Dear Isalcordo, Welcome to the Biblical Apologetics Group! You asked:Message 1 of 96 , Sep 10, 2009View SourceDear Isalcordo,
Welcome to the Biblical Apologetics Group!
<< May the group help enlighten me as to whether there is any difference between "make disciples OF all nations" and "make disciples IN all nations?"
Not really. A more woodenly literal translation that represents the grammar of the words more directly would be something like "disciple all the nations" or "make all the nations disciples." The word "nations" (_ethne_) refers not to the political entities but to the peoples of all nationalities or ethnicities; it is in other contexts often translated "Gentiles" when used in contrast to the Jews (though that is not the case in Matthew 28:19). Jesus is not saying that every individual in all the nations will actually become disciples but that the church's mission is discipling people of or in all nations. We are to call all people to follow Jesus.
In Christ's service,
Bill, Religion is not science. Nobody could have corrected the Bishop of Rome. The most one can do really is to propose or argue a different opinion onMessage 96 of 96 , Oct 26, 2009View SourceBill,
Religion is not science. Nobody could have "corrected" the Bishop of Rome. The most one can do really is to propose or argue a different "opinion" on certain subject, like the canonicity of certain writings from that expressed by the Pope, or on the Pope's stand on certain "unsettled" church issues. Of course, one can expose abuses by Popes, as did Luther on the sellling of iidulgences. But that did not happen in the first 1000 years of the Catholic Church.
In the Service of the Lay People of God.
--- In email@example.com, "William" <eliadefollower@...> wrote:
> I wrote very little in the post about the bishop in Rome being corrected. Most of it was cut and paste from my cited sourde.
> Likewise you use of the Catholic Encyclopedia and Eusebius to defend your position is roughly comparable to asking the fox if he raided the chicken coop. Those which have reason to defend the position of Rome will find ways to defend it rather then admit wrongdoing. Please find non-Catholic defenses of this incident. Also remember, there is evidence that Eusebius intentionally corrupted sources to accomodate his patron, Constantine, even as he sought, as a historian, to present the truth. Eusebius is one of the sources I refer to in support of the fact that Acts in not historical, but rather denies history when inconvenient.