Baptist Theologian Says Non-Catholic Believers Should Honor Mary

Agape Press ^ | December 24, 2003 | Jim Brown

[Tantumergo]

"Why would she have not said "for I know not man, nor will I ever know a man..."

That's the implication of the words otherwise she would have said:

"Oh really who's the father going to be?" or

"Oh really, Joseph's finally going to get me into the sack is he?"

"Was it common for temple handmaids too be engaged?"

Dunno - probably commoner than angels appearing to virgins and telling them that they are gonna sprog the Son of the Most High God!

[Tantumergo]

Deo gratias! ;)

[A.A. Cunningham]

More smorgasbord theology. You champion his nailing of the 95 Theses on the Cathedral door yet dismiss one of the few things he was correct about. How convenient.

[drstevej]

Actually, I disgree with most of the 95 theses too.

I do like number 86:

86 - Again: since the pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?

[A.A. Cunningham]

Actually, I disgree with most of the 95 theses too.

Yet you call yourself a Lutheran. Very disingenuous, to say the least.

[drstevej]

When have I ever called myself a Lutheran? I have been in non denominational churches for 30 years and have never been a Lutheran.

You must have me mixed up with someone else. Ya think?

[Tantumergo]

"Yet you call yourself a Lutheran. Very disingenuous, to say the least."

I have seen Steve call himself many things, and he has been called many things more - but never a Lutheran! ;)

[drstevej]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1048068/posts?page=7#7

A bit-o-biography for ya.

[drstevej]

***he has been called many things more ***

My very favorite is "drity old devil."

[Tantumergo]

S'funny, I think DIRTY old devil would be more appropriate!

;)

[jude24]

Dr, it isn't wise to reject the Teaching of the Catholic Church which Jesus established to Teach in His name. Using the Bible, show me where Jesus said the Church He established would teach error?

CG, how do we know that the earthly institution that is the Catholic church is The Church of the New Testament, to the exclusion of the Protestant and Orthodox branches?

[drstevej]

Maybe so, but drity old devil it was.

[Catholicguy]

The Church existed prior to the New Testament being written. The New Testament resulted from Catholic authors writng Catholic letters to Catholic Churches. Every single letter in every single word of every single sentence of every single paragraph of every single book in the N.T. was written by a Catholic and it was the Catholic Church which decided which books would be included in the New Testament and which books would not be included.

[drstevej]

Don't forget James, the first pope.

[DManA]

Why would she marry Joseph if she had no intention of ever consumating the marriage? How is that a marriage?

It was because she had no intention of ever being diddled!

[jude24]

Allow me, if I may.

Your argument would be like saying the Democrats are Constitutionalists. After all, the Constitution was written by those who would join the Democratic-Republican party. But to equate modern Democrats with the founders of the Constitution would be a mistake because it neglects two factors: firstly, that the Democratic-Republicans underwent a split in the 1850's to form the Democratic Party and the Republican party, and secondly, that the Democrats don't stand for the same things the Founders did (limited government, etc.)

Now, how do we know that that isn't the case with the Catholic church? That, over 2,000 years, their theology has evolved to get away from the apostolic teachings demonstrated in the New Testament, and that a closer representation of Christianity isn't found in the Orthodox or Reformed branches of Christianity?

(Incidentally, I'm trying to not bash... so please don't take offense in my comparing the Catholic church to the Democrats. I mean nothing by it other than an illustration.)

[jude24]

Steve, as best as I can tell, the phrase translated "full of grace" in Luke 1:28 by the Catholics is kecharitomene, a feminine perfect passive participle form of charitoo. The only other time in the New Testament charitoo is used is in Ephesians 1:6 as echaritosen in the third person aorist indicative -- referring to the Father ("to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.") On the other hand, your Acts reference uses a different word, pleres pisteos.

The fact that the same phrase used to describe Mary in Luke is used to describe all Christians in Eph. 1 is more interesting to me.

Tantumergo and CG, I'd like your inputs as well.

[Catholicguy]

Totally wrong. As can be proved from innumerable sources and official Documents of the Living Magisterium - Documents of Ecumenical councils and Papal Encyclicals and Holy Writ itself - the Catholic Church is the only church that has never changed Doctrine. Doctrine does develop in the sense that, guided by the indewelling of the Holy Spirt, Holy Mother Church, over time, understands with more depth and clarity the Original deposit of Faith, however, she at no time, unlike protestant confessions, develops Doctrine that oppose that which came before. From day one she has taught the Real Presence in the Eucharist which can be proved form innumerable texts - beginning with the sixth Chapter of John.

Your comparison twixt a Divine Institution (Jesus established the church - matt 16:18) and a man made political system reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what the truth is.

[Catholicguy]

heck, I thought you were one of the brighter Calvinists :)

Even Uniatarians( Rastafarians for that matter) know Peter was the first Pope

[drstevej]

Acts 6:8 Ste/fanoj de\ plhrhj xaritoj ...

The term in 6:7 is pisteos, but in verse 8 it is charis