Posted on 12/14/2014 11:57:21 AM PST by ealgeone
The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.
BUMP from the top of the next 250!
Gay - sexually attracted to someone who is the same sex
You don’t know me, or what’s best for me. I’m a Roman Catholic. End of story. You aren’t going to change my beliefs. They are what they are. In not here to mock anyone; nor am I here to convert anyone. Believe as you choose, you have a free will. If you find joy, and any of the Fruits of the Holy Spirit of which Scripture speaks, in your own faith, proclaim them! Rejoice in God! Surely you can say something positive about your faith, or about your life as a result of that faith, if you truly wish to win converts!
Don’t forget indulgences...I got Granny out of Purgatory for $25.
Then just why are you here?
>>Surely you can say something positive about your faith, or about your life as a result of that faith, if you truly wish to win converts!<<
I most certainly can! I am assured that I rest secure in the arms of Jesus, assured of everlasting life with Him. I am unencumbered by doubts of insufficiency or inadequacy as I am in the spiritual realm already cleansed. I have Jesus as my constant companion with the Holy Spirit as by counsellor. I can go directly before the throne of God in Jesus name and need of no fallible man to assist me or stand in my way.
Thank you!
Actually, while it is etymologically "derived," it is the means by which is was derived, that of "presbuteros" in Greek ("senior/elder in Gk, and presbyter in Latin) being translated into English as "preost," and then "priest," but which became the word used for "hierus" ("sacerdos" in Latin), losing the distinction the Holy Spirit made by never distinctively giving NT presbuteros the distinctive title hiereus.
Thus while it is etymologically derived from presbuteros that does not mean that this was what presbuteros meant. Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and evolving changes in form and meaning. over time, however, etymologies are not definitions. To use it as definition what presbuteros meant is to engage in an etymological fallacy
The word which the Holy Spirit distinctively uses for priests - Jewish as well as pagan - is “hiereus” or “archiereus.” (Heb. 4:15; 10:11) and which is never used for NT pastors, nor does the words presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer) which He does use for NT pastors mean "priest."
All believers are called to sacrifice (Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9) and all constitute the only priesthood in the NT church, that of all believers, (1Pt. 2:5,9; Re 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). But nowhere at NT pastors distinctively titled hiereus, and the idea of the NT presbuteros being a distintive class titled "hiereus" was a later development, due to imposed functional equivalence, supposing NT presbyteros engaged in a unique sacrificial ministry as their primary function.
Catholic writer Greg Dues in "Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide," states, "Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions." "When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice [after Rome's theology], the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist." (http://books.google.com/books?id=ajZ_aR-VXn8C&source=gbs_navlinks_s) And R. J. Grigaitis (O.F.S.) (while yet trying to defend the use of priest), reveals, "The Greek word for this office is ‘?e?e?? (hiereus), which can be literally translated into Latin as sacerdos. First century Christians [such as the inspired writers] felt that their special type of hiereus (sacerdos) was so removed from the original that they gave it a new name, presbuteros (presbyter). Unfortunately, sacerdos didn't evolve into an English word, but the word priest [from old English "preost"] took on its definition." (http://grigaitis.net/weekly/2007/2007-04-27.html) And instead of dispensing bread as part of their ordained function, which NT pastors are never described as doing in the life of the church, and instead the primary work of NT pastors is that of prayer and preaching. (Act 6:3,4) "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." (2 Timothy 4:2) And which is what is said to "nourish" the souls of believers, and believing it is how the lost obtain life in themselves. (1 Timothy 4:6; Psalms 19:7;Acts 15:7-9) Thus distinctively identifying Christian clergy with the same distinctive title used for the Jewish sacerdotal clergy (priests) rather than the term the Holy Spirit calls these pastors (presbyters/elders) is unscriptural and functionally unwarranted. But with some RCs it does not matter how many times a specious Catholic argument is refuted.
I joined in order to have polite discussions about mine and others' ideas as well as their faith journeys.
Someone who is searching for God could read some of these posts thinking that followers of Jesus can be very unkind to one another. We all must be an example of Christian charity, even when we disagree.
As for the rest, good for you! It is possible to proclaim your faith without deriding that of another. In our world, with all its problems, people need to know that belief and what it brings, can be a source of good.
Thank you for your answer!
We are admonished in scripture to correct errors when we see them. Doing so is not lack of charity. Allowing those errors to go unchallenged would also be a disobedience to the word of God in scripture. I doubt very much of those who Jesus called vipers considered it charity.
there is a major difference...you cannot buy a blessed item lest you be charged for the blessing...you buy a regular item, for whatever the price is and then have it/don't have it blessed. The item is silver...you pay for the silver only. Having it blessed costs nothing.
God did not create purgatory.
The Catholic church did.
Men’s sins are paid in full. Giving an account for reward is not paying for them.
protestants have never been able to explain ANYTHING to Catholics....not even why they are/became protestants!!
Go ahead.
Mock God’s grace.
It won’t end well with you then.
Instead of just making the accusation, why don't you provide examples of said *confusing doctrines*?
Can you say *Inquisition*?
Are the humans who populate the Catholic Church sinless? HAH! Hardly! There are at least as many liars, adulterers, hypocrites, etc as any other Christian denomination. However, the fullness of God’s truth continues to be preached and lived, despite the imperfection of its adherents.
The fullness of God's truth is found in Scripture and if those in the church are leading such sinful lives, they are not living that fullness.
And we're not talking mere *imperfection*. The sins manifest in Catholicism amongst it's hierarchy are abominable, NOT *imperfection*.
only while He was a child and in her custody......what a silly accusation to make!!
unless you don't think that he fully accepted the trials and tribulations of being a human..yes, I believe that His Father protected Him from bowing to temptation...He was tempted you know.
I'm still perplexed by this.
Catholicism's own apologists admit no scriptural support for this nor any support from the ECFs. These can be verified on the catholicencyclopediaonline.
It sounds like the catholic is working on a lot of "ifing" and "couldas". Something like this...."if Christ was sinless, couldn't God....".
To be honest God is capable of doing what He wills. However, He doesn't contradict Himself or His Word.
The evidence we do have in the Word completely goes against the immaculate conception.
So again I ask....what is the catholic appealing to?
Teaching learned in childhood?
They've always done it this way and it's hard to break the "habit"? (no pun there)
I have no idea which of my posts gave you the false impression that I can see deception posed by the Catholic Church. I do, however, see Catholics who have fallen into the abyss of the protestant revolution. It is very sad to see people wasting their lives clinging to made up fantasies presented to them by those who weren't able to follow the absolute truths in Catholic theology.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.