Catholic-Anglican Reunion.

[desertknight]

My question still stands.

And your reply is in the thousands of years of Biblical history of God's chosen establishing nation states, judges, kings, armies, taxes, courts, bureaucracies, diplomacy and political and military involvement of every type with dozens of countries throughout history, all with scriptural foundation, all with the benevolent approval of God.  It is insurmountable evidence contained within the Bible, you just choose not to answer it or acknowledge it.  Does God approve of His people being "politically" involved?  Read the Bible, it is beyond dispute that He does.  I don't know how God's Word can be more clear to you on it.  I don't know how much more plainly and directly I can state it. 

[banished]

Actually, the Protestants also have there own "die like a beast" version.  This was written by a Catholic Priest who converted to the Anglican Church:

"Shortly before the council of Trent Clement VII supposibly gave himself up to sensual gratification, and it was reasonable to suppose that he who imagined he should die like a beast, should live like an epicure."  (It's amazing what an Internet search will bring up.)

[Amo]

And your reply is in the thousands of years of Biblical history of God's chosen establishing nation states, judges, kings, armies, taxes, courts, bureaucracies, diplomacy and political and military involvement of every type with dozens of countries throughout history, all with scriptural foundation, all with the benevolent approval of God.  It is insurmountable evidence contained within the Bible, you just choose not to answer it or acknowledge it.  Does God approve of His people being "politically" involved?  Read the Bible, it is beyond dispute that He does.  I don't know how God's Word can be more clear to you on it.  I don't know how much more plainly and directly I can state it.

This is one of the main problems with the Church of Rome, that is the reestablishment of the old covenant.  The things you mention above were done away with by the new covenant.  Until Christ returns again, His nation is a spiritual one.  The literal nation thing, failed miserably during the old covenant.  This was not on God's part, but on our part of course.  Of course, if your Church were based upon scripture, this would be understood.

What has the Church of Rome accomplished by trying to reestablish old covenant type literal nations upon earth in the new covenant?  She has accomplished a long trail of history regarding strife, wars, persecution, and bloodshed upon countless millions.  You cannot be a citizen of God's spiritual kingdom here on earth, and be an intricate part of the political systems of this world at the same time.  Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and will not be again, until He returns and makes it so.  Thus Rome once again puts itself in the place of Christ, trying to bring it's adulterated version of His literal kingdom upon the earth before it's time.  This is a serious lack of faith.

The high priest, priesthood, and politics of Rome are all throwbacks to the old covenant.  A system which can no longer save anyone.  A system that never could save anyone, save for their faith in those things which the new covenant in Christ Jesus has established.  Rome is presently enjoying an ever increasing influence and political power in this world.  The end result will be the same as always, she will end up persecuting all who do not bow to her, including God's true followers on this earth.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

[desertknight]

This is one of the main problems with the Church of Rome, that is the reestablishment of the old covenant.

You lost me.  The Catholic Church "re-established" Judaism?  That's silly.

The things you mention above were done away with by the new covenant.  Until Christ returns again, His nation is a spiritual one.

Until Christ comes again, His Kingdom and ours, is in heaven but His "nation", as St. Paul clearly states in Scripture, is His Church, (Rom.9:6-8).  The Church is repeatedly stated in the NT as the inheritor of the "promises of Abraham" and Christians as the new circumcised through baptism, the new Israel, (Gal. 3:29).    

The literal nation thing, failed miserably during the old covenant.  This was not on God's part, but on our part of course.  Of course, if your Church were based upon scripture, this would be understood.

If you understood scripture, then you would understand that it was within God's providence that it should.  It is a non-sensical argument.  The question is, "Does God permit His Church to be involved with the affairs of this world?"  The answer from any reading of the Bible is that He most clearly does.  You would have a point if you could point to God consistently telling Israel that they are disobeying Him by becoming involved with affairs of the world, of war and diplomacy, but not only does OT scripture NOT support any such notion, it is a thousands of year record of exactly the opposite.  

What has the Church of Rome accomplished by trying to reestablish old covenant type literal nations upon earth in the new covenant?  She has accomplished a long trail of history regarding strife, wars, persecution, and bloodshed upon countless millions.  You cannot be a citizen of God's spiritual kingdom here on earth, and be an intricate part of the political systems of this world at the same time.  Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and will not be again, until He returns and makes it so.  Thus Rome once again puts itself in the place of Christ, trying to bring it's adulterated version of His literal kingdom upon the earth before it's time.  This is a serious lack of faith.

No, and you are confusing two very different things.  Did Israel replace the kingdom of heaven under the old covenant?  Of course not!  How silly.  God guided her in all sorts of affairs on earth, but she did not do away with His heavenly Kingdom.  Did the fact that God's kingdom is in heaven dismiss the need for Him to demand that Israel act in secular matters on earth?  Of course not!  How silly.  God knows full well that while His kingdom may be not of this earth, his people on it have to deal with the world in dozens of ways every single day.  That Israel existed on earth had nothing to do with God's kingdom remaining very much in place in heaven.  That His Church, the Israel of the New Covenant, may be present on earth is no dismissal of the truth of God's kingdom being in heaven either.

The high priest, priesthood, and politics of Rome are all throwbacks to the old covenant.

The only "high priest" of the Catholic Church is the high priest, Jesus Christ.  You seem to be implying that if it is in the OT, then it no longer apllies.  Really?  No ten Commandments for you?  No OT scriptures in your Bible?   Is it lost on you that Jesus did not abolish the Old Covenant but He and His Church are to be the fulfillment of it?   Christ is our High Priest.  We the Church are His new Israel and our kingdom is ultimately in heaven, but nowhere in scripture is there any prohibition of involvement in affairs on earth.  If so, how are we to call the peacemakers blessed?  How to feed the hungry?  Slake the thirsty?  Clothe the naked?  Now if you say, "Well those things are OK, but not brokering peace in the middle east or the Church being involved with civilizing the barbarians who over-ran Rome in the 5th century AD."  Well, then you're just arguing degree or semantics, not whether it is scripturally prohibited or not.  

A system which can no longer save anyone.  A system that never could save anyone, save for their faith in those things which the new covenant in Christ Jesus has established.  Rome is presently enjoying an ever increasing influence and political power in this world.  The end result will be the same as always, she will end up persecuting all who do not bow to her, including God's true followers on this earth.

No "system" saves anyone. One is saved by the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, through our faith.  

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

That has nothing to do with any prohibition of Christ's Church not being involved with affairs of the world.  Nothing.  You really do not get that Christ is telling them He is the Son of God here?  You have totally missed the very obvious meaning of this passage.  Christ is conveying here, that He is the Son of God, and not the simple political insurgent, a userper of the crown, that they believe Him to be.  Christ is being asked if He is the Jewish revolutionary who He was accused of being by being lauded as "King", He is telling them the truth they do not understand, that they are about to crucify God incarnate and that He willingly goes to His death.   It is nonsense to interprit it as God's condemnation of whether Pope Gregory should have parlyed with Atilla the Hun or today's Popes should help to broker a peace in Rwanda or if the Church should become involved in famine relief in India.   It has nothing to do with that.  Christ is making the point to them that they do not understand who they are about to crucify.  We are called to be stewards of this world and grown men with authority who take responsibility for it and the Christian witness we bear in it.  If it is a father's responsibility to head his houshold, as scripture tells us, than it is a Christian king's responsibility to head his nation with the same sobriety.  That includes those who act as Christ's shepards on earth, His Bishops.    
 

[banished]

desertknight,

This is one of the reasons why our Protestant friends like Amo think that Catholics reestablished the old covenant.  They don't understand the Last Supper and the fact that Jesus offered himself to the father in gratitude.

I snipped this piece from a church home page:

(quote)
During the Last Supper Jesus gave the Passover celebration a special new dimension. The ritual Passover bread and wine for which the head of the household would give thanks and bless as he distributed them to the other participants of the meal became something more through the action of Jesus. He gave thanks, not just for what God had done for the Israelites in the past, but also for what He himself had been able to do in the course of His earthly life, in faithfulness to the vocation to which He had been called by His heavenly Father. The bread and wine were no longer symbolic Passover offerings to God, but were the body and blood of Jesus, presented to the Father as a thanksgiving offering for the saving mission that had been His life, a life that was now drawing to a close. Jesus was offering himself to the Father in gratitude.
(end of quote)

[mclees8]

desertknight,

This is one of the reasons why our Protestant friends like Amo think that Catholics reestablished the old covenant.  They don't understand the Last Supper and the fact that Jesus offered himself to the father in gratitude.

I snipped this piece from a church home page:

(quote)
During the Last Supper Jesus gave the Passover celebration a special new dimension. The ritual Passover bread and wine for which the head of the household would give thanks and bless as he distributed them to the other participants of the meal became something more through the action of Jesus. He gave thanks, not just for what God had done for the Israelites in the past, but also for what He himself had been able to do in the course of His earthly life, in faithfulness to the vocation to which He had been called by His heavenly Father. The bread and wine were no longer symbolic Passover offerings to God, but were the body and blood of Jesus, presented to the Father as a thanksgiving offering for the saving mission that had been His life, a life that was now drawing to a close. Jesus was offering himself to the Father in gratitude.
(end of quote)

Gave Himself in gratitude of the Father? I think you are a little mixed up. God gave us Jesus to suffer as the Lamb of God for our sins. He was God incarnate. He died for us not that he was grateful for God because he was God made flesh. It is us that needs to be grateful for God. " For God so loved the world the he GAVE his only begotten Son the whomsoever believeth  in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. His flesh and blood that was given as an offering for our sins on the cross depicks the suffering for us as God's perfect lamb that forever did away with the OT Priest hood for a new and everlasting once and fall sacrifice for our sins.   

While you are so hung up on having a meal of Jesus you miss that we are spiritually made one in body and blood when we take him as Lord and savior. His body was broken for us and His blood was shed for us. I am gratefull he died for me and i pray i will be able Willing to suffer even death for Him not because I am grateful to suffer for suffering is pain. Why would he be gratefull for that. he prayed he would not have to but was still obedient to the Fathers will.   

[mclees8]

My question still stands.

And your reply is in the thousands of years of Biblical history of God's chosen establishing nation states, judges, kings, armies, taxes, courts, bureaucracies, diplomacy and political and military involvement of every type with dozens of countries throughout history, all with scriptural foundation, all with the benevolent approval of God.  It is insurmountable evidence contained within the Bible, you just choose not to answer it or acknowledge it.  Does God approve of His people being "politically" involved?  Read the Bible, it is beyond dispute that He does.  I don't know how God's Word can be more clear to you on it.  I don't know how much more plainly and directly I can state it. 

This is not the Old Testament Israel. This is the New Covenant church. No political envlovement  was ever established. It is you who has not shown that Christ New covenant church was to be any kind of religious political power. Read the New Testament

It is clearly not there. Why don't you choke don your pride and admit it. and sureley nothing as corrupt as the 5th century bishops. Tell me Jesus was with them or even Peter

[desertknight]

Because there is nothing to admit.  Why do you Protestants keep acting as if there is nothing from the OT that applies?  Where did Christ impose this prohibition in scripture?   John 18:36 clearly doesn't.  It has nothing to do with any prohibition.  That proposition is silly.  Actually, it is unfair of me to tar Protestants with this as virtually all Protestant bodies agree with us Catholics on this issue, which never really was an issue until the so called "Enlightenment".  Please identify if you will, one major Protestant "church" or denomination that prohibits itself from engaging in the affairs of the world.  Just one.  The Amish are about the only ones that come to mind.  As far as my argument, I can't prove a negative, nor does any reasonable person expect so.  It is a fallacious tactic.  So please demonstrate to me where NT scripture contradicts thousands of years worth of OT teaching on this.  That should be easy enough.  You guys are sticklers for "if it ain't in the Bible, it ain't so", so where is this mythical prohibition against the Church engaging in the world's affairs?  All you need do is just explain to me how a peacemaker can be "called blessed" by us without being involved with those parties who make war.  Explain to me how if I feed one person, that is OK by scripture, but if my Church feeds 10,000 people in Africa, well that clearly is a violation.  Really?  OK, where EXACTLY does the NT say that?  

Now you may say, "Oh, I'm not against those things, just the bad ole' Catholic Church's involvement in this or that from the Middle Ages."  Well that is not an argument of scriptural prohibition then.  That is simply an argument of degree or point of view or semantics.  For example, you may think Constantine was an awful, terrible human being.  I don't.  The Eastern Orthodox designate him a "Saint".  I don't know about that, but I do know that he did what a good king is tasked to do and helped to preserve civilization and law and order against barbarian hordes.

When we are commanded to make peace, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, insure the worker is paid, walk in justice, etc.  That is EXACTLY the New Testament's command to us Christians to become actively involved with our world.  



 

[banished]

desertknight,

This is one of the reasons why our Protestant friends like Amo think that Catholics reestablished the old covenant.  They don't understand the Last Supper and the fact that Jesus offered himself to the father in gratitude.

I snipped this piece from a church home page:

(quote)
During the Last Supper Jesus gave the Passover celebration a special new dimension. The ritual Passover bread and wine for which the head of the household would give thanks and bless as he distributed them to the other participants of the meal became something more through the action of Jesus. He gave thanks, not just for what God had done for the Israelites in the past, but also for what He himself had been able to do in the course of His earthly life, in faithfulness to the vocation to which He had been called by His heavenly Father. The bread and wine were no longer symbolic Passover offerings to God, but were the body and blood of Jesus, presented to the Father as a thanksgiving offering for the saving mission that had been His life, a life that was now drawing to a close. Jesus was offering himself to the Father in gratitude.
(end of quote)

Gave Himself in gratitude of the Father? I think you are a little mixed up. God gave us Jesus to suffer as the Lamb of God for our sins. He was God incarnate. He died for us not that he was grateful for God because he was God made flesh. It is us that needs to be grateful for God. " For God so loved the world the he GAVE his only begotten Son the whomsoever believeth  in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. His flesh and blood that was given as an offering for our sins on the cross depicks the suffering for us as God's perfect lamb that forever did away with the OT Priest hood for a new and everlasting once and fall sacrifice for our sins.   

While you are so hung up on having a meal of Jesus you miss that we are spiritually made one in body and blood when we take him as Lord and savior. His body was broken for us and His blood was shed for us. I am gratefull he died for me and i pray i will be able Willing to suffer even death for Him not because I am grateful to suffer for suffering is pain. Why would he be gratefull for that. he prayed he would not have to but was still obedient to the Fathers will.   

What did all that have to do with Protestants not understanding the Last Supper, and getting mixed up the Catholics and the old covenant?

[mclees8]

Dear Night  Jesus was asked by the disciples why did you speak to the people in parables ?
He said  it is because in seeing they do not see and in hearing they do not hear, They perceive but they have no understanding. Truly God must reveal truth and understanding .   

There are three things that make up Babylon and they have been a part of this world and it’s systems since the fall of man. All three operate independently of God. Or in ignorance of Him.  First there is Religious Babylon, then political Babylon, and then monetary Babylon.. All this works within the many cultures of this world. It is all man puts his faith in without truly knowing God.  So why do I say that ? Are all these things necessary to maintain law, order, a sense of morality. Yes.

But in spite of the this sin with all its evils works within every aspect of all this. Who did Jesus say was the prince of this world who operates within all human enterprise? Satan! We talk about the spirit of the world which is really the spirit of antichrist in the world. It just simply exists and will until Jesus comes and the day of the Lord begins.

Paul said the law was a school teacher. It teaches us that no one can keep it  Good and evil exists. Since the fall we determine good and evil according to our own wisdom. Now we must have law. Man always looks to man to rule over him. The children of Israel were know different. They wanted a king like all the other lands had kings.  Samuel warned them that the kings would put  many burdens on them. Some were good kings and some down right evil. Yet we have had rulers over us in every aspect of life. Some good most not good.  I do not know any government that has not been corrupt because man himself is corrupt. This includes all religious government

You want to say Christians in denominational churches have government involvement. There is a difference if the church appeals to government then when it is the government. We all want fair and just representation. So we want those who are more likely to represent our values. But this is not about Christ or gospel. Honest representatives is like looking for honest car  salesmen.  Jesus was not about the world governments.  I said the world and its governments is racing toward antichrist.  Many wanted to be God throughout history. None yet have dominated the whole world. It was not possible but today it is very possible.

You remember Mike Huckabee who ran for president? He is a Christian and ex Baptist preacher Which one we be more Christian to you. Mike or Obama who also was supposed to be a Christian. Could they truly be followers of Christ and be president.  Especially the President of the US and most powerful man upon the earth.  As president he cannot say Jesus is Lord of all and the only way of salvation. Jesus was very emphatic about that witness. Many have died for it , but the president has to be a friend to all religions careful not to offend. Not even Mike Huckabee could preach what he must have preached when He was a Baptist preacher or he would no be able to become president. What do you think it means to not love not  the world or the things of it. So you say what is wrong with the church being involved with Government. The world is in a tailspin of economic and moral delima. The world is ripe for a messiah . They want a king who can solve the worlds problems. When one is so powerful as to have an almost absolute control of the people and the economy of the whole world you will have God upon the earth. That will be the Man of sin. Now what powerful Christian institution is wanting just that. One World government.   One man at the helm. With all the worlds technology at his fingertips. Still think the church should be involved with politics of the world? They are in bed with it.    The Pope is a powerful religious figure head and the Word says the apostate church will rise to power riding on his back. How can the word of God make any more clear.
God bless

[chosenone]

I was bought up as an Anglican and there is absolutely NO WAY that I would EVER become Roman catholic. Far too many inconsistancies and things that are just NOT in the Bible.
Although I have long ago left the anglican churches I have many many friends still there and they feel the same. There are so many differences. I

I now go to charismatic churches where God can actually do things that He wants to, and He heals, restores and delivers and he doesnt  have to try to fit in around mans rules and regulations and traditions. yes .Freedom at last!

[winsome]

I was bought up as an Anglican and there is absolutely NO WAY that I would EVER become Roman catholic. Far too many inconsistancies and things that are just NOT in the Bible.
Although I have long ago left the anglican churches I have many many friends still there and they feel the same. There are so many differences. I

I now go to charismatic churches where God can actually do things that He wants to, and He heals, restores and delivers and he doesnt  have to try to fit in around mans rules and regulations and traditions. yes .Freedom at last!

Ah yes, charismatic churches. Once you leave the Catholic church it's a slide downhill to this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryeDZVhEuAo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn6FF5nhTSs

[banished]

I was bought up as an Anglican and there is absolutely NO WAY that I would EVER become Roman catholic. Far too many inconsistancies and things that are just NOT in the Bible.
Although I have long ago left the anglican churches I have many many friends still there and they feel the same. There are so many differences. I

I now go to charismatic churches where God can actually do things that He wants to, and He heals, restores and delivers and he doesnt  have to try to fit in around mans rules and regulations and traditions. yes .Freedom at last!

chosenone,

I am a Charismatic Catholic so we can agree that there is Unity in the Holy Spirit.  I noticed that you were very upset about me converting that poor soul with Catholic Grief Counseling, so I would say that you are 99 percent Protestant and 1 percent Charismatic. Why do you hate Catholics?  I have converted hundreds and hundreds of people, some to Protestant and some to Catholic.The gifts of the Holy Spirit are basic to the church (which is all Christians), essential to carrying out the church's mission.  They are the heart of who we are as Christians.  They are not something reserved for just the prayer meeting and then hidden away, but rather practiced at the prayer meeting so that they become the natural part of our everyday living of the gospel.  Like, bringing people to Christ right here on this forum. 

[Amo]

desertknight, you said -

You lost me.  The Catholic Church "re-established" Judaism?  That's silly.

It reestablished a priesthood upon which they are dependent for salvation like that of the old covenant priesthood.  They had to bring their sacrifice to the priest to mediate for them in receiving forgiveness of their sins.  Catholics must go to their priests and confess their sins.  They also must partake of Catholic communion which requires transubstantiation, which can only be performed by the priests, thus putting man between humanity and God again in relation to salvation. 

Christ came to do away with the go betweens.  Through Him we all have direct access to the throne of God for the forgiveness of our sins, and the impartation of the Holy Spirit of God upon the believer.  Rome has reestablished old covenant obstacles between humanity and God which Christ came to abolish.

Until Christ comes again, His Kingdom and ours, is in heaven but His "nation", as St. Paul clearly states in Scripture, is His Church, (Rom.9:6-8).  The Church is repeatedly stated in the NT as the inheritor of the "promises of Abraham" and Christians as the new circumcised through baptism, the new Israel, (Gal. 3:29).

You are right, they are the Israel of God.  That Israel though is a spiritual one, not a  literal one again until Christ returns and we all inherit our spiritual heavenly bodies.  Then we will be literal citizens of the literal kingdom of God established when He returns.  Now, the body of Christ, the new covenant Israel is composed of those of all nationalities, and peoples, and tongues of this earth who are in Christ by faith.  His nation is His Church, because it is a spiritual nation, not a literal one.  His kingdom is here also through us, but it is spiritual, not literal.  Nevertheless, that which is spiritual is real and eternal, and that which is literal here and now is passing away.

I Jn 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Matt 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Matt 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. 8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

The spiritual kingdom of God is here now in the individual and corporate body of Christ.  The literal kingdom of God will be established evermore at His return.

  

If you understood scripture, then you would understand that it was within God's providence that it should.  It is a non-sensical argument.

No sir. It absolutely was not God’s plan that Israel should miserably fail their calling as His nation on this earth.  The problem with Israel was that though they were born of the nation, this did not mean they were born again.  The new covenant Israel is composed of those only who are born again, of the Spirit, and not the flesh.  This cannot be measured by any literal kingdom or nation or people of this earth, but only by the impartation of the Spirit of God upon those who are His.  Thus God alone will separate the wheat from the tares when He returns.  No Church, or kingdom, or nation, or people of this earth can claim that being one of them, means you are the saved of God.  Only being born again of the Spirit will determine this, and only God Himself will make that judgment final when He returns.   

The question is, "Does God permit His Church to be involved with the affairs of this world?"  The answer from any reading of the Bible is that He most clearly does.  You would have a point if you could point to God consistently telling Israel that they are disobeying Him by becoming involved with affairs of the world, of war and diplomacy, but not only does OT scripture NOT support any such notion, it is a thousands of year record of exactly the opposite.

Yes it is.  This is exactly my point, the Church of Rome is eaten up with the old covenant when it suits her purpose.  This is because she is not as concerned with exalting the new covenant by the word of God, as she is about exalting her own power and influence among the nations of this world.  The NT is all about what the new covenant Church did by the power of the Holy Spirit of God, and completely separate from the kingdoms, nations, peoples, and powers of this earth.  They were accused of turning the world upside down, which very thing they did by introducing heavenly principles and powers which are in direct opposition to the principles and powers of this earth. 

Acts 17:6 And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; 7 Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus.

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

No, and you are confusing two very different things.  Did Israel replace the kingdom of heaven under the old covenant?  Of course not!  How silly.  God guided her in all sorts of affairs on earth, but she did not do away with His heavenly Kingdom.  Did the fact that God's kingdom is in heaven dismiss the need for Him to demand that Israel act in secular matters on earth?  Of course not!  How silly.  God knows full well that while His kingdom may be not of this earth, his people on it have to deal with the world in dozens of ways every single day.  That Israel existed on earth had nothing to do with God's kingdom remaining very much in place in heaven.  That His Church, the Israel of the New Covenant, may be present on earth is no dismissal of the truth of God's kingdom being in heaven either.

Neither the old or new covenant Israel’s of God replace the kingdom of God in heaven, they are an extension of the same.  There is no question about whether the kingdom of God is in heaven or not, where there is no sin or rebellion against God.  The only question concerning the same is here on earth where the only created beings exist that actually do live in sin and rebellion against God.  It is here that God must have a people to represent Him, in order for His kingdom to exist on this planet in rebellion.  The old covenant people and nation of God were to look forward to the establishment of that kingdom on earth by faith in the coming of the Messiah. We new covenant people and nation of God look back by faith to the established fact of the same in and through Christ our Lord and Savior. 

Christ has come into the world that Satan has claimed as his own by way of sin and rebellion against the authority of God, and extended the kingdom of God into the very hearts of all those who profess Him as Lord and Savior by willing obedience to the same.  All this right in the world that Satan claims as his own.  Thus the spiritual kingdom of God is alive and well on earth, and will be fully reestablished when God returns again to set all things in order.

Even old covenant Israel was to remain completely separate and independent of the kingdoms of this world, for it was not a kingdom or nation of this world, but of God.  Whenever it mingled itself with the other nations of this earth religiously or politically by way of compromise, it was referred to by the prophets of God as being unfaithful to the Lord.  As committing adultery, and even whoredom (Jer. 3:8&9, Eze. 16:14,15,28,29, Hos. 4:15).  These are the same sins of Rome during the new covenant era, thus she is accused of the same by the new testament prophets (Rev. 14:8, 17, 18, 19:2). 

The only "high priest" of the Catholic Church is the high priest, Jesus Christ.  You seem to be implying that if it is in the OT, then it no longer apllies.  Really?  No ten Commandments for you?  No OT scriptures in your Bible?   Is it lost on you that Jesus did not abolish the Old Covenant but He and His Church are to be the fulfillment of it?   Christ is our High Priest.  We the Church are His new Israel and our kingdom is ultimately in heaven, but nowhere in scripture is there any prohibition of involvement in affairs on earth.  If so, how are we to call the peacemakers blessed?  How to feed the hungry?  Slake the thirsty?  Clothe the naked?  Now if you say, "Well those things are OK, but not brokering peace in the middle east or the Church being involved with civilizing the barbarians who over-ran Rome in the 5th century AD."  Well, then you're just arguing degree or semantics, not whether it is scripturally prohibited or not.

Yes Christ did come to fulfill the old covenant, and in so doing changed many things in respect to the same.  These truths are clearly pointed by the words of Christ, and His apostles in the new testament.  A literal go between priesthood between God the Father and all believers has now been abolished.  Each believer now has access directly to the throne of God through Jesus Christ, the High Priest of the new covenant.  He is the go between.  The Pope and his priesthood are a false reestablished old covenant go between obsolete system of worship.  So is any other that attempts to place itself between God and humanity outside of the impartation of the Holy Spirit of God from Christ upon those He is using for mediation.  Those who refuse the authority of the scriptures, and thus the authority of Christ, simply cannot have this gift from Christ.  Thus the Church of Rome most certainly does not have it.  It is by their fruits that we know them, not by their claims to authority or lineage.

Yes there most certainly are ten commandments to me sir, all ten.  Not like the Church of Rome which has contradicted the testimony of Christ Himself in claiming to change one of them, and completely ignoring another by way of teaching and practice.  Which very thing itself completely disqualifies it from being that which it claims of itself, to be the true Church of Christ on earth.  Both the old and new testaments are the word of God, and the final word of authority for me.  Your Church and Pope contradict the same in teaching and practice, and thus will never be considered the Church of Christ to me or countless others. 

The true Church of Christ most certainly can and does do many of the acts you mentioned above, but never while obstinately breaking the commandments of God, and teaching others to do so also.  Not to mention contradicting his word through practice and teaching in many other ways also.  These very things disqualify her from being the Church of Christ ministering, while she attempts any of the acts that you mentioned above.  They make her the adulterous women of the book of Revelation which commits fornication with the kings of the earth, instead of the pure virgin which has been espoused to Christ.

Concerning your comments regarding the barbarians of the fifth century, it is again the exact opposite of what you claim.  It was the abominations which filled the cup in the hand of the Church of Rome which brought down the barbarians from the north upon the Roman empire as judgment from God.  Rome survived about a thousand years as a pagan entity, but hardly 200 as an apostate Christian entity.  As God sent the king of the north to punish the Jews, and destroy their temple when they had mixed pagan sun worship with that which He had commanded them, so likewise He sent judgment from the north upon those new covenant apostate Christians who did the same.

No "system" saves anyone. One is saved by the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, through our faith.

AMEN!  Yet if the Jews had not expressed that faith by confessing their sins over the sacrifice, which typified Christ, and allowing the priests to mediate typifying Christ’s mediation in the heavenly sanctuary, they would have expressed a lack of faith.  That old sacrifice, and officiation have been done away with in Christ.  Yet the Church of Rome reestablishes the same through her demand for confession to the priest, and the un-bloody sacrifice of her Mass and her transubstantiation, which demand the mediation of her priesthood.  So, your own confession above contradicts the teachings of your Church. 

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

That has nothing to do with any prohibition of Christ's Church not being involved with affairs of the world.  Nothing.  You really do not get that Christ is telling them He is the Son of God here?  You have totally missed the very obvious meaning of this passage.  Christ is conveying here, that He is the Son of God, and not the simple political insurgent, a userper of the crown, that they believe Him to be.  Christ is being asked if He is the Jewish revolutionary who He was accused of being by being lauded as "King", He is telling them the truth they do not understand, that they are about to crucify God incarnate and that He willingly goes to His death.   It is nonsense to interprit it as God's condemnation of whether Pope Gregory should have parlyed with Atilla the Hun or today's Popes should help to broker a peace in Rwanda or if the Church should become involved in famine relief in India.   It has nothing to do with that.  Christ is making the point to them that they do not understand who they are about to crucify.  We are called to be stewards of this world and grown men with authority who take responsibility for it and the Christian witness we bear in it.  If it is a father's responsibility to head his houshold, as scripture tells us, than it is a Christian king's responsibility to head his nation with the same sobriety.  That includes those who act as Christ's shepards on earth, His Bishops.

And as your church firmly believes, her authority is greater than that of any of the kings of this earth, even in this earth.  Thus, she is the master manipulator and ruler of this world in rebellion against God.  Thus, she is the woman that rides the beast, the wh*re of the book of Revelation, and BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. 

Christ’s Church is in this world, and must work in this world, but she is not of this world.  There is no better way to be of this world, than to be a religion of the same which has relations with, and manipulates the kings and merchants of the earth.  This is Rome.


John 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word…….
9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine………………………………......................................
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Sorry desert knight, but Jesus does mean that His kingdom is not of this world, neither are His people.  His kingdom is in this world only in and through His people who are to call all of this world out of the same into His kingdom.  They are to remain separate from the kingdoms of this world, and all illicit relationships with the same.  Thus the Church of Rome is excluded from God’s kingdom, and is moreover the mother of all apostate religions, Christian ones especially, that have these illicit relationships with the kings and merchants of the earth. 

2 Pet 3: 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

If you find that you feel at home in this earth, and you are a member of an institution controlling, and seeking greater control of it, you are in danger of perishing along with it.
















   

[desertknight]

UPDATE:

Archbishop Vincent Nichols, its leader, has appointed a panel of bishops to plan the recruitment of entire Church of England parishes.

The move, effectively to “poach” Anglican congregations disenchanted with their church’s liberal drift, came as Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, held a meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in the Vatican.

Speaking after their meeting, Williams denied that the Pope’s offer to allow members of the Church of England to convert while preserving many of their traditions was “a kind of dawn raid on the Anglican communion”.

He added: “I don’t think it’s a question of the Catholic church trying to attract by advertising and special offers.”

Williams admitted that there were serious tensions between the two churches, however.

The Catholic committee targeting Anglican converts will look at ways of overcoming obstacles to receiving entire parishes.

A key problem is property. Many of the congregations wanting to defect to Rome are attached to beautiful church buildings.

There is no question of the Catholic church buying such places of worship from the Church of England — and the Church of England commissioners are not willing to sell them.

The committee of Catholic bishops will scrutinise the possibility of church sharing, the use of temporary buildings for convert vicars and their congregations.

The panel will also look at the possibility of taking out long-term leases of Anglican churches, giving the Catholics responsibility for repairs and maintenance for up to 100 years.

Many Anglican clergy and lay worshippers have become dissatisfied with Williams’s leadership and are still resentful about the Church of England’s decision to ordain women priests.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 927030.ece

Nichols fired another broadside on the eve of the meeting at the Vatican, saying Anglicans should not become Catholic to protest against liberalisation and adding that any converts must accept the Catholic church’s doctrine.

“It must be a positive desire in the heart — not questions of the ordination of women to the episcopate, not questions of sexual ethics — but it must centre round the understanding of the role of the office of bishop of Rome,” Nichols said in London.

Forward in Faith, the Anglo-Catholic group, believes up to 450 Anglican parishes are considering joining the exodus to Rome.

Bishop John Broadhurst, chairman of Forward in Faith, said: “We welcome this initiative.”



The Most Reverend Archbishop of Canterbury and HH Pope Benedict XVI.