Posted on 01/09/2012 10:38:02 PM PST by rzman21
Did the apostles demand that Mary be venerated? If so why didn’t they write about it. Did Paul tell the jailor that there was an entire book of rules and creeds to recite when the jailor asked him “what must I do to be saved”? What about the thousands who scripture tells us “were added”? Did they forget to write about the extensive length of time needed to study the “catechism” and the many other requirements added since the apostles passed from this life?
Scripture contains very little of the “required” nonsense taught in most churches today. Christ said "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life”. Paul, when asked by the jailor said “believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved-and your house”. We read that those who “believed” received the Holy Spirit and not one of them recited the Nicene Creed or spent months or even years studying some “catechism” before they were even allowed “membership” in some earthly organization.
Most of the doctrines taught and required by so called “churches” today are nothing more than “doctrines of men”. For those who truly desire the promises of Christ for eternal life with Him the simple gospel is “believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved”.
Getting lost in the weeds of “doctrines of men” is not what either Jesus or the apostles taught. Follow Christ alone or man. You cannot serve both Christ and man.
The explaining of which is above any man's pay grade, no matter how brilliant. No mortal human who sees through a glass darkly can begin to understand it no matter what they claim.
I don't think it's that...It's the scriptures...The authority of the scriptures...
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
How can someone read and BELIEVE that verse and not know that Jesus was born, the Son of God and not created...They've perverted the scriptures...
How about your Catholic NAB??? Does that one tell you that Jesus was 'begotton' of God???
That is what I get that Nestorius is saying...
But, to continue with the analogy, I did not precede my mother. While the three facets of the Trinty are three attributes of the same triune being, the attributes must differ at least somewhat in order to even make them describable. When pressed to define terms, no one of any orthodoxy will repeat the same description for Father, Son, and Holy Ghost and any justification for each naming will necessarily differentiate itself from the others. I mean, if a novice asks an initiate 'why "The Father"?' and the follows in asking 'why "The Son"?', the answer he will receive for the first question must contain some language which differs from the second. The three aspects must have discrete qualities for them to even become objects of language. Anything which differentiates "Son" from "Father" and "Holy Ghost" issues from Mary. There are properties of the other two aspects which do not issue from Mary.
There is no miracle which does not contain paradox or apparent illogic, and would otherwise be no miracle at all. I believe that the birth of Christ was miraculous, and I am quite comfortable with the idea that the Son is somehow also the Creator of his mother without it becoming necessary for Mary to be reformed into some Demi-Urge in order to preserve a conclusion to a human logic puzzle which lacks sufficient nuance to even treat "Father" and "Son" as different qualities.
To the moderator reading the thread or handling the complaint. And post 42 was not yours.
You can't just say 'it's so' because someone claimed at some time to have seen an Apostle...Or even if the person made the claim that they were taught by an Apostle...The Apostles taught a lot of folks who twisted what was said, or taught other gospels...
The only actual record we have is the God breathed, preserved scriptures...
Which certainly bears repeating again and again.
Thanks.
Correct, in the human terms. We don't know when God creates souls, if that has any relevance in periods of time. However, God pre-dates all if we put it in this time-space perspective
The Son is God incarnate born of the virgin Mary. She of course is no Demi-urge, she the created being who bore Him.
More critically, she bore Him, not a part of Jesus Christ , but the Word. To separate out the natures is to follow down the path of trying to separate out the human and divine natures and leads to conclusions like a man who became God or a man "possessed" by the spirit of God.
I said
An individual will use their own reading/interpretation of the scriipture -- Scripture is detailed and has many nitty-gritties that one can get lost in -- what happens if they take Psalm 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. and john 10:34 34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? to argue the first point.The Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons too say "It's the scriptures...The authority of the scriptures"For the second about them being brothers, if we take the various philosophies being developed in the 1800s -- you have Jehovah's Witnesses who argue that Jesus was created, and was Archangel Michael. The Adventist belief under Ellen G white expressed the same. If you take that He was just an angel, then Lucifer was/is just an angel too -- one little step away from orthodoxy leads to a chasmic fall
it does seem to me that if one throws out the community of believers and praying, reading, learning, worshipping as a community, individuals can make such conclusions as in the Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesse, Mormon, even Messianic Jewish belief (the latter currently puzzles me as Jewish folks shake their heads at these guys beliefs and to me it looks like they are trying to merge mercury and water
i am not going to argue the point of an Adventist or a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon's own philosophy, yet a Mormon would say that Jesus was the Son of God but a created being and a Jehovah's Witness would give detailed arguments that Jesus was the angelic being seen by Moses and hence a created being.
Well, the theology of Nestorianism can be separated from what Nestorius actually taught.
Nestorius rejected those who said "God is an eternal being and cannot have been born"
Nestorianism says that Christ divinity and humanity are two separate persons existing in one body.
Now whether Nestorius himself said that is debatable. Nestorius emphatically declared that there is one Christ and one Son, and St. Cyril himself has preserved for us some passages from his sermons which the saint admits to be perfectly orthodox, and therefore wholly inconsistent with the rest.For example: "Great is the mystery of the gifts! For this visible infant, who seems so young, who needs swaddling clothes for His body, who in the substance which we see is newly born, is the Eternal Son, as it is written, the Son who is the Maker of all, the Son who binds together in the swathing-bands of His assisting power the whole creation which would otherwise be dissolved." And again: "Even the infant is the all-powerful God, so far, O Arius, is God the Word from being subject to God."
The problem is that Nestorianism moved towards the idea that Christ was a man who was adopted as God's son.
By that extension, CB, Mormons and Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses do the same: “believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved”..
Even some Hindus who add Christ to their pantheon say they believe in Lord Jesus. In your opinion is this relevant to salvation or not?
you are correct -- the guidance is by the Holy Spirit
Jesus was both God and man
Jesus, God pre-existed all
Jesus God created all including His mother, Mary
Mary was His mother, not His creator, just as your mother or my mother is not our creator.
yet, Mr. Rogers, it is also possible for those to read this and say that the concept of the Trinity is wrong. Iscool and I have sparred over that for some time and both can quote scripture to prove their points.
Even Dave who quoted from Swedenborgian and shared his faith as Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the ONE God and is Father, Son and Holy Spirit points out scripture for this.
As individuals, individual ideas of what scripture means abounds
to your point, that IS relevant to Salvation. don't you agree?
If a person says that Christ was a man, "adopted" as God's son, do you believe that has no effect on their salvation?
In before the post disappears.
yes, that is orthodoxy’s approach.
Sources? Can you cite that?
Anyone who claims to understand the true nature of Christ is kidding themselves and any attempt to tie salvation to that understanding is proclaiming the “doctrines of man”.
Not any more than Catholics are by adding all the peripheral requirements for salvation.
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.