Posted on 12/10/2014 6:32:20 AM PST by marshmallow
"Christian unity" is one of those terms that stir up a whole spectrum of—sometimes emotional—opinions.
On the one hand, we know that Jesus prayed to the Father concerning future believers "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you" (John 17:21a, NIV).
On the other hand, charismatics know it is almost pointless to discuss the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12, 14) with Baptists or most anyone else from a mainline denomination. And Protestants of just about any stripe get riled up when they hear Catholics talking about papal infallibility or their adoration of the Virgin Mary.
It's on this latter point that Rick Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, and successful author, has waded into a hornet's nest of controversy by telling a Catholic News Service interviewer that Protestants and Catholics "have far more in common than what divides us" and that Catholics do not "worship Mary like she's another god."
Regarding Warren's view that Catholics do not worship Mary, Matt Slick, writing on the website of the Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry, goes into great detail with material from Roman Catholic sources that say Mary is "the all holy one," is to be prayed to, worshipped, that she "brings us the gifts of eternal life" and she "made atonement for the sins of man."
If that's not putting her in the place of Christ as a god-like figure to be worshipped, then what is it?
"We believe in Trinity, the Bible, the resurrection, and that salvation is through Jesus Christ. These are the big issues," Warren says. "But the most important thing is if you love Jesus, we're on the same team."
To Warren's point about being on the same team, Slick.....
(Excerpt) Read more at charismanews.com ...
If you want a conversation, fine. Telling another person what he “REALLY” thinks is not normal or adult conversation.
God spent thousands of years forming a people who would be holy enough to recognize him when he came in the flesh. The people the gospels list as the ancestors of Jesus are progressively more holy as time goes on. It stands to reason that the woman from whose flesh the UNFALLEN Christ would take his flesh, and who would be responsible for helping to mold his UNFALLEN psyche, would herself be most fit for that function if she herself was UNFALLEN.
If Mary had been a sinner, Jesus (being God, and just) would have had to wreak vengeance on her, given the intimate relationship between mother and son. Wreaking vengeance is not compatible with a healthy mother-son relationship.
If Mary had not been immaculately conceived—i.e., if she had not been an UNFALLEN person—HER BODY COULD NOT HAVE OBEYED HER WILL when she gave the angel Gabriel her consent to conceive the Word in her womb.
Belief in Mary’s preservation from death and from the corruption of the tomb, by means of her bodily assumption into heaven, was universal in the early Church. The total absence of any tradition regarding a corpse, a tomb, or even relics is evidence that this belief indeed was universal.
Any belief that was universally held by the first generations of Christians has to be the truth—because it is repugnant to hold that Christ’s promise to preserve his Church in the truth was a lie.
The Assumption is evidence for the Immaculate Conception, because it shows that Mary was not punished with death, as she would HAVE to be if she had been a sinner.
The belief that one can profitably read and interpret Scripture WITHOUT RECOURSE TO REASON is as improbable as being able to sing opera without breathing.
That tells me you can't answer the question with any hint of justification.
Why do non-catholics rely on sola scriptura? Because of the false teachings that develop when you don't as in the "immaculate conception".
Any belief that was universally held by the first generations of Christians has to be the truth—
Arthur my man....you're proving my point regarding the information from the catholic encyclopedia online. You're only appealing to man's reason.
Your appeal to the first generations of Christians is also without merit as the catholic encyclopedia tells the catholic not to rely on this as being literal. It was also not a "universal" belief among early Christians either.
So you, a priest, are admitting, you believe in a doctrine of the church that has no scriptural support,(which should stop the whole thing right there) or cannot be appealed to based on "tradition", and is also based on an defendable translation of the Vulgate.
It staggers the mind.
BTW, I wasn't telling you what you believe or any other catholic....I was repeating what a catholic encyclopedia was saying about the catholic belief.
Why do you change the words of scripture? Here, let me give you that again.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: You shall not bow down to them or serve them,
Do you see anything in there that says "Gods"? I don't. Do Catholics make graven images? Yes they do. Do Catholics bow down to them? Yes they do.
These are your church's teachings. Not my opinion or any other Christian's....it's from the catholic church.
You can't defend it and you know it.
This is merely an internet forum. Not something to be taken so seriously. I was commenting on the tone of the comments here.
Where does scripture teach that all true things are in scripture explicitly?
Sola Scriptura does not state that all true things are found only in Scripture.
That exposes a great misunderstanding of what sola Scriptura is.
Where did CAtholics get it from? Did they make it up? Did they get it from pagans? Where did they get the concept from? Or did they get it from scripture? If they got it from scripture why can't others?
Sola Scriptura
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3059418/posts?page=828#828
Here is a good definition of what is meant by Sola Scriptura.
“First of all, it is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge. The Bible is not exhaustive in every detail. John 21:25 speaks to the fact that there are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in John, or in fact in any book in the world because the whole books of the world could not contain it. But the Bible does not have to be exhaustive to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church. We do not need to know the color of Thomas’ eyes. We do not need to know the menu of each meal of the Apostolic band for the Scriptures to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church.
Secondly, it is not a denial of the Church’s authority to teach God’s truth. I Timothy 3:15 describes the Church as “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” The truth is in Jesus Christ and in His Word. The Church teaches truth and calls men to Christ and, in so doing, functions as the pillar and foundation thereof. The Church does not add revelation or rule over Scripture. The Church being the bride of Christ, listens to the Word of Christ, which is found in God-breathed Scripture.
Thirdly, it is not a denial that God’s Word has been spoken. Apostolic preaching was authoritative in and of itself. Yet, the Apostles proved their message from Scripture, as we see in Acts 17:2, and 18:28, and John commended those in Ephesus for testing those who claimed to be Apostles, Revelation 2:2. The Apostles were not afraid to demonstrate the consistency between their teaching and the Old Testament.
And, finally, sola scriptura is not a denial of the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding and enlightening the Church.
What then is sola scriptura?
The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the “rule of faith” for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. To be more specific, I provide the following definition:
The Bible claims to be the sole and sufficient rule of faith for the Christian Church. The Scriptures are not in need of any supplement. Their authority comes from their nature as God-breathed revelation. Their authority is not dependent upon man, Church or council. The Scriptures are self-consistent, self-interpreting, and self-authenticating. The Christian Church looks at the Scriptures as the only and sufficient rule of faith and the Church is always subject to the Word, and is constantly reformed thereby.
“If Jesus existed before Mary and if Jesus was God before Mary existed, Mary is not the mother of God.”
Is Jesus one person or two?
Does Jesus have two natures or one?
Do women give birth to persons or natures?
Someone on FB posted something I saved. It said God told men they would find mates in all corners if the world and then He made it round.
And yet proof texts are what Catholics here have claimed is the support for the Trinity.
You just shot yourself in the foot with that explanation.
Are you telling us that Catholics don't mean what they say?
Honestly, I’ve never heard these prayers you and the other protestants are posting. Maybe other Catholics have. I was a lapsed Catholic who married a protestant and was away from the Catholic Church for many years. I’m so happy to have found my way home again.
I fail to see where, in the prayer that you posted, Mary is presumed to have the powers of a god. I do see where she is revered.
What "anti-Protestant" nastiness? Where is it?
What is being said that indicates Mary is a god?
Y’all should worry more about catholic beliefs. I trust the Bible a whole lot more than any catholic doctrine.
“I love it. I post facts from a catholic website that blows the “immaculate conception” out of the water,”
Read that very carefully. You actually think there is a Catholic website that “that blows the “immaculate conception” out of the water”?
That bizarre assertion of yours sets the tenor for the rest of your post - ridiculous.
“admits no scriptural or “traditiona” support for it, I ask for a reason why ya’ll believe this, and your best reply is to launch into an attack on protestants.”
So my response has to agree with what you expected?
“That tells me you can’t answer the question with any hint of justification.”
No, I simply reject your premise. I am wise to do so for you actually said there is a Catholic website that “that blows the “immaculate conception” out of the water”. That tells me no amount of debate will matter.
“Why do non-catholics rely on sola scriptura? Because of the false teachings that develop when you don’t as in the “immaculate conception”.”
Sola scriptura IS a false teaching by your own standard. It appears no where in scripture.
Either it’s the power of deception.
Or they’d have to admit that they were wrong and have been wrong all this time. And if that was wrong, it would open up the possibility that there are other things the Catholic church could also be wrong about.
The whole house of cards would come tumbling down.
I agree but I think it's both. So much time and energy has been invested in pushing this that if the pope were to admit they were wrong the catholic church collapses.
Let's not overlook the economic aspect of Mary either. She's big business. Rosaries, statues, jewelry, clothes, schools, art, etc. Not giving up that cash stream anytime soon.
Satan has long wanted to replace Jesus and the sacrifice He made on the cross.
When catholics approve the fifth marion doctrine promoting her to co-redeemer, Satan will think he has accomplished something he's long wanted to do.
And to think, he would be using the mother of Christ in a perverted way to do so....and through a church that claims to honor the Son.
“Sola Scriptura does not state that all true things are found only in Scripture.”
I never said it did. Notice that there were TWO different paragraphs? Why do we use paragraphs when writing, metmom? Surely you remember the answer to that question, metmom.
“That exposes a great misunderstanding of what sola Scriptura is.”
Except I never misunderstood it. You misunderstood what was posted even though there were separate paragraphs. Reading: it’s fundamental.
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.