Sacred Oral and Written Tradition

[RobGentner]

If belief in Mary is not necessary then what am I to make of these statements:

'O chosen Queen of Heaven! You alone are the refuge of guilty mortals to whom so many a tearful eye, so many a wounded and miserable heart is raised . . . **You, O elect Queen, are the gate of all grace, the door of compassion that has never yet been shut! **
Bl. Henry Suso

Mary is the key to the gates of Heaven.

St. Ephrem

**Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys! **
St. Ambrose

God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.

St. Thomas Aquinas

No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.

St. Bonaventure

This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.

Genesis 28:17

Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.

St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori

Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.

St. Bernard

Or this paragraph from Bull Ineffabilis:

"4. This solemnly proclaimed doctrine is expressly termed a “doctrine revealed by God”. Pope Pius IX adds that it must be “firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful”. Consequently, whoever does not make this doctrine his own, or maintains an opinion contrary to it, “is shipwrecked in faith” and “separates himself from Catholic unity”.

If you are “shipwrecked in the faith” you are an apostate and without salvation.
You can find this article at:
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm23.htm

JA4, You are too precious! If I wasn’t married!

The last shall be first:

In 1854, with the Bull Ineffabilis, Pius IX solemnly proclaimed the dogma of the Immaculate Conception: “… We declare, pronounce and define that the doctrine which asserts that the Blessed Virgin Mary, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God, and in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, was preserved free from every stain of original sin is a doctrine revealed by God and, for this reason, must be firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful” (DS 2803).

I believe that so does all real catholics only heretics don’t believe that.See, that was easy!

As for the rest that you quoted: Make of them what you want. A beautiful hand crochet doilies would be nice. :dancing:

Thet aren’t very (name removed by moderator)ortant to the Church. Actually, say whatever you want, sweetheart!
It won’t change the truth, just like your saying other things does not make them true or Church teachings.:whacky:

The Catholic Church does not, has not and will not teach that anyone MUST believe anything about The Blessed Mother Mary except that:

1. She was Born without sin!
2. She remained a virgin, her entire life
3. That her son took her Body and Soul up to heaven.

That is all that we teach that must be believe.

Now Mary as a Co-redeemer, Co-redemtrix. We believe that because: She is!
In fact, every missionary or evangelist is a co-redeemer, that being that they help bring people to the redemption of Christ. Were it not for the evangelists many people in Africa or India would had never even heard about Jesus Christ.

When you teach the Gospel to your child or bring him to church, you become a co-redeemer with Christ. The one who baptized you was a co-redeemer with Christ.
When you teach the Bible to someone, you are a Co-redeemer of Christ. When we attempt to teach you the truth about Christ, we are Co-redeemers.
The term Co-redeemer or Co-redemptrix, as Pope John 2 stated about Mary, may out of context, seem to suggest that Christ does not redeem alone, but somehow needs a partner That is not true nor what th Holy father said nor meant!  He only meant that Mary  was a "cooperator with the Redeemer", its Latin prefix, "cum", does not denote equality or partnership, but accompaniment (as in co-star or co-pilot). Etymologically, it suggests dependence and subordination, and in the case of Mary, it refers to Mary's association with Jesus Christ…     St. Paul said "We are God's co-workers" in I Cor. 3:9, the Greek word is "synergoi"... and of course, Virgin Mary was a unique "God's Co-Worker" from Bethlehem to Calvary…

The rest is in your mind. :bigyikes:
See wasn’t that easy?

We all appreciate you far more than you and your gang will ever know…:extrahappy:

Really? :blushing: SIGH! :flowers: Ditto!!

 

[twb1621]

RobGentner:
slap me five RoB…

 

[Ag_not]

The Catholic Church does not, has not and will not teach that anyone MUST believe anything about The Blessed Mother Mary except that:

1. She was Born without sin!
2. She remained a virgin, her entire life
3. That her son took her Body and Soul up to heaven.

That is all that we teach that must be believe.

cough

psssst

1. Mother of God

cough

1. Mother of God

ahem

 

[guanophore]

Its not a logical inconsitency. I have demonstrated clearly what the rule is in regards to sin. All die unless there is exception as i have clearly shown. Its like the law of gravity. What goes up must go down. However there are exceptions to this when there is a “higher or different law” that affects the what we normally see.

Catholics believe that Jesus loved His mother, and did not allow her body to experience corruption.

I did not deny it but qualified it why in certain cases it did not always happen.

Glad we can agree on that point.

Under certain unique circumstances there would be. In these exceptional cases we have the testimony of the Scriptures. We don’t have that with Mary being without sin nor is there evidence in Scripture that she was assumed into heaven.

Well, speak for yourself! Those who have separated themselves from the Apostolic Tradition don’t have it…the rest of us do! :dancing:

It does not say. I’m not making the claim, Catholics who believe she was without sin say these things and its up to them to support it if they want to be justified in their belief. So far it has never been demonstrated. Just asserted.

No, ja4, at least have the honesty to own your own problems, and don’t try to push them off on others. Catholics do not need to conivnce you of our beliefs, that is the job of the HS. We can explain to you why we believe what we do, but it is not incumbent upon us to pursuade anyone. Furthermore, the fact that you find us unjustified in our beliefs is of little concern to us. We are not arrogant so as to justifiy ourselves before God, or others. We recieve the sacred teaching from those to whom it was entrusted by Christ, “like newborn babes”. We have no need to kick against the goads.

I have seen many times the idea that she was kept from sinning like a person who was kept from falling into a pit.

Well, you misunderstood what you saw, then. This analogy refers to her relation ship with original sin,and has nothing to do with personal sins.

I think Catholic apologist Jimmy Atkin has said something like as Jerry Mattics who was also a Catholic apologist not to mention some posters.

Everyone who has tried to explain this to you has clarity about the difference between personal sin, and original sin. Your posts have demonstrated that you are severely deficient in this area, so it stands to reason that you do not understand.

In any of the accounts that the Scriptures have of him is there anything in them that should make us think he was a perfect man who never sinned in thought or deed? Does anyone in the NT attest to this?

Here is a good example of your lack of understanding in the basic issues of sin and grace. Nothing unclean can enter heaven. Sin is unclean. No sin can enter heaven. Anyone who enters heaven has been made clean. (no sins).

If belief in Mary is not necessary then what am to make of these statements:

God can save whomever He wants, however He likes. He is not dependent upon human knowledge or understanding.

I would think that you would make of them what they are, part of people’s private prayers and personal devotions.

If belief in Mary is not necessary then what am to make of these statements:
justasking4;4366128:

Or this paragraph from Bull Ineffabilis:

"4. This solemnly proclaimed doctrine is expressly termed a “doctrine revealed by God”. Pope Pius IX adds that it must be “firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful”. Consequently, whoever does not make this doctrine his own, or maintains an opinion contrary to it, “is shipwrecked in faith” and “separates himself from Catholic unity”.

If you are “shipwrecked in the faith” you are an apostate and without salvation.
You can find this article at:
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm23.htm

This bull is addressed to the faithful (that means Catholics) and is designed to prevent them from falling from grace. Since you were never faithful to the church’s Apostolic Tradition, I don’t see how this applies to you. You hae never been in Catholic unity.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4368101]

Catholics believe that Jesus loved His mother, and did not allow her body to experience corruption.

What you believe and what is true are 2 different things. Remember you have no proof for your claim…

Glad we can agree on that point.

This is scary…

Well, speak for yourself! Those who have separated themselves from the Apostolic Tradition don’t have it…the rest of us do! :dancing:

No, ja4, at least have the honesty to own your own problems, and don’t try to push them off on others. Catholics do not need to conivnce you of our beliefs, that is the job of the HS. We can explain to you why we believe what we do, but it is not incumbent upon us to pursuade anyone. Furthermore, the fact that you find us unjustified in our beliefs is of little concern to us. We are not arrogant so as to justifiy ourselves before God, or others. We recieve the sacred teaching from those to whom it was entrusted by Christ, “like newborn babes”. We have no need to kick against the goads.

I know you say this but i also see how terribly troubled you are by the lack of support for these things.

Well, you misunderstood what you saw, then. This analogy refers to her relation ship with original sin,and has nothing to do with personal sins.

How do you know this? Do you know where the original quote for this can be found?

Everyone who has tried to explain this to you has clarity about the difference between personal sin, and original sin. Your posts have demonstrated that you are severely deficient in this area, so it stands to reason that you do not understand.

Not so. I do understand the difference and its still creates problems for you. For example how did Mary keep herself from sinning all her life? Do the Scriptures tell us how she did this?

Here is a good example of your lack of understanding in the basic issues of sin and grace. Nothing unclean can enter heaven. Sin is unclean. No sin can enter heaven. Anyone who enters heaven has been made clean. (no sins).

True. This is what the death of Christ and His resurrection accomplished for us. Its His blood that cleanses us from sin and it was His death that paid the price for our sins. It is His “life” that saves us. Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift… 2 Cor 9:15

God can save whomever He wants, however He likes. He is not dependent upon human knowledge or understanding.

If such a thing did happen as you claim then you need some facts to support it with. So far you not provided any and i’m very disappointed in you…

I would think that you would make of them what they are, part of people’s private prayers and personal devotions.

If you claim the name of Christ then these things must be grounded in the truths of Scripture.

justasking4;4366128]If belief in Mary is not necessary then what am to make of these statements:

'O chosen Queen of Heaven! You alone are the refuge of guilty mortals to whom so many a tearful eye, so many a wounded and miserable heart is raised . . . You, O elect Queen, are the gate of all grace, the door of compassion that has never yet been shut!
Bl. Henry Suso

Mary is the key to the gates of Heaven.

St. Ephrem

Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys!
St. Ambrose

God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.

St. Thomas Aquinas

No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.

St. Bonaventure

This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.

Genesis 28:17

Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.

St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori

Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.

St. Bernard

justasking4;4366128]

Or this paragraph from Bull Ineffabilis:

"4. This solemnly proclaimed doctrine is expressly termed a “doctrine revealed by God”. Pope Pius IX adds that it must be “firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful”. Consequently, whoever does not make this doctrine his own, or maintains an opinion contrary to it, “is shipwrecked in faith” and “separates himself from Catholic unity”.

If you are “shipwrecked in the faith” you are an apostate and without salvation.
You can find this article at:
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm23.htm

This bull is addressed to the faithful (that means Catholics) and is designed to prevent them from falling from grace. Since you were never faithful to the church’s Apostolic Tradition, I don’t see how this applies to you. You hae never been in Catholic unity.

Do you consider these things part of the fullness of the Truth?
Secondly, if a catholic rejects these things have they become shipwrecked in the Catholic faith?

 

[justasking4]

slap me five RoB…

Just slap me…View attachment 4468

View attachment 4469

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Just slap me…

**Why did your request make me Smile? Why didn’t you answer Rob? **

It does not say. I’m not making the claim, Catholics who believe she was without sin say these things and its up to them to support it if they want to be justified in their belief. So far it has never been demonstrated. Just asserted.

Hmmm, I thought that only protestants had to be justified?
When did the Church say we had to be justfied ourselves? We made that rule for those who do not have a clear grasp of “basic Christianity” e.g. Protestants!

You, unfortunately, not having infalliability through the grace of the HS, are liable to fall for every whiff of false doctrine. Such as often proved to be the case, when New Age Spiritualities and Secular Humanistic attitudes about the Bible and christian ethics crept into all your counterfeit christian type churches.
Catholic apologetics is a defense developed against this threat to the real church. It does this using a sanctification process by which real christians are enabled to cultivate a mature faith which allos us to love God with our minds as well as our hearts (Mt 22:37).
Being the true church we are ready to give a defense for what we believe! (1 Pet 3:15) But, we don’t need to be justified. That happended 2,000 years ago! That is required of you New Age thinkers, as you twist the real message of Jesus trying to find that which the CC always has taught.

I have seen many times the idea that she was kept from sinning like a person who was kept from falling into a pit. I think Catholic apologist Jimmy Atkin has said something like as Jerry Mattics who was also a Catholic apologist not to mention some posters.

She was full of grace, she didn’t need to be kept from falling. She never intented to sin. The devil didn’t tempt her did he? What is your reference for that? Would her Son had allowed her to be tested by the devil?

You need to take a break and study the Scriptures. This is an embarrassing comment….

Goodness, did someone call you a heretic again? SIGH! I apologize for them if they did!

In any of the accounts that the Scriptures have of him is there anything in them that should make us think he was a perfect man who never sinned in thought or deed? Does anyone in the NT attest to this?

Did anyone ever say Elijah was a perfect man who never sinned in thought or deed? Where was that mentioned? I only read you saying it? Do you think you are God?

I am not sure what you are saying. Can you clarify?

Are you rewriting the NT again? Did God reveal to you that Elihah was a sinner? Where is that in the OT or the NT? Is it in your own mind? Do you add food coloring to the jello to make it blood red before you nail it to your wailing wall?

Do you claim to know and understand what your church teaches perfectly? Do you claim to obey perfectly?

Do you realize that some people say you are bearing false witness to the testament of Jesus? I told them JA4 didn’t mean it and was only playing. I said she/he/they don’t believe half of what they say! So you apologize!

I love you, you silly goose! If you ever get a chance to get away from the “others” call the national hotline. We can hide you. You will be safe! Don’t worry there are catholics here ready to help you. Just call! Your soul depends on it!

 

[twb1621]

What you believe and what is true are 2 different things. Remember you have no proof for your claim…
?

Does it blow your mind to imagine that the woman who brought our Saviour Jesus Christ into the world could be special?

why is it you rarely respond especially to that which calls for the use of common sense. You are debating a point that you could never reach the understanding of without Sacred Tradition and A BIBLE. You are using a adaptation of the Bible that has books removed from it not to mention altered text. Answer one question with a realistic, honest answer. Who authorized the withdrawl of books and changes in the remaining text of the Bible you use from that which passed through centuries as the word of God yet took the basics from the original Bible?

 

[justasking4]

twb1621;4368984]
Originally Posted by justasking4
What you believe and what is true are 2 different things. Remember you have no proof for your claim…
?

twb1621
Does it blow your mind to imagine that the woman who brought our Saviour Jesus Christ into the world could be special?
No. What blows my mind is the Creator Who made all the billions of galaxies etc would become a man. That is mind blowing…

why is it you rarely respond especially to that which calls for the use of common sense. You are debating a point that you could never reach the understanding of without Sacred Tradition and A BIBLE.

Do you have an example of this?

You are using a adaptation of the Bible that has books removed from it not to mention altered text.

What are you referring to here?

Answer one question with a realistic, honest answer. Who authorized the withdrawl of books and changes in the remaining text of the Bible you use from that which passed through centuries as the word of God yet took the basics from the original Bible?

Are you referring to the DC"s which were elevated to full canon status at the council of Trent?

 

[justasking4]

Realcatholicgk;4368714]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Just slap me…

Realcatholicgk
Why did your request make me Smile?

Probably because some hopes it happens–

Why didn’t you answer Rob?

I think you are right. He needs some attention:shrug:

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
It does not say. I’m not making the claim, Catholics who believe she was without sin say these things and its up to them to support it if they want to be justified in their belief. So far it has never been demonstrated. Just asserted.

Hmmm, I thought that only protestants had to be justified?
When did the Church say we had to be justfied ourselves? We made that rule for those who do not have a clear grasp of “basic Christianity” e.g. Protestants!

I was not referring to being justified in a salvation sense but in the way we are justified i.e. warrented- supported sense for anything we believe.

You, unfortunately, not having infalliability through the grace of the HS, are liable to fall for every whiff of false doctrine. Such as often proved to be the case, when New Age Spiritualities and Secular Humanistic attitudes about the Bible and christian ethics crept into all your counterfeit christian type churches.

That is true in some churches. I have also seen this with some catholics. Have you ever heard of Matthew Fox? He was a member of the Dominican Order for 34 years and you should see some of the bizarre things he has come up with.

Catholic apologetics is a defense developed against this threat to the real church. It does this using a sanctification process by which real christians are enabled to cultivate a mature faith which allos us to love God with our minds as well as our hearts (Mt 22:37).
Being the true church we are ready to give a defense for what we believe! (1 Pet 3:15) But, we don’t need to be justified. That happended 2,000 years ago! That is required of you New Age thinkers, as you twist the real message of Jesus trying to find that which the CC always has taught.

You missunderstand what i meant by being justified.

justasking4
I have seen many times the idea that she was kept from sinning like a person who was kept from falling into a pit. I think Catholic apologist Jimmy Atkin has said something like as Jerry Mattics who was also a Catholic apologist not to mention some posters.

Rob
She was full of grace, she didn’t need to be kept from falling. She never intented to sin. The devil didn’t tempt her did he? What is your reference for that? Would her Son had allowed her to be tested by the devil?

The problem is that you think this claim is a fact and there are no facts to back this claim up. Full of grace does not mean a person does not or could not sin. Look it up in a Greek Lexicon and you will not find this idea.

justasking4
You need to take a break and study the Scriptures. This is an embarrassing comment….

Rob
Goodness, did someone call you a heretic again? SIGH! I apologize for them if they did!

Don’t apologize. I take it as a compliment out here…

justasking4
In any of the accounts that the Scriptures have of him is there anything in them that should make us think he was a perfect man who never sinned in thought or deed? Does anyone in the NT attest to this?

Rob
Did anyone ever say Elijah was a perfect man who never sinned in thought or deed? Where was that mentioned? I only read you saying it? Do you think you are God?

No need to be God. All that is needed is to study what the Scriptures say about Elijah and they do not make this kind of claim.

justasking4
I am not sure what you are saying. Can you clarify?
Rob
Are you rewriting the NT again? Did God reveal to you that Elihah was a sinner? Where is that in the OT or the NT? Is it in your own mind?

The Scriptures never make the claim that Elijah or any man is not a sinner. There was only one Man Who never sinned. All men have sinned-- See Romans 5:12

Do you add food coloring to the jello to make it blood red before you nail it to your wailing wall?

I don’t even like it and its not allowed in my house…:tsktsk:

justasking4
Do you claim to know and understand what your church teaches perfectly? Do you claim to obey perfectly?

Rob
Do you realize that some people say you are bearing false witness to the testament of Jesus? I told them JA4 didn’t mean it and was only playing. I said she/he/they don’t believe half of what they say! So you apologize!

:whacky:

I love you, you silly goose! If you ever get a chance to get away from the “others” call the national hotline. We can hide you. You will be safe! Don’t worry there are catholics here ready to help you. Just call! Your soul depends on it!

Famous words of the inqusitors…

 

[twb1621]

No. What blows my mind is the Creator Who made all the billions of galaxies etc would become a man. That is mind blowing…
As well that should for all of us, but at least you answered this question, “no” I believe is your answer… although that’s hard to believe based on your questions.

Do you have an example of this?
yes, go over all the posts and see what you never responded to. And then would you provide an answer to this?

What are you referring to here?

again, how many books are in your Bible, which will tell you what I am referring to. Again, please provide an answer.

Are you referring to the DC"s which were elevated to full canon status at the council of Trent?

No it was a direct question and I am referring to the version you use compared to the one passed down through centuries on end. Simple questions. I am not asking for answers that are no more than questions themselves. Thats the point. You can’t learn anything if you think you know it all. And you obviously think you know Catholicism based solely on your limited sources. you said before your Bible has 66 books in it? with all the information you have been offered, why don’t you research it? the theology you believe in will end historically long before you get back to the era of our Lord.

 

[justasking4]

twb1621;4369196]No it was a direct question and I am referring to the version you use compared to the one passed down through centuries on end. Simple questions.
Does not the Catholic church use more than one version of the Bible? Of course it does. Versions of the Bible are based on manuscript families.

I am not asking for answers that are no more than questions themselves. Thats the point. You can’t learn anything if you think you know it all. And you obviously think you know Catholicism based solely on your limited sources. you said before your Bible has 66 books in it? with all the information you have been offered, why don’t you research it? the theology you believe in will end historically long before you get back to the era of our Lord.

What “theology” are you referring to?

 

[guanophore]

What you believe and what is true are 2 different things. Remember you have no proof for your claim… [/qutoe]

This is true. I don’t have “proof” for the vast majority of the articles of faith. That is why they are not called “articles of proof”

I dont’ have any proof that Jesus was created out of Mary’s egg, either, but I choose to believe it because it is an article of faith passed down to us from the Apostles. Why does it bother you so much that others believe differently than you?
justasking4;4368620:

I know you say this but i also see how terribly troubled you are by the lack of support for these things.

Please be responsible, ja4, and own your own trouble. Those who have received the Apostolic faith have the witness of the HS that these things are true. We are not subject to your puny fleshly demands for “proof”. Our beliefs are based on faith, not on “proof”. Your inability to find support for our beliefs using your limited SS approach, of course, is no surprise. We know that scripture was never intended to hold all of the revelation of God.

How do you know this? Do you know where the original quote for this can be found?

Yes. I know this because this is the Church teaching. We believe that Mary was saved from original sin (this has all been posted to you before from the catechism), then chose to follow Christ throughout her life by deciding not to sin. She was enabled, like all of us are, to not sin by the power of the HS, who has delivered us from sin.

Not so. I do understand the difference and its still creates problems for you. For example how did Mary keep herself from sinning all her life? Do the Scriptures tell us how she did this?

No, clearly you do not. If you did, you would not be mislabeling doctrine that relates to original sin to doctrine that relates to personal sin.

None of us can keep ourselves from sinning. One can only refrain from sin by the power of the HS. Yes, the scriptures tell how this is done.

True. This is what the death of Christ and His resurrection accomplished for us. Its His blood that cleanses us from sin and it was His death that paid the price for our sins. It is His "life" that saves us. Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift... 2 Cor 9:15

Amen! His desire was to deliver us from the slavery of sin, so that we can choose the good and the Holy. He does not intend for us to keep on sinning.

If such a thing did happen as you claim then you need some facts to support it with. So far you not provided any and i'm very disappointed in you...:eek:

No, ja4, I don’t need facts. Speak for yourself! I have accepted this as an article of faith, just as Thomas, when he knelt before the Lord, accepted that He was Lord and God. I am disappointed that you are not able to accept the Teachings by faith, but I understand that this is hard to do with people who have trust issues. It is hard to trust anyone with anything. That, and the fact that you have been fed so much falsehoods about the Catholic faith, it is not surprising that you are unable to trust.

If you claim the name of Christ then these things must be grounded in the truths of Scripture.

No, ja4, you are confused. It goes this way “if you claim Sola Scriptura, then these things must be grounded in Scripture”. But, Catholics are not limited to Scripture, thank goodness.

Catholicism is not a “religion of the book”. None of the Catholic Teachings originate in the Scripture.

Do you consider these things part of the fullness of the Truth?

No, ja4. How many times do I have to repeat this? You really present as a person who has a deep hardness of heart. These are private prayers of individuals. They are not part of the Divine Deposit of faith that was once and for all entrusted to the Saints.

Secondly, if a catholic rejects these things have they become shipwrecked in the Catholic faith?

I think criticizing and finding fault with the private prayer life of others is definitely heading for a coral reef. Do you need to avoid your own prayer life so strenuously that you cannot restrain youself from criticizing that of others?

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4369892]

Originally Posted by justasking4 View Post
If such a thing did happen as you claim then you need some facts to support it with. So far you not provided any and i’m very disappointed in you…

No, ja4, I don’t need facts. Speak for yourself! I have accepted this as an article of faith, just as Thomas, when he knelt before the Lord, accepted that He was Lord and God.

You might want to go back and read this passage about how the Lord Jesus dealt with the doubts that Thomas had. Jesus did not just let him “accept” Him by mere faith but gave the evidence to Thomas by inviting him to see and touch His wounds. Only then did he exclaim-- My Lord and My God.

I am disappointed that you are not able to accept the Teachings by faith, but I understand that this is hard to do with people who have trust issues. It is hard to trust anyone with anything. That, and the fact that you have been fed so much falsehoods about the Catholic faith, it is not surprising that you are unable to trust

.

 

[guanophore]

No, the reference was made to the Septuagint, which is the Bible used by Jesus and His disciples, and has been used by the church continuously ever since.

You missunderstand what i meant by being justified. :(

This may be. You are fond of pressuring Catholics in to justifying their beliefs according to your limited criteria.

The problem is that you think this claim is a fact and there are no facts to back this claim up.

No, ja4. This is a problem for you, not for us. We do not claim it is a “fact”, but an article of faith. We receive it as part of the Apostolic Revelation. We receive this in faith, by faith, for faith. It is not a matter of fleshly “proofs” as it is for you.

Full of grace does not mean a person does not or could not sin. Look it up in a Greek Lexicon and you will not find this idea.

We are in perfect agreement about this. However, your statement makes it clear that you do either do not understand the Apostolic teaching on original sin, or the Catholic teaching. The term “full of grace” is a reference to how God prepared Mary in advance to bear His son. She was already full of grace when the angel came.

Mary, like Eve, could have chosen to sin. She chose not to do so. This is why we call her the New Eve. She is what God intended for Woman to be. This is why Jesus called her Woman!

No need to be God. All that is needed is to study what the Scriptures say about Elijah and they do not make this kind of claim.

Good. I am glad we can agree that Elijah was saved by grace, through faith!

The Scriptures never make the claim that Elijah or any man is not a sinner. There was only one Man Who never sinned. All men have sinned-- See Romans 5:12

So, how do you think that he got to heaven? We are in agreement that nothing unclean can enter heaven…

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4370097]No, the reference was made to the Septuagint, which is the Bible used by Jesus and His disciples, and has been used by the church continuously ever since.

We don’t know what the Septuagint of the OT was exactly that Jesus used. We don’t know if it had the DC"s or not since the earliest copy dates from around the 4th century.

This may be. You are fond of pressuring Catholics in to justifying their beliefs according to your limited criteria.

The same thing has been happening to me also. In fact i not only have defend the Scriptures but also have to deal with personal attacks…

No, ja4. This is a problem for you, not for us. We do not claim it is a “fact”, but an article of faith. We receive it as part of the Apostolic Revelation. We receive this in faith, by faith, for faith. It is not a matter of fleshly “proofs” as it is for you.

Your faith has to be based on something. You cannot have faith in faith. That’s nonsense and unbiblical…

We are in perfect agreement about this. However, your statement makes it clear that you do either do not understand the Apostolic teaching on original sin, or the Catholic teaching. The term “full of grace” is a reference to how God prepared Mary in advance to bear His son. She was already full of grace when the angel came.

Your not getting this from the meaning of the phrase. Rather you are reading into it Catholic doctrine and trying to make it mean something it does not.

Mary, like Eve, could have chosen to sin. She chose not to do so. This is why we call her the New Eve. She is what God intended for Woman to be. This is why Jesus called her Woman!

You have no proof for your claim about Mary. The Scriptures do not support your claims.

Good. I am glad we can agree that Elijah was saved by grace, through faith!

So, how do you think that he got to heaven?

Taken up in a chariot.

We are in agreement that nothing unclean can enter heaven…

Yes. How one is cleansed is the issue.

 

[twb1621]

Does not the Catholic church use more than one version of the Bible? Of course it does. Versions of the Bible are based on manuscript families.

Sorry but the true Holy Bible as introduced by the CC has been retained throughout time since its compilation and has never changed in content. That is except for those adopted and adapted by the reformed. There is a difference between revised editions and altered or missing scriptural text.

What “theology” are you referring to?

The theology your Bible has limited you to has limited you to only a part of full Christianity. Start with the Latin Vulgate and compare forward through history. See what is in the “True Bible” compared to what is missing and “adapted” in the “version” you refer to. And you are still not answering questions, only skirting what is asked of you…

 

[twb1621]

justasking4
in all your questions regarding the Blessed virgin you are missing a very important point of the Bible as a whole. Love. As the commandments require, as Jesus required, we are to love as we love ourselves. Honor? we are to honor our father and mother. Not tolerate, but honor. And in wedding vows we are to honor our spouse. Simple little things. Love and honor of Mary does not show disrespect or less worship to Our Lord Jesus but quite the opposite, we honor her because we are to love her as we are to love all others and we honor her because she devoted herself to the live of our Savior from conception to His passion and beyond. She was with Him throughout it all. What less could one expect.

 

[mercygate]

No. What blows my mind is the Creator Who made all the billions of galaxies etc would become a man. That is mind blowing…

Do you have an example of this?

What are you referring to here?

Are you referring to the DC"s which were elevated to full canon status at the council of Trent?

JA4, you KNOW that the canon of Scripture ALWAYS included the Deuterocanonical texts and that the full conciliar declaration at Trent was an affirmation of what the Church had already promulgated in the late 4th Century.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

justasking4
in all your questions regarding the Blessed virgin you are missing a very important point of the Bible as a whole. Love. As the commandments require, as Jesus required, we are to love as we love ourselves. Honor? we are to honor our father and mother. Not tolerate, but honor. And in wedding vows we are to honor our spouse. Simple little things. Love and honor of Mary does not show disrespect or less worship to Our Lord Jesus but quite the opposite, we honor her because we are to love her as we are to love all others and we honor her because she devoted herself to the live of our Savior from conception to His passion and beyond. She was with Him throughout it all. What less could one expect.

Hi twb, That was very nice! But tell me the truth, I won’t say anything. You actually don’t think that will work with JA4 do you?
I think you will get their standard: “Not sure what you are saying. Can you clarify”?