L
Lampo
Guest
From your personal, fallible interpretation, correct?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
J
justasking4
Guest
There is absolutely no proof for this assertion. In fact there is no mention of her birth in Scripture to begin with.Originally Posted by submittedjoy
Mary was a sinner like the rest of us and acknowledged that she was in need of a saviour. {“And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” Luke 1:46-47}
Lampo
Incorrect. Her Saviour saved her from sin in a different way than me and you. Of course God is Mary’s Savior! She was freed from original sin in the womb (unlike us who are freed from sin outside of the womb), but needed a Savior as much as the rest of humanity.
L
Lampo
Guest
Here is a bunch of proof!There is absolutely no proof for this assertion. In fact there is no mention of her birth in Scripture to begin with.
Exodus 25:11-21
2 Sam. 6:7
1 Chron. 13:9-10
1 Chron. 15 and 16
Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2
Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16
Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9
Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14
Rev 11:19
Rev 12:1
Rev. 12:17
Rev. 12:2
Isaiah 66:7
Gal 4:19
Rom. 8:22
Jer. 13:21
Hos. 13:12-13
Micah 4:9-10
Rev. 12:13-16
There is absolutely no proof in Scripture that she sinned is what you should have said.
Read this please
J
justasking4
Guest
Who has the infallible interpretation of these things? Are you going to say your fallible leaders are now infallible when we know that all men are fallible? Are you going to say that Peter was the founder and leader of the church at Rome when there is no evidence for it? Are your going to say that celibate leadership is what the Scriptures teach in contradisinction to the Scriptures clear teaching that married men were to be leaders as taught in I Timothy 3? Are you going to say that the Scriptures teach that a man must perform some kind of penace when they don’t teach such a thing?Originally Posted by justasking4
The marian doctrines and the further developement of them. Celibate leadership, Peter as pope and penance to name a few.
Lampo
From your personal, fallible interpretation, correct?
On what basis will you say these things are not true?
L
Lampo
Guest
That’s quite a cluster bomb! Should we tackle one doctrine at a time? Should I point out that you admitted that you are fallible in your interpretation of Scripture and that you could be wrong in 100% of your interpretations?Who has the infallible interpretation of these things? Are you going to say your fallible leaders are now infallible when we know that all men are fallible? Are you going to say that Peter was the founder and leader of the church at Rome when there is no evidence for it? Are your going to say that celibate leadership is what the Scriptures teach in contradisinction to the Scriptures clear teaching that married men were to be leaders as taught in I Timothy 3? Are you going to say that the Scriptures teach that a man must perform some kind of penace when they don’t teach such a thing?
On what basis will you say these things are not true?
L
Lampo
Guest
I say those things on the basis of God’s Word. His *entire *Word. I say these things especially based on 1 Tim. 3:15. Either those things are true or they are not. I argue the pillar and bullwark of truth has the answer.Who has the infallible interpretation of these things? Are you going to say your fallible leaders are now infallible when we know that all men are fallible? Are you going to say that Peter was the founder and leader of the church at Rome when there is no evidence for it? Are your going to say that celibate leadership is what the Scriptures teach in contradisinction to the Scriptures clear teaching that married men were to be leaders as taught in I Timothy 3? Are you going to say that the Scriptures teach that a man must perform some kind of penace when they don’t teach such a thing?
On what basis will you say these things are not true?
J
justasking4
Guest
Where do any of these passages mention anything about her? Where is her name mentioned or that this is the mother of the messiah in these?Originally Posted by justasking4
There is absolutely no proof for this assertion. In fact there is no mention of her birth in Scripture to begin with.
Lampo
Here is a bunch of proof!
Exodus 25:11-21
2 Sam. 6:7
1 Chron. 13:9-10
1 Chron. 15 and 16
Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2
Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16
Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9
Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14
Rev 11:19
Rev 12:1
Rev. 12:17
Rev. 12:2
Isaiah 66:7
Gal 4:19
Rom. 8:22
Jer. 13:21
Hos. 13:12-13
Micah 4:9-10
Rev. 12:13-16
There is absolutely no proof in Scripture that she sinned is what you should have said.
Read this please
What does Romans 8:22, Galatians 4:19 have to do with Mary?
L
Lampo
Guest
They are referencing Mary as the Immaculate Ark of the New Covenant.What does Romans 8:22, Galatians 4:19 have to do with Mary?
J
justasking4
Guest
The problem is that when you look at the various passages they don’t support catholic teachings. Take for instance penance. What passage in scripture teaches such a thing?Originally Posted by justasking4
Who has the infallible interpretation of these things? Are you going to say your fallible leaders are now infallible when we know that all men are fallible? Are you going to say that Peter was the founder and leader of the church at Rome when there is no evidence for it? Are your going to say that celibate leadership is what the Scriptures teach in contradisinction to the Scriptures clear teaching that married men were to be leaders as taught in I Timothy 3? Are you going to say that the Scriptures teach that a man must perform some kind of penace when they don’t teach such a thing?
On what basis will you say these things are not true?
Lampo
I say those things on the basis of God’s Word. His *entire *Word. I say these things especially based on 1 Tim. 3:15. Either those things are true or they are not. I argue the pillar and bullwark of truth has the answer.
L
Lampo
Guest
Exodus 25:11-21 - the ark of the Old Covenant was made of the purest gold for God’s Word. Mary is the ark of the New Covenant and is the purest vessel for the Word of God made flesh.Where do any of these passages mention anything about her? Where is her name mentioned or that this is the mother of the messiah in these?
2 Sam. 6:7 - the Ark is so holy and pure that when Uzzah touched it, the Lord slew him. This shows us that the Ark is undefiled. Mary the Ark of the New Covenant is even more immaculate and undefiled, spared by God from original sin so that she could bear His eternal Word in her womb.
1 Chron. 13:9-10 - this is another account of Uzzah and the Ark. For God to dwell within Mary the Ark, Mary had to be conceived without sin. For Protestants to argue otherwise would be to say that God would let the finger of Satan touch His Son made flesh. This is incomprehensible.
1 Chron. 15 and 16 - these verses show the awesome reverence the Jews had for the Ark - veneration, vestments, songs, harps, lyres, cymbals, trumpets.
Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2 - Luke’s conspicuous comparison’s between Mary and the Ark described by Samuel underscores the reality of Mary as the undefiled and immaculate Ark of the New Covenant. In these verses, Mary (the Ark) arose and went / David arose and went to the Ark. There is a clear parallel between the Ark of the Old and the Ark of the New Covenant.
Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16 - John the Baptist / King David leap for joy before Mary / Ark. So should we leap for joy before Mary the immaculate Ark of the Word made flesh.
Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9 - How can the Mother / Ark of the Lord come to me? It is a holy privilege. Our Mother wants to come to us and lead us to Jesus.
Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14 - Mary / the Ark remained in the house for about three months.
Rev 11:19 - at this point in history, the Ark of the Old Covenant was not seen for six centuries (see 2 Macc. 2:7), and now it is finally seen in heaven. The Jewish people would have been absolutely amazed at this. However, John immediately passes over this fact and describes the “woman” clothed with the sun in Rev. 12:1. John is emphasizing that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant and who, like the Old ark, is now worthy of veneration and praise. Also remember that Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1 are tied together because there was no chapter and verse at the time these texts were written.
Rev 12:1 - the “woman” that John is describing is Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Just as the moon reflects the light of the sun, so Mary, with the moon under her feet, reflects the glory of the Sun of Justice, Jesus Christ.
Rev. 12:17 - this verse tells us that Mary’s offspring are those who keep God’s commandments and bear testimony to Jesus. This demonstrates, as Catholics have always believed, that Mary is the Mother of all Christians.
Rev. 12:2 - Some Protestants argue that, because the woman had birth pangs, she was a woman with sin. However, Revelation is apocalyptic literature unique to the 1st century. It contains varied symbolism and multiple meanings of the woman (Mary, the Church and Israel). The birth pangs describe both the birth of the Church and Mary’s offspring being formed in Christ. Mary had no birth pangs in delivering her only Son Jesus.
Isaiah 66:7 - for example, we see Isaiah prophesying that before she (Mary) was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son (Jesus). This is a Marian prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.
Gal 4:19 - Paul also describes his pain as birth pangs in forming the disciples in Christ. Birth pangs describe formation in Christ.
Rom. 8:22 - also, Paul says the whole creation has been groaning in travail before the coming of Christ. We are all undergoing birth pangs because we are being reborn into Jesus Christ.
Jer. 13:21 - Jeremiah describes the birth pangs of Israel, like a woman in travail. Birth pangs are usually used metaphorically in the Scriptures.
Hos. 13:12-13 - Ephraim is also described as travailing in childbirth for his sins. Again, birth pangs are used metaphorically.
Micah 4:9-10 - Micah also describes Jerusalem as being seized by birth pangs like a woman in travail.
Rev. 12:13-16 - in these verses, we see that the devil still seeks to destroy the woman even after the Savior is born. This proves Mary is a danger to satan, even after the birth of Christ. This is because God has given her the power to intercede for us, and we should invoke her assistance in our spiritual lives.
Taken from here.
L
Lampo
Guest
I will answer if you honestly tell me that you truly want to understand Catholic teaching.The problem is that when you look at the various passages they don’t support catholic teachings. Take for instance penance. What passage in scripture teaches such a thing?
F
FaithofAbraham
Guest
Original sin is the thing that causes physical death, Adam’s curse on all his children. So do you say Mary never died? If not there is no reason she needs to be free of original sin, it is not something held against you to make you a sinner or anything like that.Incorrect. Her Saviour saved her from sin in a different way than me and you. Of course God is Mary’s Savior! She was freed from original sin in the womb (unlike us who are freed from sin outside of the womb), but needed a Savior as much as the rest of humanity.
L
Lampo
Guest
The AssumptionOriginal sin is the thing that causes physical death, Adam’s curse on all his children. So do you say Mary never died? If not there is no reason she needs to be free of original sin, it is not something held against you to make you a sinner or anything like that.
J
justasking4
Guest
Lampo;3384600]Exodus 25:11-21 - the ark of the Old Covenant was made of the purest gold for God’s Word. Mary is the ark of the New Covenant and is the purest vessel for the Word of God made flesh.
2 Sam. 6:7 - the Ark is so holy and pure that when Uzzah touched it, the Lord slew him. This shows us that the Ark is undefiled. Mary the Ark of the New Covenant is even more immaculate and undefiled, spared by God from original sin so that she could bear His eternal Word in her womb.
1 Chron. 13:9-10 - this is another account of Uzzah and the Ark. For God to dwell within Mary the Ark, Mary had to be conceived without sin. For Protestants to argue otherwise would be to say that God would let the finger of Satan touch His Son made flesh. This is incomprehensible.
1 Chron. 15 and 16 - these verses show the awesome reverence the Jews had for the Ark - veneration, vestments, songs, harps, lyres, cymbals, trumpets.
Luke 1:39 / 2 Sam. 6:2 - Luke’s conspicuous comparison’s between Mary and the Ark described by Samuel underscores the reality of Mary as the undefiled and immaculate Ark of the New Covenant. In these verses, Mary (the Ark) arose and went / David arose and went to the Ark. There is a clear parallel between the Ark of the Old and the Ark of the New Covenant.
Luke 1:41 / 2 Sam. 6:16 - John the Baptist / King David leap for joy before Mary / Ark. So should we leap for joy before Mary the immaculate Ark of the Word made flesh.
Luke 1:43 / 2 Sam. 6:9 - How can the Mother / Ark of the Lord come to me? It is a holy privilege. Our Mother wants to come to us and lead us to Jesus.
Luke 1:56 / 2 Sam. 6:11 and 1 Chron. 13:14 - Mary / the Ark remained in the house for about three months.
Rev 11:19 - at this point in history, the Ark of the Old Covenant was not seen for six centuries (see 2 Macc. 2:7), and now it is finally seen in heaven. The Jewish people would have been absolutely amazed at this. However, John immediately passes over this fact and describes the “woman” clothed with the sun in Rev. 12:1. John is emphasizing that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant and who, like the Old ark, is now worthy of veneration and praise. Also remember that Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1 are tied together because there was no chapter and verse at the time these texts were written.
Did anyone in the OT consider the mother of the Messiah to be some kind of ark “type”?Rev 12:1 - the “woman” that John is describing is Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Just as the moon reflects the light of the sun, so Mary, with the moon under her feet, reflects the glory of the Sun of Justice, Jesus Christ.
Does anyone in the NT consider her the same?
What church father taught she was some kind of ark “type”?
How can Mary be the mother of all Christians when the Scriptures never teach such a thing? Even the passage in John doesn’t teach such a thing nor do any apostles who knew her best taught such a thing.Rev. 12:17 - this verse tells us that Mary’s offspring are those who keep God’s commandments and bear testimony to Jesus. This demonstrates, as Catholics have always believed, that Mary is the Mother of all Christians.
How do you or the church knows she had no birth pangs?Rev. 12:2 - Some Protestants argue that, because the woman had birth pangs, she was a woman with sin. However, Revelation is apocalyptic literature unique to the 1st century. It contains varied symbolism and multiple meanings of the woman (Mary, the Church and Israel). The birth pangs describe both the birth of the Church and Mary’s offspring being formed in Christ. Mary had no birth pangs in delivering her only Son Jesus.
Do any of the writers of the NT make this claim also?Isaiah 66:7 - for example, we see Isaiah prophesying that before she (Mary) was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son (Jesus). This is a Marian prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.
Gal 4:19 - Paul also describes his pain as birth pangs in forming the disciples in Christ. Birth pangs describe formation in Christ.
Rom. 8:22 - also, Paul says the whole creation has been groaning in travail before the coming of Christ. We are all undergoing birth pangs because we are being reborn into Jesus Christ.
Jer. 13:21 - Jeremiah describes the birth pangs of Israel, like a woman in travail. Birth pangs are usually used metaphorically in the Scriptures.
Hos. 13:12-13 - Ephraim is also described as travailing in childbirth for his sins. Again, birth pangs are used metaphorically.
None of these passages have anything to do with Mary though.Micah 4:9-10 - Micah also describes Jerusalem as being seized by birth pangs like a woman in travail.
Who teaches this from this passage that “God has given her the power to intercede for us, and we should invoke her assistance in our spiritual lives”?Rev. 12:13-16 - in these verses, we see that the devil still seeks to destroy the woman even after the Savior is born. This proves Mary is a danger to satan, even after the birth of Christ. This is because God has given her the power to intercede for us, and we should invoke her assistance in our spiritual lives.
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
You can not find a single scripture verse that contradicts any of the Church doctrines. The celibacy requirement is not a core doctrine necessary for an individuals salvation. It is a priestly qualification that is a held tradition out of reverence and respect to Jesus as the model of our High Priest setting the example of celibacy.The marian doctrines and the further developement of them. Celibate leadership, Peter as pope and penance to name a few.
JTA4 - I get so sad for people like you. You have been so brainwashed by the fundamentalist poison that it is going to take a miracle or a major personal event (usually of the tragic variety) to get through to you. God WILL get you back if you keep seeking though. It’s only a matter of time.
I recommend that you start questioning your own Protestant teaching with as critical an eye as you have against Catholic teaching. There are deceitful devils out there pretending to be men of God who are trying to pander to demogogery and petty biases and humanity’s natural contempt for all authority to keep you from receiving your crown of truth and full heavenly reward. If you are objective of heart then you need to start looking at the following scripture verses and ask yourself who taught you to be disobedient to Jesus’ teachings in these areas (Authority, Tradition, Baptism [real not symbolic], Eucharist [real not symbolic] , Anointing, Suffering, Works). You are banking your entire salvation on the teaching-traditions of the Protestant revolution that only go back 500 years. The Catholic Church goes back 2,000 years and can trace itself to the original apostles.
Top 10 Scripture Verses Protestant’s Ignore or Rationalize Away.
- Matthew 16:18-19 / Isaiah 22:22 (Authority)
‘And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church…’ - 1 Timothy 3:15 (Church Authority [NOT individual authority])
‘If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth’ - 2 Thessalonians 2:15 (Tradition)
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the **traditions **which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter - 1 Peter 3:21 (Baptism)
“Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves [salvific not symbolic] you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” - John 20:23 (Confession)
“And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” [individuals can NOT forgive themselves of sin by saying “I am sorry” - they can pray for it then MUST confess or intend to confess before death] - John 6:53-58, 66-67 (Eucharist)
So Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you…" [YOUR LORD COMMANDED to eat His body and drink HIS blood - why are you not?] - 1 Corinthians 11:27 (Eucharist)
“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.” [The Apostles WARN you that if you receive the Eucharist unworthily you commit a sacrilege and will die] - James 5:14-15 (Anointing)
“Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.” The sacrament of the Sick only through the Church] - Colossians 1:24 (Suffering)
“Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh and I complete what is lacking in Christ’s affliction for the sake of his body, that is, the church” [We must live and die in Christ to have Glory in Christ. We must each bear our own crosses to suffer with Him] - James 2:24 (Works)
“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”
[Protestants ignore this verse entirely that faith alone is NOT sufficient for someone that lives in Christ]
J
justasking4
Guest
I understand Catholic teachings and i understand what the scriptures teach. Do you understand what the Scriptures teach on these things in context?Originally Posted by justasking4
The problem is that when you look at the various passages they don’t support catholic teachings. Take for instance penance. What passage in scripture teaches such a thing?
Lampo
I will answer if you honestly tell me that you truly want to understand Catholic teaching.
L
Lampo
Guest
I guess Luke 10:16 applies here. “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”I understand Catholic teachings and i understand what the scriptures teach.
Yes, because I am a committed Catholic.Do you understand what the Scriptures teach on these things in context?
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
You still don’t get the most fundamental teaching - the Apostolic Church teaches - scripture does not teach. Scripture is read to support teaching. Individuals are not free to personally interpret scripture outside of the authority of the Church.Do you understand what the Scriptures teach on these things in context?
James
L
Lampo
Guest
Actually, they are, but what you get is Protestantism and the splintering of faith communities and all of the chaos.Individuals are not free to personally interpret scripture outside of the authority of the Church.
J
justasking4
Guest
CentralFLJames;3384778]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Do you understand what the Scriptures teach on these things in context?
I’m not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify?CentralFLJames
You still don’t get the most fundamental teaching - the Apostolic Church teaches - scripture does not teach.
Scripture is read to support teaching. Individuals are not free to personally interpret scripture outside of the authority of the Church.
How does a catholic know when they are doing this? For example how do you know if you are interpreting a particular passage of scripture according to the authority of the church if the church has never defined something or infallibly interpreted a particular passage that you are studying?James
Take a couple of examples in regards to Mary being an ark type. Has the church offically ruled that she is such?
Or that she is the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Where has the church offically pronounced this of her?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.