Posted on 12/17/2010 7:31:07 AM PST by marshmallow
>>You do believe in the Trinity, don’t you?<<
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Nor do I. Neither do I have a problem believing that Mary was forgiven in advance of her Original Sin. I am quite confident God could accomplish that if He so desired.
God Bless
Thank you. May God bless you and yours as well.
With all due respect, BenKenobi, if I were to say, "Here comes BenKenobi, with his mother, and his brothers Jim, Bob, and Ed," would you assume I meant anything other than your mom and those children to whom she also gave birth?
I understand that Jesus' brothers *could* have been Joseph's kids from a previous marriage, or *could* have been adopted. However, there's no evidence to support that. It seems that just common sense would indicate that the word 'brother' means just that - brother.
Now, I'll admit my near complete ignorance of Aramaic. It's possible that the word 'brother' could have a far broader cultural meaning in that language than it does in English, more like it does in Arabic. In that language, people will refer to each other as "my Muslim brother," "my Arab brother," etc, but there's always the modifier there to indicate that they do not mean a blood relation. When there's no modifier, and the context is that of family, brother means brother, not some more distant relation.
True.
>>As for the Atonement, recall the “Passover Lamb without blemish”? Christ bore our sins because he was perfect, because he was sinless<<
He was sinless but was susceptible to sin because of His human side. He did not sin. Satan would not have tried to tempt Him if he didn’t think Jesus was at least capable. That interaction would not have meant anything if He wasn’t. Ya, Ya, I know. I don’t fully understand either but God’s ways are not our ways and God’s thoughts are not our thoughts.
Thanks!
I always think of it this way. In the Greek.
Philo - love
Adelphoi - brothers (which is the word used in that passage).
What do you get when you put them together? Philadelphia.
Your turn to answer...I answered yours.
Why is Rome so intent on creating a man-centered cult of Mary worship? What exactly is the frenetic interest in lifting up an ordinary young woman any more than say, John the Baptist (who after all baptized the Creator of the Universe) or Jacob (who after all wrestled with an angel) or Jonah (who spoke with God directly)? And, look at all of the Catholics around here, they all speak prayers to Mary in their taglines and when they comment on something related. The believers pray to God...the Catholics to Mary. Hmmm.
They weren't "perfect" (God) they were only "innocent" -- like animals are innocent. But since they weren't animals they were capable of disobedience. Animals don't have the free will to disobey, they are confinded to operate only on instinct.
Well, Satan would have done it anyways, because everything he does is doomed to failure. He’s lost, the game is over, but he’s desperately trying to catch up.
The point behind it is to show people what Satan is like, and how he tempts people. Always the lesser over the greater good. Always the good for today over the good for tomorrow.
All I know is that scripture says he was fully man, more than we ourselves are men, as Adam was before the fall. He still could have chosen to sin, as Adam did, but chose not to sin despite the severe suffering to which he was subjected. Intellectual temptation, but not temptation of the sort we suffer in our desires and needs.
And the Roman cult would pour cold water on Augustine now if he were standing rebutting the Pelagian (or Semi-Pelagian) heresy it peddles now. What about Augustine? Would you like to embrace his remarks? You mentioned the so-called Fathers, so let’s talk the Pelagian controversy.
That's a lie. If you're going to insist on attacking Catholics, at least don't exaggerate to make your claim bigger than it is.
We want to tell you everything, but you don’t know the secret handshake. Sorry. See if you can purchase a decoder at the local religious bookstore.
I guess you've never seen a black lab looking guilty after getting in the trash....
Man, I’m missing out, I’d better get a quote about Mary in too!
Since you quote Irenaeus, you must agree with this:
“”The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus” (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]).”
“3.1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times;...For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity.
3.2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say, ] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.”
http://earlychurchtexts.com/public/irenaeus_on_tradition.htm
The greek word used here is Adelphoi, which is the same as in the last half of Philadelphia.
The Greek doesn’t limit it to brothers. There are four things it could mean.
1, it could mean half-brothers, sons of Mary
2, it could mean half-brothers by marriage, sons of Joseph.
3, it could mean kinsmen (male relatives of the same household).
4, it could mean brothers as in ‘Christian brethren’.
You are right that the context seems to refer to a familiar relation, which is why I believe the better word would be kinsmen.
Father eternal, son eternal, holy spirit eternal?
Begotton not made, one in being with the father?
ohoh.. Is there a Marion feast on November 5, (your tagline) or is that the day we all get together and eat saltcod?
I’m confused...
The problem is that the disunity is visible, and I don’t believe this is how it was ought to be in the beginning, that this is a tribute to our brokenness. I think we are all supposed to be in God’s house together.
For me personally it was this realization that brought me over. I eventually came to the conclusion that while there were things to which I disagreed, that Christ himself wanted us to be together, and it was up to me to figure this out. The conversion had to be me going to the Catholic church.
I didn’t leave because I was unhappy with the Mennonites or that they were poorly informed, it really had absolutely not a blessed thing to do with them.
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.