Posts by clash_city

33

Reformed Episcopal View of Christ

by thepreacher in

necessity of the old testament in understanding the work of christ

by curtis i. crenshaw .

i n the volume of the book, it is written of christ (

clash_city_rockers

Hi Firm,

It is sad when you really don't give an account for any of the objections to Rominism on this post, just silly blank assertions with out any scriptual exigeses. But then again you really don't need the bible because the bible alone to you is insufficient. To you the bible is lacking, so much for Psalm 19.

What is Rome's (not Scott Hahn or Pat Madrid) official position on 2 Tim 3:15-17 and in light of that how can you give an account for the claims of scripture for the power it contains to make a christian grow in Christ. Scripture Alone can train up in rightiousness and is sufficient to equip the christian to live his/her life as a christian.

1 Tim 3:15-17

15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Your statement

Prespertyrianism has changed its doctrine and split countless times since its inception in the 16th ctry

No Give me one doctrinal chainge found in the Westminster Confession of faith?

The only change is when a presbyterian denomination goes liberal and those who are faithfull to the bible have to split and form a bible beliving presbyterian denomination.

You have absolutly no clue on presbyterian church history. So to make the claim that you just made is to bare false witness and break the 9th commandment. I don't go around mis-representing Roman Catholicism I have many Roman Catholic theology books and have a good grasp of Papist doctrine probably even better than you.. In fact it is your church that has changed yes your church just like the JW has new light. Did you know that John the XXIII and Paul the VI where greatly influenced by theologian Karl Rhaner? Yes Vatican 2 is a radical doctrianal shift of "NEW LIGHT" for the Romenists. From a traditional Romanism of Pius the X, XI, XII to a liberal neo-orthodox even protestant at times Roman Catholicism.

Firm, who feels guilty because the bible calls him to faith and repentance and to flee the idolotry of Romanism, so Firm uses an individualised version of Papist doctrine to give him psychological comfort and a shallow false sence of security against the THREATS of UNBELIEF and punnishment in HELLthat the bible speeks of, writes this blastophmus dribble:

because they don't know that a Catholic gets much more of God's Word at Mass than just the Bible (which by itself, the Mass is laden with).

This kind of sillyness can be written with a world view that views thr BIBLE as insuffiecient in mind. Rember the JW's also view the bible as insuffiecient too. WT plus the bible for the J-Dub.

Question: In light of your statement is the mass new or added revelation from God if so is it plainary and verbal inspiration? Remember you can not give your own answer you have to give the official Papist position with Impramator and Nehil Obstrat.

This is what Firm is missing out on this is what the bible cliams for itself no saserdotal mass can ever claim this.... But then agian you hate the authority of the bible since the bible gave birth to the church and not the other way around

I leave with Ps 19

Psalm 19For the director of music. A psalm of David.

1 The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
2 Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they display knowledge.
3 There is no speech or language
where their voice is not heard. [1]
4 Their voice [2] goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.

In the heavens he has pitched a tent for the sun,
5 which is like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion,
like a champion rejoicing to run his course.
6 It rises at one end of the heavens
and makes its circuit to the other;
nothing is hidden from its heat.

7 The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul.
The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy,
making wise the simple.
8 The precepts of the LORD are right,
giving joy to the heart.
The commands of the LORD are radiant,
giving light to the eyes.
9 The fear of the LORD is pure,
enduring forever.
The ordinances of the LORD are sure
and altogether righteous.
10 They are more precious than gold,
than much pure gold;
they are sweeter than honey,
than honey from the comb.
11 By them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

12 Who can discern his errors?
Forgive my hidden faults.
13 Keep your servant also from willful sins;
may they not rule over me.
Then will I be blameless,
innocent of great transgression.

14 May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be pleasing in your sight,
O LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer.

Footnotes

19:3 Or They have no speech, there are no words; / no sound is heard from them
19:4 Septuagint, Jerome and Syriac; Hebrew line

I got to go more latter though,

jr

Edited by - clash_city_rockers on 26 November 2002 10:2:27

21

Baptize your own kids?! Why not?

by nicolaou in

go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things i have commanded you.. .

matthew 28:19,20 nwt.

well some here might still like to see their children make a dedication to god.

clash_city_rockers

The Bible Does teach Peado Baptism as Children of Believers are part of the promise of the Covenant of Grace, Now this may ruffel the feathers of our Baptist Friends but this is why they reject the total backage of Calvinism/Reformed theology.

Gen 17:7-13

7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."
9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. (cf. Gen 15)

Acts. 16:31-34

31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household." 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house. 33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34 The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God--he and his whole family.

Childeren of Believers are seen as disiples and are expecter to be obedient in the Lord

Eph 6:1-4

1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 "Honor your father and mother"--which is the first commandment with a promise-- 3 "that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth." 4 Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord. (cf. Ex 20:12 and Deut. 5:16)

Eph 6:3 incluedes covenant language a promise to the children.

21

Baptize your own kids?! Why not?

by nicolaou in

go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things i have commanded you.. .

matthew 28:19,20 nwt.

well some here might still like to see their children make a dedication to god.

clash_city_rockers

Paduan,

Where does the official Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church teach what you just claim?

The r.c. church acknowledges that anyone may perform a baptismal rite.

Give me the reference I just looked at the New Catichism and could not find it. Or is this just and Americaniesed individualist self proclamation. Remember as a Papist you have a NEW Governing Body: RCC Official Magisterium.....

47

Falsifiability

by donkey in

jw
friends

i pose this challenge to believers: what would it take for you to stop believing in god?.

this is an interesting challenge.

well, it may sound paradoxical, but in order for any claim to be true, it must be falsifiable.

clash_city_rockers

Presuppositional Procedure By Dr. Greg Bahnsen

Here then is how the presuppositional (transcendental) method of defending the faith would proceed once the preliminary discussions and clarifications have taken place with the unbeliever - and the two outlooks now come head to head.[1] The unbeliever says that he knows that miracles are impossible, that a personal almighty God does not exist, that ethical principles are not normative across cultural boundaries, etc. Or the unbeliever says that the believer cannot know that the Bible is God's word, or that Jehovah exists, or that Christ was His Son, etc. The Christian apologist must seek to uncover what this unbeliever's personal convictions are regarding metaphysical and (coordinated with it) epistemological matters which are relevant: e.g., what is the nature of things which are real, how does the world operate, where did it come from, what is man's place in the world, what is man's nature, are there moral or epistemological norms which are not chosen by the individual, what are the criteria of truth, what are the proper methods of knowing, is certainty possible, etc.? Once the believer has a fairly good grasp of the general kind of worldview assumed (or explicitly advocated) by the unbeliever, we can suggest that it should be compared to the worldview of the Christian. The Christian can show that the particular objections raised by the unbeliever would, within the Christian outlook, not prove to be legitimate objections or intellectual problems at all. Thus who really "knows" what he is talking about, the Christian or the non-Christian? The cogency of each side's theory and practice of knowing must be tested within the broader worldviews of which they are a part. The apologist explains how rationality, communication, meaning, science, morality, man's redemption and renewal are quite understandable, meaningful, coherent, or intelligible within the Biblical worldview - within "the picture" of thinking God's thoughts after Him. The apologist then engages in an internal critique of the unbeliever's worldview to show that it is (1) arbitrary, and/or (2) inconsistent with itself, and/or (3) lacking the preconditions for the intelligibility of knowledge (language, logic, science, morality, redemption, etc.). Since that is the case, the unbeliever cannot "know" the things which he urges against Christianity - indeed, could not know anything at all and loses all claim to rationality. The Christian has proven the rationality and necessity of His scripturally based worldview.

The specific questions or philosophical issues with which an apologist chooses to intellectually press the unbeliever, and the particular aspects of experience which he selects for application of these issues, are wide, varied, and not prescribed in advance by the transcendental program of proving Christianity and disproving any version of autonomous unbelief. Take anything about which the unbeliever is committed or concerned - anything which seems uncontroversial and agreed upon by the unbeliever and believer alike - and from that point display that it would be unintelligible, or meaningless, or incoherent if the unbeliever's worldview, instead of the believer's, were true. The illustrations are as wide as human experience - from the curing of polio, to the composing of an opera, to the condemnation of police brutality, to the balancing of your checkbook. And the philosophical issues about which Van Til wrote we should broach to prove the unbeliever's epistemology and discredit the unbeliever's were extensive and varied. To consider a few, we read about the problem of making sense of (or possibility of):

predication, reason, explanation, interpretation, learning, certainty, universals, possibility, cause, substance, being, or purpose, counting, coherence, unity, or system in experience or in a conception of a "universe," logic, individuating of facts, unchanging "natures" or laws in a chance universe, uniformity, science, connecting logic and facts or predication to reality, avoiding contradictions, avoiding the irrationalism or scepticism which arise from the tension between knowing discursively and knowing-asystematic, etc.

In short, the transcendental critique of unbelieving worldviews aims to show that, given their presuppositions, there could be no knowledge in any field whatsoever - that it would be impossible to find meaning or intelligibility in anything at all.

Once again it is important to recall that Van Til's presuppositional apologetic does not argue that unbelievers in fact do not count, reason, learn, communicate, engage in science, explain, seek purpose and order, etc. Because they psychologically know God, they are both concerned for the issues listed above and are to some extent successful in negotiating or applying them to understand the world and their personal experiences. The issue is not what the unbeliever can do intellectually, but whether he can give an account of it (epistemologically) within the worldview he has advocated or espoused. Because all autonomous perspectives take man's interpretation of the world to be "original" - to be the primary ordering of particulars or "rationalizing" (making systematic sense out of) the brute facts, it puts man at the center of the knowing process - and pays the price for doing so by slipping in subjectivism and skepticism ultimately (when consistent and driven to the logical outcome of his presuppositions). The only alternative - the Christian worldview - places the creative and providential activity of the Triune God "back of" all of man's experiences and intellectual efforts, thereby solving the fundamental problems of epistemology which leave the unbelieving critic nowhere to stand. Only Christianity can account for or make sense of the intellectual accomplishments of the unbeliever. The critic of the faith has been secretly presupposing the truth of the faith even as he argues against it; his own arguments would be, upon analysis, meaningless unless they were wrong and Christian theism were true.

Van Til encapsulated the essence of the transcendental argument in apologetics and expressed it memorably in the "Credo" which he wrote for his festschrift. In his proposal for a "consistently Christian methodology of apologetics," Van Til's suggestion was that "we claim... that Christianity alone is reasonable for men to hold. It is wholly irrational to hold any other position than that of Christianity. Christianity alone does not slay reason on the altar of 'chance.'" Accordingly, said Van Til, we must reason by presupposition. And the powerful essence of that presuppositional argument is just this: "The only 'proof' of the Christian position is that unless its truth is presupposed there is no possibility of 'proving' anything at all." What the Christian sets forth as the Bible's worldview - as authoritatively revealed by God - is the indispensable foundation for proof itself - for the intelligibility of reason and experience, the ability to make sense of knowing anything whatsoever. At this point, the unbeliever's choices are either to acknowledge the truth revealed by God's word (and repent of his sins, including intellectual autonomy) or to reject rationality itself. He had demanded that the Christian "give a reason" for his firm conviction ("hope") about Christ and His word (cf. 1 Peter 3:15), and the non-Christian must now accept the Christian's reasoning (involving his concrete worldview) or retreat from the task and normativity of "giving reasons" (for rationality, intelligibility, meaning, logic, science, morality, etc.). In either case, the apologetical encounter has been successful for, and in favor of the truth of, the Christian position.

[1] It should not be necessary to point out that what follows is a highly compressed and artificially "programmatic" summary of what the procedure aims to be. In actual conversations, the order in which things are discussed, the relevant illustrations, the irrelevant sidebars, the personal quirks and unpredictable "mental associations" will all contribute to a specific dialog which likely differs from other ones and wanders many different directions in pushing toward its ultimate destination.

33

Reformed Episcopal View of Christ

by thepreacher in

necessity of the old testament in understanding the work of christ

by curtis i. crenshaw .

i n the volume of the book, it is written of christ (

clash_city_rockers

The Canons of the Council of Orange

(529 AD)

Protastant Theology

A anti-Tritentine Roman Catholic document

CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit, and does not understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5).

so much for the Roman Catholic notion of Free Will

CANON 18. That grace is not preceded by merit. Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.

So much for the Roman Catholic silly notion of mariting the marit of Christ.

but you know what Firm Your probably an Americanized Indaviduallist version of Mordern Roman Catholicism Sort of the McCatholic Church Roman Catholic Have Rome and the Pope your way. I bet If I pressed hard enough you wouldn't even submit to your own Roman Catholic Authority..... So Much for Roman Catholic Sola Ecclesia

When Cardenal Joseph Ratzinger (who is head of the sacrad office of teaching and doctrine for the Roman Catholic church) Liberalizes catholic doctrine you have to go along with him, and do it cheerfully also.

Huggs, Kisses and sqishy squeezes,

jr

Edited by - clash_city_rockers on 22 November 2002 6:38:21

33

Reformed Episcopal View of Christ

by thepreacher in

necessity of the old testament in understanding the work of christ

by curtis i. crenshaw .

i n the volume of the book, it is written of christ (

clash_city_rockers

You Tell Us: Does Rome Provide Infallible Certainty About the Gospel?

The Council of Florence, the 14 th Ecumenical (and hence infallible) Council of the Roman Catholic Church, said the following:

It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church. (Denzinger 714).

Yet, section 841 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993) says:

The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."

In a similar way the Pope seemed to be in line with section 841 when he said,

VATICAN CITY, SEP 9, 1998 (VIS) - At today's Wednesday general audience in St. Peter's Square, the Pope spoke on the theme of The Spirit of God and the 'Seeds of Truth' in non-Christian Religions. The 'seeds of truth', said John Paul II, are 'the effect of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body', the wind 'which blows where it wills'. The Holy Father explained that in all authentic religious experiences, the most characteristic manifestation is prayer. ... Every true prayer is inspired by the Holy Spirit, Who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person. Through the practice of what is good in their own religious traditions, and following the dictates of their consciences, members of other religions positively respond to God's invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even though they may not recognize Him as their Savior. The attitude of the Church and of individual Christians with regard to other religions is characterized by sincere respect, deep kindness, and also, where it is possible and appropriate, cordial collaboration. This does not mean forgetting that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator and Savior of the human race. Nor does it imply lessening the missionary effort to which we have an obligation, in obedience to the command of the Risen Lord: 'Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit'. This attitude of respect and dialogue, concluded John Paul II, represents a due recognition of the 'seeds of the Word' and of the 'groans of the Spirit'. It also prepares the proclamation of the Gospel in awaiting the time when the Lord shows his mercy.

Yet, scarcely two years later, we encounter a Papal encyclical Dominus Iesus, which reads in part,

4. The Church's constant missionary proclamation is endangered today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle). As a consequence, it is held that certain truths have been superseded; for example, the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability while recognizing the distinction of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of the one Church of Christ in the Catholic Church.
5. As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ. In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6), the full revelation of divine truth is given: No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him (Mt 11:27); No one has ever seen God; God the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has revealed him (Jn 1:18); For in Christ the whole fullness of divinity dwells in bodily form (Col 2:9-10).
For this reason, the distinction between theological faith and belief in the other religions, must be firmly held. If faith is the acceptance in grace of revealed truth, which makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently, then belief, in the other religions, is that sum of experience and thought that constitutes the human treasury of wisdom and religious aspiration, which man in his search for truth has conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God and the Absolute.
This distinction is not always borne in mind in current theological reflection. Thus, theological faith (the acceptance of the truth revealed by the One and Triune God) is often identified with belief in other religions, which is religious experience still in search of the absolute truth and still lacking assent to God who reveals himself. This is one of the reasons why the differences between Christianity and the other religions tend to be reduced at times to the point of disappearance.
Hence, those solutions that propose a salvific action of God beyond the unique mediation of Christ would be contrary to Christian and Catholic faith.

But, only a few months later, we get this:

GENERAL AUDIENCE Wednesday 6 December 2000
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
The theme of our General Audiences during this Great Jubilee Year has been the glory of the Trinity, and today we ask what we must do to ensure that the glory of the Trinity shines forth more fully in the world. In essence, we are called to be converted and to believe in the Gospel. We are to accept the Kingdom of God in our hearts, and to bear witness to it by word and deed. The Kingdom indicates the loving presence and activity of God in the world, and should be a source of serenity and confidence for our lives. The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the Beatitudes the poor in spirit, the pure of heart, those who bear lovingly the sufferings of life will enter Gods Kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and his Church, contribute under the influence of grace to the building of this Kingdom. In the Lords prayer we say: "Thy Kingdom come"; may this be the hope that sustains and inspires our Christian life and work.

Do you really think Rome clarifies the issues of the gospel, or does she muddle them?

33

Reformed Episcopal View of Christ

by thepreacher in

necessity of the old testament in understanding the work of christ

by curtis i. crenshaw .

i n the volume of the book, it is written of christ (

clash_city_rockers

Well sorry to disappoint you Firm, but the Reformed faith is the true continuation of the apostolic faith. When Rome anathamatiesed the gosple at the council of Trent in 1564 a document and council you have no clue on. God anathamatiesed the Roman Catholic Church. The true "Catholic Church" resides in those churches that Preach the Gospel, Rightly Adminster The Sacraments, and practice Church Disapline (which your church doesn't I'l just go to a local Papist Center and just observe the rampant bible illiteracy that has plueged Roman Catholics, not to say thier disobedience to thier own Catholic ways such as birth control which many of Your people scoff at.... In fact I know many Papist who live inmoral lives and thier preists and church leaders know that about them and yet do nothing they just say thats the Catholic way, in which I reply oh Your fellow papist live in debochery and inmorral filthy living and the preist says "oh yes they got to sow thier wild oats" NO JOKE who was the last Roman Catholic excommunicated or disfellowshipped for thier whicked conduct??????????? The true Catholic Church whe one Christ has been building the last 2000 years is the bible believing Christ preaching Reformed Protestant Church.

Yes I have herd of Scot Hahn. Have you heard of his friend Gerry Mattaticts? Gerry became a "traditionalist Roman Catholic conver" They used to be best friends but now Gerry refers to Scott Hahn as a liberaliesed Roman Catholic and a copitulator. I had Dinner with Gerry oh back in Sept 2000 he told me that Scott Hans version of Roman Catholicism is a false ans liberaliesed view of Roman Catholicism and if I wan't the real McCoy I should check out the Pope Pius the X Catholicism. I also sent a copy of my friend apologetic paper against Roman Catholicism He said that this was the best defence of protestantism yet... I can't defent my Popery against such a good Reformed Presupositional presentation. In fact I heard Patrick Madrid can't defend against it......

Firm you have know clue on what Roman Catholic Doctrine is.

I sugest you buy Lugwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Documents From the Counsil of Trent, and It's Catachism From Pius the V

Gregory the 16th encyclicals, Also the catachism against Modernism by Pius the X (my guess you would be guilty of all of them) and other encyclacals by Pius the 9,10,11

Documents of Vatican 1 which Ibelieve was under Leo the 8th? and the Modernest Vatican 2 and New Catachism, which I would compare all the chainges with the old Baltamore Catichism a Papist Catichism that the Firm has no clue on it's contents

If you wan't clue on what "catholic answers" is don't go to Pat Madrin or James Aken but read Robert Bellerman.

Cheers and I hope you go to the book store,

jr

33

Reformed Episcopal View of Christ

by thepreacher in

necessity of the old testament in understanding the work of christ

by curtis i. crenshaw .

i n the volume of the book, it is written of christ (

clash_city_rockers

The Firm,

Sorry if your a Roman Catholic then I as a bible believing Christian can never join forces with the likes of you sorry to sound so mean but my disposition is to do what I can to contribute to the shutting down and distruction of the synogogs of Satin wheather it be The Watchtower or the Roman Catholic church since they are both anti-christ instatutions that are apposed to Christ and his Kingdom.

As far as you paying attention to the conversation I quoted Heb 9 not 6 go back and look at my previous post.

Why does the Firm refuse to deal with Heb 9 well it's because it apposes the Roman Mass as the representation and resacrafice of Christ but what does the bible say.

Heb 9:23-28

23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another-- 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation

For more information on False Religions such as Jehovahs Witnesses and Roman Catholicism please go to

http://www.aomin.org

Edited by - clash_city_rockers on 21 November 2002 7:29:7

16

Prayers through the name of Jesus?

by ozziepost in

it's common practice for dubs to end their prayers with words that indicate that they are being made "in jesus' name" i.e.

through the mediatorship of jesus.

more than that, dubs listening to congregation prayers would be aghast if the prayer leader omitted the words "through jesus christ" as the concluding remark of his prayer.

clash_city_rockers

It's so sad.....

according to WT theology after the 144,000 are dead and gone there will be no one left to pray to Jesus. Where will be your hope.... who will listen.....

The good news is that anyone who places thier trust on Jesus for salvation then Jesus will always be his or her medeator....

there is hope and it is found in Jesus........

jr

Edited by - clash_city_rockers on 20 November 2002 0:12:35

16

Prayers through the name of Jesus?

by ozziepost in

it's common practice for dubs to end their prayers with words that indicate that they are being made "in jesus' name" i.e.

through the mediatorship of jesus.

more than that, dubs listening to congregation prayers would be aghast if the prayer leader omitted the words "through jesus christ" as the concluding remark of his prayer.

clash_city_rockers

Blondie (BTW that was a cool band from the late 70's)

I understand your point.....

But why even pray to Jesus or what is the point to praying to Jesus is Jesus is not Really your medeator. Just the medeator of the 144,000 which most in the organization are not. And isn't the 144,000 those special super saints starting with the discipels of Jesus' day up untill today with the GB ending with the "last generation at 1914" if thats so the the last of the GB are old and have one foot in the grave. This is acourding to WT theology. Soon there will be no 144,000 (GB from the 1914 era) if thats so there will be know one left to pray to Jesus since Jesus only listens to the 144,000 since he is thier medeator alone. Think of it it's the year 2020 and acourding to WT theology no one can pray to Jesus any more. The only way out for the WT is some bogus new light.

just a thought,

jr

Edited by - clash_city_rockers on 19 November 2002 22:18:40

clash_city_rockers

Posts by clash_city_rockers

Footnotes

The Canons of the Council of Orange

(529 AD)

A anti-Tritentine Roman Catholic document