Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Mary was sinless -- so get over it (Part V).

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jul 23, 2012 6:51:22 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 24, 2012 6:28:07 AM PDT
Kevin Bold says:
One of the biggest obstacles to Protestants coming to understand the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is their insistence that Romans 3:23 has no exceptions besides Jesus. How many times have they naively quoted this verse, as if it were the last word on the subject?

Protestants need to understand that Biblical "alls" tend to be hyperbolic. Using the principle of "letting Scripture interpret Scripture," we see that there are exceptions to every Biblical "all," and Scripture and logic both say so.

Hebrews 9:27: Says we all die "once". So how do Enoch and Elijah go straight to Heaven without dying? And what about the widow's son Elijah resurrected, the man who rose again after his corpse touched Elisha's bones, Jairus' daughter, and Lazarus?

1 Sam 4:5 When the ark of the covenant of the LORD came into the camp, all Israel gave a mighty shout, so that the earth resounded.

Let's get this straight: The moment the Ark was back, everyone in Israel instantly knew it, shouted for joy, and the rest of the world wondered what the noise was?

1 Sam 7:5 Then Samuel said, "Gather all Israel at Mizpah, and I will pray to the LORD for you."

Everyone in Israel dropped what they were doing and went to Mizpah. Yeah. Right.

Matthew 2:3: Was ALL Jerusalem really as disturbed by Christ's birth as King Herod?

Matthew 3:5 & Mark 1:5 say ALL of Jerusalem and Judea came out to receive baptism by John the Baptist. Would this include the Pharisees, Saducees, the High Priest, King Herod, Pilate, and the Roman garrison?

Obviously, "all" doesn't always mean "all" the way modern Protestants interpret it. Each of the Bible's "alls" have at least a few exceptions.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 7:00:14 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 7:04:59 AM PDT
Threads with multiple sequels are proof that some people just like to argue and don't know when to quit.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 7:19:14 AM PDT
"Uh...Faith??? Usually, when you say "we" you mean the Catholic church. Get a grip."

Uh...Karen???

I told YOU what I meant. Reading comprehension/context has a lot to do with one's understanding. IF you have a question about something I've said, please ask me. It is better than misrepresenting what a person has ACTUALLY said and meant.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 7:34:31 AM PDT
Did anything productive come out of the first 40,000 posts on this subject?

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 7:40:48 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 7:42:36 AM PDT
Bruce E. Wade,

He said: "Barbara, just to let you know, I do not smoke cigars or
play cards. Grace and Peace, S.D.G."

She said: Well, that's a good thing, they're probably bad for you.
You can always bet on football, especially on the Super Bowl...

...and I always love your "Grace and Peace, S.D.G."

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 7:54:55 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 10:38:23 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
Here For The Music says:
Did anything productive come out of the first 40,000 posts on this subject?
------------------------------------
Well, I can say that one poster asked to know more about Justin Martyr and his first Apology. I found that particular experience to give me satisfaction at personal level.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 7:58:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 7:58:19 AM PDT
I'm glad to hear it wasn't a total waste of people's time and effort.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:19:35 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:26:59 AM PDT
Amon says:
Dude, seriously can you just let this discussion die already?

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 8:28:38 AM PDT
Keepin' Lily,

I wrote an email to Pope Benedict XVI, thanking him
for his efforts to reconcile Martin Luther to the Church,
thanking him for his movements toward the confessional
Lutherans, who are very close to his heart, last night.

Unfortunately, the only email address we have for Pope
Benedict XVI is still not active, is perhaps permanently
discontinued, as my email did not go through.

However, we can write letters to Pope Benedict in this
manner, and I plan to do so:

http://www.ehow.com/how_8104430_write-letter-pope.html

* * *

Lily, best wishes for your mother and for you. Both of you are
in our thoughts and prayers.

God bless

* * *

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:33:32 AM PDT
That is AWESOME, Barbara!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:34:42 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
Barbara,

You can tweet him. Look his account in tweeter.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 8:37:58 AM PDT
Boomy says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:50:14 AM PDT
Faith, we can write to him to our heart's content,
we can tell him everything we want to, and we
can thank him for all his hard work.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 8:51:04 AM PDT
Amazing, Ferdinand, did you tweet the Pope?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 9:09:13 AM PDT
There are reasonable exceptions, all does not always mean all
2 Hypotheticals:

A man falls into a well and everyone is in church except one woman who is returning late from relatives in another town [she had planned to be back in time to attend church but something unforeseen prevented her - e.g. weather, an accident, illness...]. The woman is not able to pull the man from the well by herself but he is about to die, so she runs to the church where everyone is and she does not stop to pick up her head-covering. She runs into the church and interrupts the service, saying, come quickly a man has fallen into the well and is drowning.

This is reasonable exception to the New Testament instruction that women are to neither to speak or teach in the church [1 Corinthians 14:33-38]. It is of the same reasoning as healing the sick on the sabbath and pulling your ox out of the ditch.

2nd

A christian woman comes into a church, during service she pulls the covering off of her head and cries out, my children were all killed in an accident 1 year ago as you all know, why has God forsaken me and why did he allow me to live on without hope?

This is not a reasonable exception, if her husband was not able to provide sufficient support and instruction then he should have approached the church elders. If the husband and the church elders through the husband failed to comfort the grieving mother then Grace sufficiently covers the mothers out burst, but it would have been better had the church community and husband had provided sufficient support.

If the grieved mother will not be reconciled and continues in her outbursts, she is in rebellion against the church and faith and must be put out of it until she become obedient to her husband and the church.

The woman's out burst is a clear indication of the failure of the church community to care for and comfort/guide the woman in her grief and healing, or failing to do so, to declare her anathema after reasonable time and attempts to build up her faith.

Neither circumstance negates the general New Testament Gospel teaching/policy that women are not to speak or teach in the church and they are to wear a covering.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 9:11:36 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
Barbara,

No yet.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 9:13:17 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 3:04:07 PM PDT
Ferdinand says:
StevePL says: "I believe in water baptism, I've been water baptized. I just don't believe in infant baptism."

ferdi: No what you wrote before. And also appears that you did not read the quotes. Justin Martyr identifies Baptism as a bath of regeneration. You told me that Water Baptism had no effect or validity in salvation. Aren't you contradicting yourself?

spl: No, not at all. I believe that water baptism is a ritual, and what power it has I can't say. But I know what John the Baptist said about water baptism, that he just baptizes with water, but Jesus will baptize with the Holy Spirit, and with fire. I was water baptized as an infant, and again in my 30's, but I wasn't baptized with the Holy Spirit, and fire, until I was 42. January 13, 1998, I believe it was.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a classical example of why AUTHORITY is needed. Our friend is only seeing the written words and missing the actions. When John the Baptist washed Jesus at the Jordan, obviously, was not for the forgiveness of sin for the sinless could not repent any sin. Therefore, this baptism has a different meaning. First, it fulfilled the promise that the Messiah would be announced as the anointed of God. We see that after receive the bath, the Spirit came over Jesus and the voice of the Father announce Him as the chosen one, His Son. Second, because the Baptism of John was of repentance, it would have no effects over Jesus, for He did not have any sins to repent. However, we do see an association between the pouring of water and the coming of the Spirit. Therefore, the second meaning of Jesus actions was to sanctify the water Baptism and made it Holy, a Sacrament.

This explains why Justin Martyr writes those that received the bath of REGENERATION. Water Baptism not longer is for the cleaning of the body. Now, is for anointment of men as children of God. You receive the Holy Spirit and adopted by God.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 9:14:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 11:04:18 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
StevePL says:

spl: I think the Gospel is the Word of God and is sufficient for salvation. The rest of the Bible is embellishment.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ferd: Embellishment? Ouch! I would never refer to the Holy Inspired Written Words in the Bible like that. Nasty!

spl: Hmmm, using my word. Ummm. I think the Gospel is what it's all about, basically. I think a lot of people will gain salvation and eternal life that have only read the Gospel. You don't need the rest of the Bible to make it to heaven. The rest is embellishment in that respect.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I love this post from our friend. In a simple post he has demolish the non-Catholic claim that Scripture is all we need. I explain myself, non-Catholics have claim that the 27 books of New Testament of the Bible is the only thing that is needed to obtain salvation. Now, a non-Catholic has reduced to just 4 books. Then, we would need to ask, is Sola Scriptura what God intended when He inspired the authors of the Books of the Bible? From this post, we can conclude a big and clear NO. All the books in the New Testament are necessary for Salvation. Also, the Old Testament can't be rejected because the Old hide the New and the New reveal the Old.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 9:15:49 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 9:27:16 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
StevePL says:

ferd: ROTFLOL!!! Your residual of Manifest Destiny is the only thing that allows you to keep alive that concept in your head. However, the reality is that concept is long gone. Even Latin America is no longer under your control. Wake up, dude. You may find the Goths at the gate when you finally do it.

spl:The rest of the world is coming around, thanks to us.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't wish to point to the obvious, but, if you cannot keep control over you back lawn, how you can keep control over your neighbors' houses? I think the owner of the home at the other corner of the street (China) is taking care of it.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 9:15:53 AM PDT
Theresa says:
Steve: "But catholic just means universal, as compared to a bunch of churches with their own ideas. The church in Rome wasn't THE Catholic Church, it was just one of the many churches considered to be 'catholic'."

T: That "bunch of (early 1st century) churches" all had a centralized authority in addition to their local hierarchy of leaders. There was a 'head' among the bishops---a 'head bishop'---and that was Peter.
The rest of the NT (after the Gospels) explain this, as do the writings of the early Church Fathers.

That early Church structure remains today in the Catholic Church. Each 'local church' is named a diocese and is headed by the bishop of that diocese. Each diocese has an hierarchy of ordained bishop/priests/deacons. The bishop of the 'diocese of Rome' is the "pope" and he is the 'head bishop'.

Posted on Jul 23, 2012 9:17:15 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
StevePL says:

StevePL says: "I don't judge or condemn a whole ethnic group. I ALWAYS judge individually, it's just that nearly every latino I've met individually seems to have a lot of the same mentality as George Zimmerman. There are probably exceptions, but I haven't met them yet. They all have seemed arrogant, self centered, and bigoted."

ferd: Funny, he contradicts himself in his own statement.

spl: No I dont. I'm always open to having good relationships with everyone.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will reserve my comments on this post.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 9:22:10 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 9:28:24 AM PDT
Ferdinand says:
Barbara,

If I tweet the Pope, I would like to suggest that he authorizes issuing one of the existing Bibles without Chapters and Verses. I believe that much of the division in Christendom is due the Christians obssesion with Chapters and Verses. We are missing the context of the written words in the Bible.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 9:28:18 AM PDT
Kevin Bold says:
Like Bahais do with Muslims?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2012 9:32:20 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2012 9:38:36 AM PDT
Kevin Bold says:
Yes. Catholics are getting sharper while Protestants are getting frustrated and desparate. You'd think they were under the impression that we'd never read Romans 3:23 before, and no one knew what it meant until fundamentalist Protestants came along (early 1800's).
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400 Next ›
Discussion locked

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  57
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Jul 23, 2012
Latest post:  Sep 26, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers

Search Customer Discussions