Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Posted on 06/13/2011 3:57:07 PM PDT by HarleyD
It made me stop and ask what other "tenets of the faith" did I receive during those cathecism classes that also did not line up with scripture. And yes, our cathecism classes were all taught without ever a reference to scripture.
I understand that the Pontiffs are not to be questioned, but to set their personal doctrines above the written word almost smacks of other faiths that have established their tenets on a man or a small group of men that teach a new revelation.
I believe this discussion is worthy as it tends to make the important aspects of the faith more real.
I much better understand Jesus as a person, facing the issues of life, much as we do, and to know that he grew up in a family, probably with younger brothers and sisters and two loving parents. Yes, Joseph is last mentioned when Jesus was twelve, but since there is nothing else written about the next two decades, we don't know what happened to Joseph.
Today, I tend to think that Jesus spent an actual three days and three nights in the tomb, as I strongly doubt he died on a Friday, but rather on the eve of the High Sabbath (not necessarily a Friday!)
I believe that Jesus did visit and preach to the souls of those that had departed earlier, as they were in the bosom of Abraham waiting for his resurrection.
I believe in the second coming, but also that each of us experience our own second coming when Jesus comes and the spirit dwells within us.
I believe in a believer's baptism, Jesus is the example of this himself.
And we do not pray to Mary, for the Father himself has appointed His Son to be our Chief intercessor.
Mary was especially favored, but still just as human as anyone of us.
Her humanity is so strongly shown at the foot of the cross. She was as heart-broken as any Mom could ever be, and to know she experienced all of that as a person brings encouragement to each of us.
Yes, it would be strange indeed if Mary had one child, Jesus, at the age of 12 or 14 or however old she was, and then have no more children. Why would she ignore her maternal instincts (and human desires)? And Joseph could go for that? I don't think so. There is plenty of room for common sense in Christianity, and it is disappointing to see so many people prefer unnatural, weird science fiction.
Matthew 13:54-56
54 and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
John 7:2-5 2Now the Jews’ Feast of Booths was at hand. 3 So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea, that your disciples also may see the works you are doing. 4For no one works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 For not even his brothers believed in him.
Both Mary and Joseph did such a wonderful, obedient thing. It must have been quite a scandal, they were probably talked about, etc., yet they obeyed God. After Jesus was born, why wouldn’t God let them go on to have a normal marriage and more children? Children were so important in that culture, especially sons. What would be gained by requiring Mary to remain a virgin, and she and Joseph to have a sexless marriage with no more children? Would it make Mary any less holy if she had a normal marriage and more children? I don’t get why some people are so insistent that she remained a virgin her whole life.
There has been a strong effort by many in the Catholic church to have Mary declared to be the co-redeemer with Christ. That sounds like worship to me.
Not really an accurate account. The Books of the New Testament were being written within 15 years of the Crucifixion. There was not a prolonged period of people "telling stories". Also, Christians recognized the Scriptures within one generation of the end of the Apostolic Era, even though at this time no dominant hierarchy had emerged.
An objective view of history reveals the Holy Spirit at work not a particular church that had not even emerged yet.
Just when you think you’ve heard it all.
Yet Jesus invited Thomas to not only touch him, but to put his hands INTO Jesus wounds.
How would Thomas then not have died, touching the resurrected Christ?
Jesus touched plenty of people while he ministered here on earth, even lepers, which should have technically made Him unclean.
How did they not fall over dead then?
FRegards,
LH
You would have us believe that Mary went through her entire life with NO physical contact with another human being the whole time?
Pity the soul who maybe bumped into her on the street.
“How is this to be since I do not know man?” Luke 1:34
Notice the perfect tense. “I do not know man” means I will not be having sexual intimacy today, tomorrow or any time in the future. The apostles and the early Church knew well that Mary had a perpetual vow of chastity, and that God, as well as her husband Joseph, permitted her to keep her vow. Her simple question to the angel is also a very wise challenge, for as she knew from Hebrew scriptures, one must test a spirit. The angel’s answer that she was to conceive without violating her vow was proof that his message was from God.
“Brothers” in Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic does not distinguish cousins from siblings.
I am always puzzled by the Protestant view that the Bible can be trusted, but the Church which safeguarded it from the beginning, and which received the Lord’s Great Commission is unworthy of the same trust.
metmom, regarding the quote from Matthew, you may note that while Our Lord is referred to as “the carpenter’s son,” James, Joseph, Simon and Jude are not, nor are they, in Scripture, referred to as Mary’s.
A quote for you, from heresiarch Martin Luther’s Sermons On John, chapters 1-4, 1537-39: “Christ...was the onlySon of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him...’brothers’ really means ‘cousins’ here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.”
Nuff said. I truly wish you a good evening, either way.
I don’t mind admitting when I am wrong. There is nothing “inaccurate” about what I wrote. The substance of my comment was that Tradition preceded Scripture and must have provided a cohesion to the early Church.
The definitive analysis of the heresies of the Roman Catholic Church:
http://www.buzzardhut.net/index/htm/Dangers.pdf
It's just not true. The Scriptures were being written within 15 years of the Crucifixion.
no
That just sounds like limited language skills to me. "Co" does not means an equal. Mary is singled out by the the Church because of the extraordinary way she cooperated in our redemption.
We who call our selves Christians are all called to be co-redeemers to one degree or another. St. Paul suggests we are all called to be co-redeemers with Christ when he says that even our sufferings can be added to what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ, for the sake of His Body the Church (Col 1:24).
James and Jude, both of whom penned Epistles, were half-brothers of Jesus. James and Jude’s father was Joseph, husband of Mary. Jesus’ Father was/is God Almighty, First Person of The Holy Trinity. Therefore, Jesus’ male siblings were only HALF brothers. And Jesus also had several half-sisters.
Mark 6:2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?
Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Protestants for the most part live by The Lego Block Method of Scripture Interpretation which means they stick verses they like together to prove whatever they like. Given that fact, they have a very deep psychological need to accuse the Catholic Church of doing the same thing Protestants have been doing since Luther which is to apply the principle of "if it's difficult to obey, interpret it away".
It's a perfect example of a group that sees it's faults in others. They know they decide what they want to accept first and then interpret Scripture in a way that supports that predetermined result so they figure the Church must really have done the same thing at some point.
But the Scriptures do. "and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas"
In order to take that position, one must invalidate the Scripture above. And that is the problem - Overriding Scriptures rather than letting the Scriptures renew the mind.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
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.