Fatima, the work of satan?

  • Thread starter Thread starter myfavoritmartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
myfavoritmartin said:
These are not of the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Therein lies your problem… if it ain’t in Scripture, it ain’t

The truth of the matter is that the Tradition came First!!

Scripture is simply the written form of much of Tradition, not all.

It is the book of the Catholic Church… not the book of the Reformation and those who followed.
 
MrS said:
Therein lies your problem… if it ain’t in Scripture, it ain’t

The truth of the matter is that the Tradition came First!!

Scripture is simply the written form of much of Tradition, not all.

It is the book of the Catholic Church… not the book of the Reformation and those who followed.
Click to expand...
Many forget the fact that it was, is and forever will be the book of the Catholic Church. The written form of many of the traditions but not each and every one of them. Some things did not need to be written or proven. If everything was then there would be no need for FAITH.
 
This has been my contention in many of my arguements in the CAF forum. Critics of CC cannot use the scriptures against her, whose scriptures they are.
 
4 posts in a row not one addressing my post!

I’ll change it…
the last 2 promises, lets see an ECF before 200 confirming these
2 mysteries…heck I bet 250 ad and you won’t.
 
myfavoritmartin said:
4 posts in a row not one addressing my post!

I’ll change it…
the last 2 promises, lets see an ECF before 200 confirming these
2 mysteries…heck I bet 250 ad and you won’t.
Click to expand...
The coronation refers to Revelation where the “Woman clothed with sum… crown of 12 stars…”

Scholars agree that this description is of the Mother of God, and also could represent the Church herself.

As for the Assumption… since Mary was conceived without sin (her stain of original sin and all its “penalties”) was removed by Jesus, her Savior, before her conception.

This is reasonable when we consider her Son was also born without original sin. His human nature would have inheirited it if Mary had original sin. He however chose to die to apease the Father for our sins…

The Church declares Mary’s Assumption occured “…at the end of her earthly life…”

Considering how the early Church (Fathers and non-Fathers) had such great desire to preserve the remains of the dead… and yet they had nothing to preserve of Mary… no body, no grave, no evidence …

You may wish to consider this a conspiracy… but maybe you can see that it is all reasonable at the very least.
 
MrS said:
The coronation refers to Revelation where the “Woman clothed with sum… crown of 12 stars…”

Scholars agree that this description is of the Mother of God, and also could represent the Church herself.

As for the Assumption… since Mary was conceived without sin (her stain of original sin and all its “penalties”) was removed by Jesus, her Savior, before her conception.

This is reasonable when we consider her Son was also born without original sin. He however chose to die.

The Church declares Mary’s Assumption occured “…at the end of her earthly life…”

Considering how the early Church (Fathers and non-Fathers) had such great desire to preserve the remains of the dead… and yet they had nothing to preserve of Mary… no body, no grave, no evidence …

You may wish to consider this a conspiracy… but maybe you can see that it is all reasonable at the very least.
Click to expand...
I like to add on my own final thread. The Assumption of Mary is clearly in revelations. “A woman appeared in the heaven.” That woman is Mary. She is in Heaven body and soul… so how did she get there? God took her up in the heaven.
 
hey, Manny…

One of my sons just returned from 2nd tour in Iraq…

and I asked him where he was going to go now… he said Disney World 😃 and he and his wife and kids did just that.

Say a prayer for him if you would… his faith is dormant right now.
 
LilyM said:
Just read something that gave me the best laugh I’ve had in ages - Munificentissimus Deus, :
Click to expand...
When speaking in regard to the assummption of Mary.
Pius 12 in this document, bravely states…
"this truth which is based on the Sacred Writings, which is thoroughly rooted in the minds of the faithful, which has been approved in ekklesiastical worship from the most remote times"

Share that scripture with me please…you know “based on sacred writings”
 
myfavoritmartin said:
When speaking in regard to the assummption of Mary.
Pius 12 in this document, bravely states…
"this truth which is based on the Sacred Writings, which is thoroughly rooted in the minds of the faithful, which has been approved in ekklesiastical worship from the most remote times"

Share that scripture with me please…you know “based on sacred writings”
Click to expand...
You should read the whole document. Prior to that statement you will see this:
  1. Often there are theologians and preachers who, following in the footsteps of the holy Fathers,[20] have been rather free in their use of events and expressions taken from Sacred Scripture to explain their belief in the Assumption. Thus, to mention only a few of the texts rather frequently cited in this fashion, some have employed the words of the psalmist: “Arise, O Lord, into your resting place: you and the ark, which you have sanctified”[21]; and have looked upon the Ark of the Covenant, built of incorruptible wood and placed in the Lord’s temple, as a type of the most pure body of the Virgin Mary, preserved and exempt from all the corruption of the tomb and raised up to such glory in heaven. Treating of this subject, they also describe her as the Queen entering triumphantly into the royal halls of heaven and sitting at the right hand of the divine Redeemer.[22] Likewise they mention the Spouse of the Canticles “that goes up by the desert, as a pillar of smoke of aromatical spices, of myrrh and frankincense” to be crowned.[23] These are proposed as depicting that heavenly Queen and heavenly Spouse who has been lifted up to the courts of heaven with the divine Bridegroom.
  2. Moreover, the scholastic Doctors have recognized the Assumption of the Virgin Mother of God as something signified, not only in various figures of the Old Testament, but also in that woman clothed with the sun whom John the Apostle contemplated on the Island of Patmos.[24] Similarly they have given special attention to these words of the New Testament: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you, blessed are you among women,”[25] since they saw, in the mystery of the Assumption, the fulfillment of that most perfect grace granted to the Blessed Virgin and the special blessing that countered the curse of Eve.
 
newbie1234 said:
The child is Jesus who was born out of the nation of Israel, Mary being a part of that nation as was paul and any other Israelite. The dragon will make war with the believing remnant of Israel in these last days. The chapter is not refering to the CC or Mary specifically. See zech14:1-5 for support on Israel fleeing during last days.
Click to expand...
What do you mean when you say, “these last days”?
 
Mickey said:
What do you mean when you say, “these last days”?
Click to expand...
The end times or last days refers to what Rev is describing as the tribulation and the second coming of Christ. I do not know the time or the hour, but He will come like a theif in the night so be prepared. Repent and make thy life a living sacrifice to the Lord. He is coming soon. Alleluia!
 
hoosierdaddy said:
Yes, I understand (Edited by Moderator). Mary being a co-redemptrix is nothing more than saying we need her for our salvation. Jesus accomplished our salvation ON THE CROSS, BY HIMSELF. Understand?
Click to expand...
Are you sure?

Paul said, “Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.” (Colossians 1:24)

I’m just curious…what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions?

What is Paul going to fill up in his flesh?
 
Randy_Carson said:
Are you sure?

Paul said, “Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.” (Colossians 1:24)

I’m just curious…what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions?

What is Paul going to fill up in his flesh?
Click to expand...
oh now you did it Randy…😃

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/3/3_2_107.gifI can see them all scrambling to look up that verse

and then wondering why their pastors never quoted it.

%between%
 
hoosierdaddy said:
So using the scriptural reference for discernment, we prove that these apparitions of Mary cannot be from Satan. They must therefore be of God.

Except Scripture never tells us that there will be visions of Mary.

Scripture never tells us to submit to any “visions of Mary”.

Scripture does tell us that the devil appears as an angel of light…
Click to expand...
Right on daddyo
 
myfavoritmartin said:
Right on daddyo
Click to expand...
Umm, but it DOES tell us to test ***all ***spirits - including all apparitions. To what purpose, if those that are of Mary aren’t in any circumstances going to be authentic, or if the only authentic ones are to be those that are directly of Christ himself??

Christ and Paul who was speaking on his behalf could have saved us an awful lot of trouble if they’d just said ‘look guys, you don’t need to bother having anything to do with any apparition of anyone who isn’t Christ!’
 
Originally Posted by hoosierdaddy forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*So using the scriptural reference for discernment, we prove that these apparitions of Mary cannot be from Satan. They must therefore be of God.

Except Scripture never tells us that there will be visions of Mary.

Scripture never tells us to submit to any “visions of Mary”.

Scripture does tell us that the devil appears as an angel of light…*
and I respond…
The Catholic Church also does not tell us there WILL BE visions of Mary. It does however investigate claims… and deems them as false, unsure, or perhaps worthy of belief.
Scripture… the Book of the Catholic Church… does not tell us to submit… who says it does.?
And if you are even slightly insinuating that Mary = angel of light = devil…
don’t stand close to me.
Jesus honored His mother, and “…was subject to…” her. If she is good enough for Him, she is good enough for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top