11305Re: [Covenanted Reformation] The Pope is very Antichrist.
- Oct 2, 2004Barry:
Do you recommend a Bible translation and commentary that represents
the very best in scholarship that would command the respect of the
majority of thoughtful people in this holy catholic and apostolic
Riley: Sure. For a Bible translation I'd recommend the King James
Version. For a commentary I'd recommend Calvin's commentaries.
These have been most helpful to me.
--- In email@example.com, Barry Ferguson
> Dan:coherency, and I didn't call myself a flaming apologist for the
> But I didn't say absolute coherency, I said a certain
church of Rome. I was raised in a Protestant country in a
Protestant church in the sixties - so I have strong individualist,
Lutheran, Presbyterian, American, democratic, sympathies - and have
wrestled with and given vent to marked hedonistic and bohemian
tendencies all my life in a very zestful "pursuit of happiness." (:).
>bottom of things, and the little I knew that was dangerous grew into
> "Sin when its finished is death."
> It's hard to be unbiased and impartial in trying to get to the
a little more that I knew that was confusing.
>at the time I was fighting off a great deal of chaos and
> Maybe I threw my hands up in surrender to Rome too early, but
>day and the light at the end of my tunnel.
> I am still thinking and praying my way through to the light of
>the Catechism of the Catholic Church - it has helped me to understand
> Meanwhile, there is a great deal of clarity and coherency in
the creeds better and has fostered in me a certain calm in reflecting
on, and seeking to understand, the Catholic faith.
> I believe even Pat Robertson and Billy Grahm gave it positive
>the confessions and catechisms of the church I was raised in - and I
> I also have a copy of Luther's Small and Large Catechisms and
think these through to the best of my ability and have found much
that is helpful in all of this.
>represents the very best in scholarship that would command the
> Do you recommend a Bible translation and commentary that
respect of the majority of thoughtful people in this holy catholic
and apostolic Christian forum?
> Do you dare?
> Dan Fraas <fraasrd@y...> wrote:
> "Rome has at least going for it a certain coherency among its
> its clergy, its teaching office and its leader, and it has historicin
> cohesion, ..."
> It does? Haven't you seen the war going on between rival factions
> the Roman Catholic Church on theology, liturgy, charismatic gifts,coherent
> Mariology, and the very definition of catholicity? It's not
> at all.precedent
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Barry Ferguson
> <gogon789@y...> wrote:
> > gmw:
> > I understand and respect your views, they are clear and
> coherent, and they make sense, and can be reasonably held in
> principle and in good conscience, as you so ably do.
> > I disagree, however, that this is what Paul meant when he
> wrote this letter with regard to the man of sin.
> > I also believe that there is a very strong historic
> drawn by many fathers of the church that gives Peter a certainoffice
> and a charism in terms of leadership and primacy, and this wasconfession
> historically found in the chair of Rome. This can be scripturally
> justified, and the interpretation that applies to Peter's
> also applies to Peter's office.Reformation.
> > But this office was not meant in the autocratic way that it
> came to be understood in the middle ages, and that autocracy was
> judged by God, clearly, by way of the events that led up to the
> schism with the east and subsequently followed in the
> Apostolic authority is distributed throughout the episcopacy aswell
> as in the "sense of the faithful" and they all work upon eachother -
> and a leadership role for one bishop ensures just that -leadership,
> not lordship.rich
> > God's judgements are corrective, not punitive. History is
> not frozen back in the sixteenth century.
> > Continual splintering through the Protestant mode just
> creates more chaos and confusion and division, and God is not the
> author of confusion.
> > The people in this forum can't even agree on an authorized
> Biblical text. And if the Bible is our only source of authority,
> then what good does it do if we can't get an "authorized" version
> that is commonly agreed on among warring Protestant factions?
> > What is the standard Biblical text that is authoritative for all
> Protestants who believe that Scripture alone is the sole authority?
> > Can you tell me that without starting a huge controversy,
> either in this forum or elsewhere in the Protestant world?
> > Rome has at least going for it a certain coherency among its
> people, its clergy, its teaching office and its leader, and it has
> historic cohesion, despite the tragedy that created both major
> schisms. The Modern Catechism of the Catholic Church befits the
> teaching office of an ancient historic Christian Church. It is
> in patristic testimony and conveys sound interpretation accordingto
> what the church has believed consistently always and everywherebe
> throughout antiquity.
> > Am I a staunch and flaming apologist for the Roman Catholic
> Church? I am not. But the more I see arguments that will never
> resolved over Bibles that are apparentlly illigitimate the moregrew
> confused I become. I am not a scholar. I am a lay person. I
> up reading the Revised Standard Bible - that's what was given to merival.
> in ninth grade confirmation class. I did not know I was reading
> some sinister document subtly altered by God's hissing arch-
> I thought I was reading God's Word.the
> > The Protestant "priesthood" is composed of its so-called
> scholars, and they can't agree on anything.
> > Can they?
> > So who do we believe - and whose leadership do we follow?
> > Barry
> > gmw <raging.calvinist@v...> wrote:
> > --- In email@example.com, Barry Ferguson
> > <gogon789@y...> wrote:
> > > gmw:
> > > Your theory makes sense if the Bishop of Rome is not in
> > subjection to the Spirit and the Word of God in obedience to
> > Christ. If he is, however, and he is who he thinks he is, then
> > could be resisting God's leadership - or His Spirit - in your own
> > life.
> > >
> > 1. Tis not merely my theory, but the dying testimony of countless
> > martyrs, and the universal position of Protestants up until very
> > recently.
> > 2. My theory makes sense if the Bishop of Rome is not in
> > to the Spirit and the Word of God in obedience to Christ. But
> > Bishop of Rome is not in subjection to the Spirit and the Word ofhimself
> > in obedience to Christ. Therefore my theory makes sense. ;)
> > > Your scripture about the "man of sin" is misapplied to the
> > > Bishop of Rome,
> > No no, and again no. The man of sin that sits himself in the
> > and usurps the position and perogatives of Christ, is the Pope of
> > Rome.
> > > he opposed Peter to his face and in doing so he did not call
> > > the anti-Christ,
> > This is correct, obviously because Peter did not claim for
> > the title or position of Pope, neither was it given to him byService.
> > Christ. It would therefore be very silly to call
> Peter "Antichrist"
> > when Peter was not Antichrist. The term certainly does apply to
> > Pope of Rome, however.
> > gmw.
> > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>