Mary did not have sin

[benidict]

I find it deeply disturbing on the emphasis that one need a requirement of what religion he is?
I am truly bewildered…

But if you like so many here are in such pain to know what religion i am i will tell you.
I hope this will make it easier for you, but i am guessing it will not.

If i was to belong to a religious denomination it would be - Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

very good! and previously, they were called the way. and they became known as…you guessed it! the Catholic Church. and yes you would have been part of this. so whats holding you back now my friend? Peace

 

[andrewv33]

very good! and previously, they were called the way. and they became known as…you guessed it! the Catholic Church. and yes you would have been part of this. so whats holding you back now my friend? Peace

are you trying to convert me?
in any case thanks for the invite… however i dont think i can become any other denomination but a christian for a number of reasons.

 

[benidict]

are you trying to convert me?
in any case thanks for the invite… however i dont think i can become any other denomination but a christian for a number of reasons.

that would be nice but nah! lol! thats really is the Holy Spirits job. i was just looking at the historical progression of the Church, and what it was called first, to the time when it became known as Catholic. does give you some food for thought tho. doesnt it? and you are most welcome. and i understand where you are coming from. i could not be anything but a Catholic Christian. Peace to you and yours. but to stay on topic. are you aware of the relevance of the ark of the covenant?

 

[andrewv33]

. are you aware of the relevance of the ark of the covenant?

not a great deal, the bible is vast and there is so much… but i will get to it one day

 

[benidict]

not a great deal, the bible is vast and there is so much… but i will get to it one day

thank you for your honest response. i will wait then. if you have not broached this subject, it would do us little good to discuss it. i appreciate your candor. it shows you have a humble spirit. that is very good. in the mean time. you can google Mary and the ark of the covenant. and look at what others have said concerning this. you may find it interesting. there is a very strong paralell between the two. Peace

 

[Bill_Pick]

JohnDanian,
The only problem I have with the declaration is that it binds the conscience of the believer, when there is no explicit scriptural support for it. Frankly, to me, it is a reasonable and believable statement of the Blessed Virgin’s condition, necessary for being the Theotokos. Reasonable, yes. Binding, no.

Jon

Luke 1-15

 

[eucharisteo]

I find it deeply disturbing on the emphasis that one need a requirement of what religion he is?
I am truly bewildered…

But if you like so many here are in such pain to know what religion i am i will tell you.
I hope this will make it easier for you, but i am guessing it will not.

If i was to belong to a religious denomination it would be - Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

then you ought to leave it blank, friend. If you had a bible quote that states the bible is the sole authority of your faith then pleeeeeassee feel free to put it. But we both know that verse only exists in la la land.

Knowing you religion is a matter of honesty about what you believe. You’re coming to the table with an agenda is appears when you try to play some kind of cat and mouse game. I expect people to ask what mine means. I state I’m Christian. Then I place a Greek term next to it. Anyone that has taken Greek would know what is written. If someone asks I laugh and explain where the term came from and why I use it. I even have an opportunity to show them where I got it and who wrote it.

And to address your last paragraph. So you claim you’re a Christian only then? So what does the sign in front of the building say other than location identifier say. Does it say Southern Baptist, bible Church, Church of Christ, Nazarene, or something else. The early Christians were also referred to as “the way”, but that’s not even important. Ignatius of Antioch, notice the name of where he was located, said “where there is Jesus Christ there is the Catholic Church” on his way to be martyred for the faith or for Christianity. It might do you some good to read up on him and his writings after the canon of scriptures were declaired by the Catholic Church by the way until some confused single man named Martin Luther decided to removed 7 books from the already finalized bible. In fact, he also wanted to remove the book of James and Revalations. But the other men working with him said “no”. So he got part of his way and so did they. That was not based on God’s authority or the bible. That was based on mans authority away and separated from the Church authority.

What was it that Peter Said about interpreting scripture is such a way?

2 Peter 3:16-17

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

Your attitude and word choices places you in a fundamentalist group of some sort. So you can’t be Lutheran, Episcopalian, Methodist or even Presbyterian.

 

[eucharisteo]

are you trying to convert me?
in any case thanks for the invite… however i dont think i can become any other denomination but a christian for a number of reasons.

does the first reason begin with the word “stubborn”?

 

[Nicea325]

I am really finding it hard to understand where you are going, or did you want me to ask you where you are going with your point. Sorry.

It is not hard to understand at all.Problem is the belief of the Bible-Only is bogus and is not taught by Scripture anywhere;more important,it was not taught Christ or the Apostles.

Yes i did state that The Bible is a instructional, inspirational book, where one can learn more about God! that is what i am saying… i do not know where else one can learn about God?

Ahhhh…how about the CHURCH he FOUNDED? Did not Jesus promise to guide into all truth? Jesus left us His Church with leaders. Read the entire Bible and God always appointed leaders. God did not say: Only follow the Bible.

I love how you insert “Written” and try to quote add that as my quote… in any case the pharisees tried to use the bible against Christ by applying and twisting the deeper meaning.

Yeah and the Pharisees also misunderstood scripture just as so many Protestants do all the time. And who corrected them? Jesus!

I do not know what is it you are trying to prove but the New and Old Testament are the inspired words of God and I am just saying, that is a good source of food for our soul, our mind. You obviously have other ideas and other avenues where you can feed your spirit and soul with similar literature… share with me.

His Church,Apostolic Traditions (which Protestants flat out REJECT) and Sacred Scripture.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webby

When Luke & Matthew writing were writing Biblical scripture. Where was the catholic church? Nowhere. It was nowhere and did not exist.

WRONG! Are you that prideful? When Matthew and Luke were writing years AFTER Jesus death and resurrection,Jesus already FOUNDED His Church. Jesus founded a “catholic” or “universal” church meaning what? It is for ALL. Did he not Jesus say: Preach to **ALL **nations…It is clear the kind of church He founded. Catholic is merely an adjective describing Christ Church.

Back then, there was NO Catholic church. NO Tradition. It was just the apostles/disciples & biblical scripture

.

Wrong again! No Catholic/Universal church? Christ Church had spread across the entire Roman Empire. No tradition? Aahhhhh…Jesus taught ORALLY;hence which he passed on to the Apostles who in turn WROTE it down and became known as Sacred Scripture. Meaning what? Scripture is ORAL TRADITIONS simply penned.

One thing for certain. The Bible never officiated any pope or leader of the ‘clan’. INstead Jesus said the greatest must be the servant of all. Why then would there even be a LEADER???

That makes absolutely no sense at all. Jesus Himself chose 12 leaders,which passed it on to others names bishops,which are mentioned by Paul in the NT.

 

[Dokimas]

OK, let’s rewind a bit, that post didn’t do much and was perhaps evasive…if it was I apologize.

We’re still hung up on Genesis 2 it seems, in which you see evidence that Adam and Eve were intimate before the fall. I don’t see how you could know that for sure from the text. Here it is again:

(drbo.org/chapter/01002.htm) (accessed 6/ 20/ 10)

Now, the 2 becoming one flesh seems to pertain to intercourse, and perhaps, at least in Christian Theology even more. For example, it could include the rights one has over one’s spouses’ body (mutually given away to each other in the Sacrament of Marriage):

(drbo.org/chapter/53007.htm) (accessed 6/ 20/ 10) (emphasis mine)

This verse came to mind when I was thinking about the 2 becoming one flesh:

(Ephesians 5:28-29) (drbo.org/chapter/56005.htm) (accessed 6/ 20/ 10)

I may have missed it, but what did Jesus understand Moses to mean in Gen 2 when He quoted it? Remember what Paul said about having sex with a harlot?

 

[Dokimas]

Continued:

Anyway, I’m just kind of thinking and/or speculating here and I’m not necessarily sure how much I am in or out of line w/ Catholic teaching (hopefully someone correct me if I am out of line.)

So, the 2 becoming 1 flesh, don’t see it happening at a specific time, from Genesis 2, rather I kind of see Scripture just teaching us about woman coming from man and the man leaving father and mother and cleaving to his wife and being joined together and becoming one flesh because of this; hence the word “Wherefore”, in the passage.

To be honest, I’m not positive that I know the meaning of the passage. But, I don’t see that it has to be read as Adam and Eve for sure having intercourse before the fall, whereas, if I understand you correctly, you seem to.

If this is to me, yes I believe they had sex before the fall. Notice this veres –

Ge 1:28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

My guess is this verse was before the fall. Note God’s command. That involves sex, correct?

 

[Dokimas]

Tell me what sat on top of the Ark of the Convenant? TWO CHERUBIMS,the second choir of angels according to ancient traditions. Is that not likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, ? Yep!

The Mercy Seat and the Two Cherubim. They were not to be worshiped. It was the Glory of God that was inbetween the Two Cherubim that was to be worshiped. That Glory wasn’t made by humans. It WAS God. It was NOT always there between the Cherubim.

 

[JonNC]

Luke 1-15

Hi Bill,
Hope you are surviving our North Carolina heat.

Did you mean Luke Ch. 1, v 15, or Luke Ch 1 through 15?

Not sure how 1:15 works: For he shall be great before the Lord; and shall drink no wine nor strong drink: and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb. .

Help me out,
Jon

 

[Nicea325]

The Mercy Seat and the Two Cherubim. They were not to be worshiped. It was the Glory of God that was inbetween the Two Cherubim that was to be worshiped. That Glory wasn’t made by humans. It WAS God. It was NOT always there between the Cherubim.

Who mentioned anything about the worship of cherubims? Exactly! They were not to be worshiped nor the ARK (Mary) but the Word of God,manna and the staff (Jesus).

What was not always there? The 10 Commandments? The manna?

 

[Dokimas]

Who mentioned anything about the worship of cherubims? Exactly! They were not to be worshiped nor the ARK (Mary) but the Word of God,manna and the staff (Jesus).

What was not always there? The 10 Commandments? The manna?

Your response that I commented on was to the post about idolitry and mentioning a verse from Exodus 20 whick commands not to make a graven image. Then you posted about the cheubim and the ark.

That’s why I said what I said.

Why did you respond to the warning about idolitry the way you did???

 

[Nicea325]

Your response that I commented on was to the post about idolitry and mentioning a verse from Exodus 20 whick commands not to make a graven image. Then you posted about the cheubim and the ark.

That’s why I said what I said.

Why did you respond to the warning about idolitry the way you did???

Yes. God told them to make two graven golden images from ABOVE (Cherubims). And? How is that against Exodus 20?

As a Catholic I am very aware of idolatry and it is wrong. God is not against all religious art and even my NKJV Study Bible, Protestant Bible, makes it clear. Want the reference from it? God is against the worship of graven images,which in-turn becomes idol wrship,not so much against religious art.

Mind you,this from a Protestant Bible,which clearly its producers have realized Protestants have misunderstood that specific command/verse.

 

[teachccd]

Yes. God told them to make two graven golden images from ABOVE (Cherubims). And? How is that against Exodus 20?

As a Catholic I am very aware of idolatry and it is wrong. God is not against all religious art and even my NKJV Study Bible, Protestant Bible, makes it clear. Want the reference from it? God is against the worship of graven images,which in-turn becomes idol wrship,not so much against religious art.

Mind you,this from a Protestant Bible,which clearly its producers have realized Protestants have misunderstood that specific command/verse.

I have wondered if Jesus were alive today would Protestants take pictures of Him?

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Yes. God told them to make two graven golden images from ABOVE (Cherubims). And? How is that against Exodus 20?

As a Catholic I am very aware of idolatry and it is wrong. God is not against all religious art and even my NKJV Study Bible, Protestant Bible, makes it clear. Want the reference from it? God is against the worship of graven images,which in-turn becomes idol worship,not so much against religious art.

Mind you,this from a Protestant Bible,which clearly its producers have realized Protestants have misunderstood that specific command/verse.

I have wondered if Jesus wre alive today would Protestants take pictures of Him?

Of course they would take pictures,but if one accused them of worshiping a picture,they would obviously say they are not,because worship is for God alone! Geeeee…sound familiar?

Actually,I have always wondered about those Protestants always accusing us Catholics of idol worship (Mary,saints,etc) why many of their churches always have a Nativity Scene or Easter Scene with figures outside their churches? Hhmmmmmm?

How is that any different than us Catholics? I call it convenience at its best!

 

[benidict]

I have wondered if Jesus were alive today would Protestants take pictures of Him?

i bet they would! lol! many of them already have paintings of him in their homes. and some who are in the “closet” in their reverence to the Blessed Mother, have images, and candles of her… peace