Godsunworthyservant said:

That doesn't surprise me. That also sounds very much like something he would say. What's your point?

Click to expand...

If you read his short article, he compares the account of Zacchaeus to the Parable of the Lost Sheep

Luke has already prepared the reader for this understanding of the Lord’s words to Zacchaeus. In chapter 15 we find another of the Lord’s famous parables–the Parable of the Lost Sheep. He speaks of a man with 100 sheep. They are all sheep and all, therefore, represent believers. Ninety-nine of the sheep remain with the shepherd and experience the blessings of that communion. One, however, wanders away and experiences the danger and loss of such communion. But the shepherd, who clearly represents Christ, goes to find and save that lost sheep.

So Zacchaeus was a lost believer and a believer is a born again child of God. So like i originally wrote.

Zacchaeus was already a born again believer, he was just a lost born again believer.

essentialsaltes said:

Even Hannity's scraping the bottom of the barrel:

View attachment 364202

Click to expand...

They forgot renaming the Gulf of Mexico............

Tor0 said:

It doesn't help that he says he knows other women weren't for him.

Click to expand...

I am curious why this "doesn't help". But you are welcome not to explain this.

My experience is that certain women can be very upset to hear about my past women. But others can be ready to share with me about past women, and minister understanding to me.

Each person is different; so I shouldn't assume about you.

I personally understand that it can be good that I give attention to whatsoever my lady friend is talking about and doing. Or else . . . she might disappear into some gossip group or to some other guy who will give her a listening ear. And - - as much as I know about her, I can use for caring for her, possibly, if she is sick or disabled, and simply to keep her company, and so I can give her medical care providers reliable feedback about how she is doing.

If it has to do with her, be interested > Jesus knows every thing and He is interested in you in everything, right? This is included in how Jesus loves us.

So, I want to know about her past men, so I can have insight into how she has developed and how I can help her to grow in Jesus and in the real world. But welcome her to share with various people, since Jesus wants us to love everyone. And help her to love them, practically.

But yes I see how I have not shown maybe so much interest in her female friends of the past. So, may be I need to pray about this.

I would say you two need to spend time together with mature Christian couples and single older people who can share their experience and example with you.

mourningdove~ said:

I so very much agree.

I have to say, I really don't understand the dismay so often shown towards those who prefer the TLM.
Not from you personally; I'm speaking in broad generalities here.

When the N.O was introduced, suddenly the TLM was no longer the norm. And the change was sudden.

Many either made the adjustment to the N.O. or left the Church.
For many the departure was gradual, but many did leave.

All these years, those that stayed have continued in the way of the N.O.
They have no choice, if they want to remain a practicing Catholic and don't have access to the TLM.

So, the 'adjusting' that's been done has been on the part of those who prefer the TLM.
Not those who prefer the N.O.

I jumped into this thread because of comments being made about TLM people thinking they are 'special'.
I jumped in to say that that just isn't true of many of us.

What many TLM worshippers are, is sad.
We lost something very special, very traditional Catholic, and we are sad about it.
It is not 'pathological' to miss something that was once loved, to sometimes talk about it, to long to see it again.
(We do this all the time, about loved ones who have died, favorite places, etc.)

I do realize this isn't an easy subject to discuss in this forum. Most here prefer the N.O. And I respect that.
And that is why I recently voted for the Traditional forum to be reopened, so as to avoid any potential divisiveness here.

Perhaps if the new pope lifts TLM restrictions, and more posters appear with interest in the TLM, there will be the vote needed to support reopening the Traditional forum, where Traditional subjects can be discussed without potentially resulting in divisiveness.

Click to expand...

If L:atin helps one pray better, fosters a mood or disposition, then Great. I prefer N.O. because I celebrate it with other people,
But I prefer Divine Office in Latin because I pray it alone and feel more connected to the centuries.

But back to Francis. His concern was that the Latin Mass was "being used in an ideological way" in reaction to modernity, hostile to Vatican II as well as N.O. At least that is my understanding.

The issue of is it about God or about us is a both/and answer. Above all God desires a worship characterized by love, kindness and justice. God is both transcendent and immanent. A "My liturgy is more sacred than your liturgy" attitude is the antithesis of the celebration.

So, was Francis right about the ideology? Maybe for some. Who knows how many. For others maybe nostalgia. I don't thing there is anything wrong with that as long as we are clear about it.

d taylor said:

-
​

He titled his written article Saving the Lost

Click to expand...

That doesn't surprise me. That also sounds very much like something he would say. What's your point?

chevyontheriver said:

The Donatists did not accept the validity of baptism done at the hands of repentant priests who had apostasized in a persecution. Apostasy is terrible, but these people repented and were restored to ministry. Not good enough for the Donatists.

The reason it even matters is that otherwise there is no way to trust if your baptism is valid, or your confession, or your marriage, or your ordination. Because maybe the minister of those sacraments was a secret scoundrel. How do you know? In fact, given the sorry state of humanity, it might be probable that the one who provided those sacraments to you is enough of a scoundrel that you cannot trust them. The Donatist solution fails.

Click to expand...

Which is why the Catholic church teaches that even sacraments ministered by a priest in mortal sin are valid.

Sabertooth said:

Ahab did not continue in his repentance and died under judgment anyway [1 Kings 22:29-37].

Click to expand...

sure, but God's forgiveness hinged on him humbling himself and repenting in the first place.
God didn't just forgive his transgression while he declared he was right in his own eyes with a stiff neck.

Godsunworthyservant said:

I'm very familiar with Dr. Yates. He is a very learned man. While I don't always agree with his conclusions on some matters, if memory serves me, he is in agreement with me (or I am in agreement with him) on this matter. I seriously doubt that he said Zacchaeus was a "lost born again believer" just based on what I know about his theology. He might take issue with some of my conclusions but I'll be shocked if he used that phrase to describe Zacchaeus. I've been wrong about people before, so prove me wrong again. Provide the quote where he said that. You've got my curiosity aroused.

Now that sounds like the Dr. Yates that I know!

Click to expand...

He titled his written article Saving the Lost

All Becomes New said:

Wow... How does that look when you have a pastor pedo who relapsed... again?

Click to expand...

If God demanded perfection first, there'd be no need of grace, no need for Christ's sacrifice. And where would you draw the line BTW, unless you believe that there are perfectly sinless pastors out there somewhere?

All Becomes New said:

I am reading the thread. I do not need to bring up points that have already been brought up. Else, I made my case for Abraham, which you rejected on a technicality.

Click to expand...

Good man. Roger, over and out!

All Becomes New said:

View attachment 364228

Please tell me what is bothering you right now. Feel free to PM me.

Click to expand...

It boils down to I love Jesus but I hate religion.
Religion wasn't in Eden, it's something fallen men developed a need for to relate to a God they couldn't see or interact with personally.

When Moses went to commune with God on Mount Sinai, God gave just basic moral laws. But in that time... the Israelites grew restless, they wanted Aaron to make them an idol. they had developed a NEED for religion.
What followed was, God gave them a religion, full of a bunch of ceremonial religious laws, now a lot of it points to what Christ would do.

Because for most people, if you do not give them a religion, they will MAKE one, because they have a need to relate to their creator.
I do too, but I want to relate personally, not through ritual.

But if what Eternity is is not personal relationship, but religious ritual
I can't find joy in that.

Godsunworthyservant said:

You may define it as you wish. If you wish to discuss Job, start a thread and I'll add my 2 cents worth there. If you feel "I'm not being fair with the data, then please provide scriptural data to refute it and we'll discuss that. Saying I'm not being fair with the data without providing evidence doesn't mean a thing. You know what they say about opinions. Give me factual data and we can discuss that, hopefully without the slander and innuendo.

Click to expand...

I am reading the thread. I do not need to bring up points that have already been brought up. Else, I made my case for Abraham, which you rejected on a technicality.

d taylor said:

Zacchaeus was already a born again believer, he was just a lost born again believer.

Click to expand...

I'm very familiar with Dr. Yates. He is a very learned man. While I don't always agree with his conclusions on some matters, if memory serves me, he is in agreement with me (or I am in agreement with him) on this matter. I seriously doubt that he said Zacchaeus was a "lost born again believer" just based on what I know about his theology. He might take issue with some of my conclusions but I'll be shocked if he used that phrase to describe Zacchaeus. I've been wrong about people before, so prove me wrong again. Provide the quote where he said that. You've got my curiosity aroused.

d taylor said:

In fact, he strongly desires to follow the Lord in discipleship and begins that process by giving away the majority of his vast wealth because of what the Lord teaches him.

Click to expand...

Now that sounds like the Dr. Yates that I know!

"Late post"

Lent

Dear Lord Jesus: Please come into our hearts and overturn and disrupt anything and everything that is not of the Father's will Lord, Amen...

This is very sad news and it's more evidence that the leaders of the Democratic Party really does appear to love abortions.

All Becomes New said:

The details are only used to forward your claim because your claim literally does not work unless you define it so narrowly. It's like asking, "How many people in the Bible got boils for their righteousness?" (Job) So, I feel your details are an excuse for not being fair with the data.

Click to expand...

You may define it as you wish. If you wish to discuss Job, start a thread and I'll add my 2 cents worth there. If you feel "I'm not being fair with the data, then please provide scriptural data to refute it and we'll discuss that. Saying I'm not being fair with the data without providing evidence doesn't mean a thing. You know what they say about opinions. Give me factual data and we can discuss that, hopefully without the slander and innuendo.

Zacchaeus was already a born again believer, he was just a lost born again believer.

In Luke 19:1-9, we find the well-known story of a short, but rich, man named Zacchaeus. We are all familiar with the story, and with how the Lord went to Zacchaeus’s home. Zacchaeus is clearly a believer. In fact, he strongly desires to follow the Lord in discipleship and begins that process by giving away the majority of his vast wealth because of what the Lord teaches him.

Saving the Lost (Luke 19:9) – Grace Evangelical Society

This is one of my most favorite songs from AVB.

Mr. M said:

We also know he was a rich man, and a disciple. You seemed uncertain about that fact.

Click to expand...

Oh, no I'm not uncertain that he was rich or that he was a disciple Christ who gave hid burial tomb to the Lord. what I'm uncertain about is what he did with his wealth. I would figure that since he was a disciple of Christ that he was also a philanthropist and gave generously to the poor, but the Bible doesn't state that, so I'll just speculate and hope.

Give it a rest?

What is the difference between the Act passed in 2017. And the program instituted in 2023?

Better yet….

Show me where a Cabinet member can negates law?

They can’t. But they can end a program

Xeno.of.athens said:

I agree; poverty is not and should not be seen as a sign from heaven of God's disapproval.

They don't. Hardly any do. But many of them have trade surpluses with the USA and the USA administration is pretending that a trade surplus is a tariff.

Click to expand...

You do realize that is my signature and has zero to do with this thread?

It is in every one of my posts.

I did skip Easter service. I didn't;t really miss anything, I took a look at it later on the YouTube channel, nothing special, just a little more fashionable with more of a crowd (and less parking) as compared to a regular service.

I was thinking about something this week. I have gone through phases where I attended service every Sunday and every time there was a special event, and now I am in a "part time" phase. While some go weekly and attend every event, I have not found that to be workable for me when I have done it. Now granted, if I had friends there or was part of a ministry or committee, then maybe I would want to attend But since neither of these are the case, I am content to just attend occasionally Call me a part time or occasional member
As for the Previous Lent/Easter season, I just was not in the mood to go. Plain and simple I was not up for it this year so I sat this one out nothing I went last year and it was OK but nothing worth going out of the way for