Assumption

[neal4christ]

would you say that any person has the authority to bind you in any way today with regard to discipline?

I don't see binding as in creating new doctrines and forcing others to follow them. I see it as pronouncing decisions based on God's truth.

Okay, what you explained about days I already understood. Why should Christians give up Jewish feast days and then just have different feast days that are binding on them? That seems to greatly undermine Paul's teaching.

In Christ,
Neal

 

[Carson Weber]

I don't see binding as in creating new doctrines and forcing others to follow them.

I don't either. "Binding and loosing" means authority to make decisions with regard to matters of discipline in the Church, not to "make up new doctrines". Doctrines are unchangeable. The Feast of the Assumption is. It is a matter of discipline.

Why should Christians give up Jewish feast days and then just have different feast days that are binding on them?

First of all, if nothing can be binding on the Christian, then why did Jesus give his Apostles the authority to bind? That seems a little superfluous of our Saviour to do if it's a power that can't be exercised, don't you think?

There is a world of difference between the ceremonial precepts of the Mosaic Law and decisions of discipline in the New Covenant Church. The Mosaic Law was the National Consitution for the Israelite Nation. Because Jesus did away with the dividing line between Jews and Greeks, the Mosaic Law is no longer in effect. No longer is there a Nation called "God's People" from which the ethne, the gentiles are separated. Now, the two have become one in the New Covenant Household of God, and that doesn't mean that this new household isn't to be governed. It is governed by those who have the authority to bind and loose with regard to Church discipline - real, true binding authority that binds Christians: Jew and Gentile.

 

[Ray Berrian]

My mother-in-law and father-in-law who I love, went tonight to honor the person who you assume experienced the Assumption into Heaven. I know I wouldn't be shaking in my boots if I were Catholic and wilfully missed this mass. We love and honor Christ the one who made atonement for our sins. He is our only hope. Mary honors what the Son does on our behalf. There is no threat to real Christians, because we are saved by Jesus alone and through His infinite and everlasting grace. Only Jesus has power to exile us forever in Hell, and fortunately He has saved us forever. [John 3:16; I John 5:11 & 13] Romans chapter fourteen tells us what the Kingdom of God is all about. It is not necessarily showing up on man made holy days, although there is nothing wrong with honoring Christ at times of Christmas, Lent, Pentecost and so on. Protestants, if they are saved and know the Word of God will not allow men of clay to threaten them or steal their liberty in Christ; we only listen to the great Shepherd [John 10] and ' . . . the great Shepherd and Bishop of our souls.' [I Peter 2:25]

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
My mother-in-law and father-in-law who I love, went tonight to honor the person

The person?!?! Say it with me: M-A-R-Y!

who you assume

Who we are taught by the infallible pronouncement of the Church

experienced the Assumption into Heaven. I know I wouldn't be shaking in my boots if I were Catholic and wilfully missed this mass.

Why would you be a Catholic and wilfully miss this Mass?

 

[Carson Weber]

Hi Ray,

I have two questions for you.

1. It is possible that Mary's body was assumed into heaven?

2. If Jesus has disallowed Christians to be bound in matters of church discipline (e.g., what days to worship on together as a family), then why did he tell his Apostles that whatever they bound on earth would be bound in heaven? (Mt 18:18) Doesn't that sort of authority seem a little superfluous to you?

 

[Ray Berrian]

People who let the Word speak to them are taught that missing holy days does not ring up an automatic venial sin. Read Colossians 2:16 which says, 'Let no man {not even Carson Weber} judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or the *sabbath days, *{3angelsmom} which are {merely} a shadow of things to come.'

The New International Version says it well. 'Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religiou festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come, the reality, however, is found in Christ.'

Tradition! Tradition. Once again we need to be guided by Jesus Who has given us from His sacred lips, the written Word, the Bible.

 

[LaRae]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
People who let the Word speak to them are taught that missing holy days does not ring up an automatic venial sin. Read Colossians 2:16 which says, 'Let no man {not even Carson Weber} judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or the *sabbath days, *{3angelsmom} which are {merely} a shadow of things to come.'

The New International Version says it well. 'Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religiou festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come, the reality, however, is found in Christ.'

Tradition! Tradition. Once again we need to be guided by Jesus Who has given us from His sacred lips, the written Word, the Bible.

Jesus never promised a book, he never said "and I will leave my words to be recorded by the faithful" What he did was leave the Church in the hands of Peter.

Praytell where you find what you are claiming in the Bible.


LaRae

 

[Carson Weber]

Hi Ray, thanks for the response.. but you didn't answer my two questions directed to you. Thanks!

 

[Eladar]

Originally posted by MikeS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tuor:
One question about 'saints':

Since when did people get to judge who is going to heaven?

In certain instances the Church (not "people") is given the grace to know with certainty (not "judge") who has gone (not "is going") to heaven. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm sorry, but the 'Church' is made up of men.

Any time a person is declared a saint, it is a man or group of men who make this decision.

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by Tuor:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikeS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tuor:
One question about 'saints':

Since when did people get to judge who is going to heaven?

In certain instances the Church (not "people") is given the grace to know with certainty (not "judge") who has gone (not "is going") to heaven. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm sorry, but the 'Church' is made up of men.</font>[/QUOTE]You mean, in the same way that the Bible was written by men?

Any time a person is declared a saint, it is a man or group of men who make this decision.

With the inerrant guidance of the Holy Spirit. Is that COOL or what?!

 

[Eladar]

You mean, in the same way that the Bible was written by men?

I am aware of the fact that the writers of the Bible were led by the Holy Spirit to write what they did. I was not aware of the fact that this same inspiration has always been a part of the Catholic church.

With the inerrant guidance of the Holy Spirit. Is that COOL or what?!

Is that the same inerrant guidance that led the RCC during the Middle Ages?

 

[Carson Weber]

I was not aware of the fact that this same inspiration has always been a part of the Catholic church.

Not in the same way.. God doesn't just use men through "inspiration"; he also guards his Church from officially teaching doctrinal and moral error and animates Apostolic Tradition in the organic, ongoing life of the Church. Jesus said to the eleven, "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age." (Mt 28:19-20)

"you" refers to the eleven, but how could Jesus be with the eleven until the close of the age? Of course, Jesus is speaking about the Church, with which he'll be with. But, how is this church composed? Is it just anyone.. or is it those who are taught and guided by the apostles? Remember, there was no New Testament then. All that Jesus had commanded these "men" was orally transmitted, and yet Jesus entrusted the salvation of the world to eleven "men" with whom Jesus said he would be with.

Is that the same inerrant guidance that led the RCC during the Middle Ages?

Yes, and the Ante-Nicean Ages, the Post-Nicean Ages, the Dark Ages, Modernity, and Post-Modernity.

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by Carson Weber:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I was not aware of the fact that this same inspiration has always been a part of the Catholic church.

Not in the same way.. God don't just use men through "inspiration"; he also guardes his Church from officially teaching doctrinal and moral error and animates Apostolic Tradition in the organic, ongoing life of the Church. Jesus said to the eleven, "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age." (Mt 28:19-20)

"you" refers to the eleven, but how could Jesus be with the eleven until the close of the age? Of course, Jesus is speaking about the Church, with which he'll be with. But, how is this church composed? Is it just anyone.. or is it those who are taught and guided by the apostles? Remember, there was no New Testament then. All that Jesus had commanded these "men" was orally transmitted, and yet Jesus entrusted the salvation of the world to eleven "men" with whom Jesus said he would be with.

Is that the same inerrant guidance that led the RCC during the Middle Ages?

Yes, and the Ante-Nicean Ages, the Post-Nicean Ages, the Dark Ages, Modernity, and Post-Modernity. </font>[/QUOTE]Like I said, folks: Is that COOL or what?!

 

[Kathryn]

MikeS:

Like I said, folks: Is that COOL or what?!

 

[Singer]

Are we witnessing here a Catholic Backpatting Party or WHAT ?

 

[Kathryn]

Singer:

Are we witnessing here a Catholic Backpatting Party or WHAT ?

What is cool is the Church Jesus established.

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by Singer:
Are we witnessing here a Catholic Backpatting Party or WHAT ?

The Joy of Christ is contagious, and sometimes we just can't contain ourselves! Holy Days and all, you know...

But, as always, everybody is welcome! It's not our Church, it's His Church!

 

[Eladar]

Originally posted by Kathryn:
Singer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Are we witnessing here a Catholic Backpatting Party or WHAT ?

What is cool is the Church Jesus established.

</font>[/QUOTE]Jesus or Satan at this point either is possible. We'll find out when we die.

 

[Ray Berrian]

La Rae,

If God's Word the Bible is not authoritative in matters of our faith and practice, then why did Pope John Paul tell his clientele to read it for guidance, strength, and inspiration? Secondly, if God did not leave us His Word for guidance then why do we have God speaking through the Apostle Paul to Timothy and the church at Philippi saying, that Paul, was set for ' . . . the defence and confirmation of the Gospel . . . . and that I am set for the defense of the Gospel?' [Philippians 1:7 & 17] Your statement above proves again to us that you value more what a finite but godly man says in the Vatican rather than what the King of kings has to say to the churches.

La Rae, you said that the church was left in the hands of the first pope, Peter. We both read of Peter's ministry to the Jewish people and of his defense of Jesus in the garden and we read his wonderful epistles. We also read the concluding words of the Book of John that Peter in chapter twelve verse eighteen, in the twilight days of his life, is being attended by another caring disciple perhaps concluding his itinerant ministry as a faithful preacher. This leaves little wiggle-room for his being in Rome as the first pope of the Roman Catholic Church. Rest assured, if the church had elevated him to this status, his coronation day would have been at least footnoted in the Bible, God's Word. And the rest of the verse hints at the tradition that he was martyred as an Apostle of the Christian Church. As you and I probably believe, as tradition suggests, that he wanted to die on the cross inverted because he was not worthy to die the way his Savior died.

 

[KenH]

Wow! After reading through this thread I now have a better understanding of why, when the Roman Catholic Church was at the zenith of it's power - politically and religiously, that period of time is called the Dark Ages.

I thank God that He gave us a man like Martin Luther to begin to break the chains of Roman Catholicism from the awful strangle hold it had on the general population. By the way, a new movie about Martin Luther and his courageous stand for God's truth in opposing Roman Catholic error is coming out on September 26. The trailer for it is great - www.lutherthemovie.com.