10 Jun 05
Originally posted by frogstompFrogstomp: "btw what archeology has done is traced the bible god into it's polytheistic roots"
in a different thread you asked is Thomas in the bible.
do you know why his gospel isn't ?
and what it said?
would you like to read it?
"... once thought to have been entirely destroyed during the early Christian struggle to define "orthodoxy"
btw what archeology has done is traced the bible god into it's polytheistic roots
Now that would make another great subject for a new thread. Why don't you go for it. You make people curious ...... and leave it at that.
10 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerThat's hilarious. Who in this thread first mentioned the thief on the cross? You asked what good works he had done, we gave you several of the Acts of Mercy, you made a disparaging comment about St. Thomas Acquinas, we asked you which of the acts of mercy which St. Thomas Acquinas mentioned would Jesus not say was a "good work". Any of this ring a bell? So YOU'RE the one who brought up the topic. Now answer the questions or concede that the thief had done good works if the Luke version is to be believed.
I will continue to ignore questions which are totally off the topic. I will gladly answer them if you open a new thread. You always seem to be going off the topic whenever you are in a corner.
[b]Which one of the acts of mercy do you believe Jesus wouldn't have counted, dj2becker?
I find this question totally irrelevant. Are we not discussion scripture here?[/b]
10 Jun 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeyou mean like this
Frogstomp: "btw what archeology has done is traced the bible god into it's polytheistic roots"
Now that would make another great subject for a new thread. Why don't you go for it. You make people curious ...... and leave it at that.
Excerpts from the Story of Aqhat
BAAL speaking - "So, my father, EL the bull, won't you bless him? Creator of all, won't you show him your favor?"
Excerpts from the Story of Kirta
"For in his dream EL came down, in his vision the Father of Men. Later EL says - raise your hands to heaven, sacrifice to the bull, your father EL; serve BAAL with your sacrifice, the son of DAGON with your provisions." Ugarit tablets
Genesis 33:20: There he erected an alter and called it EL-Elohe-Israel.
Sumer Accad Babylon Ebla Ugarit Susa ?? where should I start?
btw the begining of knowlege is curiousity
10 Jun 05
Originally posted by frogstomp
you mean like this
Excerpts from the Story of Aqhat
BAAL speaking - "So, my father, EL the bull, won't you bless him? Creator of all, won't you show him your favor?"
Excerpts from the Story of Kirta
"For in his dream EL came down, in his vision the Father of Men. Later EL says - raise your hands to heaven, sacrifice to the bull, your father ...[text shortened]... Ugarit Susa ?? where should I start?
btw the begining of knowlege is curiousity
Aren't you able to sort these problems out for yourself.
C'mon, enlighten us.
10 Jun 05
2 edits
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/romans/romans7.htm
"4 In the same way, my brothers, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to the one who was raised from the dead in order that we might bear fruit for God."
13
4*) Did the good, then, become death for me? Of course not! Sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin, worked death in me through the good, so that sin might become sinful beyond measure through the commandment.
14
We know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold into slavery to sin.
4*) [13-25] Far from improving the sinner, law encourages sin to expose itself in transgressions or violations of specific commandments (see Romans 1:24; 5:20). Thus persons who do not experience the justifying grace of God, and Christians who revert to dependence on law as the criterion for their relationship with God, will recognize a rift between their reasoned desire for the goodness of the law and their actual performance that is contrary to the law. Unable to free themselves from the slavery of sin and the power of death, they can only be rescued from defeat in the conflict by the power of God's grace working through Jesus Christ.
I advise No1 to read this post very carefully in the context of the Faith versus/and Works debate .....
EDIT: The others should read it too ...... 😉
11 Jun 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeoutside of the fact Paul is mostly talking about himself. can you explain how that would alter the words in matt. 25 on who is sheep and who is goats.
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/romans/romans7.htm
"4 In the same way, my brothers, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to the one who was raised from the dead in order that we might bear fruit for God."
13
4*) Did the good, then, become death for me? Of course not! Sin, in order t ...[text shortened]... to read this post very carefully in the context of the Faith versus/and Works debate .....
11 Jun 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeI read it, but I can't make heads or tails of it. Nobody coveted until there was a "law" against it? Paul doesn't write very clearly which is one of the many reasons I prefer the Gospels when trying to figure out Christianity.
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/romans/romans7.htm
"4 In the same way, my brothers, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to the one who was raised from the dead in order that we might bear fruit for God."
13
4*) Did the good, then, become death for me? Of course not! Sin, in order t ...[text shortened]... ext of the Faith versus/and Works debate .....
EDIT: The others should read it too ...... 😉
11 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1: " Paul doesn't write very clearly ..... "
I read it, but I can't make heads or tails of it. Nobody coveted until there was a "law" against it? Paul doesn't write very clearly which is one of the many reasons I prefer the Gospels when trying to figure out Christianity.
Is that just another way of saying "I don't understand one hoot of what he's talking about" ?
Looking at the views you present on the subjects Paul is writing about, that would be quite an acceptable answer.
11 Jun 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeno1 doesn't recognize Pauls supremency over Christ words anyway so your question is rather moot. isnt it.
No1: " Paul doesn't write very clearly ..... "
Is that just another way of saying "I don't understand one hoot of what he's talking about" ?
Looking at the views you present on the subjects Paul is writing about, that would be quite an acceptable answer.
11 Jun 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeAgain rather than discuss the points you resort to personal s**t; at least when I insult somebody, I actually mix in some discussion of the topic. I don't understand what Paul means; his words are unclear in Romans 7. He seemed to say that before there was a "law" against it, nobody coveted, which would be nonsense. The passage doesn't seem to be discussing faith and works at all; other Pauline passages directly address that issue. Why send me to a vague passage when there are clearer ones on point, Ivanhoe? I realize it's Catholic dogma that only the Church is a proper interpretater of Scripture, but I, of course, reject that and there would be no point in discussing Scriptural interpretation at all if the only answer is "'Cuz the Church says so."
No1: " Paul doesn't write very clearly ..... "
Is that just another way of saying "I don't understand one hoot of what he's talking about" ?
Looking at the views you present on the subjects Paul is writing about, that would be quite an acceptable answer.