A Protestant view of the Mother of God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ite_ad_Ioseph
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As I read through some of the comments about “the Protestant view of Mary the Mother of God,” I was astounded by the real lack of understanding of what it is that, as one commenter put it, “offends Protestants.”

First, in the mainstream Protestant view, Mary, who up to the point of being told of God’s plan for her, and because of the birth of a child, the male seed of which was implanted within her by God the Father and the Son (who pre-existed Mary by zillions of eons to the point of eternity), all people of all ages, before Mary and afterward, would receive the real HOPE of Salvation. Up to the point of God’s communication with her, Mary was no different than her contemporaries.

I agree that God chose her. But for reasons that belong only to Him. We humans cannot impose our view of why God chose her. That is to put ourselves in the place of God, Himself. That is to idolize ourselves, and thereby to break God’s Commandment, “Thou shalt NOT have any other gods before (in the place of, or more honored than) Me or make any graven image to them, nor bow down to them or worship them.” Those are the words found in the actual author of Torah, Moses, himself. He was an Israelite. Not a Catholic, nor did he even consider himself a Christian. He believed in the first coming of a Messiah, to give Salvation to Israel from her SINS (the breaking of the Ten Commandments)

One commenter said that “the Bible is a Catholic book.” That is simply historical heresy.
The Bible was written by non other than ethnic Jews, who, in more or less varied but faithful to the written Torah in most things, never called themselves “Catholic(s).”
Mary was a Jewish woman. She, like Joseph, her betrothed, was Torah observant, as was the Child, Yeshua, taught to be until He recognized His real role in having given the Torah to Moses, along with God the Father at Mt Sinai.

Mary observed what the Catholic Church, in 1893, said was biblical, the what many unread Christians today call, “the Jewish Sabbath.” She observed, along with Joseph and Jesus and His brothers, the annual, what many unread Christians today call, “Jewish” Festivals and holy convocations every year. What she eventually came to realize was that the Child she had given birth to, gave her ancestors the Law and the Prophets, which the 1893 Catholic document says were set up by God, Himself. Jesus said, “I and My Father are One.” It was Jesus’ finger that Moses saw write the Ten Commandments on the tabets of stone. It was Jesus’ pre-incarnate voice that Moses heard dictate to Moses the Laws, Statutes and Judgements, which includes the annual holy days and periods of time for worship and study of God’s Laws, and His Plan of Salvation.

Jesus said to the Samaritan woman at the well, “For, verily I say unto thee, woman, salvation is of the Jews.” He did not say, “Salvation is of the Catholic Church.” The real historical fact is that, even though there was a Bishop of Rome within the first 100 to 125 years after Christ, there were two other Bishops, one in Alexandria, Egypt, and another in Antioch. They each controlled a segment of what was then the Christian fellowship (the Church.

Polycarp kept the Pesach, (Passover Seder and days of unleavened bread, having been taught to do so by John, the Revelator (John who wrote the book of the Revelation of Christ). Polycarp kept it, and all the other “traditions” as the Apostle Paul called the annual holy days and times, in the times based on the lunar calendar because the pre-incarnate Christ had given them in their appointed times to Moses as part of the Laws, Statutes and Judgements contained in the written Torah, the first five books of the “Jewish” bood, the Bible.

Mary, who was a child of the Child she gave the human side of Christ’s equation for Salvation to and gave birth to, observed ALL of the sacred religious calendar that the only God ever gave to anyone. She was blessed by God, Father and Son, to give birth to the incarnate Christ. She could not do it, herself. God did it for her. She was the willing participant with God the Father and Son, in carrying out their Plan of Salvation to deliver us from death, which is the penalty for sin. He, who provided the very life that became Mary, commanded His own death because He had, and has, control over all of life in the universe. Mary was, like all others who observed His days and ways, will hopefully as is the case with all of us humans, be saved when He returns to gather His little flock

The use of the word, “Catholic” came nearly 1,000 years after Christ. Up to that time, it was broadly known as "the Patriarchate of Rome. There were a few who used the term Catholic in the period of the time when Mohammed put together his religion based on Christianity, Judaism, and some pagan conceptions that pre-existed the 6th century after Christ. But it was not the common term used.

Jesus, our High Priest in Heaven, honored His mother, Mary. There were a couple of recorded events in which Jesus (Yeshua) took an opposite view to the ones that Mary took on things related to family matters. She was human. He, when His brothers came to him to ask Him to do His normal tasks as the youngest brother, said He had more important matters to attend to. They were human. So was Jesus. But by that time He realized that He was, as He is today, also Divine. He had control over life and death. Mary never did.

We cannot put ourselves in the -place of God in any way, shape or form. That is the main reason that Protestantism exists. it’s Reformation is not over yet. It still has a long way to go to get back to what the 1893 Council said was the “biblical religion.” (Judaism without the animal sacrifices and Temple services, all of which are in Heaven now where Christ is.
 
RonTheNewJew,

First of all, it is absolutely irrelevant that Christ never said the word Catholic or it took a while to get the name catholic. That doesn’t mean anything. The Church, nor the members of the church put themselves above God, The church IS God. The Bible is a catholic book, it was written by Christians. The earliest Christians were a little more Jewish than Christians today are, that’s just because the Church was new and undeveloped as it is more so today, but they were Christians. They did not remain “faithful to the Torah in most things” they stopped animal sacrifices, they decided that circumcision wasn’t necessary, they worshiped on Sundays and many other things. And of course Mary listened to the Torah growing up, and worshiped on the Jewish Sabbath, everyone did, Christ didn’t establish His church yet, giving new ways to do things, giving an Earthly authoritative head to make traditions and doctrine and hard decisions, like the Bishops did in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) pertaining to circumcision. Are you seriously arguing that there were no Catholics before Christ, or did i misread you, because that is ridiculous. And so what if Mary and Jesus had opposing views, she never sinned by doing so, and no one ever said Mary was infallible, just impeccable.
 
The term Catholic was used in the early 2nd century by Ignatius of Antioch
 
Ite ad Ioseph: First, I have taken a liking to of calling Mary Mother of God like the Greeks, who never say Mary alone, but either use her title or her title and name together. It offends Protestants even more but I don’t care.
A YouTube video discussed the difference between the ‘Catholic Mary and the Bible Mary.’ The main topic was that when God has a plan it happens with out a choice. That is, if Mary said no during the Annunciation, it would have happened anyway. They used Jonah and the whale through a picture, never spoke about it: Jonah didn’t want to do something but God made a whale swallow him and he did the job anyway. Also, it said Mary would have been scared like every other Jewish teenager should be, and that Gabriel was basically telling her, not asking, what was going to go down. Now I am not saying anything; just thinking. Your thoughts? I never thought about this before.
Isaiah 55: 6 “Seek the LORD while he may be found, call upon him while he is near; 7 let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have mercy on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. 8 **For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” **

Humanity throughout the ages, time and again has attempted to replicate the mind and heart of the Almighty God. It is futile to attempt to bring God down to our own level.

Gen. Chapter 1: 26 tells us "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, Ect.

Note here the words, **“our image” ** not “like us, or just as we are.” An image is a lesser reflection of the original. The words in the bible must be read carefully.

In what way are we "made in the “image” of God?

Jn. 4: 24 "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

Humanity is blessed with the following God-like attributes: a mind, an intellect, ability to reason, a memory, a freewill, and a soul which animates all of these as well as our physical being.

Were I to ask you to quantify for us any of these gifts you would not be able to do so because thay are all “spiritual.” We can prove they exist, but we cannot quantify them. Because they are “spiritual” we know they can ONLY come from God who to “is SPIRIT.”

Not to veer too far off track, but why God has given humanity each of these gifts is revenant to the current discussion.

We can know that God is “all-Good- Perfectly,” thus God is and has to be “all-knowing and all-wise.”

From this base we can understand that if God has gifted humanity with these gifts (we all have them, BUT each is different and unique only to us) God must have had a reason (s) to do so. Other wise God would not be Perfect, in which case God could not, would not be God.

The next logical conclusion we can reach is that if God did (and He Did) have a reason, God could not resind one or more gifts without “just and fair cause.”

Because of space limitations, let us focus on the matter of “freewill.” Which is the capacity to say YES to God, or NO to God, and is active in every sin, every good-work.

God has given each of us the ability (and in the entire Created Universe humanity is solely possessed of this ability) to love Him or to reject him. Indeed, it is reasonable to understand that this is precisely, why we are so gifted. Nothing, except humanity can Thank God, Love God and Worship God. Nothing!
**
With this understanding, we are able to discern that should God even for an instant, remove ones ability to exercise their freewill, God would cease being perfect, and thus cease being God.**

So could have done as suggested? No! God cannot (HIS CHOICE) countermand His Perfect decision to give humanity, and MARY a freewill and then removes such from her.

Consider what is necessary in order to selected from all women for all time to be the Mother of God.

She HAD TO BE PERFECT in EVERYWAY in order to give birth to a Perfect God. Read Exodus Chapter 25 and see what Yahweh DEMANDED for “his Ark of the Covenant.” PUREST GOLD!

Certainly God would have even greater expectations, work greater Wonders, for the Most Perfect Tabernacle that was to be Home for His Son, and the MOTHER of GOD!

Of course she was scared! But she had been dedicated to God at an early age, knew Scripture and the Torah, knew the Divine Prophecy. She knew God well enough to be one of God’s “Temple Virgins” and was no doubt extraordinary BLESSED.

It is the Holy Spirit, the very personification of Wisdom, Knowledge, Understanding and Courage who would be “the Father” to “The Son.” Possessing these attributes, the HS certainly was empowered to share them with Mary.

Final point: God is “all everything Good-Perfectly.” Thus God is and has to be "all Wise and all Knowing. He knew, without any doubt that she would say yes, ** however He could not be God if He made the decision for her!** It had to be this way in order to “be Perfect.”

2 Peter 3: 8 “But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”
**
Mt. 5: 48 **“You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect”.

And friend, the Bible is a Catholic Book. There is no difference in “the Catholic Mary” and the “Biblical Mary.” The entire New Testament was written by Catholics and the Catholic Bible was the ONLY Bible for about 1,500 years, and is the base for every bible in print today. Luther himself sadly acknowledged that his KJV was rooted in the Catholic Bible.
 
RonTheNewJew,

First of all, it is absolutely irrelevant that Christ never said the word Catholic or it took a while to get the name catholic. That doesn’t mean anything. The Church, nor the members of the church put themselves above God, The church IS God. The Bible is a catholic book, it was written by Christians. The earliest Christians were a little more Jewish than Christians today are, that’s just because the Church was new and undeveloped as it is more so today, but they were Christians. They did not remain “faithful to the Torah in most things” they stopped animal sacrifices, they decided that circumcision wasn’t necessary, they worshiped on Sundays and many other things. And of course Mary listened to the Torah growing up, and worshiped on the Jewish Sabbath, everyone did, Christ didn’t establish His church yet, giving new ways to do things, giving an Earthly authoritative head to make traditions and doctrine and hard decisions, like the Bishops did in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) pertaining to circumcision. Are you seriously arguing that there were no Catholics before Christ, or did i misread you, because that is ridiculous. And so what if Mary and Jesus had opposing views, she never sinned by doing so, and no one ever said Mary was infallible, just impeccable.
You say that the “Church is God.” Correct? If that is the Catholic Church’s position, then it has, indeed, committed itself to breaking one of God’s Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” This was what Adam and Eve came to think when they ate of the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil: specifically, that God did not mean what He says. They thought they could take what Satan gave them; the idea that they could do whatever they wanted, and that God would just go along with their desire to “become like God.” (Satan to Eve at the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.)

Speaking of whether there were Catholics before Christ, there were some Sadduccee priests and Temple workers who taught that a young man, for example, could take his parents’ land and home from them as long as he willed it, at his death, to the Temple priesthood. Christ said of them in Matthew 23, “They lay heavy burdens on the people. causing the people to BREAK THE LAW OF MOSES.” He knew because He was the One who gave the Torah to Moses. Christ has always existed. He is God the Son.

Since you say that “the Church IS God,” yet the Church is made up of sinners who are “followers” of Christ, then you are, by easy definition saying that God is sinful. That is blasphemy. Paul kept the annual what you call “Jewish” Festivals and the Sabbath (Shabbos, Shabbat), as did the Apostle John, Peter, and all the others. Christ, Who was and is God, therefore as He, Himself said, “unchanging,” could therefore NOT have changed that which He said was "to be kept FOREVER through all your generations.

The Apostles said, "We are grafted into the Olive Tree, Israel, and thereby have become Abraham’s seed (through the unchanging God the Son, Christ), and heirs according to the promise that God made to their father, Abraham.

Torah was given TO the ethnic Israelite nation. It was never an ethnic “Jewish” set of Laws, Statutes and Judgements. It was given TO them. People have attacked the permanent Covenant, saying it is Jewish, as in ehtnic Jewish. It never was. Christ came to live it perfectly and did so. Because the ethnic Jews did not see His sacrifice in the slaying of the innocent lamb, and did not understand what their own prophets had said of the coming Messiah (they had killed too many of them over the centuries before Christ), they thought He was blaspheming God when He said “I and My Father are One.”

There is not a “Jewish” religion. It has always been the religion and religious calendar that the Omnipotent God gave to the ethnic Jewish people to spread, unselfishly, to all nations and lands. Their problem was that they had a hard time because they WERE selfish, like many Christians today, along with Jews and others. They wanted to be set up high above the other peoples of the earth. God wanted them to serve other peoples, and He would bless them mightily if they did. But, they chose to not believe God, or honor their promises to God: “All that the Lord hath commanded, that we will do.” Christ then, before His incarnation here on earth, set in motion His pre-conceived Plan of Salvation to rescue man who was then helpless in dealing with the breaking of God’s only Law.

Jesus did not come to set up a new religion to supercede the only religion He gave to anyone, and which Christ kept perfectly, and taught His disciples to keep and teach. When He made “all things new,” it was that His life, death, resurrection, ascension and now His ministry in the Most Holy Place in the heavenly Sanctuary, would take the place of man’s empty promises. That was when things did CHANGE, big time.

The Church is NOT God. The siinners in it prove that. God is the author of all that is good and holy and truthful and loving. Man, who is under Satan’s constant attacks, blaming us and telling us that we have no hope, so come and follow him scenario, needs Christ the High Priest in Heaven to forgive us our sins, which no man can do. Even when the High Priest at Jerusalem went into the Most Holy Place, he sprinkled the blood of an innocent slain lamb on the Ark of the Covenant and the Mercy Seat. God did the rest. Man of himself could do NOTHING. Either we believe God and take Him at His word, or we do not, and instead choose to follow man’s traditions and devising.
 
Ron you might as well throw out your Bible then, because all it authors who were used b y God to write the Bible were sinners.
 
Matthew 16:18-19 / Isaiah 22:22
“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
*“And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.”*Most Protestants believe that “church” refers to the mass of Christian believers throughout the world, loosely connected to each other by their faith in the Bible alone. But these verses demonstrate that the “Church” Jesus Christ founded is not an invisible body of loosely-connected believers, but a visible and hierarchical institution built upon the person of Peter, who was given supreme authority, an office for dynastic succession, and the gift of infallibility. This Church can only be the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

In these verses, we see the following. First, Jesus builds His Church (“ecclesia”) upon the person of Peter. As we learned in the previous link on The Church, Jesus changes Simon’s name to “Kepha,” and says that on this “Kepha” He will build the Church. Kepha, in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), means a massive rock formation, and Jesus’ use of Kepha to rename Peter signifies Peter’s foundational leadership in the Church. (See also Mark 3:16 and John 1:42 where Jesus renames Simon “Cephas” which is a transliteration of the Aramaic “Kepha.”). Only the Catholic Church recognizes and proves through an unbroken lineage of successors that her foundation is Peter.

Secondly, Jesus says the powers of death will never prevail against the Church. So even though Jesus appoints sinful human beings such as Peter to lead the Church, Jesus promises that hell will not prevail against her. Because the powers of hell refer to the supernatural, this must mean that the Church, although lead by sinful people, is divinely protected. Because she is so protected, the Church cannot lead the faithful into supernatural error. That is, she is unable to teach error on matters of faith and morals. This inability to teach error on faith and morals is called “infallibility” (it has nothing to do with the sinfulness of the Church’s leaders, which deals with “impeccability”). If the Church were not infallible, the powers of death would indeed prevail over her sinful members. The consistent, 2,000 years of the Church’s teaching on faith and morals proves that Jesus has kept His promise.

Third, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. While many Protestants think that the gift of the “keys” means that Jesus appointed Peter as the guardian of the gates of heaven, the “keys” actually refer to Peter’s authority over the earthly Church (which Jesus often described as the “kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 13:24-52; 25:1-2; Mark 4:26-32; Luke 9:27; 13:19-20, etc.) In the Old Davidic kingdom, the king had a prime minister on whose shoulder God placed the keys of the kingdom (Isaiah 22:22). Similarly, the new kingdom of Christ also has a prime minister (Peter and his successors) who is given the keys of the kingdom. The keys not only represent the authority the prime minister has to rule over God’s people in the king’s absence, but also the means of effecting dynastic succession to the prime minister’s office (for example, in Isaiah 22:20-22, Eliakim replaces Shebna as prime minister in the Old Davidic kingdom). Only the Catholic Church claims and proves a succession of prime ministers (popes) all the way back to Peter, and this succession is facilitated by the passing of the keys of the kingdom.

Finally, Jesus declares to Peter that whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. As in the Old Davidic kingdom, whenever Peter the prime minister opens, no one shall shut, and whenever he shuts, no one shall open. Jesus, therefore, gives Peter the authority to make decisions that will be ratified in eternity. In order for sinful Peter (and his successors through the passing on of the “keys”) to make such decisions, he must be divinely protected. Once again, this evidences Jesus’ gift of infallibility to the Church. Only the Catholic Church claims and has proven that her 2,000 year-old teachings on faith and morals, which have never changed, are infallibly proclaimed.
 
1 Timothy 3:15
“If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.”
Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of the truth, and no knowledge outside of the Bible is necessary for our salvation. But then why does Saint Paul write that the Church, and not the Bible, is the pillar and foundation of the truth? This is a powerful text that refutes the Protestant theory of sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) which erroneously holds that the Bible is the sole source of Christian truth (a theory which cannot be found anywhere in the Scriptures). Instead, Saint Paul says the Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

This means that all the truth Jesus left us concerning faith, morality and our salvation flows from a living Church which, as we have learned, is built by Christ upon the rock of Peter and his successors. As the Catholic Church teaches, God has given us His truth in the form of the living word (written Scriptures and oral tradition) and the living teaching authority of the Church, endowed with the gift of binding and loosing. In fact, it is because the Church is the foundation of truth that we believe in the Bible. This is because the Catholic Church put the Bible together by determining which books were inspired and which books were not. The Church completed its selection of the “canon of Scripture” at the end of the fourth century. If the Catholic Church were not the pinnacle and bulwark of the truth, our belief in the Bible would be without foundation.

The Church’s compilation of the Bible illuminates the error of sola Scriptura. As alluded to above, Protestants generally believe that God has revealed everything that is necessary for our salvation through the Bible alone. Consequently, they also believe that no knowledge found outside of the Bible regarding the Christian faith is necessary for our salvation. However, the knowledge of which Scriptures belong in the Bible and which Scriptures do not is necessary for our salvation because if we didn’t know this we could be led into error. Further, this knowledge could only come from God because human beings cannot necessarily discern divine inspiration.

The problem, therefore, with sola Scriptura, is that the knowledge of which Scriptures are inspired and which ones are not is not contained in the Bible. The Bible does not have an “inspired table of contents.” Instead, this knowledge of the canon of Scripture is a revelation from God that is necessary for our salvation, and yet came to us from outside the Bible . This revelation was given to the Holy Catholic Church, and this historical and theological fact destroys the doctrine of sola Scriptura (interestingly, while Protestants reject the authority of the Catholic Church on most matters, they accept her authority in determining the New Testament canon of Scripture; we pejoratively call such picking and choosing which doctrines to believe and which doctrines to reject “Cafeteria Catholicism”).

If I were a Protestant trying to prove sola Scriptura, and there was a verse that said “the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of the truth,” I would be proclaiming that verse from the roof tops. At the same time, if I were a Protestant, I would have to ignore 1 Timothy 3:15 to continue my protest of the Catholic faith.
scripturecatholic.com/my_top_ten.html
 
Ron you might as well throw out your Bible then, because all it authors who were used b y God to write the Bible were sinners.
Stephen:
That is the whole point: But, the Bible authors never claimed to be God. The fact that they wrote what they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write and communicate to others, and yet were sinners, proves that Christ’s followers:

A. Are not God
B. They could never have been. They were created beings, just as Adam and Eve were.
C. That God the Father and Son had a Plan to save sinners through the sacricial system that ended when the real innocent Lamb took our place. The pre-incarnate Christian period Christians (ethnic Jews back then), once many of them saw what had transpired at the cross, believed and became followers of Christ and were taught to keep the Law of Moses without all the extra regulations that the rabbis and priests had told them came from God.

The Law of Moses with the Statutes and Judgements is the Gospel that Christ died that we might keep so that when He returns, we can be saved and be with Him forever. There never was another set of laws that Christ came to make. He said so, Himself: “I came not to destroy the Law or the prophets. I came to fulfill.” This doesn’t say, “I came not to destroy the Law or the prophets. I came to destroy.” Christ, thus, was saying that He came to live the Law He gave to Moses perfectly, which He did while at every opportunity He challenged the interpretations of the Pharisees, some Sadducees, etc.

Matthew 23: Christ says: “The rabbis teach in the Synagogues every Sabbath. Listen to them. But do not do as they do. For, they say but do not do. But, when they sit in Moses’s seat (where a sacred oath required them when sitting there to only READ from the writings of Moses. None of their “Oral Torah” additions were allowed from that bench.), LISTEN TO THEM AND DO WHAT THEY SAY.”

If you read Exekiel, Chapter 36, vs. 26 and 27, God there tells the prophet to write what they soon coming Gospel will be: “I will take out of their flesh their hearts of stone and will put into their inward parts hearts of flesh. I will cause them to WALK IN MY LAWS and Statutes, and KEEP MY JUDGEMENTS and DO them.” That is the Gospel of Christ.
 
Stephen:
That is the whole point: But, the Bible authors never claimed to be God.
How do you then conclude that the Members of the Catholic church claim to be God?
There never was another set of laws that Christ came to make. He said so, Himself: “I came not to destroy the Law or the prophets. I came to fulfill.”
If Christ didnt create a new commandment then why in John:13:34 does he give them one?

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

Ver. 17. Not to destroy the law, &c. It is true, by Christ’s coming, a multitude of ceremonies and sacrifices, and circumcision, were to cease; but the moral precepts were to continue, and to be complied with, even with greater perfection. (Witham) — To fulfil. By accomplishing all the figures and prophecies, and perfecting all that was imperfect. (Challoner) — Our Saviour speaks in this manner, to prepare the minds of the Jews for his new instructions. For although they were not very solicitous about fulfilling the law, still they were extremely jealous of any change being made in the letter of the law; more particularly, if the proposed change exacted a more perfect morality. Our Lord fulfilled the law three several ways: 1. By his obedience to the prescribed rites; therefore he says, it behoveth us to fulfil all justice: and who shall accuse me of sin? 2. He observes the law, not only by his own observance of it, but likewise by enabling us to fulfil it. It was the wish of the law to make man just, but found itself too weak; Christ therefore came justifying man, and accomplished the will of the law. 3. He fulfilled the law, by reducing all the precepts of the old law to a more strict and powerful morality. (St. Chrysostom, hom. xvi.)
 
1965 The New Law or the Law of the Gospel is the perfection here on earth of the divine law, natural and revealed. It is the work of Christ and is expressed particularly in the Sermon on the Mount. It is also the work of the Holy Spirit and through him it becomes the interior law of charity: "I will establish a New Covenant with the house of Israel. . . . I will put my laws into their hands, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."19

1966 The New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given to the faithful through faith in Christ. It works through charity; it uses the Sermon on the Mount to teach us what must be done and makes use of the sacraments to give us the grace to do it:

If anyone should meditate with devotion and perspicacity on the sermon our Lord gave on the mount, as we read in the Gospel of Saint Matthew, he will doubtless find there . . . the perfect way of the Christian life. . . . This sermon contains . . . all the precepts needed to shape one’s life.20
1967 The Law of the Gospel “fulfills,” refines, surpasses, and leads the Old Law to its perfection.21 In the Beatitudes, the New Law fulfills the divine promises by elevating and orienting them toward the “kingdom of heaven.” It is addressed to those open to accepting this new hope with faith - the poor, the humble, the afflicted, the pure of heart, those persecuted on account of Christ and so marks out the surprising ways of the Kingdom.

1968 The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments of the Law. The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, far from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescriptions of the Old Law, releases their hidden potential and has new demands arise from them: it reveals their entire divine and human truth. It does not add new external precepts, but proceeds to reform the heart, the root of human acts, where man chooses between the pure and the impure,22 where faith, hope, and charity are formed and with them the other virtues. The Gospel thus brings the Law to its fullness through imitation of the perfection of the heavenly Father, through forgiveness of enemies and prayer for persecutors, in emulation of the divine generosity.23

1969 The New Law practices the acts of religion: almsgiving, prayer and fasting, directing them to the “Father who sees in secret,” in contrast with the desire to "be seen by men."24 Its prayer is the Our Father.25

1970 The Law of the Gospel requires us to make the decisive choice between “the two ways” and to put into practice the words of the Lord.26 It is summed up in the Golden Rule, "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; this is the law and the prophets."27

The entire Law of the Gospel is contained in the “new commandment” of Jesus, to love one another as he has loved us.28

1971 To the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount it is fitting to add the moral catechesis of the apostolic teachings, such as Romans 12-15, 1 Corinthians 12-13, Colossians 3-4, Ephesians 4-5, etc. This doctrine hands on the Lord’s teaching with the authority of the apostles, particularly in the presentation of the virtues that flow from faith in Christ and are animated by charity, the principal gift of the Holy Spirit. "Let charity be genuine. . . . Love one another with brotherly affection. . . . Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints, practice hospitality."29 This catechesis also teaches us to deal with cases of conscience in the light of our relationship to Christ and to the Church.30

1972 The New Law is called a law of love because it makes us act out of the love infused by the Holy Spirit, rather than from fear; a law of grace, because it confers the strength of grace to act, by means of faith and the sacraments; a law of freedom, because it sets us free from the ritual and juridical observances of the Old Law, inclines us to act spontaneously by the prompting of charity and, finally, lets us pass from the condition of a servant who “does not know what his master is doing” to that of a friend of Christ - “For all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you” - or even to the status of son and heir.31

1973 Besides its precepts, the New Law also includes the evangelical counsels. The traditional distinction between God’s commandments and the evangelical counsels is drawn in relation to charity, the perfection of Christian life. The precepts are intended to remove whatever is incompatible with charity. The aim of the counsels is to remove whatever might hinder the development of charity, even if it is not contrary to it.32

1974 The evangelical counsels manifest the living fullness of charity, which is never satisfied with not giving more. They attest its vitality and call forth our spiritual readiness. The perfection of the New Law consists essentially in the precepts of love of God and neighbor. The counsels point out the more direct ways, the readier means, and are to be practiced in keeping with the vocation of each:

[God] does not want each person to keep all the counsels, but only those appropriate to the diversity of persons, times, opportunities, and strengths, as charity requires; for it is charity, as queen of all virtues, all commandments, all counsels, and, in short, of all laws and all Christian actions that gives to all of them their rank, order, time, and value.33
 
The “Catholic Mary” and the “Bible Mary” are one and the same. Catholics wrote the New Testament and decided what books were to go into it. The Bible is a Catholic book.

Those people are suggesting that God would have made Mary have a baby even if she had said no?
Mary was not a catholic she came from the house of david_ & Catholics didn;t write the bible most were Jewish.Mary is the-Mother of Jesus & the greatest Mother she was. the hands she kissed were nailed & feet she tickled were nailed the body she cradled was so badly brused__ she was his Mother-no one knows what she felt in her heart a sword went deep-:)but she gave birth to our LORD & she is with him now saying what she said here( WHATEVER HE TELLS YOU TO DO DO IT) HE IS THE KING JESUS HE PAID THE PRICE THAT WE MAY ALL GO TO HEAVENhe shed his BLOOD:)glory to the son of GOD-Mary we thank you for saying yes<<
 
=RonTheNewJew;You say that the “Church is God.” Correct? If that is the Catholic Church’s position, then it has, indeed, committed itself to breaking one of God’s Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”
Interesting thought. but I fail to follow you’re logic.

If God is our Creator (to make something out of nouthing) and He is. and If God founded His Catholic (new Covenant Chruch) which He did. And if God in perfect Wisdom and Compassion created the Seven Sacraments which He did, so that He God could in the most amazing way, stay present not only “to His Church” but also "Physically In His Church(s), then, friend, are we to be like Moses and argue with God? Naw! To what end?
Speaking of whether there were Catholics before Christ, there were some Sadduccee priests and Temple workers who taught that a young man, for example, could take his parents’ land and home from them as long as he willed it, at his death, to the Temple priesthood.
No my friend, and yes my friend.No, there could not have been “Catholics Before Christ.” The term itself came into being in the early 100’s AD.

God is “Triune” in His ONE DIVINE NATURE, showing Himslf to us as three seperate, yet unable to be seperated “persons.” God the Father (Yahweh God… The Creator), God the Son (Jesus the Redeemer) and God The Holy Spirit (The Sanctifier and Enlightner.) And yes the Trinity has exisited from the begaining of time, unknown until the Birth of Christ.

If one reads in entirity the Old Testament, or I suspect even you’re Torah, ONLY Yahweh God, God the Father made Himself known until the time of Christ on earth.
Since you say that “the Church IS God,” yet the Church is made up of sinners who are “followers” of Christ, then you are, by easy definition saying that God is sinful. That is blasphemy.
In saying that “the Church is God” we are stating that it would be a Moral, a Theological and a Physical impossibility to seperate Christ from His Chruch.

No, my friend. Our God is you’re God. Perfect and everything Good. While the members of "the church can [and most certainly do sin] “The Chruch is, and has to be holy.” The Church, NOT Her members are “all-holy!”

The Catholic Catecheism say’s: 811 “This is the sole Church of Christ, which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic.” These four characteristics, inseparably linked with each other, indicate essential features of the Church and her mission. The Church does not possess them of herself; it is Christ who, through the Holy Spirit, makes his Church one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, and it is he who calls her to realize each of these qualities"

The Church is Holy because Christ is ALL HOLY, and the Holy Spirit keeps “the Church Holy” as warranted by the Merits of Christ Death.
The Apostles said, "We are grafted into the Olive Tree, Israel, and thereby have become Abraham’s seed (through the unchanging God the Son, Christ), and heirs according to the promise that God made to their father, Abraham.
Thus I can joyfully call you “Brother!”
Torah was given TO the ethnic Israelite nation. It was never an ethnic “Jewish” set of Laws, Statutes and Judgements. It was given TO them.
One Covenant? I think not. Abraham’s Covenant, Mose’s Covenant, David’s Covenant, and the New and now “Everlasting Covenant” in the Blood of the [perfect male “lamb of God” who sacrificed His Son for our Redeemption, Jesus the Christ is the Final Covenant!

This would be an ideal topic for a seperate OP.
There is not a “Jewish” religion. It has always been the religion and religious calendar that the Omnipotent God gave to the ethnic Jewish people to spread, unselfishly, to all nations and lands. Their problem was that they had a hard time because they WERE selfish, like many Christians today, along with Jews and others.
Brother, might it be fair to ask what is the “religion / common Faith practice” of the Nation of Israel today? Clearly Abraham’s kin have fallen on hard times. I do not say this boastfully, but should we who are Brothers, living in “glass houses” be stoning each other?
Jesus did not come to set up a new religion to supercede the only religion He gave to anyone, and which Christ kept perfectly, and taught His disciples to keep and teach.
Here friend you are misinformed. Jesus instituted a New and Everlasting Covenant in His Own Blood, made better the sacrifice of [The Bible: Genesis 14: 18 "And Melchizedek king of Salem **brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High. 19 And he blessed him and said, "Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth; "

In the New Covenant sealed in His Own Blood Jesus actually becomes a Catholics “Bread and Wine!” How is that for improving on the OT?
The Church is not God.
Again the Church is from God, sustained by God, kept holy and perfect by God. Do not mix “The Church,” which is One, Holy, Catholic and Apolstolic. It is the Members NOT Christ Church which is filled with sinners.

Shalome brother,

Love and prayers friend,

Pat
 
Mary was not a catholic she came from the house of david_ & Catholics didn;t write the bible most were Jewish.Mary is the-Mother of Jesus & the greatest Mother she was. the hands she kissed were nailed & feet she tickled were nailed the body she cradled was so badly brused__ she was his Mother-no one knows what she felt in her heart a sword went deep-:)but she gave birth to our LORD & she is with him now saying what she said here( WHATEVER HE TELLS YOU TO DO DO IT) HE IS THE KING JESUS HE PAID THE PRICE THAT WE MAY ALL GO TO HEAVENhe shed his BLOOD:)glory to the son of GOD-Mary we thank you for saying yes<<
The New testament was written by Catholics, the cathechism teaches us that we were Catholic since the Pentecost, thus we conclude that the New Testament was written by catholics and the OT was written by the Jewish.

III. THE CHURCH IS CATHOLIC

What does “catholic” mean?

830 The word “catholic” means “universal,” in the sense of “according to the totality” or “in keeping with the whole.” The Church is catholic in a double sense:

First, the Church is catholic because Christ is present in her. "Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church."307 In her subsists the fullness of Christ’s body united with its head; this implies that she receives from him "the fullness of the means of salvation"308 which he has willed: correct and complete confession of faith, full sacramental life, and ordained ministry in apostolic succession. The Church was, in this fundamental sense, catholic on the day of Pentecost309 and will always be so until the day of the Parousia.

831 Secondly, the Church is catholic because she has been sent out by Christ on a mission to the whole of the human race:310

All men are called to belong to the new People of God. This People, therefore, while remaining one and only one, is to be spread throughout the whole world and to all ages in order that the design of God’s will may be fulfilled: he made human nature one in the beginning and has decreed that all his children who were scattered should be finally gathered together as one. . . . The character of universality which adorns the People of God is a gift from the Lord himself whereby the Catholic Church ceaselessly and efficaciously seeks for the return of all humanity and all its goods, under Christ the Head in the unity of his Spirit.311
 
1 Timothy 3:15
“If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.”
Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of the truth, and no knowledge outside of the Bible is necessary for our salvation. But then why does Saint Paul write that the Church, and not the Bible, is the pillar and foundation…

This means that all the truth Jesus left us concerning faith, morality and our salvation flows from a living Church. In fact, it is because the Church is the foundation of truth that we believe in the Bible.

The Plan of Salvation revealed to His chosen people and proven by Christ’s sacrifice and promise to return, is why, by faith, we believe in the Bible.

Also, regarding the “Oral Traditions,” Christ rejected the “oral traditions” of the rabbi’s.

The Church is made up, entirely, of human beings who “cannot necessarily discern divine inspiration.” Thus, we either accept all 66 books as written by fallible Jews to whose original leaders was given the religion of God, or we reject it as fable…

scripturecatholic.com/my_top_ten.html
Your text, First Timothy 3:15, when taken in the context of that verse rather than as an isolated statement by Paul in his letter to Timothy, talks about people’s personal lives and Church service in appropriate reverence and respect for the fact that, whether you call it a Synagogue or Church, it is the present day meeting place for the worship of God in truth as revealed in the Bible. The Church, as such canNOT control God or what He said in His inspired word. First Timothy 3 and 4 bears out that Paul, the Apostle, was aware, even then, of coming heresies regarding not allowing marriage, etc. He even said that Bishops should be married to only one wife. Setting itself up to say what God did not say, is wrong.

Notice, how, in chapter 4, right next door, Paul says that in the last days there will be those who will, for example, command that meats not be eaten, and who will command that people not marry, and the text in chapter 3 is talking about various offices within each congregation of the Church, doesn’t seem to say that the Church, which is SUPPOSED to be the pillar of truth, can change any aspect of that which was never questioned: God’s appointed times of worship, or the annual festivals, each with it’s theme from the Plan of Salvation.

Is there a religious organization that once said it was OK for it’s leaders to marry, including some of the earliest leaders of it, but which now forbids them to marry?

In terms of Peter and the “keys,” we have not learned any such thing from the Scriptures. If you look up the Hebrew words that Jesus actually spoke to Peter, the Hebrew word for the English word, “keys,” means knowlege already given. Knowing, as Christ did know, that Peter, to whom He happened to be speaking at that time, with the rest of the disciples nearby by the way, as well as the rest would, after His sacrifice for us, come upon situations of controversy within the Church and situations when believers might have sinned or done things against the Law of God, would be called upon to make some judgements about whether there had indeed been sin committed.

He simply told Peter that He, Christ, had given to the disciples, including Peter, the keys of the knowledge about the Law of Moses and how it can be kept, in Christ’s love, with mercy and courage unto truth (in short, to use good judgement as He had taught them all the way through His ministry with them). If they used the knowledge that He had given to them and decided a particular case a certain way, He would cause their decision to stand in heaven. The knowledge He gave to Peter, and the other disciples was, and still is the set of “keys/” He is God. The Church, though filled with professed sinners, was given special knowledge of how to keep the Law He gave Moses, without all the “rubbish” that the rabbi’s and teachers had laid upon it. But, no change in the moral Law.

At the time that Paul wrote to Timothy, Christians were all worshipping God, Father and Son, with the ethnic, observant Jews because Christ had not ever said anything to them about observing days other than those He gave at Sinai to Moses and his people. Thus, though Paul spoke and wrote in wide phrases, Paul was, nonetheless a keeper of the annual feasts of the religion he had been taught all his life. 24 years after Pentecost, Paul kept the Passover on the 15th day of Nisan, as commanded by Christ. So did John, the revelator. We know this because one of his converts from paganism, Polycarp of Antioch, said to the Bishop of Rome, when challenged, in 154 AD on his keeping the Passover at it’s God-appointed time, that he had learned what he knew, and would not change, from John, one of Christ’s Apostles.

The idea that the Church, because it is supposed to be the pillar,. that is the foundation that Christ had built when He gave the disciples their commission and message (His Laws, Statutues and Judgements (Ezekiel 36, 26, 27, Malachi 4, vs. 4, 5 and 6, Matthew 23), would ever be granted some form of “inspiration” to change any of that Law, is ludricrous. It is the Law that teaches us what is moral, just, good, decent, patient, sharing, courageous and kind. That Law is fully described in described behaviors in First Timothy 3 and 4. There is no mention of the Church having become God so as to try to say it could change what the real God said was, and is, permanent. There is only one God. Those under the judgement of the Law are those who choose not to follow Christ.

Here, of Israel. The Lord (Christ) God (the Father) is one God.There can be no other. That is, even though Protestants have yet some distance on their journey back to the religion of God.

Shalom Alechem
Baruch Adonai
 
The first Covenant was pronounced by God and made with our first parents, Adam and Eve. It was at this time that God told them to make the very first typical animal sacrifice, which they built an alter and did at the gate of the Garden of Eden. The rest of the Plan of Salvation, which started there, was revealed in steps, based on the circumstances at the time each “new” Covenant was given. After the Israelites left Egyptian bondage and reached Horeb in northwestern Saudi Arabia as we know it today, the enrtire nation of Israel was together in one place. There, the “Everlasting Covenant” was pronounced by God iwth Israel when His Laws, Statutes and Judgements and religious calendar and the themes of Salvation were formally pronouced and man’s promises of obedience were made.

What Christ did when he made “a new Covenant WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL,” was to take out of the way man’s promises and in it’s place, He instituted His life as the Sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin and to make a way for his followers to love Him because of what He did for them, such that theri love for Him would cause them to follow in His footsteps. What were His footsteps?? He kept the love contained in the written Torah, and taught men to do the same.

Peter (Cephas, an Aramaic word for “Peter,” or Petra in Greek, was likened by Jesus to a rolling stone. Jesus said while standing on a high rock, that His Church would be built on a similarly strong foundation. He even turned to Peter when Peter said he did not want Christ to go to Jerusalem and suffer: “Get thee behind Me thou Satan.” I doubt that Peter, the man Christ knew would deny Him three times in Jerusalem, was to be the leader of His Church. In fact, Christ made a non-disciple, Saul, calling him Paul, the greatest Apostle.

I’ve already explained the correct use of the word, “Keys.” Loosing and binding had only to do with judgements made using the knowledge of His Law and the prophets which Christ said should be kept by His followers (Matthew 23) Paul said, "All Scripture is given by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. That excludes man, whether Church leaders, or laiety because “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Sinful human beings cannot claim any human as “holy.” Only Christ can do that, and will at His second coming and afterward after the thousand year millenium at the Great White Throan judgement. The final judgement, based on His Ten Commandments.

Yeshua’s blessings
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top