Who really cares what the ECF's had to say?

[Thekla]

ya know, the same ECFs who attended the Council that the Holy Spirit moved to select the canon, and who venerated those who walked with Christ, His mother, and Paul had the opportunity to alter the texts of the NT and didn't. Likewise Constantine, who commissioned the first "mass production" of the same. The ECFs are consulted when teasing apart the words in the NT becauseitwaswrittenlikethisandgreekhasprefixesandsuffixesthatalsoooklikewordssoitcanbedifficulttoevenrightlydividethewordsthemselves.

if indeed the EO is so debased in interpreting a text that was written in (in some cases) their native language less than 400 years out why trust them ? And if there was some "Constantinian conspiracy", why not alter the text. The same, if the EO teachings on Mary were so far off the text, why not alter it to suit their "purposes" ?

 

[MamaZ]

Luke 1
48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

I believe we went thru this before...
I am most certain we did.

This is not a command lol.. It is a converstation between two women. This is why we are to rightly divide the word of truth.

 

[Rick Otto]

redifinition is easier than editing, especialy in Latin, Greek's rebellious child.

 

[WarriorAngel]

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Second Council of Nicaea

Seventh Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, held in 787. (For an account of the controversies which occasioned this council and the circumstances in which it was convoked, see ICONOCLASM, Sections I and II.) An attempt to hold a council at Constantinople, to deal with Iconoclasm, having been frustrated by the violence of the Iconoclastic soldiery, the papal legates left that city. When, however, they had reached Sicily on their way back to Rome, they were recalled by the Empress Irene. She replaced the mutinous troops at Constantinople with troops commanded by officers in whom she had every confidence. This accomplished, in May, 787, a new council was convoked at Nicaea in Bithynia. The pope's letters to the empress and to the patriarch (see ICONOCLASM, II) prove superabundantly that the Holy See approved the convocation of the Council. The pope afterwards wrote to Charlemagne: "Et sic synodum istam, secundum nostram ordinationem, fecerunt" (Thus they have held the synod in accordance with our directions).

CHURCH FATHERS: Second Council of Nicaea[Certain bishops who had been led astray by the Iconoclasts came, asking to be received back. The first of these was Basil of Ancyra.] ...


CHURCH FATHERS: Second Council of Nicaea
Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols.

 

[WarriorAngel]

This is not a command lol.. It is a converstation between two women. This is why we are to rightly divide the word of truth.

So are you saying she didnt speak truth?

 

[Anglian]

Dear MamaZ,

You state:

Were is the command to calle her blessed? I don't see it there. Elizabeth had no Ideah Mary was also carring a child. Mary knew she was but we don't read in scripture where Elizabeth did.[Q

We do, here in St. Luke 1:41 and foll:

1:41 And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
1:42 Then she spoke out with a loud voice and said, Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!
1:43 But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

Is this not in your Bible?

It shows:
Elizabeth knew St. Mary was pregnant; you denied that as quoted above
The Spirit was speaking through St. Elizabeth when the latter called St. Mary blessed. Does Sola Scriptura not mean reading your Bible?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Thekla]

This is not a command lol.. It is a converstation between two women. This is why we are to rightly divide the word of truth.

I think we should excise such fluff from the NT

 

[Thekla]

note, Elizabeth does not exclusively use the word makarios

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I think we should excise such fluff from the NT

I think there is enuf of that in the ECFs

Daniel 11:14 And in times, those, many-ones shall stand on king of the south: and sons of robbers/06530 p@riyts of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish of vision and they stumble

Matthew 21:13 And He is saying unto them, "It has been written, My House a House of prayer shall be being called'; ye yet it are making a den/cave/sphlaion <4693> of robbers. [Jeremiah 7:11]

Reve 6:15 And the kings of the land and the greatest and the thousand-chiefs/chief-of-thousands and the rich ones and the strong ones and every bond-servant and free man hide selves into the dens/caves/sphlaia <4693> and into the rocks of the mountains.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Thekla,

Thank you for some excellent posts, but when we are told that St. Elizabeth had no idea St. Mary was pregnant despite St. Luke's testimony, words fail.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Anglian]

I think there is enuf of that in the ECFs

Dear LLOJ,

How d'ya know if ya've never read 'em?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Thekla]

frankly, since the ECFs and all their teachings are so debased, we should toss out the texts we have of the NT and go back to the original documents penned by the hands of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc. Cause everyone knows the ECFs belonged to the same bunch as the scribes who copied them

 

[Anglian]

Dear Thekla,

Heck, why stop there? Since no one can produce these original manuscripts, better line up with those who say these texts were produced by the Church to justify its beliefs, and record only the traditions of those Churches - in so far as they record anything at all.

The earliest surviving books have 1 Clement and/or Barnabas and Hermas in them, so if we're going by the book, why don't our Sola friends put those in their book, leave us with the one the Church recognised, and take their eisegesis to their new/old book?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[MamaZ]

So are you saying she didnt speak truth?

Did I ever suggest that? Or are you as others here assuming that is what I said.. I am sure that many people have said how exciting it might have been to have the earthly mother of Christ and able to cuddle and take care of him. How happy she must have been.. But still in all of this we as the followers of Christ are not commanded to say she is bless-ed..

 

[Thekla]

Dear Thekla,

Heck, why stop there? Since no one can produce these original manuscripts, better line up with those who say these texts were produced by the Church to justify its beliefs, and record only the traditions of those Churches - in so far as they record anything at all.

The earliest surviving books have 1 Clement and/or Barnabas and Hermas in them, so if we're going by the book, why don't our Sola friends put those in their book, leave us with the one the Church recognised, and take their eisegesis to their new/old book?

Peace,

Anglian

I do thinksome folks need to have a Council on the NT; but too bad they only have our "corrupted" texts to work from

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ,

How d'ya know if ya've never read 'em?

Peace,

Anglian

From viewing all these threads on them, along with the Mariology and Popeology Boards. I still have no interest reading them

 

[MamaZ]

The ECF are just that.. It is the Apostles teachings that we are bound too. For they are written as Jesus said..

 

[Anglian]

Did I ever suggest that? Or are you as others here assuming that is what I said.. I am sure that many people have said how exciting it might have been to have the earthly mother of Christ and able to cuddle and take care of him. How happy she must have been.. But still in all of this we as the followers of Christ are not commanded to say she is bless-ed..

Dear MamaZ,

You stated that Elizabeth did not know St. Mary was pregnant, a point I addressed in my no. 786, complete with Biblical quotation. Do you stand by what you said?

Like others here, you are ignoring the context. St. Mary was becoming pregnant before marriage without her fiance's participation; she was facing, to say the least of it, a hard time explaining that one to St. Joseph (not many men would believe that from their intended). That she was still so joyful shows her complete obedience to the Lord, even though it might cost her her reputation.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Why do I feel I am on the Mariology board

http://christianforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=726

Mariology & Hagiography

 

[WarriorAngel]

Did I ever suggest that? Or are you as others here assuming that is what I said.. I am sure that many people have said how exciting it might have been to have the earthly mother of Christ and able to cuddle and take care of him. How happy she must have been.. But still in all of this we as the followers of Christ are not commanded to say she is bless-ed..

Correct me if i am wrong, but SHE said 'ALL generations SHALL call ME blessed.'
Again, either she was telling the truth, or she was lying and not filled with the Holy Spirit.

She was happy?
Not only she, my friend, but Jesus was happy to be loved and cared for by her. HE created her for this purpose. He loved her immensely, to which is why He created her to His specifications.

Now tell me, if you are rightly dividing the word of God thru truth...
DID or did not Mary say [not a suggestion mind you]
THAT ALL generations shall call her blessed....

She made a prophecy to that which the followers of what her Son would do.

NOW - either she was not telling the truth or she was.

AND why would St Luke note this, if it was a mere insignificance??