Posted on 08/15/2013 7:03:11 PM PDT by annalex
Once a woman in the crowd surrounding Christ and His disciples cries out to Him:
Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. (Luke 11:27)
What is it? We have, clearly, an act of venerating Mary. Note that the Blessed Virgin is venerated properly: not on her own but as the mother of Christ. Yet the reason for venerating is indeed concerning: it is her physiological and physiologically unique relationship with Jesus that is emphasized. That is not yet paganism with its crude theories of gods giving birth to other gods, but it is lacking proper focus and Jesus corrects it:
Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:28)
|
| The Virgin with the Child on her knees and a prophet pointing at the star. Catacomb of Priscilla, late 2nd c. Source |
Having gotten past this linguistic hurdle, we can understand clearly what this passage, Luke 11:27-28, does: it establishes veneration of saints based not on their blood relation to Christ but on their obedience to God. It is in that sense that we venerate Our Lady: given that Christ is the Word of God personified, she heard and kept both Him in person as her Child and His teaching, figuratively. In Mary the essence of sainthood is seen in the flesh as well as in the mind. We could say that by the late second century at the latest, when we find evidence of the veneration of both the prophets and the Mother of God in the catacombs, the two reasons to venerate a saint: his martyrdom as in the case of Polycarp, or his obedience to the Word, as in Mary, -- unite into a single practice.
The prayers are identified as “of the saints”. Indeed they are passed on to the elders in the beginning of the Mass and then carried by angels to the altar. The point is that they are “of the saints”, not who carries them around: so the saints in heaven are praying.
I have a family and a computer and a car, but I am not rich. My net worth is about zero. I have been greatly blessed.
It depends on my choice and the content of your posts. If you write something I find objectionable I have a right to comment within the rules of the forum. If you don't like posts being addressed to you, the only way to get relief is not to post anything.
I don't remember what the original dispute was, really. Both Matthew 19:29 and Mark 10:29-30 teach the same thing: that it is by self-denial that we gain life eternal.
"For by ONE Spirit are we all baptized into one body..." 1 Cor. 12:13).
It is the only baptism in this age of grace.
"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." (Eph. 4:4-6).
Try to make it two, because I know you will. But there is ONE in this time we live. According to God, through Paul.
Other baptisms are mentioned in the Bible, all to various extents pointing to the true one, and all involving water. The word "baptism", by the way, means "washing" or "immersion". When St. Paul writes of "divers washings" in Hebrews 9:10, he actually writes "διαφοροις βαπτισμοις", "various baptisms".
Additionally, because the Holy Spirit is doing the baptizing it MUST be a spiritual baptism. NOT water.
I agree. And it is Christ Who is offering the Eucharist, and absolving sins at confession, and annointing at confirmation.
At issue here is the typical Protestant either/or thinking. If it is the Holy Ghost then, you reason, it cannot be also the water, or the priest. The fact is that Christ did not come as a pure spirit but He came incarnate. All his miracles had a material aspect to them: rub the spit, touch the garment, use the washwater to make wine, etc. We straddle two worlds, the material world and the spiritual world and the sacraments join the two together.
How convenient! Well let me remind you.
To: boatbums
Correct both times. "Camel through a needle-eye" is a metaphor for something that would
be impossible without God. Jesus treated wealth the same way in Matthew 19:21:
go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me
The gospel has many examples of rich people giving their wealth away and joining Jesus in poverty; none where the rich man remains rich and is praised. A rich man must end his days in a monastery if he wants to be saved.
2,065 posted on Wednesday, September 18, 2013 8:41:32 AM by annalex (fear them not)
Notice the statement I have bolded? Well, you doubled down on it and even got a little snide.
To: WVKayaker; daniel1212; Elsie; CynicalBear; smvoice; metmom In the end, the story tells us that young man who valued that wealth more than eternal life. That is the moral to that story, not that one must not have wealth
That cannot be because the story concludes "a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven". Read the gospel every once in a while, then post opinions about it.
I will liken that story, that lesson, to the idolater's in the Roman Catholic organization
That would be your opinion. The text however speaks for itself: "everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life", so therefore it is good to join, for example, a monastery if one wants to gain eternal life.
Romans 3: 19
...speaks of the futility of "works of the law" and says nothing about joining or not joining monasteries, donating wealth or anything like that.
2,192 posted on Thursday, September 19, 2013 8:25:17 PM by annalex (fear them not)
You do realize that when a person teaches truth from scripture they don’t forget what the “original dispute” was. It’s that old “Oh! what a tangled web we weave” line that gets one in trouble. Your teachings have been shown to be in error over and over again. It’s gotten to the point where anyone reading these posts will likely discount anything you have to say. May I say that it is you who needs to "Read the gospel every once in a while" without the distortions errors of the RCC clouding.
When people truly understand the words of scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit they stop that nonsense. It’s rather clear that it’s where we put our trust. It doesn’t have to be wealth. It can be a “church” and “saints” and “trinkets” as we have been shown over and over in these threads.
Christ did indeed baptize.
"I (John the Baptist speaking) indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he (Christ) shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:" (Matt. 3:11).
There are 3 baptisms in that one verse. One with water unto repentance, BY a man (John the Baptist), one BY CHRIST, baptizing a person WITH the Holy Ghost, and one BY CHRIST, baptizing a person WITH fire.
On the day of Pentecost, Christ did indeed baptize those who had already been baptized in water for remission of sins, with the Holy Spirit and fire. So, three baptisms for believers. Not ONE. AND NOT ONE of those were performed BY the Holy Spirit.
Until Paul. NOW, he says there is ONE baptism, BY the Holy Spirit, whereby HE baptizes us INTO the Body of Christ. Obviously, a spiritual baptism, which was NEVER mentioned before Paul, by the way. Christ does NOT perform this baptism for today.
Go back to ingnoring???? Say what? You have been ignoring the plain words of scripture posted by her and all of us consistently. What do you mean “go back to ignoring”. You can’t “go back” if you never left it.
One needs to know the enemy and the deceptive practices they use.
And intelligent reader ey? An intelligent reader would understand “now in this time” and not make really stupid comments like “A rich man must end his days in a monastery if he wants to be saved.”
John the Baptist was NOT being praised like Catholics praise their so called saints or Mary. In fact, the text puts the Catholic “veneration” nonsense to shame by stating that even he “that is least in the kingdom is greater than he”.
Matthew `11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
That shows that NO ONE is to be put in some sort of “special class” (remember your statement about your so called saints?) of veneration. Is there actually anything you are correct about? I have seen none.
So you have left nothing for Christ! I think you had better stay clear of any millstones
Is part of the kingdom gospel "repent and be baptized for remission of sins"? Of course it is. Now, what if a man said he was sent to preach the gospel, but he was not sent to baptize. Which gospel could he possibly be referring to? The kingdom gospel says "repent and be baptized for remission of sins". Either he is a charlatan, preaching a charlatan gospel, or his gospel does NOT contain "repent and be baptized for remission of sins." And what if that man said that God is going to judge the secrets of men by his gospel one day? Either he is a charlatan or God isn't requiring "repent and be baptized for remission of sins" now.
He calls his gospel "The Gospel of the Grace of God." It's different. Different name, different time, different people. And God told him that his gospel WILL be used to judge men one day. (ROm. 2:16).
Do you still think that water baptism is for today?
No.
The Acts were written by Luke, who had nothing to do with the RCC apostacy that was to come centuries later.
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.