Posted on 12/31/2015 4:29:48 PM PST by NYer
Well then it is YOU that is the Protestant.
You can't become a part of the body of Christ until you recognize it for what it is.
It's absurd to think the BIBLICAL church that Jesus started is sitting there in Roman Catholicism.
I've given you the scriptures before, some day you will thirst for a true relationship with God.
Nice rant, no of course not.
People aren't the Holy Spirit, God is.
Good grief, get real!
I thought you said the HS gave you your interpretation of the Bible?
Again, you displayed the hypocrisy of your position, rejecting some doctrines because they are not explicitly spelled out in Scripture and accepting others even though they are not explicitly spelled out in Scripture.
You've misread my Post. I've said that was Not why Catholics do not believe in the rapture.
You are assuming that the disagreement is based on lack of finding in scripture rather than lack of finding in both elements of scripture and tradition as we'll as contradictions.
If Jesus dies Jesus is the second person of the trinity. Jesus dies on the cross in his humanity. It is also because He is one person, that God is said to have died on the Cross for sins.
This is because within the actions of one person the realities and values are communicable. The value of the action of Jesus as God-Man to suffer and die for sins is why you can say in both ways that are true. A Man died on the cross and God died on the Cross.
If there is no communication of values in the one person Jesus, there is no value in the sacrifice. He was always Fully God and Fully Man.
The value of Motherhood of Mary as Mother of God does not require her to be some kind of author of God. She only has to be the Mother of Jesus. But the Title Mother of God inherently teaches that God was Her Son, and that Jesus Is Was and Always will be the incarnate God.
Does that answer it for you?
Matthew 28:18-20.
If you keep getting things mixed up and don't make clear what you are saying it's impossible to debate.
I thought you said the HS gave you your interpretation of the Bible?
That seems to be your interpretation of what I said. I never said that, if you think so show me the link.
I'll wait.
First, that Mary is obviously not the origin of the deity of Jesus does not make her not a Mother of God. As I've been repeating ad nausea at this point. Motherhood in its definition does not entail sole authorship. The Fact that the there are two natures in Christ suffice for the definition. To be a Mother is to bear and give birth to a child. This passage (IS 7:14) suffices for the definition of Motherhood of Jesus.
The distinction that Mary is the Mother of God is not undercut by a non-mention of the word Mother in your quote from Romans. Much Like bachelor is an unmarried man a woman who conceives and bears a child is the Child's Mother. There's no way this could not be the case without saying something terribly awkward about Jesus and Salvation.
Who is Jesus? He is the Second person of the Trinity. (Heb 1:3) Jesus is God. At no time is he not God. You cannot separate His person from His two natures. He is always one Person with Two. Since Mary's Motherhood suffices for this Title.
It is also an important reminder that to say otherwise by any reason is to deny some aspect of the union of two natures in one person. No Mary is not the Sole author of the nature of God. She is the source for the flesh of Christ. But she bore a person. She gave birth to the second person of the Trinity. This is why in ad nauseam I'm forced to repeat a basic fact of Christianity.
If you deny this you deny the same reality that gives value to the meaning "God died on the Cross." Because two natures existed in the one person. Therefore, whatever is predicated of the person is predicated of the natures and vice versa.
Scripture calls us Children of God By adoption. This is because the Grace of Christ makes us like Christ, Children of God. When God looks upon His Children He sees the grace of the Holy Spirit at work making them adopted heirs(Jn 1:12-14; Romans 8:14; 1 John 3:2). Not Blasphemy, Jesus himself says something on this hinted new relationship in him (Mt 12:50; Mk 3:31).
You should come out of the cold and recognize that you have a familial relationship with God because of Jesus.
Your quotation of speculation from Cardinal Ratzinger, not doctrine, is in reference to a title I'm not discussing. It is a separate issue from the title Mother of God.
Of course not. That’s a silly idea.
I said that early Christians scrupulously and enthusiastically preserved relics of the apostles, tens of thousands of martyrs, and other holy persons.
Thus, the ABSENCE of relics of Mary requires an explanation.
And the absence of any CLAIMED relics of Mary—even phony ones—requires an explanation.
In other words: Why did all the potential fraudsters REFRAIN from claiming to have a relic from Mary?
The only possible explanation is that all Christians, from the earliest days, believed a story that implied the IMPOSSIBILITY of anyone’s having a relic of Mary.
The whole Trinity?
Or don't you believe in the Trinity and therefore God became human, as in modalism?
So you are agreeing then, that GOD died when Jesus died? Yes or no?
Considering the propensity of people to worship objects, it would be no surprise to me that God would not allow there to be any relics left.
God is the one who buried Moses and nobody knows where his body is and it’s clear that it’s for good reason.
John 3:3 Jesus answered, and said to him: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
John 3:7 Wonder not, that I said to thee, you must be born again.
Oh, look at that. In this translation, the Greek is translated *born again*.
And what translation is this that translates it this way you ask?
A very good question, my FRiend.
It just so happens to be copied and pasted out of the Douay-Rheims Bible, the CATHOLIC Bible.
Imagine that. All those Catholics Bible scholars did not get the translation correct according to our resident semi-anonymous FReeper "scholars".
Isn't it interesting how Catholics sit in judgment of non-Catholics about how wrong they are for using a certain translation of Greek that their very own Catholic church uses?
That means they are sitting in judgment and condemnation of the men the Catholic church used to translate Scripture and sitting in judgment of the Catholic church authorizing that version.
Aren't we so fortunate to have all these Catholic FReepers here to straighten their church out for everyone? I didn't know they knew better than their church's hierarchy.
I didn't know they had so much latitude in interpreting Scripture themselves. 1.2 billion personal interpretations of Scripture. Every man his own pope - 1.2 billion strong........
LOL!!!!
GMTA
Well, someone has to take a hit for the team......
IF a priest THINKS.....
So a priest can refuse to forgive sins and ultimately send someone to hell based on nothing more than his opinion?
That's EXACTLY why Jesus would not man that kind of ultimate power over another human being. That priest is NOT God, who knows the heart.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely and we've seen that play out in Catholicism over the centuries.
God Himself promises that if we confess our sins HE is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from ALL unrighteousness. If He is going to do that, there's no way He'd give a priest the power to retain sins. It's going against His will for the priest to do so.
Probably.......
Wrong. Jesus never told anyone to follow His church. He told them to follow HIM.
Matthew 4:19 And he said to them, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."
Matthew 8:22 And Jesus said to him, "Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead."
Matthew 9:9 As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax booth, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose and followed him.
Matthew 10:38 And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus told his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
Matthew 19:21 Jesus said to him, "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
Mark 1:17 And Jesus said to them, "Follow me, and I will make you become fishers of men."
Mark 2:14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax booth, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose and followed him.
Mark 8:34 And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
Mark 10:21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
Luke 5:27 After this he went out and saw a tax collector named Levi, sitting at the tax booth. And he said to him, "Follow me."
Luke 9:23 And he said to all, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
Luke 9:59 To another he said, "Follow me." But he said, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father."
Luke 18:22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
John 1:43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, "Follow me."
John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
John 12:26 If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.
John 21:19 And after saying this he said to him, "Follow me."
John 21:22 Jesus said to him, "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!"
1 Peter 1:23 Being born again not of corruptible seed, but incorruptible, by the word of God who liveth and remaineth for ever.
No, it doesn't because the word *God* means more than and is used for more than, only Jesus.
The term *mother of JESUS* is the term than actually suffices to address that Title.
It is specific enough, where as the term *mother of God* is too ambiguous to automatically imply that Jesus is the One who Mary is the mother of.
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.