The Protestant Reformation Turns 500
- Thread starter HammerStone
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
By thanking GOD for creating men with the faith, courage and discernment to stand against the corporate status quo.HammerStone said:
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Not to cause waves here, but.....
The Protestant Reformation, American Revelution, Bonhoffer's attempt to assasinate Hitler all bring rebellion to the forefront. Is rebellion ever justified?
The Protestant Reformation, American Revelution, Bonhoffer's attempt to assasinate Hitler all bring rebellion to the forefront. Is rebellion ever justified?
Regarding the first, I'm sure the Pharisees had similar thoughts towards Jesus and his band of followers.aspen2 said:
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Really? So you are equating Catholicism with The Temple Pharisees? And I suppose Luther is Moses, right? Wow that is one way to look at it....pretty harsh.ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
No offense, but it works both ways.....Lucifer also lead his people out of God's Kingdom
So back to the question.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
aspen2 said:
An apt comparison I would think.
The Protestant Reformation Turns 500
When I think of the above title. My thoughts tend to "come out of her my people and touch not the unclean.... ." Guess what, so they did! Praise the LORD!
Not to be the thread jerk here, but couldn't that same question be applied to you on a personal level since we are all aware that you don't fully accept all Catholic dogma/doctrine? What makes your situation totally unlike that of say Luther or Zwingli? Or, as is probably the case, is rebellion situational?
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
i am not exempting myself from the question. however, in the case of my membership in the Catholic Church - i may have a few different opinions than the Vatican, but i am willing to risk being wrong. i do not want to change the teachings of the church or leave it.
You "have a few different opinions than the Vatican?"aspen2 said:
Ya think? Let's review, shall we?
--- You support Gay Marraige, something the Catholic Church opposes and Pope Benedict stated would bring about the downfall of mankind.
You claim that you would only believe it if the Pope spoke Ex Cathedra (something that has only been done twice) but then admitted than even then you would not go along with it.
--- You support on-demand abortion, something that the Catholic Church (indeed all true Christianity) opposes because it is the taking of a life (translation: Murder) that was in the process of being "fearfully and wonderfully made."
--- You support using the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas,(which the Catholic Church has denounced 'without reservation') A 'gospel' which claims that Jesus killed two children when He Himself was a child and struck several adults blind. A 'gospel' which claims entire dialogs of Jesus that are not supported anywhere and not even remotely found in the four actual Gospels.
These are NOT minor 'doctrinal differences.' These are actual cornerstones on which the Catholic Church stands.
You are a Cafeteria Catholic, picking and choosing what you want to believe, discarding that which you do not like.
It is easy to see why you "do not want to change the teachings of the church." If you aren't going to follow them anyway, then why bother, right?
.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
where have i said that i support 'on demand' abortion?
how does my view of the gospel of thomas differ from the Vatican?
i do support gay marriage for nonchristians and i am willing to risk being wrong on this subject.
so foreigner, how is having a difference of opinion with the Vatican make me a cafeteria catholic? you have no idea about my prayer life, commitment to catholic doctrine, mass schedule, life work.......
i think it is time to give up that nasty old bone you are chewing on.
how does my view of the gospel of thomas differ from the Vatican?
i do support gay marriage for nonchristians and i am willing to risk being wrong on this subject.
so foreigner, how is having a difference of opinion with the Vatican make me a cafeteria catholic? you have no idea about my prayer life, commitment to catholic doctrine, mass schedule, life work.......
i think it is time to give up that nasty old bone you are chewing on.
So you can't even keep track of what you say? I'm shocked. No, really...
You said on this very board that because of what you have witnessed as far as children being born to poor and unqualified mothers and due to the abuse etc. it is more humane to simply allow the children to be aborted. You stated specifically that you support it because it is a NEED. That means these women could simply request an abortion and it would be done. That means abortion on demand.
Your position is simple really: Anti-Christian.
The Vatican and denounced the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas as a fake.
You have said, again on this very board, that it can and could/should be used as a tool for new Christians.
Your support of Gay Marraige for non-Christians and accuse all others of violating the civil rights of homosexuals for opposing it.
The Catholic Church says it is a sin and should not be supported. Period.
Their opposition means that you feel the Catholic Church is 'violating the civil rights of homosexuals.'
It is the third more-than-minor issue with which you completely disagree with the Catholic Church.
And if you aren't able to distinguish the difference between 'having a difference of opinion' and actively working to undermine your church's position, then the problem obviously doesn't lie with me...
Translation: Cafeteria Christian.
.
You said on this very board that because of what you have witnessed as far as children being born to poor and unqualified mothers and due to the abuse etc. it is more humane to simply allow the children to be aborted. You stated specifically that you support it because it is a NEED. That means these women could simply request an abortion and it would be done. That means abortion on demand.
Your position is simple really: Anti-Christian.
The Vatican and denounced the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas as a fake.
You have said, again on this very board, that it can and could/should be used as a tool for new Christians.
Your support of Gay Marraige for non-Christians and accuse all others of violating the civil rights of homosexuals for opposing it.
The Catholic Church says it is a sin and should not be supported. Period.
Their opposition means that you feel the Catholic Church is 'violating the civil rights of homosexuals.'
It is the third more-than-minor issue with which you completely disagree with the Catholic Church.
And if you aren't able to distinguish the difference between 'having a difference of opinion' and actively working to undermine your church's position, then the problem obviously doesn't lie with me...
Translation: Cafeteria Christian.
.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
i think you need to go back a reread what i have written.
i believe that legalized abortion is a necessary evil in our society today. i believe it is a mortal sin. i believe it needs drastic reform - it should always be the last option. outlawing abortion will not stop rich people from going to another country and having the proceedure. The most effective way to decrease abortion is to reform adoption laws and the foster care system. I do not like abortion and i do not support abortion on demand.
i do not believe the gospel of thomas is inspired or part of scripture. The majority of my posts on this board denounce Gnosticism and dualism. however, Thomas is helpful as a historical tool when studying the early church.
i support the legalization of homosexual marriage in America. i believe homosexuality is a sin and should only be considered outside the church. it is a matter of protecting the civil rights of two adults who want to share there lives together without being prosecuted or discriminated against. i do not believe the catholic church should change their position or teaching on this subject. i also believe that the Vatican has no moral jurisdiction over the lives of nonchristians.
The Vatican's position on abortion and homosexual marriage should be consisted with their stance on birth control - sinful for Christians, but legal.
once again, i am choosing to follow my conscience, which is a teaching of my church. i may be wrong, but I am willing to take the risk. i do not take any of these issues lightly, nor am i flippant or rebellious in my actiions.
You however have been dogging me for years on the board, Foreigner - always quick to accuse me of taking my church's teaching lightly or misleading new christians. I not only believe that you consistently take my words out of context, you use them against me with malice in an effort to expose me as a hypocrite all costs. The reason I bring this up is not because it bothers me, as much as it worries me. I have to be honest - when i see you efforts and use of sarcasm and ridicule to tear apart people you disagree with, in such a driven and consistent manner, I worry about the bitterness that has to be growing in your heart. Therefore, i want to encourage you to repent - give up that nasty bone you seem drven to pick with everyone you disagree with. Stop dispising people!
i believe that legalized abortion is a necessary evil in our society today. i believe it is a mortal sin. i believe it needs drastic reform - it should always be the last option. outlawing abortion will not stop rich people from going to another country and having the proceedure. The most effective way to decrease abortion is to reform adoption laws and the foster care system. I do not like abortion and i do not support abortion on demand.
i do not believe the gospel of thomas is inspired or part of scripture. The majority of my posts on this board denounce Gnosticism and dualism. however, Thomas is helpful as a historical tool when studying the early church.
i support the legalization of homosexual marriage in America. i believe homosexuality is a sin and should only be considered outside the church. it is a matter of protecting the civil rights of two adults who want to share there lives together without being prosecuted or discriminated against. i do not believe the catholic church should change their position or teaching on this subject. i also believe that the Vatican has no moral jurisdiction over the lives of nonchristians.
The Vatican's position on abortion and homosexual marriage should be consisted with their stance on birth control - sinful for Christians, but legal.
once again, i am choosing to follow my conscience, which is a teaching of my church. i may be wrong, but I am willing to take the risk. i do not take any of these issues lightly, nor am i flippant or rebellious in my actiions.
You however have been dogging me for years on the board, Foreigner - always quick to accuse me of taking my church's teaching lightly or misleading new christians. I not only believe that you consistently take my words out of context, you use them against me with malice in an effort to expose me as a hypocrite all costs. The reason I bring this up is not because it bothers me, as much as it worries me. I have to be honest - when i see you efforts and use of sarcasm and ridicule to tear apart people you disagree with, in such a driven and consistent manner, I worry about the bitterness that has to be growing in your heart. Therefore, i want to encourage you to repent - give up that nasty bone you seem drven to pick with everyone you disagree with. Stop dispising people!
-- You have selective memory as to what you said on this very board earlier.aspen2 said:
You said that abortion to be available to women because of your 'experience' and that since these women aren't prepared to be mothers (drug addicts, etc.) and the support and adoption programs are so terrible, that it would be better to allow the women to simply abort the children. THAT is your criteria for abortion. And that is HARDLY the 'last option.'
And yes, that is abortion on demand.
These are lives that God created and has a purpose for. You feel that just because the woman isn't qualified to be a mother and the "support services" aren't up to standard, that it is better - and justifiable - just to murder the child. Any child. Every child. As long as the mother doesn't seem fit to be a mother.
And then you try to justify it by saying that "rich people" can do it so why can't poor people. You are attempting to justify one sin by pointing to another?
What a ridiculous thing to say.
It is still murder - it is still a sin (by your own words) - and it still goes against what God wants and the Catholic church stands for.
So let's review shall we?
-- The church has denounced the gnostic gospel of Thomas. You support it
-- The church opposes gay marraige. You support it.
-- The church opposes abortion. You support it.
Translation: Cafeteria Catholic.
By the time the RCC got organized ...
the leadership had decided on promoting cessationism.
IMO, this was the result of sinful man being deceived by Satan.
I'm a-thinkin' it's a big ditto re: the OSAS doctrine.
Perhaps someone could clue me in on when this actually began?
the leadership had decided on promoting cessationism.
IMO, this was the result of sinful man being deceived by Satan.
I'm a-thinkin' it's a big ditto re: the OSAS doctrine.
Perhaps someone could clue me in on when this actually began?
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
I have stated what I believe. Your paraphrasing and reframing of my beliefs without reference is meaningless, foreigner.
You stated - and please feel free to go back and see for yourself. I understand that you don't always hold yourself accountable for what you say - that since a large number of women who get pregnant are not qualified to be mothers and the babies will end up suffering, and the support and adoption services do such a terrible job, that abortion NEEDS to be made available for these women.
You based that (you say) on your own personal observations as to how flawed the system is.
That means you feel it is acceptable for a woman to get an abortion if it appears that the child would be born into an environment that would be bad for it.
Translation: You support abortion if the person desires it.
In other words, abortion on demand.
Aspen, these were your own words and comments.
Eventually you are going to have to learn to either own up for the things you say or simply not say them.
If I am wrong it what I say, then please feel free to share what your position on abortion in this situation actually is today.
You based that (you say) on your own personal observations as to how flawed the system is.
That means you feel it is acceptable for a woman to get an abortion if it appears that the child would be born into an environment that would be bad for it.
Translation: You support abortion if the person desires it.
In other words, abortion on demand.
Aspen, these were your own words and comments.
Eventually you are going to have to learn to either own up for the things you say or simply not say them.
If I am wrong it what I say, then please feel free to share what your position on abortion in this situation actually is today.
Similar threads
