Mary Sinless?

[calluna]

So your saying that all of the early Church fathers were wrong?

I'm saying that the much-too-late 'church fathers' would not have been so called had they been right. They were in any case a minuscule group in comparison to Christians, who must have numbered into many thousands to force the empire to change its ways. They cannot be supposed to be in any way representative of the church, of which nothing has survived other than the New Testament; it would of course be very surprising if anything had survived, other than copies of NTs, which could not be suppressed. None of the works of these 'fathers' were canonised, and that can only be because they were not acceptable to Christians. The 'ECFs' were mostly monarchical bishops, which are utterly inimical to Christianity, though just what a control-freak emperor wanted- and they have survivors' guilt in spades. 'Toadies' is a fair description for them.

If she was even half what she is made out to be, it is incredible that the whole NT was written without a single good word written about Mary. Paul wrote of Jesus, 'born of a woman', indicating his ordinariness, and the woman's. The case of the Vatican/EOC is truly mind-boggling beyond description. I don't know how anyone can come to a place like this and defend it.

Christianity might have been illegal, but that doesn't mean that pertinent information didn't get passed down.

Illegality meant that those 'leaders', such as Miltiades, who survived until the empire finally gave in and recognised that Christianity was not going to go away, were so weakened and compromised that they did exactly as Constantine and his successors told them- or they too would have perished. The imperial 'church' carried over all the main characteristics of Roman paganism, including virgin cult, and whitewashed them with a lick of (Judaised) Christianity. The result was pretty well the opposite of apostolic teaching, utterly unrecognisable from the church of Peter and Paul.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Well, there is that whole hypostatic union part that probably makes it a bit different. His two natures, human and divine, are inseparable. Please don't ask me to try & explain this mystery of the Incarnation.

I get that. I'm just saying that to claim that Christ's flesh was literally different than ours is wrong. It wasn't.

It was just flesh and blood like every other human has.

The whole "the blood of Jesus" thing is a metaphor... Jesus' actual human blood isn't literally being put over our sin somewhere...

 

[MrStain]

Isreal fell while God was leading them directly via a pillar of fire...

I mean, they were standing at the base of the mountain. Moses was on top with God Himself and they could see it and there was a giant pillar sitting there waiting for them to be ready to move agian...

So what do the people do? THEY BUILD AN IDOL!!!!

YEAH!!

Wait... what?!?!?!

Yeah. They just saw the 10 plagues, the Red Sea part, Mana is falling daily from heaven, a pillar of fire/cloud is directing them when they travel and thier leader is on top of a mountain with God...

and they are worshipping an idol...

And you think the chuch can go 100 years? 200 years? 500 years? 2000 years without completely going off teh path and needing a complete, 100% makeover back to what God wanted??? Really?

Man, this thread is so all over the place.

Remember, Jesus is like a wise man who built his house on a rock (Mt 7:24) and don't forget the promise He made about the gates of hell not prevailing against the Church. (Mt 16:18) Not too mention that Jesus said He & the Holy Spirit would be with us always (Jn 14:16 & Mt 28:19-20).

This of course was foretold by the prophete Isaiah (Isa 9:6-7) and is also recorded in Daniel (Dan 2:44 & 7:14).

Don't get me wrong. The Church is the hospital for sinners and we know there are always going to be folks who just don't live up to the calling. As scriptures says, the tares will grow among the wheat until the harvest (Mt 13:24-30), but I trust that He will gather the faithful into His barn.

 

[dinomight]

Man, this thread is so all over the place.

Remember, Jesus is like a wise man who built his house on a rock (Mt 7:24) and don't forget the promise He made about the gates of hell not prevailing against the Church. (Mt 16:18) Not too mention that Jesus said He & the Holy Spirit would be with us always (Jn 14:16 & Mt 28:19-20).

This of course was foretold by the prophete Isaiah (Isa 9:6-7) and is also recorded in Daniel (Dan 2:44 & 7:14).

Don't get me wrong. The Church is the hospital for sinners and we know there are always going to be folks who just don't live up to the calling. As scriptures says, the tares will grow among the wheat until the harvest (Mt 13:24-30), but I trust that He will gather the faithful into His barn.

Right, the Bible doesn't indicate that the Church would ever need to be completely rebuilt, much less by way of separation into a new denomination. It's true that there were corrupt people in the Church, but I understand the Catholic position to be that the Holy Spirit preserves doctrine. It's quite unfortunate, but true, that people abused their power in the Church in the course of history. I wonder what the climate would be like today had the Catholic leaders at the time been willing to reform the things Martin Luther was originally talking about.

Just a thought.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Man, this thread is so all over the place.

Remember, Jesus is like a wise man who built his house on a rock (Mt 7:24) and don't forget the promise He made about the gates of hell not prevailing against the Church. (Mt 16:18) Not too mention that Jesus said He & the Holy Spirit would be with us always (Jn 14:16 & Mt 28:19-20).

This of course was foretold by the prophete Isaiah (Isa 9:6-7) and is also recorded in Daniel (Dan 2:44 & 7:14).

Don't get me wrong. The Church is the hospital for sinners and we know there are always going to be folks who just don't live up to the calling. As scriptures says, the tares will grow among the wheat until the harvest (Mt 13:24-30), but I trust that He will gather the faithful into His barn.

Everything that you just said just means one thing:

Someone, somewhere was following God properly at every point in human history since the church started.

It does not mean that the human organization known as "the Church" was actually that group of people at any time...

and Jesus isn't the wise man in that story, we're suppose to be the wise man and Jesus is the rock we're suppose to build on...

 

[larry_boy_44]

Right, the Bible doesn't indicate that the Church would ever need to be completely rebuilt, much less by way of separation into a new denomination. It's true that there were corrupt people in the Church, but I understand the Catholic position to be that the Holy Spirit preserves doctrine. It's quite unfortunate, but true, that people abused their power in the Church in the course of history. I wonder what the climate would be like today had the Catholic leaders at the time been willing to reform the things Martin Luther was originally talking about.

Just a thought.

I hate to tell you this... But "the church" isn't a human organization at all. The church is simply every person who is actually following God.

God will preserve proper doctrine, but He won't take away our free will and He won't violate our right to screw up and destroy ourselves...

He'll simply find someone else who is actually following Him and entrust the truth with them...

Also, if you use the argument that God preserved the truth then you run into the issue of someone had to be wrong, either the people in power when they were wrong (or before something was changed) or the people after...

Let's say there is some Roman Catholic Council today. and they change something big and you have to believe it to be saved, etc... So now... Is everyone up until today who didn't believe that damned? Or is everyone from here forward damned now? One of them has to be wrong, both cannot be right (although I guess both could technically be wrong...)

 

[dinomight]

I hate to tell you this... But "the church" isn't a human organization at all. The church is simply every person who is actually following God.

God will preserve proper doctrine, but He won't take away our free will and He won't violate our right to screw up and destroy ourselves...

He'll simply find someone else who is actually following Him and entrust the truth with them...

Also, if you use the argument that God preserved the truth then you run into the issue of someone had to be wrong, either the people in power when they were wrong (or before something was changed) or the people after...

Let's say there is some Roman Catholic Council today. and they change something big and you have to believe it to be saved, etc... So now... Is everyone up until today who didn't believe that damned? Or is everyone from here forward damned now? One of them has to be wrong, both cannot be right (although I guess both could technically be wrong...)

Wait a second. The Church is not a human organization, but at the same time it is every person following God? Your alternate definition sounds to me exactly like a human organization, one which was founded by Christ Himself as the cornerstone. Also, the Catholic Church cannot change doctrine. If a Council were to change the requirements of salvation, thus contradicting itself and the Bible, I think Catholicism would pretty much implode. I don't think that's going to happen, though.

The purpose of Church Councils is to clarify, not to change, doctrine. For instance, as cloning continues to be perfected, I'm sure the Catholic Church will see a need to discuss the moral implications of doing so.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Wait a second. The Church is not a human organization, but at the same time it is every person following God? Your alternate definition sounds to me exactly like a human organization, one which was founded by Christ Himself as the cornerstone. Also, the Catholic Church cannot change doctrine. If a Council were to change the requirements of salvation, thus contradicting itself and the Bible, I think Catholicism would pretty much implode. I don't think that's going to happen, though.

The purpose of Church Councils is to clarify, not to change, doctrine. For instance, as cloning continues to be perfected, I'm sure the Catholic Church will see a need to discuss the moral implications of doing so.

The church is NOT a human organization... at all... its the body of Christ and no human organization can contain that...

and Councils have changed doctrinal requirements.

For example, the Council of Nicea dictating everyone had to agree with the Nicene Creed. Or when they adopted Indulgences where you could pay to have your sins forgiven...

There are tons of examples of that kind of thing...

 

[dinomight]

The church is NOT a human organization... at all... its the body of Christ and no human organization can contain that...

and Councils have changed doctrinal requirements.

For example, the Council of Nicea dictating everyone had to agree with the Nicene Creed. Or when they adopted Indulgences where you could pay to have your sins forgiven...

There are tons of examples of that kind of thing...

It's not organized by humans, yet is an organization of humans. If it were up to humans to maintain it, it would not last, just as the Greco-Roman religions did not last. The Body of Christ survives because it truly is what it claims to be. It truly was established by the Son of God, and it will never fall. The Holy Spirit lives within the Body, within the believers, and guides us.

Let's not forget that Jesus gave humans the responsibility of building, and continuing, the Church. Christians, the Church, have a sacred responsibility to protect the Truth. Remember what Jesus said to Peter: "Feed my sheep (John 21:17)"

 

[larry_boy_44]

It's not organized by humans, yet is an organization of humans. If it were up to humans to maintain it, it would not last, just as the Greco-Roman religions did not last. The Body of Christ survives because it truly is what it claims to be. It truly was established by the Son of God, and it will never fall. The Holy Spirit lives within the Body, within the believers, and guides us.

Let's not forget that Jesus gave humans the responsibility of building, and continuing, the Church. Christians, the Church, have a sacred responsibility to protect the Truth. Remember what Jesus said to Peter: "Feed my sheep (John 21:17)"

So only Catholics are saved?

The only way what you are saying is true is if only Catholics are saved...

 

[dinomight]

The church is NOT a human organization... at all... its the body of Christ and no human organization can contain that...

and Councils have changed doctrinal requirements.

For example, the Council of Nicea dictating everyone had to agree with the Nicene Creed. Or when they adopted Indulgences where you could pay to have your sins forgiven...

There are tons of examples of that kind of thing...

I did a quick search on Indulgences; I'd ask that you do the same thing before getting into that. There are many misconceptions, one of which is that it consists of buying forgiveness for sins. That's not at all what it is, because to receive an Indulgence you have to have already been forgiven. It's a completely separate thing, once again.

 

[dinomight]

So only Catholics are saved?

The only way what you are saying is true is if only Catholics are saved...

I am absolutely amazed that you possibly could have gotten that out of my statement. Not once did I use the word Catholic, nor did I imply anything about any individual person's salvation. All I said was that the Body of Christ must maintain the Truth.

Unfortunately, the Church has been split, thus making things so complicated. We're unified in our belief in Christ as Savior, and that is what matters. It would be folly for anyone to claim to know what's in the heart of a person and what their relationship is with Jesus.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I did a quick search on Indulgences; I'd ask that you do the same thing before getting into that. There are many misconceptions, one of which is that it consists of buying forgiveness for sins. That's not at all what it is, because to receive an Indulgence you have to have already been forgiven. It's a completely separate thing, once again.

you buy it to recieve less time in purgatory before getting to heaven...

The point was that either the pope who started taking them was wrong, or the pope who stopped it was wrong...

they both can't be right. So we for sure cannot say that the church has always been right.

 

[dinomight]

you buy it to recieve less time in purgatory before getting to heaven...

The point was that either the pope who started taking them was wrong, or the pope who stopped it was wrong...

they both can't be right. So we for sure cannot say that the church has always been right.

Once again, please do some more research before you talk about Indulgences. You cannot buy less time in Purgatory, and the Catholic Church actually does still offer Indulgences. They don't sell them though. I'm not saying that they weren't misused by people in the Church, but, seriously, if you will just read about Indulgences, you may be surprised by what you learn.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Once again, please do some more research before you talk about Indulgences. You cannot buy less time in Purgatory, and the Catholic Church actually does still offer Indulgences. They don't sell them though. I'm not saying that they weren't misused by people in the Church, but, seriously, if you will just read about Indulgences, you may be surprised by what you learn.

I know what I said wasn't exact... I get it...

The point isn't what they did...

The point is the fact that they STARTED doing something, then decided it was wrong to do it...

Thus one of the groups were wrong...

 

[larry_boy_44]

I am absolutely amazed that you possibly could have gotten that out of my statement. Not once did I use the word Catholic, nor did I imply anything about any individual person's salvation. All I said was that the Body of Christ must maintain the Truth.

Unfortunately, the Church has been split, thus making things so complicated. We're unified in our belief in Christ as Savior, and that is what matters. It would be folly for anyone to claim to know what's in the heart of a person and what their relationship is with Jesus.

But my point is that no organization can claim they are "always right" or anything like that.

The body of Christ is not an organization at all because we can't define it.

You can't assume that just because a group calls themselves the Church that they are actually doing the will of God...

So it doesn't matter who taught what, it only matters what the truth is...

 

[dinomight]

I know what I said wasn't exact... I get it...

The point isn't what they did...

The point is the fact that they STARTED doing something, then decided it was wrong to do it...

Thus one of the groups were wrong...

They did not change the doctrine, though. I know I'm bound to be seriously annoying you right now, and I'm sorry for that, but the fact that they still have indulgences today is proof that they did not decide it was wrong.

The other thing to realize is that the Catholic Church can change positions on non-doctrinal issues, which makes it important to find out whether something is considered doctrine or not.

Here's another example: Pope John Paul II apologized for sins committed by the Church throughout its history, for persecutions and such. That didn't change any doctrines, though.

 

[dinomight]

But my point is that no organization can claim they are "always right" or anything like that.

The body of Christ is not an organization at all because we can't define it.

You can't assume that just because a group calls themselves the Church that they are actually doing the will of God...

So it doesn't matter who taught what, it only matters what the truth is...

That's right. It only matters what the truth is. So, the question is, how do you determine what the truth is and correctly interpret Scripture? Many people since the Reformation have read the Bible for themselves, prayed about it I'm sure, and felt led to quite different conclusions from one another. Somebody has to know the truth and teach it to others.

1 Corinthians 14 (King James Version)

26How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.


I repeat, someone has to teach us.


P.S. I was being somewhat rhetorical in asking how we learn the truth, as I know that discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[larry_boy_44]

They did not change the doctrine, though. I know I'm bound to be seriously annoying you right now, and I'm sorry for that, but the fact that they still have indulgences today is proof that they did not decide it was wrong.

The other thing to realize is that the Catholic Church can change positions on non-doctrinal issues, which makes it important to find out whether something is considered doctrine or not.

Here's another example: Pope John Paul II apologized for sins committed by the Church throughout its history, for persecutions and such. That didn't change any doctrines, though.

they changed the fact that they could take money for them, though...

But it doesn't matter, they point is that even teh church admits that it is wrong sometimes (thus to blindly trust them is dumb and wrong and not a good argument for anything)

 

[larry_boy_44]

That's right. It only matters what the truth is. So, the question is, how do you determine what the truth is and correctly interpret Scripture? Many people since the Reformation have read the Bible for themselves, prayed about it I'm sure, and felt led to quite different conclusions from one another. Somebody has to know the truth and teach it to others.

1 Corinthians 14 (King James Version)

26How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.


I repeat, someone has to teach us.


P.S. I was being somewhat rhetorical in asking how we learn the truth, as I know that discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Yes, but again, all that means is SOMEONE is teaching the truth.

It doesn't mean any organization or any specific group of people are teaching the truth.

Its entirely possible that, as some say, the entire "church" was not following God as soon as a few hundred years after Christ.

Is that what happened? I don't know, but it is POSSIBLE, because all that is necessary is that someone is teaching it somewhere, not that a group of people specifically are...