Posted on 08/17/2015 6:07:35 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
Thatns.
Every time the child Jesus and his mother are mentioned together, he is mentioned first (vv. 11, 13–14, 20–21).
That should have been “Thanks!”
oops.
He is first as He should be.
I’ve heard on this thread not a single Christian recorded in the NT found Jesus in scripture. So while the Messianic Promise of Gen 3:15 is well know, He wasn’t referred to as Jesus in Genesis so that must account for the confusion. Either that or the OT isn’t scripture either in reality or for the sake of this conversation. Apparently reading scripture can be idol worship as well so watch out for those Bible Studies!
Tim Staples demonstrates that these truths are taught in Scripture. They are foreshadowed in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament passages are cited by the New Testament authors.
Since you have not read Staples’s book, you can assert all you want that he is mistaken, but you have no credibility.
Yes. “Ebb” and “Tide”.
And Staples qualifications are.....what?
You're funny. Lightning preferentially strikes well grounded objects.
Maybe that should be “Roll” “Tide”??
Please, see post 32. You can’’t quote one part of the Bible and deny another part of it.
“Mary is the mother of “God with us.” “
You will believe whatever your church teaches you, apparently. Your call.
We will disagree. God never calls Mary the mother of God. He never makes her into a demigodess - positioned between people and God. He never gives her special powers.
If it was true, He would have included it in His Word. He did not.
I certainly wish you the best. I just disagree with your private interpretation of Scripture to read into it your pre-existing belief.
Best.
Roll, I read post 32. What are you talking about?
Explain yourself.
“Tim Staples demonstrates that these truths are taught in Scripture. They are foreshadowed in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament passages are cited by the New Testament authors.”
No doubt, as a Catholic who MUST believe what your denomination teaches about Mary, he sees it everywhere.
Frankly, I see horses and people’s faces in clouds. The difference between Tim Staples and I is that I know they are not really there. It just appears to my eye that they are there because of my familiarity with the idea. But they are not real horses and faces friend. They are clouds which I imposed my idea upon as Tim does with the Scriptures.
“Since you have not read Staples’s book, you can assert all you want that he is mistaken, but you have no credibility.”
First, I don’t need to be judged as having a shred of credibility by you. Why would I?
I have the inspired Word of God. I’ve studied it for decades, in English. In Greek. In Hebrew. I’ve outlined the whole thing, verse by verse, chapter by chapter, book by book. I’ve taught through vast portions verse by verse. I’ve translated portions.
The truth comes from Scripture, not from a book by a guy who is reading Marian Faces into Scripture that didn’t arise until syncretic paganism was incorporated into the Imperial Roman version of Christianity.
To spot a counterfeit, you only need to know the original well.
I wish you well Arthur.
“You’re funny. Lightning preferentially strikes well grounded objects. “
Exactly as we see happening here. In particular, people never appreciate it when you invalidate their sense of reality. Yet it is what they need, which is why we are discussing things on this open thread, instead of it being a caucus thread. All progress starts with telling the truth. Let the lightening strikes come.
The grounding in His Word protects me quite well, thankfully.
Best to you ebb tide (nice screen name)
The Bereans search the scriptures to prove what Paul taught them about Salvation by The Grace of God in Christ. No doubt Paul taught them about Abraham being saved by believing God and it was counted for him righteousness. It would be easy for Paul to then connect the faithing by Abraham tot he one whom Abraham believed was coming to be His Redeemer. There are several in the Septuagint which they had then who are spoken of as professing’ I know that my Redeemer liveth’ or ‘he looked forward to my day’, as Jesus spoke of David and the hallmarks of Hebrew Faithing.
The title “Mother of God” is derived from the revelation of scripture.
1. The Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Spirit
2. The Son: The Word of God, in the beginning with God. Identified as Jesus, who said about Himself, “before Abraham was, I Am”.
3. The incarnate Son of God is the 2nd person of the Trinity.
4. Mary was the mother of the incarnate Jesus, the 2nd person of the Trinity.
5. If each person of the Trinity can be addressed as God, then Mary is the mother of God, that is, the incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity. She is not the mother of the Father or of the Holy Spirit, or even of the pre-incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity.
Again Hmmmmmm? So you are saying they weren't reading the NT? That there were scriptures before that? Catholicism sure is confusing. Good thing the Vatican is around to clarify all these important points.
**Do you affirm or deny that Mary is the mother of “God with us” according to the scriptures ?**
Do you affirm or deny that Jesus Christ said: “..The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.”?
Do you affirm or deny that the phrase “God the Son” is never used by Jesus Christ, or the apostles, in the holy scriptures?
Is it so hard to believe the scriptures, that show Jesus Christ (remember? our example?), praying to the Father, and never to any anybody else; not to any of the prophets, or to Noah, or Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob, etc?
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.