Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
IMHO, speaking "lovingly" includes speaking respectfully.
And respectfully means truthfully.
IMHO, dogmatically insisting on unsubstantiated, late rumors lacks truth, respect or love. In spite of the sincere intention.
Someone MAY desire to flatter me by telling others that I have a Ph.D. from Harvard. I don't. Thus, such doesn't flatter me, it embarrass me and is disrespectful to the truth (I have a B.S - no jokes please - from the University of California). You INTENTION may be good, but the result is not. My mommie taught me to always ask, "Is it true and is it helpful?" She told me to not spread rumors - even well intentioned ones. And I try not to do that - especially about one whom I love, adore and hold in highest esteem, such as Our Blessed Lady.
That's MY perspective, anyway....
Pax
- Josiah
Because it is a topic of intimately private issue & substance of which none is our need or responsibility to attend, leastwise in any great detail out of respect for privacy beside the obvious fact that there are loftier, meatier spiritual issues to attend in the oursuit of Christian ideals as described in the two greatest commandments.
Mr. Rick Otto,was there a guard posted?
Matt27:59: And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
60: And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
61: And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.
62: Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
63: Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
64: Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
65: Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
66: So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
Matt 28: 1: In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2: And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3: His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4: And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
5: And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6: He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
7: And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
8: And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
9: And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
10: Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.
11: Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
12: And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
13: Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
14: And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
15: So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
Well, if you're gonna believe the scripture, there's your witnesses including Himself.
What he said.
Luke 11:27-28
27 While he was saying this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you! 28But he said, Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it!
There is no room for 'Mariodoulia' in Christianity.
FWIW I am going to add a few things - archeologists wanted to study the historical and accurate content of the LDS' claims from Mr Smith regarding the 'cities and towns' he named and claimed.
But, as no surpirse - there was nothing.
Not one stone - not one iota of proof of any person he named or city and town.
He completely fabricated the historical stories.
There is a video somewhere on that....on youtube...?
Or some other type video that shows the experts explain the pains they took looking for these places which do not exist.
I dont understand how anyone can compare historical proof to a fabricated story.
Doesnt work with me....no matter how much Smith tried to imitate the historical Church in order to convert ppl, still doesnt make them correct.
But when proof is on the side of the claim - it really does bring credibility to the table.
Well, I said it before, will say it again...
The gate the Lord entered thru - would remain shut and NO man can enter where the Lord has entered thru.
He wasn't really talking about a gate.
He was hiding the Virgin Mary His Mother from satan so she would be able to fulfill her role in bringing us the Savior.
For what purpose would God preserve a gate?
But not His own Flesh and Blood in which He entered life with us?
THE OT was a prefigure of His life, which included His Mother.
HOW did He enter into life to be our Savior?
Thru His Mother.
Can a man enter where He has entered?
NO.
yes, I know. Which merely discredits your claims. Clearly, no Church has ALL truth, in that they do not know every little thing. I.E, brothers or coursins, or literal days, or millions of years, as you yourself have said. If Jesus was promising the RCC (as you so claim) all truth... where did it go? Why don't you know these things? I know you'll limit the "all" to match "what we teach."Ahhh, but this too is in the Bible. It is a promise of Christ to those he ordained as teachers and apostles:
John 16:13
"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;
you're repeating what has already been refuted. Yes, I know you don't accept the refutation, and more than we accept that he was speaking about Mary's womb in this passage.Well, I said it before, will say it again...
The gate the Lord entered thru - would remain shut and NO man can enter where the Lord has entered thru.
He wasn't really talking about a gate.
He was hiding the Virgin Mary His Mother from satan so she would be able to fulfill her role in bringing us the Savior.
For what purpose would God preserve a gate?
But not His own Flesh and Blood in which He entered life with us?
THE OT was a prefigure of His life, which included His Mother.
HOW did He enter into life to be our Savior?
Thru His Mother.
Can a man enter where He has entered?
NO.
agreed... and I don't ask for conclusive proof. myself, I ask for ANY mention of it, in a source that we ALL accept (scripture.) PV, IC, Assumption.... not one iota exists in scripture regarding these. Some passages are forwarded regarding it, but if you're honest, they are incomprehensible as evidence to the dogma, if the dogma is not already believed in the first place. It reeks of prooftexting, finding any words that match what is already believed.Okay I'm a few pages behind so if someone has already addressed this please forgive.
Not that I don't disagree with Christ being resurected or that it is mentioned in the Bible.
The argument is to provide conclusive proof. Faith is not based on conclusive proof.
yes, this is true. We must accept the things in the bible on a matter of faith. I haven't seen anyone argue against this.For one to accept what is written in the Bible about the resurrection and the Trinity(and other things) as proof one must have faith. Faith that the Bible is the Word of God.( Yes i do agree that it;s the Word of God.)
I also see the false comparison. I have no idea how the thread got on to the silliness that the ressurection isn't substatiated by scripture. It's one of the clearest things you can find in the gospels.Take out the belive that the Bible is the Word of God and then one is left with pure intellectual exercise. One which requires analytical and quantative proof.
This is what is being asked by CJ.
We have provided ecf''s quotes and biblical verses to substantiate our faith. But if one does not have faith in this, then one requires proof and faith is not based on proof.
See the fallacy??
Peace
demands of one person, perhaps.just to mention, we till have not established the authenticity of the NT per the standards demanded in this thread -- good thing you cited the OT
The Church is not right because She claims She is anymore than Paul is right "because" He says so. The Church can only give what She is given. We understand you don't believe that and have, with great effort, decried the Church on this forum. We also understand you do not accept doctrinal development.the Dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is not simply an embraced article of faith, it's dogma: the highest level of certainty, and if a teacher is right cuz he claims he is
all parties in this thread agree on the validity of scripture. Where the communication breaks down, is where the one side doesn't believe that it is neccessary to believe things outside of scripture, and the other forwarding that scripture is merely an incomplete record.
You cannot accept the 'fruits' (the bible) of those Fathers and reject their writtings...it is like you trust them as far as compiling the canon but mistrust them for the rest of their writtings. It is illogical and God made us rational beings.
demands of one person, perhaps.
myself, I don't think it wise to quibble about the authenticity of a source that we both agree is true... can't we have some agreement without shin-kicking?
all parties in this thread agree on the validity of scripture. Where the communication breaks down, is where the one side doesn't believe that it is neccessary to believe things outside of scripture, and the other forwarding that scripture is merely an incomplete record.
lets not shatter the one small piece of common ground that we have.
5.
and you do not take into account any of the errors in the English translations... or the Greek.... you go on and on... Those were cousins it has been said before... But if you are an English speakers I guess that truth is moot..
Hi, bbbbbbbPoint well taken. If you are an English speaker using any and all known English translations of the Bible, this is what it clearly means. If you are a Greek reader and translator this is also what it means. If you are RCC or EOC then it is a different story.
.
perhaps you should consult a Greek (Hellenistic/Greek) dictionary
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?