church_me

Answering Protestants ^ | 7 March 2014 | Matthew Olson

[daniel1212]

You would rather have this drunk deciding what is divinely inspired?

Not again! Once again you avoid answering a simple but important question, this time by parroting out-of-context quotes , and as if Luther like a pope decided what books were in Scripture for us. Which simply reveals more ignorance on your part.

Either answer the question or give up your diversionary tactics!

[taxcontrol]

Rites and ceremonies are the traditions of man. They are created by man for either convenience (time and place), custom (dad always did it this way), or control.

For example. The Bible teaches to confess our sins one to another. It does not say go to confession (church, plus priest, plus rectory, etc).

[LurkingSince'98]

and what wahoo thinks that Jesus and God are not one and the same????

[daniel1212]

Not Mary of Rome - instead Blessed Mary - Mother of God:

I see you are new here, but yes, it is indeed the Mary of Rome , since Scripture no where states or teaches on the holy blessed Mary such things as her being an exception (which noted exceptions is the practice of the Holy Spirit for notable characters) from being a sinner, or for her being a perpetually sinless virgin and having a sexless marriage (contrary to its description: Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4,5), who is ascended to Heaven, and who is already crowned (which happens after the resurrection) and enthroned as Queen of Heaven with almost unlimited power, including having the ability to process virtually unlimited prayer requests, (the Holy Spirit provides zero examples of prayer to anyone in Heaven but the Lord , or in its instructions on who to pray to), and who is even set forth by some notable Catholics as a more immediate and superior recourse for help than Christ Himself.

References to the Virgin Mary as being blessed in found in the Holy Bible.

Thanks for those wonderful texts, but which are irrelevant to the issue, which is not that Mary is blessed, which is to be affirmed, but that she is uniquely blessed due to her supreme holiness, which is simply not what Scripture teaches.

Many souls are blessed in Scripture, including Jael, "Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent." (Judges 5:24) And as Mary was in being graced to be the vessel of the Incarnation of Christ, thru whom came the body God the Father, thru Christ, (Jn. 1:13) prepared. (Heb. 10:5)

And thus contrary to your statement, “ all generations shall call me BLESSED.” [Lk. 1:48] (all generations except for protestants), faithful Pros do call her blessed as Scripture states this (and read some classic evangelical commentaries such as Matthew Henry, etc.) , but to the egregious extremes Catholics indulge in, contrary to Scripture which warns against "thinking of men [or women] above that which is written." (1Cor. 4:6)

And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: BLESSED is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck.” [Lk. 11:27]

But contrary to RCs which would have the Lord drop everything to give heed to the mother He (as part of the Godhead) created as a holy vessel of the Lord, His response was,

"But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it." (Luke 11:28)

For consistent with this, "Hail, full of grace" (Lk. 1:28) charitoō ="graced," is the same as Eph. 1:6, which all believers are graced to be in the Beloved.

To Catholics she is Blessed Mary, Mother of God - I personally don’t give a rat’s butt what you think about her or our Church.

She is far more than that to RCs (and is not ontologically the MoG as theotokos, the God bearer), which is the issue, while your attitude and language speaks volumes, contrary to pious faithful Mary. And which is often why allegations are made that Prots do not honor Mary, as they honor the one of Scripture, not the demigodess of Rome.

as I said all generations will call Mary Blessed - but yours.

Good Scripture, but additions to it bring a curse. "A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish." (Proverbs 19:9) May God grant you mercy and repentance.

Luke 1:38 [Behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it done to me according to thy word], Marvelous faith in such circumstances! - Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown

Luke 1:46-55 A magnificent canticle, in which the strain of Hannah’s ancient song, in like circumstances, is caught up, and just slightly modified and sublimed. Is it unnatural to suppose that the spirit of the blessed Virgin had been drawn beforehand into mysterious sympathy with the ideas and the tone of this hymn, so that when the life and fire of inspiration penetrated her whole soul it spontaneously swept the chorus of this song, enriching the Hymnal of the Church with that spirit-stirring canticle which has resounded ever since from its temple walls? In both songs, those holy women, filled with wonder to behold “the proud, the mighty, the rich,” passed by, and, in their persons the lowliest chosen to usher in the greatest events, sing of this as no capricious movement, but a great law of the kingdom of God, by which He delights to “put down the mighty from their seats and exalt them of low degree.” - Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown

Luke 1:47 My spirit hath rejoiced - Exulted. These words are uncommonly emphatical - they show that Mary’s whole soul was filled with the Divine influence, and wrapped up in God. - Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

She was a virgin, a pure unspotted one ... She is dignified: “Thou art highly favoured. God, in his choice of thee to be the mother of the Messiah, has put an honour upon thee peculiar to thyself, above that of Eve, who was the mother of all living.” .. She has the presence of God with her: “The Lord is with thee,... She has the blessing of God upon her: “Blessed art thou among women; not only thou shalt be accounted so by men, but thou shalt be so.

she was troubled at the sight of him, and much more at his saying. Had she been a proud ambitious young woman, that aimed high, and flattered herself with the expectation of great things in the world, she would have been pleased at his saying, would have been puffed up with it, and (as we have reason to think she was a young woman of very good sense) would have had an answer ready,

But, of all the thoughts she had as to what manner of salutation it should be, I believe she had not the least idea of its being ever intended or used for a prayer..and to be ten times repeated for the Lord's prayer once; so it is in the church of Rome. But her thoughtfulness upon this occasion gives a very useful intimation to young people of her sex, when addresses are made to them, to consider and cast in their minds what manner of salutations they are, whence they come, and what their tendency is, that they may receive them accordingly, and may always stand on their guard. -Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible

[LurkingSince'98]

yeah right.

In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Hail, Full of Grace, the Lord is with thee, Blessed art thou among women and Blessed is the Fruit of they Womb Jesus.

Holy Mary, Mother of god pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen

For the Greater Glory of God
Ad Marjoram Dei Gloriam

[metmom]

and what wahoo thinks that Jesus and God are not one and the same????

Then what's wrong with *mother of Jesus* that the Catholic church felt the need to call Mary *the mother of God?

Why the need to correct the God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired word of God?

Wasn't what the Holy Spirit did good enough that it needed correcting or changing??

[xone]

For the Greater Glory of God

Sure, while you recite the previous prayer. Where was Mary when John had his vision of heaven recounted in Revelation? In the scenes by the throne, where was she? She was in the crowd with the rest of the saved, not seated next to Christ in the Catholic imagination.

[LurkingSince'98]

because the heresy that Jesus and God are not one and the same was fully refuted and called heresy by the third century.

God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit are One God, therefore: Jesus is God and God is Jesus and references to them are fully and freely interchangeable.

to believe otherwise is to just be a heretic.

AMDG

[LurkingSince'98]

My soul doth magnify the Lord.
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid;
for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me Blessed.
Because he that is mighty,
hath done great things to me;
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is from generation unto generations,
to them that fear him.
He hath shewed might in his arm:
he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.
He hath put down the mighty from their seat,
and hath exalted the humble.
He hath filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich he hath sent empty away.
He hath received Israel his servant,
being mindful of his mercy:
As he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his seed for ever.

and the punchline “henceforth all generations shall call me Blessed” obviously excepting yours.

AMDG

[xone]

I do hail Mary, as the Virgin mother. She was a fine example of a saved sinner. I call her blessed. I don’t call on her now as she (soul) is enjoying her rest in heaven awaiting the resurrection of her body. I don’t doubt that those in the line of Christ will gain great rewards in heaven, their faith and works in their faith will merit what God decides. I won’t have a problem with it at all. She got there the same way I will, by faith in the work of the Risen Lord.

[Religion Moderator]

Do you have an original source for that quote? I haven’t yet found a manuscript titled “Commentary on St. John” by Luther though that is the general description given for it.

[LurkingSince'98]

Mary is The Woman of the Apocalypse

From the Book of Revelation, 11:19—12:1-18.[3]

11:19 Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. 12:1 A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 It was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in the sky; it was a huge red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads were seven diadems. 4 Its tail swept away a third of the stars in the sky and hurled them down to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to devour her child when she gave birth. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne. 6 The lady herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty days.

7 Then war broke out in heaven; Michael* and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back, 8but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9The huge dragon, the ancient serpent,* who is called the Devil and Satan, who deceived the whole world, was thrown down to earth, and its angels were thrown down with it.e 10Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say:

“Now have salvation and power come, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Anointed. For the accuser of our brothers is cast out, who accuses them before our God day and night.

11 They conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; love for life did not deter them from death.

12 Therefore, rejoice, you heavens, and you who dwell in them. But woe to you, earth and sea, for the Devil has come down to you in great fury, for he knows he has but a short time.

13 When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. 14 But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she was taken care of for a year, two years, and a half-year. 15 The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth after the woman to sweep her away with the current. 16 But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth and swallowed the flood that the dragon spewed out of its mouth. 17 Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus. 13:1 It took its position on the sand of the sea.’’

The Blessed Virgin Mary

The image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, for one, has been described as a representation of the Woman of the Apocalypse.[4]

Mary of Velankanni, is believed to be a depiction of our the Woman of the Apocalypse

One strain of Catholic tradition assigns the identity of the woman to the Virgin Mary after her assumption into heaven, where she is revealed in all her glory as the “Queen of Heaven”, “Mother of God”, and “Mother of the Church”. This view has been affirmed by Pope Pius X,[5] Pope Pius XII,[6] Pope Paul VI,[7] and Pope John Paul II.[8] According to this view, the woman’s “male child,” is a reference to Jesus (Revelation 12:5), since he is destined to “rule all nations with a rod of iron” (Revelation 12:5). The dragon trying to devour the woman’s child at the moment of his birth (Revelation 12:4) is a reference to Herod the Great’s attempt to kill the infant Jesus (Matthew 2:16). Through his death and resurrection, Jesus “was snatched up to God and to his throne” (Revelation 12:5).

However, most of the ancient commentators identified her with the Church, while in the Middle Ages it was widely held that she represented Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Modern exegetes, have generally held to the older interpretation, with certain modifications, on the strength of contextual details, while in recent years several Catholics have championed the Marian interpretation. Ancient witnesses to the Marian interpretation include St. Epiphanius,[9] Tychonius[10] (who heavily influenced St. Augustine), the unknown author of the History of Joseph the Carpenter,[11] Quodvultdeus (a disciple of St. Augustine), Cassiodorus (Complexiones in Apocalypsi, written c. 570 AD), and the Greek Fathers Andreas and Oikoumenios[12] (sixth century). For an assessment of the logical and theological reasons for identifying the Woman of Revelation 12 with Mary Mother of God

The commentary of the New American Bible (the official Roman Catholic Bible for America) states that “The woman adorned with the sun, the moon, and the stars (images taken from Gn 37:9–10) symbolizes God’s people in the Old and the New Testament. The Israel of old gave birth to the Messiah (Rev 12:5) and then became the new Israel, the church, which suffers persecution by the dragon (Rev 12:6, 13–17); cf. Is 50:1; 66:7; Jer 50:12.” [14]

The image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, has been described as a representation of the Woman of the Apocalypse. Mary of Velankanni, of the Basilica of Our Lady of Good Health, at Tamil Nadu, is also said to be a depiction of the Woman of the Apocalypse.

Some Catholic commentary, such as Haydock’s Catholic Bible Commentary (1859) allows for both the church (primarily) and Mary

AMDG

[terycarl]

Are you arguing that being the steward of Scripture makes them the infallible authority on it, so that those who dissent from them are rebels against God? And if this is not the argument, then what worth is the assertion at issue?

ummmm, basically yes. When Christ promised that what you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, He pretty much protected the Catholic church from error. He also said whose whoever sins you shall for give are forgiven, whose sins you shall retain are retained.....establishing the Sacrament of penance or reconciliation, or confession.

see how easy it is when you listen and believe??

[terycarl]

The Catholic church stands in opposition to that.

then you're wrong

[terycarl]

If you were to actually Luther quote I asure you that you would never, ever say that again. It so condems the Papist heresy that I even shutter.

let's see now...we have a 2,000 year old church, the very establishment of Christanity, the basis on which every Christian "denominaation" is based,......and you have personally decided that it is heresy.......O.K., I guess

[terycarl]

What do you call a thinking Catholic?

correct....and saved.

[Alex Murphy]

Ever since Frank was elected Pope we see every FRoman Catholic telling us what HE really said. How many little Popes do we have on FR?? How many folks are on your ping list. That is a good start.

And more coming out of the woodwork every day!

[terycarl]

you would have it to enjoy.....say "Thanks Catholics"!!! They wrote the OT, thousands of years before the Catholic church even existed. That's pretty impressive. What gall to take credit for itself the work of God. We have the Bible. Say *Thanks Holy Spirit*.

you like to carry comments to the extreme...of course they didn't write the old testament, however, when they wrote the bible as we know it, they included the old testament for your perusal.

they did, however, write the new testament. Using "raw material", booke, papers, teachings, tradition etc., they compiled, after much study and discussion, the new testament as we know it today. Was the Holy Spirit involved...well duhhhh, that's where the guidance and the inspiration comes from. With the Holy Spirit, the Catholic church gave the world the bible as we know it. People have since tried to modify what the church presented, but to no avail.....the Catholic Bible is true, complete, and final....any and all changes made to it are in error...all of them.

[daniel1212]

Are you arguing that being the steward of Scripture makes them the infallible authority on it, so that those who dissent from them are rebels against God? And if this is not the argument, then what worth is the assertion at issue?

ummmm, basically yes.

Thanks for your honesty, but you (among others) - and Rome - have effectively nuked the church under that premise .

For the fact is that under the aforementioned premise for Rome's authrity then 1st century souls should have submitted themselves to the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in the seat of Moses, ( Mt. 23:2) having historical descent over Israel, the instruments and stewards of Scripture and inheritors of promises of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation, (Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34) "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." "Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen." (Romans 9:4-5)

And thus they confronted the Lord with the fundamental question, "By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?" (Mark 11:28)

But whose answer was more than they could handle, that of asking, "The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer Me, " (Mark 11:30) for like Rome, they presumed of themselves a level of veracity above that of Scripture, yet the common people had more discernment than they did, "for all counted John, that he was a prophet indeed." (Mk. 11:32)

And rather than needing a perpetual assuredly (if conditional) infallible magisterium in order to have assurance of Truth - and for both men and writings to be established as being so - not only were writings recognized as Scripture long before Rome would presume she alone was the authority for that, but the Lord Himself reproved both the devil and the Scribes and Pharisees with Scripture. And established His claims upon upon Scriptural substantiation, in word and in power, as did the apostles and early church. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

In contrast, like the Scribes and Pharisees but worse, Rome presumes herself to be the supreme and infallible authority, not Scripture, which is only what she says it is and means, and thus she autocratically defines Tradition, Scripture and history as supporting her.

For according to her interpretation, or decree, only her interpretation is authoritatively correct in any conflict.

However, the greater the claim, then the greater the corresponding evidential warrant is required, yet Rome is not even close (nor do i) to the apostolic manifestation of the Truth, with the manner in which in all things they commended themselves as the ministers of God, "By pureness,...by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left," (2 Corinthians 6:6-7; cf. 2Cor. 4:2; 6:2-10) And yet they did not even claim Rome's perpetual assured infallibility.

Thus rather than the Inquisitors and their means, or today's inclusiveness, the apostles rod was a spiritual one to be feared. "For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?" (1 Corinthians 4:20-21)

And it was largely due to their level of manifest attestation that the prima NT church had the limited unity that they overall had (amidst much diversity), like Israel in the beginning. And every true believer would want to follow a Peter or a Paul today, not men titled "priests" with its phylacteries and perversions, dispensing human flesh to gain spiritual life, akin to endocannibals, and pointing souls to a supreme infallible head in Rome. Etc.

[daniel1212]

Do you have an original source for that quote? I haven’t yet found a manuscript titled “Commentary on St. John” by Luther though that is the general description given for it.

No replies i see, but this uncritical RC quoting of quotes by Luther abounds, and even when they have a actual source, they are usually taken out of context. Thus i provided that of some quotes which a certain poster are pasted thrice today.

And therein i provide the best source for researching such quotes, and in which can be seen one of at least two posts by Swan addressing this statement, and sourced to Luther’s Sermons on John 16 [LW 24 (Luther's Works in English)]

Hope this helps.