Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You can change the wording but you can't change the implications!they are also not catholic either
But the RCC demands compliance to "misunderstandings" rather that permitting parishioners to read the Bible for themselves so they can see the difference and come to a "true understanding" of what the scriptures REALLY says for themselves!That’s why I said we must have understanding or we can only have misunderstanding
You can change the wording but you can't change the implications!
But the RCC demands compliance to "misunderstandings" rather that permitting parishioners to read the Bible for themselves so they can see the difference and come to a "true understanding" of what the scriptures REALLY says for themselves!
Nobody told that to the Catholics I know.they are also not catholic either
Mary is the mother of the man Jesus who is God's son. How can she be mother to both the Father and the Son?Mary is the mother of God
Nope! Here are all the verses that use "Mary - mother of --- "Mary is the mother of God
The development of apostasy and you are in boots and all!apostles creed!
Nicene Creed!
Athanasius Creed!
It isn't how we understand it; it's how you understand it. So why don't you tell us.Jn 3:5 born again by water and the spirit.
Does it mean “faith alone”? “Accept Jesus as your personal lord and savior”?
Or does it mean the Christian sacrament of baptism?
which one?
we need facts not the fantasy the fundamentalist preacher bellows on Sunday morning!
You can change the wording but you can't change the implications!
Nobody told that to the Catholics I know.
Mary is the mother of the man Jesus who is God's son. How can she be mother to both the Father and the Son?
That's called heresy!
Nope! Here are all the verses that use "Mary - mother of --- "
Mat 27:56...among whom were Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zeb'edee.I couldn't find any verses that said "Mary, mother of God" anywhere. So I guess God did not need a mother, right? Maybe the RCC is wrong about that "tradition."
Mar 15:40...There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salo'me,
Mar 15:47...Mary Mag'dalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid.
Mar 16:1...And when the sabbath was past, Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salo'me, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.
Luk 24:10...Now it was Mary Mag'dalene and Jo-an'na and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told this to the apostles;
Act 1:14...All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
Act 12:12...When he realized this, he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John whose other name was Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying.
I'll be impressed when you deny the perpetual virginity of Mary, prayers to Mary, the assumption of Mary and the RCC.Check out the praise forum
I made two threads and no mention of Mary!