Posted on 02/15/2010 9:07:17 AM PST by GonzoII
The Scenario:
Ever have one of those days when you’re feeling full of energy and vigor? I mean, you’re feeling just obnoxiously happy? Well, this is one of those days.
Driving home from work, you switch on the radio to see what’s happening, and you tune in to a local Protestant radio station just in time to hear a preacher speaking against various Catholic doctrines concerning Mary. The show is called Pastor Bob’s Bible Hour. Pastor Bob proclaims: “Jesus knew Catholics would come along and begin to worship His mother and call her perpetual virgin and absurd things like that. But the Bible says: ‘Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brethren James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all of His sisters with us?’ (Matt. 13:55-56a). And isn’t it sad, my brothers and sisters?”
Pastor Bob goes on to say: “Jesus dealt with these Mary worshippers in His day. In Luke 11:27-28, the Bible says, ‘A woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts that You sucked!” But He said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”’”
On a normal day you would probably just listen, take a few mental notes and drive on. But not this time. You’re feeling a little bit too saucy. You take the first exit you see and head for a phone. This is just one more reason why you need to buy that cell phone you’ve been talking about getting.
Step One:
(Excerpt) Read more at envoymagazine.com ...
There’s not a shred of Biblical evidence for either fantasy.
It’s quite out of character with Christ’s characterization of His relationship with His mother AND HIS BLOOD BROTHERS AND SISTERS post the beginning of His ministry.
Twisting, distorting, mangling, stretching, adding to Scripture doesn’t change the facts from God’s perspective.
And it doesn’t convince most folks not brain-washed at a early age.
There are some, and I’ve read them. How seriously should we take them? I think we can take or leave them. I think they’re available on the internet, if you’re curious, but what I read came from an old, published book that is no longer avialable.
NGR
. . . context . . . Scripture . . . history . . . logic . . . accuracy . . . truth . . .
Sharp Grandfather with some keen discernment.
Congratulations. What a heritage.
Yeah. A lot of the posts from the other side . . . are super embarrassing.
Sometimes one has the feeling to move backwards covering them with a blanket.
It was certainly staggering, stunned me, actually.
More than a phrase....
Sometimes, it seems like some of the Marian hogwash, blasphemy, idolatry stuff is not at all well thought out.
It’s kind of like this slobbery 2 year old muddy little boy rushing up to his mummy all gah-gah in love and adoration to give her his treasured new find . . . a garter snake . . . not realizing that garter snakes are not remotely favored creatures by mummy.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
Not at all.
Just logical conclusions from reading uncensored, uncontrolled, accurate historical records.
What I find interesting is that while I was suspended twice for posting to a thread I started, a Romanist who was asked to leave the very same thread still continues to post with immunity.
Why is that?
What did it entail?
Ahhhhh . . . so, in your
extremely paragon surperior pontifical wisdom and knowledge . . .
you have decreed that those terms mean
absolutely nothing.
Sooooooooooooooooooo impressive.
Incredibly impressive.
Obviously that’s why Richard Cardinal Cushing bothered to affix his Imprimatur—because it would mean nothing whatsoever.
About as logical as the dogma of the Vatican affiliated groups and organizations . . . i.e. not much at all.
INDEED.
GREAT ONE.
LUB
PRAYERS DEAR HEART.
CHRIST SAID THAT
JOHN THE BAPTIST WAS BETTER THAN BOTH OF THEM.
I guess Roman Catholics et al/Vatican associated blokes feel quite comfortable making Christ out to be a liar.
The poster instructed to leave was Dr. Eckleburg. She is not Romanist.
What did what entail?
Yeah.
It was designed so that the willfully blind would find no meat in it whatsoever.
I wasn’t speaking of Dr E. I carefully constructed my sentence so that it was clear I was not speaking of this thread.
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.