Thanks that means your institution has no credibility.Once again----purposely misrepresenting my posts.
Heretics have no credibility.
Thanks that means your institution has no credibility.Once again----purposely misrepresenting my posts.
Heretics have no credibility.
So, Pope Francis sees nothing wrong with blessing unrepentant, practising sodomite couples (or lesbian couples). Since when has "extending an olive branch" been the holy, loving response to unrepentant sinners, who are practising abominable wickedness?We don't claim an authoritative Church takes away dissent. The claim is that it takes away justification for dissent--which means those who dissent have no credibility. In Protestantism, there is no such mechanism.
The disunity does not exist in this case becasue the pope is teaching the Faith, but precisely becasue his teachings are causing mass confusion about the Faith and allowing heresy and dissent to flourish. In other words--the pope is negligent. Where have we seen this in history before? With Pope Honorius. Francis, is, in effect, a modern day Honorius.
Those who believe the Faith have been highly critical of Francis's disastrous Declaration, going so far as to refuse to implement it. Rightly so.
Pope Francis in the Declaration does not see himself as changing Church teaching on homosexuality or gay unions. He sees himself as extending an olive branch to those in gay unions wanting them to feel welcome in the Church. ...
Yes, he does. The blessing is for the individuals, not the couple. That said--I agree that such an explanation is splitting hairs. At best the distinction is theoretical. Whatever the pope's intentions the fact is that gay people see it as a blessing for their relationship.So, Pope Francis sees nothing wrong with blessing unrepentant, practicing sodomite couples (or lesbian couples).
Here is the thing: whether you "Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the most biblical of all" types like it or not, when you say "Homosexuality is an abomination to God" what the person hears is "I am an abomination to God. God hates me."Since when has "extending an olive branch" been the holy, loving response to unrepentant sinners, who are practicing abominable wickedness?
Yep----that would make me want to repent!The correct response is to show them their sin, tell them about God's command to repent, warn them about God's judgment and hell if they don't repent, then tell them that there is forgiveness and wholeness, through faith in Jesus Christ, because he shed his blood and died on the cross, as the propitiation for sinners, then rose from the dead.
Or an apologist who doesn't want to waste time with hearts that are closed.10 words, no substance. You said those who dissent have no credibility. So if one "dissents" because he thinks something is incorrect, your answer is to just say "heretic" and call it a day.
Lazy apologetics, at best.
That is just an excuse for failure to answer questions or respond to a post. Hearts who see the flaws in your posts are not closed to God, but closed to your poor response. You keep blaming others for your inabilities to supply a valid response.Or an apologist who doesn't want to waste time with hearts that are closed.
Or an apologist who doesn't want to waste time with hearts that are closed.
The way to reach people is to obey what the Lord says - preach the gospel, not bless people in their wickedness.Yes, he does. The blessing is for the individuals, not the couple. That said--I agree that such an explanation is splitting hairs. At best the distinction is theoretical. Whatever the pope's intentions the fact is that gay people see it as a blessing for their relationship.
Here is the thing: whether you "Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the most biblical of all" types like it or not, when you say "Homosexuality is an abomination to God" what the person hears is "I am an abomination to God. God hates me."
So the question is--what are you people interested in? Are you interested in converting minds and hearts to Christ, or are you just interested in being right? If all you want to be is right---keep on with your "Homosexuality is an abomination to God. The Bible says convert or go to Hell." Other Bible Christians can give you likes and you can congratulate each other on being the greatest Bible Christians ever.
I agree that Pope Francis's Declaration may not be the most prudent thing to do. That said, at least I give the pope credit for trying to find ways to reach gay people in gay relationships. Before someone is convinced that they need to repent, they first have to understand that God loves them. If they think God hates them, how does that make them want to convert? If I thought God hated me, why would I want anything to do with Him?
Yep----that would make me want to repent!
Converting minds and hearts to GOD does NOT include affirming their sins by saying that it is OK to continue committing those sins. Sometimes, the best way is direct and to the point, which obviously PO's you and other rc's off to no end. Telling sinners that GOD loves them without telling them the truth of their sins affirms their sins.Yes, he does. The blessing is for the individuals, not the couple. That said--I agree that such an explanation is splitting hairs. At best the distinction is theoretical. Whatever the pope's intentions the fact is that gay people see it as a blessing for their relationship.
Here is the thing: whether you "Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the most biblical of all" types like it or not, when you say "Homosexuality is an abomination to God" what the person hears is "I am an abomination to God. God hates me."
So the question is--what are you people interested in? Are you interested in converting minds and hearts to Christ, or are you just interested in being right? If all you want to be is right---keep on with your "Homosexuality is an abomination to God. The Bible says convert or go to Hell." Other Bible Christians can give you likes and you can congratulate each other on being the greatest Bible Christians ever.
I agree that Pope Francis's Declaration may not be the most prudent thing to do. That said, at least I give the pope credit for trying to find ways to reach gay people in gay relationships. Before someone is convinced that they need to repent, they first have to understand that God loves them. If they think God hates them, how does that make them want to convert? If I thought God hated me, why would I want anything to do with Him?
Yep----that would make me want to repent!
What did Jesus tell the woman "caught" in adultery? GO AND SIN NO MORE.Jesus never said come here I will bless you even though you are sinning. He told them the truth.
Where in my post did I say that we should affirm sin? Did I say that?Converting minds and hearts to GOD does NOT include affirming their sins by saying that it is OK to continue committing those sins.
As I said, sir, if you think Bible thumping is effective, then have at it. You evangelize in your way, I will do so in my way.Sometimes, the best way is direct and to the point, which obviously PO's you and other rc's off to no end. Telling sinners that GOD loves them without telling them the truth of their sins affirms their sins.
Fine. I don't think Bible thumping is an effective way to do this. That was my point.The way to reach people is to obey what the Lord says - preach the gospel, not bless people in their wickedness.
Here is the "Actually....." part of your post, where you attack an irrelevant detail that was technically incorrect, but does not affect the point of the post.By the way, we are not supposed to be trying to make people want to repent, that's God's job. We are supposed to be telling them their condition (guilty sinners, under condemnation) and the way out of that condition (the gospel).
Or an apologist who doesn't want to waste time with hearts that are closed.
I don't need to be able to read your heart. I just need to be able to read your posts.Nice to know that you are able to read men's hearts.
Oh? You mean to tell me that if I cite the Scriptures that Catholics believe reflect their teaching---you will give up Protestantism and become Catholic? You won't immediately give me 1001 reasons, dances, excuses, and rationalizations for why the Scriptures I cite do not actually teach Catholic doctrine, but in some way, somehow, affirm Protestantism? You won't do that?I am open to truth. You might consider that you are either not promoting truth, or that you you are doing a really bad job of it.
So I am Catholicism thumping, am I? Am I telling you that if you do not give up the lie of Protestantism and all your unbiblical doctrines, you will burn in Hell? I am telling you that, and then claiming that I am saying this, not becasue I hate you, but because I love you? That is what you see me doing?I see you criticizing someone for "biblethumping". You are catholicism thumping.
Again, please show me the post where I have told Protestant posters they are going to Hell if they do not give up the unbiblical doctrines they believe in, repent, and accept the one true Church.You don't see that you are doing exactly what you complain of. I'd rather lean on God's word than on something that is speculated to be God's word.
I don't need to be able to read your heart. I just need to be able to read your posts.
Oh? You mean to tell me that if I cite the Scriptures that Catholics believe reflect their teaching---you will give up Protestantism and become Catholic? You won't immediately give me 1001 reasons, dances, excuses, and rationalizations for why the Scriptures I cite do not actually teach Catholic doctrine, but in some way, somehow, affirm Protestantism? You won't do that?
So I am Catholicism thumping, am I? Am I telling you that if you do not give up the lie of Protestantism and all your unbiblical doctrines, you will burn in Hell? I am telling you that, and then claiming that I am saying this, not becasue I hate you, but because I love you? That is what you see me doing?
I do not claim, despite our disagreements that in the end, I see you as a fellow believer?
Again, please show me the post where I have told Protestant posters they are going to Hell if they do not give up the unbiblical doctrines they believe in, repent, and accept the one true Church.
You obviously are very passionate about your beliefs RPO. I commend you for your faithfulness and institutional knowledge. (I learn from you all the time).Or an apologist who doesn't want to waste time with hearts that are closed.
Where did I ever endorse this behavior? I know that it is counter productive. I do not agree with street preachers standing acroos the strees fromrc churches and yelling through a bullhorn at them.Consider: it is like the people who show up at abortion clinics dressed up as death or satan, and then shout at the women going in "You are a baby killer! You are going to Hell! God will get you!" Is that going to make a woman want to choose life? Is that going to convert anyone? NO. Heck, I am pro-life----and that stuff makes me--and I am a man---want to go have an abortion! That kind of stuff-----is counterproductive.
They forget what RC protestors do.Where did I ever endorse this behavior? I know that it is counter productive. I do not agree with street preachers standing acroos the strees fromrc churches and yelling through a bullhorn at them.
Bible thumping is an insulting term, often used to give rebels an excuse not to obey God's commands. They often pretend not to want to do biblical evangelism, out of "love" (of course, it isn't really love at all, since love obeys the Lord).Fine. I don't think Bible thumping is an effective way to do this. That was my point.
But you evangelize in your way, I will do so in my way. If you want to Biblethump, then Biblethump.
...
Well stated. I mean in my day the nuns were big on hell, possession by the devil, scaring kids.Bible thumping is an insulting term, often used to give rebels an excuse not to obey God's commands. They often pretend not to want to do biblical evangelism, out of "love" (of course, it isn't really love at all), since love obeys the Lord.
To evangelise is to preach the "evangel" (the good news that the Lord Jesus Christ shed his blood and died on the cross, then rose from the dead, accomplishing a complete, once and for all victory over sin, death and the devil). We also need to tell the lost that they are guilty sinners (the law is an excellent tool for this), so that they realise the need for the gospel; that God now commands all men everywhere to repent; and that there is salvation from sin, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
If anyone thinks that this is "Bible thumping", then whatever he does instead, is not evangelism.
My sister briefly went to a convent school, where the nuns were keen on hitting, demeaning and throwing things at the pupils. My parents quickly removed her from there.Well stated. I mean in my day the nuns were big on hell, possession by the devil, scaring kids.