Catholics...For Your Advise.

[jmcrae]

You are anointed by God and you need to be taught by men???

God has appointed men to teach me, yes. This is not a burden - He does this because of His great love for us, and so that we may experience His love from each other. He has shown me who these men are (and has even marked them with a special sign so that I can easily know who they are), and instructed me to listen to their counsel. “In the multitude of counsellors, there is wisdom.”

I do not puff myself up with pride, or think that I alone am anointed, or that my anointing has given me all wisdom. Indeed, it only makes me realize and understand how small my mind really is, and how much I need to learn from others whom God also has anointed.

Just listen to yourself. You are saying that you are attending kindergarten after attending convocation.

When I asked Jesus - since I see Him face to face, - I asked Him, “Why must I go to the priest for Confession?” He told me, “So that the priest may love you as I have loved you, and so that you may love him as I have loved him.”

 

[Anna_Scott]

God has appointed men to teach me, yes. This is not a burden - He does this because of His great love for us, and so that we may experience His love from each other. He has shown me who these men are (and has even marked them with a special sign so that I can easily know who they are), and instructed me to listen to their counsel. “In the multitude of counsellors, there is wisdom.”

I do not puff myself up with pride, or think that I alone am anointed, or that my anointing has given me all wisdom. Indeed, it only makes me realize and understand how small my mind really is, and how much I need to learn from others whom God also has anointed.

When I asked Jesus - since I see Him face to face, - I asked Him, “Why must I go to the priest for Confession?” He told me, “So that the priest may love you as I have loved you, and so that you may love him as I have loved him.”

jmcrae,

Very interesting post. I appreciate your comments.

Anna

 

[LutheranDK]

Is this guy for real?

Is he saying that if you’re a Christian, then no one can teach you anything?


OMG* this guy needs to read the Bible…

• = G = Gosh

 

[wisdomseeker]

Is this guy for real?

Is he saying that if you’re a Christian, then no one can teach you anything?


OMG* this guy needs to read the Bible…

• = G = Gosh

i think that is what he claims to do.

 

[jmcrae]

Is this guy for real?

Is he saying that if you’re a Christian, then no one can teach you anything?


OMG* this guy needs to read the Bible…

He claims that he does, but it’s definitely not the same one that I’m using - mine is all full of commandments like “honour thy father and thy mother,” and “do as they say; not as they do,” and all of this kind of thing.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Is this guy for real?

Is he saying that if you’re a Christian, then no one can teach you anything?


OMG* this guy needs to read the Bible…

• = G = Gosh

Either one of two things is true for this guy?

(1) He does not go to any church. If that is true, it would be unfair to Protestants to call him a Protestant. It seems to me a prerequisite of being a Protestant is that you attend a church that is classified as Protestant.

(2) He goes to a (presumably) Protestant church. In that case he obviously has a few screws missing in his reasoning ability because he is taught every Sunday through the message at church (unless he is Friends which is possible but I sort of doubt it). In that case, he should be handled with gentleness.

From my time on these forums, having a few missing screws in reasoning does not limit itself to one branch of Christianity.

 

[Javl]

Either one of two things is true for this guy?

(1) He does not go to any church. If that is true, it would be unfair to Protestants to call him a Protestant. It seems to me a prerequisite of being a Protestant is that you attend a church that is classified as Protestant.

(2) He goes to a (presumably) Protestant church. In that case he obviously has a few screws missing in his reasoning ability because he is taught every Sunday through the message at church (unless he is Friends which is possible but I sort of doubt it). In that case, he should be handled with gentleness.

From my time on these forums, having a few missing screws in reasoning does not limit itself to one branch of Christianity.

It is truly amazing for this guy that is “self taught” to know more than the Theologians and Scholars who have studied these subjects for years.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Anna_Scott]

Either one of two things is true for this guy?

(1) He does not go to any church. If that is true, it would be unfair to Protestants to call him a Protestant. It seems to me a prerequisite of being a Protestant is that you attend a church that is classified as Protestant.

(2) He goes to a (presumably) Protestant church. In that case he obviously has a few screws missing in his reasoning ability because he is taught every Sunday through the message at church (unless he is Friends which is possible but I sort of doubt it). In that case, he should be handled with gentleness.

From my time on these forums, having a few missing screws in reasoning does not limit itself to one branch of Christianity.

I’ve never heard of a Protestant Church that doesn’t believe in teaching.

I quoted 2 Posts worth of Scriptures in the N.T. that clearly support teaching. Mosacked just ignores, what he doesn’t want to hear. I keep thinking maybe things will turn around, but doubt it’s going to happen.

Anna

 

[Mosacked]

The one who is being deceived is you, my friend. By your words and actions and a confrontational attitude it looks like the “great deceiver” is prompting you, for he knows scripture also ( and better than you do ). Please stop and think of what you are doing before you fall into the deep pit and cannot climb out.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Looks like?..You don’t judge based on looks.

 

[Mosacked]

I’ve never heard of a Protestant Church that doesn’t believe in teaching.

I quoted 2 Posts worth of Scriptures in the N.T. that clearly support teaching. Mosacked just ignores, what he doesn’t want to hear. I keep thinking maybe things will turn around, but doubt it’s going to happen.

Anna

You quoted without understanding. And you wish to be taught by men. Be my guest.

I’m going BACK to the Bible. And no thanks, I don’t need to be taught by humans, the majority of whom (according to Jesus) are going to Hell.

.

 

[Mosacked]

Mosacked, if you are a non-Christian then please tell me so. Otherwise I am assuming you are a Christian:

Luke 1: 39-45 In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a city of Judah, and she entered the house of Zechari’ah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.”

How do you personally and honestly interpret this passage form Sacred Scripture especially the expression “mother of my Lord” given the fact that the angel said “the Lord is with you” in Luke 1:28 to Mary earlier in Sacred Scripture?

When I read your first post about Theotokos I honestly thought you were a non-Christian attacking Christ. Do you know the history behind Mary being called Theotokos (God-bearer or the one who gives birth to God), and why this title has everything to do with Christ Jesus (who is fully God and fully man; one person) and NOT God the Father or God the Son BEFORE the Incarnation of God becoming man?

To Catholics the title Mother of God has everything to do with Jesus because Catholics believe Jesus to be God. To Catholics to say Mary isn’t the Mother of God you are saying that Jesus isn’t God which is blasphemy to Catholics. The title Mother of God is a blessing to Mary because she was blessed to have God become her human child called Jesus and so “all generations will call me blessed” Luke 1:48.

If you are a non-Christian then I ask you what I asked a Muslim on another thread:

Do you believe it is impossible for an infinite God to become a finite child of a mortal human woman? If so then He is not an infinite God. We can’t understand how because of our finite human minds, so it is a Divine Mystery we accept on faith.

lurker,

Firstly, we MUST understand that the Bible is not just a collection of God’s instruction, its also a collection of the follies of men. Job’s wife spoke against Job and insulted him for obeying a God that could do nothing for him, Moses killed the egyptian man and ran away from Egypt…etc. NOT everything in the Bible is instruction nor to be taken as instruction. UNless specifically instructed, actions by the characters in the Bible DO NOT all imply God’s approval.

What Elizabeth said was what she said. In her own words, Mary is the mother of the lord, it is like what Ralphinal clearly acknowledged that it is MERELY a title. God CANNOT have a mother. (I AM THE ALPHA & THE OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END). To insist against that declaration is BLASPHEMY.

Now, what is Theotokos?

Can Mary give birth to God? NO. What merely happened is that the Holy Spirit of God came upon Mary to enable her to conceive the blessed Jesus. Could Mary have conceived Jesus? NO. The Holy Spirit conceived Jesus… Mary was MERELY A VESSEL used by God.

Matthew 1:20 " for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. "

Note the above…IT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT CONCEIVED JESUS.

1 - No human can give birth to God. (ie no created can give birth to the creator)
2 - Being a humanly host to the offspring of God does not equate one to being the mother of God.
3 - Mary herself called herself a maid/servant to God.

Notice something here?..Neither God nor Mary had spoken about who is the mother of God. Its just you fellas jumping on the unfortunately misconstrued statement spoken by Elizabeth.

.

 

[wisdomseeker]

lurker,

Firstly, we MUST understand that the Bible is not just a collection of God’s instruction, its also a collection of the follies of men. Job’s wife spoke against Job and insulted him for obeying a God that could do nothing for him, Moses killed the egyptian man and ran away from Egypt…etc. NOT everything in the Bible is instruction nor to be taken as instruction. UNless specifically instructed, actions by the characters in the Bible DO NOT all imply God’s approval.

What Elizabeth said was what she said. In her own words, Mary is the mother of the lord, it is like what Ralphinal clearly acknowledged that it is MERELY a title. God CANNOT have a mother. (I AM THE ALPHA & THE OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END). To insist against that declaration is BLASPHEMY.

Now, what is Theotokos?

Can Mary give birth to God? NO. What merely happened is that the Holy Spirit of God came upon Mary to enable her to conceive the blessed Jesus. Could Mary have conceived Jesus? NO. The Holy Spirit conceived Jesus… Mary was MERELY A VESSEL used by God.

Matthew 1:20 " for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. "

Note the above…IT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT CONCEIVED JESUS.

1 - No human can give birth to God. (ie no created can give birth to the creator)
2 - Being a humanly host to the offspring of God does not equate one to being the mother of God.
3 - Mary herself called herself a maid/servant to God.

Notice something here?..Neither God nor Mary had spoken about who is the mother of God. Its just you fellas jumping on the unfortunately misconstrued statement spoken by Elizabeth.

.

are you serious?
your understanding of this has been considered heretical long ago. why do you insist on this? what you know?

Mother Mary conceived Jesus of the Holy Ghost. what is that you dont understand here?
she is the Mother of Jesus. who is Jesus?

 

[ralphinal]

lurker,

Firstly, we MUST understand that the Bible is not just a collection of God’s instruction, its also a collection of the follies of men. Job’s wife spoke against Job and insulted him for obeying a God that could do nothing for him, Moses killed the egyptian man and ran away from Egypt…etc. NOT everything in the Bible is instruction nor to be taken as instruction. UNless specifically instructed, actions by the characters in the Bible DO NOT all imply God’s approval.

What Elizabeth said was what she said. In her own words, Mary is the mother of the lord, it is like what Ralphinal clearly acknowledged that it is MERELY a title. God CANNOT have a mother. (I AM THE ALPHA & THE OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END). To insist against that declaration is BLASPHEMY.

Now, what is Theotokos?

Can Mary give birth to God? NO. What merely happened is that the Holy Spirit of God came upon Mary to enable her to conceive the blessed Jesus. Could Mary have conceived Jesus? NO. The Holy Spirit conceived Jesus… Mary was MERELY A VESSEL used by God.

Matthew 1:20 " for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. "

Note the above…IT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT CONCEIVED JESUS.

1 - No human can give birth to God. (ie no created can give birth to the creator)
2 - Being a humanly host to the offspring of God does not equate one to being the mother of God.
3 - Mary herself called herself a maid/servant to God.

Notice something here?..Neither God nor Mary had spoken about who is the mother of God. Its just you fellas jumping on the unfortunately misconstrued statement spoken by Elizabeth.

.

That is not exactly what I said. What I said was that it was a title that tells you more about her son than it does about her. You put the emphasis on Mother, we put it on God.

Jesus is God. Mary is his mother. Mary is the Mother of God. To deny the last means you must deny at least one of the parts. Take your pick as to which one.

Now, Mary is not the Mother of the Creator. Nor is she Mother of the Holy Spirit. She is Mother of the Word made Flesh. It is a Trinitarian doctrine. Do you deny that Jesus is God? I did not think you did. Do you deny that Mary gave birth to him? I did not think you did. That is in the Bible clearly.

I see what you are posting. It seems like you are having issue with two parts. The first is the Trinity. Jesus is God. That does not mean that God is Jesus nor does it mean that The Father is the Son or the Holy Spirit is the Son. The Son was born of Mary. The Son IS God. Not 1/3 of God. God. The second part is that you seem to have trouble grasping the Incarnation itself. The Son emptied himself and became Man. To do so, he was born of a Virgin. HE was still God, now with a Human Nature. The Infinite took on the Finite that we might be able to have eternal life.

 

[Anna_Scott]

It is truly amazing for this guy that is “self taught” to know more than the Theologians and Scholars who have studied these subjects for years.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

Looks like?..You don’t judge based on looks.

I’ve never heard of a Protestant Church that doesn’t believe in teaching.

I quoted 2 Posts worth of Scriptures in the N.T. that clearly support teaching. Mosacked just ignores, what he doesn’t want to hear. I keep thinking maybe things will turn around, but doubt it’s going to happen. :shrug:Anna

You quoted without understanding. And you wish to be taught by men. Be my guest.

I’m going BACK to the Bible. And no thanks, I don’t need to be taught by humans, the majority of whom (according to Jesus) are going to Hell.

So, you continue to ignore all those passages of Scripture that speak of “teaching.” If you think I “quoted without understanding,” then take each Scripture and tell me how you understand them.

lurker,

Firstly, we MUST understand that the Bible is not just a collection of God’s instruction, its also a collection of the follies of men. Job’s wife spoke against Job and insulted him for obeying a God that could do nothing for him, Moses killed the egyptian man and ran away from Egypt…etc. NOT everything in the Bible is instruction nor to be taken as instruction. UNless specifically instructed, actions by the characters in the Bible DO NOT all imply God’s approval.

What Elizabeth said was what she said. In her own words, Mary is the mother of the lord, it is like what Ralphinal clearly acknowledged that it is MERELY a title. God CANNOT have a mother. (I AM THE ALPHA & THE OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END). To insist against that declaration is BLASPHEMY.

Now, what is Theotokos?

Can Mary give birth to God? NO. What merely happened is that the Holy Spirit of God came upon Mary to enable her to conceive the blessed Jesus. Could Mary have conceived Jesus? NO. The Holy Spirit conceived Jesus… Mary was MERELY A VESSEL used by God.

Matthew 1:20 " for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. "

Note the above…IT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT CONCEIVED JESUS.

1 - No human can give birth to God. (ie no created can give birth to the creator)
2 - Being a humanly host to the offspring of God does not equate one to being the mother of God.
3 - Mary herself called herself a maid/servant to God.

Notice something here?..Neither God nor Mary had spoken about who is the mother of God. Its just you fellas jumping on the unfortunately misconstrued statement spoken by Elizabeth.

are you serious?
your understanding of this has been considered heretical long ago. why do you insist on this? what you know?

Mother Mary conceived Jesus of the Holy Ghost. what is that you dont understand here?
she is the Mother of Jesus. who is Jesus?

Mosacked,

You entire post is a “teaching” according to Mosacked; and it is a false “teaching.”

If you are going strictly by the Bible, then quote the passages in the Bible that support your “teaching,” in your post above. I’d really like to see that.

Anna

 

[Javl]

So, you continue to ignore all those passages of Scripture that speak of “teaching.” If you think I “quoted without understanding,” then take each Scripture and tell me how you understand them.

Mosacked,

You entire post is a “teaching” according to Mosacked; and it is a false “teaching.”

If you are going strictly by the Bible, then quote the passages in the Bible that support your “teaching,” in your post above. I’d really like to see that.

Anna

I say this in all charity. Mosacked does not know or understand what we say, nor does he know or understand what he says. For if he did he would not make such ridiculous statements. He truly thinks that all scholars and theologians are wrong and that only he alone is right. Pray for him.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Anna_Scott]

I say this in all charity. Mosacked does not know or understand what we say, nor does he know or understand what he says. For if he did he would not make such ridiculous statements. He truly thinks that all scholars and theologians are wrong and that only he alone is right. Pray for him.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

You’re right, Javl. It’s just so hard to watch. I cringe every time I read one of his posts.

Anna

 

[AmateurPianist]

I’ve never heard of a Protestant Church that doesn’t believe in teaching.

And that is the one thing that I hope the Catholics on this thread get.

I have been to a number of different churches and I do not know of one that would be supportive of Mr. M. here.

So please do not take Mr M. as representative of all Protestants or even one strain of them. He is not.

Oh btw…I thought last night of the possibility of Friends, but having known a few Friends on this forum, nope. Friends have a much more gentle and not totally whacked out approach.

So you all can continue this if you want, but I suspect you will be…
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Anna_Scott]

And that is the one thing that I hope the Catholics on this thread get.

I have been to a number of different churches and I do not know of one that would be supportive of Mr. M. here.

So please do not take Mr M. as representative of all Protestants or even one strain of them. He is not.

Oh btw…I thought last night of the possibility of Friends, but having known a few Friends on this forum, nope. Friends have a much more gentle and not totally whacked out approach.

So you all can continue this if you want, but I suspect you will be…
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

AP,

I’d say you summed it up very well.

Anna

 

[Tomster]

So, you continue to ignore all those passages of Scripture that speak of “teaching.” If you think I “quoted without understanding,” then take each Scripture and tell me how you understand them.

Mosacked,

You entire post is a “teaching” according to Mosacked; and it is a false “teaching.”

If you are going strictly by the Bible, then quote the passages in the Bible that support your “teaching,” in your post above. I’d really like to see that.

Anna

Anna,

What Mosacked does not understand is that no obligation exists binding each individual to draw the subject matter of his/her faith directly from the Scriptures.

The obligation of reading the Bible, if such existed, would be founded either in the nature of the subject itself or upon a divine command. The nature of the subject requires only a knowledge of religion suited to each one’s condition. This may be obtained in various ways, but chiefly by the oral teaching of the Church. Nor can we point to any divine precept enjoining the reading of the Bible on all. Whenever the Apostles addressed letters to the faithful these were intended, in the first place, for those to whom they were addressed, and were doubtless publically read, with the necessary comments, by the pastors of the communities. Some of the inspired letters were addressed to individuals, other to particular churches. Nowhere do we find a precept enjoining on all Christians, either in the times of the Apostles or of later ages, the reading of the apostolic writings.

If any such divine precept existed, it could not have been unknown to the Early Church Fathers. Now although these recommend the reading of the Scriptures to those who may profit by them, yet they expressly assert that there is no such universal obligation. “Thy faith has saved thee,” says Tertullian, “not the study of the Scriptures; faith is contained in the Creed.” Nor does the same writer fail to censure in another place those who do not read the Scriptures in a proper spirit. St. Augustine is still more explicit on this matter: “Established on faith, hope, and charity, and holding to these immovably, man needs not the Scriptures, except as a means of instructing others. Hence many by these three [virtues] live in the desert without the Scriptures.” What St. Augustine here says of hermits St. Irenaeus asserts of whole nations, who had received and preserved the faith by the oral teaching of the Church alone. And St. Jerome severely rebukes the presumption of those who pretend to interpret the Scripture without authority.

Unfortunately for Mosacked, he knows none of this.

 

[Mosacked]

That is not exactly what I said. What I said was that it was a title that tells you more about her son than it does about her. You put the emphasis on Mother, we put it on God.

Jesus is God. Mary is his mother. Mary is the Mother of God. To deny the last means you must deny at least one of the parts. Take your pick as to which one.

Now, Mary is not the Mother of the Creator. Nor is she Mother of the Holy Spirit. She is Mother of the Word made Flesh. It is a Trinitarian doctrine. Do you deny that Jesus is God? I did not think you did. Do you deny that Mary gave birth to him? I did not think you did. That is in the Bible clearly.

I see what you are posting. It seems like you are having issue with two parts. The first is the Trinity. Jesus is God. That does not mean that God is Jesus nor does it mean that The Father is the Son or the Holy Spirit is the Son. The Son was born of Mary. The Son IS God. Not 1/3 of God. God. The second part is that you seem to have trouble grasping the Incarnation itself. The Son emptied himself and became Man. To do so, he was born of a Virgin. HE was still God, now with a Human Nature. The Infinite took on the Finite that we might be able to have eternal life.

Ralphinal,

I am getting somewhere with you, but nowhere with the others.

If you observe carefully, you will notice that there are certain things kept secret from even Jesus. Jesus once said…nobody knows, only the Father, and Jesus said Just as my Father sent me, I send you. Notice that unless the Father sents, nobody can come to Jesus.

This is the differentiating factor between what you believe and what I believe.

JESUS WAS THE SON OF GOD, THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON.. He was NOT the Father. The Bible says this very clearly…He was the SON.

I have already shown you that the Bible itself declared that Jesus was a conception of the Holy Ghost. NOwhere did it attribute it to Mary, and Mary herself declared herself a maid/servant of God.

It is ONLY the CATHOLICS themselves who insist on deitifying her.

.