that horse is dead.Posted on 08/27/2010 11:45:13 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
For those who claim to know all there is to know about Catholic teaching, the distinction between opinion and dogma is often overlooked. The emphasized words are important.
Interesting. You have no problem believing hearsay about those Baptists
that horse is dead. No it's not... it's resting.
I think that the, so to speak 'resolving trend' over time is that the idea of ONE Church and of its identity as body and bride of Christ purges Unam Sanctam of the sense that if one hasn't done homage to the pontiff one will become a crispy critter.
The OT is Gods revelation to the Jews.. It was never given to the church. It remains under the authority of the jewish people
The NT is Gods revelation to the church..
Rom 3:1 ¶ What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Exactly, Jesus confirmed that canon, and even today it remains Gods revelation to the jews..
Well, that was painful. Not much for conversation but very suited to expressing and effecting malice.
It's interesting, de Montfort and Mary are a big part of my 'spirituality' and yet I never, ever entertain the idea that in any radical sense Mary controls Jesus.
Your side seems to despise de Montfort and, well, indicates how some people cannot be understood unless they are loved.
I guess I need to love you all more, because I do not understand the seeming need to taunt, jab, poke, stab, and hurl mud.
I know many on my side, myself included, fail to exhibit love in our posts. An important difference is that, I THINK, we don't enjoy it. Many on your side seem unable to resist the urge to say something hurtful.
Oh well. I do not recognize myself in your description of Catholic devotion to Jesus. I have a devotion to the infant Jesus, but it is not exclusive or predominant in my prayers and thoughts.
Well that's good, but you did express a willingness to believe the above little baptist anecdote. It reminds me kind of the accusation that Jews ate litttle babies that was once made in Europe. I would never eat little babies except maybe in a Jonathan Swift sort of way
It is good to post the quotes in context....from your source
v • d • e Rabbinic Judaism recognizes the 24 books of the Masoretic Text, commonly called the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible. Evidence suggests that the process of canonization occurred between 200 BCE and 200 CE. A popular former theory is that the Torah was canonized circa 400 BCE, the Prophets circa 200 BCE, and the Writings circa 100 CE,[1] perhaps at a hypothetical Council of Jamnia, but this position is increasingly rejected by modern scholars.
The Book of Deuteronomy includes a prohibition against adding or subtracting,[2][3] which might apply to the book itself (i.e. a "closed book," a prohibition against future scribal editing) or to the instruction received by Moses on Mt. Sinai.[4]
The Book of 2 Maccabees, itself not a part of the Jewish canon, describes Nehemiah (around 400 BCE) as having "founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings" (2:13-15). The Book of Nehemiah suggests that the priest-scribe Ezra brought the Torah back from Babylon to Jerusalem and the Second Temple (8-9) around the same time period. Both 1 and 2 Maccabees suggest that Judas Maccabeus (around 167 BCE) also collected sacred books (3:42-50, 2:13-15, 15:6-9), and some scholars argue that the "Jewish biblical canon" was fixed by the Hasmonean dynasty.[5] However, these primary sources do not suggest that the canon was at that time closed; moreover, it is not clear that these particular books were identical in content to those that later became part of the Masoretic text. Today, there is no scholarly consensus as to when the Jewish canon was set.
Primary sources for the "Hebrew Bible Canon" are listed in McDonald and Sanders's The Canon Debate, 2002, Appendix A.[6]
In other words Scripture tells us when there was a canon.. but scholars are disagreeing on it
I have learned the hard way that old age and senility do not work as excuses. :-)
Just got back from shopping and have a lot of cooking to do.
I Just wanted to let you know I saw the post and will get back to it later.
Is everything in the Bible inspired or not? It seems the statement "In him we live and move and have our being" would qualify as a spiritual revelation. And it seems that the author of Acts would find it worthy of being included among other inspired words. Or are you saying that parts of the Bible (which you hold to be the word of God) are profane?
Hideously disgusting.
I'm not seeing that in what you quote -- I see references to holy books (not listed) but no indication that the OT Jews even had a notion of canonicity in the required sense.
Mary's is nothing but creature, albeit redeemed. She is forever subordinate. She is "one of us" in a way different from the way Jesus is united to us, because while Jesus is the pioneer and perfecter, the first fruits of creation, He is also the Word by Whom all things were made. Mary, on the other hand, is one of the creatures, and she is foremost among recipients of grace - first of the second fruits.
So that can almost explain the light-hearted extravagance of praise heaped upon her. I think the undeserved reputation some non-Catholics have for gloominess is here deserved. They do not seem to be able to understand, accept, or enjoy the almost playful aspect of Marian language and devotion.
Look. A Sundae is a Sundae with or without a cherry on top. The cherry adds nothing to the way a Sundae can fill you up and make you "delight yourself in fatness." Jesus is my Sundae. By HIS extravagance, by the shaken down, pressed together, running over nature of His grace, He puts a cherry on top.
How ridiculous the cherry would be without the Sundae, underneath it. How even more than perfectly wonderful the whole thing is!
And despite the obvious pleasure your side takes in insulting her whom we love and us for loving her, I will still delight in the extravagance of the Love of God, who always gives more than we can desire or deserve and greater than we can imagine or pray for.
Matthew 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
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.