Questions For A Catholic

[aspen]

First- prove "full of grace".
The Greek for "full of grace" is "plaras karitos", and is never used in Luke 1, and the two places it is used, don't reference Mary (John 1:14 and Acts 6:8).

The word κεχαριτωμένη, (kecharitōménē), here translated as "full of grace", admits of various translations. Grammatically, the word is the feminine present perfect passive voice participle of the verb χαριτόω[sup][2][/sup], charitóō, which means "to show, or bestow with, grace" and, in the passive voice, "to have grace shown, or bestowed upon, one". The form of the verb is intensive, hence the translations "full of grace".[sup][3][/sup]


[font="arial][size="2"]Stephen is not ”hailed” as being ” full of grace” but only referred to as being ”full of grace”. The term that is used for ”full of grace” in the greek towards St.Mary and Jesus in Luke:1:28 and John:1:14 both denote sinlessness. It harbours a different definition by the inspired authors. The greek definition referred to Stephen being ”full of grace” used is ”pleres pistis”. It denotes not a grace of sinlessness, but to the contrary, the grace of ”moral conviction.”
[/size][/font]
I'm glad we agree. Now if you'd just apply this to grace, blessing, peace, holiness, etc...
You need to read this passage a bit closer, I think. They called to him as in, "Surely, your mother and family are most important" and he turned that notion down. He didn't do a "regardless of roles"... He SHOT DOWN the notion of roles here.

I think you are reading into the verses. Once again, Jesus was trying to be inclusive. According to your understanding, if Jesus was really shooting down His family, He would be guilty of disrespecting His parents - I do not see this as being an option because Jesus is without sin.

 

[truthquest]

Yes, and that is why we have always proclaimed to have the fullness of Christ.

Do you think John 1:16 only applies to the Catholic Church and to Catholics?
John 1:12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— [sup]13[/sup] children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
John 1:[sup]14[/sup] The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
[sup]15[/sup] (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) [sup]16[/sup] Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. [sup]17[/sup] For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

[sup]John 1: 29[/sup] The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
[sup]John 3:16[/sup]"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

This is what I believe the fullness of the gospel is all about. And it is for everyone who believes and receives Christ so whoever does this has the fullness of Christ.

Matt. 12: [sup]46[/sup] While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. [sup]47[/sup] Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” [sup]48[/sup] He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” [sup]49[/sup] Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. [sup]50[/sup] For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

Yes, all brothers and sisters in Christ. All having the fullness of Christ. It is not just for some, not just for one church etc., but for all.

 

[aspen]

Do you think John 1:16 only applies to the Catholic Church and to Catholics?
John 1:12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— [sup]13[/sup] children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
John 1:[sup]14[/sup] The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
[sup]15[/sup] (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) [sup]16[/sup] Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. [sup]17[/sup] For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

[sup]John 1: 29[/sup] The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
[sup]John 3:16[/sup]"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

This is what I believe the fullness of the gospel is all about. And it is for everyone who believes and receives Christ so whoever does this has the fullness of Christ.


Matt. 12: [sup]46[/sup] While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. [sup]47[/sup] Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” [sup]48[/sup] He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” [sup]49[/sup] Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. [sup]50[/sup] For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

Yes, all brothers and sisters in Christ. All having the fullness of Christ. It is not just for some, not just for one church etc., but for all.

You've made some nice points, I was a Christian before I joined the Catholic Church and I was glad when I realized that we share the same baptism and faith. In fact, if the Roman Catholic Church forced another baptism, as one Protestant church I considered joining did; I would have not joined. On one hand, I have no doubt that Christians who trust in Jesus and submit to His justification / sanctification, outside the RCC (I believe all Christians are Catholic or apart of the universal Body of Christ) are having their hearts transformed by Jesus. On the other hand, my sanctification has been enriched beyond description - my prayer life, social gospel, intimacy with Christ has grown so deeply. I guess, it is difficult for me to weigh in on this point. All I know is that God's grace is richly given - and I think Selene agrees.

 

[mcorba]

Aspen quote -

all people who follow the doctrine of the Trinity and accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior are part of the Body of Christ; despite the fact that a minority of my brothers and sisters do not recognize their Catholic brothers and sisters to be Christians.

I agree with this also. So it doesnt sound like the Catholics posting on here are excluding other Christians.
We have also argued fairly and tried not to attack others beliefs, whilst being under attack, and yet two
posters have said we have a bone to pick!

Who has a bone to pick with whom?
On a thread that is meant to be open minded and offer answers to questions, not to defend criticism.

Here is the standard universal English question mark symbol: ?

 

[TexUs]

On the other hand, my sanctification has been enriched beyond description - my prayer life, social gospel, intimacy with Christ has grown so deeply.

It's not due to the RCC, which seems to be what you're insinuating in your context, but the work of God in you.

The word κεχαριτωμένη, (kecharitōménē), here translated as "full of grace", admits of various translations. Grammatically, the word is the feminine present perfectpassive voice participle of the verb χαριτόω[sup][2][/sup], charitóō, which means "to show, or bestow with, grace" and, in the passive voice, "to have grace shown, or bestowed upon, one". The form of the verb is intensive, hence the translations "full of grace".[sup][3]

[/sup]
[sup][/sup]You're really stretching.
Here's the strongs reference for it: http://strongsnumber.../greek/5487.htm.
It means highly favored. The word full is absolutely nowhere in the original Greek- which will be your main problem. And if Luke actually meant grace, why didn't he just use the word for grace?

To contrast, view the strongs reference for full: http://strongsnumber.../greek/4134.htm grace: http://strongsnumber.../greek/5485.htm which is what's found in the other two passages. Universal, simple, and absolute words.
Additionally, look at all the numerous translations of this passage. It seems all the scholars of our day must be idiots thinking this means "highly favored" eh?? Only the Catholics have the true knowledge of how to translate Greek, eh?
http://bible.cc/luke/1-28.htm

Stephen is not ”hailed” as being ” full of grace” but only referred to as being ”full of grace”. The term that is used for ”full of grace” in the greek towards St.Mary and Jesus in Luke:1:28 and John:1:14 both denote sinlessness.

Except, that term isn't used in Luke. It's only used in John 1:14 and Acts 6:8. You cannot pick and chose the application of the words, here. If this phrase means sinlessness (it does not), then the same would ring true for Stephen.

The greek definition referred to Stephen being ”full of grace” used is ”pleres pistis”. It denotes not a grace of sinlessness, but to the contrary, the grace of ”moral conviction.”

Um, the words are THE EXACT SAME as used in John.

According to your understanding, if Jesus was really shooting down His family

Never said that. I said he was shooting down those that were trying to elevate his family.

 

[Selene]

Love, is a verb. In order to love God one needs to hear his Word and live that Word.



Love is so easy to say, but to truly love is so much harder.

Hello Thankful,

You are correct that it is a verb, but it can also be used as a noun. As a noun in can be used in such a way: The love of money is a sin. In the Bible, it says that God is love; and that is what I am speaking about when I stated "Love is greater than knowledge because God is love and nothing is higher nor greater than God.....not even knowledge." Knowledge is nothing if one does not know love.

1 John 4:8 Who ever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

You've made some nice points, I was a Christian before I joined the Catholic Church and I was glad when I realized that we share the same baptism and faith. In fact, if the Roman Catholic Church forced another baptism, as one Protestant church I considered joining did; I would have not joined. On one hand, I have no doubt that Christians who trust in Jesus and submit to His justification / sanctification, outside the RCC (I believe all Christians are Catholic or apart of the universal Body of Christ) are having their hearts transformed by Jesus. On the other hand, my sanctification has been enriched beyond description - my prayer life, social gospel, intimacy with Christ has grown so deeply. I guess, it is difficult for me to weigh in on this point. All I know is that God's grace is richly given - and I think Selene agrees.

Yes, I agree. We recognize that the Holy Spirit is also with the Protestants. We worship the same God and believe in the Holy Trinity. The Holy Spirit is not just in the Catholic Church.

 

[aspen]

It's not due to the RCC, which seems to be what you're insinuating in your context, but the work of God in you.


Indeed, Yet I have become aware that He is using the medium of the RCC.

[/sup]
[sup][/sup]You're really stretching.
Here's the strongs reference for it: http://strongsnumber.../greek/5487.htm.
It means highly favored. The word full is absolutely nowhere in the original Greek. And if Luke actually meant grace, why didn't he just use the word for grace?


It is a stretch if you are not a member of the Orthodox, Coptic, or RCC; but what is more of a stretch? A translation that was taught early in church history or one that is part of a challenge to the established rule? which took 1500 years to be brought into focus?

To contrast, view the strongs reference for full: http://strongsnumber.../greek/4134.htm grace: http://strongsnumber.../greek/5485.htm which is what's found in the other two passages. Universal, simple, and absolute words.
Additionally, look at all the numerous translations of this passage. It seems all the scholars of our day must be idiots thinking this means "highly favored" eh?? Only the Catholics have the true knowledge of how to translate Greek, eh?
http://bible.cc/luke/1-28.htm

The problem with this idea is that you are assuming that all scholars unanimously believe this translation to be valid, which denies the many scholars outside Protestant / Evangelical circles and even some within. Strong's is a fine reference,but it definitely represents a minority viewpoint within Christianity.

Except, that term isn't used in Luke. It's only used in John 1:14 and Acts 6:8. You cannot pick and chose the application of the words, here. If this phrase means sinlessness (it does not), then the same would ring true for Stephen.


I provided reasoning for the translation - it would seem to be present in Luke, based on correct usage of grammar. Your argument is similar to Evangelicals who claims that Peter could not be The Rock in Mathew 16:18 because the masculine use of the word is used, which means pebble. But, no one would call a man in the first century by the feminine form of the word, so the masculine is substituted based on grammatical usage for gender.


As I described above, a different term is used when describing Stephen.


Um, the words are THE EXACT SAME as used in John.


I will have to look in to this.


Never said that. I said he was shooting down those that were trying to elevate his family.


Ah, that makes a difference, but not in my understanding of the text. I think we tend to read Jesus' and Paul's statements with modern eyes and add all kinds of intonations and intentions that make both seem gruff and almost like they are using tough love to straighten out the sinners. When in fact, both were compassionate and attracted listeners because of it. They had a message that made marginalized people feel included not "shot down".

 

[Templar81]

I have no doubt that Christians who trust in Jesus and submit to His justification / sanctification, outside the RCC (I believe all Christians are Catholic or apart of the universal Body of Christ)

I'm very glad to see you believ ethat. we in teh CE did break from Rome because Henry VIII wanted a divorce but we never stopped being part of the Universal Ctholic chruch. Infact we still say in the creed that we "believe in one holy catholic and Apostollic church," so whilst being Protestant we're still a alittle Catholc. Some Anglicans, particualrly Keble, Pusey and Newman (later Cardinal Newman) stressed the Catholicity of Anglicans very strongly and it is something I've always held dear.

However Aspen, the sad fact is that many Roman catholics do not understand this.

Doctrinally there is very little in the catholic Catechism that I can disagree with as you can see from my posts. I wasn't too sure I like Pope Benedict but when he came to England alst year I really warmed to him and I think he spoke much sense.

 

[Selene]

I'm very glad to see you believ ethat. we in teh CE did break from Rome because Henry VIII wanted a divorce but we never stopped being part of the Universal Ctholic chruch. Infact we still say in the creed that we "believe in one holy catholic and Apostollic church," so whilst being Protestant we're still a alittle Catholc. Some Anglicans, particualrly Keble, Pusey and Newman (later Cardinal Newman) stressed the Catholicity of Anglicans very strongly and it is something I've always held dear.

However Aspen, the sad fact is that many Roman catholics do not understand this.

Doctrinally there is very little in the catholic Catechism that I can disagree with as you can see from my posts. I wasn't too sure I like Pope Benedict but when he came to England alst year I really warmed to him and I think he spoke much sense.

Hi Templar,

Like the Orthodox Christians, your doctrines are very similar to ours.

In Christ,
Selene

 

[Anastacia]

Quote: "I have no doubt that Christians who trust in Jesus and submit to His justification / sanctification, outside the RCC (I believe all Christians are Catholic or apart of the universal Body of Christ)"



When I was a Catholic, I was a Traditional Catholic. And the popes said that if a Catholic leaves the church and doesn't return before they die....then they will be

eternally condemned.

Also, when I was a Catholic, we were taught that no one outside the Catholic church would be saved. That's what the "infallible" popes said. Also, the

popes said that one must agree with every single thing the Catholic religion believes, and if someone were to not believe even one belief, then that person would be

deemed a heretic, and be apostate. Now, we were all told that the Catholic religion doesn't ever change, but I think pope John Paul II tried to loosen up some

commands of previous popes for the sake of ecumenical reasons. But the current pope Benedict XVI is trying to get things back to the way they used to be. Even with

pope John Paul II's changes here and there---the Catholic church still would be as false as ever.

There is no way, not in any way, that I am a part of the Catholic church. I find that to be offensive that you should say that, and a personal attack. There are some

Protestant denominations who are gathering with the Catholic church, also some Evangelicals.....but those who love God's Truth, and those who desire with all their

heart to obey God, and not to lean to the right nor the left of His Word.....those people will not be yoked with the Catholic church, ever.

And I know Selene and Aspen are trying to ignore my posts. So, just in case someone might of missed it from earlier---Mary's title isn't as the Catholic church says,

"Mother of God." Mary is the mother of the human Jesus. God does not have a mother! Every where one looks, the Catholic religion has turned itself against the Word

of God.

 

[aspen]

Quote: "I have no doubt that Christians who trust in Jesus and submit to His justification / sanctification, outside the RCC (I believe all Christians are Catholic or apart of the universal Body of Christ)"



When I was a Catholic, I was a Traditional Catholic. And the popes said that if a Catholic leaves the church and doesn't return before they die....then they will be eternally condemned. Also, when I was a Catholic, we were taught that no one outside the Catholic church would be saved. That's what the "infallible" popes said. Also, the popes said that one must agree with every single thing the Catholic religion believes, and if someone were to not believe even one belief, then that person would be deemed a heretic, and be apostate. Now, we were all told that the Catholic religion doesn't ever change, but I think pope John Paul II tried to loosen up some commands of previous popes for the sake of ecumenical reasons. But the current pope Benedict XVI is trying to get things back to the way they used to be. Even with pope John Paul II's changes here and there---the Catholic church still would be as false as ever.
There is no way, not in any way, that I am apart of the Catholic church. I find that to be offensive that you should say that, and a personal attack. There are some Protestant denominations who are gathering with the Catholic church, also some Evangelicals.....but those who love God's Truth, and those who desire with all their heart to obey God, and not to lean to the right nor the left of His Word.....those people will not be yoked with the Catholic church, ever.

Traditional Catholic? Where you in communion with Rome? Or were you in some schism church like Pius X?
Catholic means universal.

 

[Anastacia]

Traditional Catholic? Where you in communion with Rome? Or were you in some schism church like Pius X?
Catholic means universal.

Are you kidding? Traditional Catholic a schism church? You bet Traditional Catholics believe the popes are infallible. Didn't you read what I just posted? And you really think I don't know what Catholic means? Get serious.

 

[aspen]

Are you kidding? Traditional Catholic a shism church? What does the name Traditional mean to you? You bet Traditional Catholics believe the popes are infallible. Didn't you read what I just posted? And you really think I don't know what Catholic means? Get serious.

Since you responded so nicely, there is a large group of traditional catholics that are separate from Pius X, but out of communion with the RCC - their schism happen soon after Vatican II. Actually, there West Coast headquarters is in my city.

blessings

 

[Anastacia]

Since you responded so nicely, there is a large group of traditional catholics that are separate from Pius X, but out of communion with the RCC - their schism happen soon after Vatican II. Actually, there West Coast headquarters is in my city.

blessings

You didn't read what I posted, maybe skimmed it. But you couldn't be saying these things to me if you really read it. I was raised strict Traditional Catholic. Traditional Catholics did not like what pope John Paul II did with the church...pope John Paul II was big on ecumenism. Traditional Catholics believe the popes are infallible, and believe what all the popes before pope John Paul II taught, things like.....if you aren't in the Roman Catholic church, then you are not saved. Also, if you don't believe every single thing taught by RCC,then you would be a heretic and apostate. And that's what pope Benedict XVI was trying to bring back----Tradiional Catholic beliefs. But I think that might of got stopped in some areas.

 

[Selene]

Since you responded so nicely, there is a large group of traditional catholics that are separate from Pius X, but out of communion with the RCC - their schism happen soon after Vatican II. Actually, there West Coast headquarters is in my city.

blessings

I remember that there was a priest who was teaching something that went against Catholic doctrine. He preached that only Catholics are saved and those outside the Catholic Church are not saved. This goes against the true teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, and he was excommunicated by the Vatican. I forgot the name of the priest. I will have to look it up.

 

[Anastacia]

I remember that there was a priest who was teaching something that went against Catholic doctrine. He preached that only Catholics are saved and those outside the Catholic Church are not saved. This goes against the true teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, and he was excommunicated by the Vatican.

You prove you don't know much at all about the Roman Catholic religion. And I'm not going to waste my time trying to educate you about what pope said what.

 

[Selene]

You prove you don't know much at all about the Roman Catholic religion. And I'm not going to waste my time trying to educate you about what pope said what.

I am sorry to say, but you were never raised Roman Catholic. You were in a church that was already excommunicated by the Vatican. Your church did not separate from us. Your church was excommunicated by the Vatican because your church went against Catholic doctrines.

 

[aspen]

You didn't read what I posted, maybe skimmed it. But you couldn't be saying these things to me if you really read it. I was raised strict Traditional Catholic. Traditional Catholics did not like what pope John Paul II did with the church...pope John Paul II was big on ecumenism. Traditional Catholics believe the popes are infallible, and that if you aren't in the Roman Catholic church, then you are not saved. Also, if you don't believe every single thing taught by RCC,then you would be a heretic and apostate. And that's what pope Benedict XVI has been bringing back----Tradiional Catholic beliefs.

Hmm.....

So how can these traditional catholics claim to believe the Pope is infallible and not like what Pope John Paul II did in the RCC? Doesn't seem to make much sense

 

[Anastacia]

Hmm.....

So how can these traditional catholics claim to believe the Pope is infallible and not like what Pope John Paul II did in the RCC? Doesn't seem to make much sense

Do you know what ecumenism is? All the popes before John Paul II said that anyone who is not in the Catholic church is not saved. What is so hard for you two to understand? You both don't understand the things of God. Nor do you understand the things of the Roman Catholic Church.


And Selene, what you say to me is such that----I'm just going to ignore you. How you can just say anything is pathetic.

 

[aspen]

Do you know what ecumenism is? All the popes before John Paul II said that anyone who is not in the Catholic church is not saved. What is so hard for you two to understand? You both don't understand the things of God. Nor do you understand the things of the Roman Catholic Church.

And Selene, what you say to me is such that----I'm just going to ignore you. How you can just say anything is pathetic.

Why don't you answer the question, Anastacia? How can your group of Traditional Catholics believe the Pope is infallible AND not like the work of John Paul the II?