- Oct 14, 2015
- 6,133
- 3,090
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
If the church weren't a hospital for sinners, with Jesus as its head physician, you'd be in hell.
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.
If the church weren't a hospital for sinners, with Jesus as its head physician, you'd be in hell.If the Church weren't a hospital for sinners, with Our Lady as its Nurse, I'd be in hell!
Just don't complain when others disparage the Bible, as you are doing essentially the same thing to those who accept the authority of the Church.
If the Church weren't a hospital for sinners, with Our Lady as its Nurse, I'd be in hell!
Mary the mother of Jesus was described by God as “highly favored” (Luke 1:28). The phrase “highly favored” comes from a single Greek word, which essentially means “much grace.” Mary received God’s grace.
Grace is “unmerited favor,” meaning something we receive despite the fact that we do not deserve it. Mary needed grace from God just as the rest of us do. Mary herself understood this fact, as she declared in Luke 1:47, “. . . and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior. . .”
Mary recognized that she needed the Savior. The Bible never says that Mary was anyone but an ordinary human whom God chose to use in an extraordinary way. Yes, Mary was a righteous woman and favored (graced) by God (Luke 1:27-28). At the same time, Mary was a sinful human being who needed Jesus Christ as her Savior, just like everyone else (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:23; 6:23; 1 John 1:8).
Mary did not have an “immaculate conception.” The Bible doesn’t suggest Mary’s birth was anything but a normal human birth. Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus (Luke 1:34-38), but the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary is unbiblical. Matthew 1:25, speaking of Joseph, declares, “But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus.”
The word “until” clearly indicates that Joseph and Mary did have sexual union after Jesus was born. Joseph and Mary had several children together after Jesus was born. Jesus had four half-brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). Jesus also had half-sisters, although they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:55-56). God blessed and graced Mary by giving her several children, which in that culture was the clearest indication of God’s blessing on a woman.
One time when Jesus was speaking, a woman in the crowd proclaimed, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed” (Luke 11:27). There was never a better opportunity for Jesus to declare that Mary was indeed worthy of praise and adoration. What was Jesus’ response? “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it” (Luke 11:28). To Jesus, obedience to God’s Word was more important than being the woman who gave birth to the Savior.
Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus, or anyone else, direct any praise, glory, or adoration towards Mary. Elizabeth, Mary’s relative, praised Mary in Luke 1:42-44, but her praise is based on the blessing of giving birth to the Messiah. It was not based on any inherent glory in Mary.
Mary was present at the cross when Jesus died (John 19:25). Mary was also with the apostles on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14). However, Mary is never mentioned again after Acts chapter 1. The apostles did not give Mary a prominent role. Mary’s death is not recorded in the Bible. Nothing is said about Mary ascending to heaven or having an exalted role there. As the earthly mother of Jesus, Mary should be respected, but she is not worthy of our worship or adoration.
The Bible nowhere indicates that Mary can hear our prayers or that she can mediate for us with God. Jesus is our only advocate and mediator in heaven (1 Timothy 2:5). If offered worship, adoration, or prayers, Mary would say the same as the angels: “Worship God!” (see Revelation 19:10; 22:9.) Mary herself sets the example for us, directing her worship, adoration, and praise to God alone: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for He has been mindful of the humble state of His servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me — holy is His name” (Luke 1:46-49).
The Catholic Church has not errors in its dogma. Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.And the errors of the CC?
There are no counter Biblical traditions, and I'm not sure why you would have problems with extra Biblical traditions.Forgive me if it's already been mentioned, but my issue is not extra-Biblical traditions, it's counter-Biblical traditions, passed down by an authority that seems at the very least, unnecessary given the work of the great High Priest on the cross.
We don't accept the authority of the Church "in place of" the Bible. We accept the authority of the Church "in addition to" the Bible. When the Church decides dogma, that is also God's own words. So yes it IS a difference of priorities-- you disparage God's own words.Yes, if they accept the "authority" of the church in place of authority of God's own words. It seems that we have a difference of priorities here.
There are no counter Biblical traditions, and I'm not sure why you would have problems with extra Biblical traditions.
That doesn't really answer the question. You cannot say the Roman Catholic Church is "the one true church" and that it has an "infallable" ability to intereptation scripture when all you can say is "there are no errors it its dogma" and everything else is up for question.The Catholic Church has not errors in its dogma. Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church.
We don't accept the authority of the Church "in place of" the Bible. We accept the authority of the Church "in addition to" the Bible. When the Church decides dogma, that is also God's own words. So yes it IS a difference of priorities-- you disparage God's own words.
And who determines the intereptation of the bible and what parts of the bible should have authority?.........thank you. I rest my case. [emoji19]We don't accept the authority of the Church "in place of" the Bible. We accept the authority of the Church "in addition to" the Bible. When the Church decides dogma, that is also God's own words. So yes it IS a difference of priorities-- you disparage God's own words.
In Matthew 23:1-3 Jesus supports a religious hierarchy by stating the Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses (meaning they have teaching authority) and instructing his followers to do everything they teach. In addition, the NT clearly teaches ordination via the laying on of hands, and gives us the offices of deacon, presbyter, and bishop.I have no issues with extra-Biblical. Counter Biblical? Matthew 23:8 and 23:9 and in point of fact, much of Jesus' earthly ministry would seem to indicate a distinct lack of the need for the sort of earthly hierarchies and traditions that Catholics require.
To my mind, ANY traditions that contradict what is given in the Biblical text are counter-Biblical.
We believe that the Bible is the perfect (in its original form), inerrant and complete Word of God; we believe further that only person worthy of veneration is God, and apart from Him, none are Holy, not one. We believe that the only proper worship should be directed at God alone, specifically person and works of Jesus Christ. We do not accept the validity of the Catholic Church's post-Biblical traditions, except, and only if they do not contradict what is given in the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments.
We will not agree on this.
Jason, it works how it works. If you don't like it, well, I guess that's why you aren't Catholic.That doesn't really answer the question. You cannot say the Roman Catholic Church is "the one true church" and that it has an "infallable" ability to intereptation scripture when all you can say is "there are no errors it its dogma" and everything else is up for question.
There are no "additions" that go against what is written in the Bible. However, what does often happen is that we interpret the Bible differently than Protestants.I've pointed out in past postings how these additions go against what is written. I asked Patricius about what happens to people who are saved by grace after they die, but never got an answer. He says only the holiest of the holy (the "saints" by Catholic definition) go to Heaven. So, what happens to those who are covered by the grace given to us by the death and resurrection of the Only Begotten Son? (BTW, those are the ones referred to in the bible as the saints)
The Church determines the interpretation of the Bible, since the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, which shall lead unto all truth. All of the Bible has authority.And who determines the intereptation of the bible and what parts of the bible should have authority?.........thank you. I rest my case. [emoji19]
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?