Co- Redemptrix

[amadeus]

Sooooo, you're saying that you guys haven't posted the following lies??
- Catholics worship Mary
- Catholics worship statues
- Catholics are forbidden to read the Bible
- Catholics are NOT Christian
- The Catholic Church killed "millions" of people during the Inquisitions
- Pope Pius XII gave his blessing on Hitler's atrocities
- The Catholic Church was started by Constantine
- The Catholic Church is thinking about changing some of their doctrines
- All priests are pedophiles
- The list goes on and on and on . . .

You're a LOT more dishonest than I gave you credit for, Amadeus . . .

There really is a difference between singular and plural as well as between individuals. All Catholics are not alike and the same goes for non-Catholic believers.

 

[Jun2u]

The point here, Einstein is that you were attempting to show that Mary was cursed with labor pains because of her sin.
I destroyed that impotent argument by illustrating that pain and death were ALSO penalties for sin - and Jesus suffered BOTH.

BOTH Mary and Jesus were sinless - and they BOTH suffered pain and death .

The devils knew Jesus as the "sinless" (holy) one, but Mary???
Scriptures don't contradict scriptures. If Mary admitted in her magnificat that she also needed a Savior like everybody else, it means, she is not "sinless" as you and your church claim!

To God Be The Glory

 

[twinc]

The devils knew Jesus as the "sinless" (holy) one, but Mary???
Scriptures don't contradict scriptures. If Mary admitted in her magnificat that she also needed a Savior like everybody else, it means, she is not "sinless" as you and your church claim!

To God Be The Glory

what Mary knew and the Church knows but we have problems with is that we were/are saved before we were/are born - twinc

 

[BreadOfLife]

The devils knew Jesus as the "sinless" (holy) one, but Mary???
Scriptures don't contradict scriptures. If Mary admitted in her magnificat that she also needed a Savior like everybody else, it means, she is not "sinless" as you and your church claim!

To God Be The Glory

WRONG.

The demon in Mark 1:24 refers to Jesus as "the HOLY ONE of God" - not the "Sinless One".
"Holy" (hagios) simply means to be set apart.

As for the Magnificat - Mary DID need a Savior - and it was God.
The difference between her and the rest of us is that we are pulled out of the mud of sin.
She was saved from falling into the mud in the first place (Kecharitomene).

 

[BreadOfLife]

There really is a difference between singular and plural as well as between individuals. All Catholics are not alike and the same goes for non-Catholic believers.

And I never said that "ALL" non-Catholics lie about the Catholic Church.
I am ONLY referring to all of YOU who have lied on this forum.

So, you just lied again . . .

 

[amadeus]

And I never said that "ALL" non-Catholics lie about the Catholic Church.
I am ONLY referring to all of YOU who have lied on this forum.

So, you just lied again . . .

You still have not learned how to read. I thought people learned to do that in the schools of men, but truly without the Holy Ghost, there are a great many things, which really, are messages from God in unknown tongues.

I am praying that God will first help you to open your heart and then fill you with the Holy Ghost.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Did you ever call your mother "woman" to her face?

Jesus did with Mary!

Good grief - time for another Bible lesson . . .

In Gen. 3:16, God tells the serpent that the offspring of the "Woman" will crush his head.

In John’s Gospel, Jesus never refers to his mother as “mother” (John 2:4, 19:26). Whenever he addresses his mother, he calls her “Woman”. You anti-Catholics point to this as "proof" that there was nothing special about Mary or that Jesus didn’t hold her in very high regard. This couldn’t be further from the truth. This correlates directly to the Woman in Gen. 3:15 and in Rev. 12.

Jesus defeats death on Calvary (Skull place) and fulfills the prophecy in Gen. 3:15 about the offspring of the "Woman".
Mary is present at the foot of the cross while this is happening - and what does Jesus call her in John 19:26? He calls her “WOMAN”, because the prophecy about the head of the serpent being crushed in Genesis is taking place right there on Calvary.

Finally - God COMMANDS us to honor our mother and father.
Do you honestly believe that Jesus would break his own Commandment and disrespect His mother?? Calling her "Woman" is the greatest honor He could have given her.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You still have not learned how to read. I thought people learned to do that in the schools of men, but truly without the Holy Ghost, there are a great many things, which really, are messages from God in unknown tongues.

I am praying that God will first help you to open your heart and then fill you with the Holy Ghost.

Just be honest from now on, Amadeus.
Leave the lies, myths and falsehoods at the door when you come her.

 

[amadeus]

For the moment, I am finished here! Of course, God may call be back at a later time!

 

[Richard_oti]

and there we have the whole point of trinity doctrine, i guess

Not in my opinion. There were several "ideas" that were floating around. The trinity doctrine gained traction IMO due to secular and "other" influence(s). However, to disagree, became verbotten. To have in one's possession any writings that were contrary, also became verbotten.

Such were ordered to be burned at various points in history, as well as the house(s) that contained them. Said "punishment" varied from confiscation of one's property to capital punishment. Heck, if someone claimed that I was "disturbing" the "church" in speaking as I do, even that held capital punishment at a time in history. And of course, anyone not accepting it, was deemed heretical, which also was punishable by law.

If memory serves, I believe it was circa 405 CE that an edict was decreed that all shall recognize the trinity. But again, there were a great number of such edicts that were put in place through secular authority(s).


"[T]hose who accept Messiah in such a way that they do
not cease to observe the Old Law" Jerome; On. Is. 8:14.

Panarion 29, Epiphanius writes:
"We shall now especially consider heretics who... call themselves Nazarenes; they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way
the Old Testament of the Jews; for they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings ... so that they are approved of by the Jews, from whom the Nazarenes do not differ in anything, and they profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and to the customs of the Jews, except they believe in [Messiah]... They preach that there is but
one [Elohim], and his son [Y'shua the Messiah]. But they are very learned in the Hebrew language; for they, like the Jews, read the whole Law, then the Prophets... They differ from the
Jews because they believe in Messiah, and from the Christians in that they are to this day bound to the Jewish rites, such as circumcision, the Sabbath, and other ceremonies."

What does Epiphanius mean when he writes:
"They do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings"?

Does that imply that it was "forbidden" elsewhere?


364 CE: The Council of Laodicea orders all religious observances are now to be held on Sunday. Shabat, or Saturday is declared sinful and against Christ.

 

[Richard_oti]

"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. John 1:18
The implication of the verse is that every appearance of God in the Old Testament was an appearance of the "Angel of the Lord" or the preincarnate Son of God (some believe both to be true, but the book of Hebrews makes the point that Jesus is more than an angel). This also means that Yahshuah is Yahavah in the flesh. Hebrews 10:5 seems to confirm this: "Therefore when He came into the world, He said: Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me."
We also have the proof text: "For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" Colossians 2:9
The concept of a trinity is not the idea of 3 Gods, but of 1 God known in 3 persons. I don't believe that we, with finite minds, can ever entirely grasp the infinite "nature" of God, but why should we have a problem with an infinite, eternal God, revealing Himself in a hierarchy through the person of His Son and His Holy Spirit? Who can contain infinity without being infinite?

Thanks for your reply. I am familiar with the "Trinity", it was what I was introduced to first. Nor, do I consider Jesus as a mere "angel".

In Colossians 1:15, Jesus is the "firstborn" of all creation. The first brought forth, of all creation.


Tehillim 110:1 ne'um YHVH la-'adoni shev li-ymnini `ad_'ashit 'oyeveyka hadom le-ragleyka

Psalms 110:1 declares YHVH to-my lord sit! at-my right hand until_I make your enemies footstool for-your feet.


1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. ... 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all.

In Numbers 11:17 and 25, why did YHVH "take" of the Spirit that was upon Moses to "put" it also upon the seventy?

Why did Jesus have to leave, in order for the Comforter to come?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Thanks for your reply. I am familiar with the "Trinity", it was what I was introduced to first. Nor, do I consider Jesus as a mere "angel".

In Colossians 1:15, Jesus is the "firstborn" of all creation. The first brought forth, of all creation.

In Numbers 11:17 and 25, why did YHVH "take" of the Spirit that was upon Moses to "put" it also upon the seventy?

Why did Jesus have to leave, in order for the Comforter to come?

"Firstborn" in Colossians 1:15 doesn't have anything to do with the order of creation, but refers to the legal right as inheritor; Jesus is the inheritor of all creation. Those that receive the Spirit of adoption become co-inheritors with Him.
The Spirit upon Moses was an annointing Jesus placed upon Him so he was able to give prophecy and use the wisdom of God in applying God's word to legal disputes. Jesus placed this annointing upon the 70 elders to give them the same ability to use wisdom in legal disputes and remove some of the burden from Moses. see Numbers 11:17
The reason Jesus had to leave before the coming of the comforter was that He had to pay the redemption price of all creation with His blood; Man had to be redeemed from sin before we could receive the seal of our redemption, the Holy Spirit.
See Ephesians 1:7, 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, Ephesians 1:13, Ephesians 4:30

 

[Stranger]

WRONG.

The demon in Mark 1:24 refers to Jesus as "the HOLY ONE of God" - not the "Sinless One".
"Holy" (hagios) simply means to be set apart.

As for the Magnificat - Mary DID need a Savior - and it was God.
The difference between her and the rest of us is that we are pulled out of the mud of sin.
She was saved from falling into the mud in the first place (Kecharitomene).

Oh yeah. A little 'kecharitomene' on mary just like ketchup on fries. Stops mary from sliding into 'sin'. Next order please. Mustard, mayonaise, kecharitomene.

Stranger

 

[epostle1]

"Firstborn" does not necessitate a second born.

“For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus, and yet Jesus says to His mother, Woman, behold thy son,’ and not Behold you have this son also,’ then He virtually said to her, Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.’ Is it not the case that every one who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, Behold thy son Christ.’ What a mind, then, must we have to enable us to interpret in a worthy manner this work, though it be committed to the earthly treasure-house of common speech, of writing which any passer-by can read, and which can be heard when read aloud by any one who lends to it his bodily ears?” Origen, Commentary on John, I:6 (A.D. 232).

 

[epostle1]

The devils knew Jesus as the "sinless" (holy) one, but Mary???
Scriptures don't contradict scriptures. If Mary admitted in her magnificat that she also needed a Savior like everybody else, it means, she is not "sinless" as you and your church claim!

To God Be The Glory

But you refuse to say WHEN Mary received her salvation.
Did the angel say "POOF! Mary! you are now sinless" which the angel did not say.
Did Mary go to the Temple and recite the sinners prayer before Jesus was born??? which is no less absurd???
There are only 2 places in scripture where Kecharitomene is found. Luke 1:28 that describes Mary, and Jesus Christ in John 1:14.
You can believe Jesus is Full of Grace because it i explicit but you refuse to believe Mary can be too, in a lesser sense. It's not Catholicism that has these problems.
If Mary received salvation when she was conceived, then Mary was sinless by the merits of the cross retrospectively. (like David received forgiveness)

In your system, Jesus never needed a mother.

 

[pia]

For the moment, I am finished here! Of course, God may call be back at a later time!

How come ? I will miss your posts very much. God bless you and your family

 

[pia]

But you refuse to say WHEN Mary received her salvation.
Did the angel say "POOF! Mary! you are now sinless" which the angel did not say.
Did Mary go to the Temple and recite the sinners prayer before Jesus was born??? which is no less absurd???
There are only 2 places in scripture where Kecharitomene is found. Luke 1:28 that describes Mary, and Jesus Christ in John 1:14.
You can believe Jesus is Full of Grace because it i explicit but you refuse to believe Mary can be too, in a lesser sense. It's not Catholicism that has these problems.
If Mary received salvation when she was conceived, then Mary was sinless by the merits of the cross retrospectively. (like David received forgiveness)

In your system, Jesus never needed a mother.

She did not need to be sinless, just of a pure heart...Jesus wasn't conceived in her womb containing the Holy spirit already, remember He was born as a son of mankind...Because He remained without sin, He was able to receive the fullness of God through His Holy spirit, to teach men truth and to show Gods Love to them, thus becoming the first ever human being containing the Holy spirit completely within His own spirit, all of the time, until the cross...A new creation, created not by human hands but by God Himself....Mary was and always will be a highly favored, woman, but she shouldn't be turned into a false deity...I'm sure even she would protest...

 

[aspen]

According to him and other Catholics, their church is the only true way to salvation. There was even such a thread started by one of them for Christs sake. To me it seems to violate one of the rules of this website of not accusing others of not being "true Christians", yet it went unchallenged by the moderators. So I am not at all surprised that he comes here accusing everyone not of his church as "liars". We aren't really saved according to his ilk.

Nah, he makes no distinction between members and nonmembers - we are all liars

 

[Dcopymope]

Nah, he makes no distinction between members and nonmembers - we are all liars

All liars and unsaved, and this guy is still here, running his mouth. I just don't know what to say anymore.

 

[epostle1]

Mary didn't need to be sinless, it was fitting.
Can God and sin co-exist?