Biblical Mary

[Taken]

a. Sinless Mary (Luke 1:28)
b. God impregnating Mary - Mary conceives Jesus in HER womb (Luke 1:31)
c. Shepherd (Bishop) Peter (John 21:15-19)

That was fun.
Anything else?

Deception always appears to be fun for you...

Instead of hiding behind Scriptural references....
Quote the Scripture that says:
"Sinless Mary"

 

[Wrangler]

Your LORD vs Lord is a complete red herring.

Not at all. It goes right to the heart of the matter.

Your retreating to foreign languages is a Confession you’ve lost the argument and hope to divert attention elsewhere.

 

[Wrangler]

I've looked all through Luke 1 in 4 commonly used translations - KJV, RSV, ESV, ASV and none of them use LORD

Proving my point. Lowercase ‘Lord’ is NOT a synonym for God. Only the capitalized variant is.

So, a Catholic starts off this thread under false pretenses, pretending your doctrine is in the Bible when it is not.

Had the statement been, Mary is the mother of our Lord, I would have agreed all day long.

 

[Wrangler]

If however you start without any preconceived ideas, and you read Luke 1:28, there is really no way you can come up with Mary being sinless.

And no way of coming up with the notion of Immaculate Conception of Mary.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Is English your first language?



A reasonable conclusion from this is that John IS the son of Mary.



I guess not. John is not the son of Mary. Yet, Jesus tells Mary to look at your son, John. That's weird. Something is both a thing (son) and not a thing (not a son). To your way of thinking,

• You are right, except for being wrong.
• I am wrong, except for being right.

Well if John is the son of Mary, He is never mentioned as such in Scripture. All that I know say it is the apostle JOhn (the beloved disciple) which is jesus'cousin (john the son of Zebedee).

 

[Mungo]

Not at all. It goes right to the heart of the matter.

No it doesn't.

Your retreating to foreign languages is a Confession you’ve lost the argument and hope to divert attention elsewhere.

I didn't retteat to a foreign language. That is a false claim.

You've bottled it and made no answer to the points I made and are trying to divert to something else.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You are the one who is being stubborn and obstinate.

In the Catholic Church there are different liturgical Rites, 24 in total.
ALL Rites adhere to the same doctrines and ALL Rites are in full communion with the Pope.
There is ONE Church - the Catholic Church with what are known as particular churches (not sects).
The Catechism which we quote from is the Catechism of The Catholic Church - not Roman Catholic Church

They differ in liturgical practices and some aspects of governance.
There is a useful article in Wikipedia explaining this with a list of the different particular churches.
Catholic particular churches and liturgical rites - Wikipedia

A couple of quotes:
There are 24 autonomous churches: one Latin Church and twenty-three Eastern Catholic Churches, a distinction by now more historical than geographical. The term sui iuris means, literally, "of its own law", or self-governing. Although all of the particular churches espouse the same beliefs and faith, their distinction lies in their varied expression of that faith through their traditions, disciplines, and canon law. All are in communion with the Holy See.

The word "church" is applied to the Catholic Church as a whole, which is seen as a single church: the multitude of peoples and cultures within the church, and the great diversity of gifts, offices, conditions and ways of life of its members, are not opposed to the church's unity. In this sense of "church", the list of churches in the Catholic Church has only one member, the Catholic Church itself (comprising Roman and Eastern Churches).

Yes you will see the term Roman Catholic applied to the Latin or Roman rite. My own diocese is the Roman Catholic Diocese of Liverpool because it serves Roman Rite Catholics in the Liverpool area.

And yes, you will see a lot of local churches caller Roman Catholic Church because the Latin or Roman rite exists mainly in the west.

But to refer to the Church as a whole as the Roman Catholic Church is incorrect.

They may honor the pope, but they do not recognize him as their pontiff- that is a big difference.

What is Roman Catholicism? | What is the Catholic Church ...
What is Roman Catholicism?
Feb 12, 2021 · Roman Catholicism is a worldwide religious organization headquartered in Vatican City in Italy.

Roman Catholicism | Definition, Beliefs, History, & Facts ...
Roman Catholicism | Definition, Beliefs, History, & Facts
Roman Catholicism, Christian church that has been the decisive spiritual force in the history of Western civilization. Along with Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism, it is one of the three major branches of Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church traces its history to


Roman Cathoicism is the only church headquartered in the Vatican, and th eonly catholic sect that recognizes the pope as the true head of the church.

Now if you want to split hairs like you are doing we can strain at the gnats you are presenting, but we all know that Roman Cathokliciusm is its own sect- no matter how many other churches are in communion with the pope or have catholic as part of their name.

We can do the same with the Baptists. there are numerous baptist sects but all are independent of each other though many are in communion with one another.

Now can we get back to Mary?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Hus, Tyndale and Luther were Catholic priests who repudiated their Catholic beliefs - so, yes - they were heretics.
That is the very definition of "heresy", Einstein.

This has NOTHING to do with "biased" Catholic theologians in the Councils - but the repudiation of Catholic teaching by Catholics.

Well if they are repudiating heresy, then they may be heretics to those holding the heresy, but not heretics in the eyes of God and His Inspired Word.

And it was their Roman Catholic beliefs specifically that they repudiated- especially Popery!

 

[Mungo]

They may honor the pope, but they do not recognize him as their pontiff- that is a big difference.

What is Roman Catholicism? | What is the Catholic Church ...
What is Roman Catholicism?
Feb 12, 2021 · Roman Catholicism is a worldwide religious organization headquartered in Vatican City in Italy.

CARM! You quote from CARM!!!

That proves nothing, zilch!

Roman Catholicism | Definition, Beliefs, History, & Facts ...
Roman Catholicism | Definition, Beliefs, History, & Facts
Roman Catholicism, Christian church that has been the decisive spiritual force in the history of Western civilization. Along with Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism, it is one of the three major branches of Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church traces its history to

Sorry, but that is wrong.

Roman Cathoicism is the only church headquartered in the Vatican, and th eonly catholic sect that recognizes the pope as the true head of the church.

Now if you want to split hairs like you are doing we can strain at the gnats you are presenting, but we all know that Roman Cathokliciusm is its own sect- no matter how many other churches are in communion with the pope or have catholic as part of their name.

We can do the same with the Baptists. there are numerous baptist sects but all are independent of each other though many are in communion with one another.

Now can we get back to Mary?

You are just plain wrong.

There is a useful article in Wikipedia explaining this with a list of the different particular churches.
Catholic particular churches and liturgical rites - Wikipedia

A couple of quotes:
There are 24 autonomous churches: one Latin Church and twenty-three Eastern Catholic Churches, a distinction by now more historical than geographical. The term sui iuris means, literally, "of its own law", or self-governing. Although all of the particular churches espouse the same beliefs and faith, their distinction lies in their varied expression of that faith through their traditions, disciplines, and canon law. All are in communion with the Holy See.

The word "church" is applied to the Catholic Church as a whole, which is seen as a single church: the multitude of peoples and cultures within the church, and the great diversity of gifts, offices, conditions and ways of life of its members, are not opposed to the church's unity. In this sense of "church", the list of churches in the Catholic Church has only one member, the Catholic Church itself (comprising Roman and Eastern Churches).[/QUOTE]

 

[Wrangler]

especially Popery!

Let's see Biblical Popery. LOL

 

[Wrangler]

You've bottled it and made no answer to the points I made

Not sure what you even mean about bottling it up. As far as answering the other points you made; I guess I'm still focused on the 1st boo-boo that you are failing to admit. There are many lords in the Bible and note of them are God.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

WOW.

Sooooo, you can only offer "suppositions" as to why Mary's "other children" couldn't care for her because the Bible is SILENT about it.
Yet you insist that she indeed had "other children" - when the Bible is just as SILENT about it.

I hope you don't run your personal life with the SAME kind of confusion . . .

Well your ignorance of the SCriptures are showing. The Bible doesn't declare as to the why Jesus handed over Mary's care to John, just that He did.

But as to Mary having other children:

Matthew 12:

47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Mark 6
King James Version

6 And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him.

2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?

3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Matthew 13:54-56
King James Version

54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?

55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

Please don't try the "cousin thig. that doesn't fly linguistically, grammatically, contextually or culturally ! Jesus had at least four brethren and two sisters according to Gods Word!

JOseph and Mary , once Jesus was born, did a lot of knowing each other as a good jewish husband and wife would do according to the law.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

This is like speaking to a box of rocks . . .

The 20 or so Liturgical Rites I mentioned are ALL part of the ONE Catholic Church.
they are not "Catholic sects" - they are Liturgical Rites. We are ALL in full communion with each other and with the Pope.

The "sects" that YOU are ignorantly referring to are groups that have broken away from the Catholic Church.
In short, they are nothing but Protestants - just like YOU.

Get your facts straight and stop embarrassing yourself . . .

Well they may have Catholic in their name, but only the roman Catholic church recognizes the Pope as Supreme Pontiff and only the Roman CAtholic church is headquarteredin rome. You can strain at your gnats all you want but everyone knows that the Roman church is ts own sect and though the other Cathooic churches have commonality, they are their own sects with their own leaders and headquarters. YOu may all be in communion with the pope, but each sect has its own leader and none other recognize the pope as the ultimate head.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

CARM! You quote from CARM!!!

That proves nothing, zilch!



Sorry, but that is wrong.




You are just plain wrong.

There is a useful article in Wikipedia explaining this with a list of the different particular churches.
Catholic particular churches and liturgical rites - Wikipedia

A couple of quotes:
There are 24 autonomous churches: one Latin Church and twenty-three Eastern Catholic Churches, a distinction by now more historical than geographical. The term sui iuris means, literally, "of its own law", or self-governing. Although all of the particular churches espouse the same beliefs and faith, their distinction lies in their varied expression of that faith through their traditions, disciplines, and canon law. All are in communion with the Holy See.

The word "church" is applied to the Catholic Church as a whole, which is seen as a single church: the multitude of peoples and cultures within the church, and the great diversity of gifts, offices, conditions and ways of life of its members, are not opposed to the church's unity. In this sense of "church", the list of churches in the Catholic Church has only one member, the Catholic Church itself (comprising Roman and Eastern Churches).

[/QUOTE]


Well in that "sense". Once again parsing words to paint the protrait you want. All have their won headquarters and only th eRoman Church recognizes the Pope as supreme head. I can play the sam word game with Baptist churches just like you are with Catholicism, But the Roman Catholic church is a separate and distinct church . It has its own liturgy, its own headquarters, the college of cardinals do not make decisions of the other sects. the othere "Catholic" churches do not follow Romes decrees by compulsion as Roman Catholic churches are required to!

You are simply painting a picture to suit your agenda.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Let's see Biblical Popery. LOL

Don't need to. Jesus never commanded the church to have a "Pope".

 

[Mungo]

Well in that "sense". Once again parsing words to paint the protrait you want. All have their won headquarters and only th eRoman Church recognizes the Pope as supreme head. I can play the sam word game with Baptist churches just like you are with Catholicism, But the Roman Catholic church is a separate and distinct church . It has its own liturgy, its own headquarters, the college of cardinals do not make decisions of the other sects. the othere "Catholic" churches do not follow Romes decrees by compulsion as Roman Catholic churches are required to!

You are simply painting a picture to suit your agenda.

Eastern Catholic Churches
The definition of an Eastern-Rite Catholic is: A Christian of any Eastern rite in union with the pope: i.e. a Catholic who belongs not to the Roman, but to an Eastern rite. They differ from other Eastern Christians in that they are in communion with Rome, and from Latins in that they have other rites.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Eastern Churches

 

[Mungo]

@Ronald Nolette
From the Vatican web site
Congregation for the Eastern Churches
The complex reality of the Oriental Churches with respect to their geographical, cultural and social conditions requires that the great Catholic community will share its resources, which can help the Orientals to keep alive and to develop the most genuine traditions of their Churches according to the instructions of the Second Vatican Council, the norms of the Code of Canons of the Oriental Churches and the directives of the Supreme Pontiffs.

 

[Mungo]

Not sure what you even mean about bottling it up. As far as answering the other points you made; I guess I'm still focused on the 1st boo-boo that you are failing to admit. There are many lords in the Bible and note of them are God.

All the Lords in Luke 1 are God. That is all I am focussing on.

Time for you to stop dissembling and answer my post.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yeah right!

This is heresy!

How?
Please explain . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

William Tyndale was not just somebody or anybody. He was an outstanding Catholic scholar and theologian who not only translated the Bible into English, but wrote extensively. But he saw the errors of the Catholic Church and exposed them. You might want to read these writings to see the truth.

• The Introduction to the New Testament [Pathway into Holy Scripture] (1525)
• The Parable of the Wicked Mammon (1528)
• The Obedience of a Christian Man (1528)
• The Practice of Prelates (1530)
• An Answer to Sir Thomas More's Dialogue (1531)
• Expositions of 1 John and Matthew V-VII (1531 and 1533)

It is a fact of history that many English versions of the Scriptures existed before Wycliff -let alone Tyndale. They were authorized and completely legal (see “Where We Got the Bible” by Henry Graham, ch. 11, “Vernacular Scriptures Before Wycliff”).

FAR from being the “hero” of the English Bible – Tyndale was a trouble maker. He was infamous for his verbal assaults on the clergy, from the pope down to the friars and monks. Not only did he have a complete contempt for Church authority - he was first tried for heresy a full 3 years BEFORE his translation of the NT, in 1522. In fact, his own bishop in London wouldn’t even come to his defense.

Tyndale left England for Worms and was influenced by Luther. It was there that in 1525, he produced his English translation of the NT – which included a prologue with notes that attacked the Catholic Church and the clergy in general.

Even PROTESTANT authors David Price and Charles C. Ryrie comment on Tyndale's translation:
“Unquestionably, anti-Catholic outbursts are sufficiently numerous to make a strong impression on any reader.”

Secular Authorities condemned his English translation as heretical. It might interest you to know that even Henry VIII – who had such contempt for the Catholic Church that he murdered many Catholic clergy members – even HE condemned Tyndale’s translation as flawed and heretical.

In 1531 he declared that “the translation of the Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale should be utterly expelled, rejected, and put away out of the hands of the people.”

In 1543. Henry again declared: “all manner of books of the Old and New Testament in English, being of the crafty, false, and untrue translation of Tyndale . . . shall be clearly and utterly abolished, extinguished, and forbidden to be kept or used in this realm.”

Tyndale’s heresy wasn’t translating the Bible into English. That had ALREADY been done authoritatively.
No – his heresy was in the heretical ideas that his version promoted. It was blatantly anti-Catholic in its wording.