Posted on 08/27/2010 11:45:13 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
If they weren't written down, deduced from Scripture, or were contrary to Scripture they are useless.
Scripture is not to be supplanted by the imagination of man.
2 TIMOTHY 3:
16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Sometimes this is just too easy. How can you claim that Catholics "cannot decide for themselves" what Scripture says and must rely on what the Church tells them it says and then complain that there is no instrument by which to instruct Catholics? How also can you boast that Protestants are independent free thinkers and have an indwelling of the Holy Spirit to guide their interpretations and then claim that they have the official commentaries to prove it? Even you have to admit that is a pretty convoluted scenario to not ridicule.
Grow up. This thread veered from the original topic almost immediately. That is the nature of threads on FR.
What do YOU think this young woman's reaction would be? Would she say, "How can this be, I've never had sex?" No, because she would assume that the future event you were talking about would happen AFTER she married, she and her husband would have intercourse and conceive a child. The expected response from the young woman would be one of excitement, maybe a little apprehension, but mainly excitement and joy.
The Blessed Virgin Mary's response in Luke 1:34 ONLY makes sense if she NEVER INTENDED to have intercourse.
No, but the anecdotal stories of hateful Protestants and their equally ignorant Preachers is very cute.
Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead [their] dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.
Jer 44:26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth.
Jer 44:27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah that [are] in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.
the 'queen of heaven is one of the pagan gods that Israel went after
"The Virgin [Mary] was given the title Queen of Heaven and is depicted wearing a blue robe decorated with stars and standing on a crescent Moon. This image is almost identical to pagan representations of the goddess of love Ishtar who was worshipped by the Babylonians."
-(Michael Howard, The Occult Conspiracy: The Power of Secret Societies in World History [NY, NY: MFJ Books, 1989], p. 22).
Mark I will add your job need to my prayer list.. I hope one comes soon ( one with good access to Fr :)
I wonder if somebody "accidentally" pressed the Abuse key.
I don't recall asking you for any advice.
This thread veered from the original topic almost immediately. That is the nature of threads on FR.
So? I decided to veer back.
Tell you what though, let's veer again shall we. ALL of the Catholics and ALMOST all of the Protestants on this thread believe, as a matter of faith, in the Holy Trinity. You deny the Holy Trinity, so why don't we just talk about that.
What sect do you belong to that denies the Trinity?
Do you also deny that Jesus Christ is God? If you DO believe He is God, are you a polytheist?
Was just listening to Offspring again! :-)
Irony is lost sometimes.
Isn't Gill your "Official Inspired commentary"?
Please pay attention. I labelled it as a DELIBERATELY STUPID comment. Compare and contrast this to the post I was commenting on.
The pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Dn 2:37), yet this doesn’t preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rv 17:14; 19:16), does it? Also, the Emperor of Persia was called the Shahenshah or King of Kings — is it wrong to call Jesus that term then?
Please pay attention. I labelled it as a DELIBERATELY STUPID comment. Compare and contrast this to the post I was commenting on.
At least a discussion of the trinity doctrine would be a subject worthy of discussion, something (hopefully) beyond,
“So are you, only more so!!!”
I fail to see that as anything other than an attempt to tarnish the Church and Mary by a forced linkage to something non-Christian. Stories of Great Floods in Mesopotamia do not invalidate the Noah story. The alleged virgin birth of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) in 563 BC do not invalidate Christs virgin birth.
Nobody is saying that she needs to be a nobody and nobody is *threatened by her*. That’s no different that the liberal rhetoric tactic of calling others who disagree with you *haters*.
Grow up.
What we’re saying is that the attributes the Catholic church inflicts on her are unscriptural.
She was not perpetually a virgin, she was not immaculately conceived, she was not assumed into heaven. Not one of those things has any Scriptural support. She should not have statues made of her, placed in front of the church, have candles lit to and she should not be prayed to. The only one we are commanded to pray to is God the Father. People who have died and gone to heaven are not God and do not have the power or authority to answer prayer.
Our objection is the fantasy’s attached to her person and taught as truth.
Actually that is MY question to Catholics.. How can Catholics say that the church is the "pillar and ground" of the truth and Scripture is never of private interpretation , that only one that can interpret scripture, when they have actually only interpreted a few verses? Glad we are on the same page here
How also can you boast that Protestants are independent free thinkers and have an indwelling of the Holy Spirit to guide their interpretations and then claim that they have the official commentaries to prove it?
Have I ever said that I am an independent "free thinker"? The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin and leads us to Christ.. One of the marks of one regenerated by the Holy Spirit is a passion for the word of God.. The scriptures hold plain truths that show us who God is,who Christ is and is fully sufficient for growing in Christ and training..
I love when I read scripture and I have an ahh haaa moment when I understand why Christ did that or an OT type for the first time.. dont you love that too?
Commentaries are the work of Scholars, that explain the historic settings, word meanings, history etc.. they do not pretend to be infallible, but observations on the scriptures..only God can make them live in you
John 21:24-25
24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.
25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
******************************************************************************
Big deal. that doesn’t give anyone license to make up stuff, claim it happened and then say that since the Bible doesn’t say it didn’t happen, we can assume it did.
What fallacious um,... reasoning.
At that point, then why would Catholics say that what Joseph Smith claimed, was wrong?
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.