When did the universal Church first mentioned in 110AD stop being universal?

[Born_Again]

I already answered your question. A non-Catholic Christian is a believer. Unfortunately, they don't believe in the fullness of truth.
Protestant Christians, although being related top the ONE Body of Christ - have separated or divorced themselves from that ONE Body.

As for attacking my beliefs as "so far out there" - I would be moire than happy to explain ANY Catholic teaching that you have obviously been misinformed about.

Okay.. So the "fullness"... Are they going to hell then? You know, since they dont believe the "fullness of truth"?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Straw man fallacy again.

No - just a recognition of a cowardly refusal to debate the linguistic implications of the words Adelphoi and Adelphe.
Pointing out that you teach NT Greek does not bolster your position if you are unwilling to explain it . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Okay.. So the "fullness"... Are they going to hell then? You know, since they dont believe the "fullness of truth"?

The Catholic Church doesn't condemn ANYBODY to Hell - not even Judas.
That is up to God and God alone.

 

[Born_Again]

As for attacking my beliefs as "so far out there" - I would be moire than happy to explain ANY Catholic teaching that you have obviously been misinformed about.

Hey, I stated that they feel that way about yours as you feel about theirs. So dont get all grumpy "attacking" when its turned around you. Double standards dont sit well with most people.

 

[Born_Again]

The Catholic Church doesn't condemn ANYBODY to Hell - not even Judas.
That is up to God and God alone.

Exactly! You dont know. Thats why we put our faith in Christ. Not man, not an organization. Not a fallwind of legalistics. Christ and Christ alone.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Exactly! You dont know. Thats why we put our faith in Christ. Not man, not an organization. Not a fallwind of legalistics. Christ and Christ alone.

I don't understand your point. You agree that we shouldn't condemn people to Hell and we don't.
And, if you knew your Bible, you would know that the Church is not a "man made" organization but was built by Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:18).

In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates His very SELF with His Church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hey, I stated that they feel that way about yours as you feel about theirs. So dont get all grumpy "attacking" when its turned around you. Double standards dont sit well with most people.

Who said I was "grumpy"??
I told you that I would be MORE that happy to explain any Catholic teaching that you have obviously been misinformed about.

Doesn't sound "grumpy" to me.
In fact, it sounds downright charitable . . .

 

[mjrhealth]

In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates His very SELF with His Church.

Yes not your church, or teh Jws or any other religion, please stop twisting scripture its not Gods doing

 

[mjrhealth]

I already answered your question. A non-Catholic Christian is a believer. Unfortunately, they don't believe in the fullness of truth.
Protestant Christians, although being related top the ONE Body of Christ - have separated or divorced themselves from that ONE Body.

No they have seperated them self from your church, and they, like you, have divoced themselves from Him. Jesus only has one bride, His Church made up of all believers, are you going to argue with Jesus.

Still waitng for prrof that your church is His, because so far all i see is lies and deception.

And please dont yell, use blue, and bold it just proves our point, your arguements have no basis so your are trying to shout us all down.

 

[bbyrd009]

i already posted the "invisible Church" passage--he doesn't care, mjr.

 

[OzSpen]

And YOU teach NT Greek??
I think that maybe you need to go back to school . . .

The Greek word is "Kecharitomene" that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive participle, indicating a completed action with permanent result. It translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.”

By comparison, the word used in Ephesians 1:6 and applied to the saints is charis.
Kecharitomene is not a mere description here. It is used as a TITLE.

The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace” or “Hail, highly favored one".
He said, "Hail, Kecharitomene."

BreadOfLife,

Your sarcasm towards me in this post is unbecoming of you on this Christian forum. It says more about you than about me.

Daniel Wallace, a NT Greek scholar, in dealing with the verbal side of the participle, wrote:

The time of the participle's verbal nature requires careful consideration. Generally speaking, the tenses behave just as they do in the indicative. The only difference is that now the point of reference is the controlling verb, not the speaker. Thus, time in participles is relative (or dependent), while in the indicative it is absolute (or independent).... The perfect participle also indicates antecedent time. [source].

Chart 80
Time in Participles

In Luke 1:28, kecharitwmene, a perfect passive participle of charizomai, is translated as 'having been favoured', i.e. endued with grace, has this time factor: The main verb is 'he said' at that time in the first century. The perfect tense participle indicates this translation: 'having been favoured [endued with grace] and as a result you still have this favoured condition (in the first century)'. Being the passive voice, indicates that God is the agent and Mary is the receiver of that grace that caused the angel Gabriel to announce this favour.

Dana & Mantey in A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament state that 'the significance of the perfect tense in presenting action as having reached its termination and existing in its finished results lies at the basis of its uses. Emphasis, as indicated by the context, or the meaning of the verb root, may be on either the completion of the action or on its finished results' (p. 201).

Therefore, Luke 1:28 means that the angel announced in the first century that Mary was endued with grace by God in the past (when the angel announced it) and it continued into the present. The perfect participle says nothing about the continuing favour of God that requires Mary to be a continuing, exalted, favoured woman in the church and put on such a pedestal that a school can be named after her as 'Our Lady of the Way'.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

No - just a recognition of a cowardly refusal to debate the linguistic implications of the words Adelphoi and Adelphe.
Pointing out that you teach NT Greek does not bolster your position if you are unwilling to explain it . . .

Now you give me an ad hominem fallacy and a red herring fallacy. We cannot have a responsible discussion when you continue to erect straw man fallacies about what I write and then give other logical fallacies of response.

I will not continue to respond when you engage in this kind of abuse.

Bye, bye,
Oz :wub:

 

[tom55]

Straw man fallacy. Fallacious, erroneous reasoning!

I use the church fathers when they agree with the Bible. When they invent something opposed to the Bible, as with the Evangelium of James (pseudopigrapha - fake stuff), I expose it. That's what any sound expositor of Scripture should do. Seems as though you don't want to venture into that realm of where the church fathers promote doctrines contrary with Scripture, that you reject the church father's view in favour of the RCC's position. opcorn:

"I use the church fathers when they agree with the Bible."

Translation: I use the church fathers when thy agree with MY interpretation of the bible.

If you would take the time to read what The Apostolic and Church Fathers have written they agree with the RCC.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes not your church, or teh Jws or any other religion, please stop twisting scripture its not Gods doing

When YOU can show me evidence of ANY other Church today that existed in the 1st century in an unbroken line - you MIGHT have something.
However, if you can't provide this evidence - then you have failed again.

Good luck . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

No they have seperated them self from your church, and they, like you, have divoced themselves from Him. Jesus only has one bride, His Church made up of all believers, are you going to argue with Jesus.

Still waitng for prrof that your church is His, because so far all i see is lies and deception.

And please dont yell, use blue, and bold it just proves our point, your arguements have no basis so your are trying to shout us all down.

Please provide me with the Chapter and Verse that tells us that the Church is made up of "ALL" believers.

As I pointed out earlier - MY Bible says that even the demons believe (James 2:19).
Are they part of the Church??


PS - when your responses amount to nothing moire than whining about your opponent's use of text formatting - it usually means that you have run OUT of steam . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

i already posted the "invisible Church" passage--he doesn't care, mjr.

Ummmm - Jesus said that there is no such thing as an "invisible" Church.
In fact, He said just the opposite:

Matt. 5:14
"You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill CANNOT be hidden."

I suggest you read your Bible . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Now you give me an ad hominem fallacy and a red herring fallacy. We cannot have a responsible discussion when you continue to erect straw man fallacies about what I write and then give other logical fallacies of response.

I will not continue to respond when you engage in this kind of abuse.

Bye, bye,
Oz :wub:

Sooooo - you don't have an answer, do you?
That's what I thought.

Do your students get their money back when you can't answer their questions?

 

[BreadOfLife]

BreadOfLife,

Your sarcasm towards me in this post is unbecoming of you on this Christian forum. It says more about you than about me.

Daniel Wallace, a NT Greek scholar, in dealing with the verbal side of the participle, wrote:



In Luke 1:28, kecharitwmene, a perfect passive participle of charizomai, is translated as 'having been favoured', i.e. endued with grace, has this time factor: The main verb is 'he said' at that time in the first century. The perfect tense participle indicates this translation: 'having been favoured [endued with grace] and as a result you still have this favoured condition (in the first century)'. Being the passive voice, indicates that God is the agent and Mary is the receiver of that grace that caused the angel Gabriel to announce this favour.

Dana & Mantey in A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament state that 'the significance of the perfect tense in presenting action as having reached its termination and existing in its finished results lies at the basis of its uses. Emphasis, as indicated by the context, or the meaning of the verb root, may be on either the completion of the action or on its finished results' (p. 201).

Therefore, Luke 1:28 means that the angel announced in the first century that Mary was endued with grace by God in the past (when the angel announced it) and it continued into the present. The perfect participle says nothing about the continuing favour of God that requires Mary to be a continuing, exalted, favoured woman in the church and put on such a pedestal that a school can be named after her as 'Our Lady of the Way'.

Oz

Uh-huh.
And here's what some other English-speaking scholars tell us "Kecharitomene" denotes, based purely on the definition of the word and its grammatical usage:

" 'Highly favoured' (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians 1:6 . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] "is right, if it means 'full of grace which thou hast received'; wrong, if it means 'full of grace which thou hast to bestow' "
(A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14)

"It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace."
(Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament).

"However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of "charitoo." It uses "kecharitomene," while Ephesians 1:6 uses "echaritosen," which is a different form of the verb "charitoo." Echaritosen means "he graced" (or bestowed grace).
Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass."
(Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p. 166).

"Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action."
(H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Harvard Univ Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p. 175).


YOUR turn professor . . .

 

[tom55]

Tom,

The Protoevangelium of James (The Infancy Gospel of James) is a fake that is in the Pseudepigrapha. It is a false document attributed to Jesus' brother, James. And you dare to use it to support your unbiblical view of the perpetual virginity of Mary.

Oz

Mary was perpetually a virgin and the whole Church, at the time of it's writing, remembered this fact. The Protoevangelium of James reflects the existence of this tradition. It incorporates it into a legend about Mary. The writing does not originate the tradition. The perpetual virginity of Mary has been taught for 2,000 years. Belief otherwise is a recent invention.

How is my view (The Churches teaching) unbiblical when the bible says she was a virgin AND scripture only identifies Jesus as her son; no other person?

I have scripture and 2,000 years of Church teaching and Church Fathers/doctors to back up my view. You, my friend, are promoting a legend that started long after the death of Jesus.

 

[tom55]

BreadOfLife,

Your sarcasm towards me in this post is unbecoming of you on this Christian forum. It says more about you than about me.

Daniel Wallace, a NT Greek scholar, in dealing with the verbal side of the participle, wrote:



In Luke 1:28, kecharitwmene, a perfect passive participle of charizomai, is translated as 'having been favoured', i.e. endued with grace, has this time factor: The main verb is 'he said' at that time in the first century. The perfect tense participle indicates this translation: 'having been favoured [endued with grace] and as a result you still have this favoured condition (in the first century)'. Being the passive voice, indicates that God is the agent and Mary is the receiver of that grace that caused the angel Gabriel to announce this favour.

Dana & Mantey in A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament state that 'the significance of the perfect tense in presenting action as having reached its termination and existing in its finished results lies at the basis of its uses. Emphasis, as indicated by the context, or the meaning of the verb root, may be on either the completion of the action or on its finished results' (p. 201).

Therefore, Luke 1:28 means that the angel announced in the first century that Mary was endued with grace by God in the past (when the angel announced it) and it continued into the present. The perfect participle says nothing about the continuing favour of God that requires Mary to be a continuing, exalted, favoured woman in the church and put on such a pedestal that a school can be named after her as 'Our Lady of the Way'.

Oz

Where in scripture does it say that God rescinded the exalted and favored title for Mary? Scripture says "from now on all generations will call me blessed." When did that title (blessed) end?

I will go out on a limb here and say that God, Jesus, Joseph, the Apostles and the people that walked and talked with Mary put her on a pedestal......but I could be wrong <_<