A
always_gr8ful
Guest
Thanks, Brit72!Great post.
But the Post above all Posts is #856. How can anyone read all that and not want to get on their knees and thank God for the Gift He gave us! Finished, complete, Perfect.
- Status
But the Post above all Posts is #856. How can anyone read all that and not want to get on their knees and thank God for the Gift He gave us! Finished, complete, Perfect.
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
CWBetts! I dedicate and offer this explanation up for you!
Brit! Listen carefully!
First of all, just a warning. Please donât ever insult our Blessed Lord on here or anywhere else ever again by speaking a word against his mother like you have here. I know you have done it out of ignorance, but I am warning you now. Youâre on a Catholic forum, here we pay the respect to her that she deserves. Donât you dare ever call her a sinner, or say that she died etc. How rude to Christ!
âŚ
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
âŚ
Here we go. Have you heard of the Ark of the Covenant? I presume you are aware of its makeup. For those who donât; it contained the distillation of the old covenant; Aaronâs staff, the 10 commandments etc. So basically, the word of God and the Old Covenant. Now, God really liked this box. People touched it, and he killed them. Nothing unclean was allowed to come near it, it was made from nothing unclean, it contained nothing unclean. This thing was spotless. Or⌠immaculate.
Now, letâs look at the New Covenant. Jesus = the Word, the Logos. Jesus = the New Covenant. If you deny this, youâre not a Christian. Sorry!
By denying the Immaculate Conception, what youâre saying is that God the Father would allow the Glorious New Covenant which surpasses the Old in every way imaginable, to be put in an inferior Ark to that of the old. Because thatâs what our Blessed Mother is; the Ark of the New Covenant. She housed Jesus in her womb, right? Deny one and you deny the other.
You quote; âKing David writing in Psalms says that he was brought forth in iniquity and in sin when his mother conceived him - biblical proof of mankinds sinful nature from the time of conceptionâ Psa 51:5. This quote proves only that King Davidâs sinful nature came from the time of conception. Donât you agree that Jesus was preserved from sin? If he was - surely God can preserve other people from sin too? Your quote proves nothing relevent.
Maryâs sacrifice after the Nativity also proves nothing. I could act like a 1st century Jew and make a sacrifice like they did, but as a Christian it would have no bearing on the state of my salvation. The fact that Mary thought she needed to do this simply shows her humility; St Louis de Montfort said that he thought that Mary is so humble that she didnât even realise her paramount role in Salvation History. Secondly - the sacrifices were traditional and to not do so would have been arrogant and unheard of.
I think you fail to understand the meaning and purpose of the Immaculate Conception - this, like all Mariological ideas, are purely Christological. The IC is true because it highlights what a special case Jesus is. Also, the IC is NOT true because of anything Mary herself had done - she is preserved from sin in light of the merits and works of Christ.
Another reason is this: when Eve made her choice, she was free from the the influence of both Original Sin and also Actual Sin. It is only fair for the new Eve, Mary, to make her choice in a similar state. Else, how could she possibly agree?
Also, just to be cheeky - itâs unscriptural to say that Mary sinned. Whereâs the chapter and verse that says that Mary sinned? Explicit reference please! Because if the comments about all men being in sin etc have one exception, they can have two. For God, all things are possible.
Mediatrix
This concept is not unfounded in Sacred Scripture - check out Revelation, in which the prayers of the saints and the cries of the martyrs are proved to be most efficacious. St Paul also tells us to pray for each other - these âdeadâ are alive in Christ. In fact they are more alive than we ever will be in this life.
ALSO even if they are not in Sacred Scripture - who cares? Whatâs the issue? The Trinity is not in SS, the term incarnation is not in SS - and Iâll tell you one thing. Sola Scriptura, Sola Fides, and Once Saved, Always Saved are certainly not in SS.
In conclusion, the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is right, and anything anyone says to the contrary is wrong. Any contrary understanding of Scripture is wrong. All other Christian sects have at least one element wrong. And, sorry, but you are wrong in this instance.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Here we go. Have you heard of the Ark of the Covenant? I presume you are aware of its makeup. For those who donât; it contained the distillation of the old covenant; Aaronâs staff, the 10 commandments etc. So basically, the word of God and the Old Covenant. Now, God really liked this box. People touched it, and he killed them. Nothing unclean was allowed to come near it, it was made from nothing unclean, it contained nothing unclean. This thing was spotless. Or⌠immaculate.
Now, letâs look at the New Covenant. Jesus = the Word, the Logos. Jesus = the New Covenant. If you deny this, youâre not a Christian. Sorry!
By denying the Immaculate Conception, what youâre saying is that God the Father would allow the Glorious New Covenant which surpasses the Old in every way imaginable, to be put in an inferior Ark to that of the old. Because thatâs what our Blessed Mother is; the Ark of the New Covenant. She housed Jesus in her womb, right? Deny one and you deny the other.
You quote; âKing David writing in Psalms says that he was brought forth in iniquity and in sin when his mother conceived him - biblical proof of mankinds sinful nature from the time of conceptionâ Psa 51:5. This quote proves only that King Davidâs sinful nature came from the time of conception. Donât you agree that Jesus was preserved from sin? If he was - surely God can preserve other people from sin too? Your quote proves nothing relevent.
Maryâs sacrifice after the Nativity also proves nothing. I could act like a 1st century Jew and make a sacrifice like they did, but as a Christian it would have no bearing on the state of my salvation. The fact that Mary thought she needed to do this simply shows her humility; St Louis de Montfort said that he thought that Mary is so humble that she didnât even realise her paramount role in Salvation History. Secondly - the sacrifices were traditional and to not do so would have been arrogant and unheard of.
I think you fail to understand the meaning and purpose of the Immaculate Conception - this, like all Mariological ideas, are purely Christological. The IC is true because it highlights what a special case Jesus is. Also, the IC is NOT true because of anything Mary herself had done - she is preserved from sin in light of the merits and works of Christ.
Another reason is this: when Eve made her choice, she was free from the the influence of both Original Sin and also Actual Sin. It is only fair for the new Eve, Mary, to make her choice in a similar state. Else, how could she possibly agree?
Also, just to be cheeky - itâs unscriptural to say that Mary sinned. Whereâs the chapter and verse that says that Mary sinned? Explicit reference please! Because if the comments about all men being in sin etc have one exception, they can have two. For God, all things are possible.
Mediatrix
This concept is not unfounded in Sacred Scripture - check out Revelation, in which the prayers of the saints and the cries of the martyrs are proved to be most efficacious. St Paul also tells us to pray for each other - these âdeadâ are alive in Christ. In fact they are more alive than we ever will be in this life.
ALSO even if they are not in Sacred Scripture - who cares? Whatâs the issue? The Trinity is not in SS, the term incarnation is not in SS - and Iâll tell you one thing. Sola Scriptura, Sola Fides, and Once Saved, Always Saved are certainly not in SS.
In conclusion, the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is right, and anything anyone says to the contrary is wrong. Any contrary understanding of Scripture is wrong. All other Christian sects have at least one element wrong. And, sorry, but you are wrong in this instance.
Viva Cristo Rey!
A
always_gr8ful
Guest
No, but you are confusing what God commands, and what is necessary for Salvation (belief).
Acts 17 doesnât say repent to be saved, and neither does Acts 2.
Reading Acts 2 in context, whose Name did Peter tell the crowd to call on to be saved? (verse 21) Whose Name forgives sin? (verse 38)
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
Are you actually crazy? I mean seriously, do you actually call yourself a Christian?
Jesusâs first missionary words were âThe Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe the good news.â
Sacred Scripture is understood in light of Christ and interpreted by the CC. No amount of misunderstood quotes you produce will change the fact that you have to repent. Seriously, this is the most anti-intellectual thing Iâve heard in at least 23 days.
B
BRIT72
Guest
Did you read any of the Scriptures that prove that Mary was a sinner, there is only one person that ever lived that was sinless and that is Christ. I hope poor Mary doesnât know about the worship she receives, she would be horrified.
A
always_gr8ful
Guest
Personal insults only reflect on you. Not very âCatholicâ either.
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
Did you read my response?
Those quotes do not prove that Mary was a sinner, as I demonstrated in my post.
And, sorry, what worship are you referring to? Iâm not sure I can think of any worship she receives.
B
BRIT72
Guest
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1Timothy 2:5
R
rinnie
Guest
Oh No keep reading. She can out do herself!
My favorite one to date is that we donât have to repent, and follow the ten commandents. But we COULD if we wanted to. But we donât have to, its up to us. Thats my favorite. But we can sin all we want as long as we believe! Thatâs still the winner in my book!:bigyikes:
C
Catholic20064
Guest
Thatâs probably not a good thing â itâs doubtful they would all become Catholic. Many would become agnostic/atheist if the trend is correct. We need to pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ.
B
BRIT72
Guest
That is truly ridiculous, who said that?Oh No keep reading. She can out do herself!
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
You donât ever respond to anything properly, do you? Like most of your kind itâs just âWhen in doubt, throw them a quote from their own Scriptures that they are well aware of, and well aware of the real meaning of.â
Alwaysgrateful, I apologise for being rude. I was shocked by the counter intuitiveness of your ideas which seem utterly ridiculous to me and most others. You have no right to twist the Gospel like that - but youâre right, thatâs no excuse for rudeness.
B
BRIT72
Guest
My kind! LOL
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
Your chum, always grateful, apparently.
And that does kind of take the biscuit.
Itâs not that people hold these views that amuses/shocks/irritates/worries me, because Iâve held some pretty unorthodox views in the past - I can see how it happens. Itâs their resistence to the truth and admonishment, and stubbornness to cling onto ridiculousness.
T
tomarin
Guest
No need to shout. Yes, but Christians have always believed in the communion of saints. Mary is a saint. So I donât see what the problem is.
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
Yeah, you are a kind. Passionate in your love of God, heartfelt in your convictions of his love and justice and enthusiastic to spread his message. Just terribly, fatally flawed in your understanding and utterly refusing to acknowledge it.
You might say the same to us, but itâs different because itâs not our opinion. We submit completely to the truths that Christ has revealed in his Church. Sure, we consider with them and wrestle with them, but ultimately weâre following orthodoxy and trusting God rather than what we reckon or how we feel.
You might say the same to us, but itâs different because itâs not our opinion. We submit completely to the truths that Christ has revealed in his Church. Sure, we consider with them and wrestle with them, but ultimately weâre following orthodoxy and trusting God rather than what we reckon or how we feel.
B
BRIT72
Guest
But honey, you are following the catholic church, we are following Christ directly.
I submit to Christ, not man. I wish you could understand.
B
BRIT72
Guest
Iâm a saint too, but Christ is still the only mediator.
C
ChristusVincit
Guest
But you donât have the same access to Christ we have. You perhaps even have a wrong understanding of Christ. Weâre not following man, we follow Christ directly. The CC submits to Christ, our teachings are from him and his 12 (11) apostles. Our hierarchy donât pluck this out of nowhere, and our hierarchy are as much a part of this as we are. We all follow Christ. Look at the Hebrew Bible. God used prophets to lead Israel, but it was still him leading them. This is what the Catholic Church is. She speaks with HIS authority. We follow him.
We donât follow what we âfeel,â or our own egos (which is what an idea that we have a right to personally interpret or twist Scripture how we want really is) which is what the entire Protestant movement is based on. We do nothing but what Christ tells us. Individually we sin, but as a body we obey him. How could we not? He promised that the gates of hell would never prevail on the Church he founded on St Peter. To say that falsehood etc has entered the CC is to say that the gates of hell have prevailed, and to call our Blessed Lord a liarâŚ
- Status