Jesus is the Life Preserver. Mary is the Rope He Chose To Reel Us In.

The Most Ancient Tradition | 06-16-2019 | Charles O'Connell

[Zionist Conspirator]

[af_vet_1981]

I myself have argued against Paul being the author of Hebrews on the basis of the contrasting style and absence of his otherwise uniform statement of his authorship, yet 2 Peter 3:15 seems to refer to this epistle, and thus I postulate that it may have been originally a synagogue address (to Christians meeting therein) that was penned by someone else, as with the gospels and the teachings of Christ.

I doubt it; Jews who believed in Jesus were generally barred from the synagogues. The epistle was written to these:

• Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
  
  ...
  
  
• Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.
• Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.

Hebrews, Catholic chapter three, Protestant verse one,
Hebrews, Catholic chapter thirteen, Protestant verses twenty three to twenty four,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

But if you want to contend against the Pauline authorship of Hebrews than that is fine with me. However, then you need to thus attribute error to your own council of Trent:

It could have been the Apostle Paul. The part about a synagogue address makes no sense. Had it been to a Greek, Asian, or Roman synagogue, it would have been addressed to a church fathered by the Apostle. It could have been to the churches of Judea and Galilee, and it could have been Pauline, or someone closely associated with the Apostle.

The Pontifical Biblical Communion, in a decree issued on April 24, 1914, reaffirmed its canonicity. It answered the question, “Has the apostle Paul to be regarded as the author of this letter in the sense that not only must one hold that he conceived it and expressed it under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but that he gave it the form in which it has come down to us?” Its reply was, “No, not unless the Church decides so in the future.” This is probably why there is no direct reference to Paul as author of this letter in recent liturgical books. However, Paul can be regarded as the indirect author of Hebrews. Researchers are free to explore this matter.

[Popman]

You must have a different version of. Luke 1 because their is no early account of Jesus life in there except for a passing reference...

[metmom]

That’s the image of God I was raised with as a Catholic.

[daniel1212]

Ott acknowledges for the first three centuries, the “veneration” of Mary was connected with the veneration of Christ. It is in the fourth century, and especially after Ephesus (431), that the formal veneration of Mary is found. “For the first three centuries, the “veneration” of Mary was intimately connected with the veneration of Christ. From the 4th c onwards we find a formal veneration of Mary herself.”

Ephesus? That are also had a tradition:

So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth. And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians. (Acts 19:27-28)

Mary’s unparalleled stature as a figure to whom the faithful sought recourse grew through the slow accumulation of a complex matrix..An ever-growing stock of inventive literary images and elaborate phraseology embellished the liturgy.

Pelikan observes “…there is no altogether incontestable evidence that it was used before the fourth century, despite Newman’s categorical claim that “the title Theotocos, or Mother of God, was familiar to Christians from primitive times.”

Carroll contends “…there is little evidence or no evidence that anything like the Mary cult existed during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.”

Par for the Catholic course, but tradition is and means what they say, based on tradition.

Thanks. Is your whole paper online?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

.

[Mark17]

Islam does teach the Muslim’s salvation is however Allah weighs the scales....unless you die in jihad.

Speaking of jihad, my catholic dad told me, that if a man dies, fighting for his country, he would go to Heaven. Have you ever heard of anything so ridiculous in your life? It just goes to show you some of the weird beliefs that some Catholics have.

[ealgeone]

Urban II promised forgiveness of sins for those who died in battle during the first Crusade IIRCC.

Roman Catholicism's version of jihad.

[Mark17]

I was wondering where it came from. I couldn’t believe my dad made it up out of thin air.

[2nd amendment mama]

placemark

[Religion Moderator]

“You have no idea.”

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Mind reading is making it personal.

[Mark17]

Salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, not in anyway by works placemaker.

[2nd amendment mama]

??? I’m very aware of that. Not sure who your post was for.

[Luircin]

It’s just a self-set reminder to come back to the thread later and see what’s happening on it.

[daniel1212]

Much of Roman Catholic theology is based on the discounted Infancy Gospel of James.

Some official theology is influenced by it, while RC apologists argue for such desired beliefs as Mary being a type of vestal virgin (yet extrapolating from othwer sources for it).

For the Roman Catholic, who seemingly elevates "tradition" to a position equal to, and in many cases, superior to Scripture, to continue to rely upon this discredited and rejected writing is telling.

Rome presumes to be as God.

“It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine. ” "I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves.... The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour." — Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, “The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation,” (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228.

[Mark17]

It’s just a self-set reminder to come back to the thread later and see what’s happening on it.

[MHGinTN]

The conflation of the Catholic Org with the actual One True Church of Jesus The Christ made up of ALL believers across time and not an institution has deep roots. Deception at it’s most refined! We confront it almost daily right here in Freerepublic ... and I am certain the posters know they are conflating for empowerment of their Org (rhymes with Borg).

[Elsie]

Would/could you do this?

The forthcoming "why not" should prove interesting.

[Elsie]

The "great sign" not only has both an individual and collective reference, it also has both a present and future reference,...

You Catholics appear prepped for looking for SIGNS in the sky.

Good luck with the next one.

---

Matthew 24:24-25

For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.

[Elsie]

... just as the rays of the sun penetrate without breaking or injuring in the least the solid substance of glass,
so after a like but more exalted manner did Jesus Christ come forth from His mother's womb without injury to her maternal virginity..

WHAT??

Are we having a contest to find the most crazy non sequitar ever published??