How do Catholics explain 1 Timothy 2:5 and Hebrews 7:26?

[Arglaze]

Well in that case…1 Coronthians 15:25
says that Christ “must reign untill he has put all his enemies under His feet” Does this mean that after he has put all his enemies under his feet, Christ will cease to reign?

No Christ will reign forever Luke 1:32-33

“Firstborn” is a legal term indicating a special privledge or rank.
Psalm 89:27 call David “firstborn” even though he is Jesse’s eigth son.
Collasians 1:15 calls jesus “the firstborn of all creation” Many people were born before Christ. St. Paul is simply indicating that Jesus has primacy over all creatures.
The term firstborn does not prove that Mary had other children.

See what happens when you don’t have the Church Christ founded as your teacher. Do some research.

Sure, this can be explained. Most times only childs are not refered to as firstborn, they are just the only child. But firstborn, gives place to more than one, there are several examples, that for lack of space I can’t list.
I’d like however to expand on what you wrote Regarding 1 Cor 15:25, since there’s more in that verse that ca be learned.

And actually, yes you’ve got it right when you said Christ will reign until The Father puts all his enemies under Jesus’ feet, then Christ will yield and be subject unto his Father to unite us in an even closer bond with God. All are subject to Christ, and Christ is subject to the Father. So technically yes, Christ only reigns till all his enemies are put under his feet, but since Christ is one in the Father, Christ is actually reigning forever.
I can see how by my previous statement on Joseph one would conclude that 1 Cor. 15:25 says something that sounds awckward, but if you read 1 Cor. 15:24-28. It would be easier to see that both statements in 1 Cor. and Luke 1:32-33 don’t really contradict each other, the complement each other depending on which part of Christ’s ministry we’re talking about.

So although it sounds like Christ will only reign till his enemies are put under his feet, this only refers to his Priestly Kingship in our behalf in the Heavenly Sanctuary, like the book of Hebrews says, however that only ends his work as a Priest, then when He is subject to the Father, then He reigns forever as King of Kings.

Remember Christ has 3 offices that he performs at different times. Prophet, Kingly Priest, and King.
On earth He fulfilled the Prophet part.
Currently He is fulfilling that Kingly Priest office.
When all enemies are under His feet and death is destroyed like 1 Cor. 15:24-28 says, then He’ll be subject to the Father and reign forever.

Just read it carefully.
1 Cor 15:24-28
“… For he must reign… Feet… Last enemie to be destroyed is death… And when all things shall be subdued unto Him” (Jesus) “Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him” (The Father) “that put all things under him” (Jesus), “that God” (The Father) may be all in all. (This is the reigning forever part)

So the statement you posted is not incorrect, it just needed the rest to be better understood.

 

[adrift]

But I understand, generally speaking, Catholics wont admit they worship the Pope.
However, If you show a person without preconceived ideas what people do in the presence of the Pope (or the “Holy Father” like some call him), that person would call it worship.

Worship means that you believe the person is a god. A person without preconceived ideas would not come to a conclusion that it was worship. It is preconceived ideas that see worship. It is also ignorance of what worship is.

After she had the baby, then was Joseph able to “knew” her, not before, but till after she had the baby was born. And that “knew” has nothing to do with getting to know Mary as a person, if you know what I mean.

Again this is ignorance of what a word means or putting a meaning that is not intended.

Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death (2 Sam. 6:23).

There are many examples in the bible of the word until that if you would apply your meaning would lead to some odd results like with Saul’s daughter. Unless you believe she had children after she died.

Even the word “firstborn” says there are more born. Not her only child. That Jesus brothers and sisters are from Joseph’s previous marriage, is an assumption.

Again ignorance of the meaning of first born
Ex 13:2; Nb 3:12 - consecrate first -born that opens womb
Ex 34:20 - first-born among your sons you shall redeem
First born does not indicate other children but rather is a sanctification. That is why Mary and Joseph went to the temple the first born had to be redeemed. Only children were called first born.

---

 

[SIA]

Sia,

Before we all existed God had a plan to create us all, since God knows all things past, present, and future, God knew that he had to create a UNIQUE human that will one day carry His SON, just like the Ark of the Covenant that carried the Word of God, and as we all know, that the WORD of God is Jesus Christ now in the flesh.

Now this Old Ark was made Very Unique by God Design for it will hold the WORD of GOD.

Now the WORD of God has been made Flesh in the NEW ARK. And this New ARK, is the Blessed Virgin Mary, whom she was not made like the Old Ark made by mens hands following God’s pattern This New Ark “Virgin Mary” is not made by human hands this NEW ARK was Soley made by God’S Hand Unique and pure and Unspotted FOREVER! Virgin Mary had the Will to choose or not to choose God’s Plan for our SALVATION.

Sia, it is scary to imagine Virgin Mary using her right, Her WILL, to say No?

As we all know Virgin Mary, the New Eve, the New Living Ark, the Queen Mother, said YES!!! Did not Virgin Mary through her YES give us LIFE, “Who is Jesus” …Did not Virgin Mary give us SALVATION “Who is Jesus” So YES!!! Virgin Mary has a ROLE in Our Salvation unlike anyother human being beside Jesus. i don’t see the correlation between Jesus who is God and Mary who is merely a human. Mary was chosen, Jesus is the great I AM.

Sia, Truth is EVERYONE PLAYS A ROLE IN ONES SALVATION! Does not the pastor down the street bring Salvation “Who is Jesus” to those who LISTEN to him ect…? Thing is, it wouldn’t happen at all if it weren’t the will of God

We are our brothers keeper:thumbsup:

Truth is Jesus Christ is the source of Our Savation… Truth is. there is No other Human being that comes close to the Virgin Mary in regards to OUR SALVATION For She said YES She was there at the BEGINING She was there at the End. SHE will be there to greet us as Queen and Mother in Heaven for all eternity:thumbsup: Wether you believe it or not and how emmbarassed will you be, when you confront her. There’s no basis for this in Scripture.

Food for thought: As Adam & Eve ate the apple and played a role in our sinfulness, Jesus the source of Salvation & Virgin Mary as Co-redemtrix in our Salvation. Amen Again, this is totally different from the picture Scripture gives us of who Mary was.

Sia, Don’t every King have a Queen Mother?

(Rev 12: 1) A great sign appeared in the sky, a Woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and on her head a CROWN of twelve stars.

UFAMTOBIE

 

[Arglaze]

Worship means that you believe the person is a god. A person without preconceived ideas would not come to a conclusion that it was worship. It is preconceived ideas that see worship. It is also ignorance of what worship is.

Not necessarily. And btw, being called Vicar of Christ is taking the title of the Holy Spirit, He is the only one Jesus appointed to replace Him on earth. Catholics used to refer to the popes as vicars of peter, and the Holy Spirit for Vicar of Christ, but somewhere in history someone mixed it, and named the pope with a title that belongs to God. Now, I’m not against the man, for all I know he may be devoted to God and follows according to the light he has, but I’m against what the title represents, for no man should carry that title, its blasphemy. As far as the meaning of worship, that is your definition, but God consistently rebukes those who do things like what people do toward the pope, including John when with good intentions bowed down to worship the angel and the angel rebuked him. We may claim to worship God, but if we bow down to any man or graven images, it is still misleading, that’s why God prohibited that. The only safety is to bow to no man, abstain from the form of evil.

Again this is ignorance of what a word means or putting a meaning that is not intended.

It would have been nice if you could explain if the word “knew” in the context of the sentence means something other that intercourse, or specify what word you meant

There are many examples in the bible of the word until that if you would apply your meaning would lead to some odd results like with Saul’s daughter. Unless you believe she had children after she died.

Again ignorance of the meaning of first born
Ex 13:2; Nb 3:12 - consecrate first -born that opens womb
Ex 34:20 - first-born among your sons you shall redeem
First born does not indicate other children but rather is a sanctification. That is why Mary and Joseph went to the temple the first born had to be redeemed. Only children were called first born.

Mmm, not really, the use for that particular text is properly understood, the text you are bringing about Saul’s daughter is understood diferently (that from that day until the day she died, she had no children, the “until” denotes for how long). In Joseph’s case it’s used to emphasize that he did not have intercourse w/her till the baby was born. Now using your Saul example, it would have been different if the text said, “he knew her not from that day until the day she died”, but that’s not what the Bible says.

On the firstborn issue, I know what the word means, but I’m also aware that in scripture, most only children are not refered to as first born, but as only child. I’ll leave that one however to your discretion. And that text from the temple doesnt prove Mary’ eternal virginity.

 

[adrift]

Not necessarily.As far as the meaning of worship, that is your definition,

It is how Websters
defines it. It is also how the Old Testament defines it.

I

t would have been nice if you could explain if the word “knew” in the context of the sentence means something other that intercourse, or specify what word you meant

The definition of knew does not change the definition of until. Which like worship does not mean what you want it to.

used as a function word to indicate continuance (as of an action or condition) to a specified time

. It says nothing of what happens after the specified time. It does not mean that it changes

Mmm, not really, the use for that particular text is properly understood, the text you are bringing about Saul’s daughter is understood diferently (that from that day until the day she died, she had no children, the “until” denotes for how long). In Joseph’s case it’s used to emphasize that he did not have intercourse w/her till the baby was born. Now using your Saul example, it would have been different if the text said, “he knew her not from that day until the day she died”, but that’s not what the Bible says.

You have too properly understand it? Is that a way of saying you have to change the plain meaning of it? That until is understood the same way in both versus as the dictionary defines it. The text would not have been different.

 

[Arglaze]

It is how Websters
defines it. It is also how the Old Testament defines it.

I
The definition of knew does not change the definition of until. Which like worship does not mean what you want it to.
. It says nothing of what happens after the specified time. It does not mean that it changes

You have too properly understand it? Is that a way of saying you have to change the plain meaning of it? That until is understood the same way in both versus as the dictionary defines it. The text would not have been different.

Ok, and Mary remained a virgin because? And she was assumed into heaven without seeing corruption because the Scriptures say so where?
This English 101 lesson that teaches what? Rather than point what you call ignorance, I think I could learn something if you presented your point. Remember what question we are answering.

 

[adstrinity]

Ok, and Mary remained a virgin because?

Girl Power

 

[Arglaze]

Girl Power

yeah, that’s what I thought. Arguments that lack spiritual strenght are mostly aimed to self glorification. Debate on words that teach nothing, and just point deficiencies. I could argue forever about language and semantics, but I’m not a lawyer, nor am I very educated, but the Bible was written for that type of person.

Let your light shine before men so they may glory your Father which is in heaven, Not “girl power”.

A girl’s power consists in being a servant to others, specially in being better servants to men.

Bring something better to the plate so we can all learn something and profit.

 

[Peter_J]

Girl Power

Arglaze, it seems to me that you’re making a big deal out of a little joke.

 

[Arglaze]

Arglaze, it seems to me that you’re making a big deal out of a little joke.

Yeah, people tell me that all the time, but I don’t like games when salvation is at stake. But you’re probably right, I need to chill sometimes.

Girl Power!
peace ya’ll, I’m going to the abortion topic now, I won’t b back to this one, feel free to refute all my claims, I’ll try not to answer.

 

[Sailka]

yeah, that’s what I thought. Arguments that lack spiritual strenght are mostly aimed to self glorification. Debate on words that teach nothing, and just point deficiencies. I could argue forever about language and semantics, but I’m not a lawyer, nor am I very educated, but the Bible was written for that type of person.

Let your light shine before men so they may glory your Father which is in heaven, Not “girl power”.

A girl’s power consists in being a servant to others, specially in being better servants to men.

Bring something better to the plate so we can all learn something and profit.

                                                                                           You're SO Close, Arglaze.  Just substitute  Volunteer/Helping others, But NEVER EVER servant.          Know only Servants,  Officially, Arglaze?     The Pope takes 3 Vows of Becoming Servant.  Atrchbishops 2 Vows of Being  Servants. Priests One.

                                                                               Live in Jesus                     Tony   :thumbsup:

 

[adrift]

Ok, and Mary remained a virgin because?

I see that you are SDA I believe that you don’t believe Jesus is God. But I do. How could it be allowed that a mere human would then touch the womb that carried God?

And she was assumed into heaven without seeing corruption because the Scriptures say so where?

What does the scriptures say about her death? Oh there is nothing is there? Catholics believe in both oral and written tradition. Paul says to follow his traditions. I would assume that would hold true for the other apostles. Her assumption is from those oral traditions. I believe that some even say that it is alluded to in Revelations.

This English 101 lesson that teaches what?

They teach that your interpretations are wrong. You tried to show from these scriptures that Mary wasn’t a virgin. You were trying to misuse those scriptures using terms that did not apply.

Rather than point what you call ignorance, I think I could learn something if you presented your point.

It is amazing that you missed the point. By the way ignorance is not a defamatory remark. It only denotes not having knowledge. Most of us are ignorant because it is not possible to know everything. The point was that you were making judgments on things you are not knowledgeable about as if they were truth and proved your point when they were not and did not. If you didn’t learn something, than it means you knew this already and you presented a false definition anyway?

Remember what question we are answering.

How do Catholics explain 1 Timothy 2:5 and Hebrews 7:26. It really is simple Communion of Saints. Paul ask for prayers and says he will pray for others. That doesn’t negate Christ being the one mediator. Jesus said to love one another. To ask for the needs of others is a high form of love. We don’t believe that the saints answer our prayers rather that they present our cause to Jesus. Jesus said God was not the God of the dead but the living. Jesus was referring to David and Moses.

 

[mercygate]

I see that you are SDA I believe that you don’t believe Jesus is God. But I do. How could it be allowed that a mere human would then touch the womb that carried God?

Um. SDAs hold an orthodox, trinitarian theology of God and believe that Jesus is true God and true Man. They’re not JWs.

 

[adrift]

Um. SDAs hold an orthodox, trinitarian theology of God and believe that Jesus is true God and true Man. They’re not JWs.

Thank you I thought they held the same view as JW. I guess I was ignorant.

 

[maryj]

let me save some time – I’ve very aware of the RCC view of this concept. The communion of saints includes those both alive and dead – the physically dead saints are alive in Christ (in heaven). We collectively compromise the body of Christ. Up to here I agree – but I won’t follow the rabbit trail down the road to veneration or the idea of intercession. It’s improper, has pagan roots, and therefore it’s heretical.

O.K then if you agree to that point…that there is a bond of unity among all believers, both living and dead, who are committed followers of Christ. We collectively compromise the Body of Christ, let’s throw in for good measure we are branches connected to Christ the vine, than we are also connected to each other.
St. Paul emphasizes this unity in Christ’s body in 1 cor. 12:12-27 and in Romans 12; 4-16.
Just as Paul asked fellow believers(saints) to pray for him (Rom 15:30 Col 4:3 1 Thess 5:25 Eph 6:18-19 Thess 3:1), now we can ask Paul and the other saints in heaven to pray for us. I don’t think that sounds pagan.

Hi adrift, we covered this with sola and arglaze awhile back. Never did get a reply from either of them on this…Imagine that. Keep up the good work.

 

[sola_scriptura]

O.K then if you agree to that point…that there is a bond of unity among all believers, both living and dead, who are committed followers of Christ. We collectively compromise the Body of Christ, let’s throw in for good measure we are branches connected to Christ the vine, than we are also connected to each other.
St. Paul emphasizes this unity in Christ’s body in 1 cor. 12:12-27 and in Romans 12; 4-16.
Just as Paul asked fellow believers(saints) to pray for him (Rom 15:30 Col 4:3 1 Thess 5:25 Eph 6:18-19 Thess 3:1), now we can ask Paul and the other saints in heaven to pray for us. I don’t think that sounds pagan.

The idea of intercession per se doesn’t have pagan roots, but rather the idea of patronage, for instance:

St. Maturinus is the patron saint invoked against infertility

The Roman god Liber is the god of fertility (Libera is the fertility goddess).

St. Benedict of Nursia is the patron saint of farmers (and farm workers)

The Roman god Messor is the god of agriculture

There are hundreds more parallels like this, you can spend the time and compare the saints to the gods if you would like, here’s the links I used:

unrv.com/culture/minor-roman-god-list.php

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patron_saints_of_occupations,_activities_and_communication_mediums

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patron_saints_of_ailments,_illness_and_dangers

I can’t say if for every endeavor there was a Roman god for there is now a saint for (although perhaps there is – I’m just not going to spend weeks studying the thousands of Roman gods and saints) – I simply believe it’s likely this is where the idea springs from.

The idea of praying to anyone except God for blessings in any endeavor is alien to Judeo-Christianity. Moreover, it certainly doesn’t enjoy apostolic support.

So IMO the parallel here is to obvious to ignore. This is how the ancient Roman people prayed – it was ingrained in their culture (through centuries of pagan tradition). Therefore, I think the idea of patronage does have pagan roots. However, why stop there. Obviously if it can be shown one element connected to the practice of intercession is likely to have pagan roots – then the entire practice must be called into question.

I find no biblical or apostolic basis for this practice hence I reject it in the strongest terms.

 

[Arglaze]

Hi adrift, we covered this with sola and arglaze awhile back. Never did get a reply from either of them on this…Imagine that. Keep up the good work.

actually, yes we answered this several times. From the Adventist stand (which is very different from mainstream Protestants), the God condemns speaking to the dead, that includes those who died in Christ. So I cannot pray to that which is unconcious. The idea that when a person dies they go to heaven is not biblical. I challenged this, and I only obtained assumptions.
Someone brought up Christ’s statement of the thief at the cross and I disected and explained in detail why they did not go to heaven that day. And was nicknamed “soul sleeper theory,” which no one answered to either.
The communion of saint was also answered by both sola and myself from the Scriptures and there is no scriptual support for praying to anyone other than God. Jesus died so we could boldly come to the Father without asking anyone to speak to God for us. When Jesus was asked how to pray, he gave a simple prayer pattern to follow. And I challenge anyone to give me a text with a prayer to God from anyone who asks a saint in heaven, or a dead saint. All prayers go straight to God through no other channel than Jesus.

Catholics argued that they follow a tradition given to them by the popes. And if they choose to believe that the pope speaks in behalf of God with an authority equal to that of God, then it would be rebelion for them not to obey the pope in matters of faith.

That being the case, I can’t argue against the authority of God on earth, The Pope, regardless of wether he contradicts the Bible or not, since he’s under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he can change the rules anytime.

 

[Sailka]

:nope:

actually, yes we answered this several times. From the Adventist stand (which is very different from mainstream Protestants), the God condemns speaking to the dead, that includes those who died in Christ. So I cannot pray to that which is unconcious. The idea that when a person dies they go to heaven is not biblical. I challenged this, and I only obtained assumptions.
Someone brought up Christ’s statement of the thief at the cross and I disected and explained in detail why they did not go to heaven that day. And was nicknamed “soul sleeper theory,” which no one answered to either.
The communion of saint was also answered by both sola and myself from the Scriptures and there is no scriptual support for praying to anyone other than God. Jesus died so we could boldly come to the Father without asking anyone to speak to God for us. When Jesus was asked how to pray, he gave a simple prayer pattern to follow. And I challenge anyone to give me a text with a prayer to God from anyone who asks a saint in heaven, or a dead saint. All prayers go straight to God through no other channel than Jesus.

Catholics argued that they follow a tradition given to them by the popes. And if they choose to believe that the pope speaks in behalf of God with an authority equal to that of God, then it would be rebelion for them not to obey the pope in matters of faith.

That being the case, I can’t argue against the authority of God on earth, The Pope, regardless of wether he contradicts the Bible or not, since he’s under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he can change the rules anytime.

                                                                                            Lot of misunderstandings, Arglaze.   Traditions are not started by Popes. They are  things done for centuries or  Milenia, and Accepted as right.                                                                     
                                                                                           Our Judgement by Lord  is not  weeks later, etc.  Is instantly when we  die, and Soul leaves the body.  Is Tradition And Bible.   
                                                                                            We  don't 'speak to the  dead'.  We pray for them, or ask  them to pray for us.  We mean their Souls, not their dead bodies.   They are With the Lord.   And bunch of   peeps or souls praying for same thing works better than one. 



                                                               
                                                                                           The Pope does bot speak with authority equal to God. He speaks as His Earthly representative.   
                                    
                                                                                           You might consider what the Lord said about Truth on Earth. Nowhere in the Bible.  The Lord says in 1 Timothy 3:15   that Truth on Earth is In the Church,  in the Apostles, known as the Council of Bishops, or Magestarium.   
                          
                                                                                           Live in Jesus.  Careful  with own ideas that contradict  Sound Tradition or Bible.                                              :getholy: :signofcross: :gopray2:                                    Tony
                                 
                                                                                           PS:   Please list ANY One, or thousand Pope, or Church  teachings   contrary to the Bible, or changes the "Lord's Rules".   Never happens.

 

[Arglaze]

:nope:

                                                                                            Lot of misunderstandings, Arglaze.   Traditions are not started by Popes. They are  things done for centuries or  Milenia, and Accepted as right.                                                                     
                                                                                           Our Judgement by Lord  is not  weeks later, etc.  Is instantly when we  die, and Soul leaves the body.  Is Tradition And Bible.   
                                                                                            We  don't 'speak to the  dead'.  We pray for them, or ask  them to pray for us.  We mean their Souls, not their dead bodies.   They are With the Lord.   And bunch of   peeps or souls praying for same thing works better than one. 



                                                               
                                                                                           The Pope does bot speak with authority equal to God. He speaks as His Earthly representative.   
                                    
                                                                                           You might consider what the Lord said about Truth on Earth. Nowhere in the Bible.  The Lord says in 1 Timothy 3:15   that Truth on Earth is In the Church,  in the Apostles, known as the Council of Bishops, or Magestarium.   
                          
                                                                                           Live in Jesus.  Careful  with own ideas that contradict  Sound Tradition or Bible.                                              :getholy: :signofcross: :gopray2:                                    Tony
                                 
                                                                                           PS:   Please list ANY One, or thousand Pope, or Church  teachings   contrary to the Bible, or changes the "Lord's Rules".   Never happens.

Yeah, those are the teachings we’ve been discussing.

You said tradition says when you die, your soul goes to heaven, and yet there’s no Scripture doctrinal support for this, in fact, it’s in direct contradiction to what many places in scripture say when u die you loose conciousness and fall to a sleep, like Jesus did when he died. However, there is more support for resurrection, the main one being 1 Thesalonians 4:16, which is so clear. I have many easy to understand Scripture support for this, but all the RCC has its the traditions that contradict the Word.

Please reconsider,
If when we die we go to heaven, wouldn’t it be more desirable to die than to live?
Wouldn’t baby abortion guarranty a soul to heaven?
Why don’t we rush to the Creator’s arms?
Why don’t we desire death more than life so we can be in heaven?

Simple, death is the separation from the life God gives us.
if when we die we go to heaven, why is there need for the resurrection?
Jesus did not go to heaven at death, He went to “hell”, “sheol”, “grave”, which ever name we wanna call it, when he rose on Sunday, then he went to heaven.
RCC teaching directly contradicts this. And I think its the 2nd time I mention this.

RCC holds tradition in equivalence to the Scriptures, they say the Church speaks the Words of God, and its infallible. History teaches this is not so, and the practices of many RCC bishops and previous popes is witness to this, just like any other church.

We could argue a million statements on why we are “representatives” of Jesus, and we are, but the only “Representative” that Jesus left to act in His place is The Holy Spirit.
Men are not left with authority over the Church because they are prone to error, just like Peter when Paul rebuked him. If that occurred today, the church would probably kill Paul for doing that. The Holy Spirit is in control. There is so much corruption within all churches, that the only reliable source of Truth is the Holy Scriptures through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, I will not trust my knowledge of salvation into the doctrines or traditions of men.

Tradition mandates what the RCC believes, it is their rule of faith.
So what the Bible teaches needs to adjust to the tradition. That’s why the Cathechism exists. It modifies what the Bible says to fit tradition.

Not for me. The Bible says “to the law and testimony”, other than this, there’s no safety. The church is not infallible, God’s Word is.

 

[SenorSalsa]

The idea of intercession per se doesn’t have pagan roots, but rather the idea of patronage, for instance:

St. Maturinus is the patron saint invoked against infertility

The Roman god Liber is the god of fertility (Libera is the fertility goddess).

St. Benedict of Nursia is the patron saint of farmers (and farm workers)

The Roman god Messor is the god of agriculture

There are hundreds more parallels like this

God is the ruler of Heaven and Earth
Cronus is the Roman god ruler of all

God is the creator of the Earth
Gaea is the roman god that created the earth

Jesus is the Son of God the King
Zues is the son of Cronus

there are hundreds more parallels like this. Christianity is just Paganism in hiding