A Christian is a person who believes and follows Christ by being baptized (either by water, blood or desire) in the one Christian Faith.

I am Christian because God has given me the grace to perceive the truth of Christianity and to follow it according to His prescriptions.

In the same way and with much of the same prayers as we did 3000 years ago.

We have been through this.

I reminded you that twice before have the people of Israel practiced their religion without the Temple.

I told you that the priesthood still exists and they are doing well.

You just ignore these facts. But that's hardly an argument against the validity of the Jewish faith.

It doesn't.

Buildings don't matter.

Whether or not a priesthood exists doesn't matter.

The only things that matter are G-d and the people of Israel.

KFC POSTS:

I'm interested in this answer as well.

Lula, I'll just leave this ...you are adding to scripture. I've already warned you. You know what the scripture says about adding to the scriptures right?

I'll say again, there is NO such thing as a Jerusalem Catholic Council. While you're in Acts 15...take a good look at v16 and notice the wording..."after this."



[/quote]

KFC,

Regarding the highlighted.....You have no ground to stand on.

So, take your own admonition and apply it to yourself and the Protestant translated Bibles you hold so dear....

From the Douay Rheims version.....St.Matthew 6: 9-13,

9 Thus therefore shall you pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.

10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.
12 And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

Yet the King James Version has the same passages as

 ⁹After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

 ¹⁰Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

 ¹¹Give us this day our daily bread.

 ¹²And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

 ¹³And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Can you explain the extra added words in verse 13?

Your wrods Back to you....look who's adding to Scripture...and you know what Scripture says about adding to the Scriptures, right?

So I ask you about the Jerusalem "Catholic" Council and you come back with this?  So when you have nothing to back up your statements you switch gears instead of following thru? 

I've shown you over and over that you are adding to scriptures.   Actually it's funny you brought this up.  Last week in Bible Study (all former Catholics) the ladies were discussing how the RCC took out the last part of the Our Father.  I'm not sure I'd ever heard of that although it did seem vaguely familiar to me.  Maybe being the transition way back when I was a kid leaving the RCC for the Protestant faith. 

Do you have a Greek NT?  I do.  And guess what?  It's in the Greek.  When in doubt...go to the Greek.  In the Greek (translated into English) it reads exactly like this:

"and not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil; because of You is the kingdom and the power and the glory to the ages.  Amen. "

A caveat tho.  This is usually bracketed in our modern translations meaning while it's found in some of the Greek manuscripts it's not found in some of the most reliable ones.  In many modern translations they are usually put in footnotes or in some bibles like the NASB in brackets.  So even tho some are not sure if it was in the original account the words are perfectly fitting the passage and express truths that are thoroughly scriptural.  They are an echo of 1 Chron 29:11. 

There's a few instances where words have been included but were found out later were considered "scribal gloss."  One I'm thinking of is in John 5 when the lame man was waiting by the pool and it said that "angels stirred the water."  That's not in the best manuscripts either and is usually noted in footnotes, taken out altogether or put in italics (like my KJV). 

So many of my commentaries say basically while this is a very profound and biblical statement it is suspicious because some of the best manuscripts don't have it.  So it's not adding to scripture but being unsure they put it in with an explanation not wanting to take it out because it is found in some of the ancient Greek manuscripts.   If it was an unbiblical statement it never would have survived the scrunity already given it. 

As to the discussion of Gentiles.  Paul made a distinction and it was very clear.  There are now three divisions of people.  Jews, Gentiles and the Church.  You'll find this in 2 Corinthians 10.  The Jewish nation never ceased being the Jewish nation in God's eyes.  The Church did not replace the Jews or the Nation and Paul was making this clear by putting down these three divisions. 

Re: the highlighted.....Ah, no., no, no.   Christ is not about divisions. Period. And God is not a respector of individuals or of nations, including the modern state of Isreal....Now is the time....Everyone, all nations, includinjg the Jews are to come to the one Faith of Christ.

Read Galatians...the blessings promised to Abraham and his seed comes not by the old Mosaic Law, but by faith ...v. 25 after Faith is come we are no longer under the pedagogue....v. 26...there are no divisions of people...for "you are all the children of God, by faith in Jesus Christ."

v. 27-29 make it plain there are no divisions of people....27 For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew, nor Greek,;There is neither bond nor free; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Jesus Christ. 29 And ifyou be in Christ's, then you are the seed of Abraham, heirs accordinhg ot the promise."

It doesn't get any plainer than that...get back to the Gospel, KFC and away from fostering political and Messianic Zionism.

 It's not about a future physical temple in Isreal...it's about saving spiritual souls...all of them .....it's about bringing the Jews and all people to Christ...just as the Apostles did.  

KFC says:

Lula says: 

NO? 

my mistake...it's 1 Corinthians 10 not 2nd Corinthians

The bible says: 

"Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles nor to the church of God.  v32

I see three divisions of people here Lula.  This is clear.  The church is distinct from the Jews.  No replacement here. 

Jesus said himself "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth;  I came not to send peace but a sword." 

A sword divides.  The gospel mission involves tension, persecution, death even.  The gospel divides familes and people groups.  Unity can only be found in the spirit filled believers.  Spirit bound with spirit. 

AGAIN:  You can either believe the scriptures or believe what the RCC is interpreting for you.  Your choice. 

lula posts 100

This is my input concerning who the Gentiles were. Note, I said "were".

kfc posts 107

lula 109

I agree 100% with your first sentence....1Cor. 10 is the proof text. No problem. 1Cor. 10 also fully supports what I said about the Gentiles and Jews.

I said no becasue you included the word "now". There are no Gentiles now. We have to read St. Paul to the COrinthians in context of what he was teaching and preaching and take into consideration the time in which this was taking place. At that time in St.Paul's day there were Jews, Gentiles and the Chruch.

In reality, everthing that St.Paul taught and preached followed what happened as recounted in the Book of Acts of the Apostles.  The Church of The New Covenant had just been established in 33AD at Pentecost Day was just getting underway. This was a point of transition from the OLd to the New and why the Apostles and disciples received the Holy SPirit at the First Pentecost Day, otherwise they wouldn't have been able to fully understand Christ Crucified and Risen and be able to preach and teach the one true Faith. St.Paul was converted and baptized into the one Faith and was at the Council of Jerusalem.  The Apostles and disciples had there work cut out for them as there was lots of confusion as to the end of the Old Mosaic Law and the New Law of Spirit and Grace. The Old Mosaic Law's Temple sacrifices, ceremonies, rites and rituals (circumcision) were no longer salvific...we know this is true becasue at Christ's Sacrifice and death, the Temple Veil was rent from top to bottom ...and God no longer was there.

I don't get half of what you're saying Lula.  Honestly.  Lot of RCC speak to me.  Although I do agree with you there is unity in the body of Christ.  We just are not looking at it with the same definition.  The church to you is the RCC.  Not to me.  To me it's believers of all walks and denominations. 

All I'm trying to show you is Paul very clearly made a distinction between the three groups of people.  We still have them today.  We have the believers (church-made up of Jews and Gentiles) the unbelievers (Gentiles) and the Jews which God will revisit when the fullness of the Gentiles is done.   You keep bringing up Galatians.  That has nothing to do with what I'm speaking about here in Corinthians.  That passage in Galatians has ONLY to do with believers.  That's not what I'm talking about.  Here in Corinthians it's expressly saying these Gentiles are unbelievers. 

The mention of Jews separate from the church (made up mostly of Jews at this time) showed that Israel was not replaced by the NT church but remained distinct. 

The veil being rent in two at the crucifixtion of Christ only meant that from now on the Priests were no longer the mediator between man and God.  Christ now had earned that position as our High Priest (read Hebrews).  He is our Priest.  He is our King.  We are no longer in need of the Priestly system...Jewish or otherwise.  That's why the RCC with the whole priesthood order is not in line with the scriptures.  That whole system has been done away with.  The RCC picked it back up after the destruction of the Temple but they were never supposed to.  That's not according to script. 

That doesn't make sense.

The meaning of gentile used to be "non-Jew" before Jesus and still does.

A non-believing Jew of 3000 years ago was still a Jew and not a gentile.

It does make sense if one uses terminological exactitude.

Fact is, both terms "Judaism" and  "Jew" have changed significantly from the ancient days of God revealed religion of Judaism as recorded in the OLd Testament.  

3000 years ago, until the advent of modernism in Jewry, the term "Jews" was universally applied to believers and worshippers  of the one true God of Abraham, Isaac according to the OLd Mosaic Law. Gentiles were non-believers.

 After 70AD, and the advent of modernism in Jewry as well as of man-made Judaism, which is nothing more than a debating society, the term "Jew" was given a different meaning....one can be a Jew without believing in God and without adhering to Judaism. In other words, "Jew" to Jews is now a racial classification and has nothing to do with believing in and worshipping God according to His revealed religon.

It's because you are in line with the modern definition of Jews and Judaism that what I said doesn't make sense to you.

Actually.....the meaning of Gentile used to be "non-believer"  in the One True God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

that's why i said:

Some say Christians are Gentiles, but this can't be true if we are consistent with the meaning of who Gentiles were....back in the days of Biblical Judaism before the Christian era.

ONce Christ died on the Cross, everything changed. ....God's revealed religion of Judaism was fulfilled in Christ...The Temple Veil was rent from top to bottom....The religious world is no longer divided between believing Jews and non-believing Gentiles....

After Christ, believing Jews are those who believe in Christ and are baptized and are Christians.....non-believing Jews are the "the Jews" St.John 8.  The religious world is divided between those who believe in Christ and accept His teachings and those who don't.  That's why it is said, you are either with Christ or against Him.

Your exactitude is an imprecise approximation.

A Jew remains a Jew, no matter his beliefs.

When the children of Israel built the golden calf they remained children of Israel. They did not become gentiles during the process and Moses returned to the children of Israel, not to a bunch of gentiles, and he was angry with them but he did not convert them to Judaism.

according to my dictionary a Gentile is a non-Jewish person. 

Which is exactly as it was 3000 years ago and is today.  Has nothing to do with the Temple veil. 

Lula's just trying to show that the Church (to be specifici RCC) is now the new Israel.

Not biblical.  Not truth.  No way.  Paul showed there were now three divisions.  Jews, Gentiles and the Church.  That's exactly how it is today. 

kfc posts: 115

The Catholic CHruch alone fits the religion and the Chruch of the Holy Bible. Your definition of "the church" is unBiblical....it is found nowhere in the Holy Bible.

Your  definition of "the church" comes from one of the Protestant forefathers, probably Calvin, and it has been handed down to you through Protestant oral tradition.

Your definition of "the Chuuch" does not fit with Ephesians 4: 2-6,  2 With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. 3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.

Amongst individual believers from every walk and amongst all the various and diverse denominations, there is no "one body", no "one Spirit", no unity of "one faith"; there is no "one baptism".

 Your definition of "the Church" does not fit with the Church of the Holy Bible that Christ established and placed under the delegated , universal headship of St.Peter, the first Pope. St. Matt. 16:18-19.

18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

In fact your definition effectively says that CHrist didn't keep His promise and that the gates of Hell did prevail against His Chruch built upon St.Peter.

The Bible shows that Christ, the Good Shepherd, called His Chruch, a "sheepfold" which He placedin the care of earthly shepherds, starting with St.peter. St.John 21: 15-17.

15 ......Jesus saith to Simon Peter:...... Feed my lambs.

16 He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. 17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

 "Feed my sheep" is OUr LOrd fulfilling HIs promise to St. Peter; St. Matt. 16:19; by charging him with the superintendency of all His sheep, without exception; and consequently of His whole flock, that is, of His own church.

kfc posts:

Your attempt to besmirch the CC one more time is evidence you know little of the Holy Bible.

The Bible p;roves that Christ instituted a priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech Heb. 7:5-20, made up of "ambassodors" of Christ, such as are Catholic Priests 2Cor. 5:20. 

If you had read the Books of Acts, you would know that the Apostles, St. Paul appointed other "fit men" to continue with the mission to preach, teach and baptize in Christ's name...by the Sacrament of the laying on of hands. Christ is the Eternal High Priest and He gavie4 his authority to bind and loose and to forgive sins first to His Apostles and they in turn as we learn from Acts, ordained successors.

The Bible shows that  St.Peter had successros and he told them to continue feeding Christ's flock..and that Christ is to be the model of priests and the laity...1St.Peter 5:1-4, 10-11

1 The ancients therefore that are among you, I beseech, who am myself also an ancient, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ: as also a partaker of that glory which is to be revealed in time to come: 2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking care of it, not by constraint, but willingly, according to God: not for filthy lucre's sake, but voluntarily: 3 Neither as lording it over the clergy, but being made a pattern of the flock from the heart. 4 And when the prince of pastors shall appear, you shall receive a never fading crown of glory. 5 In like manner, ye young men, be subject to the ancients. And do you all insinuate humility one to another, for God resisteth the proud, but to the humble he giveth grace.

10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us into his eternal glory in Christ Jesus, after you have suffered a little, will himself perfect you, and confirm you, and establish you. 11 To him be glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.

Note that St.Peter mentions the ancients and that fits to a "t" with the Ap;ostles and ancients who were at the Council of Jerusalem.

The Bible proves that the Chruch Christ established was to be in modern language, a self perpetuating Spiritual system, One of the evidences of this was the selection of Matthias to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Judas Acts. 1:26.