Mary as Aeiparthenos; why?

ramcam2 said:
even if what you say is true that it is peter's statement of faith, the biblical fact is that jesus established his church and the keys of heaven was given to peter being the chief steward of the church here on earth (see isaiah 22:22 for the analogy). how can you refute the claims of early christians on the primacy of peter/rome? unless, you claim you know better than those who were taught by the apostles and their disciples.
Click to expand...

What I wrote is right in Scripture for you to read. The plain, contextual God-breathed written words of God. The "early Christians", meaning who exactly? Were they the Apostles and disciples who knew and walked with Jesus? And if not why should I, as a born-again Christian, give their claims greater recognition than what is in Scripture? So, the answer to your question is if what anyone wrote that deviated from what God spoke through the writers of the NT, by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit, it is to be refuted.
ramcam2 said:
but you accepted the christian writings this organized institution through its councils in the 3-4 century with the approval of the pope/rome determined as inspired and to be the canon of the book we call the bible. the bible where you base your faith and teachings. is that not ironic?
Click to expand...

There was no pope in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th century. You claim is spurious. And you seem to ignore what I wrote in my reply to you in post #349. Here, I'll quote it to refresh your memory:

"The later councils and debates were largely useful in weeding out inferior books that claimed the same authority.". The accepted Scriptures were considered inspired if these were written by one of Jesus' disciples, someone who was a witness to Jesus' ministry, such as Peter, or someone who interviewed witnesses, such as Luke. Were written in the first century A.D., meaning that books written long after the events of Jesus' life and the first decades of the church weren't included and were consistent with other portions of the Bible known to be valid, meaning the book couldn't contradict a trusted element of Scripture.

The councils in question were the council of Nicea in A.D. 325 and the First Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381. Well before the Rcc so therein lays the historical facts you didn't mention."
Click to expand...

ramcam2 said:
here...
In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)

Kindly post what Pope Gregory said. i would make a guess that he said 'roman see' and not 'roman catholic church'.
Click to expand...

Gregory is considered the first pope of the Rcc. So much for the "unbroken apostolic succession" claim of your Rcc.
ramcam2 said:
you just cannot admit the historical truth that the councils of the catholic church in the 3-4th century determined which writings were inspired and collected them to be the canon of the new testament that you and i are using.
Click to expand...

See my comment and quote above.
 
Lastdaysbeliever said:
What I wrote is right in Scripture for you to read. The plain, contextual God-breathed written words of God. The "early Christians", meaning who exactly? Were they the Apostles and disciples who knew and walked with Jesus? And if not why should I, as a born-again Christian, give their claims greater recognition than what is in Scripture? So, the answer to your question is if what anyone wrote that deviated from what God spoke through the writers of the NT, by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit, it is to be refuted.
Click to expand...
you are ignoring the biblical fact that the keys of heaven were given to Peter as the chief steward of his kingdom here on earth, his church.
Lastdaysbeliever said:
There was no pope in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th century. You claim is spurious. And you seem to ignore what I wrote in my reply to you in post #349. Here, I'll quote it to refresh your memory:


Gregory is considered the first pope of the Rcc. So much for the "unbroken apostolic succession" claim of your Rcc.
Click to expand...
the word 'pope' meaning father is a 'title' given to the bishop of rome who is the chief steward of the church jesus established by virtue of his position as the successor of the first chief steward of the church, peter. many christians refer to the word 'pope' in their writings. tertullian in 300ad and another bishop in milan in 998ad. the first chief steward of the church who used it is marcellinus who died in 304ad. however, in 1073 it was formally decided by Pope Gregory VII that no other bishop of the Catholic Church would hold the title except the bishop of rome, the valid successor to peter. you have to refresh your history for gregory vii is the 157th pope/chief steward of the church established by jesus christ.
Lastdaysbeliever said:
See my comment and quote above.
Click to expand...
until now, you cannot deny that it was the church, you hated, that gave you the 27 inspired books of the new testament.
 
ramcam2 said:
you are ignoring the biblical fact that the keys of heaven were given to Peter as the chief steward of his kingdom here on earth, his church.

the word 'pope' meaning father is a 'title' given to the bishop of rome who is the chief steward of the church jesus established by virtue of his position as the successor of the first chief steward of the church, peter. many christians refer to the word 'pope' in their writings. tertullian in 300ad and another bishop in milan in 998ad. the first chief steward of the church who used it is marcellinus who died in 304ad. however, in 1073 it was formally decided by Pope Gregory VII that no other bishop of the Catholic Church would hold the title except the bishop of rome, the valid successor to peter. you have to refresh your history for gregory vii is the 157th pope/chief steward of the church established by jesus christ.

until now, you cannot deny that it was the church, you hated, that gave you the 27 inspired books of the new testament.
Click to expand...

God gave the world the Bible! It is HIS inspired written Word so your claim the Rcc is responsible for it is pure arrogance and proves you would rather elevate your institution than bow before the Creator! So yea, your argument is as tired as the Rcc argument it is the only true representative of God on earth or Mary is the mother of God...
 
Lastdaysbeliever said:
God gave the world the Bible! It is HIS inspired written Word so your claim the Rcc is responsible for it is pure arrogance and proves you would rather elevate your institution than bow before the Creator! So yea, your argument is as tired as the Rcc argument it is the only true representative of God on earth or Mary is the mother of God...
Click to expand...
yes, God gave us the bible but how did He do it? did it drop down from the sky to our hands or maybe in bookstores (am just kidding)? you keep ignoring the historic and biblical fact that God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
 
ramcam2 said:
yes, God gave us the bible but how did He do it? did it drop down from the sky to our hands or maybe in bookstores (am just kidding)? you keep ignoring the historic and biblical fact that God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
Click to expand...

I am not ignoring any historic and biblical fact. The difference between you and me is I give all the credit to God for His God-breathed written Word while you want to claim the Rcc is responsible for it. His Holy Spirit inspired the writers of not only the OT but the NT and when did this happen? Long before your Rcc even came into existence. Did the Rcc give the world the Bible? No. I have discussed this at length with other Rc's on this board and each one of you has defaulted to "but the Rc gave you the Bible". I understand your desire to give fealty to your chosen institution just as I desire to give ALL the glory to God.
 
ramcam2 said:
yes, God gave us the bible but how did He do it? did it drop down from the sky to our hands or maybe in bookstores (am just kidding)? you keep ignoring the historic and biblical fact that God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
Click to expand...
you got it!
 
ramcam2 said:
yes, God gave us the bible but how did He do it? did it drop down from the sky to our hands or maybe in bookstores (am just kidding)? you keep ignoring the historic and biblical fact that God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
Click to expand...
But not your evil leaders. You keep ignoring the historical and biblical fact that God did not and never would use the RCC, it is not His church. The fruit of the RCC proves it is not His church. Its false teachings prove it is not His church. The fact that it ignores the sin of its leaders prove it is not His church. The fact that the RCC fails every spiritual test prove it is not His church.

Okay just tell us when did God tell us to pray to anyone other than the Lord. Show us one apostle that prayed to Mary after she died. Please clearly state the book, chapter and verse for these revelations from God.
 
Lastdaysbeliever said:
I am not ignoring any historic and biblical fact. The difference between you and me is I give all the credit to God for His God-breathed written Word while you want to claim the Rcc is responsible for it. His Holy Spirit inspired the writers of not only the OT but the NT and when did this happen? Long before your Rcc even came into existence. Did the Rcc give the world the Bible? No. I have discussed this at length with other Rc's on this board and each one of you has defaulted to "but the Rc gave you the Bible". I understand your desire to give fealty to your chosen institution just as I desire to give ALL the glory to God.
Click to expand...
i think you did not read my post. i said, yes, God gave us the bible.
I also did not say the church is responsible for it (bible). I said, God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
please, do not misread my posts. thanks.
 
balshan said:
But not your evil leaders. You keep ignoring the historical and biblical fact that God did not and never would use the RCC, it is not His church. The fruit of the RCC proves it is not His church. Its false teachings prove it is not His church. The fact that it ignores the sin of its leaders prove it is not His church. The fact that the RCC fails every spiritual test prove it is not His church.

Okay just tell us when did God tell us to pray to anyone other than the Lord. Show us one apostle that prayed to Mary after she died. Please clearly state the book, chapter and verse for these revelations from God.
Click to expand...
here we go again, thanks.
peace be with you.
 
ramcam2 said:
here we go again, thanks.
peace be with you.
Click to expand...
It is not here we go again at all. It is the proof that your institution has no authority, is not His church and is founded by the father of lies. Thanks. It is not our fault the bad fruit yells out for all who have discernment to hear, the RCC is the bad tree.

I asked questions which have never been answered:

Okay just tell us when did God tell us to pray to anyone other than the Lord? Show us one apostle that prayed to Mary after she died? Please clearly state the book, chapter and verse for these revelations from God?
 
balshan said:
It is not here we go again at all. It is the proof that your institution has no authority, is not His church and is founded by the father of lies. Thanks. It is not our fault the bad fruit yells out for all who have discernment to hear, the RCC is the bad tree.

I asked questions which have never been answered:

Okay just tell us when did God tell us to pray to anyone other than the Lord? Show us one apostle that prayed to Mary after she died? Please clearly state the book, chapter and verse for these revelations from God?
Click to expand...
i will only respond to you if you forego with your ad hominems.

peace be with you.
 
ramcam2 said:
i think you did not read my post. i said, yes, God gave us the bible.
I also did not say the church is responsible for it (bible). I said, God uses humans as instruments of his will. He used the church he established so that we can have a book we call as the bible.
please, do not misread my posts. thanks.
Click to expand...
is not the rcc/cc. post 1 verse that names the rcc/cc as 'His church'. rcc/cc doesn't even teach His word. His church does teach His word continually, it also teaches the gospel and about the rebirth.
 
mica said:
is not the rcc/cc. post 1 verse that names the rcc/cc as 'His church'. rcc/cc doesn't even teach His word. His church does teach His word continually, it also teaches the gospel and about the rebirth.
Click to expand...
not what history tell us.
 
leonard03782 said:
The rcc standard for exchanging ideas goes pretty much like this: "we tell you what to believe and you accept it w/o question." Sounds pretty familiar to me.
Click to expand...
we do no force our belief on you but you do not have to respond with ad hominems and strawmans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top