What do you think scripture says about Mary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa4Catholics
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear all,

Re-reading a post I just placed, I realize that the quote is definitely “peace to all men on whom his favour rests”, NOT “peach to all men”. Oops, sorry. Peaches do TASTE divine, though!

Just another example of how man, and therefore anything created by man, is sinful and prone to error!

Paul xo
 
Dear DrPaul,
Praise Be To God for your recent conversion! May the Lord continue to grow you in His grace and mercy.

Let me just touch on some of the things that you said that perhaps need some clarification by us Catholics because you do not really understand what we believe in context. The fact is that within the total context of scripture and over 2,000 years of living Sacred Tradition we can pretty well substantiate all we believe.

Now before you go off on me about “traditions of men”, let me point out that Chrsitainity, like Judaism is founded on traditions. This is evident from many sources, but one that stands out in my mind is the next to last book of the NT…Jude. St. Jude’s epistle is canon and full of good stuff, however, he quotes from two traditional Jewish writings that are not canon and gives them inspired status (see Jude 9 and 14-15). Verse 9 is taken from The Assumption of Moses and the other two are direct quotes from The Book of Enoch. Now if this apostle recognized Sacred Tradition and included it in his canonical NT writings, then in imitating him as he followed Christ I suspect that we should too. This is just one aspect of this discussion, but I find it compelling.

Now…You said:
I think it’s blasphemous to consider Mary to be the “New Eve”, comparing her to Jesus Himself (God) as the “New Adam” (or the Son of Man, with reference to Old Testament prophecy). Surely, all prophecy was in anticipation of the coming of Jesus, and God’s plan of our salvation through Him, not of the coming of a “sinless woman” who was to be revered?
Click to expand...
Let me just suggest that you not be slinging such words as “blasphemous” around until you have some better understanding of what we’re talking about. The New Eve concept IS supported by scripture. I direct your attention to Genesis, the 3rd chapter, and 15th verse, where Mary’s position as they new Eve is first prophesied. (“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” Douay-Rheims Version) How will “the woman” crush the head of Satan? By saying “yes” to God and agreeing to become the mother of the Word Incarnate, the Messiah, The King of kings and Lord of lords.

You, (and most other non-Catholic Christians) also have no concept of who Mary was BECAUSE of her position as mother of the Messiah. For that you need to go back into an OT word study of the Hebrew word “giberah” or queen mother…and see the position that Mary scripturally holds as the mother of Jesus. There is a very clear scriptural precedent for the intercessory role of the Blessed Virgin, and you see her display this very role in John 2 at the wedding feast in Cana. Mary’s message to us is the very same as it was to the servants then. “Do whatever he tells you.”

You seem to have issues with The Holy Trinity. Granted that word is not found in scripture, but then neither are terms like “accepting Christ as Lord and Savior”, “altar call”, or “sinner’s prayer”. However…the nature of the Trinity is implicit throughout the Bible, beginning pretty much with Genesis 1:26 (“And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth.”).

Welcome to our boards my friend. All we ask is that you are respectful of us and our faith and we’ll share many fine discussions with you.
Pax vobiscum,
 
Church Militant-

I would like to jump in for one second if you and drpaul do not mind. You both were duscussing whether Mary is the New Eve and you (Church Militant) brought up Gen 3:15 and you wrote:
I direct your attention to Genesis, the 3rd chapter, and 15th verse, where Mary’s position as they new Eve is first prophesied. (“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” Douay-Rheims Version) How will “the woman” crush the head of Satan? By saying “yes” to God and agreeing to become the mother of the Word Incarnate, the Messiah, The King of kings and Lord of lords.
Click to expand...
Your paraphrazing is a little off; look what Scripture says.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
“He” shall bruise and not “she” and in different translations it is written “It shall bruise” but never is it “she.”

“Your seed” is the evil spirits and wicked men and “her seed” is the seed of the Messiah in other words His Church (His Bride hence the “her seed”). The person that will “bruise on the head” is Christ, He shall give the blow to Satan and satan shall bruise on the heel or in other words be afflicting His Church and His people.

Mary and Christ did not redeem man but Christ did alone. Solo Christo. Mary is not the New Eve there is only a New Adam in Scripture.

That’s my 5 cents but please continue with the debate.

God Bless.
 
Christ's friend:
Church Militant-

I would like to jump in for one second if you and drpaul do not mind. You both were duscussing whether Mary is the New Eve and you (Church Militant) brought up Gen 3:15 and you wrote:Your paraphrazing is a little off; look what Scripture says.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
“He” shall bruise and not “she” and in different translations it is written “It shall bruise” but never is it “she.”

“Your seed” is the evil spirits and wicked men and “her seed” is the seed of the Messiah in other words His Church (His Bride hence the “her seed”). The person that will “bruise on the head” is Christ, He shall give the blow to Satan and satan shall bruise on the heel or in other words be afflicting His Church and His people.

Mary and Christ did not redeem man but Christ did alone. Solo Christo. Mary is not the New Eve there is only a New Adam in Scripture.

That’s my 5 cents but please continue with the debate.

God Bless.
Click to expand...
the word seed is never used in connection to a woman except in this passage. Your argument fails on that point.
 
I believe it says ALL BORN OF THIS EARTH HAVE SINNED…

Yet it says the ,“least in the kingdom of heaven,” born of above, like angels, are greater than John the Baptist…

It has also says no has ,“SEEN THE FATHER except those from HEAVEN,” yet we believe someone has SEEN the almighty father…

Then again, once ONE has SEEN, and knows, what meaning does this EARTH really have yet, except building heavenly treasure? Faith is great, yet with WISDOM, comes much grief, King Solomon… 👍
 
Christ's friend:
Church Militant-

I would like to jump in for one second if you and drpaul do not mind. You both were duscussing whether Mary is the New Eve and you (Church Militant) brought up Gen 3:15 and you wrote:Your paraphrazing is a little off; look what Scripture says.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
“He” shall bruise and not “she” and in different translations it is written “It shall bruise” but never is it “she.”
Click to expand...
http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1...es.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage12/1.gif

That IS a direct quote form the Bible…NOT a paraphrase. That’s exactly what the Doauy-Rheims Bible says. Your version however sounds even father afield…Oh well…I’m sure yours is also short at least 7 books.
 
Christ's friend:
Church Militant-

I would like to jump in for one second if you and drpaul do not mind.Your paraphrazing is a little off; look what Scripture says.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
“He” shall bruise and not “she” and in different translations it is written “It shall bruise” but never is it “she.”
Click to expand...
http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1...es.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage12/1.gif

That IS a direct quote from the Bible…NOT a paraphrase. That’s exactly what the Douay-Rheims Bible says. Your version however sounds even farther afield than some I’ve seen…Oh well…I’m sure yours is also short at least 7 books. (Which BTW predates the King James version by 2 years…)
 
40.png
BayCityRickL:
When posters say that Jesus was certainly sinless we all agree, but even the Savior took on Himself the guilt of all of our sins. He took on our shame.

Elsewhere others have made comments about the smelly place he was born, contrasting that to the sinfulness into which He was born.

I don’t want to truly go negative here, but there’s something that nobody ever talks about. Even if Mary was born sinless and remained sinless, what does that mean to us? Catholics make this ‘point’ that in itself creates and generates so much conflict with other Christians, I wonder if it’s really worth it? It may be a devout legend and tradition, but it has become regarded as dogma (you have to believe it) which drives this big wedge between us and other believers.

When Jesus said “teach all that I have commanded” I wonder if the Church has gone too far beyond teaching what God has commanded? Why is it essential to salvation to believe that Mary was immaculately conceived? The test that my mind conjures up, is whether the ‘good thief’ on the cross had to believe in Mary’s immaculate conception? No evidence of that. But, our Lord said that he would be that day in Paradise.

And, then, too, there’s the same bunch of questions about Mary’s perpetual virginity. Seriously…who cares? Even if she was perpetually virgin, so are a lot of women AND men!! Mary’s virginity does not seem to be anybody’s business, as far as I can tell. Do these beliefs about Mary embellish or enhance our salvation in any way?

The Church has retired Jan 1 as a celebration of Jesus’ circumcision. Now, that was important in Jewish life. Why has that fallen to the wayside, as long as we’re talking about things below the waist? That ritual of Jewish initiation has been sanitized to the “Presentation of our Lord in the Temple.”
Click to expand...
The first of January is now the feast of the Mother of God!!, I think that says something, and a good Mother as Mary was/is would do the best for her Child as becoming her faith and state in life. Theologically, Mary’s perpetual virginity IS important to fully understand the importance of Christ and his mission. The alledged “wedge” you speak off has been bought about by protestant re-engineering Traditions and faith held for 2000 years. Luther’s revolt is only 500 years old and the fundo’s anti Catholic screaming less than 150 years. It is best to pay heed to the Faith of our fathers than some new fangled anti-belief. It is interesting to note that in our Lady’s many apparitions she has never appeared to unbelievers (except Egypt) and Never to protestants, as she knows she would be revilled and misunderstood. She usually appears to the little ones (except Juan Diego), the Children, that Christ so warmly urged us to be. Let us be as Children with Faith in the richness and majesty of Christ and his Church!
God bless
 
40.png
morey:
Ha! We have someone who is playing God here. Solo Christo has decided that Mary is dead. Jesus Himself has no word to say. If Jesus wanted to ressurect Mary bodily 2000 years ago, He simply would NOT be able to do so. Why ? Because Solo Christo said so !!!

You know what ? Mary has something that Christ loves. You know what it is ? It’s called humility.
Click to expand...
Dear Friends,
I think you could leave “solo Christo” to his unbelief, I have meet people like him before, they even think a crucifix or crossing yourself is idolotary. I hope he does’nt have any pictures of his loved ones in his home , gosh!! he would be guilty of idolotry. Pray for him
 
40.png
drpaul:
Dear Lisa,

Thank you for your reply. I think it’s wonderful that so many people are searching earnestly for the truth. I believe Jesus’ teaching that those who seek, find.

I find it interesting to read the posts (of which, I admit, I’ve not gotten through all yet. Have you seen how many posts there have been in 2 weeks???) There are a lot of good points, but there’s also a lot of rubbish, and a few comments which I find, quite frankly, to be unbefitting of a Christian! I hope we’re all keeping in mind what this is all about: becoming the righteousness of God.

“But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matt 6:33).

Seeking JESUS first will certainly help us to see all other issues in the correct light, no matter how large or small we perceive them to be!

I’m a relatively new Christian (about 3 years now.) Some may say that this makes me inexperienced, but others may say that it helps me to be less biased by the church, or by various dogmas that seem to be rampant in ALL “denominations”. I hope that the latter is true to an extent. There is a problem with “denominationalism” (i.e., Catholics vs. Protestants, etc.):

“Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: ‘Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall.’” (Luke 11:17)

As Christians, we all really should be uniting on what we have in common, and getting out there in the world to bring the good news to other folk!

If we are all CHRISTIANS (i.e., believers in Christ as God’s son, in his death and resurrection on the 3rd day, and in his place at God’s right hand in the kingdom of heaven), then surely CHRIST is at the centre of it all.

I’m not against praising God for His other precious gifts: and thanks be to Him for the gift of my own life, to be sure, and those of the prophets, apostles, and all others used as instruments of His divine will to bring us to an understanding and a belief in Him, including Mary the mother of Jesus. But as a Christian, I will praise God for His precious gifts, not Mary, and I will not worship Mary, pray to Mary, or call on her name when the Son of Man comes down on the clouds on that glorious day in the future! Surely, it will be Jesus, the Christ.

(disclaimer: I’m not saying that anyone else believes this, but just trying to point out that maybe focusing on God and His son, our saviour Jesus Christ and how he died and rose again are perhaps more important than debating who was Jesus’ earthly mother and how did she live or die.)

If we are going to quote angels, I feel we’ve exhausted one topic thoroughly: Gabriel’s brief greeting to Mary. How about these?

"Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peach to men on whom his favour rests.” (Luke 2:13-14)

Praising God, not the Trinity. Glory to God, not the Trinity. What IS the Trinity, anyway? Please don’t answer that, because there are as many explanations for that as there are people, it seems. Mary, God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ, our Personal Counsellor, our conscience, the Holy Ghost, the resurrected spirit of Jesus, etc, etc. Pick and mix. At the end of the day, the Trinity is never mentioned in Holy scripture, more than likely because referring to Himself in that way didn’t appear to be important to God. And if that’s good enough for God, it’s good enough for me, too! Surely, He had more important things to tell us through His inspired word. In order for us all to stop being divided against ourselves, why don’t we focus on the important points, and let God work out the finer details?

After all, how will we EVER know the truth? How arrogant is it of any of us to claim to know more of God’s divine will than another? That’s like saying I know 3 grains of sand on the Costa del Sol compared to your 2. Isn’t it easier to appreciate the beach, and praise God for His gift?

Lisa, I hope I wasn’t speaking with any bias, but of course we’re all biased, whether we know it or not. Perhaps we just all need to humble ourselves to the Lord, accepting how little we know and asking for His help to understand, to love, and to accept the truth, which is Jesus.

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

Paul
Click to expand...
MMMMMMMMM, But as Cardinal Ratzinger has said, the Catholic Church is NOT a denomination, it is the Mystical body of Christ, the Church only God could have created
 
CreosMary Said:
But as Cardinal Ratzinger has said, the Catholic Church is NOT a denomination, it is the Mystical body of Christ, the Church only God could have created
Click to expand...
Very well said there good Catholic Sheila 👍
 
Christ's friend:
Church Militant-

I would like to jump in for one second if you and drpaul do not mind. You both were duscussing whether Mary is the New Eve and you (Church Militant) brought up Gen 3:15 and you wrote:Your paraphrazing is a little off; look what Scripture says.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
“He” shall bruise and not “she” and in different translations it is written “It shall bruise” but never is it “she.”

“Your seed” is the evil spirits and wicked men and “her seed” is the seed of the Messiah in other words His Church (His Bride hence the “her seed”). The person that will “bruise on the head” is Christ, He shall give the blow to Satan and satan shall bruise on the heel or in other words be afflicting His Church and His people.

Mary and Christ did not redeem man but Christ did alone. Solo Christo. Mary is not the New Eve there is only a New Adam in Scripture.

That’s my 5 cents but please continue with the debate.

God Bless.
Click to expand...
It is the exegesis of Christ’s friend that is in error. The whole point of the Protoevangelium is the promise of the Woman and Her Seed. This is the promise that there will be a woman who will be the New Eve and that her son will be the New Adam. The Protoevangelium also says something else that has escaped our friend’s attention:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman”

This is the real key of the passage, not the crushing of Satan’s head. Surely we are reading the passage wrong if we do not recongize that by complete obedience to the Will of God, and by being an enemy of Satan the Woman does have the power to crush the head of Satan even when Satan bruises the heel of the Seed of the Woman; we are able to accept that it is the Seed of the Woman who will crush the head of Satan.

Maggie
 
40.png
CreosMary:
The first of January is now the feast of the Mother of God!!, I think that says something, and a good Mother as Mary was/is would do the best for her Child as becoming her faith and state in life. Theologically, Mary’s perpetual virginity IS important to fully understand the importance of Christ and his mission. The alledged “wedge” you speak off has been bought about by protestant re-engineering Traditions and faith held for 2000 years. Luther’s revolt is only 500 years old and the fundo’s anti Catholic screaming less than 150 years. It is best to pay heed to the Faith of our fathers than some new fangled anti-belief. It is interesting to note that in our Lady’s many apparitions she has never appeared to unbelievers (except Egypt) and Never to protestants, as she knows she would be revilled and misunderstood. She usually appears to the little ones (except Juan Diego), the Children, that Christ so warmly urged us to be. Let us be as Children with Faith in the richness and majesty of Christ and his Church!
God bless
Click to expand...
Do not forget that Martin Luther, John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli as well as other early “reformers” acknowleded the necessity of the Marian dogma. The denial that we see now is caused by the period known as the Enlightenment.

Maggie
 
Christ's friend:
Church Militant-

“Your seed” is the evil spirits and wicked men and “her seed” is the seed of the Messiah in other words His Church (His Bride hence the “her seed”). The person that will “bruise on the head” is Christ, He shall give the blow to Satan and satan shall bruise on the heel or in other words be afflicting His Church and His people.

Mary and Christ did not redeem man but Christ did alone. Solo Christo. Mary is not the New Eve there is only a New Adam in Scripture.

That’s my 5 cents but please continue with the debate.

God Bless.
Click to expand...
The exegesis on what forms the seed is in error. Christ’s friend fails to connect to the significance of Jesus referring to his mother as Woman in John’s Gospel. It was Jesus who was bruised by Satan. The bruising is an indication that Jesus (the seed of the woman) will be inflicted with pain, but will not die from the conflict (the Sacrifice on the Cross).

These words in Genesis represent the promise of the Messiah, not the Christian Church.

Maggie
 
Church Militant:
http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1...es.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage12/1.gif

That IS a direct quote from the Bible…NOT a paraphrase. That’s exactly what the Douay-Rheims Bible says. Your version however sounds even farther afield than some I’ve seen…Oh well…I’m sure yours is also short at least 7 books. (Which BTW predates the King James version by 2 years…)
Click to expand...
Hi C.M. The bible is never in error.Only our understanding. or a printers error. 😃 ] My catholic version does say HE. :confused: God Bless
 
40.png
SPOKENWORD:
Hi C.M. The bible is never in error.Only our understanding. or a printers error. 😃 ] My catholic version does say HE. :confused: God Bless
Click to expand...
My Catholic JB version says IT.

This is what happens when we translate from one language to another. The wording gets changed and then the meaning changes.

However, if you put the whole context of Genesis 2:14-15 together, there are two points that emerge that need to be considered. The first :

“I will make you enemies of each other,
you and the woman”

This is a clear statement and since the first Eve has already been “in bed” with Satan by accepting his temptation then she is not the one who is to be the enemy of Satan.

“your offspring and her offspring”

This is the promise of the Messiah, who will be the offspring of the Woman.

“It will crush your head
And you will strike its heel”

This is the second point that is emphasised. Is this a reference to the Woman taking this action, or is it a reference to the action of the Messiah? Well I think it is both. First of all, this is fulfilled when Jesus becomes the Sacrificial Lamb and dies on the Cross. It is true, that Satan did strike the heel of the seed of the woman - that seed is Jesus. It is also true that when Jesus died, He crushed the head of Satan.

I think that it is the whole of the verse that gives us the prophecy. The woman is to be the enemy of Satan and that means that she will have nothing to do with sin. This in turn makes her the one who is being prepared to bear the Messiah. Satan tried to strike at the “seed” of the Woman but failed; not just at the Resurrection but each time Satan tempted Jesus to give up and disobey His Father.

Maggie
 
Genesis 3:12-13 “It was the woman you put with me; she gave me the fruit, and I ate it”.

In one classic statement by Adam, the writer shows us the BREAK IN HARMONY with one another (it was the woman), with God (YOU put with me), and with nature (the fruit, and I ate it). In other words, sin.

Contrast with this:

Luke 1:41-42 The child leaped in her womb and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. She gave a loud cry and said, “Of all the women you are the most blessed, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”
In one classic statement by Elizabeth, the inspired writer shows us perfect HARMONY with God, with one another, and with nature. In other words, no sin.
 
40.png
Fidelis:
Let’s look at the actual Scripture verse, Romans 3:23:

**For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God. **

.
Click to expand...
Dont know what translation you are using. The below is from a new translation called NET-free download which also includes the deuterocanonical books. Here is the above in context more or less.

Romans 3:9-28

The Condemnation of the World

3:9 What then? Are we better off? Certainly not, for we have already charged that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin, 3:10 just as it is written:

“*There is no one righteous, not even one, *

3:11 there is no one who understands,there is no one who seeks God.
3:12 All have turned away,together they have become worthless;there is no one who shows kindness, not even one.”%between%
3:13 “Their throats are open graves,%between%they deceive with their tongues,the poison of asps is under their lips.”%between%
3:14 “Their mouths are%between% full of cursing and bitterness.”%between%**
3:15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
3:16 ruin and misery are in their paths,
3:17 and the way of peace they have not known.”%between%****
3:18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”%between%****

3:19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under%between% the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him%between% by the works of the law,%between% for through the law comes%between% the knowledge of sin. 3:21 But now%between% apart from the law the righteousness of God (which is attested by the law and the prophets)%between% has been disclosed— 3:22 namely, the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. 3:24 But they are justified%between% freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 3:25 God publicly displayed%between% him%between% at his death%between% as the mercy seat%between% accessible through faith.%between% This was to demonstrate%between% his righteousness, because God in his forbearance had passed over the sins previously committed.%between% 3:26 This was%between% also to demonstrate%between% his righteousness in the present time, so that he would be just%between% and the justifier of the one who lives because of Jesus’ faithfulness.%between%

3:27 Where, then, is boasting?%between% It is excluded! By what principle?%between% Of works? No, but by the principle of faith! 3:28 For we consider that a person%between% is declared righteous by faith apart from the works of the law.%between%

Although Mary may have been sinless, I do not see this proven by scripture. It is based on early Fathers using reason and it is a tradition of the Catholic church. All Christians use some tradition in their beliefs,noone is purely ‘solo scriptura’, regardless of what they say and this doctrine is based on a Catholic/early Christian tradition, IMO.

Laura
 
40.png
CreosMary:
MMMMMMMMM, But as Cardinal Ratzinger has said, the Catholic Church is NOT a denomination, it is the Mystical body of Christ, the Church only God could have created
Click to expand...
Dear CreosMary,

Thank you for your reply. I need to say, though, that whether you like it or not, there are many different groups who choose to worship the Lord in their own way. It is the worship that is important. We, as sinful humans, have no right to judge anyone, as God Himself tells us through the Scriptures. It is between each one of us, and God. God will judge whether we are part of His body, not Cardinal Ratzinger. So this forum, then, should be simply to help ourselves to grow in knowledge and understanding so that we may grow closer to God, not to try to convert, attack, or defend, or otherwise torment each other, as has happened in some instances on this forum!

There is another, perhaps much more vitally important point that I feel should really be brought up, and I hope it will give birth to debate fueled by research into the Scriptures, an open mind and heart, and prayer to God.

There seems to be a basic Catholic assumption on these threads that ONLY the Catholic church has the answers, and therefore anyone who is NOT a Catholic is wrong. For example, for many, the Catholic Bible seems to be the only acceptable translation for some reason. (even though there are different and conflicting Catholic versions, too!)

What’s more, there seems to be a universal disclaimer that applies only to the Catholic church that quashes any argument against it: (I quote from the link of this site regarding Mary’s sinful nature:)
The Catholic Church was commissioned by Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly—guided, as he promised, by the Holy Spirit until the end of the world. (John 14:26, 16:13). THE MERE FACT THAT THE CHURCH TEACHES THAT SOMETHING IS DEFINITELY TRUE IS A GUARANTEE THAT IT IS TRUE.
Click to expand...
The quotation from John is what the Protestant church would believe to be a reference to the Holy Spirit being a personal counsellor, which I understand is debatable if the Catholic church don’t believe in the Holy Spirit in the same sense as Protestants. At any rate, the Bible NEVER says anything about the CATHOLIC church being infallible! That is certainly an interpretation which could never be made of a human institution- which, by definition, is made of and by sinful humans and will always therefore be prone to error and sin! (which, of course, is obvious to anyone not completely ignorant to the failings of the Catholic or the Protestant churches in history!) It’s so supremely arrogant to say that the Catholic church is infallible, that it almost perfectly exemplifies Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees:

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men’s bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.” (Matthew 23:27-28)

We are ALL full of sin. And each and every translation of God’s message to us is prone to error, as we fully know, even though we try our best. It is a translation.

I also find it interesting that the writer refers to anyone who voices a disagreement to his teachings as “Fundamentalists”! I don’t know what to think about that one! Whatever happened to “those that seek, find, and to those that knock, the door will be opened”?

Love, DrPaul (a Fundamentalist, apparently)
 
Hi drpaul,
I enjoyed your post and sense a desire for unity in the body of Christ when I read it. That’s a desire we share along with many others I have no doubt. I want to join you in a sincere effort to understand.
40.png
drpaul:
It is the worship that is important. We, as sinful humans, have no right to judge anyone, as God Himself tells us through the Scriptures. It is between each one of us, and God. God will judge whether we are part of His body, not Cardinal Ratzinger. So this forum, then, should be simply to help ourselves to grow in knowledge and understanding so that we may grow closer to God,
Click to expand...
It is pleasing to know that noncatholic christians would want to com to a catholic forum to learn. I will put my best effort into making the exchange of ideas between us as charitable and sincere as possible by keeping in mind that we’re not only allies with a common foe, we are brethren.****
I have some difficulty in accepting what you said about worship being the primary good in our relationship with God and it’s form having a secondary importance.****
The Scripture is abundant in examples of worship that weren’t pleasing to Him and I think it would be good to review them in order to distinguish a method of knowing how it is best for us to approach God.
**I make this a suggestion with a brief example as a supplement. **
Cain’s offering was rejected. His offering was a sign of his own desires and not God’s. Abel offered God a sign of understanding and gift of self. The primary reason it was a pleasing and prophetic sign wasn’t as much because Abel understood how or why it would please God, The reason it was awas acceptable was because abel lived a good life.
** Abel picked out from what his life surrounded him with for an offering ****nd gave from the heart and it was that human element that inherently gathered the materials of his life into an acceptable offering of worship pleasing to the Lord. **
So we must examine our hearts and lives carefully and always be humbly willing to accept the possibility that our worship lacks in some way. We must be carefull that what we object to in another is a serious matter or if it is serious only to ourselves because of some sin in our own heart. Cain would have told abel how wrong his offering was but somehow I doubt that Abel had is eyes on what Cain was going to offer. I think all he was thinking about was pleasing God with his own. We need this attitude in our worship as well.
We can’t teach truth by pointing out what is wrong. Although I agree that is appropriate at times somehow,I think when it is for most of us God will orchestrate the circumstance to do so.
**I don’t want to make too long a post so I hope you didn’t mind my interjection. **
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top