What are these sacred traditions? Or can you post a link for me to study them?
And I believe the only sacred traditions are in the bible. It's hard for me to accept anything outside the bible. But I want understand your beliefs.
Immaculate Conception
- Thread starter MMurphy
- Start date
- Status
What are these sacred traditions? Or can you post a link for me to study them?
And I believe the only sacred traditions are in the bible. It's hard for me to accept anything outside the bible. But I want understand your beliefs.
Hasn't this discussion already been worn out? I think we all know where we stand and we've all come full circle.
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
Yes I think it's quite apparent we are deadlocked. But at least it's been made clear there are at LEAST two very different sides.
It's only a recommendation that we figure out how the conversation can progress or we move on altogether. This thread has lead to misunderstanding after misunderstanding; "Oh, you don't believe in Church authority? You must be so full of pride!" "Oh, you don't believe in Sola Scriptura? You must believe in adding to the Scriptures!"
This thread in particular has an ugliness beneath the surface.
This thread in particular has an ugliness beneath the surface.
I was going to be done with this thread, but instead , I'm done with being bullied.
For those seekers of truth out there I have been reminded of the following fundamental truths.
php 2:6. who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. and so seeking out a second witness to confirm truth;
Heb 2:6 It has been testified somewhere, "What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him?
Heb 2:7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor,
Heb 2:8 putting everything in subjection under his feet." Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him.
Heb 2:9 But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
Not aware of anything lower than the angels, yet higher than mankind.
These two discourses make it plain that Jesus was OK with being born of a woman who like every other woman was born with a sinful nature. Sure she was chosen out by God, but that did not change her need for salvation by Christ Jesus.
Note in particular these two witnesses to the truth:
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Heb 2:7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor,
Those who wish can post Latin phrases all they like, the truth shall remain truth forever.
For those seekers of truth out there I have been reminded of the following fundamental truths.
php 2:6. who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. and so seeking out a second witness to confirm truth;
Heb 2:6 It has been testified somewhere, "What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him?
Heb 2:7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor,
Heb 2:8 putting everything in subjection under his feet." Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him.
Heb 2:9 But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
Not aware of anything lower than the angels, yet higher than mankind.
These two discourses make it plain that Jesus was OK with being born of a woman who like every other woman was born with a sinful nature. Sure she was chosen out by God, but that did not change her need for salvation by Christ Jesus.
Note in particular these two witnesses to the truth:
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Heb 2:7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor,
Those who wish can post Latin phrases all they like, the truth shall remain truth forever.
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
I agree with you, I think it does have an ugliness beneath the surface, but perhaps there's a lesson to be learned here. Christians are taught to evangelize but when fully educated Christians attempt to "educate" one another on matters where they completely disagree, I'm not sure that ugliness and fighting can be avoided.
My biggest issue is when people don't acknowledge that there ARE two sides of the debate. When one side, and I'm going to use the side I'm on, because that's been my experience - is either held in such utter contempt or not taken seriously that the other side simply dismissed it. That is offensive and it will not stand. "I'm right, you're wrong" is one thing. "I'm right, your side doesn't exist" is quite another.
I don't mind debate and discussion, and I do hold the opinion that there is one objective truth, but when a debate has exhausted itself into slander and bad misconceptions, then that's something else.
Who's bullying you? I wouldn't condone that.
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
I'm only talking about the human nature aspect of this debate now, but EVERYONE feels strongly about this subject and feels theirs is the "one objective truth". In any circumstance, not just this one, I feel people need to be reasonable. Holding fast to your convictions is good, noble, desirable. But how can two sides debate at all if both sides are so convinced they have the absolute truth that they don't budge from an issue? Of course this is going to lead to bickering!
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
Could this not be said of both sides? To put it another way, you suspect Lynsander (and presumably myself) are reading these scriptures through "Catholic glasses". Do you not see how we could put the same thing to yourself? That you read the scriptures through a "fundamentalist" filter?
Or to put it more crudely, you feel we are "tainted" by Catholicism and we feel you are "tainted" by fundamentalism.
The point I'm making is that any criticism you level in our direction, we could do the very same thing in return. And I'm sure neither of us wants to do that in the interests of staying civil and polite.
Further, being born in the likeness of men (plural) shows that the intent of the passage is that He, Jesus was born in the same way as men, not had the singular been used ie. in the likeness of a man.
So since Jesus was born in the same way as men are born, His gestation and birth were like any other. Only the manner of His conception was unique.
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
So since Jesus was born in the same way as men are born, His gestation and birth were like any other. Only the manner of His conception was unique.
Php 2:7. but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
TalkJesus
Inactive
If she had not sinned, then Mary would not need God as her Saviour, but she did in her song of praise.
Luke 1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
If Mary having inheritted the original sin is still a problem, then you have to contend with how she can be born without sin? Following that line of thinking, her mother would have to be without sin, and then her grandmother, and so on down the line to Eve and that is just plain unBiblical.
And then there is that consequence for sin which is death.
Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Mary has died. She is not around nor alive today on earth. As big a deal that the RCC has made her out to be, she is not residing at the Vatican.
So Mary does not need to be without sin to carry the baby Jesus to birth.
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
And I also hope that this thread can stay open a while longer because we're finally discussing how to iron out our differences in a constructive way.
The number and variety of proofs for this simple fact seem so obvious it is difficult to see how anyone would see things differently after an objective study. But then, I suppose if external considerations are added into the mix, then truth as an objective reality becomes a bit fuzzy.
So I hope the OP has actually been answered.... if it hasn't then I suppose it never will.
TalkJesus
Inactive
Take heart, brother calvin. When we all come face to face with Him in our own time and in our own order, they will know.
1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
I think we will all get a surprise one way or the other.
But to lighten things up a little, what do you think of v13? Given that Paul is looking ahead to post resurrection/rapture times, what place has 'hope' in the eternal scheme of things. What would we hope for? That there will be a place set at the table for us? Or that my new grown leg will not get waterlogged in the bath?
No, what I mean is I don't want people to feel bad for expressing their opinions.
PeaceLikeaRiver
Inactive
Respectfully, I think that when one approaches Christianity for the first time it's quite necessary to look at the historical aspects of it.
How things were at the beginning, what was believed and practiced, and how they changed.
If one wants to become a Catholic, or a Lutheran, or one of the major branches of Christianity, you don't just walk in and sign a sheet. You have to go to classes. You take the time and learn and study and see what it's all about. So you don't see people one day announce "Hey I became a Lutheran today." My perspective is that you DO, however, just announce one day that you're born again. There's no long term study associated with it, it's made to be a very simple thing - just give yourself to Christ, publicly read a few words and you're in, you're a saved Child of God.
I don't mean to make one sound better or more appealing than the other, but those are very different approaches to take to Christianity. And this is ME speaking from my own experience now, I personally want to know all the history, what was believed, what was changed, what was discarded, etc. before making up my own mind which path I'm going to take.
So how this all ties in with your post - when you say it's hard to you to accept anything outside of the Bible, you most likely have not looked at historical Christianity when there was a time when there was MORE than just the Bible to consider.
- Status