Rekindling Amazement

[A new day]

Normal human deduction is in the Bible. But let me suggest you Luke deeper in Luke. An emissary of God said to Mary that her Child is Lord, i.e. God, i.e. the Messias [Cf. Luke 1:26-30]. Using the brain God gave most men, we see Jesus is God, He ascends to heaven to sitting on His throne, thus, like all of antiquity at least up and until the last hundred years or so, that makes Mary the Queen Mother of that domain.

But, lets not stop there, St. Elisabeth calls Mary mother of her "Lord" [Cf. Luke 1:43] . Once again using the brain God gave most men we deduce Mary is the mother of our God, Elisabeth's Lord. As the mother of the Lord, Mary's title is - you got it - Mother of God. Extend that newly found logic a bit; as our Lord sits on His throne Mary sits as the Lord's mother or Queen Mother.

Now, since certain graces of reasoning were withheld from Protestantism, let me suggest to you that the custom of the day of Christ is for an only son to bequeath his mother's care to another friend or relative. On the cross Jesus Christ gave His Mother to the Church in the person of John [Cf. John 19:26-27]. Now Mary is the Mother of the Church!

JoeT

None of this even remotely justifies worshiping mary. veneration is latin for "worship" no matter which way it is sliced and diced. When she given the title "queen of heaven" it is a declaration that of divinity. This is NOT anywhere in the bible. It isn't commanded of us in the NT. The apostles didn't do it, and they, themselves, discouraged people from venerating them.

Isaiah 42:8
"I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.

Isaiah 43:11
I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.

Isaiah 43:10
Before Me no god was formed, and after Me none will come.

Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the LORD, the King and Redeemer of Israel, the LORD of Hosts: "I am the first and I am the last, and there is no God but Me.

Isaiah 45:21
There is no other God but Me, a righteous God and Savior; there is none but Me.

 

[Nondenom40]

Normal human deduction is in the Bible. But let me suggest you Luke deeper in Luke. An emissary of God said to Mary that her Child is Lord, i.e. God, i.e. the Messias [Cf. Luke 1:26-30]. Using the brain God gave most men, we see Jesus is God, He ascends to heaven to sitting on His throne, thus, like all of antiquity at least up and until the last hundred years or so, that makes Mary the Queen Mother of that domain.

But, lets not stop there, St. Elisabeth calls Mary mother of her "Lord" [Cf. Luke 1:43] . Once again using the brain God gave most men we deduce Mary is the mother of our God, Elisabeth's Lord. As the mother of the Lord, Mary's title is - you got it - Mother of God. Extend that newly found logic a bit; as our Lord sits on His throne Mary sits as the Lord's mother or Queen Mother.

Now, since certain graces of reasoning were withheld from Protestantism, let me suggest to you that the custom of the day of Christ is for an only son to bequeath his mother's care to another friend or relative. On the cross Jesus Christ gave His Mother to the Church in the person of John [Cf. John 19:26-27]. Now Mary is the Mother of the Church!

JoeT

Normal human deduction is in the Bible. But let me suggest you Luke deeper in Luke. An emissary of God said to Mary that her Child is Lord, i.e. God, i.e. the Messias [Cf. Luke 1:26-30]. Using the brain God gave most men, we see Jesus is God, He ascends to heaven to sitting on His throne, thus, like all of antiquity at least up and until the last hundred years or so, that makes Mary the Queen Mother of that domain.

So you want to reduce many of your marian doctrines and dogmas to human deduction? Thanks for admitting none of it is in the bible. Your dogmas are the highest form of doctrine. They HAVE to be believed. They should also have the highest level of evidence. Youre throwing in the towel here. Raising the white flag and admitting all of it is made up. Thanks again.

And no, not like 'all antiquity up to the last hundred years or so...' The bible isn't silent on this old testament position. Its clear that there was one. What we don't see, or ever see is mary being called all these things catholics claim about her. Gods kingdom isn't mans kingdom. There is no queen of heaven if there were, it would have been made abundantly clear. Youre forcing your own presuppositions into the text.

But, lets not stop there, St. Elisabeth calls Mary mother of her "Lord" [Cf. Luke 1:43] . Once again using the brain God gave most men we deduce Mary is the mother of our God, Elisabeth's Lord.

Folks, lurkers, this is what eisegesis looks like. The bible NEVER says this. You can deduce all day long it doesn't make it true. You have an agenda and you'll insert your unbiblical doctrines in anywhere you can. This isn't rcia. I think its called ocia now if i'm not mistaken.

Mary's title is - you got it - Mother of God.

Now all you have to do is show us this title. All you are doing is promoting mary at the expense of the integrity of scripture. Do you think God is pleased that you are taking His word and perverting it? Maybe repentance is in order?

Extend that newly found logic a bit; as our Lord sits on His throne Mary sits as the Lord's mother or Queen Mother.

Your logic is poor at best. At worst its heresy. The only extending it deserves is into the trash bin. Youre making a mockery of Gods word.

Now, since certain graces of reasoning were withheld from Protestantism

If we lack certain graces, why are we the ones actually protecting the integrity of scripture? Why are we the ones protecting the biblical Mary? Maybe catholic grace is actually a hatred for God? Thats what it looks like from where i'm sitting.

On the cross Jesus Christ gave His Mother to the Church in the person of John [Cf. John 19:26-27]. Now Mary is the Mother of the Church!

Only if you despise God and relish spitting in His face. What a perversion! Jesus is on the cross, bloody, the weight of the worlds sin on His shoulders, in pain physically, spiritually and all catholics can do is gush over mary. But lets play the 'are we consistent in our hermenutic' game shall we? If Jesus gave mary to the church then He gave John as well. He didn't just speak to John 'behold your mother'. He spoke to Mary, 'behold your son.' So He gave John to us as a son. Isn't that nice? I have an apostle as a son and didn't even know it. But you don't believe that do you? Course not, John as our son is just nuts isn't it? What a silly thing to say. Your logic isn't just flawed its reprehensible to a born again believer.

 

[JoeT]

None of this even remotely justifies worshiping mary. veneration is latin for "worship" no matter which way it is sliced and diced. When she given the title "queen of heaven" it is a declaration that of divinity. This is NOT anywhere in the bible. It isn't commanded of us in the NT. The apostles didn't do it, and they, themselves, discouraged people from venerating them.

Isaiah 42:8
"I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.

Isaiah 43:11
I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.

Isaiah 43:10
Before Me no god was formed, and after Me none will come.

Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the LORD, the King and Redeemer of Israel, the LORD of Hosts: "I am the first and I am the last, and there is no God but Me.

Isaiah 45:21
There is no other God but Me, a righteous God and Savior; there is none but Me.

You make my point then, don't you? If Jesus is Lord, then the Mother of the Lord King, is queen mother. Every king on earth had a queen mother. Why do you deny Christ His Mother?

JoeT

 

[JoeT]

So you want to reduce many of your marian doctrines and dogmas to human deduction? Thanks for admitting none of it is in the bible. Your dogmas are the highest form of doctrine. They HAVE to be believed. They should also have the highest level of evidence. Youre throwing in the towel here. Raising the white flag and admitting all of it is made up. Thanks again.

Did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

The Marian doctrines don't belong to me, however using the graces of reasoning given me it is easy to see Mary as the Queen of Heaven. God gave us a brain, it is part of our human nature, endeavor to use it. There is only one mind to holds the Sacred Scriptures as a single thought of God, the Church.

And no, not like 'all antiquity up to the last hundred years or so...' The bible isn't silent on this old testament position. Its clear that there was one. What we don't see, or ever see is mary being called all these things catholics claim about her. Gods kingdom isn't mans kingdom. There is no queen of heaven if there were, it would have been made abundantly clear. Youre forcing your own presuppositions into the text.

Once again, I must explain to you that what I believe is not my own making, rather an accommodation of a typical sense of Scripture and a literal sense of Scripture.

Folks, lurkers, this is what eisegesis looks like. The bible NEVER says this. You can deduce all day long it doesn't make it true. You have an agenda and you'll insert your unbiblical doctrines in anywhere you can. This isn't rcia. I think its called ocia now if i'm not mistaken.

The bible never says up is up and down is down; doe that mean down is up and up is down? No, we use our brain God gave most of us.

Now all you have to do is show us this title. All you are doing is promoting mary at the expense of the integrity of scripture. Do you think God is pleased that you are taking His word and perverting it? Maybe repentance is in order?

Esther was a virgin Jewish girl who saved her people from destruction. Her grace and beauty bound the heart of the king to her own. Whereby she was elevated to the throne of queen as it was pleasing to the king. Our King, our Lord, so raised a comely farm girl, Mary, saving her people from destruction. Mary alone was spared from the spiritual death of original sin and was united as one heart with God always pleasing Him. She too was elevated to Queen by her Lord and our Lord.

Likewise, Rebecca Mary extends the water of eternal life, her Son, Jesus Christ to His brethren for which we adore her.

Your logic is poor at best. At worst its heresy. The only extending it deserves is into the trash bin. Youre making a mockery of Gods word.

You mean to tell me that your god is not King of Kings, Lord of Lords? [Cf. Apocalypse 19:16]. That not truly being the case, let us again extend this logic with the brain given the human race, understanding that Jesus Christ is our Lord, our King and is our God. Knowing Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ then we deduce, deduct, glean, infer, conclude it is both right and proper to consider Mary the Mother of God; Hence as He is King of Heaven and Earth so too is the Mother of the King the Queen Mother of Heaven and earth.

If we lack certain graces, why are we the ones actually protecting the integrity of scripture? Why are we the ones protecting the biblical Mary? Maybe catholic grace is actually a hatred for God? That's what it looks like from where I'm sitting.

You've made a terrible miscalculation, Protestantism doesn't protect the integrity of Sacred Scripture. Are you protecting the biblical Mary by not honoring Mary as the Queen of Heaven, the very first "Catholic" and by extension the very first Christian? How does adoring the mother of the Personification of Grace equate to hatred for God? I'd suggest moving your seat over some, you need to view it from reality. " Therefore he made to him a covenant of peace, to be the prince of the sanctuary, and of his people, that the dignity of priesthood should be to him and to his seed for ever." [Ecclesiasticus 45:30]

Only if you despise God and relish spitting in His face. What a perversion! Jesus is on the cross, bloody, the weight of the worlds sin on His shoulders, in pain physically, spiritually and all catholics can do is gush over mary. But lets play the 'are we consistent in our hermenutic' game shall we? If Jesus gave mary to the church then He gave John as well. He didn't just speak to John 'behold your mother'. He spoke to Mary, 'behold your son.' So He gave John to us as a son. Isn't that nice? I have an apostle as a son and didn't even know it. But you don't believe that do you? Course not, John as our son is just nuts isn't it? What a silly thing to say. Your logic isn't just flawed its reprehensible to a born again believer.

Ok, we're stand before the throne of judgement. You'll declare His Mother as a common sinner, that He was born of the sinful flesh, that He viewed His Mother as unbelieving twit. I'll stand before the Lord and proclaim all the times she heard my prayer and in turn asked the Her Lord to change the dark waters of life to a sweet wine - "our life, our sweetness and our hope".

Good luck!

JoeT

 

[JoeT]

JoeT said: - Once again you exhibit error. Not only are you in error but in so doing there is a pretentious moral belief that isn't possessed; you profess to be a Book Only person by which you judge the Catholic Church. Yet, according to Sacred Scripture we know that, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind." [Matthew 22:37] which is a Catholic moral teaching.

Your response reflects a perfect example of a typical Roman Catholic

Which was my goal, thank you for confirming I succeeded.

exhibition of error by intentionally leaving out one of the two great commands of the Law which God Himself gave to Moses, and is undeniably according to Sacred Scripture. Jesus said "The Law, is founded on two commandments, love for God (Matt. 22: 36-40), and love for neighbor." Perhaps in your Roman Catholic way of distortion, you were just 'pretending' to leave out the Lord's second greatest commandment, because you don't have a "moral belief" in it, or perhaps it just isn't a Roman Catholic "moral teaching."

I agree it is one of the great commandments to love one's neighbors. However, I rightly assumed you would understand that to Love God and keep His commandment is in effect to keep the commandment to love thy neighbor; one naturally follows the other.

JoeT

 

[Nondenom40]

Did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

The Marian doctrines don't belong to me, however using the graces of reasoning given me it is easy to see Mary as the Queen of Heaven. God gave us a brain, it is part of our human nature, endeavor to use it. There is only one mind to holds the Sacred Scriptures as a single thought of God, the Church.

Once again, I must explain to you that what I believe is not my own making, rather an accommodation of a typical sense of Scripture and a literal sense of Scripture.

The bible never says up is up and down is down; doe that mean down is up and up is down? No, we use our brain God gave most of us.

Esther was a virgin Jewish girl who saved her people from destruction. Her grace and beauty bound the heart of the king to her own. Whereby she was elevated to the throne of queen as it was pleasing to the king. Our King, our Lord, so raised a comely farm girl, Mary, saving her people from destruction. Mary alone was spared from the spiritual death of original sin and was united as one heart with God always pleasing Him. She too was elevated to Queen by her Lord and our Lord.

Likewise, Rebecca Mary extends the water of eternal life, her Son, Jesus Christ to His brethren for which we adore her.

You mean to tell me that your god is not King of Kings, Lord of Lords? [Cf. Apocalypse 19:16]. That not truly being the case, let us again extend this logic with the brain given the human race, understanding that Jesus Christ is our Lord, our King and is our God. Knowing Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ then we deduce, deduct, glean, infer, conclude it is both right and proper to consider Mary the Mother of God; Hence as He is King of Heaven and Earth so too is the Mother of the King the Queen Mother of Heaven and earth.

You've made a terrible miscalculation, Protestantism doesn't protect the integrity of Sacred Scripture. Are you protecting the biblical Mary by not honoring Mary as the Queen of Heaven, the very first "Catholic" and by extension the very first Christian? How does adoring the mother of the Personification of Grace equate to hatred for God? I'd suggest moving your seat over some, you need to view it from reality. " Therefore he made to him a covenant of peace, to be the prince of the sanctuary, and of his people, that the dignity of priesthood should be to him and to his seed for ever." [Ecclesiasticus 45:30]


Ok, we're stand before the throne of judgement. You'll declare His Mother as a common sinner, that He was born of the sinful flesh, that He viewed His Mother as unbelieving twit. I'll stand before the Lord and proclaim all the times she heard my prayer and in turn asked the Her Lord to change the dark waters of life to a sweet wine - "our life, our sweetness and our hope".

Good luck!

JoeT

Did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

And?

The Marian doctrines don't belong to me

Who said they did?

however using the graces of reasoning given me it is easy to see Mary as the Queen of Heaven.

Maybe you need to recheck your reasoning. A cursory reading of the n.t you would never come to the conclusion mary was queen of heaven or any of the other nonsense youre pushing.

Esther was a virgin Jewish girl who saved her people from destruction. Her grace and beauty bound the heart of the king to her own. Whereby she was elevated to the throne of queen as it was pleasing to the king. Our King, our Lord, so raised a comely farm girl, Mary, saving her people from destruction. Mary alone was spared from the spiritual death of original sin and was united as one heart with God always pleasing Him. She too was elevated to Queen by her Lord and our Lord.

Esther as queen is in the bible. Mary as queen isn't. See the difference? One is actually there, one isn't. Why do catholics so easily cling to what isn't in the bible?

Knowing Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ then we deduce, deduct, glean, infer, conclude it is both right and proper to consider Mary the Mother of God; Hence as He is King of Heaven and Earth so too is the Mother of the King the Queen Mother of Heaven and earth.

So your religion is largely based on deduction. Mine is based on faith and the sure word of scripture. I guess if you wanted to join a logic club become catholic. If you want to be saved and born again believe in and trust Jesus as your savior.

You've made a terrible miscalculation, Protestantism doesn't protect the integrity of Sacred Scripture.

Christians do, not roman catholics and not prots.

Are you protecting the biblical Mary by not honoring Mary as the Queen of Heaven

Yes.

How does adoring the mother of the Personification of Grace equate to hatred for God?

Because you've made a mockery of the biblical Mary the mother of Jesus. And as such give any honor or adoration belonging to God, to a mere creature.

Ok, we're stand before the throne of judgement. You'll declare His Mother as a common sinner, that He was born of the sinful flesh, that He viewed His Mother as unbelieving twit.

Really? You people love your drama don't you? And bearing false witness.

I'll stand before the Lord and proclaim all the times she heard my prayer and in turn asked the Her Lord to change the dark waters of life to a sweet wine - "our life, our sweetness and our hope".

And Jesus will say 'depart from me, i never knew you.' When you stand before the Lord in your current state, you won't be asking inane questions or making absurd comments about mary. You'll drop to your knees and proclaim Jesus Christ is Lord of all.

Good luck.

 

[JoeT]

And?

And, did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

I forgot to ask, how do you mock a thing; hey rock you look soft as a sponge? Likewise, how do you mock a book unless you think it is a Divine object?

JoeT

 

[Nondenom40]

And, did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

I forgot to ask, how do you mock a thing; hey rock you look soft as a sponge? Likewise, how do you mock a book unless you think it is a Divine object?

JoeT

Gods word is a thing now?

Its Gods word. He authored it. If i mock Shakespeare who cares? Mocking Gods word is mocking the one that wrote it. That doesn't cross your mind when you make fun of it or tear Jesus down to lift mary up? It should.

 

[JoeT]

Gods word is a thing now?

Its Gods word. He authored it. If i mock Shakespeare who cares? Mocking Gods word is mocking the one that wrote it. That doesn't cross your mind when you make fun of it or tear Jesus down to lift Mary up? It should.

God's "Word" is not a BOOK. If God's "Word" were a BOOK it would be alive, don't you know that there is life in His Son [Cf. 1 John 5:11]? Jesus Christ teaching was verbal, "Logos" refers to the mental word which can be thought of as Wisdom, all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal. Jesus Christ told the Apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you"[Cf. Matthew 28:20]. He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book. If Christ did so order we did we would still be in the first century. I can't claim to know the percentage of the population in the 1st century that was illiterate but the percentage of high morals and common sense was rather high. Most people reasoned outside of a book and know it is not BOOK that has set us free, rather "Christ has made us free" [Galatians 4:31]. You know it is quite funny how "Catholic" St. Paul is yet you claim him to teach a chaotic truth, a different truth for each. Christ says He has glorified us not BOOKed us.

Now go get glorified in the Catholic Church!


JoeT

 

[balshan]

God's "Word" is not a BOOK. If God's "Word" were a BOOK it would be alive, don't you know that there is life in His Son [Cf. 1 John 5:11]? Jesus Christ teaching was verbal, "Logos" refers to the mental word which can be thought of as Wisdom, all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal. Jesus Christ told the Apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you"[Cf. Matthew 28:20]. He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book. If Christ did so order we did we would still be in the first century. I can't claim to know the percentage of the population in the 1st century that was illiterate but the percentage of high morals and common sense was rather high. Most people reasoned outside of a book and know it is not BOOK that has set us free, rather "Christ has made us free" [Galatians 4:31]. You know it is quite funny how "Catholic" St. Paul is yet you claim him to teach a chaotic truth, a different truth for each. Christ says He has glorified us not BOOKed us.

Now go get glorified in the Catholic Church!


JoeT

God is clear His word is written down and it is sad that when you read His word it does not speak to you. To me and others it is alive and it teaches as you read it.

Now get out of the millstone that is the RCC.

 

[organgrinder]

And, did you know that the name "Mary" means "Domina" in Hebrew?

I forgot to ask, how do you mock a thing; hey rock you look soft as a sponge? Likewise, how do you mock a book unless you think it is a Divine object?

JoeT

I have no idea where you got that from Joe, but this is what I found:

The name Mary was derived from the ancient Hebrew name Miriam. Miriam was the name of Moses’ sister in the Old Testament of the Bible. This name may have come from a root meaning “beloved,” or from a word meaning “bitter” or “rebellious,” a reference to the biblical Miriam’s life as a slave in Egypt.

• Origin: In Latin editions of the Bible, the name Miriam (or Maryam, an Aramaic variant) was rendered as Maria. This led to the French name Marie, which in English was spelled as Mary.

From the VeryWellFamily Web Page

Other searches said the same. Nothing about Domina (a Latin word by the way). Latin meaning of Domina is mistress of a house or household or family.

 

[A new day]

God's "Word" is not a BOOK. If God's "Word" were a BOOK it would be alive, don't you know that there is life in His Son [Cf. 1 John 5:11]? Jesus Christ teaching was verbal, "Logos" refers to the mental word which can be thought of as Wisdom, all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal. Jesus Christ told the Apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you"[Cf. Matthew 28:20]. He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book. If Christ did so order we did we would still be in the first century. I can't claim to know the percentage of the population in the 1st century that was illiterate but the percentage of high morals and common sense was rather high. Most people reasoned outside of a book and know it is not BOOK that has set us free, rather "Christ has made us free" [Galatians 4:31]. You know it is quite funny how "Catholic" St. Paul is yet you claim him to teach a chaotic truth, a different truth for each. Christ says He has glorified us not BOOKed us.
Now go get glorified in the Catholic Church!
JoeT

And why does the rcc today, have a “written” record of its history that they teach from to the laity about its own traditions? And why does the rcc church teach from a “missel” or “lectionary”. From some of the posts, I gather most rc's have one or the other.

Jesus quoted from Scripture. “it is written” God, Himself dictated the 600 plus laws and had moses write them down. There is a reason contracts and agreements are to be in writing. Oral agreements are easily changed and/or broken. This can not be done with written agreements. And the reason companies and big businesses always have written and signed contracts by both parties. Oral agreements are unreliable.

Oral traditions get changed over time to suit the tastes and whims of those in leadership positions.

Scripture on the other hand has not changed.

As a matter of fact, Jesus condemned the pharisee's for relying on oral traditions and following them instead of what they knew was written down in Scripture.

Mark 7:5
So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders

But Jesus, Himself said...

Mark 7:6-9
He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.' You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions."And he continued, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

Mark 7:13
Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

 

[balshan]

I have no idea where you got that from Joe, but this is what I found:

The name Mary was derived from the ancient Hebrew name Miriam. Miriam was the name of Moses’ sister in the Old Testament of the Bible. This name may have come from a root meaning “beloved,” or from a word meaning “bitter” or “rebellious,” a reference to the biblical Miriam’s life as a slave in Egypt.

• Origin: In Latin editions of the Bible, the name Miriam (or Maryam, an Aramaic variant) was rendered as Maria. This led to the French name Marie, which in English was spelled as Mary.

From the VeryWellFamily Web Page

Other searches said the same. Nothing about Domina (a Latin word by the way). Latin meaning of Domina is mistress of a house or household or family.

My searches found the same thing, which was what I expected to find.

 

[balshan]

And why does the rcc today, have a “written” record of its history that they teach from to the laity about its own traditions? And why does the rcc church teach from a “missel” or “lectionary”. From some of the posts, I gather most rc's have one or the other.

Jesus quoted from Scripture. “it is written” God, Himself dictated the 600 plus laws and had moses write them down. There is a reason contracts and agreements are to be in writing. Oral agreements are easily changed and/or broken. This can not be done with written agreements. And the reason companies and big businesses always have written and signed contracts by both parties. Oral agreements are unreliable.

Oral traditions get changed over time to suit the tastes and whims of those in leadership positions.

Scripture on the other hand has not changed.

As a matter of fact, Jesus condemned the pharisee's for relying on oral traditions and following them instead of what they knew was written down in Scripture.

Mark 7:5
So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders

But Jesus, Himself said...

Mark 7:6-9
He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.' You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions."And he continued, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!

Mark 7:13
Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

You made an excellent point:

Oral traditions get changed over time to suit the tastes and whims of those in leadership positions.

Scripture on the other hand has not changed.

 

[Nondenom40]

God's "Word" is not a BOOK. If God's "Word" were a BOOK it would be alive, don't you know that there is life in His Son [Cf. 1 John 5:11]? Jesus Christ teaching was verbal, "Logos" refers to the mental word which can be thought of as Wisdom, all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal. Jesus Christ told the Apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you"[Cf. Matthew 28:20]. He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book. If Christ did so order we did we would still be in the first century. I can't claim to know the percentage of the population in the 1st century that was illiterate but the percentage of high morals and common sense was rather high. Most people reasoned outside of a book and know it is not BOOK that has set us free, rather "Christ has made us free" [Galatians 4:31]. You know it is quite funny how "Catholic" St. Paul is yet you claim him to teach a chaotic truth, a different truth for each. Christ says He has glorified us not BOOKed us.

Now go get glorified in the Catholic Church!


JoeT

Sounds like i struck a nerve.

God's "Word" is not a BOOK.

Scripture isn't the word of God? God didn't pen it or author it?

If God's "Word" were a BOOK it would be alive,

It is. A person can pick up Gods word, read it and the Holy Spirit work in that person to bring them to life and quicken their spirit and they can be born again by reading His word.

Jesus Christ teaching was verbal, "Logos" refers to the mental word which can be thought of as Wisdom, all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal.

Well, logos refers to the person of Christ. He IS the word. But since He isn't physically here and you can't fly to Israel to hear Him speak on a cool morning on a mountain side hill, where exactly do YOU hear this 'verbal' teaching? How is it proclaimed and where does the person speaking it get those words? Hmm??

Jesus Christ told the Apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you"[Cf. Matthew 28:20].

Sure, they were there. Its the first century and they are being sent out by Jesus Himself. Where do YOU get the words by which you are taught all things He has commanded? Does Jesus come down to you personally and tell you? If not where do you get those teachings? Youre failing miserably at this you know? Your utter disdain for Gods word is showing.

He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book.

Ever the mocker of God and His Holy word. And while Jesus didn't move people to write, other than John, the Holy Spirit certainly did. Which is why we have a bible at all.

You know it is quite funny how "Catholic" St. Paul is yet you claim him to teach a chaotic truth, a different truth for each. Christ says He has glorified us not BOOKed us.

Paul was no more catholic than i am. He was a christian and fought and exposed the very thing your church has become. An enemy of the gospel. There is no chaos in Pauline theology only in the catholics eyes.

Why do catholics hate Gods word? Here are some things the bible says about itself;

The following are some of the words which tell us how God would have us regard his Word:

pure—perfect—sure—truth—eternal—forever settled in heaven—it sanctifies—it causes spiritual growth—it is God-breathed—it is authoritative—it gives wisdom unto salvation—it makes the simple wise—it is living and active—it is a guide—it is a fire—a hammer—a seed—the sword of the Spirit—it gives the knowledge of God—it is a lamp to our feet—a light to our path—that which produces reverence for God—it heals—makes free—illuminates—produces faith— regenerates—converts the soul—brings conviction of sin—restrains from sin—is spiritual food—is infallible— inerrant—irrevocable—it searches the heart and mind—produces life—defeats Satan—proves truth—refutes error—is holy—equips for every good work—is the Word of the living God (Psa. 119:9-11, 38, 105, 130, 133, 160; Psa. 19:7-11; Psa. 111:7-8; Isa. 40:8; Eph. 5:26; 2 Tim. 3:15-17; Jer. 5:14, 23:29; Matt. 13:18-23; Eph. 6:17; Psa. 107:20; Titus 2:5; 1 Pet. 1:23, 2:2; Acts 20:32; John 8:32, 10:35, 17:17).

Where is there a similar list for your sacred tradition?

 

[A new day]

Sounds like i struck a nerve.

Yup

 

[Misfit]

And why does the rcc church teach from a “missel” or “lectionary”

I went through this before. Words from the Bible printed in other places do not cease words from the Bible. The Missal and Lectionary conform to our liturgical way of worship. Specific readings for specific days, there is nothing wrong with that either.

Scripture on the other hand has not changed.

Only the interpretation of it has changed. Yours is of the new variety, you know, the one that took over 1500 years to come about. Why such a thing even continued on after that, name the century and someone came up with a new interpretation different than yours. Maybe they are right and you are wrong, have you ever thought about that?

 

[A new day]

Words from the Bible printed in other places do not cease words from the Bible.

No one said anything about what is quoted above, There is the claim posted earlier by another rc, of “all truths proclaimed by Christ were verbal.” “He did not say, go sell books, or write books, or follow me into a book” Then the author went on to show oral teachings were superior to what was written down.

I pointed out that the rcc also uses written material, itself. Not just oral speeches. To say otherwise is hypocrisy.

Languages and dialects change, but Scripture has NEVER changed. Todays, Scriptures have been compared to the scrolls written in bible times, and the comparison has shown that Scriptures NEVER change. God is fully able to preserve His written word.

Interestingly, all of us non-rc's come from different denominations, different countries, and different walks of life and yet we all arrive at the same interpretations and meanings. Scripture as a whole, interprets Scripture.

I didn't post an interpretation. I posted the conversation between Jesus and the pharisee's who would rather follow tradition instead of doing what God said in Scripture. And Jesus said that in doing so they nullified the word of God.

We have been told numerous times by rc's that tradition superseded Scripture. And yet, Jesus blasted the pharisee's for setting Scripture aside, in order to follow traditions. Jesus, Himself set the record strait, that Scripture itself was God's word. I let Scripture do the speaking, and it obliviously struck a nerve; didn't it?

 

[JoeT]

I have no idea where you got that from Joe, but this is what I found:

The name Mary was derived from the ancient Hebrew name Miriam. Miriam was the name of Moses’ sister in the Old Testament of the Bible. This name may have come from a root meaning “beloved,” or from a word meaning “bitter” or “rebellious,” a reference to the biblical Miriam’s life as a slave in Egypt.

• Origin: In Latin editions of the Bible, the name Miriam (or Maryam, an Aramaic variant) was rendered as Maria. This led to the French name Marie, which in English was spelled as Mary.

From the VeryWellFamily Web Page

Other searches said the same. Nothing about Domina (a Latin word by the way). Latin meaning of Domina is mistress of a house or household or family.

That's right, and Mary, or Miriam, refers to our Lady of the House. St. Bonaventure took all the meanings of the name saying "

"This most holy, sweet and worthy name was eminently fitted to so holy, sweet and worthy a virgin. For Mary means a bitter sea, star of the sea, the illuminated or illuminatrix. Mary is interpreted [as] Lady. Mary is a bitter sea to the demons; to men she is the Star of the sea; to the Angels she is illuminatrix, and to all creatures she is Lady."​

​

Many find the Hebrew meaning in Miriam of Star of the Sea symbolizing Mary as an Ark of the Covenant carrying our Salvation across the dark seas of sin (typified by the flood) to the shores of our salvation. The Jews of antiquity feared the sea and the dark waters of the flood were most always associated with the sea.

Many find the Hebrew "mari" meaning Lady, taken in relationship to the Lord her Son. In today's jargon Mary is the First Lady of the Church. You are correct in stating that "Domina" is the Lady of God's House, the Catholic Church.

​

JoeT​

 

[organgrinder]

That's right, and Mary, or Miriam, refers to our Lady of the House. St. Bonaventure took all the meanings of the name saying "

"This most holy, sweet and worthy name was eminently fitted to so holy, sweet and worthy a virgin. For Mary means a bitter sea, star of the sea, the illuminated or illuminatrix. Mary is interpreted [as] Lady. Mary is a bitter sea to the demons; to men she is the Star of the sea; to the Angels she is illuminatrix, and to all creatures she is Lady."​

​

Many find the Hebrew meaning in Miriam of Star of the Sea symbolizing Mary as an Ark of the Covenant carrying our Salvation across the dark seas of sin (typified by the flood) to the shores of our salvation. The Jews of antiquity feared the sea and the dark waters of the flood were most always associated with the sea.

Many find the Hebrew "mari" meaning Lady, taken in relationship to the Lord her Son. In today's jargon Mary is the First Lady of the Church. You are correct in stating that "Domina" is the Lady of God's House, the Catholic Church.

​

JoeT​

Big big stretch, Joe. You, Bonaventure and others went WAY beyond what the Hebrew meaning is. And no, Domina refers to lady of the house, not Mary or Miriam. Better check your facts better next time.