Peanut Gallery: The Immaculate conception of Mary!

[lionroar0]

oh! call the private investigators! We have eyewitnesses to the death of Christ, and eyewitnesses to him being alive shortly after!

not sure how we'll figure it out without Inspector Clousseau on the case.

come now, let's be reasonable, it is not the same thing.

(nor, should an "eyewitness" account be absolutely neccessary. I think it's kind of silly to ask for an eyewitness account to the PV of Mary... someone would have to watch her 24/7. eww.

the driving point is we have a biblical record that indicates the ressurection. We have no such record of the Marian dogmas. Only scriptures that bear a vague connection, if you already believe the dogmas to begin with.

Kind of if one belives in Sola Scriptura. One will find it in mentioned in the Bible.

Peace

 

[Uphill Battle]

Sola scriptura isn't a doctrine or a dogma (and you've been told that before.) so you don't "believe in it." you may use is as a method. It is nothing more.

 

[Hentenza]

The fact that you could not answer my question is quite revealing. In fact, you cannot show me IN THE BIBLE where it says that everything must be in the Bible, because it just ain't there.

Does the bible says that is NOT the Word of God? Where in the bible does it say that it is not sufficient?

 

[lionroar0]

Does the bible says that is NOT the Word of God? Where in the bible does it say that it is not sufficient?

IS it sufficient by itself or with a teacher?

Peace

 

[D'Ann]

Is the word Trinity in the Bible? No, because that word was not a word when the Bible was written. But over the years, the theology behind the Trinity was evolving and even though the word is not in the Bible, most Christians believe in the Trinity.

The Bible in some ways is like a treasure map. There are a ton of symbols that lead us and guide us, but one has to figure what those symbols mean and how they apply.

Sorry... I probably should stay out of this thread. This apologetics stuff is difficult and I applaud all of you who do know how to share your faiths and explain your faiths in a loving and caring and wonderful way while discussing various other faiths. This is a gift that I think not all have. May God bless you all always.

 

[lionroar0]

Sola scriptura isn't a doctrine or a dogma (and you've been told that before.) so you don't "believe in it." you may use is as a method. It is nothing more.

But it's still a method that people have to belive in. Otherwise people would not use it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but those that hold to it belive that it's a God given method and that it's found with in the Scriptures.


Peace

 

[MamaZ]

All we need is the scripture for it is able to fully equip the saints.
2Ti 3:14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them,
2Ti 3:15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
2Ti 3:17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

2Pe 1:19 So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
2Pe 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
2Pe 1:21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

So if the scripture is inspired by God and can equip the man of God and we do well to pay attention to it where is it written that tradtion is anywere inspired of God and nothing but hand me down hear say and old wives tales?

 

[MamaZ]

Here is some more..
Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
Joh 14:24 "He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.
Joh 14:25 "These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you.

Mar 7:6 And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
Mar 7:7 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
Mar 7:8 "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."

It may do one good to do a study on how many times it is written is spoken of in the scriptures. and then compare that to tradtion and see what out weighs the other and why we take scripture as our testing strip for truth. For Jesus also said this.

Joh 17:16 "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Joh 17:17 "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.
Joh 17:18 "As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 "For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth.

 

[MamaZ]

Who is Jesus? He is the word made flesh.. For in the beginning God said and it was so.

 

[katholikos]

Does the bible says that is NOT the Word of God? Where in the bible does it say that it is not sufficient?

There is a difference between "sufficient" and "complete".
The Bible plainly says that not everything Jesus said or did is in the Bible. Since Jesus IS the Word of God made flesh, and since not everything Jesus said or did is in the Bible, that means that all of the Word of God is not in the Bible.

 

[BreadAlone]

There is a difference between "sufficient" and "complete".
The Bible plainly says that not everything Jesus said or did is in the Bible. Since Jesus IS the Word of God made flesh, and since not everything Jesus said or did is in the Bible, that means that all of the Word of God is not in the Bible.

But what is the AUTHORITY, then? Certainly not men! What you must COMPARE all other teachings with, is the Scriptures, which "Cannot be broken." 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! The Holy Spirit is the revealer of Truth, and all that is necessary for us to know has been revealed in the Scriptures.

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

For that matter, many Christians see such a dogma as "breaking" the Scriptures ("There are none who are perfect, not even one." "All have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God." "Surely [we] were sinful from birth, sinful from the time [our] mother concieved [us].") And if such is the case, you would think that Roman Catholics would take it upon themselves to "not cause their brother to sin" and keep such Unscriptural and Unprovable tendencies to themselves for the sake of love and Christian unity.

 

[katholikos]

But what is the AUTHORITY, then? Certainly not men!....

Oh contraire mon fraire. Jesus gave authority TO MEN. That fact is abundantly clear in ther Bible.

For that matter, many Christians see such a dogma as "breaking" the Scriptures

Which is why Peter warned of the dangers of personal interpretations. These same Christians point at each others denominations and say that each others' doctrines are wrong. That is the fruit of Sola Scriptura: Denominational chaos.

Lets not forget how, in John 6, when Jesus gave a teaching that was too hard to accept, many walked away from him.

all this Marian nonsense

Not nice. A Mod should know better

 

[Uphill Battle]

But it's still a method that people have to belive in. Otherwise people would not use it.

perhaps, but it is not a matter of faith. It's not a teaching, or a must believe. It's simply a method.

Correct me if I'm wrong but those that hold to it belive that it's a God given method and that it's found with in the Scriptures.

some do, I'm sure. I don't see in scripture where God said "use only scripture." It isn't there. But one two points alone, it's the reason I use it.

1) Scripture IS the word of God, and it is held as such.
2) traditionalists have error, despite claims of perfection.

that, is enough for me to eschew extra-biblical teachings. the "we have it all right, even though it's not in the bible" people have differing teachings as well, though they blame all division and differences on Sola Scriptura.

Oh contraire mon fraire. Jesus gave authority TO MEN. That fact is abundantly clear in ther Bible.

indeed he did. Now the question is, WHAT authority. I know what he gave the apostles. You don't have to quote it. What I'm looking for is some backup for the claim that all clergymen for the rest of history would share the same.

ain't going to find it outside of "because we say so."

Which is why Peter warned of the dangers of personal interpretations.

you mean this?

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.

that isn't what that passage is saying. It's saying scripture did not COME from prophets own interpretation.

not what you are saying.

These same Christians point at each others denominations and say that each others' doctrines are wrong.

and the "one true churches" of the world do less? please. Don't be a hypocrite.

Lets not forget how, in John 6, when Jesus gave a teaching that was too hard to accept, many walked away from him.

yes... when JESUS gave. Let's not pretend to be Jesus... M'kay?

Not nice. A Mod should know better

we can't all pass your Catholic Holy litmus test.

 

[BreadAlone]

Oh contraire mon fraire. Jesus gave authority TO MEN. That fact is abundantly clear in ther Bible.

Christ gave what authority to men? To continue in the teachings that he gave.

Which is why Peter warned of the dangers of personal interpretations. These same Christians point at each others denominations and say that each others' doctrines are wrong. That is the fruit of Sola Scriptura: Denominational chaos.

Kind of like your holy vicars constantly disagree with the next one that your denomination produces. Kind of like how St. Peter believed in the 6 day creation, in the very same book you speak of here, and yet the current pope believes the Earth is billions of years old.

Or maybe like how St. Peter said that we can only be saved by the name of one, Jesus Christ, and the last pope said that all who "earnestly seek god" could get to heaven.

Yes, there are GREAT dangers of "personal interpretation."

Lets not forget how, in John 6, when Jesus gave a teaching that was too hard to accept, many walked away from him.

Yes, let's not forget that it's IN SCRIPTURE.

Not nice. A Mod should know better

Worse could be said.

 

[katholikos]

Oh contraire mon fraire. Jesus gave authority TO MEN. That fact is abundantly clear in ther Bible.

indeed he did. Now the question is, WHAT authority. I know what he gave the apostles. You don't have to quote it. What I'm looking for is some backup for the claim that all clergymen for the rest of history would share the same.

First, I would ask a counter-question: At what point in history did men give up that authority - which you admit that Christ gave - and hand it over to a book that cannot itself excersise authority?


But, to answer your question: 1 and 2 Timothy are all about Timothy being a bishop. And Paul speaks about how his apostolic gifts are handed on to him:

1 Timothy 4:14
Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery

2 Timothy 1:6
For this reason I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

"Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place of God, and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and with the deacons, who are most dear to me, entrusted with the business of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father from the beginning and is at last made manifest"
- Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, 6:1 [A.D. 110]

 

[Uphill Battle]

I'm sure you would ask a counter question first... It serves to avoid answering the question in the first place. I don't believe the authority given by Christ, was ever given up.

now I ask again, what authority? What I meant by my earier question is, your church claims overweening authority over all matters of faith.

demonstrate this. It shouldn't be that hard, if it's really true.

 

[katholikos]

I repeat: 1 and 2 Timothy are all about Timothy being a bishop. And Paul speaks about how his apostolic gifts are handed on to him:

1 Timothy 4:14
Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery

2 Timothy 1:6
For this reason I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

"Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place of God, and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and with the deacons, who are most dear to me, entrusted with the business of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father from the beginning and is at last made manifest"
- Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, 6:1 [A.D. 110]

 

[bbbbbbb]

And where was Timothy's see? It is a pity he was only a bishop and not a cardinal.

 

[katholikos]

And where was Timothy's see?...

I don't know. But I'm sure someone does.

....It is a pity he was only a bishop and not a cardinal.

A Cardinal IS a bishop, just like the Pope is a bishop.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I don't know. But I'm sure someone does.

God does, I'm sure, but the Bible certainly never indicates anything of the sort,

A Cardinal IS a bishop, just like the Pope is a bishop.

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.