Mary

[sawdust]

You're still trying to divide Jesus into two parts.

I keep hearing this, but it is not what I hear Genez saying. The only division I hear him speaking of is in Christ's functions. As a man He functioned in one capacity and as God He functioned in another capacity. If that is what he is indeed saying, then why is that so hard to understand? I function as wife, mother, friend. It seems a similar thing to me when Paul discussed the Church. We are all members of one body yet each have a different function in that body. We are not a million (or so) bodies but one body.

Maybe I'm hearing him wrong but ......

peace

 

[lionroar0]

Paul was a spiritual father to some. But, he was not to be called "father.

So it's okay for Paul to refer himself as father but others are not not supposed to. Then Paul disobeyed Christ. Why would he call himself father when we are not supposed to call anyone father?

No one who was involved with our spiritual relationship to God was to be referred to as, "Father."

And yet Paul refers to himself as a spiritual father to some. This is a circular argument.

Abraham was called "father" just like we have "founding fathers."

The word Father has many meanings. Abraham was also a spiritual father giving His blessing to Isaac.

And, when Stephen spoke, it was in reference to younger and older men.

By your logic their forefathers were only older men. They were very involved in our Spiritual relationship. God made a covenant with Abraham. Jospeh interpreted dreams from God. Moses brought the Jews out slavery by the command of God into the promised land and also gave moses the commandments. The levetical priesthood came from the tribe of levi. You missing the Big picure of what St Stephen was saying.

Also if you do some research in to the word elders in the NT it is presbeturos. Which is presbetyer then became the word papa. The word Papa is father, patriach and pope.

Rabbi was a spiritual leader. Teacher, ditto. And, some were in the habit of using the term "Father" in reference to someone in such particular positions. You make it sound like Jesus had no meaning behind what he said. It was just said to fill space on a page. Yet, the catholic church calls their pastors "Father." I guess Jesus was talking about nothing?

Because they are spiritual fathers. They serve us by concecrating the Eucharist and celebrating Mass amongs other things such visiting the sick, the homebound, administering the sacrament of healing, and also by giving spiritual direction. They are spiritual fathers. We can also call them reverend and pastors. It's just more of a custom to call them father. There's nothing prohibiting us fomr calling them pastors and or reverend. I have never met a priest that demanded to be called father.

One can not be a servant of another if he is being his father to him. It would be like a household servant who has authority over a child to watch over him, demanding that the child call him father. The child's father would not like it if he heard him saying that to his child.

See above

Okay then, where does it apply? When Jesus said call no man father? How is that passage to be applied to our Christian walk? You have tried to make it walk in reverse and disappear from holding any meaning for us.

See above

And, priests? That went out with the nation of Israel. We are now all priests in Christ. A priest represents himself to God. We now have direct access to our Father through the blood of Christ. And, an ambassador represents God to other men. We are all called to be both.

Jesus never came to abolish the ordinated priesthood which serves, not all are called to it. The workers are few. I would agree that we are all a nation of priest but not all can belong to the ordinated preisthood. The Body of Christ has Many parts and many gifts each with it's own charism. Not all were Apostles and not all were Elders nor deacons. With in the early Church.

We are all priests before God. There is no assigned specialty priesthood in the church's hierarcy. It was only found under the Mosiac law for the Jews. We name our sins to God. We no longer go to a priest to name our sins so he can offer a sacrifice for those sins. Jesus paid for all our sins. There are no more sacrifices to be offered. There is no need for a speciality priesthood.

Now this one made me laugh. Do this in Memory of Me

And, we are all called to a higher priesthood than the Jews knew of. For we are all called a"royal priesthood."

Yes notice that this letter was being sent by an Apostle that Christ chose. If we follow your logic Jesus should not have chosen Apostles. Every diciple should have equal footing. This is contrary to Scriptures.

The Catholic church has obviously created its own system outside of the system designated in the Bible. No wonder that for years the Catholic church did not want the people to get their hands on a Bible they could read and understand for themselves

NOw your just being funny.

The NIV is paraphrased. You should try another Bible.

BTW What makes you a heretic is that you wish to say that Jesus human nature died on the cross. If it did as you suggest then how did he enter sheol?

That is a question you haven't answered. I think it would be polite and chrislike to answer it before we go into talking about the word "father" since we haven't concluded that debate yet.

 

[lionroar0]

I keep hearing this, but it is not what I hear Genez saying. The only division I hear him speaking of is in Christ's functions. As a man He functioned in one capacity and as God He functioned in another capacity. If that is what he is indeed saying, then why is that so hard to understand? I function as wife, mother, friend. It seems a similar thing to me when Paul discussed the Church. We are all members of one body yet each have a different function in that body. We are not a million (or so) bodies but one body.

Maybe I'm hearing him wrong but ......

peace

Did you read my responce to genez? I also had another reponce not directly addressing genez but the topic as a whole

Peace

 

[Isidore_AK]

The real question should be. Was Nestorius misunderstood? Was Luther? Was John Hus? Wycliffe? Your councils had a very bad batting average.

And, I had been confusing Wycliffe with Tyndale.

http://www.prca.org/books/portraits/tyndale.htm


It was William Tyndale who wrote the first translation into English for the common man. He was murdered by the Church for disagreeing with them on the very same doctrines you accuse me of not holding to. Interesting how times have changed. But, the Word of God never does.

In Christ, GeneZ

Not again! This has nothing to do with this thread! Go back and re-read my post #71...there had been Anglo-Saxon translations and English/Latin Interlinears since the 700's. And Tyndale was not executed for translating the Bible...there were always non-Latin bibles (mostly French, as it was the pre-dominant language for so long...). This is an excerpt from a This Rock magazine article (Volume 13, Number 10; December 2002) on Tyndale:


"Finding no support for his translation from his bishop, he left England and came to Worms, where he fell under the influence of Martin Luther. There in 1525 he produced a translation of the New Testament that was swarming with textual corruption. He willfully mistranslated entire passages of Sacred Scripture in order to condemn orthodox Catholic doctrine and support the new Lutheran ideas. The Bishop of London claimed that he could count over 2,000 errors in the volume (and this was just the New Testament).

And we must remember that this was not merely a translation of Scripture. His text included a prologue and notes that were so full of contempt for the Catholic Church and the clergy that no one could mistake his obvious agenda and prejudice. Did the Catholic Church condemn this version of the Bible? Of course it did.

The secular authorities condemned it as well. Anglicans are among the many today who laud Tyndale as the "father of the English Bible." But it was their own founder, King Henry VIII, who in 1531 declared that "the translation of the Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale should be utterly expelled, rejected, and put away out of the hands of the people."

So troublesome did Tyndale’s Bible prove to be that in 1543—after his break with Rome—Henry again decreed that "all manner of books of the Old and New Testament in English, being of the crafty, false, and untrue translation of Tyndale . . . shall be clearly and utterly abolished, extinguished, and forbidden to be kept or used in this realm."

So please stop bringing up Tyndale, Wycliffe, or the Inquisition. Jesus said that there would be both good and bad within his Church. See Matt 13:24-50.
You cannot look upon a particular action of the Church and say that the entirety of it is evil...both the Catholics & Protestants of the time have blood on their hands. Regardless, your comments have nothing to do with whether of not Mary is the Theotokos...

 

[lionroar0]

Hello Lionroar0



Alright let me see if I am tracking what you are saying, The skin and bone Jesus died and stayed in the tomb, But the spirit which is the the true essence of any individual descended into hades,

is this what you are saying?

yours in Christ
deu 58

Not to take away from the fact that we were healed by stripes and that He bled for us but for this debate in a way yes.

I will try to clarify as best I can. We all agree that God became flesh. His human nature came from Mary and also His flesh. This is how he humbled himself to our stature. This is in union with that part of Him that is the God part. Then He was born from Mary both Human and devine. This is the part of the nicean creed He was begotten not created. He was birthed into this world not created into it. Unlike adam that was created.

When He died His Spirit or essence did not stop being human. It is Human and God. Another example would be when we die we do not stop being human. Although our flesh dies our humanity is part of our souls. This is something inherent in all humans. When we die we do not loose our human nature and become a horse or something else. We are still humans but in spirit. When we meet all those that have died before us they will have all the things that makes them Human. They will have all the emotions and Love for each other and God that they had when they were alive except of course with out the sin part.

When Jesus died on the cross His humanity(Human Nature) didn't stay in His body it went with Him in union with that part of Him that is devine.

Our humanity although connected to our flesh is not entirety the flesh. It is also our nature or our identity as Children of God.

I hope this made sence.

Peace

 

[lionroar0]

Hi Oblio



Oi yoi yoi!!!You totally deny that there ever was a period in historry called the drak age???? That has got to but to be worst case of denial I have ever seen!!!


Flabbergasted, but still yours in Christ
deu 58

Hi deu

He is saying that in the east there was no dark ages as in the west. The dark ages started when barbarians destroyed Rome. The seat of culture in the western world. The dark ages were not caused by the Church as modern history would have us believe. Actuallay there were scientist that were under the sponsor ship of the CC. I have not studied it in detail, other catholics have a greater knowledge then myself on this subject. Maybe it could be another thread here. You could also ask in OBOB.

Peace

 

[Cliff2]

Hi deu

He is saying that in the east there was no dark ages as in the west. The dark ages started when barbarians destroyed Rome. The seat of culture in the western world. The dark ages were not caused by the Church as modern history would have us believe. Actuallay there were scientist that were under the sponsor ship of the CC. I have not studied it in detail, other catholics have a greater knowledge then myself on this subject. Maybe it could be another thread here. You could also ask in OBOB.

Peace

In the book of Revelation it tells us when the dark would be, it was from 538-1798.

During this time period there was great persecution to many who followed God's Word, that is if they could get hold of one. It was not until towards the end of this time that Bibles were able to be purshased by ordinary working people.

 

[Axion]

I keep hearing this, but it is not what I hear Genez saying. The only division I hear him speaking of is in Christ's functions. As a man He functioned in one capacity and as God He functioned in another capacity. If that is what he is indeed saying, then why is that so hard to understand? I function as wife, mother, friend. It seems a similar thing to me when Paul discussed the Church. We are all members of one body yet each have a different function in that body. We are not a million (or so) bodies but one body.

Maybe I'm hearing him wrong but ......

peace

I'm not going back over this whole thread, but you can have a look through the posts.

Not only has genez said he agreed with Nestorius, but he has consistently denied that Mary is Mother o God because she could not give birth to God. She only gave birth to Jesus, and is only mother of Jesus the man. He has said that God the Son didn't die on the cross, Jesus the man did while God the son went elsewhere. He has said that in heaven now, Jesus the man is dormant while God the Son is sitting on the throne. He has said Jesus has a new body now - not the body from Mary. He has said that Jesus didn't know things that the Son of God knew. etc. etc.

All these things say that Jesus Christ has two personhoods. One of whom tasted death, the other didn't. This is a Gnostic concept and fatal to the Christian redemption, which is why it is a MAJOR Christological heresy. There can be disagreement among Christians, but once you deny the Trinity or the reality of the Incarnation of Jesus, you step beyond the boundaries of the Christian Faith.

 

[Axion]

In the book of Revelation it tells us when the dark would be, it was from 538-1798.

You have a funny "bible". That's not in any of the ones I have.

During this time period there was great persecution to many who followed God's Word, that is if they could get hold of one. It was not until towards the end of this time that Bibles were able to be purshased by ordinary working people.

So ordinary working people were purchasing bibles in 537 AD? And also in257 AD - before the book existed?????

 

[prodromos]

John 1:1 niv
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

God the Word is Eternal. He always was. Always will be. The Word is God.

Now, that same Word entered the Burning Bush that spoke to Moses. Are you saying that bush itself is now God?

The burning bush is a type of Mary for when she would contain the uncontainable within her womb, just as the ark of the covenant is a type of Mary. Just as the bush burned without being consumed and just as the ark contained the infinite one, so too did Mary contain Him who is a consuming fire without being herself consumed.

The rest of your post made no sense as Moses clearly recognised that the bush was not God. It was the fire that was divine, not the bush, and it was the fire that Moses hid his face from.

Christos Anesti! Christ is Risen!
John

 

[Oblio]

As a man He functioned in one capacity and as God He functioned in another capacity. If that is what he is indeed saying, then why is that so hard to understand?

It is not hard to understand, but it is heresy to believe that Christ's two natures were separate capacities or modes that he functioned in. He was fully man, fully God, not sometimes man, othertimes God. All of His flesh was God, all of His flesh was man, all of His soul was man, all of His soul was God. All God, all man, all the time. In birth, life death, Resurrection and Ascension.

 

[prodromos]

As far as I know this is about as close as scripture gets to what genez is talking about concerning the death of his humanity

1pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

1pe 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Well that can't be right. a bit earlier genez posted the following:

Jesus = Humanity.
Christ = Deity.

but the above passage specifically says that Christ suffered for sins.

John

 

[prodromos]

If I die, my spirit, soul and body separate, so I have to assume if God dies He too separates and if He separates what holds everything together?

When you die, do you cease to exist?
There are numerous accounts of people who had been clinically dead for a period and later resuscitated who were completely aware the whole time. Why do you assume that Christ, while seperated from His body, would somehow be incapable of holding creation together?

John.

 

[deu58]

Hi Lionsroar0

When He died His Spirit or essence did not stop being human. It is Human and God. Another example would be when we die we do not stop being human.

Mamma ok I think I see the problem we are having understanding each other now, I really do not think I am going to do a very good job of explaining it but I will try any way,

I think the problem lies in the definition of dead, I agree with you that our human nature and our spirit nature are one, I see your point there, But what is the place of the dead? The spirits in Hades, whether paradise or hell are not dead, They are very much alive,

It is the place of the dead in the sense that flesh and bone must die to get there, Those who are dead to us as in the sense that they no longer walk this earth are very much alive in Hades, Remember the biblical teaching on the the second death, The first death is the death of the flesh that will come to us all until the day the Lord returns,

The second death which is true death comes at the judgment seat of God, This is where the fate is decided of the living spirits of those who have suffered the first death, No man can kill a spirit, No matter what method he applies, it is and always will be beyond our ability to do so,

So in this sense Jesus nor anybody else has ever truly died, No spirit as of yet has been put to death, Those that have done evil have been sentenced, thus they are in hell awaiting the day of execution of the sentence,

And it would seem that even the second death is not the annihilation of the spirit but the casting of the lost spirits into the lake of fire with Satan, the Beast and the false prophet where they will all suffer for eternity, Again a type of death completely different from the type of death we experience with the first death, A Christian has no reason to fear the the first death,

Re 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Re 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

So in this light the Spirit of Jesus which is the Spirit of God suffered completely upon the cross but the Spirit did not die, For if Gods Spirit died it would be necessary for him to go through the second death, which no spirit has yet gone through,

Re 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[prodromos]

The problem is, you have simply accepted what you have been spoon fed. That is not the Biblical way of gaining in knowledge of the Truth.

You can't eat meat with a spoon and most of us have been off the milk for a while now thanks
Now, let's see what the biblical way of gaining knowledge of the truth is:[bible]2 Thessalonians 2:15[/bible]
John

 

[prodromos]

God did not have to "go to Hades." God is already everywhere present. The God I know, is.

Your mistake is in thinking of Hades as a place rather than as a condition or state of being. Of course God is everywhere. He is even in hell!

John.

 

[deu58]

Hi Prodomos

You can't eat meat with a spoon and most of us have been off the milk for a while now thanks
Now, let's see what the biblical way of gaining knowledge of the truth is:2 Thessalonians 2:15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
John

If this be the case then not one tradition should have been added after the death of the last apostle, Especially any that go against any previous apostolic teaching, Such as bowing down to images and idols,

1jo 5:21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

Yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[prodromos]

Also I see others saying that Christ's spirit entered Hades, but I have been taught it was Christ's soul that went to Sheol, His spirit returned to heaven and His flesh went into the tomb.

Christ's divinity is inseperable from His human soul and His human flesh.

John.

 

[Jerrysch]

Hi Prodomos



If this be the case then not one tradition should have been added after the death of the last apostle, Especially any that go against any previous apostolic teaching, Such as bowing down to images and idols,

1jo 5:21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

Yours in Christ
deu 58

I think it is more serious than this...the RC group encourages their membership to bow down and kneel before stone images!

 

[prodromos]

If this be the case then not one tradition should have been added after the death of the last apostle, Especially any that go against any previous apostolic teaching, Such as bowing down to images and idols,

Icons are not idols, nor are they graven images. I think it is best not to leave words out when quoting scripture, don't you?

John