The Universal Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter lanman87
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
@lanman87,

I have already supplied biblical arguments for IC. That’s evidence that it did happen and absence of evidence to the contrary isn’t evidence of absence. You haven’t disproved them.

Point 2: She wouldn’t have been perplexed. She was betrothed to Saint Joseph and she knew that she’d be married soon. No need to go Huh? to Saint Gabriel the Archangel.
 
Last edited:
lanman87 said:
34 And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” Luke 1:34 ESV
Click to expand...
Douay-Rheims:

[34] And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?
Dixit autem Maria ad angelum : Quomodo fiet istud, quoniam virum non cognosco?
 
Last edited:
Agathon77 said:
@Crocus has a good point, @lanman87. Our Lady has a crucial role to play in the economy of salvation.
Click to expand...
So does Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Ruth, David and even Judas. God has always used imperfect people to accomplish His will. Even the evil that Joseph brothers did when they sold him into slavery was part of God purpose of redemption. If Judas hadn’t betrayed Jesus then there would not have been the perfect sacrifice for our sins.

The story of Mary is a beautiful story of a young girl who is called by God for a purpose and beautifully meets that purpose.
 
Beautiful point, @Margaret_Ann!

Love it when you bring out good old DR.
 
Last edited:
Agathon77 said:
I have already supplied biblical arguments for IC.
Click to expand...
You’ve supplied Biblical suppositions based on predetermined theological views. In other words, you are reading meaning into the scriptures that simply isn’t there.
 
@lanman87,

You still haven’t addressed kecharitomene. Full of grace. No one else was given that name. She was prepped from her IC onward for her role in the economy. A special role that no one else could serve.
 
@lanman87,

Then supply us please with a biblical argument that refutes it.

Simply accusing me of eisegesis doesn’t make your claims true.
 
That’s a specious argument, @lanman87. You made a specific claim and now you have to supply evidence that shows your claim to be true.

Theology is the Sacred Science. Treat it as the Science she is please.
 
Last edited:
Here, here; @Margaret_Ann.

And thank you. How do I say thank you in Greek or Ukrainian?
 
Agathon77 said:
You made a specific claim and now you have to supply evidence that shows your claim to be true.
Click to expand...
My claim is that the Mariology of the Catholic church started in the late 2nd Century when Mary was said to be the “new Eve” and it was built upon from there by the imaginations and speculations of Theologians and Bishops. Hence, there will be no writings from the Apostles showing that they didn’t think she was the ever-virgin (and other Marian doctrines). That is what I mean by “There is no evidence for a city that never existed”. You can’t prove something didn’t happen. You can only prove that it did happen.
 
lanman87 said:
I think they understood the Old Testament to be the Word of God and was the way to prove that Christ was the Messiah was show this in Scripture.
Click to expand...
Question, where in the Bible, and the Bible alone, does the Bible teach the Bible alone?

ZP
 
🤔 So, you’re denying the possibility of drawing logical deductions from Genesis 3:15 that is the basis for all Mariology and the statements of Apostolic Fathers?

If your logic holds; we can’t hold any opinions or define doctrines against all the heresies against the true Faith the Fathers had to defend Holy Mother Church from?

Conversely: Your reformers can’t hold any opinions that don’t conform to the Apostles themselves?

Re: Faith alone was never taught, Sola Scriptura was never taught, the Real Presence was defended by Saint Paul in 2 Corinthians… and so on?
 
Last edited:
Agathon77 said:
So, you’re denying the possibility of drawing logical deductions from Genesis 3:15 that is the basis for all Mariology and the statements of Apostolic Fathers?
Click to expand...
The problem is inference. We can’t read a passage and infer a meaning that is not true to the passage. In other words, we are free to just make stuff up based on what we think it means. BTW-this is a problem in American Evangelism as well. I once heard a Baptist preacher say that the water Jesus turned into wine wasn’t alcoholic. He was wrong.
 
So, @lanman87:

You’re left with the classic Protestant basis with which to hold against Scripture that refutes Protestant doctrines; that is: It’s all a matter of interpretation?

Btw: Logical deduction is a far cry from making stuff up as you stated.
 
Last edited:
Sorry but that doesn’t cut it. The Holy Spirit descended on Our Lady and the Apostles at Pentecost. He gave them everything necessary - His Gifts, Virtues and even the charismata. The Apostles then knew that She was the Mother of God and everything the Holy Spirit revealed to them about Her all the other doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic Faith.

Did they put everything in writing? God chose Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, Jude and later Paul to write down what He wanted them to while at the same time preserving them from error. C.f. Providentissimus Deus. Did the other Apostles write? We don’t know.

The Catholic Church existed before one iota of the NT was written. God has and always will preserve the Church from error in spite of the world, the flesh and the devil.

I’m going to take a time out before I post something I’ll regret.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top