Peanut Gallery: The Immaculate conception of Mary!

katholikos · Sep 6, 2008

bbbbbbb said:
Of course. I'm glad my point was not lost on you. The Pope = a cardinal = an archbishop = a bishop. Therefore, my local bishop is the pope and Timothy was the Pope in his day.

Wow.

No wonder we need "school vouchers."

lionroar0 · Sep 6, 2008

1) Scripture IS the word of God, and it is held as such.

Says who?

Peace

katholikos · Sep 7, 2008

I always thought Jesus was the Word, made flesh

bbbbbbb · Sep 7, 2008

katholikos said:
I always thought Jesus was the Word, made flesh

I find it odd, then, that during the Mass the priest will lift up a Bible and loudly declare, "This is the Word of the Lord. This is the Word of the Lord. This is the Word of the Lord." Obviously, something is seriously amiss. Shouldn't he be doing that with the consecrated Host?

katholikos · Sep 7, 2008

bbbbbbb said:
I find it odd, then, that during the Mass the priest will lift up a Bible and loudly declare, "This is the Word of the Lord. This is the Word of the Lord. This is the Word of the Lord." Obviously, something is seriously amiss. Shouldn't he be doing that with the consecrated Host?

Wow. You really goofed that up didn't you. Actually, it is a lay lector that says "The Word of the Lord", after he/she reads two of the scripture readings, and they do not lift up the book.

The priest only reads a Gospel reading, after which he says "This is the Gospel of the Lord", and he holds up a book that only contains the four Gospels.

But, at any rate: The Bible is the Word of God insofar as it is put to writing, so the priest is correct. But, the Bible is not the COMPLETE TOTAL Word of God: Christ is THE WORD which God spoke to the world.

LittleLambofJesus · Sep 7, 2008

katholikos said:
Wow. You really goofed that up didn't you. Actually, it is a lay lector that says "The Word of the Lord", after he/she reads two of the scripture readings, and they do not lift up the book.

The priest only reads a Gospel reading, after which he says "This is the Gospel of the Lord", and he holds up a book that only contains the four Gospels.

But, at any rate: The Bible is the Word of God insofar as it is put to writing, so the priest is correct. But, the Bible is not the COMPLETE TOTAL Word of God: Christ is THE WORD which God spoke to the world.

And He is also the Bread that came down from Heaven.

1 corin 11:26 For as often ever ye may be eating the bread, this, and the drink-cup ye may be drinking, the death of the Lord ye are according-messaging until which ever He may be coming/elqh <2064> (5632) [Revelation 19:11]

Hey, lookie here!!! Here He is coming back down again

Reve 19:11 And I perceived the heaven having be opened and Lo! A horse, white and the One sitting on it/him being called Faithful and True and in justice He is judging and is battling.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=5366795&page=3
What is the "Parousia" in the New Testament

MamaZ · Sep 7, 2008

lionroar0 said:
Says who?

Peace

Jesus. For Jesus tells us that Gods word is truth. Peter tells us that no scripture is an act of human will but men moved by the Holy Spirit and Paul tells us that all scripture is inspired of God.

MamaZ · Sep 7, 2008

So the words that Jesus spoke were not the word of God? And these men who wrote the scriptures did not do so with the Holy Spirit of God then? And when Jesus told the diciples that they were clean by what He spoke?

katholikos · Sep 7, 2008

LittleLambofJesus said:
And He is also the Bread that came down from Heaven....

He is indeed.
I feel truly blessed to receive that Bread of Life - the flesh and blood which is true food and true drink indeed - every Sunday.

katholikos · Sep 7, 2008

MamaZ said:
So the words that Jesus spoke were not the word of God? And these men who wrote the scriptures did not do so with the Holy Spirit of God then?.....

Nobody said that. In fact, you illustrate my point: Since Jesus is THE WORD, everything He said was the Word of God. You are correct. AND, since the Bible says that not everything He said is in the Bible, it is an inescapable fact that the Bible does not contain the total Word of God:

John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

MamaZ · Sep 8, 2008

John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

The miracles that He preforms could never all be contained into one book. For His miracles are still going on today.

katholikos · Sep 8, 2008

MamaZ said:
The miracles that He preforms could never all be contained into one book. For His miracles are still going on today.

I don't see the word "miracle" in the text

CaliforniaJosiah · Sep 8, 2008

katholikos said:
I always thought Jesus was the Word, made flesh

Jesus is the INCARNATE Word.
Scripture is the WRITTEN Word.
You know that....

The RCC is neither.
The Pope is neither.
You know that, too.

Back to the issue of the dogmatic substantiation for the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

.

.

katholikos · Sep 8, 2008

CaliforniaJosiah said:
Jesus is the INCARNATE Word.
Scripture is the WRITTEN Word.
You know that.....

Thanks for proving my point, which is that the total entire word of God is not contained in the Bible. See, you can get something right when you try.

CaliforniaJosiah said:
The RCC is neither.
The Pope is neither.
You know that, too..

I never said they were. Are you in a "straw man" mood this morning?

CaliforniaJosiah said:
Back to the issue of the dogmatic substantiation for the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

Okay. The Dogma is True.
Next?

CaliforniaJosiah · Sep 8, 2008

BreadAlone said:
But what is the AUTHORITY, then?

The RCC acknowledges ONE infallible, unaccountable authority: ITSELF. (another discussion for another day, thread and forum)

If a teaching fits in with the rest of the Scriptures, than it has the POSSIBILITY of being correct..though it still may not be!

Excellent point. Theoretically possible does not equal dogmatic fact. It's theoretically possible that Mary was 7 feet tall, had red hair and 30 children. All that is clearly within the realm of possibility - even without God's specific intervention ("with GOD, ALL things are possible."). But does that require that all those things are dogmatic facts - Truth to the highest level of certainty and importance (dogma)? I think MOST Catholics would say 'no.'

This means that all this Marian nonsense is NOT necessary nor fruitful for Salvation. One does not have to believe Mary was Immaculately Concieved.

Well, the RCC strongly disagrees with you. This is DOGMA - the highest level of truth and importance... (BTW, thus it requires the highest level of substantiation - making the entire, complete absense of such even more stunning and remarkable).

I don't DENY this teaching (but then I don't deny that there might be 4 billion fuzzy brown creatures on the Moon of Endor either; it IS possible). I'm not sure it contradicts Scripture (although it certainly could be regarded as problematic for the several reasons our Protestant friends have noted). On the other hand, it does have some "tradition" behind it - albeit not ecumenical and not very historic. Of all the Catholic denomination's Marian dogmas, this is the weakest - but not for long; many opinion that the Co-Redemptrix of Mary will be made dogma within our lifetimes , and THAT will keep this forum very busy for decades.

I'm looking forward to our Catholic friend substantiating that the earlest Church Fathers all taught this as dogma, that it has had ecumencial consensus since 30 AD, and so forth. The "debate" has gotten off to a slow start, but I'm very much looking forward to whatever is offered. Nothing so far, but I'm sure good stuff is on the way!

Thank you!

Pax

- Josiah

.

CaliforniaJosiah · Sep 8, 2008

katholikos said:
The Dogma is True.

Ah, THAT is the substantiation we've all been waiting for, LOL....
SURLY, if YOU think it's true, that makes it dogma!

(Me thinks Mormon apologetics are infinately more convincing and scholarly in comparison)

.

MamaZ · Sep 8, 2008

katholikos said:
I don't see the word "miracle" in the text

I don't see the word said either. But back to the op.

CaliforniaJosiah · Sep 8, 2008

lionroar0 said:
Then same as yours concerning the resurrection.

I have Scripture on the Resurrection of Jesus.
Do you have Scripture for Mary being conceived immaculately? IF SO, no one has shared such since the CC alone made this dogma.

.

CaliforniaJosiah · Sep 8, 2008

lionroar0 said:
Yeah but it does not say that all Truth is in the Bible.

No. It's accepted that 1+1 = 2. The Bible doesn't say that. You have a point, it's just entirely moot to Theology.

I realize that the RCC (like the LDS) regards one as also authoritative, at least equally with God in His Scriptures (itself, exclusively and infallibly). And I realize that if self appoints self as the sole authority, sole interpreter and sole arbiter, declaring self as infallible and thus unaccountable, then if self says that Jesus had 3 eyes and now lives on the Moon of Endor, then He does - it's indisputable and unquestionable. The RCC and LDS don't "need" substantiation. As the Mormon Apostle and Prophet Bruce McConkie wrote (by inspiration), "The (LDS) Church doesn't need the Bible, the Bible needs the Church." I think we all understand the RCC/LDS rubric here.

But, my respected friend, just ONE difference is that, unlike the RCC and LDS, I'm not appointing myself as the sole authority or infallible or unaccountable; I'm not requiring God to agree with me; I'm not placing myself equal to God or insisting that He needs me to be the final/infallible/unaccountable Authority (ie Bruce McConkie's often made point). I'm submitting to an Authority ABOVE and BEYOND and OUTSIDE of me - one that for 3500 years has been acknowledged by all believers as the infallible, written/black & white, knowable/unalterable, divinely written Scripture. This, ultimately, is what separates the RCC/LDS from classic Protestantism: One submits to itself alone, the other to God's Scriptures. One looks inward, the other upward. One declares SELF as infallible, the other declares GOD as infallible. But ah, another discussion for another day, thread and forum (seems the two of us have had that discussion, LOL).

Back to the dogmatic substantiation for the unique, new dogma of the Catholic denomination that Mary (specificly) was CONCEIVED immaculately.....

Thank you!

Pax

- Josiah

.

Brennin · Sep 8, 2008

CaliforniaJosiah said:
Ah, THAT is the substantiation we've all been waiting for, LOL....
SURLY, if YOU think it's true, that makes it dogma!

Pope done tol' me so!

Peanut Gallery: The Immaculate conception of Mary!

Well-Known Member

Coffee drinker

Well-Known Member

bbbbbbb

Guest

Well-Known Member

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

MamaZ

Guest

MamaZ

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

MamaZ

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

MamaZ

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Wielder of the Holy Cudgel of Faith

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency