Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas? (2)

[fhansen]

Neither do a mass of unrelated comments, folklore, and theological speculation, yet that's what you're saying is more reliable than the Bible. With the Bible, at least we all know what we're dealing with. With Tradition, it's whatever any particular denomination chooses to consider pertinent--and they all choose different comments, etc. from history and reach different conclusions.

Not any denomination, though, but both churches, east and west, that can at least trace their histories back much further than any Protestant denominations.

Well, we don't know that it was always or exclusively the method used, but Scripture does indeed indicate infant baptism, so that's why we do it.

Depends on who “we” are. Many Reformers retained certain such, er, traditions where Scripture was vague. Others rejected infant baptism in favor of adult/believers only.

Now let's take a look at your preferred alternative. With Tradition, some catholic churches believe in the Assumption of Mary, others (also claiming Tradition) do not.

The high degree of reverence paid to Mary, her perpetual virginity, and her importance to the faith in general in both churches east and west, and the similarities between the Dormition of the Theotokos and the Assumption of Mary, the feasts of which are both celebrated on the same day, are so striking contrasted with the virtual lack of and even aversion to such attitudes and observances among much of Sola Scripturalism that I wouldn’t bother using Mary as a model for what separates the two churches. The same situation goes for, to a very great extent, the concept of an afterlife purification, the Real Presence, the liturgy, the sacraments, apostolic succession, indefectibility/infallibility of church teachings, concepts of justification, rejection of absolute assurance of salvation, etc.

Your own church claims Papal Supremacy and Papal Infallibility by "Tradition," but the Eastern Orthodox--who are at least as old and certainly as Tradition-oriented--denounce both of those as wrong. So where's the advantage for "Tradition?" Obviously, there isn't any.

Papal authority is the one most significant difference between the churches. Authority always has that problem with man-or maybe it’s the other way around. But whoever takes the stand-guaranteed to produce unity of beliefs, along with defiance, I suppose- that a human authority is necessary in order to have a place where the buck stops, where we can go to resolve the very issues that manifest themselves in a thread such as this one, issues that arise due to a belief in the concept of Sola Scriptura coupled with a rejection of the authority of the historical church, whoever does so at least has an honest handle on the solution to a very real problem IMO.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Some irrefutable facts.

Not irrefutable at all...as I will show.

1. No NT author speaks of Mary as "the Mother of God" or the "Queen of Heaven"

Whether spoken of as such or not, Jesus is God, Mary is Jesus' mother, ergo, entitled Mary, the Mother of God. Queen of Heaven is a title. Mother of God is what Mary is.

2. When we DO find someone in the NT saying to JESUS "Blessed be Mary your Mother" -- Jesus' response is "ON THE CONTRARY..."

No, we don't. Someone says "Blessed be the breasts that suckled you, and Jesus replies, "more blessed are they who...". There's no "ON THE CONTRARY.

3. Both Stephen and Mary are said in the Bible to be "full of grace" -- nobody dreams up immaculate conception stories for Stephen - and Protestants have no more reason for such dreaming about Mary as about Stephen.

Angel Gabriel names Mary "full of grace". Luke says that Stephen was filled with grace. Very different scenario, very different circumstances.

4. Mary confesses Christ as Lord and Savior. yep -- she needed one for "ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" which includes Mary when she and Jesus' brothers come to drag him off - saying he has gone mad, during the time of his ministry.

Yes, Mary needed a savior, in fact she had one. God graced her with sinlessness, which is, in fact, how she was saved. I don't know the passage you're referring to, I don't believe it's in our Bible that way. No surprise there, though.

in Christ,

Bbo

 

[Root of Jesse]

The bible says that not one person is good, no not one. All have fallen short of Gods glory. Even Mary. I dont understand how people dont question this RCC doctrine. Why do people think RCC can fix our our denominational issues? Clearly they cant even discern the most fundamental truth of all.

Jesus is a person, too. God the Father is a person, too. Are they not good? Mary, for her case, was made good, she wasn't inherently good.

What you guys fail to see is God's hand in everything. God made Mary good. Precedented by God making Adam good, and Eve good. The difference is that they said no to God, Mary said yes.

 

[brinny]

Re: Post #142:

Not irrefutable at all...as I will show.
Whether spoken of as such or not, Jesus is God, Mary is Jesus' mother, ergo, entitled Mary, the Mother of God. Queen of Heaven is a title. Mother of God is what Mary is.
No, we don't. Someone says "Blessed be the breasts that suckled you, and Jesus replies, "more blessed are they who...". There's no "ON THE CONTRARY.
3. Both Stephen and Mary are said in the Bible to be "full of grace" -- nobody dreams up immaculate conception stories for Stephen - and Protestants have no more reason for such dreaming about Mary as about Stephen.
Angel Gabriel names Mary "full of grace". Luke says that Stephen was filled with grace. Very different scenario, very different circumstances.
Yes, Mary needed a savior, in fact she had one. God graced her with sinlessness, which is, in fact, how she was saved. I don't know the passage you're referring to, I don't believe it's in our Bible that way. No surprise there, though.

Interesting views. Thank you kindly for sharing.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by Souldier View Post
The bible says that not one person is good, no not one. All have fallen short of Gods glory. Even Mary. I dont understand how people dont question this RCC doctrine. Why do people think RCC can fix our our denominational issues? Clearly they cant even discern the most fundamental truth of all.

Jesus is a person, too. God the Father is a person, too. Are they not good? Mary, for her case, was made good, she wasn't inherently good.

What you guys fail to see is God's hand in everything. God made Mary good. Precedented by God making Adam good, and Eve good. The difference is that they said no to God, Mary said yes.

Thank you for sharing your views.

This verse comes to mind and indicates why God was compelled to send His only begotten Son, Jesus the Christ, the Lamb of God, as THE Sacrifice for sin:

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" ~Romans 3:10

It is because of the above, that none are righteous, no not one, that God did this:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." ~John 3:16

Thank you kindly.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Thank you kindly for sharing your view.

When it comes to my faith, it's never my view.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I think when you get a little further into the thread that you will see at least one or maybe two of those things i referred to

So far, not even one.

 

[SpyderByte]

Jesus is a person, too. God the Father is a person, too. Are they not good? Mary, for her case, was made good, she wasn't inherently good.

What you guys fail to see is God's hand in everything. God made Mary good. Precedented by God making Adam good, and Eve good. The difference is that they said no to God, Mary said yes.

Nice eisegesis!

 

[Root of Jesse]

Thank you for sharing your views.

This verse comes to mind and indicates why God was compelled to send His only begotten Son, Jesus the Christ, the Lamb of God, as THE Sacrifice for sin:

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" ~Romans 3:10

It is because of the above, that none are righteous, no not one, that God did this:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." ~John 3:16

Thank you kindly.

How does that relate to Mary being made sinless by God?

Side note: Thanks for your prayers for Archbishop Cordileone.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny View Post
Thank you kindly for sharing your view.

When it comes to my faith, it's never my view.

Thank you kindly for sharing your opinion on that.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Nice eisegesis!

Thanks, if it was my own. But it's not.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by Souldier View Post
The bible says that not one person is good, no not one. All have fallen short of Gods glory. Even Mary. I dont understand how people dont question this RCC doctrine. Why do people think RCC can fix our our denominational issues? Clearly they cant even discern the most fundamental truth of all.

Originally Posted by Root of Jesse View Post
Jesus is a person, too. God the Father is a person, too. Are they not good? Mary, for her case, was made good, she wasn't inherently good.

What you guys fail to see is God's hand in everything. God made Mary good. Precedented by God making Adam good, and Eve good. The difference is that they said no to God, Mary said yes.

How does that relate to Mary being made sinless by God?

Would you care to elaborate on how Mary was made sinless by God?

Thank you kindly.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Would you care to elaborate on how Mary was made sinless by God?

Thank you kindly.

You will have to ask God about that. I'm not privy. I can tell you, maybe, why, though. Because God, being God would want the most perfect mother for his son, the most perfect vessel. Because Jesus, being God, would want the most perfect mother. Because the Holy Spirit, being God, would want the most perfect spouse.

As I've said, Mary did nothing to merit any of this. God did it. Just as it is a saving act to stop someone before they step into the path of an ongoing car, as much as it is a saving act for the car to slam on the brakes, or for the person to jump out of the way on their own. Saving can take place beforehand, or during.

 

[SpyderByte]

Thanks, if it was my own. But it's not.

Yeah, I know. Your denomination reads all kinds of stuff into the text...

 

[topcare]

Jesus is a person, too. God the Father is a person, too. Are they not good? Mary, for her case, was made good, she wasn't inherently good.

What you guys fail to see is God's hand in everything. God made Mary good. Precedented by God making Adam good, and Eve good. The difference is that they said no to God, Mary said yes.

Many evangelicals what to limit God to just their own idea of linear time, they can't or won't grasp the idea that God is outside of time and can apply the atonement at any one point without anyone's approval or say so.

 

[SpyderByte]

Would you care to elaborate on how Mary was made sinless by God?

Thank you kindly.

You will have to ask God about that. I'm not privy.

No one is, because it didn't happen, and there is no evidence it did.

 

[SpyderByte]

Many evangelicals what to limit God to just their own idea of linear time, they can't or won't grasp the idea that God is outside of time and can apply the atonement at any one point without anyone's approval or say so.

What you've just described is open theism, a heresy, and rejected by every mainline denomination. You again are pulling spurious accusations out of thin air. Stop or I will simply start reporting you.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny View Post
Would you care to elaborate on how Mary was made sinless by God?

Thank you kindly.

You will have to ask God about that. I'm not privy. I can tell you, maybe, why, though. Because God, being God would want the most perfect mother for his son, the most perfect vessel. Because Jesus, being God, would want the most perfect mother. Because the Holy Spirit, being God, would want the most perfect spouse.

As I've said, Mary did nothing to merit any of this. God did it. Just as it is a saving act to stop someone before they step into the path of an ongoing car, as much as it is a saving act for the car to slam on the brakes, or for the person to jump out of the way on their own. Saving can take place beforehand, or during.

Interesting thoughts and perspective.

Thank you kindly for sharing your views.

 

[fhansen]

What you've just described is open theism, a heresy, and rejected by every mainline denomination. You again are pulling spurious accusations out of thin air. Stop or I will simply start reporting you.

That is not open theism, any more than predestination in general or Molinism, for that matter, is open theism.

 

[SpyderByte]

That is not open theism, any more than predestination in general or Molinism, for that matter, is open theism.

Stating God is stuck in linear time is 8 fact the staple of open theism. Open theism reduces God to an exalted man trapped inside linear time, with no foreknowledge or plan. I've debated enough of them to know.