Redemption ?

[101G]

How could the early church follow sola scriptura when there was no Bible for 350 years?

well now, we have the bible for over two thousand years now, why are we still not following it.

Peace in Christ Yeshua/Jesus.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Let's see here...
Irenaeus complains of factions and the need for the church to be united. In that regard he speaks of the necessity of the united church to maintain Apostolic teaching. And we have the idea that the proper arena for the exposition of the Scriptures is within the context of the church. Sorry, there's nothing damning here.

Clement complains of those who misuse and abuse Scripture by cherry picking what suits them best in order to establish heresy. Nothing damning here.

Gregory of Nyssa invokes Apostolic teaching against a Trinitarian/Christological heresy. Nothing damning here.

Athanasius quotes Scripture in Serapion 1:27 and continues quoting Scripture in 1:28. So the "tradition," "teaching" and "faith" to which he refers is clearly based in Scripture...

Basil the Great speaks of beliefs and practices derived from "written" and "unwritten sources." Yet Basil also said the following:
“We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.” Basil the Great (ca.329–379) On the Holy Spirit, 7.16
Sounds like Basil considers Scripture the final court of appeal, hmm...

Ambrose who says that the church is in possession of the truth also said:
“For how can we adopt those things which we do not find in the holy Scriptures?” Ambrose (340–397 A.D.) On the Duties of the Clergy, 1:23:102

Augustine says he believed the Gospel via the preaching/teaching of the church. No problem there. That's the job of the church. Ever hear of the Great Commission? As for the rest of your quote, I can only assume that, right or wrong, Augustine believed that the church would not teach anything contrary to Scripture, for he also said:
“Neither dare one agree with catholic bishops if by chance they err in anything, but the result that their opinion is against the canonical Scriptures of God.” St. Augustine (354–430) De unitate ecclesiae, 10...

Aquinas may have believed in the validity of unwritten instructions, but hopefully he didn't contradict himself by making any of these unprovable apostolic "traditions" de fide, for he also said:
“For our faith rests on the revelation made to the Prophets and Apostles who wrote the canonical books.” Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) Summa Theologiae, Question 1, art. 8

In any case, as I just demonstrated very clearly, none of your quotes contradict my quotes. Your attempt you make certain "Fathers" contradict themselves is an act of pure desperation on your part. BTW, no one is saying the entire early church embraced Sola Scriptura. But there were in fact many who certainly did embrace Scripture as the final authority. The point is clear. My quotes demonstrate that Luther did not "invent" this. Sorry you wasted your time.

And it sounds like you're confused - and a little dishonest.
To put it simply- if any Early Church Father says that the Church is necessary for interpretation and the standard of orthodoxy, or that Tradition is binding, then he does NOT believe in Sola Scriptura. You can cherry-pick their quotes all day long and you won't find ONE who promotes Sola Scriptura in the CONTEXT of his writings. ALL of them promote the Church as the final Authority.

As for Basil - following the "meaning" of Scripture is not a support of Sola Scriptura.
Oral Tradition follows the "meaning" of Scripture because it is supported by Scripture.

As for Augustine - he stated that he wouldn't even believe in Scripture - which YOU tout as our "final court" of appeal - if the AUTHORITY of the Catholic Church didn't move him to do so. To him the Catholic Church was ther final court of appeal.
Taking his words out of context doesn't bolster your position . . .

Like I said - cherry-picking one-liners from the VOLUMES of their writings is neither accurate nor honest.
It's just another cheap anti-Catholic tactic . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

well now, we have the bible for over two thousand years now, why are we still not following it.

Peace in Christ Yeshua/Jesus.

Really?
We've had the Bible for over 2000 years?
When was it compiled and declared Canonical??

Have you EVER cracked open a history book?

 

[BreadOfLife]

First of all I believe in intercession and mediation. As for Dogma being established over time the Dogma of Immaculate Conception has been for a long time now. And we are not talking about assisting we are talking about Redeeming, and this is not a Catholic Dogma but still is in discussion. Assisting in the ACT of redemption and being a co redeemer are to entirely different things. Mary was redeemed through her yes. And her soul rejoiced in God her Saviour. What is the difference between co-redeemer and co-saviour? Redeemer and Saviour are reserved for the King just as a mother can not be the father ,or a woman a man, or priest. Redeemer is Christ's title. I do not believe in co-redeemer. You can. I believe in venerating Mary and the Saints I know they are intercessors and mediators. I know we are co-workers but all redemption is in Christ. because it is solely upon Him that our redemption comes by. First for Mary then all others. And the bottom line is Dogma is defined by scripture not mans notions. And yes finally Mary can do nothing without God the Redeemer, Savior. She brings forth Christ our Redeemer. So, in your opinion I am a liar because I do not believe in the Title Co-Redemptrix? Many Catholics do not. And since Redemption comes through Christ alone I do not fear what you claim.

If you feel our redemption comes from Mary, who herself was redeemed by the Redeemer, go ahead.Let me ask you in whom did Mary's redemption depend upon..... herself or Christ? It is clear, her soul magnifies the Lord that is her role. All and everyone's redemption relies solely on Christ, whom she magnifies. There is no co-redeemer only Redeemer whom we are coworkers in bringing the lost to. Ones redemption from the first to the Last relies completely on Christ.

You're being dishonest.

Attempting to show that the underlying message of the title of "Co-Redemptrix" means that the Church considers Mary to be another redeemer is a flat out LIE.

Kepha was spot-on with his explanation that "Co-Redemptrix" means that Mary "assisted" in our redemption and she "assists" in our mediation with Christ. She collaborated with Him - she didn't redeem us.

When YOU put gas in your car, YOU don't make the engine work. YOU don't make the tires spin.
You simply assisted the car so that the CAR would do these things.

 

[EndTimeWine]

You're being dishonest.

Attempting to show that the underlying message of the title of "Co-Redemptrix" means that the Church considers Mary to be another redeemer is a flat out LIE.

Kepha was spot-on with his explanation that "Co-Redemptrix" means that Mary "assisted" in our redemption and she "assists" in our mediation with Christ. She collaborated with Him - she didn't redeem us.

When YOU put gas in your car, YOU don't make the engine work. YOU don't make the tires spin.
You simply assisted the car so that the CAR would do these things.

So perhaps the new Dogma some Catholics are trying to get Pope Francis to implement per the request of April 2017 should be called" Assitantrix of the Redeemer." Since she merely assist and redemption only comes through Christ. No lie on my part. And since you have a heretic Pope in the Vatican it will be of no surprise if he assist you in your lunacy.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You said: "What you have to prove is that Tradition and Magisterium are not needed."
The problem is not that tradition and the church are not needed, it's that they are not infallible, as the Catholic Church claims.

Really??

Was Jesus just joking when He said:
Matt 16:18-19
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Was He lying when He said:
Matt. 18:17-18
If he refuses to listen to them, TELL THE CHURCH. If he refuses to listen even to the CHURCH, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.
Amen, I say to you, WHATEVER YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and WHATEVER YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Was He just kidding around when He told the leaders of His Church:
Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

Why don't you take Him seriously??

 

[BreadOfLife]

So perhaps the new Dogma some Catholics are trying to get Pope Francis to implement per the request of April 2017 should be called" Assitantrix of the Redeemer." Since she merely assist and redemption only comes through Christ. No lie on my part. And since you have a heretic Pope in the Vatican it will be of no surprise if he assist you in your lunacy.

It's glaringly apparent that no matter how many times the prefix "Co" is explained to you, it just dribbles out of your ears.
"Co" only means "equal" to English-speaking Americans who are ignorant of other languages.

"Co-Redemptrix" is perfectly fine - when you have the capacity to understand that it doesn't mean what you want people to think it means.

Do your linguistic homework before posting these embarrassingly ignorant comments . . .

 

[EndTimeWine]

It's glaringly apparent that no matter how many times the prefix "Co" is explained to you, it just dribbles out of your ears.
"Co" only means "equal" to English-speaking Americans who are ignorant of other languages.

"Co-Redemptrix" is perfectly fine - when you have the capacity to understand that it doesn't mean what you want people to think it means.

Do your linguistic homework before posting these embarrassingly ignorant comments . . .

What do I want people to think it means? Are sure I am only English speaking? What does Redeemer mean? Perhaps you need help with you English and any other you claim to speak. I have explained too what your ignorance does NOT permit you to see. Not only that, you push Dogma still in the making one of which has always been controversial even amongst Catholics. Why a new title anyway? Was Mary Immaculately conceived in her Mother's womb or when the Holy Spirit came upon her and the Power of the most High over shadowed her?

 

[twinc]

What do I want people to think it means? Are sure I am only English speaking? What does Redeemer mean? Perhaps you need help with you English and any other you claim to speak. I have explained too what your ignorance does NOT permit you to see. Not only that, you push Dogma still in the making one of which has always been controversial even amongst Catholics. Why a new title anyway? Was Mary Immaculately conceived in her Mother's womb or when the Holy Spirit came upon her and the Power of the most High over shadowed her?

here is the new "MAGNIFICAT" = not the one that goes 'my soul magnifies my God ' etc but "I am born again, I am a new sinless creation. no more in condemnation here in the grace of God I stand" - twinc

 

[BreadOfLife]

What do I want people to think it means? Are sure I am only English speaking? What does Redeemer mean? Perhaps you need help with you English and any other you claim to speak. I have explained too what your ignorance does NOT permit you to see. Not only that, you push Dogma still in the making one of which has always been controversial even amongst Catholics. Why a new title anyway? Was Mary Immaculately conceived in her Mother's womb or when the Holy Spirit came upon her and the Power of the most High over shadowed her?

Ummm, first of all - this entire angry tirade reflects a deep ignorance of the prefix "Co". Then again, it may be a simple a refusal to acknowledge that it doesn't mean what YOU want it to mean. YOU want it to mean that the Church is trying to tell us that Mary is another Redeemer. And, as I already explained to you - that is a lie.

As for Mary's Immaculate Conception - what does that have to do with what we are talking about??
Besides - your question answers itself:
"Was Mary Immaculately conceived in her Mother's womb or when the Holy Spirit came upon her and the Power of the most High over shadowed her?"

"Conception", by definition occurs in the womb.

 

[101G]

Mary needs salvation just like everyone else. Luke 1:47 "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour". nothing diffrent, for all of us are in need of the Saviour.

 

[101G]

"Conception", by definition occurs in the womb.

ERROR, not always. A pregnancy starts with fertilization, when a woman's egg joins with a man's sperm. Fertilization usually takes place in a fallopian tube that links an ovary to the uterus. If the fertilized egg successfully travels down the fallopian tube and implants in the uterus, an embryo starts growing.

the word overshadow, it's the Greek word G1982 ἐπισκιάζω episkiazo (ep-ee-skee-ad'-zo) v.
1. to cast a shade upon
2. (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy
3. (figuratively) to invest with preternatural influence
the meaning here, not in the natural way of conception between a man and a women. this body, this Child, God conceived or God made. for the scripture states, "prepare me a body"', Hebrews 10:5.

 

[twinc]

Mary needs salvation just like everyone else. Luke 1:47 "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour". nothing diffrent, for all of us are in need of the Saviour.

guess you missed it - so here it is again - the modern/updated version of the 'Magnificat' = my soul magnifies the Lord and my Spirit rejoices in God my Saviour ' etc = modern/updated version = I am a born again sinless new creation, no more in condemnation, here in the grace of God I stand etc - twinc

 

[101G]

guess you missed it - so here it is again - the modern/updated version of the 'Magnificat' = my soul magnifies the Lord and my Spirit rejoices in God my Saviour ' etc = modern/updated version = I am a born again sinless new creation, no more in condemnation, here in the grace of God I stand etc - twinc

don't guess, know. just read my footnote ...

 

[BreadOfLife]

ERROR, not always. A pregnancy starts with fertilization, when a woman's egg joins with a man's sperm. Fertilization usually takes place in a fallopian tube that links an ovary to the uterus. If the fertilized egg successfully travels down the fallopian tube and implants in the uterus, an embryo starts growing.

the word overshadow, it's the Greek word G1982 ἐπισκιάζω episkiazo (ep-ee-skee-ad'-zo) v.
1. to cast a shade upon
2. (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy
3. (figuratively) to invest with preternatural influence
the meaning here, not in the natural way of conception between a man and a women. this body, this Child, God conceived or God made. for the scripture states, "prepare me a body"', Hebrews 10:5.

Yes - and the point being that Mary was not "conceived" when the Angel visited her. She was a young woman.
Mary was conceived in the normal way - within her mother's body.

 

[FHII]

guess you missed it - so here it is again - the modern/updated version of the 'Magnificat' = my soul magnifies the Lord and my Spirit rejoices in God my Saviour ' etc = modern/updated version = I am a born again sinless new creation, no more in condemnation, here in the grace of God I stand etc - twinc

Is there anything there that any Christian couldn't claim for himself or herself? Or is this something that Mary had excusively or "more of"?

I have heard the arguement that we are all co-redeemers. I don't believe it necessarily, but if its true why are we discussing it with Mary? Is she more of a co-redeemer than others?

Why hasn't anyone talked about Paul being a co-redeemer or Peter? Why isn't twinc or BOL being addressed as such? Or 101G or Endtimewine?

In 17 years on internet boards I have never heard anyone say, "Now my brother and co-redeemer... Lets not forget the words of Barnabas the Co-redeemer..."

And if there are other redeemers... Even minor ones.... Wouldn't that make Jesus a co-redeemer also? Even though he did the brunt of the work... Isn't he merely a co-redeemer too?

So why is it that with all the co-redeemers in the world, people are only giving that term to Mary? And why Twinc would you speak of Mary's sinlessness by grace if we all have it? We are all Christians, so why have I never heard Mary calked "Mary the Christian"?

 

[twinc]

don't guess, know. just read my footnote ...

hopefully some one will come on and explain it to you - twinc

 

[FHII]

Yes - and the point being that Mary was not "conceived" when the Angel visited her. She was a young woman.
Mary was conceived in the normal way - within her mother's body.

I am a fair man... I have heard the rumor that aome believe Mary was also immaculately conceived. But I Dont see that being taught by the nonprotestant church.

I have seen them teach that Mary was born totally sinless, never sinned and was even born without the stai of original sin. That of course is something that is contrary to scripture... But that she was born a virgin herself isn't in their teaching.

 

[twinc]

Is there anything there that any Christian couldn't claim for himself or herself? Or is this something that Mary had excusively or "more of"?

I have heard the arguement that we are all co-redeemers. I don't believe it necessarily, but if its true why are we discussing it with Mary? Is she more of a co-redeemer than others?

Why hasn't anyone talked about Paul being a co-redeemer or Peter? Why isn't twinc or BOL being addressed as such? Or 101G or Endtimewine?

In 17 years on internet boards I have never heard anyone say, "Now my brother and co-redeemer... Lets not forget the words of Barnabas the Co-redeemer..."

And if there are other redeemers... Even minor ones.... Wouldn't that make Jesus a co-redeemer also? Even though he did the brunt of the work... Isn't he merely a co-redeemer too?

So why is it that with all the co-redeemers in the world, people are only giving that term to Mary? And why Twinc would you speak of Mary's sinlessness by grace if we all have it? We are all Christians, so why have I never heard Mary calked "Mary the Christian"?

the problem appears to be that like you here most cannot or will not interpret properly but will even claim inspiration and guidance by the H/S - WHAT IS STATED HERE is that those who claim being specially born again new sinless creations by the grace of God refuse this to Mary - it is the same with claiming to be infallible and inspired and guided by the H/S except Catholics and definitely not the Pope - twinc

 

[FHII]

the problem appears to be that like you here most cannot or will not interpret properly

What was my interpretation? I asked why give all this to Mary and talk about Mary having it when we all do?

but will even claim inspiration and guidance by the H/S

Did I ever say that?

WHAT IS STATED HERE is that those who claim being specially born again new sinless creations by the grace of God refuse this to Mary

Who has ever said that?