You have taken the scripture out of context, Rick. If you look at the Psalm from which that quote is taken, it is clear that there are two groups of people referenced there. Paul is quoting the description of the fools, who say in their heart, “there is no God”. He is saying in Rom that the unbelieiving Jew is no closer to God than the unbelieving Gentile.
Title? Obsessed is more accurate. The same phrase, which is shown below is exactly what it means and could be written the same way and applies to all saints.
That’s right; how many ways are their to demonstrate unbelief? Many! Most of those profess and even play church.
Not quite the same as the title “Full of Grace”. In Ephesians, he bestows a measure of Grace upon us, but Mary was Full of Grace. Her title means “One who has been, is, and continues to be for an indefinite time into the future full of grace” If you would just open your heart to the Blessed Mother, she will draw you closer to Jesus. How can you claim to have Jesus as a friend, when you denigrate His Mother? Do you badmouth the parents of your earthy friends? If not, why do you badmouth the mother of the one who is our greatest friend and eldest brother?
Acutally, I think not. Given the number of my separated brethren that come here with the same misunderstanding, I think it is not so hard.to get confused about this. Many moderns just do not understand the structure of the clan in society. All relatives too close to marry were called brothers and sisters.It is real hard to get that one wrong.
I am glad that your time at CAF has been fuitful!
Have you been “running after” me, Rick?
Yes. I think the misunderstandings that occur due to the use of ancient Latin are profound. Your own posts testify to this.
Adoration is due only to God. You have confused this with the honor that is given to the servants of God. I learned this FROM the Church. The people that need to be told are those such as yourself, who misunderstand.
Yes, of course! Since you have little understanding of ancient language, you most likely have little or no experience with ancient liturgy as well. The incense is powdered, then spooned on a bed of hot coals. It smokes a lot, and fills the room with marvellous odors. Much more pleasant than human body odor.
I think this is a good thing! I am glad to hear that there is such a marked contrast between how you understand the Bible, and how the Apostles did. It is important to have this contrast so that the Truth is more evident.
I think you have mischaracterized religion, as you have ancient liturgical language. The Apostles never taught that there is anything wrong with religion. On the contrary, they taught that we should have “pure religion” (my righteous one shall live by faith). I do agree that Christianity is about individuals coming to Christ, as opposed to a whole nation, as Israel was called. However, this does not mean that we remain “single” for once we are in Christ, we are members one of another. One cannot claim to be Christian with this modern “me and Jesus- and no one else” mentality.
This is an example of what I was saying. He does call us to trust in Him and be transformed by the renewing of our minds. However, he chose not to be “alone”. He chose to join us with one another, and build us into His One Body, the Church. That is why we can also count on the Church to bring us home to heaven. He is not separated from her.
I do agree that each one will give an account of himself. Religion without faith is of no avail, but you misunderstand Catholicism if you think it is a “legalistic playbook”. I also once misunderstood it the same way. Whatever outward expressions, we are all saved by grace, through faith. If one comes burning incense to express one’s faith, this is not a deterrant to eternal life.
I do agree that the role of Mary in the modern Church is much larger than the role we see in the NT.
No, actually, this is a different word. The use of the past perfect from the angel indicates someone who has been previously filled with grace, and continues to be filled in the present.
Well, Rick, it seems that you are not the model of obedience yourself. I am not sure that you ever read the forum rules, but you are clearly not following them. If you have a rebellious heart, you will say “It is better to follow God than man”. However your witness here has not been, as Mary’s is, gentle and obedient. Your postes have been distrespectful, hostile, condescending, and do not demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit or the spirit in which a defense of one’s faith shoudl be made.
As a protestant it is hard to think of Mary as the spouse of the Holy Spirit because this is not clearly stated in scripture. Also the passage you mention in Rev 12:1 we blelieve is refereing to the church, which isclearly stated in scripture as being the bride of christ.Jesus has the same body now that he was born with friends, therefore Mary Indeed]! was the Mother of God. Jesus went through a lot of trouble to show us His risen body a promise that this would be us if we obeyed His commands spoken throughout the entire bible.
Mary from birth to death has pointed to Her Son in time of need. We are adopted sons and daughters of Mary, and Jesus decree on the cross when he turned to Mary and His disciple and said in; John 19: 25-27" When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.
The Assumtion of Mary only reinforces the belief in being adopted sons of God, and of the ressurection, after all no matter how you cut the cake she was the spouse of the Holy Spirit, third person of the Triune God.
REV 12: 1, And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.
Peace and God Bless
onenow1
The idea of Mary being a perpetual virgin is new to me. There seems to be much made of it, why is this such an important belief to the RCC? Wouldn’t she be just as holy even if she had other children with Joseph after Christ was born?
The woman in Revelation is giving birth to one the dragon wants to destroy. That would be a description of what was really going on at the nativity. The Church did not give birth to Jesus, Mary did. THe woman in Rev. 12 is Mary
It is stated, but in metaphorical language. The explanation of the Angel to Mary uses ancient Hebraisms that are about sexual relations. When a man “overshadowed” a woman so that she conceived, he was doing his marital duty, and engaging in the marital embrace.
Yes, this is one of the acceptable interpretations for Catholics.
Not just “Roman” Catholics (those of the Latin Rite) but all the other 22 Catholic Rites as well, and other Apostolic Churches not in communion with Rome, but founded by Apostles including the Orthodox, Coptic, and Oriental Churches.
No, because she made a vow of celibacy to God, and if she had other kids, she would be abandoning her vow, which meant that she shrank back from her sole dedication to God to fulfill the desires of the flesh.
Well explain how can Jesus become sin if he was not made to have sinfull flesh as this peice states?
Well that is not for you to decided were my heart is to Mary or to another person in this planet to whom I will to come to know the Lord.
It is now clear you are decidedly NOT Catholic, or if you are you are decidedly heterodox. You are throwing up every fundamentalist argument ever. Come clean.
Actually, I am Catholic; however, do I not subscribe to some of the churches teaching or question some of the teachings, yes as should all of us who are wanting to know the truth. They seem very inconsistent and confusing to the message at which the apostle preached to and in and around Israel (but not limited to only Israel) If I am considered a heretic so be it. But I hold firm in Christ my Lord for he is my help and rock and Sheppard of my soul.