| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/13/2013 9:10:43 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poster’s request |
Posted on 10/11/2013 9:11:50 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Vatican City, Oct 11, 2013 / 07:25 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Anticipating Pope Francis' entrustment of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on Oct. 13, a specialist in Marian apparitions reflected on how the Blessed Mother serves to bring people to Jesus.
“It is necessary to have recourse to the Virgin because she can only bring you to God. That's her whole mission. She has nothing of self in it at all. She lives only for God and to bring you to God,” said Marian expert Tim Tindal-Robertson during an Oct. 10 interview with CNA.
Tindal-Robertson is currently the national president in England of the World Apostolate of Fatima, an international association of the faithful which was erected by the Pontifical Council for the Laity in 2010.
Speaking of the significance of Pope Francis’ decision to entrust the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Tindal-Robertson said that “the Pope has judged that in the year of faith this is a very appropriate moment” to focus on Mary’s presence in the Church.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
While I reject the Catholic worldview every bit as much as the Protestant, Catholic authors and bloggers far outstrip their Protestant rivals in the quality of their writing and discourse. Only a couple of Protestants I am aware of can truly pass muster.
It was pointed out to you by me on that other thread that the 3rd heaven is straight up from the North Star...Well beyond the reach of the Hubble telescope...
I have tried several times to engage them in discussions about, the nature of the incarnation, the Trinity, infinity and eternity in relation to the Godhead, among others. The only response I get (paraphrased) "It ain't in the Bible
Col_2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
And every time you try to engage someone with your fables, you are shut down by the words of God...
But again, we see what God has to say about your human intellect...
So, because one reads and believes fables, that makes one an intellect??? Even your insults aren't very intellectual...
I have pinged you to the other thread. Thank you for admitting that. It seems that another persona has trouble recalling her part in it.
Reiterating what Jesus said incompletely is what you were doing. Jesus didn’t finish that conversation until He had explained to them that He was not speaking about the real physical flesh but was speaking spiritually. That’s what we have been trying to get you to see. Catholics stop the conversation and don’t listen to what Jesus explanation was.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
It wasn’t the physical flesh He was talking about, it was the spiritual. He also knew that there would be some who wouldn’t believe that it’s spiritual but would keep thinking He meant real physical flesh.
John 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not.
Jesus also mentioned once before what became of what went into the stomach.
Matthew 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
But keep thinking it’s flesh if you want.
Romans 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
"The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Cor 2:14
Quoting experts like Thayer, Strong, NASEC and others like them are “people with no formal training and no understanding of the Greek”? Wow! Who knew?
Your agreeing with him comes as no surprise nor does his comment about not being able to have “intellectual” conversation. Those who follow Christ don’t discuss spiritual maters with “intellect” nor should they. It’s spiritual issues that are important and the carnal “intellect” does not understand them in the least. They can’t get beyond the carnal intellect as evidenced by your comments.
Only those incapable of making an intellectual argument would ever think such a thing.
This is pure simplistic nonsense.
“Jesus’ body was wearing” Where on Heaven and Earth did you pick up such nonsense? Go ask Thomas! His body was not found in the tomb. Period.
Mary was the tabernacle of the Christ. The Mother of God. The God who raised Lazarus, was not going to have his own Mother’s body corrupted by the elements of the earth. She is the Queen of the Angels, visited by the angel Gabriel and told that God had found her blessed among all his creation: Heaven and Earth.
Only low information fools depend on their faith on Scripture alone. A Scripture- Bible formally put together by the authority of the early CHURCH fathers. The curse of the Reformation has spawned 35,000 faiths and produce an illiterate Christianity who cannot delve into the oral tradition that was handed down for the first 100 years after the death of the Christ, and how the words of the Bible (yes, Scripture) was understood and interpreted by Peter, his disciples and followers.
The curse of the Reformation is nowhere more evident than in the U.S, where the Joel Osteens, Bishop TD Jakes, Benny Hinns, Billy Grahams, Schullers, Jimmy Swaggarts amassed personal family fortunes by each preaching their “own” brand of EZ-Christianity from the text. Christianity reduced to a happy-clappy foot stomping charade.
For them the profound work of the great theologians like Aquinas, Augustine, and Benedict XVI were too much to intellectually absorb and comprehend.
Besides, accepting the Catholic truth iwould undercut their profitable family run operations. So too to for the low-information neighborhood corner street Foursquare Church pastors and their Mormon-like congregants. Understanding the Holy Eucharist, the Mass, the Assumption, etc is too much for these folks AND is a risk to the livelihood and personal lifestyles.
So the tens of thousand of converts to Catholicism, including atheists, appears to matter like to this “Bible” only crowd.
Thus when the great American Lutheran theological scholar -Richard John Neuhaus converted to Catholicism it was seismic shock and a massive embarrassment to the Lutherans, not unlike when Cardinal John Henry Newman left the Anglican Church and converted to Catholicism and then wrote his profound book giving his reasons. Go read Newman’s “The Catholic Church.”
Non-Catholics need to stop being lazy. The great English essayist, Hillaire Belloc, in his book “Heresies” tells us why Protestantism is a heretical brand of Christianity.
These low-information Protestants need to go read up more before continuing to spout utter nonsense.
All of the above are indeed derived from the Scriptures both old and new testaments. When we look at the various councils and debates, they point to the Bible.
That Holy Scriptures are God's revelation to mankind. It is not God's complete revelation as to His complete Nature. God may never reveal His True Nature to us even in the Kingdom. But He has revealed what He deems as important for us to know.
Francis Schaeffer once said to a group of atheists and agnostics reference to the Bible as God's revelation to mankind. He said "you may not think it is complete to answer all your questions, you may even think it is not the best answer; however it is the ONLY answer."
Now there are many, many RC beliefs and traditions that firmly point to the Bible. Some are the sanctity of life (life begins at conception because the OT tells us life begins with a father 'begetting' a child=conception); be fruitful and muliply (in the Bible clearly); the Trinity (all evidence is in the Bible both OT and NT--"let Us make man..."); marriage for life, no divorce (the CLEAR words of Jesus Christ in the gospels); the list goes on. I know because I was raised, educated and was a practicing RC.
The RCC even gets obedience correct in my opinion. Both the NT and OT "formula" for Salvation was and will always be Trust AND Obey. Where I think the RCC veers off course is the nature of this saving faith. The NT epistles are clear salvation is "by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast."
Where I depart company with some evangelicals is the NT is also VERY clear that saving faith PRODUCES works. Where I depart from Roman Catholics is these works do not save us, justify us. The fruits of our saving faith produces good works: "having been filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God."(Philippians 1:11). And the key here of "filled with the fruit of righteousness" is that it "comes through Jesus Christ..." for God's praise and glory. I see more evidence in Scriptures (OT and NT) for Jesus' imputed righteousness than I do for the "infused" righteousness. In my opinion (and not poking anyone in the eye) I believe this is where the Roman Catholic church theology is incorrect.
Based on the above, I say in laymen's terms. Our works do not save us, but our saving faith produces works---This is faith in action. And if we claim saving faith and do not produce fruit, we are told to examine our lives. As Jesus Christ said "You will recognize them by their fruits."
Another point I would like to address is that the Scriptures are also clear that God is Sovereign in the Justification, Sanctification and Glorification processes. God does the calling, the convicting of the heart of the sinner leading to repentance, the justifying, the sanctification as conforming us to the Son's image and one day He will glorify our bodies in resurrection finally ridding us of the corruptable for incorruptable.
Thank you for the dialogue. I hope we can continue to converse on what I think has been a polite and informative discussion.
Grace and Peace!
Reiterating what Jesus said incompletely is what you were doing.
I don't understand where "Queen of Angels" came about. I have to say that is the first time I have heard that. I have heard "Queen of Heaven" before but the other title escapes me. I even think most Roman Catholics shy away from the Queen of Heaven title because it has implications of Mary being the 'wife' of The Father. Which we all know is a big "no no." The "found her blessed among all creation" may be Catholic tradition but not evidenced in Luke chapter 1.
This evangelical does not deny the importance of Mary mother of Jesus Christ (Truly God, Truly Man). I mean we have her most important account recorded in Luke chapter 1:
Jesus’ Birth Foretold 26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And coming in, he said to her, “Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you.”
29 But she was very perplexed at this statement, and kept pondering what kind of salutation this was. 30 The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; 33 and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.”
34 Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.
36 And behold, even your relative Elizabeth has also conceived a son in her old age; and she who was called barren is now in her sixth month. 37 For nothing will be impossible with God.” 38 And Mary said, “Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.
Mary Visits Elizabeth 39 Now at this time Mary arose and went in a hurry to the hill country, to a city of Judah, 40 and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! 43 And how has it happened to me, that the mother of my Lord would come to me? 44 For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy. 45 And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what had been spoken to her by the Lord.”
The Magnificat 46 And Mary said:
“My soul exalts the Lord, 47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. 48 “For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. 49 “For the Mighty One has done great things for me; And holy is His name. 50 “And His mercy is upon generation after generation Toward those who fear Him. 51 “He has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart. 52 “He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. 53 “He has filled the hungry with good things; And sent away the rich empty-handed. 54 “He has given help to Israel His servant, In remembrance of His mercy, 55 As He spoke to our fathers, To Abraham and his descendants forever.”
56 And Mary stayed with her about three months, and then returned to her home.
I thank you for the compliment. I do so prefer to stay in the Spirit.
The rest of that RCC dribble I'm just going to ignore. I wouldn't have any idea when you are changing the subject.
Wow, the above is a mouthful of anger:) If I am low information for pointing to the Scriptures for matters of salvation and righteousness, then I am in good company with Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude. They all used the OT extensively in their epistles and the recorded Words of the Master Jesus Christ. So I accept their "low information" company gladly.
Now let us shift to your comments about the canon. Were the Scriptures in the canon authoritative because the Church fathers put them there; or did they put them in the canon BECAUSE the Scriptures were authoritative. Kind of the tail wagging the dog scenario.
I am sure you are familiar on how the Jewish scribes preserved all scriptures containing the Name of God and portions that stated "thus saith The Lord." We know they got it right by inspiration given Jesus Christ spoke those words of Scripture in the Gospels and Revelation.
The apostles do the same thoughout their epistles and in Acts. The apostles also make known what they are saying is inspired by God. They said "Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God...", and "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ..." The ECFs knew this method of identifying authoritative inspirational works. That is why they made the canon. Not because of their authority, but of the authority of the works themselves.
If I might ask: Why do you view our righteousness as imputed rather than infused?
Revelation 21:27 and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.
Clearly we must be perfected to enter into heaven. An imputed righteousness is what Jesus was referring to in Matthew 23:27 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness.
The obvious "elephant in the room" with regards to our John 6 discussion is the context of the full passage. I am seeing a lot of quoting of the "eating" portions of the chapter. In the beginning of John 6 Jesus fed the multitudes. They followed Him and he rebuked them for only following Him to keep their stomach's full. Then we get to a very interesting point of John chapter 6:
26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”
But the above "that you believe in Him whom He has sent" was not enough for these hungry freeloaders. They wanted a sign and claimed they had Moses. Then Jesus taking "that you believe in Him whom He has sent" enters into using depiction, types/examples.
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
Then the Jews grumbled because of what Jesus told them above. Then Jesus tells them:
43 Jesus answered and said to them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
So even before we get to the contentious flesh and blood verses Jesus points out that those the Father gives Him and believes in Him will have eternal life. It was after they all grumbled denying Him that Jesus' types/examples became more difficult for them to understand. It today's "lingo" that would be "hey I told you Who I Am and what you must do. You did not believe Me when I said it and you told me you have Moses and manna. So then I told you I AM the Bread of Life and those that ate manna died, but you won't die believing in My Work. Then when you did not believe that, I told you to eat My Flesh and Blood because My flesh and blood will deliver you from your sins. And then when most of you said 'eww eating flesh and blood' I told you I am speaking of spiritual matters and not fleshly matters."
IMO, that about covers John 6. A Masterful display of clear logic from The Master. He started out explaining in terms of spiritual but they were not listening, they were awed they could get a free meal from Him. Then it was the unbelieving Jews in the audience that started to bring up concrete things like manna and Moses (Hebrew is a VERY concrete language) so Jesus explained His message in the concrete things they knew. And when they went "eww flesh and blood we must eat", Jesus clearly states He is speaking of spiritual matters, which is where He started earlier in the chapter. I think that is an approach within context and expository.
Let me explain once an for all why the above comment is a bunch of hooey.
When you love someone, I mean really truly LOVE someone you want to know them as deeply and richly as possible. You want to know everything about them. Where they came from, who there parents are, do they have brothers and/or sisters. In short you want to know everything there is to know about them. Otherwise you will be like the wheat in Luke 8:6 Some seed fell on rocky ground, and when it grew, it withered for lack of moisture. and explained in Luke 8:13 Those on rocky ground are the ones who, when they hear, receive the word with joy, but they have no root; they believe only for a time and fall away in time of trial.
Doesn't it make more sense to be the wheat in Luke 8:8 And some seed fell on good soil, and when it grew, it produced fruit a hundredfold.” After saying this, he called out, “Whoever has ears to hear ought to hear.” and explained in L:uke 8:15 But as for the seed that fell on rich soil, they are the ones who, when they have heard the word, embrace it with a generous and good heart, and bear fruit through perseverance.
Each of you has a spouse of significant other that you love. When you met them didn't you want to know everything there was to know about them. Don't you think that as Christians we should do the same with Jesus?
I will not be responding to any snarky posts.
Great points! Understanding spiritual things is off limits to some and we have been told that. Those who God is calling do get it however and it’s they we keep the word of God front and center for.
It’s rather simple really. There is head knowledge and there is Spiritual knowledge. Satan has head knowledge and knows scripture inside and out. We are called to Spiritual knowledge. There are also married people who know absolutely everything there is to know about their mate and then there are soul mates. Soul mates is way better and so is Spiritual knowledge.
“When you love someone, I mean really truly LOVE someone you want to know them as deeply and richly as possible. You want to know everything about them. Where they came from, who there parents are, do they have brothers and/or sisters. In short you want to know everything there is to know about them. Otherwise you will be like the wheat in Luke 8:6”
You must get really frustrated then, since the scripture has precious little supporting your worship of Mary.
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.