Questions on Mary from Protestant 101

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maria1212
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CherryBomb said:
If we’re all supposed to interpret the Bible individually, then what’s the issue? Using tradition or the church is a big no no, apparently, so there’s nothing left to go on. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The Bible condemns self-interpretation. Peter says this.

Peter 3:15. And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:

3:16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

3:17. You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness.
 
The_Truthinator said:
If the Church then was universal, wouldn’t that make them catholic Christians, not “Catholic”?

This sort of reminds me of the whole Muslim conception of the patriarchs and Christ being “Muslims” because they submitted to the Will of God. Historically though, it doesn’t really seem to hold up.

Paul was thrilled, amazed, by the opportunity to be called by Yeshua’s Name. That … was enough. Wasn’t it? To be a part of that Communion, not fully understanding exactly how it works, but just being thankful for the opportunity? It’s the same today … Isn’t it?
Click to expand...
The Church my friend is Catholic since Christ’s Church teaches One Baptism, One doctrine, it is Apostolic. It’s members are Christians because the profess Jesus as the Messiah, TrueMan and True God.

The teachings of the Church in those days concerning faith and moral is the same.
 
The Protestant faith also teaches that “there is one body and one Spirit…, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father, who is over all and in all and living through all,” as well. And these Scriptures themselves are apolistic.

Friend, what will these arguments do? Maybe we might conclude that our differences in views might further hinder our fellowship if we allow doctrine irrelevant to salvation to destroy the peace and the unity we both have in Christ.

We must hold to our convictions, so long as the Spirit says to … But let’s not ourselves get caught up in “foolish, ignorant arguments that only start fights.” But let’s bind ourselves together with peace, just as Paul said (Eph.4:3).
 
The_Truthinator said:
The Protestant faith also teaches that “there is one body and one Spirit…, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father, who is over all and in all and living through all,” as well. And these Scriptures themselves are apolistic.
Click to expand...
Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium is part of apostolic. Yes, the Bible is Apostolic yet, Protestant lack bishops or form of succession. I hardly think they are Apostolic.
Friend, what will these arguments do? Maybe we might conclude that our differences in views might further hinder our fellowship if we allow doctrine irrelevant to salvation to destroy the peace and the unity we both have in Christ.
Click to expand...
I seek only to protect the doctrines of the Catholic Church which has preserved the Bible.
We must hold to our convictions, so long as the Spirit says to … But let’s not ourselves get caught up in “foolish, ignorant arguments that only start fights.” But let’s bind ourselves together with peace, just as Paul said (Eph.4:3).
Click to expand...
Well, said. THough I think we have drifted off the topic. Is this not about a question on Mary from Protestant 101?
 
The_Truthinator said:
If the Church then was universal, wouldn’t that make them catholic Christians, not “Catholic”?
…
Paul was thrilled, amazed, by the opportunity to be called by Yeshua’s Name. That … was enough. Wasn’t it? To be a part of that Communion, not fully understanding exactly how it works, but just being thankful for the opportunity? It’s the same today … Isn’t it?
Click to expand...
Well lessee, the same book of the Bible that has us called Christians (but not calling ourselves that.Acts 11:26) has “the church throughout all” called ekklesia kath olos (“Catholic Church”) in Acts 9:31 (ἡ μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ᾽ ὁλης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχεν ειρηνην οικοδομουμενη και πορευομενη τω φοβω του κυριου, και τη παρακλησει του ἁγιου πνευματος επληθυνοντο.).

And the of course there is St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was bishop of the church there in Antioch (remember Acts 11:26?) who wrote to the church at Smyrna in about 107 AD, less that 10 years after the death of St. John the evangelist, who discipled both Ignatius and Polycarp (the bishop of the church at Smyrna). What does Ignatius say?

CHAP. VIII.–LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP.(LINK)

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

Speaking of “that Communion” and Paul, let’s have a quick look at what St. Paul said about “that Communion”. (1st Corinthians 11:23-30)
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. **29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. ** Paul certainly teaches that there is a great deal more to Communion than many n-Cs believe and teach.

Ignatius agrees with him when he writes to the church at Smyrna.

CHAP. VII.–LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,

So, unlike some other folks, the New Testament and the writings of the earliest ECF do indeed indicate that the early church was Catholic. Personally I like being known by what the Church calls herself…not what some unbelievers called us.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
 
Quote= Truthinator
God used, in a similar capacity, people like Martin Luther and William Tyndale to preserve the truth of the Word by bringing it to the common people, to let them investigate it for themselves … Without such efforts, the Medieval Church would have continued to distort the Truth for its own interests. Historically speaking, it is readily agreed on by most learned men that the power hungry church had indeed corrupted the doctrines it presented to the people time and time again … That it was less than infallible, corrupted even, seems agreed upon by history herself. Honestly, the Catholic Church we have today has made numerous, wonderful reforms … It just refuses to admit past mistakes, which is really a shame to me, simply because that denies them the opportunity to receive the credit they so deserve.

Truthinator John paul the II apologised over 100 times for some of the injustices of the Catholic Church, and I believe promised to be more vigilant in the future.

I believe Martin Luther sincerely wanted to continue in the apostolic faith, but was mislead by satan, Jesus 's prophecy certainly came true on the division part and continues on today as is obevious to all of us. Of course this is God’s plan and he certainly knows whats best.

Quote= Martin Luther : Sermon on the gospel of John Chapters. 14-16. " We concede as we must, that so much of what they,[the Catholic Church say is true]: That the papacy has God’s word and the office of the Apostles and that we have received Holy Scriptures, Baptism, the sacrement and the pulpit from them"?

The development of the doctrine of Mary was well on it’s way at this tme.Back on subject.

Peace,OneNow1
 
Maria1212 said:
This point has been made many times on other threads but I will repeat it again here. The Bible is a Catholic book. The New Testament was written, copied, collected, and preserved by Catholic Christians. The official canon of the books of the Bible was authoritatively determined by the Catholic Church in the 4th century. It is from the Catholic Church! Apart from the Catholic Church, there is no guarantee that what is in the Bible is the genuine word of God. Hence, to trust the Bible, is to trust the authority of the Church. It is a contradiction for Protestants to accept the Bible, yet reject the same authority (the Catholic Church), that gave us the Bible. From a logical standpoint, how can Protestants quote the Bible as authoritative, if they reject the teaching authority of the Catholic Church?

Adventists follow the teachings of Ellen White, which is human tradition. But by rejecting the authority Christ left the Catholic Church is rejecting Christ and his Gospel. Arguing that the Bible alone is the authority in matters of faith does just this. The Bible tells us that Christ left a Church with divine authority to govern in his name. (Matthew 16:13-20, 18:18, Luke 10:16). Christ promised that this Church would last UNTIL THE END OF TIME. (Matthew 16:18, 28:19-20, John 14:16). The Bible also tells us that Sacred Tradition is to be followed alongside Sacred Scripture.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
Click to expand...
Adventists follow the teachings of Ellen White?! I´m SDA, I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. I dont know one Adventist who´s following the teachings of EGW. What in the world are you talking about?!

The Bible is a Catholic book? You cant be serious! Very sorry to say that but you sound like a proper fanatic 👍
 
pedja said:
Adventists follow the teachings of Ellen White?! I´m SDA, I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. I dont know one Adventist who´s following the teachings of EGW. What in the world are you talking about?!

The Bible is a Catholic book? You cant be serious! Very sorry to say that but you sound like a proper fanatic 👍
Click to expand...
The New Testment and its books where concluded in the 400’s. How many Prostestant sects where there then? None. There was one Church. The Catholic Church.

Secular history proves that.
 
pedja said:
The Bible is a Catholic book? You cant be serious! Very sorry to say that but you sound like a proper fanatic 👍
Click to expand...
Dear Pedja,

Am I a fantatic? No. Do I love research and studying? Yes. I love Jesus, and love studying history, and the Church he established. If that makes me a fanatic in your book, so be it.

A lot of people are ignorant about where the Bible came from. Yes, it is inspired by God, but He did not just drop it down from Heaven.

For those interested in learning more about the history of the Bible I suggest the following:
Where We Got the Bible… Our Debt to the Catholic Church (Paperback)
by Henry G. Graham (Author)
Faith of the Early Fathers: Three-Volume Set (Paperback)

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
pedja said:
Adventists follow the teachings of Ellen White?! I´m SDA, I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. I dont know one Adventist who´s following the teachings of EGW. What in the world are you talking about?!:
Click to expand...
Since you identify yourself as an Adventist, I assumed you knew and believed the 28 beliefs posted on the Adventist official website. Thank you for the reminder on not stating my assumptions beforehand.

*18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . **As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth *which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
to: maria 1212 sometimes is even hard to explain mary to people that in the past were catholic. is like trying to break a big wall:( anyway when i go on friday to pray the rosary i always pray for them.🙂
 
mayra_hart said:
to: maria 1212 sometimes is even hard to explain mary to people that in the past were catholic. is like trying to break a big wall:( anyway when i go on friday to pray the rosary i always pray for them.🙂
Click to expand...
Dear Mayra,

Thank you for your post! You are absolutely right. It encourages me to know you are praying the rosary for our Protestant brothers and sisters!

I know it is the Holy Spirit, and not myself, who can open their eyes. Particularly with Adventists, who are so anti-Catholic, I just hope they can understand why Catholics believe what they do, even if they do not agree with us. I feel like many Adventists accuse Catholics of so many things that are not true. Even if they do not agree with the Catholic understanding of Scripture, I hope that they can begin to understand that our beliefs are based on Scripture. Our belief in Sacred Tradition and oral teachings of the apostles not recorded in the Bible, is along side Scripture, not instead of it.

That is why I find Adventists beliefs and Ellen White so ironic. They claim to follow only Scripture, but then they believe Ellen Whites revelations to be truth, and follow her teachings. That is human tradition in our eyes, although they may consider it divine. It is ironic because if the Bible was the sole source of Christian teaching, then Adventists shouldnt need Ellen White, or her teachings. If Sola Scriptura were true, there would also be no need for additional prophets. I dont believe Sola Scriptura contradicts Scripture, as did many of Ellen Whites writings. I believe she was a false prophet. I just think it is ironic that a group that claims to be Sola Scriptura is not.

I respect many Adventists, and other Protestants for their dedication to Jesus. I just wish they would extend the same respect. Many non-Adventists Protestands do and I am grateful for that. I just hope that by reading the articles above, non-Catholics will be begin to understand our beliefs with a little more accuracy.

The best thing I can do for our non-Catholic brothers and sisters is pray for them. I pray for them already, but need to do more of that, and spend less time posting here!

I find reading and posting articles, and discussing them to be very helpful for strengthening my own faith. But it is a waste of time to respond to posts filled only with anger, defensiveness, and false accusations, that add nothing to the discussion. I welcome learning about differing viewpoints when they are supported with evidence, but more often than not, that is not what people post.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
 
pedja said:
Adventists follow the teachings of Ellen White?! I´m SDA, I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. I dont know one Adventist who´s following the teachings of EGW. What in the world are you talking about?!QUOTE]

If Adventists do not follow the teachings of Ellen White, why does the Adventist Church publish the Clear Word Bible?

ratzlaf.com/4-17-01%20Deliberate%20Distortions%20in%20SDA.pdf

The Clear Word is published by Southern College Press at Southern Adventist College which is owned and operated by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It was originally published with the title The Clear Word Bible but is now called The Clear Word with the dropping of the word Bible.

Sincerely,

Maria1212
Click to expand...
 
Mannyfit75 said:
The Bible condemns self-interpretation. Peter says this.

Peter 3:15. And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:

3:16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

3:17. You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness.
Click to expand...
I was being tongue in cheek 😃 We know this, but many Protestants don’t. What I don’t understand is, SS supporters say the Bible is left up solely to personal interpretation, and even if people interpret something totally different, it’s all correct. So why then, do so many of the SS protestants tell Catholics that our understanding of Scripture is “wrong?” According to them, it’s not possible to be wrong! It makes no sense! :confused:
 
And bless you, Maria1212, for your patient and thoughtful responses in this thread!
 
CherryBomb said:
If we’re all supposed to interpret the Bible individually, then what’s the issue? Using tradition or the church is a big no no, apparently, so there’s nothing left to go on. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Dear CherryBomb

That is a unique user name for sure. it would be interesting to hear how/why you chose it - but I guess that’s another subject.

I noticed that you and the odd other forum participant use a lot of characterizations, and generalizations about “SS Protestants.” I am sure you have a purpose for such things; but I am interested in finding out why you use the term “SS Protestants?” I have no idea what the “SS” stands for, so I thought I would venture from out of my cave and see if you would fill me in. :confused:

Before you post anymore :rolleyes: again, when referring to Protestants, it might be worth your while to look at the FACT that a true Protestant does not condemn all “Tradition” for the Bible itself does not do so either.

Protestants and Catholics both use “Tradition” and they use the word throughout their respective writings, but, they each respectively say this word, with much different meanings. A Catholic does not usually mean the same thing when they say “Tradition” as opposed to what a Protestant means when they refer to “Tradition.”

The Bible speaks of two types of tradition, one it supports, the other it condemns. The Bible is the best guide to determining what kind of “Tradition” any given denomination might have. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top