Ag_nots Catholic Scriptural Challenge - just ONE proven example wins!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ag_not
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Martin777 said:
Paul says a man is justified by faith apart from ANY works of the law. You get a person SAVED, justified, and he will produce works that actually give pleasure to God. He’s not interested in having people who do works because they are afraid He will send them to hell or’purgatory. Faith is the one key that opens the door to everything else. That’s why Jesus said that.
Click to expand...
Martin you are so right! Paul did say that, and the Catholic CHurch does agree with that. Because the Catholic Church goes by the bible too! We just don’t go by the bible only.

Now Paul did say a man is justified by faith apart from any works of law. But where does he say a man is justified by faith ALONE! See that’s the biggie. And you are so right works WITHOUT FAITH works are fruitless. Again you are so so right. But where does it say WORKS WITH FAITH ARE FRUITLESS. That is what I need to learn? Because that is not what Paul is saying, But I THINK that is what you think Paul is SAYING. But like what happens everyday in the bible I may be reading your words but not understanding them right. Don’t get me wrong I may again be reading YOU wrong. So now you can explain it to me. But I think you are wonderful Martin, Love you Faith. ITs so real and beautiful and that comes right from the heart.
 
Hisalone said:
It is so obvious that the Immaculate Conception is not taugtin the bible and is therefore contrary, yet many Catholics act as it is.
Click to expand...
Hisalone, regarding Mary’s sinlessness

REPOSTED
The Protoevangelium (Gen. 3:15)

To see that there is more involved than just the fact that Christ came out of Mary’s womb, let us look at the very first prophecy about Christ in the Bible: Genesis 3:15. In that passage, God is cursing the serpent for having caused mankind to fall into sin, and he says,

“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall crush your head, and you shall strike at His heel.”

Ever since the first century, Christians have recognized this as a prophecy of the coming of Christ, who would crush the dead of the devil, even as he himself was stricken by the devil on the cross.
But there is more than just a prophecy of the coming of Christ in this passage and more than a prophecy of the cross and of Satan’s defeat. There is also a prophecy of the Virgin Birth, as even Protestants recognize. The reason is that in this passage, Christ is described as the “Seed” of the woman. This is very unusual in Biblical language because normally it is only men whose offspring are described as their seed. In the ancient, biblical languages men have seed; women do not. The reason for this is that the ancients often held a particular view of human reproduction which made it more natural to talk about men having seed. In the question and answer period, we can discuss this view of reproduction if you want, for now simply note that it was very unusual in the biblical languages for a women to be described as having seed.

Since it was very unusual to talk about women having seed in the Bible, this means that there is something very unusual about the birth of Christ – the Seed of the woman. It means that he was born only of a woman, without the intervention of a man, whose Seed he would otherwise be. As a result, Christians have always regarded Genesis 3:15 as containing a prophecy of the Virgin Birth. And Protestants are included in that. They fully recognize that Genesis 3:15 prophesies not only the coming of Christ, but the way in which he could come: through the womb of a virgin.

But this means that the woman described in Genesis 3:15 is more than just Eve. Eve was not a virgin. All of the children Eve had were fathered by her husband, Adam, according to the normal course of nature. As a result, the woman in Genesis 3:15 is more than just Eve because Eve did not have any virgin births. Therefore, we know that Mary, the only woman in history to have a virgin birth, is specially in view in the Genesis 3:15.
 
Hi, Hisalone,

This is truly amazing.
Hisalone said:
Let me go real slow, 😛
Jesus is God so He can not sin.
Mary who was not God did sin becasue there is no out for her.
Click to expand...
Do you recall the angel Gabriel’s greeding in Luke 1? What do you think “FULL” of grace means? If something is “FULL” it can not hold anything else.

Right from the very beginning - Mary was identified as having been filled with Grace so there was: NO SIN… there is no room for the EFFECTS OF SIN…there was NO ROOM FOR THE STAIN OF SIN.

Is Mary God? No. Mary is a creature just like you and me.

Did Mary ‘earn’ this special privledge? No.

Did God grant her a SPECIAL Blessing? Yes.

Did God elevate her above every other human being - put on a pedistal, if you will? Yes, He did.

How do I know… well… “the Bible tells me so…” (sorry, I could not resist! 😃 ) There is no other place in the Bible - save Luke 1 - where such a greeting is given. While Gabriel’s reported visits to humans are not many - he seems to specialize in birth announcements - compare/contrast Gabriel’s greetings concerning the upcoming births of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. No where else does any heavenly spirit address a human as “FULL OF GRACE”. Look at Elizabeth’s greeting a short time later: “THE MOTHER OF MY LORD” this should surely tell all of us (just in case we missed it with Gabriel) that Mary is very special - this is more then just an important issue - it makes the case.

Do you recall how the Ark of the Covenant was to be kept? Do you not think that this 'New Ark" - Mary - who is actually holding God in her womb isn’t more important…more necessary in that she is actually nurishing Jesus Christ with her own body?

In an earlier post, there was an excellent difinition given of the word ‘proof’. Maybe an analogy would help here: The argument I understand you to be making is that while we have “2” here and “2” there … in the Bible… we can not add them together because “4” does not appear in the Bible (just like the word ‘Trinity’ does not appears in the Bible).

God gave us minds to use - we are required to use them…it is not an option. Closing our eyes to facts does not make them go away, although they may not conform to our previous understandings. This is where we are required to grow in our knowledge and love of God

God Bless
 
Hi, Hisalone,

Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…

Maybe I still fatigued…
Hisalone said:
Delussional.
Click to expand...
…but your one word insults are proving more then tedious… at least to me.

Numerous individuals have attempted to present scriptural evidence and logical arguments - and, you either ignore the material or insult the poster. :mad: I, personally, find this offensive and crude.

Present a reasoned argument or have the decency to find a list where such borish behavior is appreciated.:eek:

God Bless
 
Hmmm… I’m not sure if I read this correctly, so apologies if I’m misrepresenting what you meant to say, hisalone.

But, in one of your posts a page back or so, you asked the question “how could the devil tempt Jesus in the desert for 40 days if he did not have a sin nature?”
Code: 
Is that really what you meant? This is a teaching I honestly (and I mean this sincerely) did not realize non catholic Christians held. Do you believe that by taking on the flesh, Christ inhereited "a sin nature?"
If you do, this explains much of the theology such as calvinism the “dung hills covered with snow” and what appears in my mind, to be a very distorted view of God’s purpose for creating us. I think I understand why, if this is truly what you believe about the nature of the human person, that it could be so hard to even fathom God preserving somebody like Mary from sin.

I heard a great quote from a priest on another forum the other day that really in plain words illustrated the Catholic perspective on human nature: He said that sin, distorts and perverts what God made perfect

To turn from sin and choose God’s will is to be MORE human
To turn away from God and choose sin, is to be LESS human.

Perhaps in that context, it would make sense for your original question. Christ was taking on FULL humanity, in the perfect sense. He was fully human, which would mean in every temptation He would perfectly and always choose to turn AWAY from sin and towards the will of His father. He is the model of what we are to strive for every day in lives, in our own humanity:)

Also, we see the perfect model of one who is fully human, fully created (as Christ was not a creature, but God Himself) in Mary. She is our model of perfect obedience to Christ, and to always saying “yes” to God. He knew what He was doing when He gave us His mother!
God bless!
 
Hi, Martin777

Not only is this off-topic (remember: Catholic Scriptural Challenge…) but, you did not answer AshleyBelle’s question
Martin777 said:
AshleyBelle;4537757:
I think you know how the Canon was formed.
Click to expand...
While I am confident that AshleyBelle knows how the Canon was formed, I really do not have such confidence in you.

Please answer the question in a thorough manner as opposed to the flippant manner you have been addressing items. :eek:

I think you are capable - make me proud of you 👍

God Bless
Click to expand...
 
Ag_not said:
:bigyikes: CINETTE!!!

:hmmm: though I love you as a sister, I will not spare the :nunchuk:

I’m breathless reading this thread. 👍 I intended to get stuck in but to be honest everyone just ran rings around me - by the time I had a little think and tried to compose a reply, there were like 20 most posts

Is it safe yet to conclude, with a concensus, that the Catholic Church does **NOT **in fact teach ANYTHING that is CONTRARY to Scripture Can non catholic christians answer please.
Click to expand...
*Steve!!!Ag_not!!!

What can I say except that I must have been GaGa to post that!!

The only thing I can think of is that I was going from thread to thread to post my last postings for the night and must have got my wires crossed!!

Steve! I have not seen the posts after this one of Ag_not so you might have given me a piece of your mind which I totally deserve!

Agh maaaaannnnn!

Sorry!:bowdown2: :doh2: :hug1: :hug1: *
 
To Martin, Hisalone and all our dear Protestant separated brothers and sisters in Christ!

Here is something else regarding Purgatory for you. I dug them out today. Have no idea if anyone else posted them. Haven’t had time to read all the threads. Here goes:

• 1 Cor 3:15 is clear: “……He himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames”.

• Some say God does not demand expiation after forgiving sins. What about David? When he repented, Nathan told him: “The Lord, on his part, has forgiven you; you shall not die but since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you (Bathsheba) must surely die” (2 Sam 12:14) Even after David’s sin was forgiven, he had to undergo expiation (purgation, in this life).

• In Nb 20:10-13, because Moses doubted and struck the rock at Meribah twice to yield water, he was not allowed entry by God into the Promised Land. This was his “purgation”, illustrating that purging or atoning for sin forgiven can take place in this life as well as in the next.

• In the OT deuterocanonical book (Apocrypha) 2 Macc 12:4-46, we read: “It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins”. Judas Maccabeus had arranged for an atonement offering to be made in Jerusalem, after taking up a collection of 2000 drachmas in silver for those soldiers who had fallen in battle on whom had been found idolatrous lucky charms of the idols of Jamnia, contrary to the prohibition in Deut. 7:25. this was done to make full atonement for their sin

🙂 :love:
 
HOW did I miss this? Hello friend :tiphat: Wow. You are becoming a force to contend with 😃

I’m gonna put together a PM & send it to you. It might me next week. I want to word it just right so I gota think.

But carry on. You are great :extrahappy: Try not to hurt anybody tooooo badly :stretcher:
 
Hisalone said:
I pray until Christ is formed in you.
Christ in you is the hope of glory.

Every Christian who has Christ is the arc of the New Covenant. Do you have the faith that Mary had to be container for Christ?
Click to expand...
I would agree and as such we should hold Mary as our role model. She was the original vessel for Jesus. She physically held him in her body and spirtually held him in her heart “pondering all these things”. I have received Jesus into my heart but also into my body as well every time I receive communion. Communion - I am in union with Christ Jesus. Mary was chosen by God to bring Jesus into the world. I don’t see any disagreement with honoring her. 🙂
 
Hisalone said:
It is so obvious that the Immaculate Conception is not taugtin the bible and is therefore contrary, yet many Catholics act as it is.
Click to expand...
It is not contrary to scripture.

Feel free to point out proof. So far you have failed.

FYI:

Mary is called full of grace, the greek word used was Kecharitomene.

“The ‘perfect’ action of the participle is considered to have been completed before the time of the speaker. How long before is not a consideration but the Greek verbal idea is that the action has already been completed. Time is still secondary but perfected action must imply the past in relationship to the speaker. The person using the word is confessing that the one referred to has already been [graced].”

So, here’s what some modern, English-speaking scholars tell us “Kecharitomene” denotes, based purely on the definition of the word and its grammatical usage:

" ‘Highly favoured’ (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians. 1:6, . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] "is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’ " (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14)

“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament).

However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass. (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p.166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p.175).
see members.aol.com/johnprh/conception.html

bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm
 
I have the faith that Mary is the “container” (your word) for Jesus. God chose her. Who am I to question this. Her “yes” to God’s will is the lesson of faith that we should all follow.
 
theresa_bloom said:
I have the faith that Mary is the “container” (your word) for Jesus. God chose her. Who am I to question this. Her “yes” to God’s will is the lesson of faith that we should all follow.
Click to expand...
Do you have the faith to contain Christ?
Mary said yes can you say yes?
 
Hisalone said:
Do you have the faith to contain Christ?
Mary said yes can you say yes?
Click to expand...
That is why we honor Mary so much:) We strive to say yes with every breath of our lives, and she is our model for saying yes to Jesus.

We also say yes to Jesus every time we come, humbly, before Him…and partake of Him; body, blood, soul and divinity in the Eucharist:)
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
It is not contrary to scripture.

Feel free to point out proof. So far you have failed.

FYI:

Mary is called full of grace, the greek word used was Kecharitomene.

“The ‘perfect’ action of the participle is considered to have been completed before the time of the speaker. How long before is not a consideration but the Greek verbal idea is that the action has already been completed. Time is still secondary but perfected action must imply the past in relationship to the speaker. The person using the word is confessing that the one referred to has already been [graced].”

So, here’s what some modern, English-speaking scholars tell us “Kecharitomene” denotes, based purely on the definition of the word and its grammatical usage:

" ‘Highly favoured’ (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians. 1:6, . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] "is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’ " (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14)

“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament).

However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass. (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p.166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p.175).
see members.aol.com/johnprh/conception.html

bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm
Click to expand...
Mary was full of grace, she was bearing Jesus who is the grace that entered this world. Mary full of Jesus who is grace John 1.

None of what you wrote addresses that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Answer me this Does Mary come short of the glory of God?
If she does then this verse specifically applies to her if she doesnt you have placed her on par with God.

I HAVE PROVEN MY POINT . IF YOU REMAIN BLIND THEN IT IS NOT THAT I HAVE NOT PROVEN MY POINT IT IS THAT YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO REMAIN BLIND.
 
Hisalone said:
Mary was full of grace, she was bearing Jesus who is the grace that entered this world. Mary full of Jesus who is grace John 1.

None of what you wrote addresses that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Answer me this Does Mary come short of the glory of God?
If she does then this verse specifically applies to her if she doesnt you have placed her on par with God.

I HAVE PROVEN MY POINT . IF YOU REMAIN BLIND THEN IT IS NOT THAT I HAVE NOT PROVEN MY POINT IT IS THAT YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO REMAIN BLIND.
Click to expand...
You crack me up!🙂

Mary did not come short of the glory of God.

She was chosen by God to be his mother.

She was always full of grace.

What does FULL of grace mean?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top