[quote]Sloth wrote:
Say there is pit in which a man would at least break some bones if he fell in. Even more troublesome, this pit is obscured by foliage and debris, so that any man coming along would inevitably fall in. However, say there is one man who knows of it’s existence (perhaps from an old family story). So he goes to investigate, and just as he’s arriving a woman is only feet away from unknowingly walking into danger. But the new arrival calls out to her, intervenes, and steers her away from tragedy. Has she preserved her safety through own power? Or was it intervention?
We believe Christ was sinless because of his OWN divine nature and will.
We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will.
So yes, Mary did need a savior.[/quote]
Please stay with me because I really want to understand this. So by your statement above is that all believers in Christ are sinless because Jesus (the Divine) has made it so with his death and resurrection. If you are a beleiver you are Holy and set apart in the eyes of God and this is in the Bible. Other than Mary being the mother of Jesus what makes her so special? Jesus even defied her, when he was in the temple going about his Father’s business. He was not here to be subservent to Mary alone but to be the sacrifice for all of us including Mary.
This is what I am having issues with. Putting Mary on a pedistal that she was better than us. I understand the issue with Mary interceeding for you so that is why you pray to her. I alright with going to the priest for confession but then take it to the High Priest in Jesus Christ. These are just my thoughts. I do not understand why you need to go to Mary for help. The Bible says bring your prayers and petitions to the Throne of God. Why should I not do that?
My personal Humble opinion is any doctrine related to Mary in the Roman Catholic Church was installed by man and not by God.
This is what I am having issues with. Putting Mary on a pedistal that she was better than us. I understand the issue with Mary interceeding for you so that is why you pray to her. I alright with going to the priest for confession but then take it to the High Priest in Jesus Christ. These are just my thoughts. I do not understand why you need to go to Mary for help. [/quote]
Why wouldn’t you ask someone to pray for you? You don’t request prayers for you and your family? You don’t pray for others?
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.”
What saith the Scriptures?
I Peter 1:18-19
" Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
The redemptive activity in the N.T. (verb three times) is solely that of God or Christ. Jesus came in order to give His life as a ransom for the many. He is the “Redemption” which brings salvation, forgiveness, and freedom to those who trust in His name.
Titus 2:14 affirms that Christ’s giving of himself (in sacrifice; cf. Gal. 1:4, on behalf of the believers’ sins; Mark 10:45) redeems believers from all wickedness (cf. Psalm 130:8). Christ’s death on the cross is the price paid to free believers from the power of sin and to empower them through His Spirit to live a pure life.
The sacrificial imagery of redemption (cf. Ex. 13:13; Num. 18:15) is mirrored by I Peter 1:18-19. Those who believe are not bought with silver or gold but with something more valuable, the very life-the priceless blood, as a lamb without blemish or defect-of Christ. This freed those who had followed ancient traditions from their former empty way of life, and it releases believers today from following the traditions of men (cf. Heb. 9:11 ff., the same sacrificial imagery).
As I have stated many times, The holy scriptures are God’s infallible, true witness to His saving activity for humankind in Christ Jesus. For this reason Scripture is incomparable, forever finished, and uniquely binding. No word of man or religious institution is equal to its authority.
All doctrines, commentaries, interpretations, and traditions must be judged and legitimized by the words and message in Holy Scripture. It must be used in the church as the final authority in all matters for teaching, reproof, correction, doctrine, and instruction in righteous living (II Tim. 3:16-17). One cannot submit to the Lordship of Christ without submitting to God and His Word as ultimate and final authority (John 8:31-32).
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Say there is pit in which a man would at least break some bones if he fell in. Even more troublesome, this pit is obscured by foliage and debris, so that any man coming along would inevitably fall in. However, say there is one man who knows of it’s existence (perhaps from an old family story). So he goes to investigate, and just as he’s arriving a woman is only feet away from unknowingly walking into danger. But the new arrival calls out to her, intervenes, and steers her away from tragedy. Has she preserved her safety through own power? Or was it intervention?
We believe Christ was sinless because of his OWN divine nature and will.
We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will.
So yes, Mary did need a savior.[/quote]
I assume by now it’s become apparent the “quite a bit” we disagree on? I dunno man. I’ve seen all this Romish theology a thousand times in my studies, but seeing people I kinda know and from what I can gather certainly like, type it out like this leaves me honestly dumbfounded and sad. I really am not trying to be an ass, but this stuff is so utterly alien to the Gospel.
Not just the semantically justified idolatry with Mary, but the entire sacerdotal clutter is simply foreign to anything so much as hinted at in the bible, even the apocryphal books for the most part. There was none of this elaborately packaged pomp, ceremony and synthetic ritual anywhere. To have somebody say yes I’m saved by Christ, BUT, a church headquartered in a monstrous temple built with stolen money is the sole dispensary of the efficacy of that work, even though the author of that work who the pope is supposed to represent had “nowhere to lay his head” is truly upsetting.
How can a religious system that affords full divine worship to a piece of food (and oh yes it does) have any credibility among worshipers of Jesus Christ who “died once for all” (1 Peter 3:18) before ascending body and soul into heaven. More bizarre human semantics.
I really wish you could know how unpleasant it is for me to write posts like this. Once you open the door to “tradition” like this you’re gonna wind up with people venerating relics and flocking to see some holy place or object even though the whole of the new testament condemns those very things. I cannot help myself man. I can still see my grandmother with her alleged piece of bone from some saint. It gives me the willies. It’s creepy and anti-christian. I don’t know exactly what has to happen in somebody’s mind to associate these kooky superstitions with the mighty risen Christ.
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.” >>>[/quote]
Reading this almost brought tears of sorrow to my eyes. This view is so unspeakably tragic.
“…We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will…”
Then, according to Scripture, Mary is no different that all believers.
II Peter 1:3-4
“According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature…”
It is possible for believers to have a multiplied measure of grace and peace, seeing that god’s divine power has “given” (Gk. dedoremenes, grant generously, bestow freely) them all things necessary for “life and godliness.” Peter wanted believers to enter into all these potential blessings. They have the capability to “live godly in Christ Jesus,” as II Timothy 3:12 describes it. The Lord has “called” (Gk. kalesantos, bid, summon personally, call by name) believers to His own “glory” (Gk. doxes, honor, radiant splendor) and “virture” (Gk. aretes, maniliness, holy excellence), thereby to manifest the divine character of Christ in their lives.
If believers will claim these pecious promises they may, even now, be “partakers” (Gk. koinonoi, sharer, partner) in Christ’s “nature” (Gk. phuseos, genus, lineal descent, nan, constitution).
As belivers we partake of the very nature of God. Our sharing in His nature is another description of the new birth by which we receive the life of God. We share God’s nature in order to conform to God and His holiness (cf. I Cor. 6:19-20; Eph. 4:24).
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.”
What saith the Scriptures?
I Peter 1:18-19
" Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
The redemptive activity in the N.T. (verb three times) is solely that of God or Christ. Jesus came in order to give His life as a ransom for the many. He is the “Redemption” which brings salvation, forgiveness, and freedom to those who trust in His name.
Titus 2:14 affirms that Christ’s giving of himself (in sacrifice; cf. Gal. 1:4, on behalf of the believers’ sins; Mark 10:45) redeems believers from all wickedness (cf. Psalm 130:8). Christ’s death on the cross is the price paid to free believers from the power of sin and to empower them through His Spirit to live a pure life.
The sacrificial imagery of redemption (cf. Ex. 13:13; Num. 18:15) is mirrored by I Peter 1:18-19. Those who believe are not bought with silver or gold but with something more valuable, the very life-the priceless blood, as a lamb without blemish or defect-of Christ. This freed those who had followed ancient traditions from their former empty way of life, and it releases believers today from following the traditions of men (cf. Heb. 9:11 ff., the same sacrificial imagery).
As I have stated many times, The holy scriptures are God’s infallible, true witness to His saving activity for humankind in Christ Jesus. For this reason Scripture is incomparable, forever finished, and uniquely binding. No word of man or religious institution is equal to its authority.
All doctrines, commentaries, interpretations, and traditions must be judged and legitimized by the words and message in Holy Scripture. It must be used in the church as the final authority in all matters for teaching, reproof, correction, doctrine, and instruction in righteous living (II Tim. 3:16-17). One cannot submit to the Lordship of Christ without submitting to God and His Word as ultimate and final authority (John 8:31-32).[/quote]I’m gonna be heartbroken the day you finally say something I disagree with. Lemme just add that the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom opening the holy of holies to all who would approach though the blood of the lamb slain before he foundation of the world. The whole point was that a human priesthood was at that point rendered not only obsolete, but legalistic and sinful. (beats head on keyboard!!!) All believers ARE a holy priesthood themselves through the indwelling presence of Christ in their hearts. Millions of people are having their intimate fellowship with the living God held hostage to a human institution that God himself declared illegitimate by his rending of that veil.
Not just the semantically justified idolatry with Mary [/quote]
Not sure what you mean here. We don’t think Mary is divine. Nor, specific to the above, do we think she was without need of the savior. It isn’t semantics, we mean it literally. Anything else is heresy to us. Mary isn’t divine. See? No hesitation at all. I could say that in front of the Pope himself without worry.
Man is visual. He appreciates architecture, art, and beauty. This, isn’t evil. As to our sins Catholics know, perhaps better than anyone, the crimes committed under our name. We pray about it often–very often–after all.
Come now, even if you don’t believe in our communion, you know very well what/who we are worshiping. Not one Catholic believes a piece of food is divine. So, even if you don’t believe in the literal mass, you do realize it is God on our minds, and is to God that our praise and worship is directed.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Say there is pit in which a man would at least break some bones if he fell in. Even more troublesome, this pit is obscured by foliage and debris, so that any man coming along would inevitably fall in. However, say there is one man who knows of it’s existence (perhaps from an old family story). So he goes to investigate, and just as he’s arriving a woman is only feet away from unknowingly walking into danger. But the new arrival calls out to her, intervenes, and steers her away from tragedy. Has she preserved her safety through own power? Or was it intervention?
We believe Christ was sinless because of his OWN divine nature and will.
We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will.
So yes, Mary did need a savior.[/quote]
I assume by now it’s become apparent the “quite a bit” we disagree on? I dunno man. I’ve seen all this Romish theology a thousand times in my studies, but seeing people I kinda know and from what I can gather certainly like, type it out like this leaves me honestly dumbfounded and sad. I really am not trying to be an ass, but this stuff is so utterly alien to the Gospel.
Not just the semantically justified idolatry with Mary, but the entire sacerdotal clutter is simply foreign to anything so much as hinted at in the bible, even the apocryphal books for the most part. There was none of this elaborately packaged pomp, ceremony and synthetic ritual anywhere. To have somebody say yes I’m saved by Christ, BUT, a church headquartered in a monstrous temple built with stolen money is the sole dispensary of the efficacy of that work, even though the author of that work who the pope is supposed to represent had “nowhere to lay his head” is truly upsetting.
How can a religious system that affords full divine worship to a piece of food (and oh yes it does) have any credibility among worshipers of Jesus Christ who “died once for all” (1 Peter 3:18) before ascending body and soul into heaven. More bizarre human semantics.
I really wish you could know how unpleasant it is for me to write posts like this. Once you open the door to “tradition” like this you’re gonna wind up with people venerating relics and flocking to see some holy place or object even though the whole of the new testament condemns those very things. I cannot help myself man. I can still see my grandmother with her alleged piece of bone from some saint. It gives me the willies. It’s creepy and anti-christian. I don’t know exactly what has to happen in somebody’s mind to associate these kooky superstitions with the mighty risen Christ.[/quote]
I was going to write the following as a post to Brother Chris but this is a good one to respond to. First things first:
Chris, I am impressed with your knowledge of doctrine and taking the time to study Catholic doctrine. I have more respect for a religious person who has made an effort than someone who accepts something without question. BTW - I did read some of the Catechism. You’d make a decent priest if you chose that direction.
And that brings me to your post, Tirib. I think the Catholic Church did what it did because it realized that taking the Bible literally and basing doctrine solely on the Bible (sola scriptura) would create some problems and lead people away from the Church. So at least they made an attempt to think things through and respond to possible criticisms. So the Catholics encourage some level of thinking. If religions are to survive into the 21st century they’re going to need to encourage. I see fundamentalism as anti-intellectual and a means of driving society backwards. The Catholic Church, for all its flaws and problems (your point about communion wafers and wine turning into the body and blood of Christ is well taken), at least accepts modern science. I can see in the Catechism an attempt to reconcile certain things and think through others. What do the fundamentalists and Biblical literalists offer? A fairy tale that the earth is 6,000 years old - no critical thinking allowed. And being a Bible literalist does not guarantee freedom from heresy. Just look at our friend Pushharder. He claims that his hedonistic lifestyle is not only allowed but encourage in the literal words of the Bible.
“…We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will…”
Then, according to Scripture, Mary is no different that all believers.
II Peter 1:3-4
“According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature…”
It is possible for believers to have a multiplied measure of grace and peace, seeing that god’s divine power has “given” (Gk. dedoremenes, grant generously, bestow freely) them all things necessary for “life and godliness.” Peter wanted believers to enter into all these potential blessings. They have the capability to “live godly in Christ Jesus,” as II Timothy 3:12 describes it. The Lord has “called” (Gk. kalesantos, bid, summon personally, call by name) believers to His own “glory” (Gk. doxes, honor, radiant splendor) and “virture” (Gk. aretes, maniliness, holy excellence), thereby to manifest the divine character of Christ in their lives.
If believers will claim these pecious promises they may, even now, be “partakers” (Gk. koinonoi, sharer, partner) in Christ’s “nature” (Gk. phuseos, genus, lineal descent, nan, constitution).
As belivers we partake of the very nature of God. Our sharing in His nature is another description of the new birth by which we receive the life of God. We share God’s nature in order to conform to God and His holiness (cf. I Cor. 6:19-20; Eph. 4:24).[/quote]
Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with what I wrote.
Katz, to me this is a big deal. To raise Mary up to be the same as God is not ok. Mary is human and has sin. She needs a savior as much as all of us. Jesus is the only human who was without sin. Do I think that people can come to Jesus through the Catholic Church? Yes I do.[/quote]
I hope sir you quip, as what you have said is extreme heretics to do in the Catholic Church. One that will get you excommunicated for disobeying the first commandment. Please tell me you do not believe the Catholic Church adores or latria of St. Mary.
Mary was human, that does not mean she is with sin, after all Gabriel claimed she was Full of Grace, or was he just lying to her and flattering her in an attempt to persuade her to be G-d’s Mother.
Yes, she needs a savior, how would being sinless be equivalent to her not needing a savior. I do not remember the Bible saying Jesus is the only person without Sin. The Catholic Church is the only way as long as you believe in the Bible.[/quote]
First, your last sentence. Jesus says, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one shall come unto the Father except through me.” The Catholic Church does not save you, only the blood of Jesus Christ.
[/quote]
Stop twisting my words. I never said the Church saves you, the Holy Ghost does which is in the Catholic Church. However, only the Catholic Church has corporal authority to give the Blood and Body of Jesus Christ, as well as authority to absolve sins.
[quote]
Second, the idea of Mary being without sin says that she is righteous in her own being, so she does not need a Savior so being equal with Jesus.[/quote]
No it does not say anything about her being righteous in her own being. Were Adam and Eve righteous in their own being, they were born without sin? Where they righteous because they walked with G-d, until they distance themselves from G-d by disobeying Him?
[quote]
This is what this doctrine tells us of Mary having no Sin.[/quote]
The doctrine does not do that, you are taking doctrine that you have never read and assuming it says something. Maybe you should read the doctrine, understand the logic behind it because your assumptions are far off and not close to being correct.
[quote]
If Mary has sin then she needs Grace to be saved.[/quote]
Yes, we never denied this? What does this claim try to prove, she was full of grace, because the Lord is with her.
If anything it proves she was without sin and blemish since she was full of grace, there was no lack of grace inside her. The Lord was with her, are you saying G-d cannot do this or something?
That G-d cannot wipe Original Sin away? I am sure you reject the teachings of baptism as well.
We are saved by more than faith, we are saved by works as well.
I do not care that you are denying that Mary was favored by G-d or not, I am more flustered that you seem to be saying G-d cannot do something. She is human, that does not mean that G-d let her be born into slavery like the rest of us, especially since she was to raise our Messiah, and then bow down before Him in worship or latria. She is the new Eve, and her son is the new Adam, both again born without Sin, but this time they did not sin as they were all their days with the Lord. However, if Mary left the presence of the Lord, she would then be in sin, but she was never without the Lord.
[quote]
The Bible states that Jesus is the lamb who was slain. In the Old Testament an Unblemished Lamb was used to attone for sin. Unblemished means with out sin. Sin is the blemish on all humans.[/quote]
Yes, but you forget that just because Jesus was an unblemished lamb did not mean that much (many unblemished lambs were slain but that did not save anyone), but because he was the Perfect Unblemished Lamb, did it mean something.
God-Man, God who came down and sacrificed His own begotten son, for those that he adopted, both giving Oath to make himself the last slain sacrifice for all and enduring torture for his loved brothers and sister to die and raise on the third day.
Jesus is not just some unblemished lamb, unblemished lambs do not do much without other factors. [/quote]
The Bible itself shows that All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. “All have sinned.” This includes Mary. She can not be sinless. Can God do these things if he wants to yes, but what would the purpose be of Mary being sinless. This was not a teaching of the early church and as you said was not brought about until 1865.[/quote]
There is oral tradition. And like I said, maybe read the doctrine so you understand. I sent you a link that explains the doctrine in short.
That is like saying that Abraham is merely a vessel which G-d brought a covenant to the world. Mary was more than a vessel, she is G-d’s mother, love thy neighbor! People are not merely anything, I am sure Jesus would really appreciate someone saying his mother was merely a vessel for his use. She deserves respect, she is not worshiped with the Godhead, if someone does or says they are, that is blasphemy and violation of the first commandment. In past, it would punished by penance of bread and water for years on end, as it should be because worshiping Mary as we worship the Godhead is far from okay.
There is no proof Mary died, physical or otherwise. I believe there is another person in the Bible that was taken up to Heaven without dying a physical death.
[quote]
We are not saved by our works, it is by our works that people can see our faith.
I hope I am not twisting your words again. That is not my intentions.[/quote]
No, we are not saved by anything but Jesus. You have to have a relationship with Jesus, and the only way to have a relationship with Jesus is by having faith and doing works.[/quote]
I hope you are right that Mary is not to be worshipped. I have heard a rummor going around that the Vatican is actually thinking about giving Mary the title of Diety. Hypothetical, if the Pope was to come out and make this a doctine of the Roman Catholic Church what would you say about it?[/quote]
It is not true, that has been a rumor documented for quite sometime.
I’d kill him myself for blaspheme (kidding, those Swiss guys are pretty tough to get around), it would not be accepted as infallible because it does not go with Tradition. That is part of the infallibility, not everything the Pope says is infallible.
Basically the jist is that if he is not
in council, and
making declaration that go along with tradition, then it is not infallible.
As well Bishops are infallible if they are teaching from doctrine in a prepared state (doesn’t include off comments).
This is like we would not consider the Pope infallible on the issue of Jesus if he said Jesus was merely a moral teacher. He would clearly be committing blaspheme and probably be put into the looney bin for saying such things.
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.” >>>[/quote]
Reading this almost brought tears of sorrow to my eyes. This view is so unspeakably tragic. [/quote]
cough there is another way my good friend tirib cough
I’ve posted it here before, but as you probably already know if you give a perfect act of contrition (which is still part of confession) you can be absolved of your sins.
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.”
What saith the Scriptures?
I Peter 1:18-19
" Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
The redemptive activity in the N.T. (verb three times) is solely that of God or Christ. Jesus came in order to give His life as a ransom for the many. He is the “Redemption” which brings salvation, forgiveness, and freedom to those who trust in His name.
Titus 2:14 affirms that Christ’s giving of himself (in sacrifice; cf. Gal. 1:4, on behalf of the believers’ sins; Mark 10:45) redeems believers from all wickedness (cf. Psalm 130:8). Christ’s death on the cross is the price paid to free believers from the power of sin and to empower them through His Spirit to live a pure life.
The sacrificial imagery of redemption (cf. Ex. 13:13; Num. 18:15) is mirrored by I Peter 1:18-19. Those who believe are not bought with silver or gold but with something more valuable, the very life-the priceless blood, as a lamb without blemish or defect-of Christ. This freed those who had followed ancient traditions from their former empty way of life, and it releases believers today from following the traditions of men (cf. Heb. 9:11 ff., the same sacrificial imagery).
As I have stated many times, The holy scriptures are God’s infallible, true witness to His saving activity for humankind in Christ Jesus. For this reason Scripture is incomparable, forever finished, and uniquely binding. No word of man or religious institution is equal to its authority.
All doctrines, commentaries, interpretations, and traditions must be judged and legitimized by the words and message in Holy Scripture. It must be used in the church as the final authority in all matters for teaching, reproof, correction, doctrine, and instruction in righteous living (II Tim. 3:16-17). One cannot submit to the Lordship of Christ without submitting to God and His Word as ultimate and final authority (John 8:31-32).[/quote]I’m gonna be heartbroken the day you finally say something I disagree with. Lemme just add that the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom opening the holy of holies to all who would approach though the blood of the lamb slain before he foundation of the world. The whole point was that a human priesthood was at that point rendered not only obsolete, but legalistic and sinful. (beats head on keyboard!!!) All believers ARE a holy priesthood themselves through the indwelling presence of Christ in their hearts. Millions of people are having their intimate fellowship with the living God held hostage to a human institution that God himself declared illegitimate by his rending of that veil.
[/quote]
The Church teaches that we are all called to be “Priests, kings, and prophets…”
Not just the semantically justified idolatry with Mary [/quote]
Not sure what you mean here. We don’t think Mary is divine. Nor, specific to the above, do we think she was without need of the savior. It isn’t semantics, we mean it literally. Anything else is heresy to us. Mary isn’t divine. See? No hesitation at all. I could say that in front of the Pope himself without worry.
Man is visual. He appreciates architecture, art, and beauty. This, isn’t evil. As to our sins Catholics know, perhaps better than anyone, the crimes committed under our name. We pray about it often–very often–after all.
Come now, even if you don’t believe in our communion, you know very well what/who we are worshiping. Not one Catholic believes a piece of food is divine. So, even if you don’t believe in the literal mass, you do realize it is God on our minds, and is to God that our praise and worship is directed.[/quote]
I think the reason why tirib says we worship a piece of food is that he denies that the bread and wine turn into the Blood and Body of Christ and that is in fact we are worshiping.
“…We believe Mary was sinless because of the Divine’s nature and will…”
Then, according to Scripture, Mary is no different that all believers.
II Peter 1:3-4
“According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature…”
It is possible for believers to have a multiplied measure of grace and peace, seeing that god’s divine power has “given” (Gk. dedoremenes, grant generously, bestow freely) them all things necessary for “life and godliness.” Peter wanted believers to enter into all these potential blessings. They have the capability to “live godly in Christ Jesus,” as II Timothy 3:12 describes it. The Lord has “called” (Gk. kalesantos, bid, summon personally, call by name) believers to His own “glory” (Gk. doxes, honor, radiant splendor) and “virture” (Gk. aretes, maniliness, holy excellence), thereby to manifest the divine character of Christ in their lives.
If believers will claim these pecious promises they may, even now, be “partakers” (Gk. koinonoi, sharer, partner) in Christ’s “nature” (Gk. phuseos, genus, lineal descent, nan, constitution).
As belivers we partake of the very nature of God. Our sharing in His nature is another description of the new birth by which we receive the life of God. We share God’s nature in order to conform to God and His holiness (cf. I Cor. 6:19-20; Eph. 4:24).[/quote]
Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with what I wrote.[/quote]
I’m confused to, it sounds vaguely like he is saying that Mary is to honored because of her sinlessness, but I cannot quite tell. Maybe my comprehension is down.
“…only the Catholic Church has…the…authority to absolve sins.”
What saith the Scriptures?
I Peter 1:18-19
" Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
The redemptive activity in the N.T. (verb three times) is solely that of God or Christ. Jesus came in order to give His life as a ransom for the many. He is the “Redemption” which brings salvation, forgiveness, and freedom to those who trust in His name.
Titus 2:14 affirms that Christ’s giving of himself (in sacrifice; cf. Gal. 1:4, on behalf of the believers’ sins; Mark 10:45) redeems believers from all wickedness (cf. Psalm 130:8). Christ’s death on the cross is the price paid to free believers from the power of sin and to empower them through His Spirit to live a pure life.
The sacrificial imagery of redemption (cf. Ex. 13:13; Num. 18:15) is mirrored by I Peter 1:18-19. Those who believe are not bought with silver or gold but with something more valuable, the very life-the priceless blood, as a lamb without blemish or defect-of Christ. This freed those who had followed ancient traditions from their former empty way of life, and it releases believers today from following the traditions of men (cf. Heb. 9:11 ff., the same sacrificial imagery).
As I have stated many times, The holy scriptures are God’s infallible, true witness to His saving activity for humankind in Christ Jesus. For this reason Scripture is incomparable, forever finished, and uniquely binding. No word of man or religious institution is equal to its authority.
All doctrines, commentaries, interpretations, and traditions must be judged and legitimized by the words and message in Holy Scripture. It must be used in the church as the final authority in all matters for teaching, reproof, correction, doctrine, and instruction in righteous living (II Tim. 3:16-17). One cannot submit to the Lordship of Christ without submitting to God and His Word as ultimate and final authority (John 8:31-32).[/quote]
Yet, because of the Authority of the Church and it being one, holy, catholic, and apostolic do you have your Bible. You still have to rely on the catholic councils to affirm your book.
I think the reason why tirib says we worship a piece of food is that he denies that the bread and wine turn into the Blood and Body of Christ and that is in fact we are worshiping.[/quote]
Oh, I know. In fact, that’s what I meant. If he doesn’t believe, it is indisputable that the worship is meant for Christ.
I think the reason why tirib says we worship a piece of food is that he denies that the bread and wine turn into the Blood and Body of Christ and that is in fact we are worshiping.[/quote]
Oh, I know. In fact, that’s what I meant. Even if he doesn’t believe, it is indisputable that the worship is meant for Christ.[/quote]
But, let’s take the eucharist for just a minute. The teaching was so ‘hard’ that disciples left him. So, today’s protestant objection isn’t new.
John 6 (yes, we do read the bible, too).
[/i]“Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. I am the bread of life. Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever."[/i]
Now, many disciples leave after this. Others are grumbling and in doubt.
[i]On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? 62What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit[e] and they are life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him.”
From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.[/i]
I am going to preempt the obvious argument.
“Well, what Christ was actually saying, through his choice of figurative wording…that is, we’re actually supposed to read this as…” Stop right there!
Anyone want to say it for me? Why sola scriptura-fundamentalists would not be able to proceede with the rest of that thought?
Regarding how the Church regards the Blessed Virgin Mary, I heartily recommend this book - which is a kind of 20th century classic that is theologically sophisticated, yet can be read by non-theologians.
Just thought I’d throw it in now - took it off my shelf and began re-reading it this afternoon.
