Halloween Street Preaching

[justbyfaith]

BTW...even the reformers don't agree with you soooo there is that!!!

I think that the reformers are in agreement with the literal interpretation of Matthew 13:55-56.

 

[Giuliano]

You're not listening to Jesus. We are commanded to go out and preach the Word upon the housetops.

Matthew 10
[11] And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, inquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
[12] And when ye come into an house, salute it.
[13] And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
[14] And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
[15] Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
[16] Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
[17] But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
[18] And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

What are you doing on the internet preaching to us? Shouldn't you be going to other towns, finding worthy people to live with and operate from their houses?

 

[Willie T]

There is a lot of difference between being persecuted for your beliefs...…. and irritating people because you are being an obnoxious loud mouth.

 

[justbyfaith]

There is a lot of difference between being persecuted for your beliefs...…. and irritating people because you are being an obnoxious loud mouth.

And that is the excuse that some people have for persecuting believers for being outspoken about their faith.

 

[Willie T]

And that is the excuse that some people have for persecuting believers for being outspoken about their faith.

Jesus attracted crowds to Himself wherever He went and began calmly speaking. He didn't stand on a street corner, yelling threats at passers by. They wanted to hear Him. It was the authorities who gave Him problems because the crowds were eager to listen to Him instead of the church government's propaganda.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus attracted crowds to Himself wherever He went and began speaking. He didn't stand on a street corner, yelling threats at passers by.

You seem to think that this is what these people were doing. They weren't. They were attempting to preach the word of God.

Fact is, the sword of the Spirit pricked these people (that they were preaching to) in their hearts. I believe that they will be saved in the long run.

 

[Marymog]

Maybe I will become the Pope some day...

The pope is not infallible in his interpretation of Scripture. The Pope is the visible head of the Catholic Church. If that is your goal then I wish you well.

The magisterium of the Church (made up of many bishops) is the church's authority that gives authentic interpretation of the Word of God, "whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition". You are your own magisterium in your own church.

 

[Marymog]

I think that the reformers are in agreement with the literal interpretation of Matthew 13:55-56.

Well....what you think and what is actually true are two different things!

Here is what John Calvin wrote: "By the brethren of the Lord, he means John and James, who were accounted pillars, as he states elsewhere. (Galatians 2:9.) And, agreeably to what is customary in Scripture, he gives the name of brethren to those who were connected with Him by relationship. The word brothers, we have formerly mentioned, is employed, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, to denote any relatives whatever; and, accordingly, Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s brothers are sometimes mentioned. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation."

Martin Luther wrote: A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph and had more children after that"When Matthew says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom." "Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. […] Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers." (Sermons on John)

Huldrych Zwingli wrote: "I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424) "....taught by the light of faith the Christ was born of a virgin, we know that it is so, that we have no doubt that those who have been unambiguously in error have tried to make a figure of speech of a real virgin, and we pronounce absurd the things that Helvidius and others have invented about perpetual virginity.

John Wesley wrote: "I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."

 

[Willie T]

You seem to think that this is what these people were doing. They weren't. They were attempting to preach the word of God.

Fact is, the sword of the Spirit pricked these people (that they were preaching to) in their hearts. I believe that they will be saved in the long run.

You have to be kidding! In just the first 22 seconds of that video that turkey is threatening people that he knows nothing about, total strangers just walking past, that they are sending their children to Hell because they take them out Trick-Or-Treating. (Go listen to it.)

 

[justbyfaith]

You have to be kidding! In just the first 22 seconds of that video that turkey is threatening people that he knows nothing about, total strangers just walking past, that they are sending their children to Hell because they take them out Trick-Or-Treating. (Go listen to it.)

Does he say specifically, "you are going to hell"? Or does he simply quote scripture that tells them that that is where they are going?

I think that we ought to recognize the difference.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well....what you think and what is actually true are two different things!

Here is what John Calvin wrote: "By the brethren of the Lord, he means John and James, who were accounted pillars, as he states elsewhere. (Galatians 2:9.) And, agreeably to what is customary in Scripture, he gives the name of brethren to those who were connected with Him by relationship. The word brothers, we have formerly mentioned, is employed, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, to denote any relatives whatever; and, accordingly, Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s brothers are sometimes mentioned. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation."

Martin Luther wrote: A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph and had more children after that"When Matthew says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom." "Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. […] Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers." (Sermons on John)

Huldrych Zwingli wrote: "I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424) "....taught by the light of faith the Christ was born of a virgin, we know that it is so, that we have no doubt that those who have been unambiguously in error have tried to make a figure of speech of a real virgin, and we pronounce absurd the things that Helvidius and others have invented about perpetual virginity.

John Wesley wrote: "I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."

These great men of god were fallible; and very likely caved to pressure coming from the Catholic Church. It had more power then than it has now.

The pope is not infallible in his interpretation of Scripture. The Pope is the visible head of the Catholic Church. If that is your goal then I wish you well.

It is certainly not my goal. Who wants to become the Antichrist; and responsible for the spiritual deaths of billions?

 

[Marymog]

These great men of god were fallible; and veery likely caved to pressure coming from the Catholic Church. It had more power then than it has now.

Oh goodness....You stated that you "think that the reformers are in agreement with the literal interpretation of Matthew 13:55-56." and you were wrong. It is very, very sad that you can't even admit it.

How can you say they "caved to pressure coming from the Catholic Church" when they fought the Church on many other interpretations of Scripture and what one had to do to be save? They didn't cave on those doctrines but they caved on this one?????

Your theory makes ZERO sense.

You can't even get very basic Christian history right and yet you think that you got Scripture interpretation right????

 

[Marymog]

It is certainly not my goal. Who wants to become the Antichrist; and responsible for the spiritual deaths of billions?

If it's not your goal then why did you say "Maybe I will become the Pope some day..."?????

Since you are infallible I guess you KNOW that what you preach to other people will not lead to their spiritual death.....

 

[justbyfaith]

Oh goodness....You stated that you "think that the reformers are in agreement with the literal interpretation of Matthew 13:55-56." and you were wrong. It is very, very sad that you can't even admit it.

Who says I can't admit it? you didn't even give me a chance to do so; and as a matter of fact, I did admit it when I acknowledged that your quotes were accurate.

How can you say they "caved to pressure coming from the Catholic Church" when they fought the Church on many other interpretations of Scripture and what one had to do to be save? They didn't cave on those doctrines but they caved on this one?????

Your theory makes ZERO sense.

It was just a theory. Perhaps there is some other reason why they departed from what the scripture clearly teaches on the matter.

You can't even get very basic Christian history right and yet you think that you got Scripture interpretation right????

The focus of my study is not Christian history; but it is the interpretation of the holy scriptures.

If it's not your goal then why did you say "Maybe I will become the Pope some day..."?????

It was kind of in mockery to your sarcastic statement that you think that I think that I am infallible. That I am somehow arrogant to believe that I have the Holy Spirit and therefore a capable person when it comes to understanding scripture. I figure, if I become the Pope, at the very least you won't dispute that any more...

Since you are infallible I guess you KNOW that what you preach to other people will not lead to their spiritual death.....

In my infallibility I know most assuredly that a mark on the forehead or hand, by which people will be incapable of buying or selling, will be to their utter condemnation; and that this will be implemented by the Antichrist in the last days. Ash Wednesday is reminiscent of this; and personally I do not want to take any chances that if I were to step into any position of popery, I might bring eternal condemnation to myself and a great multitude of other people.

Maybe President; but certainly not Pope. As a Protestant believer that idea is utterly detestable to me.

 

[Marymog]

Who says I can't admit it? you didn't even give me a chance to do so; and as a matter of fact, I did admit it when I acknowledged that your quotes were accurate.

Where did you admit that my quotes were accurate?

I can't find it....

 

[Marymog]

It was just a theory. Perhaps there is some other reason why they departed from what the scripture clearly teaches on the matter.

If it's so clear then why do so many learned men disagree on what Scripture clearly teaches?

If the reformers got this clear teaching in Scripture wrong what else did they get wrong and how do we know what they got wrong? Who decides?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

The focus of my study is not Christian history; but it is the interpretation of the holy scriptures.

That's a bold endeavor since it was first written in 3(?) different languages.

If your interpretation is different then the Apostolic Fathers interpretation....who should I believe?

Curious Mary

 

[justbyfaith]

Where did you admit that my quotes were accurate?

I can't find it....

Well....what you think and what is actually true are two different things!

Here is what John Calvin wrote: "By the brethren of the Lord, he means John and James, who were accounted pillars, as he states elsewhere. (Galatians 2:9.) And, agreeably to what is customary in Scripture, he gives the name of brethren to those who were connected with Him by relationship. The word brothers, we have formerly mentioned, is employed, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, to denote any relatives whatever; and, accordingly, Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s brothers are sometimes mentioned. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation."

Martin Luther wrote: A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph and had more children after that"When Matthew says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her . . . This babble . . . is without justification . . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom." "Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. […] Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers." (Sermons on John)

Huldrych Zwingli wrote: "I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424) "....taught by the light of faith the Christ was born of a virgin, we know that it is so, that we have no doubt that those who have been unambiguously in error have tried to make a figure of speech of a real virgin, and we pronounce absurd the things that Helvidius and others have invented about perpetual virginity.

John Wesley wrote: "I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."

These great men of God were fallible; and very likely caved to pressure coming from the Catholic Church.

My reply indicates that I was not contesting that the quotes were inaccurate or that these men of God didn't really say what you say they said.

 

[justbyfaith]

If it's so clear then why do so many learned men disagree on what Scripture clearly teaches?

All I know is that it is clear to me. I suggest you read the passage (Matthew 13:55-56) for yourself and make up your own mind. Your interpretation my be colored by your bias; which is colored by the interpretation given by the Catholic Church and your belief that the Catholic interpretation takes precedence over basic hermeneutics when we read our Bibles.

If the reformers got this clear teaching in Scripture wrong what else did they get wrong and how do we know what they got wrong? Who decides?

I believe that your answer would be...the church...to which I would reply that the church consists of all those who believe in Christ and what He did for them on the Cross.

So...who decides...we do...God has exhorted us to study to shew ourselves approved unto God, workmen that do not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

If your interpretation is different then the Apostolic Fathers interpretation....who should I believe?

I think that you should read your Bible for yourself and not go by any human being's interpretation but what the Holy Spirit shows you in His word. You should believe the interpretation that comes closest to being exegesis (getting your interpretation out of the text) rather than eisegesis (reading one' s own interpretation into the text; or the interpretation of some revered Bible teacher).

 

[07-07-07]

You have to be kidding! In just the first 22 seconds of that video that turkey is threatening people that he knows nothing about, total strangers just walking past, that they are sending their children to Hell because they take them out Trick-Or-Treating. (Go listen to it.)

You must be of the world because you talk like the world -- and the world loves their own. The world hates Jesus, just as He said, and those who follow Him will be hated too. Fake christians and the lukewarm alike do not understand this.