Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
No problem al, may I suggest you check in the Catholic Encyclopedia under "Mary's Truck', I'm sure there is something in one of the early Church writings they can assimilate it, like they did with, "and with furrowed brow", and connect that to the sign of the cross, they will have no problem what so ever finding a Mary Truck. Lol (^g^)
Is there a contradiction I missed or is Dave just dumbfounded once again at obviety of the truth. God didn't do away with the old system because men couldn't be righteous under it. It was done away with because it was abused - much as other covenants entered into with God have been abused by men. When God's had enough, he acts.
I've never argued that Mary couldn't be sinless. I've argued the Bible side of it that she was chosen precisely because she was righteous and sought to be so. She still claimed a need for a saviour. And in order to atone for sin and wipe it out, there had to be sacrifice. When the old system passed at the death and resurrection, the Lord became that sacrifice. Being righteous doesn't mean *never* sinning. It means pursuing a life goal of never sinning and making things right when you do. Quite a contrast from doing what you want and then expecting God to make it right because Jesus was sacrificed for sin. God had the right to reject an offering under the old covenant when a heart was not right. He has that right still. And Mary is no exception to any rule God has made. Mary was a human being with a sin nature that she did her level best to overcome through prayer and sacrifice - and later through the Lord Jesus.
The beef comes in when you start making dumb statements like the one's I pointed out before. Eat, fill the plate with poison and then want everyone to believe you've been poisoned because there is poison on the plate after you eat. Mary having children after the Birth of Jesus in no way made her less of a virgin before Jesus' conception nor does it affect the birth of Jesus in any way. Your Doctrine is moronic to say the least, yet it is high minded 'reason' and 'logic' that comes up with such moronicisms. Such people likely coined the phrase, "I are smart" and were the proximate model of the Mortimer Schnerd character.
This is correct.
Thank you, Angelo. So then I guess we have to find some law from the OT that they can "clarify" to mean - No meat on fridays due to forced fast.. things like that..
The only church that vmatt ever said he was a part of was, guess what, the RC church and from his posts he hates all authority and never showed any signs that he had the slightest idea what sola scriptura even meant, let alone used it as a rule of faith. He is an anarchist, that is not, despite your straw man attempts, what sola scriptura teaches.
Yeah, and it wasn't until Paul that an Apostle to the Gentiles existed. The original Disciples were directly responsible for the 12 tribes of Israel - anything else was Gravy. But they were all ministers to the 12 Tribes. Paul alone was given office to the Gentiles. Which is something I just ran across in my reading for the first time. The letter Peter wrote to asia minor was written to Jewish populations in the North, where Paul's visits and letters were to Gentile populations in the South. Find new and interesting facts every day.
So, Dave now agrees. Catholic doctrine is a huge mass of misconception. LOL
Wrong.
Read the Vulgate ONLINE
PURCHASE the Vulgate
Read the Douay-Rheims ONLINE
PURCHASE the Douay-Rheims
Pray for John Paul II
Very well put.
Becky
Um. Cause Peter was already Pope?
The Papacy originated with the person of Peter. It went wherever he went. When he settled in Rome the Papacy attached itself to his successors in the office of Bishop of Rome.
Well then, why didn't Peter appoint him?
Would that be because:
1) Peter was never in Rome.
2) Peter was never elected Bishop of Rome.(see #1)
3) Peter had no authority to do such a thing.
Survey says? (ding) "all of the above." We'll be playing the big money round right after words from these sponsers..
----------------Commercial-------------------
Is your heart cold - your mind puffed up with pride of "great scholars"? Are you weighed down by confusing piles of doctrine that seem to have nothing to do with the basis of your faith. We have the answer.
Get Jesus. Throw away those doctrines and worthless philosophies from people that have no clue. Get the real thing. Accept the sacrifice of the cross today and feel the weight lifted, the heart filled and the eyes opened. Learn to rebuke the Devil in Jesus' name. Learn to pray in a manner pleasing to God. Learn what God wants from your life and more.. Just pick up the 66 books of the Bible today and put away the old garbage. Learn the Bible, love it, and accept the Lord. He'll get you through without the nonsense and lies. He'll guide your path to someone who can teach you the basics, And God will teach you the rest.
This message brought to you by people who know God and who's only agenda is seeing you saved.
Wondering if the script is possessed and editing my statemtments to it's own liking now... LOL
Thanks for clearing that up for me, you had me worried for a while, I kinda thought you might belong to the salvatition army thinking. :)
BigMack
MOTIVES OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAWS PERTAINING TO ABSTINENCE
According to the vagaries of the Manicheans, Montanists. and Encratites, flesh meat is intrinsically evil and merits the most rigorous kind of prohibition. Keenly sensible of this heterodoxy, the Church of Christ has not based her ordinances enjoining abstinence on any such unwarranted assumption. As the exponent of revelation, the Church knows and teaches that every creature in the visible universe is equally a work of the divine wisdom, power, and goodness, which defy all limitations.
This is why the first pages of the inspired text indicate that the Creator "saw all the things that he had made and they were very good" (Gen., i, 31). St. Paul is, if anything, still more explicit in condemning the folly of those sectaries, though they originated after his day.
"Now, the Spirit manifestly says that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils . . . forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that know the truth. For, every creature is good, and nothing to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving" (I Tim, iv, 1, 2, 3). Neither is the Church, in her legislation on abstinence, animated by any such gross superstition as influences the adherents of Brahmanism or Buddhism.
Moved by their theories regarding the transmigration of souls, they are logically induced to abstain from eating the flesh of animals, lest they should unconsciously consume their parents or friends. In consequence of those notions their diet is vegetarian. So rigorous is the law prescribing this diet that transgressions are visited with social and domestic ostracism. At the same time this ultra conservatism has not been espoused by all who share the doctrine regarding the transmigration of souls. Many of them have not hesitated to temper their belief in this creed with a mitigated form of abstinence from flesh meat.
Happy to oblige. Now If I can only figure out a presentation of the widget argument that isn't so vulgar, I'll have it licked. LOL
BigMack
This is what St. Jerome means when, quoting Terence, he says: Sine Cerere et Baccho, friget Venus (Cont. Jov., II, 6), or, to use the words of St. Thomas (II-II, q. cxlvii, art. 1), "the ardor of lust is dampened by abstinence from food and drink." Besides, abstinence exercises a salutary influence in leading man to suprasensible pursuits. For, according to St. Augustine (De oratione et jejunio, sermo ccxxx, de temp.), abstinence purifies the soul, elevates the mind, subordinates the flesh to the spirit, begets a humble and contrite heart, scatters the clouds of concupiscence, extinguishes the fire of lust, and enkindles the true light of chastity.
This is summarized in the official message of the Church found in the Mass-preface used during Lent: "Who by bodily fasting suppresses vice, ennobles the mind, grants virtue and rewards." It is no exaggeration, therefore, to maintain that Christians must find in abstinence an efficacious means to repair the losses of the spirit and augment its gains. Inspired by such motives, the Church wisely prohibits the use of flesh meat at duly appointed times.
Seemingly harsh, the law of abstinence, in its last analysis, serves to promote bodily and spiritual well-being. The mechanism of the body stamps man as an omnivorous animal. Hence, all nations have adopted a mixed diet. Nay. more, a priori and a posteriori reasons prove that the occasional interruption of meat diet conduces to bodily and spiritual health. In case of less rugged constitutions, the Church tempers the rigors of her legislation with the mildness of her dispensations.
Finally, the experience of nineteen centuries proves that transgression of this law neither promotes health nor prolongs life. Hence, consummate wisdom and prudence, seeking to safeguard the welfare of soul and body, inspire the Church in her laws pertaining to abstinence. (See ADVENT; LENT)
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.