Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
102 Pages « < 82 83 84 85 86 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 LYN Christian Fellowship V13 (Group), ALL about Jesus Christ.

views
     
TSunknown warrior
post Mar 12 2018, 08:47 AM

/k/ Legend
*******
Senior Member
6,240 posts

Joined: Jul 2005
God justify the Godly?

Romans 4:5 (NIV) - However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Morning guys and gals.

What this verse is saying..To the one who does not work. This is not talking about your career or your work in the office but..maybe I can paraphrase like this:

"To the one who does not try to justify himself before God through his own performance", meaning to the one who trust NOT in his own obedience but trust God who justify the ungodly. Wait minute. Shouldn't God justify the Godly? That would make more sense, wouldn't it? But No.

My Bible tells me..the one who trust God who justifies the ungodly...their Faith is credited as righteousness. Think about it. How come? Well there must be a righteous foundation for God to do this. Do you know what it is? It is the Finished Work of Christ at the cross. Not your work.

The one who trusts (you and I trusting) God who justifies the Ungodly. So, who are the ungodly? Well, basically you and I. There's nobody else. We are all ungodly before God.

The one who thinks himself as Godly before God because He managed to obey....Such CANNOT receive the Grace of the Gift of God's Righteousness. It is only given to those who performs NOT but trust in God who justifies THE UNGODLY! Such group WILL receive Righteousness.

Bible says the prayer of a righteous Man prevails much. It is this same gift of righteousness given to the Ungodly who trust not in himself. For too long, we have been taught backwards...that you must be a righteous person through your obedience in order for your prayers to be powerful. No, Bible says otherwise.

There is much power and much grace when you have the right revelation.

This is only given to those who have an ear to hear. Those who do not understand and feels triggered..well..Ask for wisdom and you shall receive. biggrin.gif

God Bless.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Mar 12 2018, 08:50 AM
prophetjul
post Mar 12 2018, 09:18 AM

10k Club
********
All Stars
12,275 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
QUOTE(yeeck @ Mar 8 2018, 11:50 PM)
First of all, a careful reading of 1 Peter 2, verses 5 and 9 reveals a reference to Exodus 19:6: ". . . and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." This text from Exodus indicates a universal priesthood in the Old Testament. And yet, in Exodus 19:22, we read, "And also let the priests who come near to the Lord consecrate themselves . . . " In other words, a universal priesthood in the Old Covenant did not exclude the possibility of a distinct ministerial priesthood as well. It would be natural then to expect the same in the New Covenant. And indeed, that is precisely what we discover.

By virtue of the sacrament of baptism and confirmation which gives an indelible mark on the soul, all of us are of truly priests, prophet and kings. However, this priesthood is not the same as that of the ministerial priesthood. The laity are distinguished from both the clergy and religious because their true consecration in the Church is of a secular nature. The use of these terms means, more generally, worship (priest), witness (prophet) and service (king). In this sense there is a continuity with the priesthood of the Old Testament which prefigured the New. In the OT, there is one high priest and other priests in the Temple. In the NT, Christ is the Eternal High Priest, and He chose His Apostles as His ministerial priests and in turn laid hands on others to continue their work.

This fact is recognized even by the early Church Fathers:

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


*
Indeed the phrase was a reference to Exodus 19:6."

However, the epistle of 2 Peter was to Christians outside of Israel. "......"to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

AND yet you refer to the OT and not abide by OT rules on the priesthood. Do you have a temple now? Are your priests in the temple after the tribe of Levite?

The ministerial priesthood and laity division is derived to control the laity as the Lord in His warnings against the Nicolaitanes in REv 2.

Yes, there is hierarchy of bishops and deacons. However, all are priests unto the Lord.

Further on the qualifications of the bishokopos, (elder)

QUOTE
This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil


WHY then does the RCC forbid their bishops to be married????
desmond2020
post Mar 12 2018, 10:21 AM

Enthusiast
*****
Junior Member
908 posts

Joined: Jun 2005
What is hyper-grace?

Question: "What is hyper-grace?"

Answer: The term hyper-grace has been used to describe a new wave of teaching that emphasizes the grace of God to the exclusion of other vital teachings such as repentance and confession of sin. Hyper-grace teachers maintain that all sin, past, present, and future, has already been forgiven, so there is no need for a believer to ever confess it. Hyper-grace teaching says that, when God looks at us, He sees only a holy and righteous people. The conclusion of hyper-grace teaching is that we are not bound by Jesus’ teaching, even as we are not under the Law; that believers are not responsible for their sin; and that anyone who disagrees is a pharisaical legalist. In short, hyper-grace teachers “pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (Jude 1:4) and flirt with antinomianism.

Jesus’ words to the seven churches in the book of Revelation strongly contradict the idea that Christians never need to repent. To the church at Ephesus, Jesus said, “Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place” (Revelation 2:4). Jesus rebukes five of the seven churches and demands repentance from them (Revelation 2:4, 6, 20; 3:3, 15–19). Far from believers being unaccountable for their sin, they must answer to Jesus for their disobedience (see also 2 Corinthians 5:10).

Preachers of hyper-grace doctrine discount the Old Testament and the Ten Commandments as irrelevant to New Testament believers. They even teach that Jesus’ words spoken before His resurrection are part of the Old Covenant and no longer applicable to born-again believers. But is this true?

In Mark 13:31, Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” Before Jesus ascended into heaven, He promised that the Father would send the Holy Spirit who “will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” (John 14:26). If Jesus’ words are no longer applicable to believers, why would we need to be reminded of them?

Hyper-grace teaching is a good example of mixing truth with error. An emphasis on the beauty and power of God’s grace is good, but some teachers are neglecting what Paul called the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). For example, it is true that Christians have been forgiven by God. But that doesn’t mean we never have to confess our sin. James 5:16 says, “Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed.” If we are to confess our sins to each other, why would we not need to confess them to God, since every sin is ultimately a sin against God (Psalm 51:4)?

Also, 1 John 1:9 gives clear instruction to believers about confessing sin. It begins with the word if: “If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” This is a cause/effect statement implying that we cannot have the second without the first. As blood-bought children of God, we do not continue to confess our sin in order to be saved from hell. We confess and repent in order to reestablish an intimate relationship with our Father. We are “positionally righteous” but “practically sinful.”

To counter this argument, hyper-grace preachers deny that John’s letters were written to believers. However, 1 John 2:1 begins with this: “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.” John is clearly writing to believers whom he personally knew. He indicates that his believing friends may indeed sin, and that, when they do, they need to confess it.

Hyper-grace preachers also claim the Holy Spirit will never convict Christians of their sin. Mature Christians should recognize this fallacy right away. Every disciple of Christ has felt the overwhelming conviction of the Holy Spirit when he or she has sinned. Jesus calls the Holy Spirit “the Spirit of Truth” (John 15:26). Truth, by its very definition, will not tolerate anything false. When the Spirit of Truth abides in a believing heart (1 Corinthians 6:19), He brings conviction about anything that is not truth.

In summary, much of what the hyper-grace preachers teach is valid. We are indeed saved by grace, not our works (Ephesians 2:8–9). And God’s grace is marvelous, great, and free (1 Timothy 1:14). However, hyper-grace teaching is out of proportion to the rest of Scripture. Any time one doctrine is emphasized to the exclusion of the rest, we fall into error because we fail to “correctly handle” the Word (2 Timothy 2:15).

Jesus was full of both “grace and truth” (John 1:14). The two are in delicate balance, and a tip to either side can result in a false gospel. We must always compare any new teaching with the “whole counsel of God” and learn to disregard anything that veers even slightly from the truth (1 John 4:1).
yeeck
post Mar 12 2018, 10:22 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,578 posts

Joined: Apr 2006
QUOTE(prophetjul @ Mar 12 2018, 09:18 AM)
Indeed the phrase was a reference to Exodus 19:6."

However, the epistle of 2 Peter was to Christians outside of Israel. "......"to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

AND yet you refer to the OT and not abide by OT rules on the priesthood. Do you have a temple now?  Are your priests in the temple after the tribe of Levite? 

The ministerial priesthood and laity division is derived to control the laity as the Lord in His warnings against the Nicolaitanes in REv 2.

Yes, there is hierarchy of bishops and deacons. However, all are priests unto the Lord.

Further on the qualifications of the bishokopos, (elder)
WHY then does the RCC forbid their bishops to be married????
*
Guess who wrote that? St Paul! And he wasn't even married, yet he is an Apostle (bishop).

QUOTE
1. Even the Evangelical scripture scholar Dr. Ralph Earle, in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, says that St. Paul in 1 Timothy 3 is not requiring bishops to be married. In stating his reasons, he first offers the most ancient position—which we know as Catholics to be apostolic in origin and found in written form in the late second century—that would say this text is placing a limitation on the number of marriages a bishop could have in his lifetime. He could only have been married once. This is the position of the Catholic Church today. If a man has been married more than once, even if licitly, he cannot be admitted to the episcopacy.

2. Earle writes, “[M]ost commentators agree that [the text] means monogamy—only one wife at one time.” This interpretation is unlikely for reasons we’ll mention below, but we should first take note that both Catholic and Protestant scholars generally agree St. Paul is not making marriage a requirement for the bishopric.

3. In that same Bible commentary, this time commenting on Titus 1:6, which makes to both elders and bishops the same prohibition against multiple marriages, another Evangelical scholar, Dr. D. Edmond Hiebert, adds, “If Paul had meant that the elder must be married, the reading would have been ‘a’ not ‘one’ wife.” I would go further and say it would most likely simply say, “The bishop must be married.” The term one indicates that he is limiting the number, not mandating marriage.

For those who would be inclined to argue the position that St. Paul is simply prohibiting polygamy to the clergy, I would add these five points:

1. The lists of disqualifications to the ministry in both Timothy and Titus were not consisting of things that would exclude a person from being a Christian at all, like polygamy would. They were things that would ensure the candidate in question was living an exemplary Christian life. Illicit “marital” situations were condemned at the Council of Jerusalem in AD 49 and declared to be deal-breakers for one to be a Christian at all (see Acts 15:1-3; 24-28). Though polygamy is not mentioned there verbatim, it would certainly be condemned implicitly in the condemnation of illicit conjugal situations.

2. There was not a single place in the Greco-Roman world where polygamy was being practiced in the first century A.D. It is unlikely St. Paul would speak of something directly like this that was simply not a problem at the time.

3. In the case of St. Paul’s first letter to Timothy, he would go on to declare that a widow who was “enrolled,” or consecrated, as a celibate and married again to have sinned gravely. There is nothing wrong with a widow remarrying. That is licit and clearly so elsewhere in Scripture, specifically in St. Paul’s own writings (see Romans 7:2-3; I Cor. 7:27-28, 39-40). But it is wrong for the one who has been consecrated for service in the Church. It is interesting that St. Paul uses the same language of limiting the widow to having been the wife “of one husband.” Obviously this was not meant to say “one husband at a time”:

Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years of age, having been the wife of one husband. . . . But refuse to enroll younger widows; for when they grow wanton against Christ they desire to marry, and so they incur condemnation for having violated their first pledge (I Tim. 5:9-12).

It is more than fitting that those consecrated as bishops, elders, and deacons would make a similar commitment.

4. St. Paul’s repeated recommendations to all to remain celibate, remain single after having lost a spouse (I Cor. 7:1; 7-8; 25-28; 32-35; 38; 39-40), or even to live a celibate life within marriage (I Cor. 7:29), are consistent with his prohibition to remarriage to those called to holy orders. St. Paul seems to speak a great deal about second marriages but never about polygamy.
Jesus Christ is the Eternal High Priest after the order of Melchisedech (Hebrews 7:13-17) who is both King and Priest. He is not a descendant of Aaron. Levites are not priests but more of the helpers in the Temple, similar to deacons in the New Testament. Catholic priests are also called alter Christus (another Christ) when they repeat the command of Jesus to consecrate bread and wine into His Body and Blood. This is why in the Eucharist, the priest says "This is MY Body, this is MY Blood", not "This is His Body, this is His Blood", even though in essence it means the same thing.

As for the Nicolaites, they are a Gnostic sect. Nicolas abandoned his wife because of her beauty, so that whoever wanted to might enjoy her; the practice turned into debauchery, with partners being exchanged in turn. John condemns them in the Apocalypse, saying (2:6): “But this thou hast, that thou hates the deeds of the Nicolaites." This means they practised ritual prostitution and sexual immorality, and Rev 2 has nothing to do with the question on ministerial priesthood. According to certain authors, they did so because they believed in the antinomian heresy, believing that grace released them from the obligation of observing the moral law. shocking.gif

This post has been edited by yeeck: Mar 12 2018, 10:26 AM
SUSsylar111
post Mar 12 2018, 12:48 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,547 posts

Joined: Jun 2008
From: KL
QUOTE(tinarhian @ Mar 11 2018, 03:01 AM)
hmm.gif
*
Now only you realize this.
I have been talking about this since a very long time ago when I started my "interaction" with Yeeck.
That is why you are not going to achieve much by debating with him.
Think about it, the points that you and the rest are discussing with him has already been discussed with him before.
I mean he is actually even using the writing of his church fathers to actually debate with us thinking that it has authority when it does not. I have been saying along that Catholism is not just another false denomination. It is literally a cult. I mean if you actually think about it.

Anyway, as I have mentioned earlier, Protestanism is not much better at the moment. It is already starting to go towards the direction of Catholism. Here is a video by my "mentor". I know you do not like him because of the interracial marraige thing. All I can say is, if I really love someone, I would probably marry that person regardless of race but then that does not mean it is right. So I would not be a hypocrite and talk about this.



This is probably going to offend many people but then
Proverbs 18:13
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

Anyway. There are a few short videos he has made on ESV anyway.


This post has been edited by sylar111: Mar 12 2018, 12:54 PM
prophetjul
post Mar 12 2018, 01:36 PM

10k Club
********
All Stars
12,275 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
QUOTE(yeeck @ Mar 12 2018, 10:22 AM)
Guess who wrote that? St Paul! And he wasn't even married, yet he is an Apostle (bishop).
Jesus Christ is the Eternal High Priest after the order of Melchisedech (Hebrews 7:13-17) who is both King and Priest. He is not a descendant of Aaron. Levites are not priests but more of the helpers in the Temple, similar to deacons in the New Testament. Catholic priests are also called alter Christus (another Christ) when they repeat the command of Jesus to consecrate bread and wine into His Body and Blood. This is why in the Eucharist, the priest says "This is MY Body, this is MY Blood", not "This is His Body, this is His Blood", even though in essence it means the same thing.

As for the Nicolaites, they are a Gnostic sect. Nicolas abandoned his wife because of her beauty, so that whoever wanted to might enjoy her; the practice turned into debauchery, with partners being exchanged in turn. John condemns them in the Apocalypse, saying (2:6): “But this thou hast, that thou hates the deeds of the Nicolaites." This means they practised ritual prostitution and sexual immorality, and Rev 2 has nothing to do with the question on ministerial priesthood. According to certain authors, they did so because they believed in the antinomian heresy, believing that grace released them from the obligation of observing the moral law.  shocking.gif
*
An apostle is not a bishop. A bishop is an elder in a congregational community. Apostles tend to move around.

Are the modern priests after the order of Melchizedek? Nope. There is only ONE, Jesus. But all are priests unto the Lord, for the umpteenth time.
Diid Jesus said only 'ordained' preists are allowed to bless the symbols? Nope. He only instructed that you do this as oft as you meet in remembrance of Him.

Not all Levites are priests. But ALL priests are from the tribe of Levi.

The Nicolaites were like the institutional priests nowadays, control of the sheeple. THat Jesus hates these controlling ministers.

The passage in 1 Tim 3 is not forcing a bishop to marry. Rather, it shows that a bishop CAN marry, unlike the instructions of the RCC to forbid their priests from marrying, adding like the Pharisees to God's instructions. Blind leading the blind.
You are missing this point.

The passage is not about a widow or widower as you have insinuated with a cut and paste. Its about the qualifications of those who wish to serve in the leadership. And CLEARLY a bishop is allowed to get married and have a family.


yeeck
post Mar 12 2018, 01:53 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,578 posts

Joined: Apr 2006
QUOTE(prophetjul @ Mar 12 2018, 01:36 PM)
An apostle is not a bishop. A bishop is an elder in a congregational community. Apostles tend to move around.

Are the modern priests after the order of Melchizedek? Nope. There is only ONE, Jesus. But all are priests unto the Lord, for the umpteenth time.
Diid Jesus said only 'ordained' preists are allowed to bless the symbols? Nope. He only instructed that you do this as oft as you meet in remembrance of Him.

Not all Levites are priests. But ALL priests are from the tribe of Levi.

The Nicolaites were like the institutional priests nowadays, control of the sheeple. THat Jesus hates these controlling ministers.

The passage in 1 Tim 3 is not forcing a bishop to marry. Rather, it shows that a bishop CAN marry, unlike the instructions of the RCC to forbid their priests from marrying, adding like the Pharisees to God's instructions. Blind leading the blind.
You are missing this point. 

The passage is not about a widow or widower as you have insinuated with a cut and paste. Its about the qualifications of those who wish to serve in the leadership. And CLEARLY a bishop is allowed to get married and have a family.
*
All the Apostles are bishops. Modern bishops we call the successors of the Apostles. A bishop has the fullness of the priesthood meaning a bishop can ordain priests and deacons.

For the umpteenth time, ministerial priesthood is not the same as the universal priesthood of the baptized of which the OT roles are but a prefigurement of the New.

No, it is no mere symbols after consecration. See John 6. Mere symbols are not worthy of damnation if eaten unworthily.

Priests serve in the place of Christ and therefore, their ministry specially configures them to Christ. As is clear from Scripture, Christ was not married (except in a mystical sense, to the Church). By remaining celibate and devoting themselves to the service of the Church, priests more closely model, configure themselves to, and consecrate themselves to Christ.

As Christ himself makes clear, none of us will be married in heaven (Mt 22:23–30). By remaining unmarried in this life, priests are more closely configured to the final, eschatological state that will be all of ours.

Paul makes it very clear that remaining single allows one’s attention to be undivided in serving the Lord (1 Cor 7:32–35). He recommends celibacy to all (1 Cor 7:7) but especially to ministers, who as soldiers of Christ he urges to abstain from "civilian affairs" (2 Tm 2:3–4).

Canonically, priests cannot marry for a number of reasons. First, priests who belong to religious orders take vows of celibacy. Second, while diocesan priests do not take vows, they do make a promise of celibacy.

Again, celibacy is a discipline of the Church and not dogma, so if the Church for a good reason decides to change that in the future, it certainly has the authority to do so.

And again, you had a false view of the Nicolaites who practised sexual and ritual immorality and was condemned in Rev 2 because of that, not because of the institutional priests. Their founder Nicolas was a deacon after all.

This post has been edited by yeeck: Mar 12 2018, 01:58 PM
prophetjul
post Mar 12 2018, 02:07 PM

10k Club
********
All Stars
12,275 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
QUOTE(yeeck @ Mar 12 2018, 01:53 PM)
All the Apostles are bishops.

For the umpteenth time, ministerial priesthood is not the same as the universal priesthood of the baptized of which the OT roles are but a prefigurement of the New.

Priests serve in the place of Christ and therefore, their ministry specially configures them to Christ. As is clear from Scripture, Christ was not married (except in a mystical sense, to the Church). By remaining celibate and devoting themselves to the service of the Church, priests more closely model, configure themselves to, and consecrate themselves to Christ.

As Christ himself makes clear, none of us will be married in heaven (Mt 22:23–30). By remaining unmarried in this life, priests are more closely configured to the final, eschatological state that will be all of ours.

Paul makes it very clear that remaining single allows one’s attention to be undivided in serving the Lord (1 Cor 7:32–35). He recommends celibacy to all (1 Cor 7:7) but especially to ministers, who as soldiers of Christ he urges to abstain from "civilian affairs" (2 Tm 2:3–4).

Canonically, priests cannot marry for a number of reasons. First, priests who belong to religious orders take vows of celibacy. Second, while diocesan priests do not take vows, they do make a promise of celibacy.

Again, celibacy is a discipline of the Church and not dogma, so if the Church for a good reason decides to change that in the future, it certainly has the authority to do so.

And again, you had a false view of the Nicolaites who practised sexual and ritual immorality and was condemned in Rev 2 because of that, not because of the institutional priests. Their founder Nicolas was a deacon after all.
*
Nonsense. An apostle is a different ministry to that of a bishop.

apostolos: a messenger, one sent on a mission, an apostle
Original Word: ἀπόστολος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: apostolos
Phonetic Spelling: (ap-os'-tol-os)
Short Definition: an apostle, a messenger, an envoy, a delegate
Definition: a messenger, envoy, delegate, one commissioned by another to represent him in some way, especially a man sent out by Jesus Christ Himself to preach the Gospel; an apostle.

episkopos: a superintendent, an overseer
Original Word: ἐπίσκοπος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: episkopos
Phonetic Spelling: (ep-is'-kop-os)
Short Definition: overseer, supervisor, ruler
Definition: (used as an official title in civil life), overseer, supervisor, ruler, especially used with reference to the supervising function exercised by an elder or presbyter of a church or congregation.

You keep on yapping about priest in place of Christ. Who instructed you to do that?
WHO instructed your priest to be celibate? Doctrines of devils?

Coincidently in 1 Tim4, after that passage

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Hello. We are not in heaven yet. We are still here on earth where this is marriage instructed of God.

Indeed Paul recommended BUT instructed is one cannot be celibate,

7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Indeed your preists are 'burning'!

Marriage was instituted from the beginning in Genesis by GOD. It is NOT the affairs of civilians!

The RCC has added a non sensical instruction of celibacy to its priests, a doctrine of devils. Causing the men to 'burn' in lusts!


yeeck
post Mar 12 2018, 02:53 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,578 posts

Joined: Apr 2006
QUOTE(prophetjul @ Mar 12 2018, 02:07 PM)
Nonsense. An apostle is a different ministry to that of a bishop.

apostolos: a messenger, one sent on a mission, an apostle
Original Word: ἀπόστολος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: apostolos
Phonetic Spelling: (ap-os'-tol-os)
Short Definition: an apostle, a messenger, an envoy, a delegate
Definition: a messenger, envoy, delegate, one commissioned by another to represent him in some way, especially a man sent out by Jesus Christ Himself to preach the Gospel; an apostle.

episkopos: a superintendent, an overseer
Original Word: ἐπίσκοπος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: episkopos
Phonetic Spelling: (ep-is'-kop-os)
Short Definition: overseer, supervisor, ruler
Definition: (used as an official title in civil life), overseer, supervisor, ruler, especially used with reference to the supervising function exercised by an elder or presbyter of a church or congregation.

You keep on yapping about priest in place of Christ.  Who instructed you to do that?
WHO instructed your priest to be celibate?  Doctrines of devils?

Coincidently in 1 Tim4, after that passage

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Hello. We are not in heaven yet. We are still here on earth where this is marriage instructed of God. 

Indeed Paul recommended BUT instructed is one cannot be celibate,

7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Indeed your preists are 'burning'! 

Marriage was instituted from the beginning in Genesis by GOD. It is NOT the affairs of civilians! 

The RCC has added a non sensical instruction of celibacy to its priests, a doctrine of devils. Causing the men to 'burn' in lusts!
*
You quoted Paul recommended celibacy but still say one cannot be celibate? Are you saying Paul is a hypocrite or Jesus Christ Himself? How blasphemous! Again, the Catholic Church does not forbid marriage since it is one of the seven sacraments, but the vow of celibacy is taken by those who are called to that state and willingly, no one points a gun at them to take on celibacy.

Who instructed priests to take the the place of Christ? Well Christ Himself delegated this authority, of course. "Do this....." and authority to bind and loose "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
icon_rolleyes.gif

BTW not sure what you mean by not the affairs of civillians (Huh?)

This post has been edited by yeeck: Mar 12 2018, 02:55 PM
SUSsylar111
post Mar 12 2018, 05:50 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,547 posts

Joined: Jun 2008
From: KL
That is why I told you not to debate with him. It's futile. He will purposely twist what you say, change definitions, etc. There will never be a clear "winner". Someone who is really looking for the truth will not pin point that you said that you actually imply that the bible says that it's imperative that everyone should marry. No one is saying that priests cannot be 'celibate ' if they choose so. Arguing with him is like arguing with an atheist. They will forever change their goalpost and then go back to their original point again. Making you go circles and circles so why bother?

This post has been edited by sylar111: Mar 12 2018, 05:51 PM
SUSsylar111
post Mar 12 2018, 06:15 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,547 posts

Joined: Jun 2008
From: KL
Anyway. For a Catholic, they probably have ready made answers for you for every "concern" that you have.. It probably does not make sense but then when you point out their fallacies they have another answer for that. They are probably the master of "answering" questions so why bother?
yeeck
post Mar 12 2018, 06:24 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,578 posts

Joined: Apr 2006
QUOTE(sylar111 @ Mar 12 2018, 06:15 PM)
Anyway.  For a Catholic,  they probably have ready made answers for you for every "concern" that you have.. It probably does not make sense but then when you point out their fallacies they have another answer for that.  They are probably the master of "answering" questions so why bother?
*
Because you'll never accept any answer no matter what. That is called a hardened heart. Will still pray for you though tongue.gif

This post has been edited by yeeck: Mar 12 2018, 06:25 PM
SUSsylar111
post Mar 12 2018, 06:46 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,547 posts

Joined: Jun 2008
From: KL
QUOTE(yeeck @ Mar 12 2018, 06:24 PM)
Because you'll never accept any answer no matter what. That is called a hardened heart.  Will still pray for you though tongue.gif
*
Sound pretty much evangelical guess 1 Corinthians 9:20- 22 then.

But then guess with your unhardened heart, you probably understand what I am implying right? Not.

Wow. I am no longer a heretic. I am so happy.

This post has been edited by sylar111: Mar 12 2018, 07:14 PM
SUSKLboy92
post Mar 12 2018, 08:45 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
Checking in...

I see the circus continues.

Checking out...
tinarhian
post Mar 12 2018, 08:52 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
726 posts

Joined: Sep 2014
QUOTE(yeeck @ Mar 11 2018, 02:27 PM)
Again you misunderstood. Nobody is denying the fact that Jesus birth is through the virgin Mary. Beside, the prophecy of Isaiah must indeed come true. What Catholic cannot accept and refuse to understand is that Mary is not a perpetual virgin. Then what about Matthew 12:46 or Mark 6:3 ? You mean to tell me that Jesus had no siblings? You meant that there are his cousins? Because the greek that is used does not imply "cousins." So did Matthew and Mark made error on this part of the text?

Yes Martin Luther and Calvin defended the perpetual virginity of Mary. When it suit you, you ignore the Bible verse that say otherwise. You meant God wanted Mary to live a life of celibacy as well? It does not make sense because God intended the Jews to multiply not to live a life of celibacy.

Then who is Jesus referring to in Matthew 12:46 onwards? You mean his adopted brothers and sisters? You will probably say to not take it literally eh? Yeah whenever it suit you, you shift your goalpost. thumbsup.gif

Isn't RC Bible had extra books? Maybe those books are not God inspired. I don't blame you because of the Roman Emperor's tradition with the Bible text. People will say its heresy because the Roman Emperor Constantine started all of these Catholic traditions. The origin of it all.

So when Catholics pray to Mary, do they pray to her for salvation? Why don't pray to God? Yes I believed Catholic adore God but they confessed their sins to the priests to avoid purgatory. I read that there is a mistranslation of repetance into penance. No wonder Catholics got excited about it. Just say your "Hail Marys" and do your rosary, everything boleh. thumbsup.gif
No need to confess to God. Shortcut eh? thumbsup.gif

Then what about 1 Timothy 2:5? Is that invalid? Or Catholic prefer men to forgive sins? Where is text in the Bible that show that? I think its because of your extra books. thumbsup.gif

Priests or pastors, or as they say "elders" are suppose to preach the gospel and teach in the pulpit about the Word of God. But hey I guess Catholics don't bother about that. Its more of doing the rituals and following the traditions.

I don't want to even start with the Catholics sex scandal, freemason, etc...That's why the Bible commanded us to get married not to live a hermit lifestyle.

Don't get this the wrong way, but I think Catholics does not seem to realize the impact of Jesus death on the cross. If you see inside the Catholic church, they still have Jesus on the cross. Jesus Christ purged our sins on the cross.

I know why Catholics defended purgatory. Its because the extra book again, Maccabees. There is no mention of spending time in purgatory yeeck. If you insist, then maybe Catholics can spend time there and report back if its really what it is. hmm.gif

You know why the early church invented purgatory. To scare those poor souls out of their hard-earned monies.

Oh RC added the extra books at the Council of Trent to counter the accusations on Purgatory. How convenience.

Do you know what is Pontifix Maximus? It mean Greatest Pontiff. Or Great Priest. Only Roman Emperors during those pagan times have this title. Why do you think Constantine hijack the church of Rome?

Chicken and duck yeeck. lol.
tinarhian
post Mar 12 2018, 08:56 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
726 posts

Joined: Sep 2014
QUOTE(sylar111 @ Mar 12 2018, 12:48 PM)
I know debating with yeeck will not change his traditional heart.

No more Denlinger!!! Love is love, it does not matter about race. Just don't marry Catholics. kidding yo.. laugh.gif
tinarhian
post Mar 12 2018, 08:58 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
726 posts

Joined: Sep 2014
QUOTE(sylar111 @ Mar 12 2018, 05:50 PM)
That is why I told you not to debate with him. It's futile. He will purposely twist what you say,  change definitions,  etc. There will never be a clear "winner". Someone who is really looking for the truth will not pin point that you said that you actually imply that the bible says that it's imperative that everyone should marry. No one is saying that priests cannot be 'celibate ' if they choose so.  Arguing with him is like arguing with an atheist.  They will forever change their goalpost and then go back to their original point again. Making you go circles and circles so why bother?
*
Its not about winning. Its about learning the truth of Jesus, spreading the gospel, etc..
tinarhian
post Mar 12 2018, 09:00 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
726 posts

Joined: Sep 2014
TS should renamed this thread. LYN Christian Fellowship (TRIGGERED EDITION). lol..
SUSsylar111
post Mar 12 2018, 09:06 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,547 posts

Joined: Jun 2008
From: KL
QUOTE(tinarhian @ Mar 12 2018, 08:58 PM)
Its not about winning. Its about learning the truth of Jesus, spreading the gospel, etc..
*
Problem is will he learn?
Lifewhysohard
post Mar 12 2018, 09:08 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Mar 2018
Hi how to become a genuine person and not fake. How to become a good person and not bad. My heart is struggling to become genuine/good person 30% and fake/bad person 70%.

This post has been edited by Lifewhysohard: Mar 12 2018, 09:53 PM
« Next Oldest · Serious Kopitiam · Next Newest »
 

102 Pages « < 82 83 84 85 86 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0474sec    0.15    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 16th December 2025 - 03:48 AM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.