgment of my interpretation of Scripture and belief in transubstantiation, well, it’s just that: your judgment, which carries absolutely no weight with me or the Catholic Church.
Since you believe that Jesus was only born “king of the Jews,” then why are you not Jewish instead of Christian?
Guess “where” His throne is from which He reigns over the house of David forever? Jesus reigns in His heavenly Jerusalem, not the one in Israel.Hebrews 12:22-23 “But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,”
Revelation 21:9-11 “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, “Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, 11 having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal.”
Who is this bride, the Lamb’s wife? The Church is Christ’s bride. The new Jerusalem is His messianic kingdom which will endure forever. Christ is the bridegroom of the Church. (Luke 5:34)
Ephesians 5:22-24 “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24 Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.”
Revelation 1:4-5 “John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood,”
Jesus resides in heaven on His throne as ruler and king after His return to earth at His Second Coming and His creation of a new heaven and a new earth.
Revelation 21:1-3 “Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God.”
His messianic kingdom is portrayed as the New Jerusalem and it endures forever.
Revelation 22:1-3 “And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him.”
to be continued…
S
SHW
Guest
Continued:
Hebrews 8:6-7 “But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.”
Hebrews 8:13 “In that He says, “A new covenant, ”He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”
Matthew 26:27-28 “Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”
Jesus establishes His New Covenant at the Last Supper.
Christ is not robbed of His rightful throne, as you say, because of what the Catholic Church teaches. Au contraire!!! His messianic kingdom is His rightful throne. Why would the King of Kings and Lord of Lords want a puny earthly kingdom when He has a heavenly messianic one which lasts forever?
Jesus is a king from the line of David but His is a much better kingship. He rules over all.
Luke 17:21 "nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”
The kingdom of God is within us when we abide in Christ and He in us.
John 6:56 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.”
John 15:10 “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.”
John 8:31 “Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide (remain) in My word, you are My disciples indeed.”
If you do not remain in the Word (obey the gospel of Jesus), then you do not remain His disciples, and if you do not remain His disciples, then you will not inherit the kingdom of God.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8** in flaming fire taking vengeance** on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power”
Pax,
SHW
Sorry, Moondweller, but we are in the times of the Gentiles right now and we will be until it is time for the Remnant of Israel to come into His Church. (Romans 9:27) The Remnant will not be able to come into the Church until the fullness of the Gentiles is completed. Jesus never returns to the Old Covenant. His New Covenant is a better one.
Hebrews 8:6-7 “But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.”
Hebrews 8:13 “In that He says, “A new covenant, ”He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”
Matthew 26:27-28 “Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”
Jesus establishes His New Covenant at the Last Supper.
Christ is not robbed of His rightful throne, as you say, because of what the Catholic Church teaches. Au contraire!!! His messianic kingdom is His rightful throne. Why would the King of Kings and Lord of Lords want a puny earthly kingdom when He has a heavenly messianic one which lasts forever?
Jesus is a king from the line of David but His is a much better kingship. He rules over all.
Luke 17:21 "nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”
The kingdom of God is within us when we abide in Christ and He in us.
John 6:56 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.”
John 15:10 “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.”
John 8:31 “Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide (remain) in My word, you are My disciples indeed.”
If you do not remain in the Word (obey the gospel of Jesus), then you do not remain His disciples, and if you do not remain His disciples, then you will not inherit the kingdom of God.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8** in flaming fire taking vengeance** on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power”
Pax,
SHW
B
benedictus2
Guest
If you read the entire Chapter 14 of John you will realize that He is speaking here about the coming of the Paraclete. This discourse was given to his disciples at the Last Supper. This is actually in support of the Catholic position that the Church cannot err because Christ has promised that she will ALWAYS be guided by the Holy Spirit. This promise of leading into all Truth is not given to given to all.
Also, neither of these two verses talk about being “sealed” in the Spirit.
Simple reason supports this: If the promise of truth is given to all then that means the spirit is one might confused spirit because he leads one to interpret this way and another to read scripture that way.
Case 1: The Eucharist. Most Protestants say it is not the Body and Blood of Christ. We say it is. If everyone is guided by the Holy Spirit which one of us is correct because we cannot be both correct.
Case 2: Protestants allow divorce contrary to an explicit teaching by Jesus Christ. You are saying that the Holy Spirit is guiding you to go agains the teaching of Jesus Christ?
Case 3: Jesus prayed that his Church will be one. Protestants are a mish mash of 33000 denomininations. The Holy Spirit Unites. The devil divides. So which spirit is really in action here?
Yes she does. But the Catholic position is not like Calvin’s. We believe in predestination of the elect but not pre-destination of the damned. You believe in pre-destination of the damned. Pre-destination of the damned presupposes an evil God. The God of the Bible is a God of love.
No. Perhaps you should find out first whether you understood me correctly. When I said that Abraham was actually righteous not merely declared righteous, it means that Christ’s salviific death caused the gates of heaven to open and pour out graces on our soul so that we are actually MADE righteous i.e. we actually BECOME righteous, instead of merely being declared to be so.
In protestant understanding we are merely covered with Christ righteousness but underneath we are still the same vile creature as before. No real change has taken place.
Catholic belief is that Christ’s life, death and resurrection actually regenerates us and make us good i.e. righteous.
Duh! Abraham was righteous because he actually was. The fact that he offered Isaac up is the proof that he was in fact righteous. If he has not followed up with the offering of Isaac then he would not have been declared so. His belief was credited to him as righteousness because he followed up his belief with action. His righteousness was actually manifested in his complete obedience to God to the point of offering up his son.
Refer to my reply above regarding the crediting of Christ’s righteousness. We are not “credited” with Christ’s righteousness. When we are sanctified, we are made holy not merely declared holy.
A
AmbroseSJ
Guest
I wasn’t endorsing your private interpretation, I was asking why you changed my words, which you didn’t answer.
You seem to think that understanding the plain language of the Scriptures is “private interpretation.” That is not so. It is just reading comprehension.
The Church has always insisted on the plain understanding of the Scriptures as the first meaning to be drawn from them. Therefore I am following the Church’s counsel by interpreting the Scriptures with their own self-evident meaning. A large part of Scriptures can be understood in this way and in no way constitutes “private judgment.” as you seem to be implying with your unheard of phrase “private interpretation.”
It is “private judgment” that takes away further meaning than what is self-evident. That is something the Jews liked to do when Jesus was among them. The Jews were quick to deny Jesus because he was “unbiblical.” Read John 5: 37-47 Do not Protestants accept a man (the Reformer of his choice) who comes under his own testimony? Do they not “pour over the Scriptures” thinking this holds their eternal life? In truth, Protestants have exactly re-captured the spirit of those Jews that Jesus was then addressing.
What happens to Paul on his way to Damascus? Jesus asks why he persecutes Him (The Lord Jesus,) not why he persecutes his Church. To Jesus the Church and He are one. To reject the Church is to reject Him who commissioned them, and to reject Him (Jesus) is to reject God the Father who sent Him.
B
benedictus2
Guest
Howie, will you please try reading my post correctly and stop ascribing to me things I never said.
Where did I say that I believe God will break His promise to those He justifies?
You know why you keep putting words in my mouth? It is because you do not understand justification and assume that my understanding of justification is the same as yours.
You do not have a coherent “why” and “how” of salvation that is why you are probably an adherent of OSAS.
Yes, we are given the gift of salvation by grace but we have to perservere. Perseverance is WORK.
This is where you Protestants fall into a lot of error. You mutilate the word of God. You need to re-read 1 Peter. And I mean the whole chapter! Maybe then you will realize what verses 3-5 really means. Keep reading the rest of the chapter and maybe pay attention to verses 13-23.
You keep saying that and I have just shown you James. And I have also explained to you that you cannot dismiss James with a verse from Paul.
Yes it does because it is in the same chapter and only one verse before. So again, please read the WHOLE chapter.
Precisely. You have just proven my point.
Aaah!, the response of someone who has run out of intelligent arguments. Nothing unexpected there.
Refer to my first point in this post.
H
Howie01
Guest
Don’t listen to him. From the Catholic Encyclopedia:The most explicit definition of the Catholic Canon is that given by the Council of Trent, Session IV, 1546. For the Old Testament its catalogue reads as follows:
The five books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first and second of Esdras (which latter is called Nehemias), Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter (in number one hundred and fifty Psalms), Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets (Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias), two books of Machabees, the first and second.
The order of books copies that of the Council of Florence, 1442, and in its general plan is that of the Septuagint. The divergence of titles from those found in the Protestant versions is due to the fact that the official Latin Vulgate retained the forms of the Septuagint…**The Tridentine decrees from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal.**Trent was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement of a canon addressed to the church.
So many Catholics, so many different understandings of Catholic teachings.
M
moondweller
Guest
I agree. The sacrifice of Christ is infinitely efficacious. But the sacrifice was limited to our time, space continuum. It began and was finished here on earth.
In God’s timing are you forever in the womb? In God’s timing is no one on earth ever born? Your statement is nonsensical.
But not in bodily form. How many of those two gathered in His name have seen Him?
A true body can be in only one place at one time. It can’t be dead and at the same time living. It can’t be simultaneously glorified and unglorified.
But if that body was dead for three days it was DEAD, not living. Can a body be dead and living at the same time? Can a glorified body be subject to death again? Christ rose from the dead BODILY in a glorified state.
M
moondweller
Guest
That verse is comparing the Mosaic sacrifices with Christ’s once for all sacrifice of Himself here on earth. After His bodily resurrection He ascended and entered the heavenly sanctuary with His own blood and now appears in the presence of God FOR US (“on our behalf”). This is in reference to His High Priestly work as Intercessor and Advocate, not His sacrificial work.
Finish the passage:Heb 9:25-28 "…nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this {comes} judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without {reference to} sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
He’s not “offering” anything. With the shedding of His blood on earth God was forever propitiated.
He actively pleads in our defense whenever Satan (the accuser) makes an accusation against us (the redeemed) (Rev. 12:10).
There is no “biblical sense” in contrast to “common sense.” It simply means “in recognition of.” IOW, do this in recognition of my historical, sacrificial death on your behalf through which I obtained your eternal redemption (Heb. 9:12). “In remembrance of” testifies to this one time, once for all, historical event. The ordinance was never to be a re-presentation (that’s impossible), but a constant recognition of what historically occurred, “once for all” for the believer’s "eternal redemption:"Heb 9:12 "…but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.Having “obtained” (past tense) is in reference to what He accomplished, once for all, through His sacrificial, sin-bearing, blood sacrifice while on earth.
A
AmbroseSJ
Guest
Howie, you underlined the wrong word, it should have been:Don’t listen to him. From the Catholic Encyclopedia:The most explicit definition of the Catholic Canon is that given by the Council of Trent, Session IV, 1546. For the Old Testament its catalogue reads as follows:
The five books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first and second of Esdras (which latter is called Nehemias), Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter (in number one hundred and fifty Psalms), Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets (Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias), two books of Machabees, the first and second.
The order of books copies that of the Council of Florence, 1442, and in its general plan is that of the Septuagint. The divergence of titles from those found in the Protestant versions is due to the fact that the official Latin Vulgate retained the forms of the Septuagint…The Tridentine decrees from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal.Trent was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement of a canon addressed to the church.
So many Catholics, so many different understandings of Catholic teachings.
Trent was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement of a canon addressed to the church.
The previous infallible pronouncements of the canon were not “effectual” in the sense that they were not combating a heretical canon the way Trent did.
Anyhow, it doesn’t change the fact that Trent confirmed the Catholic Canon that had been in use since the 4th century.
A
AndyF
Guest
SHW:
“Show your loyalty and belief in me through your works and thoughts.”
Andy
“Show your loyalty and belief in me through your works and thoughts.”
Andy
C
Christian7801
Guest
No, I’m sure the Council of Trent canonized the Apocrypha; 1200 years after the original canonizations; this was done in a reaction to the reformers who took issue with the Church on certain doctrinal issues not found in Scripture.
The Septuagint (from the Latin word septuaginta meaning seventy) was a Greek version of the Bible created during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 BCE) in Alexandria, Egypt for Diaspora Jews. Most of Jews living outside of Palestine were Greek-speaking as a result of Alexander the Great’s (357-323 BCE) campaign to Hellenize his empire.
At first, the Septuagint (LXX) consisted only of the Pentateuch (Torah, first five books of the Bible). Different books were translated from the Hebrew over a span of two centuries, including the books of the Apocrypha, and were added to the LXX.
source: gbgm-umc.org
- Status