Posted on 12/31/2015 4:29:48 PM PST by NYer
We can conjure up all KINDS of feelings and emotion for Joseph; but the fact remains that we ONLY know what Scripture records.
Whoa! Jesus left the rock tomb without rolling away the stone. The Holy Spirit could just as easily brought Jesus from Mary’s womb without using the birth canal. It would be good to keep that in mind when contemplating Mary’s ‘condition’ to sustain he vows to Joseph.
Looking at the track record of the church, I’m wondering what justification someone could possibly give that could even begin to compete with Scripture as being authoritative.
I still haven’t gotten any answer on whether the church has authority over Scripture or Scripture has authority over the church, or which one gives the other its authority.
Paul - 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 King James Version (KJV)
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.
Guess Paul didn’t have a clue. Who knew?
“Mary, mother of JESUS.”
And JESUS is GOD.
And Mary is STILL the mother of Jesus.
Actually they may have some differences but are the Catholic rites are wrong in being unified in the error of Rome, the invisible church in Scripture.
And how do you know that your judgment is correct that your church is the one true church and is necessary to know what is of God, but others are wrong in judging that she is not the one true church?
The revolution did assist in the distribution of bibles, but the Catholic church insisted that ONLY true and accurate bibles could be distributed,
More than that, she greatly restricted personal access to Scripture even if and when available in the common tongue to much degree.
Wrong, as showed you.
But of course you discount the whole institution of the priesthood at the last supper
For there was no institution of the priesthood at the last supper, only a command to "do this in memory of me," and the idea that this itself was a sacrifice for sin officiated by priests was a later development. Thus the distinctive word for "priest" is never used for NT pastors, nor in the life of the church (Acts onward, and interpretive of the gospels) are they ever shown even distributing food as part of their ordained function. See here for the rest of the refutation to save time.
the Petrine ministry ordained by Jesus
Which is another specious claim, as the NT is never shown looking to Peter was the first of a line of infallible popes reigning in Rome over all the churches, which propaganda even Catholic scholarship provides testimony against. As shown you.
Certainly there was no sola scriptura in AD30 as the New Testament was not even written nor was ut compiled until the same Church you call heretical compiled it.
Which leaves Scripture alone being indisputably the supreme authority on what is of God, and providing for additional conflative complimentary writings being recognized as such, as in the past, and thus providing for a canon. As said before, with your arguments against which being - refuted - over - many - posts by the mercy and grace of God.
True, while comparing one church with many is invalid, as is defining what a church believes by what is merely "officially" (which is subject to interpretation of RCs) professes versus what it manifests by what it does and fosters. Which leaves Rome a quite liberal system with variegated beliefs. Meanwhile comparing the unity btwn individual churches leaves certain cults, which essentially operate under the Roman model for assurance of Truth, being the winner. Thus it is not simply unity that is an issue, but the Scriptural means to it, which is not that of Rome.
What would be a valid comparison would be btwn two means of assurance of Truth, and in which those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the wholly inspired and accurate word of God being much more unified than the fruit of Rome, which she holds as members in life and in death.
► STATISTICS COMPARING CATHOLICS + EVANGELICALS (excerpts)
Catholics [2012] report the lowest proportion of strongly affiliated followers among major American religious traditions, with a considerable divergence between evangelical Protestants on the one hand and Catholics and mainline Protestants on the other. There was an abrupt decline in strength of affiliation among Catholics starting in 1984 and ending in 1989. Thus may be due to the growing number of Latino Catholics responding to the survey. Previous research has shown Latino Catholics were less likely to report a strong religious affiliation compared with other Catholics. Also, the percentage of Americans who say they adhere to no religion climbed from about 6 percent in the 1970s and 1980s to 16 percent in 2010. http://www.science20.com/news_articles/religion_america_evangelicals_surge_catholics_wane-97244
The typical Catholic person was 38% less likely than the average American to read the Bible; 67% less likely to attend a Sunday school class; 20% less likely to share their faith in Christ with someone who had different beliefs, donated about 17% less money to churches, and were 36% less likely to have an "active faith," defined as reading the Bible, praying and attending a church service during the prior week. Catholics were also significantly less likely to believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches. 44% of Catholics claimed to be "absolutely committed" to their faith, compared to 54% of the entire adult population. However, Catholics were 16% more likely to attend a church service and 8% more likely to have prayed to God during the prior week than the average American. Barna Reaearch, 2007, “Catholics Have Become Mainstream America” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/100
82% of Mainline Churches, 77% of Catholics and 53% of Evangelical Churches affirmed, "There is MORE than one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion." U.S. Religious landscape survey; Copyright © 2008 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#
Orthodox (29%), Mainline Churches (28%), and Catholics (27%) led Christian Churches in affirming that the Scriptures were written by men and were not the word of God, versus just and 7% of Evangelical Churches, who instead rightly affirm its full inspiration of God.^
Catholics broke with their Church's teachings more than most other groups, with just six out of 10 Catholics affirming that God is "a person with whom people can have a relationship", and three in 10 describing God as an "impersonal force." 2008 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#
Only 33% of Catholics strongly affirmed that Christ was sinless on earth. http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/53
40% Roman Catholics vs. 41% Non-R.C. see abortion as "morally acceptable"; Sex between unmarried couples: 67% vs. 57%; Baby out of wedlock: 61% vs. 52%; Homosexual relations: 54% vs. 45%; Gambling: 72% vs. 59% http://www.gallup.com/poll/117154/Catholics-Similar-Mainstream-Abortion-Stem-Cells.aspx
Committed Roman Catholics (church attendance weekly or almost) versus Non-R.C. faithful church goers (see the below as as morally acceptable): Abortion: 24% of R.C. vs. 19% Non-R.C.; Sex between unmarried couples: 53% vs. 30%; Baby out of wedlock: 48% vs. 29%; Homosexual relations: 44% vs. 21%; Gambling: 67% vs. 40%; Divorce: 63 vs. 46% ^
Comparing 16 moral behaviors, Catholics were less likely to say mean things about people behind their back, and tending to engage in recycling more. However, they were also twice as likely to view pornographic content on the Internet, and were more prone to use profanity, to gamble, and to buy lottery tickets. ^
In a survey asking whether one approves or rejects or overall sees little consequence (skeptical) to society regarding seven trends on the family (More: unmarried couples raising children; gay and lesbian couples raising children; single women having children without a male partner to help raise them; people living together without getting married; mothers of young children working outside the home; people of different races marrying each other; and more women not ever having children), 42% of all Protestants were “Rejecters” of the modern trend, 35% were Skeptics, and 23% were “Approvers.” Among Catholics, 27% were Rejecters, 34% were Approvers, and 39% were Skeptics. (Among non religious, 10% were Rejecters, 48% were Approvers, and 42% were Skeptics.) Pew forum, The Public Renders a Split Verdict On Changes in Family Structure, February 16, 2011 http://pewsocialtrends.org/2011/02/16/the-public-renders-a-split-verdict-on-changes-in-family-structure/#prc_jump
50 percent of Protestants affirmed gambling was a sin, versus 15 percent of Catholics; that getting drunk was a sin: 63 percent of Protestants, 28 percent of Catholics; gossip: 70 percent to 45 percent: homosexual activity or sex: 72 percent to 42 percent. Ellison Research, March 11, 2008 http://ellisonresearch.com/releases/20080311.htm http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080312/study-behaviors-americans-consider-sinful.htm
Combined aggregate results from 9 surveys conducted from 2001 through 2004 show 71% of Protestants (68% of regular church goers) and 66% of Catholics (59% of regular Catholic church-goers) support capital punishment. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/gallup-poll-who-supports-death-penalty
73 percent of Catholics rejected Catholic teaching artificial methods of birth control. Catholic World Report; 1997 survey of 1,000 Catholic Americans by Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at the University of Connecticut
Only 20 percent strongly agreed with the Church teaching that only men may be ordained. ^
Of never-married adult females, 25% of Evangelicals, 11% of Catholics and 14% of Mainline Protestants professed never to be have had sexual relations. Countering Conventional Wisdom: New Evidence on Religion and Contraceptive Use, Guttmacher Institute, April. 2011
Contraceptives
Just 15% of U.S. Catholics say that using contraceptives is morally wrong. 41% say that using contraceptives is morally acceptable, while 36% say it is not a moral issue. 37% of Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week say using contraceptives is morally wrong while 33% say it is morally acceptable and 30% say it is not a moral issue. — http://www.pewresearch.org/key-data-points/u-s-catholics-key-data-from-pew-research/#abortion
Abortion
[2000-2001] Catholic women had an abortion rate 29 percent higher than Protestants. 43% of women over age 17 in the 2000-2001 survey said they were Protestant, while 27 percent said they were Catholic. 13 percent said they were evangelical or “born-again.” Catholics were more likely to get an abortion: The abortion rate for Catholic women was 22 per 1,000 women; the rate for Protestants was 18 per 1,000 women, Alan Guttmacher Institute http://www.catholicleague.org/research/Catholic_women_and_abortion.htm; http://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/abortions-comparing-catholic-and-protestant-women/
75% of white evangelical Protestants consider having an abortion morally wrong, as do 64% of Hispanic Catholics, 58% of black Protestants, 53% of white Catholics, 38% of white mainline Protestants and 25% of religiously unaffiliated adults. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/08/15/abortion-viewed-in-moral-terms/
White evangelical Protestants are the only major religious group in which a majority (54%) favors completely overturning Roe v. Wade. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/01/16/roe-v-wade-at-40/
Fornication, homosexuality
In a 2010 LifeWay Research survey 77 percent of American Protestant pastors (57% of mainline versus 87% evangelical) strongly disagree with same-sex marriage, with 6% percent somewhat disagreeing, and 5% being somewhat in agreement and 10 percent strongly agreeing. (5% of evangelical).
Only 3% of evangelical pastors (versus 11% mainline) somewhat agree that there is nothing wrong with homosexual marriage.
11% of evangelical pastors (versus 30% mainline) somewhat agree that homosexual civil unions are acceptable, with 67% of the former and 38% of the latter strongly disagreeing with homosexual civil unions. October 2010 LifeWay Research survey of 1,000 randomly selected Protestant pastors. http://www.lifeway.com/ArticleView?storeId=10054&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&article=LifeWay-Research-protestant-pastors-oppose-homosexual-marriage
A 2002 nationwide poll of 1,854 priests in the United States and Puerto Rico reported that 30% of Roman Catholic priests described themselves as Liberal, 28% as Conservative, and 37% as Moderate in their Religious ideology. 53 percent responded that they thought it always was a sin for unmarried people to have sexual relations; 32 percent that is often was, and 9 percent seldom/never. However, nearly four in 10 younger priests in 2002 described themselves as conservative, and were more likely to regard as "always a sin" such acts as premarital sex, abortion, artificial birth control, homosexual relations, etc., and three-fourths said they were more religiously orthodox than their older counterparts. Los Angeles Times (extensive) nationwide survey (2002). http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/reports/LAT-Priest-Survey.pdf http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_2_39/ai_94129129/pg_2
The survey also found that 80% of Roman Catholic priests referred to themselves as “mostly” heterosexual in orientation, with 67% being exclusively heterosexual, 8% leaning toward heterosexual, 5% completely in the middle, and 6% leaning toward homosexual and 9% saying they are homosexual, for a combined figure of 15% on the homosexual class. Among younger priests (those ordained for 20 years or less) the figure was 23%. ^
After examining the official web sites of 244 Catholic universities and colleges in America, the TFP Student Action found that 107 – or 43% have pro-homosexual clubs. TFP Student Action Dec. 6. 2011; studentaction.org/get-involved/online-petitions/pro-homosexual-clubs-at-107-catholic-colleges/print.html
39 percent of Roman Catholics and 79 percent of born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist American Christians affirm that homosexual behavior is sinful. LifeWay (SBC) Research study, released Wednesday. 2008 LifeWay Research study. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080606/survey-americans-divided-on-homosexuality-as-sin.htm
79 percent of American Jews, 58 percent of Catholics and 56 percent of mainline Protestants favor acceptance of homosexuality, versus 39 percent of members of historically black churches, 27 percent of Muslims and 26 percent of the evangelical Protestants. U.S. U.S. Religious landscape survey; Copyright © 2008 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#
56% of Catholics overall (and 46% of the general public) believe that sexual relations between two adults of the same gender is not a sin, while 39%. of Catholics say homosexual behavior is morally wrong, (versus 76% of white evangelicals and 66% of black Protestants, and 40% of Mainline Protestants). 41% of Catholics do not consider homosexual behavior to be a moral issue. (Pew Research Center, Religion & Politics Survey, 2009; PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey, October 2010; http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Catholics-and-LGBT-Issues-Survey-Report.pdf)
Catholics testify [2010] to showing more support (in numbers) for legal recognitions of same-sex relationships than members of any other Christian tradition, and Americans overall. Almost three-quarters of Catholics favor either allowing gay and lesbian people to marry or allowing them to form civil unions (43% and 31% respectively). Only 22% of Catholics said there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship. (PRRI, Pre--election American Values Survey, 9/2010; http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Catholics-and-LGBT-Issues-Survey-Report.pdf.)
Actually, it is Catholics who show they lack "clues," for as the context here shows, the "body" not being recognized is the church as the body of Christ for which He died, which Corinthians were not recognizing by ignoring members of it, completely contrary to what they were supposed to be showing/declaring! Paul reproves Corinthian church for coming together to eat the Lord's supper, as he charges them with not actually doing so because they were eating what is supposed to be a communal meal, the “feast of charity,” (Jude 1:12) independently of each other, so that “in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken,” and thus what they were doing was to “shame them that have not.” (1Co. 11:20-22)
Therefore Paul proceeds to reiterates the words of Christ at the institution of the Lord's supper, ending with “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew [kataggellō=preach/declare] the Lord's death till he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
For while they were supposed to be showing/declaring the Lord's unselfish sacrificial death for the body by unselfishly sharing food with other members of the body of Christ, whom Christ purchased it with His own sinless shed blood, (Acts 20:28) instead they were both eating independently and selfishly. And thus were effectively treating other members as lepers, and as if the body was not a body, and as if others were not part of the body for whom Christ died. This lack of effectual recognition is what is being referred to as “not discerning the Lord's body,” that of the body in which the members are to treat each as blood-bought beloved brethren, as Christ did. Because they were presuming to show the Lord's death for the body while acting contrary to it, therefore they were eating this bread and drinking the cup of the Lord unworthily, hypocritically, and were chastised for it, some unto death. (1Co. 11:27-32)
Because this was the case and cause of condemnation — that of not recognizing the nature of the corporate body of Christ in independently selfishly eating — versus not recognizing the elements eaten as being the body of Christ — then the apostle's solution was, “Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.” (1 Corinthians 11:33-34)
And which leads into the next chapter in which Christ-like love is described. Paul himself was asked of the Lord, “why persecutest thou me” (Acts 9:4) as Paul was attacking the church, thus showing His identification with the church.
Moreover, only the metaphorical understanding easily conflates with the rest of Scripture in its totality.
But which logic we should give the Jews and Romans the formal title "God killers" and Christians should be called "Brothers of God" " but which, as with Mother of God, most naturally denotes Divinity as having relations who are ontologically of the same nature. While in a qualified technical sense such could be allowed, they are contrary to the language of Scripture in which the Holy Spirit gives few if any honorific titles to mortals, in contrast to Christ, nor exalts any created being even close to what Caths do with the false Mary of Catholicism/a>, and the Spirit even qualifies that Israel brought forth Christ "according to the flesh," God blessed for ever," (Rm. 9:5) which applies to Mary as well.
Theotokos as God-bearer better denotes Mary was the vehicle of the incarnation, but RCs mostly shun that in preference to "Mother of God" in their idolatrous quest to glorify her above that which is written, which they manifest that are far more committed to than protecting Mary from being venerated as basically,
• an almost almighty demigoddess to whom "Jesus owes His Precious Blood" to,
• whose [Mary] merits we are saved by,
• who "had to suffer, as He did, all the consequences of sin,"
• and was bodily assumed into Heaven, which is a fact (unsubstantiated in Scripture or even early Tradition) because the Roman church says it is, and "was elevated to a certain affinity with the Heavenly Father,"
• and whose power now "is all but unlimited,"
• for indeed she "seems to have the same power as God,"
• "surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven,"
• so that "the Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse."
• and that “sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name then if we invoked the name of the Lord Jesus,"
• for indeed saints have "but one advocate," and that is Mary, who "alone art truly loving and solicitous for our salvation,"
• Moreover, "there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose,"
• and who has "authority over the angels and the blessed in heaven,"
• including "assigning to saints the thrones made vacant by the apostate angels,"
• whom the good angels "unceasingly call out to," greeting her "countless times each day with 'Hail, Mary,' while prostrating themselves before her, begging her as a favour to honour them with one of her requests,"
• and who (obviously) cannot "be honored to excess,"
• and who is (obviously) the glory of Catholic people, whose "honor and dignity surpass the whole of creation." Sources and more. T
Thanks for your incorrect analysis.
The Scripture that didn’t exist in AD 30 is supreme because it didn’t exist in AD30?
Where in the Old Testament is there Protestantism?
Pretty much, yes.
They don't answer questions...They don't have any answers...Just a bunch of robots and puppets...
Oh Paul's got a clue...It's you that doesn't have a clue what Paul is talking about...
Another one verse wonder...
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.