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.
Do you apply this standard to learning a new language ?
Or to reading a poem, or literature ?
Lord have mercy +
Funnily enough I am always trying to learn language, and at the moment am studying basic koine Greek.
I understand your concern....but it isn't the same.
We come from different traditions...but we are united in Messiah, therefore in many ways I am not quite the stranger that you think...what I see in Scripture applies to the whole of the Body, no one is exempt, and our traditions should not deflect or make void the truth that is there, and on which we base our lives.
I have no problem with historical tradition, or non-biblical teachings only when the latter become unbiblical and the former keep people from the truth and simplicity that is found in Jesus.
I am aware too that at times people become 'blind' and simply cannot see that what they do is not according to sound doctrine.....in the case of some of the doctrines discussed here, I believe this has gone on for hundreds of years. Basically it is man subjecting himself to the teachings of man rather than to G-d....therefore even when Scripture demonstrates the truth and they read it, they are blinded to it because they do not truly submit themselves to it, but filter it through other things.
Can you please refute my claims? It would help your position. Merely claiming I am wrong without refuting my arguments does not make you right. Usually people present arguments of why all these are "common mistakes from modern theologies".These are all too common mistakes from modern theologies.
I'm not saying God chose Mary at the last moment. I am trying to say that Mary's decision didn't have much relevance for God knew beforegand what she would say. It wasn't like a cliffhanger. And Mary isn't the only woman who could have raised Jesus. Maybe things would have been different, but not that different.IF God had to choose another woman, then everything would have been out of sync.
Jesus came at the appointed time. Unless you believe God threw everything together at the last moment.
Notwithstanding the Kings of the Orient watched the stars and knew when the appointed time would be.
It is debatable whether Moses and Elijah went to Heaven and received glorified bodies.WE know He is called the first fruits of Heaven, but lo and behold Henoch, Elijah and Moses all received glorified bodies before Him??
I am unaware of God giving Mary such power. Please, tell me, why do you believe so? What supports your position that Mary can read hearts?Except Mary, no one else was given [or not too many anyway] the charism to read hearts outside of God.
Don't forget that in this group which you call "Blessed" in which Mary belongs many more are included, whom the Lord calls "all those who hear the Word of God and keep it".He said specifically, it is because she did the will of His Father perfectly that she was Blessed. Because she chose to be obedient unlike Eve who enjoyed the prerogative of knowing God with all graces and yet disobeyed.
Mary is not our mum. Mary is the mother of the Lord for from her He received His genetic material. God is the Father of the Lord for Jesus Christ is the perfect image of God, thus He bears His image. God is our father for we are made in His image. We are the brothers of Christ for we share a common image, even though ours is a bit out of shape. God is our Father for He created us. Even our parents are our parents because (1) they created us trough sex and (2) we are made in their image, as the Scriptures say, "Adam lived one hundred and thirty years and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and names him Seth". We have certain characteristics and qualities in common with them, thus "in their image".If you are a brother in the Lord [as we are called adopted], then guess who is your mother?
Comparing this argument to another one does not refute it.Funny. That is the same argument that atheists use against God. Why use a losing argument?
Forrest GOP said:Funny. That is the same argument that atheists use against God. Why use a losing argument?
Comparing this argument to another one does not refute it.
What is your earliest quote that states Mary was taken to heaven?True. But likewise, merely making a bad argument - which you have - does not make it correct.
Here is a challenge for you: Without reading the entire thread, I am going to assume that many early Christian writings have been quoted regarding the Assumption. Now, can you find one early Christian writing - just one - which states she was not assumed?
I already know the answer: You cannot. Therefore, the preponderance of Christian witness and historical evidence is on the side of those who believe she was assumed.
And THAT, my friend,. DOES refute your argument.
Have a nice day.
The lack of any teaching of Mary being assumed prior to the 3rd Century A.D. speaks volumes.
The Apostles never taught that Mary was assumed. That doctrine did not arise until the forming of the RCc.
The Word of God proves that the RCc did not start at Pentecost
True. But likewise, merely making a bad argument - which you have - does not make it correct.
Here is a challenge for you: Without reading the entire thread, I am going to assume that many early Christian writings have been quoted regarding the Assumption. Now, can you find one early Christian writing - just one - which states she was not assumed?
I already know the answer: You cannot. Therefore, the preponderance of Christian witness and historical evidence is on the side of those who believe she was assumed.
And THAT, my friend,. DOES refute your argument.
Have a nice day.
I did not say the RCc was at Pentecost. Forrest GOP made that claim.I don't see why everyone is criticizing Forrest GOP, its not like his post contained any less content than StudiousOne's unsupported assertion that the RCC was there at Pentecost.
The skulls were sequential. They were from different stages of John's life. From infant to death. (the last one was when he was beheaded)And, we have the physical evidence of seven completely consecrated and verified skulls that are irrefutably those of John the Baptist, but we do not have one single shred of writing to the contrary. Therefore, I assume that you believe that John the Baptist was miraculously gifted with seven heads. My question to you is whether he possessed them simultaneously or sequentially, or a combination thereof.
I did not say the RCc was at Pentecost. Forrest GOP made that claim.
I stated the fact that the RCc did not come into existence until centuries after Pentecost.
It is not anybody's opinion...it is biblical fact that the RCC is NOT the church which began at Pentecost. The Roman Catholic Church does not resemble the New Testament Church which began at Pentecost.You stated your opinion that the RCC did not come into existence until centuries after Pentecost, and Forrest GOP disagreed with your opinion.
It is not anybody's opinion...it is biblical fact that the RCC is NOT the church which began at Pentecost. The Roman Catholic Church does not resemble the New Testament Church which began at Pentecost.
The RCC began in the third century. That's history.
Neither the Roman Catholic Church nor any other church has the right to claim to be the one and only true church of Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
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?