Posted on 12/17/2010 7:31:07 AM PST by marshmallow
“We don’t tell Roman Catholics what they believe.”
Snort. Laugh. Even you cannot believe THAT canard “Doctor”.
No reformed Christian believes Christ is “two separate persons in one body,” per the definition you provided.
Neither does any Reformed Christian believe Mary was sinless, the “Queen of the Universe,” the “Dispensatrix of all Grace,” nor the “Mother of all mankind.”
You lose.
I told you what I believe. Just as Roman Catholics tell us what they believe every day on this forum. And much of what they tell us is anti-Scriptural lies, i.e. “Mary was sinless.”
As far as I can tell it is only a few wretched Calvinists who believe in "another Christ" and a "Co-redemptrix", not as actual entities, but as fallacious deceptions created by them to abuse the devout. As for works-based salvation you have to take that argument up with God:
James 2:14-26
Faith and Works
14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,
16 and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?
17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.
18 But someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works."
19 You believe that God is one You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.
20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;
23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS," and he was called the friend of God.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
ROTFLMAO!
No, the Roman Catholic catechism, Roman Catholic popes and various Roman Catholics apologetics teach that the RC priestcraft is “another Christ” and that Mary is a “co-Redeemer.”
And it’s good to see you posting Scripture, but now your job is to understand Scripture, because the verses from James you posted do not support a works-based salvation. James is saying that true faith will always produce good fruit by the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Keep reading the Bible and praying for the Holy Spirit to open your eyes and ears to the truth of CHRIST ALONE.
My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum,
et exsultávit spíritus meus
in Deo salvatóre meo,
quia respéxit humilitátem
ancíllæ suæ.
Ecce enim ex hoc beátam
me dicent omnes generatiónes,
quia fecit mihi magna,
qui potens est,
et sanctum nomen eius,
et misericórdia eius in progénies
et progénies timéntibus eum.
Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo,
dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui;
depósuit poténtes de sede
et exaltávit húmiles.
Esuriéntes implévit bonis
et dívites dimísit inánes.
Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum,
recordátus misericórdiæ,
sicut locútus est ad patres nostros,
Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.
Glória Patri et Fílio
et Spirítui Sancto.
Sicut erat in princípio,
et nunc et semper,
et in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man’s understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; in Luther’s Works, Pelikan et al, vol. 21, 326)
Yeah, the idea that “Mary is sinless” is pretty hilarious.
Dangerous, too.
“then you fall apart”.
Rich.
Merry Christmas
Hoss
Thus the Virgin Mary remains in the middle between Christ and humankind. For in the very moment he was conceived and lived, he was full of grace. All other human beings are without grace, both in the first and second conception. But the Virgin Mary, though without grace in the first conception, was full of grace in the second . . . . whereas other human beings are conceived in sin, in soul as well as in body, and Christ was conceived without sin in soul as well as in body, the Virgin Mary was conceived in body without grace but in soul full of grace.
(in The One Mediator, the Saints, and Mary, Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue VIII, edited by H. George Anderson, J. Francis Stafford, Joseph A. Burgess, Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1992, p. 238. He gives further references in his footnote 22 on page 381: “Sermon on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception (December 8?) 1527. Festival Postil (Festpostille). WA 17/2:288.17-34.”)
In the 13 years, I encountered a few of the crazies but they were in the minority. I can’t say I regret going to catholic school but, also, there wasn’t an option B. All my siblings and cousins went to catholic school. It was just the way it was. I never questioned it because it never bothered me - I was fine there.
My HS was a college prep school and because of the distance from our home, I asked if I could go to the closer HS that my sister and brother (twins) went to. My parents believed I was in the right school. That was that.
Was it strict on the ridiculous side, (not studies but dumb rules that had no redeeming value) yeah, but I think it prepared for the liberals of the world. ;) So, all in all, I have no regret going to catholic school and believe that I got an excellent education. You had something to compare it you and I didn’t. It’s all I knew. My children went to catholic school, also. ;)
Do you really believe that you can make this stuff up out of whole cloth? You cannot provide a single citation from the Catechism for either "another Christ" or a "co-redeemer" because they don't exist. Neither has any Pope ever declared Mary a co-redeemer in contradiction to the Catechism. And your fallacious repetition of the alter Chisti meaning the same as the direct translation is simply pathetic. Frankly, I thought the use of the term "Priestcraft" would have died with Alberto Rivera.
“Foul disease” shows both loathsome and disgusting and venereal disease. It is not in the same league as suggesting other Freepers need an exorcism.
I didn’t ask for the translation of that one. It falls under the commonly know phrases that are exempt as per the RM. If you look at the post number to which I was referring, you’ll see that clearly enough.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2644059/posts?page=746#746
RM: “Unless the word or phrase, sentence or paragraph - is very common (e.g. adios) then it must be translated on thread.”
I’m not asking because of any knowledge of Latin on my part, but because I see there a violation of the guidelines that RM has established. The RM has decreed that any foreign phrases that are not very common must be translated. The translations were not forthcoming.
Why are you guys not translating as instructed by the RM?
Do you hear what I hear . . . la la la
Vain repetitious prayers . . . la la la
Why?
You see the arrogant perverse haughty !!!!CONTROL!!!! phreaque stuff of at least the Rabid Clique RC’s hereon 24/7/365
and you wonder why?
Perhaps you’re tired.
LOL.
The term *Mother of God* is at the very least deceitful.
Mother of Jesus is accurate and correct and gives no false impressions about who she is and what her role in God’s plan of redemption is.
But that clearly is the problem. Catholics have, over the centuries, elevated her and given her characteristics and accolades that properly belong to only God Himself. It gives the clear impression that the whole end of this Mary stuff is to elevate her to godhood. What better way to do that than claim that she’s God’s mother.
That elevates Mary to God’s place and diminishes God to the role of a lesser being than Mary.
She gave birth to Jesus, the Second person of the Trinity.
Claiming she is the mother of God gives the false impression that His nature came from her. Jesus divine nature comes from the Father, not Mary.
The term *Mother of God* is at the very least deceitful.
Mother of Jesus is accurate and correct and gives no false impressions about who she is and what her role in God’s plan of redemption is.
But that clearly is the problem. Catholics have, over the centuries, elevated her and given her characteristics and accolades that properly belong to only God Himself. It gives the clear impression that the whole end of this Mary stuff is to elevate her to godhood. What better way to do that than claim that she’s God’s mother.
That elevates Mary to God’s place and diminishes God to the role of a lesser being than Mary.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
I'm not the one who failed to comply to the RM's instructions, thus I am not the one stirring up trouble.
It's irrelevant that *many* of you recognize the terms. That is not what was specified.
Since they are not of common usage, as in *adios* or Mea culpa* according the the RM's guidelines, they MUST be translated.
Considering it was your exorcism post that started it all, it's pretty ironic that you would accuse someone of trying to stir up trouble.
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.