T
Thekla
Guest
Can you, for example, give the description of what was 'seen' of Paul using Scripture ?
Upvote
0
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.
Paul must be confused then if you are not.
How can we followers of Paul if we have no record of how we are to follow?
Paul's conduct is recorded throughout the NT.
Let's start here:
Phil 3:17
Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. KJV
Phil 1:30
Having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in me.
KJV
Phil 3:12
Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after , if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. KJV
And;
2 Tim 4:16
At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge . KJV
And;
Phil 4:11
Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. KJV
And this one is a "biggie"
Phil 4:9
Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you. KJV
Can you, for example, give the description of what was 'seen' of Paul using Scripture ?
Are you suggesting that there is another source besides scripture that contains the infallible, inerrant word of Almighty God?
If youre gonna talk the talk, you better be prepared to walk the walk.
In the writings of His Church. The validity can be checked against the teachings of the apostles, which were spoken first, not written. There can be no contradiction.
You will have great joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, for he will be great in the eyes of the Lord. He must never touch wine or other alcoholic drinks. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even before his birth.~Luke 1:14-15
A contradiction, just so you know, is when it says something somewhere, and something entirely different somewhere else. It's not contradiction if it's believed, yet not written in the Bible.Does the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church not teach Marys Immaculate Conception? That she from the first moments of her conception ... was preserved free from every stain of original sin?
The apostle Paul didnt teach that nor did he write such nonsense. In Romans 3:23 it is clear that he taught all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. There is no exception for anyone, including Mary.
Clearly a contradiction between what your Church teaches and what the apostles taught.
Does the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church not teach Marys Immaculate Conception? That she from the first moments of her conception ... was preserved free from every stain of original sin?
The apostle Paul didnt teach that nor did he write such nonsense. In Romans 3:23 it is clear that he taught all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. There is no exception for anyone, including Mary.
Clearly a contradiction between what your Church teaches and what the apostles taught.
The CC teaches that she was born without sin and remained sinless her entire life, so that is, indeed, a contradiction.
What about John the Baptist? This was written about him:
Maybe there is something different (or more to it) in meaning to "all have sinned"?
A contradiction, just so you know, is when it says something somewhere, and something entirely different somewhere else. It's not contradiction if it's believed, yet not written in the Bible.
The apostle Paul is not the only author of the New Testament, and I don't believe he wrote about Mary at all, therefore, no contradiction. Also, clearly, Paul was using hyperbole, because Jesus never sinned. So there are exeptions to his "all". Besides, you've taken the passage out of context. Paul was talking to a specific group, not the entire Church. But even so, we acknowledge that Mary was human, and did nothing for herself. Her gift of Immaculate Conception was from God, not her own doing.
As stated before, there are a couple of ways to be saved. I can pull someone up over a cliff myself, or if I cannot, I can go and get help. Same result. The other way for the person to be saved is to pull himself up over the edge. Mary's saving was from God, as is everyone else's. Her's was done prior to her ever sinning.
Does the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church not teach Mary’s Immaculate Conception? That she ‘from the first moments of her conception ... was preserved free from every stain of original sin’?
The apostle Paul didn’t teach that nor did he write such nonsense. In Romans 3:23 it is clear that he taught ‘all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God’. There is no exception for anyone, including Mary.
Clearly a contradiction between what your Church teaches and what the apostles taught.
That's really bogus. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Logically, Paul is speaking of people, as that's who he is addressing, and Jesus is God, so there's that. Then we're left with the human Mary. I know it's cozy for RC's to believe she never once sinned and to twist the context of what Paul is clearly saying, but it's not so.
That's not a contradiction at all,
it's not even relevant to Mary. That's just taking things way out of context.
It's amusing that your lot thinks the Church is so impotent that it would dogmatically declare something so easily refutable.
The fact of the matter is that the Church is a force to be reckoned with when it comes to dogmas and theology.
You can believe that the pope simply makes stuff up, or that the Church just goes blindly along whatever idea it chooses, but that's just plain false.
If a teaching considered by this Church to be divinely revealed is not contained within the pages of the bible, the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church simply asserts its self-imposed editorial privilege and makes that which never was into that which always has been. Its called sacred oral Tradition, the lifes blood of their Church, without which they would collapse like a house of cards.
I guess we might call it wishful thinking.
In other eras, it was common to "ennoble" any important public figure after the fact. An emperor might be deemed to have become a god, for instance, even though that seems to us to be patently ridiculous. You don't "become" a god, we'd say.
So with religious figures--and women--the imagination runs towards sinlessness, perpetual virginity, universal motherhood, her body being taken to heaven by God, etc. The same kinds of tales were told about Alexander the Great, who travelled to the Moon, explored the bottom of the ocean, discovered alien beings, and more.
Like the legends of the saints, all of that happened only in the human imagination, of course.
That's not Sacred Tradition.have you ever thought that Scared Tradition might have been the thing that was used to judge what books of the NT were canonical?
have you ever thought that Scared Tradition might have been the thing that was used to judge what books of the NT were canonical?
it the books lined up with the teachings of the Church they were accepted as scripture?
With regard to the New Testament in order for a book to be recognized as canonical it had to have been written by an apostle or endorsed by an apostle. In the case of the Book of Acts, written by Luke, it was backed by the apostle Paul. The same goes for the gospel of Mark which was sanctioned by Peter and Paul.also, authorship was important too
Christians line up their teachings with what scripture says, not the other way around. With regard to the New Testament in order for a book to be recognized as canonical it had to have been written by an apostle or endorsed by an apostle. In the case of the Book of Acts, written by Luke, it was backed by the apostle Paul. The same goes for the gospel of Mark which was sanctioned by Peter and Paul.
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?