|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 29, 2004 1:54:13 GMT -5
His son is God. He didn't need to be raised by anyone. The point of a parent is to raise a child in the ways of the Lord. When your son is the Lord, it looks like this aspect of your Job is already finished. Mary's role, in the bible, is to bring Jesus into the world. The rest of what she did, as far as raising Jesus, is mere speculation. There is no reason to have a docrtine of immaculate conception and no evidence to support it. Not exactly... And this is based on what? Apparently Mary had no idea what Jesus was doing in the temple as a boy. Luke 2:48When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you." 49"Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?" 50But they did not understand what he was saying to them. From the cross, Jesus gave his mother to John. Women didn't work, Mary's son was going to die. She needed someone to support her. Jesus gave her John for support. The bible never mentions a 'spirtual mother' Luke 1: 32-35. She know that he was the Son of God, the angel told her that. Also in Luke 1:47 Mary states that God is her savior. Mary raised Jesus the man in human ways. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 5:37:07 GMT -5
My point was that we inherit sin. Because of the original sin we are all born sinners. Jesus is the exception to this. I guess I used a bad way to getting that point across. I agree with you that Jesus COULD have sinned, but did not. I saw where you were discussing this elsewhere and totally agree with this point. If He could not have sinned then He would not have really been tempted. But He is above sin and therefore could resisit the temptation. No one was born with sin, except that we are all born with a SINFUL NATURE. It is within us to naturally sin. Jesus was born with the same nature as we. HE defeated sin because He was in constant communication with our heavenly Father, showing all that anyone could do the same. We have many scriptures telling us NOT to sin. If that were not possible, we wouldn't have that instruction from God. We have others telling us that IF we should sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus, mediating for us, BUT we are expected to REJECT sin at every turn as Jesus did. We are told to PERFECT and holy AS OUR fATHER IN HEAVEN IS PERFECT AND HOLY. wE ARE ALSO TOLD THAT WE WOULD NEVER BE TEMPTED BEYOND OUR ABILITY TO RESIST. I know many don't want to hear this, but it is true. Jesus is our examaple and it is through His power that we are enabled to resist sin, IF that is what we really want.
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 5:42:36 GMT -5
A person that is saved is stained with sin and yet we carry His Son in our hearts. The point, for us, is that when we come to the Cross of Calvary where He paid it ALL, we come away from that Cross a new creature - perfect in the sight of GOD and no longer under the law's dominion. The law can not try us twice for the same offence. The law does not "try" anyone for anything. The law is the standard of God which IDENTIFIES what sin is. You make a grave error if you believe the law is for trying anyone. The law points out what sin is for ALL people including YOU which you seem to deny.
Where there is no law, there is no sin because "sin is the transgression of the law", according to God's word.
Whether you like it or not, every time you sin, you transgress the law of God. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 5:53:15 GMT -5
Can a person be saved before Jesus? What a question! The problem is in your statement. Are my sins forgiven because I believed, or because Jesus died on the cross? Now, really think about this question a bit. Are we saved by OUR OWN ACTION or by JESUS ACTION on the cross? For us to be saved, Christ had to die on the cross. We are not saved because we believe. To say this is to say that we are saved by our own actions; since believing is an action that we must do. Our sins were forgiven 2000 years ago at Calvary, whether we believe or not. Does this mean that we are all going to be with Jesus in His Kingdom? Regrettably, no. The key is acceptance or rejection. The act of believing does not save us. It is when we reject what God has already given us that we fall from grace. It is utterly disgusting that people believe that Mary was saved without Christ. It contradicts everything that Christ stands for. Mary needed the grace of God as much as I did. I refuse to believe in the Immaculate Conception unless God Himself tells me. Mary is not worthy of God's grace. Mary is saved on her acceptance of the grace of God on the cross; and nothing more. Marian theology is the equivalent of idolatry, and Mary herself is begging God to do away with it. Arch. Are you saying no one was saved before Jesus paid the price on the cross? What about those who lived and died before Jesus came? What do you say about Enoch, Elijah and Moses and the many others before Jesus even came here?
I don't think you understand tha plan of salvation.
People have always been saved by FAITH in Jesus. Those who looked forward to the cross in FAITH had their faith confirmed and their place in heaven assured by His sacrifice.
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 6:02:08 GMT -5
Arch, So you say that God would allow his Son to be born and raised by a sinful woman? That's exactly what He did. Why do you think Mary admitted she was a sinner? She knew she was a sinner and I don't see why that is so hard to accept. The bible even states that ALL people are sinners and no one is exempt. The only reason you believe she is sinless is because Rome says so and this is exactly what I mean when I tell you that you will discard the scriptures in favor of what Rome says. You don't really believe God's word except when it agrees with Rome. [/color] I do not think so. The angel at the Annunciation greeted Mary as Hail Mary, Full of grace! Guess she was full of God's grace after all. Grace does not equal salvation. [/color] Idolatry? First of all, idolatry is the worship of an innanimate object. Like kneeling and praying before statues. [/color] Mary was a real person. You have no concept of a catholic's feelings toward Mary to even say that. We did not say that she is God. Right. You don't "worship" her, you only "venerate" her. [/color] There is only one God. Jesus is The Savior. Mary was the first disciple Chapter and verse please. [/color] and every word uttered from her was pointing the way to her son, who she knew was God himself. I agree. She was a follower of Jesus, while she was alive. She is dead now and just a memory. [/color] Also, remember "Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother". From the cross, Jesus made his mother our spiritual Mother. Blessings, Ann No He didn't. There is not one word of scripture that calls Mary anyone's "spiritual mother". This is more Rc wishful thinking. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 6:04:32 GMT -5
His son is God. He didn't need to be raised by anyone. The point of a parent is to raise a child in the ways of the Lord. When your son is the Lord, it looks like this aspect of your Job is already finished. Mary's role, in the bible, is to bring Jesus into the world. The rest of what she did, as far as raising Jesus, is mere speculation. There is no reason to have a docrtine of immaculate conception and no evidence to support it. Why did Jesus have to be born as a baby? Why didn't He just appear here as a full grown man? [/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 6:06:34 GMT -5
Luke 1: 32-35. She know that he was the Son of God, the angel told her that. Also in Luke 1:47 Mary states that God is her savior. Mary raised Jesus the man in human ways. Blessings, Ann Ann, a person who is without sin doesn't need a Savior. Adam and Eve were created sinless and didn't need a Savior before they sinned. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 29, 2004 9:03:50 GMT -5
There is only one God. Jesus is The Savior. Mary was the first disciple Chapter and verse please. [/color] [/b][/color][/quote] don't have access just yet - however -- what does one have to be to be a disciple of Christ - not God but Christ. correct me but one aspect is to accept Christ as the Son of God? since Mary was the first to know of Him and accept Him -- ah, wouldn't that make her a disciple?
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Mar 29, 2004 10:12:04 GMT -5
So you say that God would allow his Son to be born and raised by a sinful woman? I do not think so. The angel at the Annunciation greeted Mary as Hail Mary, Full of grace! Guess she was full of God's grace after all. What did the angel Gabriel say? We know for sure that Luke recorded that the angel greeted Mary with " chaire kecharitômenê." The word " chaire" is a verb. The base word is " chair-" meaning "rejoice or be glad." The suffix is " -e" indicating the tense is present, the voice is active, the mood is imperative, the person is second, and the number is singular. In other words, Gabriel, the speaker, was speaking to the singular subject of the verb and was asking that subject to continue on with a revious action. In this case, rejoicing or being glad. The word " chaire" means "You can rejoice" or "You can be glad." It was a common greeting. The word " kecharitômenê" is a participle (a verb used as a noun). The base word is " charito-" meaning "show favor." The suffix is " -omenê" and the prefix is ke- indicating the tense is "perfect," the voice is pkmtyolpive, the mood is indicative, the person is second, and the number is singular. Also indicated is a feminine gender and nominative or vocative case. The "perfect" tense in Greek refers to an action that was completed in the past with a result in the present. The mood is that of a name. Gabriel is using this word in place of Mary's name. " Kecharitômenê" meant something like "You who have been shown favor and are now favored." There was nothing in this greeting that indicates that it means that Mary is "full of grace." The New American Bible for Catholics made this correction in 1970 ... And coming to her, he said, "Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.Luke 1:28 NABI guess Mary wasn't full of grace after all. Scott
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 29, 2004 10:29:15 GMT -5
Gabriel is using this word in place of Mary's name. " Kecharitômenê" meant something like "You who have been shown favor and are now favored." There was nothing in this greeting that indicates that it means that Mary is "full of grace." The New American Bible for Catholics made this correction in 1970 ... And coming to her, he said, "Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.Luke 1:28 NABI guess Mary wasn't full of grace after all. Scott i find your statement Mary wasn't full of grace after all, rather debatably -- what a concept in the KJV that verse is quit differently quoted than yours above: and ehte angel came in unto her and said Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou amongst women. 1) so it wasn't only the Rcc bible that offered the word Hail. 2) yes hail was a greeting of the time 3) grace in and of itself has been issue of debate here before but i would definitely think being chosen to bear the Son of God was a Grace. I believe that Christ Himself was the epitomy of God's grace. 4) happy monday!!
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on Mar 29, 2004 10:37:29 GMT -5
Catholic readers, believe me when I say that my intention is not to destroy your faith or cause you to turn away from religion.
Rather, it is my aim to show you what God has shown me, that His Son is all-sufficient and all that is necessary to obtain absolute forgiveness of sin and a home in heaven. It is to convince you that the Bible is complete and all we need to approach the Father in heaven, because in Jesus, "we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins!" (Col. 1:14) That Jesus is our perfect High Priest - and that He is always interceding for us in heaven - insuring our entrance into the presence of His glory. By Him (Jesus) we are given the right to go boldly into the presence of the Father with our needs.
All I ask is that you will honestly and frankly look at the evidence - and not surround yourself with only the arguments and pronouncements of your church leaders.
Consider that Jesus Christ paid for every sin on the Cross, not just the original sin of Adam. And that by coming to Christ, you exchange your filthy garments of sin for His robe of pure righteousness. That Jesus actually gives to you a new nature, His nature - and that from that day forth neither He nor the Father will ever condemn you again.
One recently told me that Jesus is not in Purgatory because He was sinless. And my message to you is that neither will you need to go to Purgatory - because of the Cross, by coming to him as a sinner and acknowledging that sin, He will judiciously remove all sin and count you as perfect from that day forth. Sinless people do not go to Purgatory.
I only ask you to read your New Testament from beginning to end, carefully and prayerfully - and see if these things I tell you is not so.
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 29, 2004 10:46:46 GMT -5
Catholic readers, believe me when I say that my intention is not to destroy your faith or cause you to turn away from religion. Consider that Jesus Christ paid for every sin on the Cross, not just the original sin of Adam. And that by coming to Christ, you exchange your filthy garments of sin for His robe of pure righteousness. That Jesus actually gives to you a new nature, His nature - and that from that day forth neither He nor the Father will ever condemn you again. One recently told me that Jesus is not in Purgatory because He was sinless. And my message to you is that neither will you need to go to Purgatory - because of the Cross, by coming to him as a sinner and acknowledging that sin, He will judiciously remove all sin and count you as perfect from that day forth. Sinless people do not go to Purgatory. I only ask you to read your New Testament from beginning to end, carefully and prayerfully - and see if these things I tell you is not so. hi nicodemus -i know full well that Christ died on the cross for my sins. that is something the Rcc teaches very strongly. i know that by my choice - i have received Christ and therefore am saved through Him. however, i am not sinless nor will i ever claim to be. i will always be a sinner, however with CHrist more fully in my life, it will be fewer and farther between. nic, i wish just by accepting Christ i would never sin again, however this is not the case. i can try as hard as possible, but still often times i fall. it is those times when i need extra help to pick myself up that yes, i go to my priest and talk with him. tell him my sins and ask for additional help & prayers.
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on Mar 29, 2004 10:54:33 GMT -5
hi nicodemus -i know full well that Christ died on the cross for my sins. that is something the Rcc teaches very strongly. i know that by my choice - i have received Christ and therefore am saved through Him. however, i am not sinless nor will i ever claim to be. i will always be a sinner, however with CHrist more fully in my life, it will be fewer and farther between. nic, i wish just by accepting Christ i would never sin again, however this is not the case. i can try as hard as possible, but still often times i fall. it is those times when i need extra help to pick myself up that yes, i go to my priest and talk with him. tell him my sins and ask for additional help & prayers. You know that Jesus died for you on the Cross - I knew that as well in my Catholic years. But what I did not know was that by receiving Jesus as my Saviour, I became "judiciously" perfect in Him. God know longer counts sin against me in regards to the ultimate penalty of hell - for hell is now an absolute impossibility for me, but "practically" my sins effect my fellowship with Him and will cost me dearly at the judgment seat of Christ. I have been saved from the penalty of my sins - hell (eternal death) I am being saved from the power of sin - santification. Every day the charm and supposed benefits of sin lose their interest and I am being conformed to the image of Christ. I will one day be saved from the very presence of sin - glorification - in eternity. Romans will show you what I mean about the judicial benefits of salvation. Galatians speaks of the practical side - and shows sanctification (as also does Corinthinans).
|
|
|
Post by Cohdra on Mar 29, 2004 12:11:56 GMT -5
This underlying fundamentalist mentality speaks volumes. Your egos will not allow you to believe that God could create a sinless human after Adam and Eve. I think it boils down to envy. God does indeed have favorites. You just need to deal with that. Christ himself said John the Baptist was the greatest man that ever lived (comparing him to all the others that had lived), see, God has favorites. Abraham, Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist (who incidentally, apparently received the Holy Spirit as a baby? Oh my!! He wasn't saved yet!!), and the BVM. This is an issue the Fundies are going to have to deal with. God can do whatever he wants. He has always created / selected "special" humans to do his work, and yes, he found favor above other humans in the ones he selected. The folks listed are special, by the grace of God. Stop feeling bad that our heavenly Father has chosen to elevate certain humans above you. I don't think God runs an american-style democracy, where everyone is equal in his eyes....I could go on and on, and list every biblical personality that God found favor with. If your really inspired correctly while reading the Good Book, you would be reading it with eyes of humility, not going through scripture pretending your as great as Moses or Elijah. If you are doing that, Your definitely not a Christian, in any sense of the word. If you can't humble yourself, if you can't subdue your arrogance, then please....stop calling yourself a Christian.
God bless
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on Mar 29, 2004 12:32:52 GMT -5
My Cohdra, what an angry post. And then to end it with God bless?
I would say that you have a problem with your first pope then, "Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons."
Was he in error?
|
|