The Doctrine and Proof of Mary's Immaculate Conception

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Ask Jesus : One Thread

Immaculate Conception THE DOCTRINE

In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."

"The Blessed Virgin Mary . . ." The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body.

". . .in the first instance of her conception . . ." The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.

". . .was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin. . ." The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam -- from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.

". . .by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race." The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.

Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception."

PROOF FROM SCRIPTURE

Genesis 3:15

No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. BUT the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer. The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel (Proto-evangelium), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman: "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" (Genesis 3:15). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically. The conqueror from the seed of the woman, who should crush the serpent's head, is Christ; the woman at enmity with the serpent is Mary. God puts enmity between her and Satan in the same manner and measure, as there is enmity between Christ and the seed of the serpent. Mary was ever to be in that exalted state of soul which the serpent had destroyed in man, i.e. in sanctifying grace. Only the continual union of Mary with grace explains sufficiently the enmity between her and Satan. The Proto-evangelium, therefore, in the original text contains a direct promise of the Redeemer, and in conjunction therewith the manifestation of the masterpiece of His Redemption, the perfect preservation of His virginal Mother from original sin.

Luke 1:28

The salutation of the angel Gabriel -- chaire kecharitomene, Hail, full of grace (Luke 1:28) indicates a unique abundance of grace, a supernatural, godlike state of soul, which finds its explanation only in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. But the term kecharitomene (full of grace) serves only as an illustration, not as a proof of the dogma.

Other texts

From the texts Proverbs 8 and Ecclesiasticus 24 (which exalt the Wisdom of God and which in the liturgy are applied to Mary, the most beautiful work of God's Wisdom), or from the Canticle of Canticles (4:7, "Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee"), no theological conclusion can be drawn. These passages, applied to the Mother of God, may be readily understood by those who know the privilege of Mary, but do not avail to prove the doctrine dogmatically, and are therefore omitted from the Constitution "Ineffabilis Deus". For the theologian it is a matter of conscience not to take an extreme position by applying to a creature texts which might imply the prerogatives of God.

PROOF FROM TRADITION

In regard to the sinlessness of Mary the older Fathers are very cautious: some of them even seem to have been in error on this matter.

Origen, although he ascribed to Mary high spiritual prerogatives, thought that, at the time of Christ's passion, the sword of disbelief pierced Mary's soul; that she was struck by the poniard of doubt; and that for her sins also Christ died (Origen, "In Luc. hom. xvii"). In the same manner St. Basil writes in the fourth century: he sees in the sword, of which Simeon speaks, the doubt which pierced Mary's soul (Epistle 259). St. Chrysostom accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capharnaum (Matthew 11:46; Chrysostom, Hom. xliv; cf. also "In Matt.", hom. iv). But these stray private opinions merely serve to show that theology is a progressive science. If we were to attempt to set forth the full doctrine of the Fathers on the sanctity of the Blessed Virgin, which includes particularly the implicit belief in the immaculateness of her conception, we should be forced to transcribe a multitude of passages. In the testimony of the Fathers two points are insisted upon: her absolute purity and her position as the second Eve (cf. I Cor. 15:22).

Mary as the second Eve

This celebrated comparison between Eve, while yet immaculate and incorrupt -- that is to say, not subject to original sin -- and the Blessed Virgin is developed by:

Justin (Dialog. cum Tryphone, 100), Irenaeus (Contra Haereses, III, xxii, 4), Tertullian (De carne Christi, xvii), Julius Firm cus Maternus (De errore profan. relig xxvi), Cyril of Jerusalem (Catecheses, xii, 29), Epiphanius (Hæres., lxxviii, 18), Theodotus of Ancyra (Or. in S. Deip n. 11), and Sedulius (Carmen paschale, II, 28). The absolute purity of Mary

Patristic writings on Mary's purity abound.

The Fathers call Mary the tabernacle exempt from defilement and corruption (Hippolytus, "Ontt. in illud, Dominus pascit me"); Origen calls her worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, most complete sanctity, perfect justice, neither deceived by the persuasion of the serpent, nor infected with his poisonous breathings ("Hom. i in diversa"); Ambrose says she is incorrupt, a virgin immune through grace from every stain of sin ("Sermo xxii in Ps. cxviii); Maximum of Turin calls her a dwelling fit for Christ, not because of her habit of body, but because of original grace ("Nom. viii de Natali Domini"); Theodotus of Ancyra terms her a virgin innocent, without spot, void of culpability, holy in body and in soul, a lily springing among thorns, untaught the ills of Eve nor was there any communion in her of light with darkness, and, when not yet born, she was consecrated to God ("Orat. in S. Dei Genitr."). In refuting Pelagius St. Augustine declares that all the just have truly known of sin "except the Holy Virgin Mary, of whom, for the honour of the Lord, I will have no question whatever where sin is concerned" (De naturâ et gratiâ 36). Mary was pledged to Christ (Peter Chrysologus, "Sermo cxl de Annunt. B.M.V."); it is evident and notorious notorious that she was pure from eternity, exempt from every defect (Typicon S. Sabae); she was formed without any stain (St. Proclus, "Laudatio in S. Dei Gen. ort.", I, 3); she was created in a condition more sublime and glorious than all other natures (Theodorus of Jerusalem in Mansi, XII, 1140); when the Virgin Mother of God was to be born of Anne, nature did not dare to anticipate the germ of grace, but remained devoid of fruit (John Damascene, "Hom. i in B. V. Nativ.", ii). The Syrian Fathers never tire of extolling the sinlessness of Mary. St. Ephraem considers no terms of eulogy too high to describe the excellence of Mary's grace and sanctity: "Most holy Lady, Mother of God, alone most pure in soul and body, alone exceeding all perfection of purity ...., alone made in thy entirety the home of all the graces of the Most Holy Spirit, and hence exceeding beyond all compare even the angelic virtues in purity and sanctity of soul and body . . . . my Lady most holy, all-pure, all-immaculate, all-stainless, all-undefiled, all-incorrupt, all-inviolate spotless robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment . ... flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone most immaculate" ("Precationes ad Deiparam" in Opp. Graec. Lat., III, 524-37). To St. Ephraem she was as innocent as Eve before her fall, a virgin most estranged from every stain of sin, more holy than the Seraphim, the sealed fountain of the Holy Ghost, the pure seed of God, ever in body and in mind intact and immaculate ("Carmina Nisibena"). Jacob of Sarug says that "the very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary; if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary". It seems, however, that Jacob of Sarug, if he had any clear idea of the doctrine of sin, held that Mary was perfectly pure from original sin ("the sentence against Adam and Eve") at the Annunciation. St. John Damascene (Or. i Nativ. Deip., n. 2) esteems the supernatural influence of God at the generation of Mary to be so comprehensive that he extends it also to her parents. He says of them that, during the generation, they were filled and purified by the Holy Ghost, and freed from sexual concupiscence. Consequently according to the Damascene, even the human element of her origin, the material of which she was formed, was pure and holy. This opinion of an immaculate active generation and the sanctity of the "conceptio carnis" was taken up by some Western authors; it was put forward by Petrus Comestor in his treatise against St. Bernard and by others. Some writers even taught that Mary was born of a virgin and that she was conceived in a miraculous manner when Joachim and Anne met at the golden gate of the temple (Trombelli, "Mari SS. Vita", Sect. V, ii, 8; Summa aurea, II, 948. Cf. also the "Revelations" of Catherine Emmerich which contain the entire apocryphal legend of the miraculous conception of Mary.

From this summary it appears that the belief in Mary's immunity from sin in her conception was prevalent amongst the Fathers, especially those of the Greek Church. The rhetorical character, however, of many of these and similar passages prevents us from laying too much stress on them, and interpreting them in a strictly literal sense. The Greek Fathers never formally or explicitly discussed the question of the Immaculate Conception.

The Conception of St. John the Baptist

A comparison with the conception of Christ and that of St. John may serve to light both on the dogma and on the reasons which led the Greeks to celebrate at an early date the Feast of the Conception of Mary.

The conception of the Mother of God was beyond all comparison more noble than that of St. John the Baptist, whilst it was immeasurably beneath that of her Divine Son. The soul of the precursor was not preserved immaculate at its union with the body, but was sanctified either shortly after conception from a previous state of sin, or through the presence of Jesus at the Visitation. Our Lord, being conceived by the Holy Ghost, was, by virtue of his miraculous conception, ipso facto free from the taint of original sin. Of these three conceptions the Church celebrates feasts. The Orientals have a Feast of the Conception of St. John the Baptist (23 September), which dates back to the fifth century, is thus older than the Feast of the Conception of Mary, and, during the Middle Ages, was kept also by many Western dioceses on 24 September. The Conception of Mary is celebrated by the Latins on 8 December; by the Orientals on 9 December; the Conception of Christ has its feast in the universal calendar on 25 March. In celebrating the feast of Mary's Conception the Greeks of old did not consider the theological distinction of the active and the passive conceptions, which was indeed unknown to them. They did not think it absurd to celebrate a conception which was not immaculate, as we see from the Feast of the Conception of St. John. They solemnized the Conception of Mary, perhaps because, according to the "Proto-evangelium" of St. James, it was preceded by miraculous events (the apparition of an angel to Joachim, etc.), similar to those which preceded the conception of St. John, and that of our Lord Himself. Their object was less the purity of the conception than the holiness and heavenly mission of the person conceived. In the Office of 9 December, however, Mary, from the time of her conception, is called beautiful, pure, holy, just, etc., terms never used in the Office of 23 September (sc. of St. John the Baptist). The analogy of St. John's sanctification may have given rise to the Feast of the Conception of Mary. If it was necessary that the precursor of the Lord should be so pure and "filled with the Holy Ghost" even from his mother's womb, such a purity was assuredly not less befitting His Mother. The moment of St. John's sanctification is by later writers thought to be the Visitation ("the infant leaped in her womb"), but the angel's words (Luke, i, 15) seem to indicate a sanctification at the conception. This would render the origin of Mary more similar to that of John. And if the Conception of John had its feast, why not that of Mary?

PROOF FROM REASON

There is an incongruity in the supposition that the flesh, from which the flesh of the Son of God was to be formed, should ever have belonged to one who was the slave of that arch-enemy, whose power He came on earth to destroy. Hence the axiom of Pseudo-Anselmus (Eadmer) developed by Duns Scotus, Decuit, potuit, ergo fecit, it was becoming that the Mother of the Redeemer should have been free from the power of sin and from the first moment of her existence; God could give her this privilege, therefore He gave it to her. Again it is remarked that a peculiar privilege was granted to the prophet Jeremiah and to St. John the Baptist. They were sanctified in their mother's womb, because by their preaching they had a special share in the work of preparing the way for Christ. Consequently some much higher prerogative is due to Mary. (A treatise of P. Marchant, claiming for St. Joseph also the privilege of St. John, was placed on the Index in 1833.) Scotus says that "the perfect Mediator must, in some one case, have done the work of mediation most perfectly, which would not be unless there was some one person at least, in whose regard the wrath of God was anticipated and not merely appeased." ~ Catholic Encyclopedia

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003

Answers

NONE of that is "proof", its all still your faith.

Your nothing but sheep that will be led to the slaughter

BAAAAAAAAAA

BAAAAAAAAA

BAAAAAAAAAA

-- Welp (satanswelp@HELL.org), October 23, 2003.


What happened to the entire thread?

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.

I don't understand you, Welp. You talk like a goat.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.

IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

AMEN.

SAINT MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL

DEFEND US IN BATTLE

BE OUR PROTECTION AGAINST THE WICKEDNESS AND SNARES OF THE DEVIL

MAY GOD REBUKE HIM, WE HUMBLY PRAY;

AND DO THOU, O PRINCE OF THE HEAVENLY HOST

BY THE POWER OF GOD, THRUST INTO HELL

SATAN AND ALL EVIL SPIRITS

WHO WANDER THROUGH THE WORLD

FOR THE RUIN OF SOULS.

IN THE MOST POWERFUL NAME OF JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD.

AMEN.

THANK YOU HOLY HEAVEN.

IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

AMEN.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


Exposing the False Doctrine of Mary - The Immaculate Conception.

That God accorded Mary, the virgin mother of Jesus, a place of high honor and respect as a most important link in His plan of salvation for man is clearly evident from the biblical record. However, the undue exaltation of Mary, even to the point of worshipping her, as is done by Catholics and others, is a most serious offense against God and Mary's Savior-son. We should not allow this tragic error to dissuade us from giving Mary the honor due her or from learning any valuable lessons from her. Of the several Marys of the New Testament, none rank in importance with the virgin mother of Jesus. The annals of inspired history nowhere treat any other woman with the singularity accorded Mary as the mother of our Savior. No other woman "found favor with God," or was "highly favored" as was Mary, as stated by the angel of the Lord, Gabriel.

The great favor extended to Mary began to be realized or find fulfillment when Joseph and Mary left their home in Nazareth and journeyed to Jerusalem where the virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus, as the Messianic prophet had foretold. God's plan of salvation, first alluded to in Genesis 3:15, where it was said the seed of woman would bruise the head of the serpent, was now becoming a reality. God's promise, as brought forth through Abraham and his seed was finding fulfillment through the seed of woman as stated in Genesis 3:15.

The prophet Isaiah pointed to Mary?s special place in God?s plan when he said, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Isa. 7:14). The inspired writer, Matthew, clearly identifies the fulfillment of this prophecy as that of the birth of Jesus by "a virgin" (Matt. 1:18-23).

The narratives of both Matthew and Luke deal with the birth of Jesus, giving a good picture. While Matthew emphasizes the more public aspects, Luke relates more of Mary's personal feelings and experiences. Some valuable lessons can be learned from these inspired writers as they inform us about Mary.

Mary, a virgin, was "espoused" to Joseph. Both were residents of Nazareth, a city considered by some as of somewhat ill repute. It was in Nazareth that the angel of the Lord, Gabriel, was sent by God to inform Mary that she had "found favor with God." This "favor" was that she would conceive in her womb and bring forth a son named "Jesus" ( Lk. 1:26-31).

It appears that Mary and family spent much time in Nazareth and were generally known by the people. In response to the wisdom and mighty works of Jesus as demonstrated in "his own country," the people asked:

"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things? And they were offended in him..." (Matt. 13:55-57).

It is clear from the above that Mary DID HAVE OTHER CHILDREN AFTER the birth of Jesus, and did NOT remain a virgin as ERRONEOUSLY taught by many. Another fact brought out is that Joseph was a carpenter. In Mark's account it is indicated that Jesus was also a carpenter (Mk. 6:3). Both Matthew and Mark reveal that the people were "offended" in or at Jesus. Though nothing is said relative to Mary's response to the people's reaction toward her son, Jesus, it would be a common reaction of a mother to have a feeling of great disappointment from such.

It appears that Joseph and Mary were poor people. Jesus was circumcised on the eight day, and when the days of Mary's purification were finished, Joseph and Mary brought him to Jerusalem to be presented "to the Lord," "And to offer a sacrifice..." (Lk. 2:24). The sacrifice of "a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons" was for those who were "not able to bring a lamb" (Lev. 12:8). This apparent lack of wealth by Joseph and Mary should serve as a reminder to us that an abundance of material wealth is not necessary for one to serve a useful purpose in God's plan of salvation for man. To the contrary, there are a number of warnings in God's word relative to the danger of material wealth.

In addition to being of humble means, Mary was not of a city of great renown. Nazareth was evidently looked upon by many with disfavor. When Philip found Nathaniel and told him they had found Jesus of Nazareth, of whom Moses and the prophets had written, Nathaniel's response was: "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" (John 1:45-46). "Nazareth" came to stand for contempt and derision when applied to Jesus by his enemies.

As God, with his unlimited knowledge, looked with favor upon Mary, from a city of no great repute, so does our Lord look with favor upon those who do "the will of the Father" (Matt. 7:21) in obeying the "author of eternal salvation" (Heb. 5:9), as is the case when one in truth responds to the call of the gospel (2 Thess. 2:14), regardless of where one lives.

The scheme of redemption, first alluded to in Genesis 3:15, would ultimately be fulfilled in Christ, born of the virgin Mary. The promise of fulfillment was given to Abraham and to his seed, as noted in Genesis 12 and 22. God?s promise of salvation would become a reality through Christ, the "seed" of woman, as is clearly set forth in Galatins 3:16.

Some seven hundred years before Christ, Isaiah makes a clear and unmistakable statement relative to Christ?s virgin birth: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Isa. 7:14). That Isaiah's predictive prophecy was to be fulfilled by a virgin birth, and that birth was Jesus, is so very clearly stated by the inspired Matthew: "Now this was all done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us" (Matt. 1:22-23).

Both Matthew and Luke give considerable information relative to the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary. We now call attention to considerable information as provided by the inspired Luke: "And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou art highly favored, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the highest: and the Lord shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elizabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. For with God nothing shall be impossible. And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her" (Lk. 1:26-38).

The "espousal" of Mary to Joseph was much more binding than is "engagement" in our present society. This is made clear by the well known church historian, Edershiem. The following statement by him helps explain how Mary could be referred to as the "wife" of Joseph in Matthew 1:20, when the angel said unto Joseph, "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife."

"From the moment Mary was the betrothed wife of Joseph; their relationship was as sacred as if they had already been wedded. Any breach of it would be treated as adultery; nor could the bond be dissolved except, as after marriage, by regular divorce. Yet months might intervene between the betrothal and marriage."

Mary couldn?t comprehend the meaning of being "highly favored" and "blessed among women." But the angel explains: She shall conceive and bring forth a son, named JESUS. He would be given "the throne of David." Though Mary obviously believed in God, how could she have a son when she had never known man, that is, had never have sexual relations with a man. This is explained by the angel; the Holy Ghost would come upon her, and the child would be called "the Son of God."

As if to strengthen Mary, the angel relates the unusual conception by her cousin Elizabeth, though she was "called barren." In response to Elizabeth?s statement that "with God nothing shall be impossible," Mary?s commendable and submissive reply was: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word."

Mary's willingness to be used in accordance with the will of God, reminds us of the attitude which characterized the household of Cornelius: "Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God" (Acts 10:33).

When Mary learned from the angel that Elizabeth would have a son "in her old age," and she herself would have a son, she visits her cousin Elizabeth:

"And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elizabeth. And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost; And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those thing which were told her from the Lord" (Lk. 1:39-45).

The words of Elizabeth to Mary that there would be a performance of the things which were told her from the Lord, must have had a great influence. Mary breaks forth in a song of great praise to the Lord and Savior: "And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. For he hath regarded the low estate of His handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. For He that is mighty hath done to me great things; and Holy is His name. And his mercy is on them that fear Him from generation to generation. He hath shewed strength with his arm; He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away. He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy; As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever. And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house" (Lk. 1:46-56).

Mary displays a great spirit of humility, as she refers to the "low estate of his handmaiden." What an honor that "all generations" would call her "blessed." That God had done unto Mary "great things" did not lessen her humility but rather increased her reverence for Him.

At exactly what point Joseph learns that Mary is with child we cannot be certain. It may have been after the three month visit by Mary with her cousin Elizabeth. Matthew reveals some interesting details about the matter: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall calls his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS" (Matt. 1:18-25).

It is hard to imagine the stress and humiliation felt by Mary! Though she knew the cause of her condition of being with child, seemingly others did not know. According to Jewish law she could not only be "put away," she could be put to death. Fortunately, Mary was blessed by a "just man" who did not act in haste, before he was informed by the angel as to Mary?s condition. Joseph was not of the mind of some today, as to what Isaiah had said in the long ago (Isa. 7:14). He accepted what the angel of the Lord said and immediately took Mary as his wife.

That Joseph "knew her not" [Mary] until Jesus was born, implies that he DID "know her" after the birth of Jesus. Had it not been for the ERRONEOUS TEACHING of Catholicism, who would have thought Mary did not have other children?

As is the case in many instances, one gospel account may contain additional information when compared with other gospel accounts. For this reason we call attention to the birth of Jesus as recorded by Luke: "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, everyone into his own city. And Joseph went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn" (Lk. 2:1-7).

In giving birth to Jesus, Mary has played a very significant part in God's plan for the salvation of man, the greatest blessing to which man can avail himself in his life on earth. How sad it is that so many spurn the gospel invitation or disavow their commitment after having responded to the call of the gospel.

It is understandable that the angel of the Lord would announce "good tidings of great joy" to the shepherds in the field, that a Savior, Christ the Lord, was born in the city of David. That heaven was pleased by this great happening was indicated by the angel and a heavenly host, "praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men" (Lk. 2:10-14).

After Mary had fulfilled her part in God's plan by giving birth to Jesus, for which she had been favored by God, attention is focused more upon Jesus and less upon Mary. We shall note briefly some references to Mary after the birth of Jesus, her greatest part in God's plan of salvation having been played. Though Mary was highly favored by God in giving birth to the Savior, it is significant that there is NO evidence that she was ever exalted to a state of the Divine. She, like other great characters of the Bible, was NOT worshipped or given a place as a mediator between God and men.

SHEPHERDS COME TO SEE JESUS. "And they came with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger." The shepherds spread the news of Jesus? birth, and those who heard "wondered" at the news. "Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart" (Lk. 2:16-19).

JESUS PRESENTED IN THE TEMPLE. In connection with the purification of Mary, the "just" and "devout" man Simeon had been directed to the temple by the Holy Spirit. Note what was said about Simeon and his words also: "And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him. And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed" (Lk. 2:33-35).

WISE MEN COME TO SEE JESUS. Some "wise men" from the east came to see Jesus. How many came? There's no way to know. "And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh" (Matt. 2:11).

VISIT TO JERUSALEM WHEN JESUS WAS TWELVE. On their journey home from Jerusalem, Joseph and Mary missed Jesus. When they found him in Jerusalem he was sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing and asking them questions: "And when they saw him they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? . . . . How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?" (Lk. 2:48-49).

MARY WITH JESUS AT CANA OF GALILEE. Mary said to Jesus, "They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, whatsoever he saith unto you, do it" (John 2:1-5).

MARY DESIRES TO SPEAK WITH JESUS. While Jesus was talking with some people, his mother and his brethren desired to speak with him. When informed of this, Jesus said, "Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!" (Matt. 12:25-27).

MARY AT THE CROSS. John records the last words that Mary hears spoken unto her by her son Jesus before his death: "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home" (John 19:25-27).

MARY IN THE UPPER ROOM. It is said of the apostles, when they had come together in an upper room: "These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren" (Acts 1:13-14).

Mary continues as a disciple of Jesus with the faithful. Though she has given birth to Jesus, God's Son, she has given him up on the cross to be the Savior of mankind. In giving up her fleshly son she has gained God's Son, the Savior of the world! What a great honor!

Many great things can be said of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Her example is outstanding in a number of areas. We would do well to emulate her example of humility. Her complete submission to the will of God is a characteristic which should be seen in all of us. It is obvious that Mary had a faith in God which was pleasing to the God of heaven. The very fact that God, being omniscient, highly favored Mary to be the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, speaks so very highly of her. Inspired history records nothing of a negative nature concerning her character.

With all the above said, Mary was still a woman, not God. In no sense of the term was she ever Deity or worthy of worship. There is NO semblance of proof that Mary was without sin. In fact, that she referred to God as "my Savior" (Lk. 1:47), implies that she was not without sin. Otherwise, why would she need a "Savior"? We reach these conclusions on the basis of what is said about Mary in God's word.

There are virtually unlimited FALSE TEACHINGS and practices concerning Mary, the mother of Jesus. History is replete with claims of miracles worked, intercessions made, visual appearances, and virtually unlimited powers displayed on the part of Mary. Some believe these FALSE and unrealistic claims originated within the Catholic Church because they wanted a "goddess," which would fit in with their other elements of paganism. Though the error concerning Mary goes back many centuries, that error in many forms is STILL SEEN within the Roman Catholic Church and some other religions. We shall note a few examples, though many others could be given.

The following are from a work by "Rev. A. W. Terminiello," with the imprimatur of the Archbishop of the Mobile-Birmingham area:

"WHAT DO WE MEAN BY THE DOCTRINE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION? By the Immaculate conception we mean that Mary was preserved from original sin from the very first moment of her conception, by a singular grace of God, through the merits of Jesus Christ. It also means that she remained sinless throughout her life."

Needless to say, the above is completely WITHOUT ANY BASIS from God's word. The SAME COULD BE SAID ABOUT SO MANY TEACHINGS of the Catholic Church and its MAN-MADE doctrines.

"WHAT IS MEANT BY THE PERPETUAL VIRGINITY OF MARY? By the perpetual virginity of Mary is meant that Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus."

Not only is this WITHOUT A BASIS from God's word, it is an outright CONTRADICTION of what is said in Matthew 13:55-56. The inspired record also says of Joseph, "And knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son..." (Matt. 1:25).

"WHAT DOE WE MEAN BY THE ASSUMPTION OF MARY? By the assumption of Mary we mean that after her death, her body was 'assumed' or taken into heaven. Since she did not inherit original sin, God could not permit her to suffer the penalty of original sin, which is corruption of the body."

The above is an example of basing ERROR UPON ERROR. The idea of original sin is NOT TAUGHT in God's word (Ezek. 18:20), just as the FALSE DOCTRINE that Mary was taken into heaven is NOT taught there. It is so often the case that error multiplies error. The progression of sin is evidenced in so many instances.

A recent request for error by Catholics. An article in the Aug. 25, 1997, issue of Newsweek, reported that the Pope had received more than four million signatures from people in 157 countries, who wanted him (the Pope) to use his power of "papal infallibility" to set forth a new dogma of Roman Catholicism. That dogma is that Mary, the mother of Christ, is "Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix of All Graces and Advocate for the people of God."

This new proposed dogma, if enacted, was said to mean that Catholics would have to accept three "extraordinary doctrines." They were: 1) Mary participates in redemption made possible by Christ. 2) All graces resulting from the death of Christ would be granted only by Mary's intercession with Christ. 3) All prayers and petitions would flow only through Mary.

Of course this new elevation of Mary would be in direct VIOLATION of 1 Tim. 2:5, which says: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." This is just another example, of which there are many, that the inspired word of God means LITTLE or NOTHING to Roman Catholics. But what can one expect in a religion which is COMPLETELY MAN-MADE, and part of which is right out of paganism?

Just about anything!

The very idea that that man can NULLIFY what God has provided through His Son, Jesus Christ, is to ASSUME a position of power and authority which is equal to that of God. By this I have reference to the fact that Christ came to earth and died as a sacrifice, in accordance with God's eternal plan, that He might be the only mediator between God and men.

Yet, many of the Catholics want to take that power as mediator from Christ and give it to Mary. How UNGODLY can people become?

The exaltation of Mary to positions which God has never given her is a good example.

That Mary, the mother of Jesus, played an important part in God's plan of salvation by bringing Christ into the world goes without saying. Mary made the prophecy of a virgin birth by Isaiah a reality. In view of her being "highly favored" by God she deserves to be called "blessed" in every generation.

The examples of Mary: 1) Her willingness to be used in God?s scheme of redemption. 2) The powerful display of humility, even when so highly honored by God. 3) Her complete and abiding faith in God, her Savior, should serve as examples for us to follow.

The fact that the Catholics have taught and practiced so many ABSURD and RIDICULOUS things about Mary should not be allowed to prevent us from giving her the honor that is due her. Neither should this prevent us from learning some good lessons from what is recorded about Mary.

The soul-condemning error about Mary, which is believed by multiplied millions, should serve as a powerful example to us that people can and do fall for error of the most serious sort. There are so many warnings about false teachings in the New Testament, and that people will follow these ways of error, that we should always be on guard lest we become a victim.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 23, 2003.



The Blessed Virgin Mary

who is Shining in Glory in Heaven Right Now

With Her Son Jesus Christ

who is Also Shining in Glory

is looking at Kevin Right Now

with Great Disappoinment

for Blaspheming Against Her Very

Sacred Immaculate Conception.

Kevin

you are on Her Red List.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


Sacred Truth:

The Magisterium of the Holy Catholic says:

The Immaculate Conception

To become the Mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with Gifts appropriate to such a role. The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "FULL OF GRACE." In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace.

Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "FULL OF GRACE" through God, was Redeemed From The Moment Of Her Conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The Most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the First Moment Of Her Conception, by a Singular Grace and Privilege of Almighty God and by Virtue of the Merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, Preserved Immune from all stain of original sin. The "Splendor of an Entirely Unique Holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the First Instant Of Her Conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "Redeemed, in a More Exalted Fashion, by reason of the Merits of her Son." The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love." (Eph 1:3-4)

The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All- Holy" (Panagia) and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature." By the Grace of God Mary remained Free Of Every Personal Sin Her Whole Life Long.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


Joseph and Mary were going to justify Jewish Law when the Saviour was walking the earth? Not logical. Just because the Jewish Law permitted Joseph "knowing" his wife did not mean that Joseph was commanded to obey Jewish Law. Joseph had a higher authority to obey and it wasn't the Law. If Mary had visitations from Gabriel, wouldn't you think that Mary realized a higher purpose for her own life? She was doing what God willed. Don't you think Joseph would have done the same obedient will?

I love my children, but what if we had only one -- Jesus? What would my role be, my purpose be, my obedience be? Would we have had more children?

rod..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.


I need to read up on Mother Teresa to learn about higher purpose in life obediant to God.

rod..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.


It is only fitting for God the Father to ensure that an Immaculate Vessel with no original sin should contain Jesus.

You got the logic, Rod, for Mary's Perpetual Virginity and Joseph's Virginity.

Mary, already espoused to the Holy Spirit, was respected by Joseph.

Jesus was born from Mary still being Virgin.

Since Joseph respected the Espousal of Mary to the Holy Spirit, Joseph Never Touched Mary.

Joseph remained a Virgin.

Mary remained a Virgin.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.



and Joseph remained with Mary until his death to protect Mary from public ridicule.

Jesus of course was a Virgin, too.

So, everyone in the Holy Family ~ Jesus, Mary, and Joseph ~ were All Virgins.

Of Course everyone in the Most Holy Trinity ~ Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ~ are All Inviolate and Immaculate, too.

No wonder the Holy Catholic Church highly acclaims Virginity.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


By the Way, Catholics do NOT worship Mary.

We Greatly Honor her ~ more than a simple honor ~ but still NOT worship.

After all, we owe Jesus to her Obedience.

Catholics only worship the Most Holy Trinity and no one else.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


For the sake of the truth, I did not look at this through a Catholic view, but only through a logical view. Of course, it does not surprise me one bit that the Catholic view is the truth. So, do not tell me that I am a blind follower of Catholicism, yet I do embrace what is the truth--Catholicism.

I cannot believe that Joseph and Mary would behave like ordinary couples. Marital relations in an ordinary couple may rely on "knowing" each other in order to avoid sins of the flesh. Are we saying that Joseph would have committed adultry because of their virgin state? I doubt this very seriously. They were not ordinary. But, they were ordained to fulfill God's will. I do not believe that it is impossible for people to live in celebacy. It is true that celebacy is a gift from God, not a curse. I don't believe God would have chosen a couple weak in the flesh, do you? It only makes sense that Joseph and Mary knew their higher obedience.

rod rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 24, 2003.


Anyone who cannot believe in Perpetual Virginity is actually saying that they do not trust Joseph and Mary, nor God. Read your Bible and make some attempt to PROVE my comment to be true. God said that celebacy is a gift. It is only logical that Joseph and Mary received the "gift" along with their purpose.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 24, 2003.


Yep, had Mary had any sexual relationship with Joseph, she would have committed adultery against the Holy Spirit who is her Spouse.

Had Joseph had any sexual relationship with Mary, he would have committed adultery, too.

Had Joseph had any sexual relationship with a woman outside their "Marriage" in the public eyes ~ the public would have accused Joseph of adultery.

Well, Joseph never touched Mary nor another woman.

That's why we call him Saint Joseph Most Chaste.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.



It is interesting to not that NOT one shred of biblical proof is offered that Mary remained a virgin after Jesus was born.

This does NOT surprise me one bit as there are NO verses that state that Mary remained a virgin.

rod,

You wrote, Anyone who cannot believe in Perpetual Virginity is actually saying that they do not trust Joseph and Mary, nor God.

This statement PROVES beyond a reasonable doubt that you have NOT read your Bible now have you rod??? To claim that Mary was a perpetual virgin is NOT the truth according to the Word of God.

Please tell me rod, what part of "and did not KNOW HER till she had brought forth her firstborn Son." (Matthew 1:25). Do you NOT understand???

The Angel told Mary that she would give birth to Jesus and Mary asked the question of the Angel in Luke 1:34, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?"

This most certainly states that the word "KNOW" means that one must have MARITAL RELATIONS for Mary PLAINLY knew that in order to CONCEIVE she must "KNOW" a man.

In Genesis 4:1, the Bible states, "Now Adam KNEW Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain,"

In the OT when Adam KNEW his wife Eve, this means that he had MARITAL RELATIONS with her (Eve) and the same applies in the NT with Joseph and Mary in that he (Joseph) did not "KNOW HER" until after Jesus was born.

You have been BLINDED by a FALSE Catholic doctrine which states that Mary remained a virgin after she gave birth to Jesus.

How hard is this for you to understand???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator]

Matthew 1:25 :

"He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he named him Jesus."

Kevin, this is how the big shots (the expert Catholic bible scholars of the New American Bible) explain this passage :

until she bore a son: the evangelist is concerned to emphasize that Joseph was not responsible for the conception of Jesus. The Greek word translated "until" DOES NOT IMPLY NORMAL MARITAL CONDUCT AFTER "JESUS BIRTH," nor does it exclude it.

Kevin, However, the Tradition of the Twelve Apostles asserts that Mary and Joseph remained virgins. This 2000 year old Tradition was passed on to us through the Holy Catholic Church.

So we follow the former interpretation, which is the Correct Interpretation, the Interpretation of the Magisterium of the Most Holy Catholic Church: DOES NOT IMPLY NORMAL MARITAL CONDUCT AFTER "JESUS BIRTH" ~ Mary and Joseph remained Virgins.

Please do not argue with the Catholic Bible scholars and The Magisterium of the Most Holy Catholic Church who are all Truly Guided by The Most Holy Spirit. You would be like a pebble arguing with Mt. Everest.

The thing to do is to heed to their Sacred Teachings.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


James,

Sorry, your Catholic doctrine that Mary remained a virgin is WRONG. It doesn't matter what Catholic Tradition states, it matters what God says.

"And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took her as his wife, and kept her a virgin UNTIL she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus." Matthew 1:24-25

The Bible gives 12 specific passages/verses that SHOW that Mary bore other children: Matthew 12:46; 13:55; Mark 3:31-35; 6:3; Luke 8:19-21; John 2:12; 7:3; 7:5; 7:10; Acts 1:14; 1 Corinthians 9:5; Galations 1:19.

Your Catholic Catechism CCC #500 responds by saying: "The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, 'brothers of Jesus,' are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ..."

However, some Protestant scholars would respond further by citing two Greek words that could have been used if cousin was actually intended rather than brother: anepsios (Strong #431) and sungenis (Strong #4773).

If Mary truly been the eternal virgin as she is purported to have been, the Holy Spirit would have inspired the use of such words to avoid the inevitable confusion.

Since the Holy Spirit did NOT use those words (as the Catholic Church falsely asserts) then Mary did NOT remain a virgin.

It is not hard to see that the Catholic Church has NO regard for the Word of God for they attempt to CHANGE it (or cast doubt on it) to suit their own FALSE DOCTRINES.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


The Dogmatic Constitution (Lumen Gentium) of the Most Holy Catholic Church says:

Wishing in His supreme goodness and wisdom to effect the redemption of the world, "when the fullness of time came, God sent His Son, born of a woman, ..that we might receive the adoption of sons". "He for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit from the Virgin Mary." This divine mystery of salvation is revealed to us and continued in the Church, which the Lord established as His body. Joined to Christ the Head and in the unity of fellowship with all His saints, the faithful must in the first place reverence the memory "of the Glorious EVER VIRGIN Mary, Mother of our God and Lord Jesus Christ".

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


The Word of God states that Mary was NOT a virgin.

Your Catholic Church teaching goes AGAINST what God has PLAINLY stated in His word.

We will be judged by the words that Jesus spoke. (John 12:48).

We will most certainly not be judged by Catholic Tradition which has NO basis in the Word of God.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


James and the Catholic Church teach that Mary was "without sin".

The Bible Teaches that Christ Alone was Sinless!!!

"For he hath made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Corinthians 5:21).

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23).

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10).

"They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Romans 3:12).

"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" (Romans 5:12).

"But the scripture hath concluded all under sin" (Galatians 3:22).

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us... If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us" (1 John 1:8, 10).

Furthermore, the Bible says that Mary needed a Savior. "And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:46-47). The RCC responds by saying that Jesus saved her from original sin and kept her from never sinning, but that as well CONTRADICTS basic Scriptural teaching that we need a Savior because of sin. If Mary never sinned, then she didn't need a Savior.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


How could The Most Holy Church of God ~ The Most Holy Catholic Church ~ not love the Most Holy Word of God? There is no logic in that.

The Most Holy Catholic Church is responsible for bringing you the Most Holy Bible. She Sifted through all the Writings existing in 382 A.D. ~ all inspired and uninspired and insufficiently inspired Writings ~ and came up with 73 Books ~ through the Guidance of the Most Holy Spirit.

However, the 73 Books Chosen by the Most Holy Catholic Church ~ through the Guidance of the Most Holy Spirit ~ Are IN ACCORD WITH The Most Holy Traditions of the Most Holy Apostles which they already have been practicing for 350 years since Christ.

There is no confusion which came first, the Most Holy Tradition or the Most Holy Bible ~ THE MOST HOLY TRADITION ~ the Most Holy Bible came 350 years later.

See, there is no conflict there, whatsoever.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


No James, it is God who gave us the Bible, NOT the Catholic Church. It was the Apostles who put their own writings into circulation.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.

Sorry James, you are WRONG again. It is the Word of God that came first, NOT Catholic Tradition as you Falsely assert.

Go back and re-read Luke 8:11.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


Here are some more FALSE DOCTRINES of the Catholic Church:

The RCC Teaches that Mary is the Cause of Salvation.

CCC #494: "At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word." Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace: As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race." Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: "The knot of Eve's disobedience was untied by Mary's obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith." Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary "the Mother of the living" and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."

CCC #966 speaks of Mary's assumption: ""Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death." The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians: In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death."

CCC #967-970 teaches that Mary "...is our Mother in the order of grace. By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus) of the Church. Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace." "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix." "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it." "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.""

CCC #1172: "...Holy Church honors the Blessed Mary, Mother of God, with a special love. She is inseparably linked with the saving work of her Son. In her the Church admires and exalts the most excellent fruit of redemption and joyfully contemplates, as in a faultless image, that which she herself desires and hopes wholly to be."

Pope Pius IX (Ineffabilis Deus) said, "Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot." This teaching is reflected in the Latin Vulgate and Douay Rheims version of Genesis 3:15 which reads, "I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel." Modern translations, including the NAB, more accurately use the masculine pronoun, thus referring to Christ instead of Mary. The RCC teaching, however, persists. The RCC Teaches that Mary Shared in Christ's Sufferings.

CCC #964: "Mary's role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death"; it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion: Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: "Woman, behold your son."

Pope Benedict XV (Inter Sodalicia ) said, "It was God's design that the Blessed Virgin Mary, apparently absent from the public life of Jesus, should assist him when he was dying nailed to the Cross." Pope Pius XII (Mystici Corporis) said, "[Mary], immune from all sin, personal or inherited, and ever more closely united with her Son, offered him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father together with the holocaust of her maternal rights and motherly love." Pope Benedict XV (Inter Sodalicia ) said, "Mary suffered and, as it were, nearly died with her suffering Son; for the salvation of mankind she renounced her mother's rights and, as far as it depended on her, offered her Son to placate divine justice; so we may well say that she with Christ redeemed mankind."

Pope John Paul II (Salvifici Doloris, 25) said, "In her, the many and intense sufferings were amassed in such an interconnected way that they were not only a proof of her unshakable faith but also a contribution to the Redemption of all... It was on Calvary that Mary's suffering, beside the suffering of Jesus, reached an intensity which can hardly be imagined from a human point of view but which was mysteriously and supernaturally fruitful for the Redemption of the world."

The RCC further teaches, "She conceived, brought forth, and nourished Christ, she presented him to the Father in the temple, shared her Son's sufferings as he died on the cross. Thus, in a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the work of the Savior in restoring supernatural life to souls" (Second Vatican Council, "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church," 61). Scripture Teaches that Christ Alone Suffered Death for Our Sins.

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us-for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'" (Galatians 3:13).

It was Christ who was "...smitten of God, and afflicted" (Isaiah 53:4).

"But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him" (Isaiah 53:6).

"We were reconciled to God through the death of His Son" (Romans 5:10).

"[Christ's] death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions" (Hebrews 9:15).

"[Christ] released us from our sins by His blood" (Revelation 1:5).

It was Christ who came "...to give His life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45).

"For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit" (1 Peter 3:18). Scripture Teaches Christ is the True Cause of Salvation.

"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21).

"For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11).

"... we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world" (John 4:42).

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

"Him (Jesus) hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour" (Acts 5:31).

"Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus" (Acts 13:23).

"[We are] justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:24).

"For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Philippians 3:20).

"For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins" (Colossians 1:13-14).

"But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Timothy 1:10).

"Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour" (Titus 1:4).

"Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour" (Titus 3:6).

"... through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 1:1).

"... into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 1:11).

"... through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 2:20).

"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen" (2 Peter 3:18).

"... ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" (1 Peter 1:18-19).

"... the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world" (1 John 4:14). Scripture Teaches Jesus is Advocate with God.

"...if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1).

"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5).

"And for this cause he (Christ) is the mediator of the new testament" (Hebrews 9:15).

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands... but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us" (Hebrews 9:24).

"Wherefore he (Jesus) is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them" (Hebrews 7:25).

"... It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us" (Romans 8:34).

"... he (Jesus) maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God" (Romans 8:27).

"For through him (Jesus) we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father" (Ephesians 2:18).

"According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: In whom we have boldness and access" (Ephesians 3:11-12).

"But now hath he (Jesus) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises" (Hebrews 8:6).

So much for the FALSE DOCTRINES of the Catholic Church. Her FALSE DOCTRINES are DEFEATED by the very book she claims to have given the world!!! (2 Corinthians 10:3-5).

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


rod,

Celibacy is not a gift to married couples, it is a gift to single people. The ability to control ones hormones.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


If that is correct, David, then it would make even more sense that Joseph and Mary were given this gift in order to carry out their God given purpose. Joseph and Mary had a unique "marriage" unlike the typical marriage of ordinary people. Joseph and Mary were not typical; they had Christ.

rod..

..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Some historians make the claim that Jesus had a twin brother. They say that Jesus did not actually die on the cross; it was his twin brother. Later, Christ resurrects himself and fulfills prophecy. All of this baloney stems from the idea that Mary gave birth to other children.

If the Bible is your unique source of information, then how can we understand that Mary gave birth to other children. It is not clear. Remeber that cousins were part of the household and considered as "brothers" and "sisters". I have read the Scriptures in order to prove such a thing; I'm not convinced. Where were Mary's "other" children when Christ was dying on the cross? If Mary had other children, why was John offered to Mary as her "son"? When Jesus said "woman", it was not a term of insignificance of Mary's role. It was to designation that made it clear that John would be her son now. "Mother behold your son" would have Mary looking up at the cross. "Woman behold your son" would have Jesus identifying John.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


"Woman behold your son" pretty much says it all. Jesus is dying. He is no longer the "son" of Mary in terms of the imediate family. Jesus cannot be on earth any longer to care for Mary. Jesus leaves John for that role. Jesus has the task of Salvation for all of the world. Jesus does not say "Woman behold My brothers and sisters" because there were none. But, there were brothers and sisters in the Body of God; we are all brothers in Christ.

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Exactly, Rod,

These are great points, Rod :If Mary had other children, why was John offered to Mary as her "son"? Jesus does not say "Woman behold My brothers and sisters" because there were none.

Kevin and David,

When the protestant pastor (not properly ordained by St. Peter and the 11) addresses the congregation, "My dear Brothers and Sisters ..." ~ Does that mean that he and his brothers and sisters all came from one mother and one father ??? NOT! Same thing when "brothers and sisters" were mentioned in the bible in relation to Jesus. It does NOT mean that their parents are also Mary and Joseph.

The spiritual father of all protestants, MARTIN LUTHER, said :

MARY IS ***FULL OF GRACE***, PROCLAIMED TO BE ENTIRELY ***WITHOUT SIN*** ... GOD'S GRACE FILLS HER WITH EVERYTHING GOOD AND MAKES HER ***DEVOID OF ALL EVIL*** ... GOD IS WITH HER, MEANING THAT ALL SHE DID OR LEFT UNDONE IS DIVINE AND THE ACTION OF GOD IN HER. MOREOVER, GOD GUARDED AND PROTECTED HER FROM ALL THAT MIGHT BE HURTFUL TO HER.

MEN HAVE CROWDED ALL MARY'S GLORY INTO A SINGLE PHRASE : MOTHER OF GOD. NO ONE CAN SAY ANYTHING GREATER OF HER.

SHE IS RIGHTLY CALLED NOT ONLY THE MOTHER OF THE MAN, BUT ALSO THE MOTHER OF GOD ... IT'S CERTAIN THAT MARY IS THE MOTHER OF THE REAL TRUE GOD.

Kevin and David, why don't you have a coversation with your spiritual father, MARTIN LUTHER, as well, about the Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity of Mary ?

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


David,

Celibacy is not only for single people. During the time of Christ, some couples who were married made vows of celibacy MUTUALLY for the service of God.

The Word of Holy Tradition says that Mary grew up IN the Temple until her marrying age.

"When Mary is visited by the Angel Gabriel, she said "How can this be since I do not know man". You've taken that to mean in the past or at very best present. But remember Mary was only betrothed to Joseph at that time (not yet Married). And the customs of the time (as should be the customs of our time) was to wait till marriage for the "marriage act". So for her to say that she has not known man in the past would be kinda obvious. Mary was stating her intent to remain a virgin (which God had willed for her - and since she was without sin, she automatically willed the same) perpetually. Otherwise, Mary would have known how "this" would be; "it" would be through her to-be spouse St. Joseph (just like Elizabeth’s husband, in the previous passages, knew it would be him). But since she already knew "it" wouldn't be through him, Mary had to inquire how "this" would be. To which the Angel replied that "it" would be through the Power of the Holy Spirit!

We might also ponder how Mary must have felt: Although she knew God wanted her to remain a virgin (we know this from her statement), Mary also knew it was God's will for her to marry Joseph. How confusing is that? On the one had she wants (what God wants) to remain a virgin, yet on the other hand she also wants (what God wants) to marry Joseph (which would mean in most cases loosing your virginity). However, Joseph had a specific role to play - not including her sexual partner, rather to be the foster-father of God! When it was revealed to Mary that she would bear a Child, which would be the Son of God, it must have all come together for her. I can just feel her relief at finally understanding God's plan for her (it is just like, but to a greater extent, spending hours and hours trying to solve a problem and finally finding the answer! Such Relief). It must have been a great burden lifted from her to know that she would still be able to remain a virgin, yet her marriage was not in vain." ~ Jack Huether

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James,

Why don't you provide Biblical proof instead of man-made doctrines? This is all Kevin is asking of you. Can you do it?

Rod, Your pretense of trying to act neutral is not working. If this kind of ridicule happened in the Catholic forum, you guys would have been gone. Although not a contributor, I am one of those who have meandered through all the debating and bashing on both sides and would like to see some evidence of real searching for the truth from some of you. Kevin is the only one,(and by the way I don't know any of you personally), who lets God's Word do the talking.

I appreciate your questions and most of your comments. Maybe you could help James with some civility in this forum. Colossians 3:16 - "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom...."

Brad

-- Brad Canham (okcanham@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Brad.

Obviously, I'm not in the Catholic Forum, so I must behave accordingly in this forum. What is it? Do you want me to flat out say that so and so are dead wrong? Would this staisfy your "lurker" desires? I do have respect for David and Kevin and I see no need to weigh-in like a ton of bricks, especially when I wish to weigh-in their doctrine and theology with mine and Catholicism. If you have noticed, my participation in the Catholic Forum is like a "fly on the wall". My comments are generally ignored or trivial at best. Also, my questions will not bring answers that are provided here in this forum. If I want all sides of the story, I'm gonna have to step outside of the envelope and ask in this post.

Now, Brad. If your joy is character analysis, fine. Have you read any of my early posts? I'm surprised the Catholic Forum didn't have me tied and burned for asking the things I did. And, It seems that I've struck a nerve with you. I had I maintained my Protestant tone you would have over-looked my questions, but now with my Catholic tone....well, get in line, I suppose.

Besides, everyone is free to move from forum to forum and learn about my questions. I hide nothing. We can even learn about Stan and his Gold Finch delights. How about providing a link to all of your postings, Brad?

Evidently, I'm becomming the dishonest, condensending, hypocritcal, heretical, mand without a country guy around here. Beautiful, just beautiful!<

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Ok Brad stop pretending to have an open mind. Your comment about using Biblical proof has only showed that you have shut the door on Tradition. You, like the 30,000 protestant denominations, have put blinders on and have become "Sola Scriptura" followers. If you truly seek the truth, don't shut your mind to Tradition which has been the understanding since before the Bible.

Who is the great PRETENDER now, Brad?

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Brad,

with all due respect,

you are a Kevin clone.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


james wrote,"Kevin and David, why don't you have a coversation with your spiritual father, MARTIN LUTHER, as well, about the Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity of Mary ?"

Well first of all, Martin Luther was not and is not my spiritual father. I only have one Holy Father, and that is Jehovah.

And secondly, I cannot have a conversation with dead people because Ecclesiastes 9:4-10 KJV says "For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works. Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment. Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest."

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Yes, David, Martin Luther is your spiritual Father because you are a protestant and you follow his spiritual rebelliousness and spiritual teachings ~ David, you are a by-product of his dissent and heresy against the Most Holy Catholic Church in 1517 A.D. Just like Martin Luther, you are anti-Catholic, therefore, he is your spiritual father.

Well,David, certain dead people are not dead anymore because their resurrected bodies and souls are now in Heaven. You can pray to them since they are living a life of Glory and since they are face to Face with Jesus Christ in Heaven ~ they can Intercede for your needs ~ All the Saints in Heaven.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


o but David, what I meant by you having a conversation with Martin Luther, is for you to read more on his heretical writings and rebellious beliefs. May God shed Light upon you. He was excommunicated by the Most Holy Catholic Church, and therefore, He is most likely in HELL. I do NOT think you can pray to him to intercede for your needs.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.

I don't believe Luther is in Hell today, you know why? Because Hell is the final place for those who rejected Christ. Only after the Great White Throne judgement will Hell be filled.

Revelation 20:12-15 KJV says: "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Thank you for your wonderfully peaceful responses rod and james. No wonder more people do not drop in to "converse" with you. I have no problem with Traditions, if they are in accordance with what God would want, not man. I have read almost all the threads, and did say I have seen some good input from you rod. Does even that say I know anything about your real character? No. I just mentioned what I did for what it might seem to others who "lurk". I have noticed that what is written in these forums does not always come out exactly as the person would have wanted. Since I am new to this, I will try to do better. Looking forward to better conversations, Colossians 3:15 - "Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace." Brad

-- Brad Canham (okcanham@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.

Hi Brad.

Stay with us and converse. Since my Catholic belief has been rejuvenated, I have noticed a change in "conversation" among non-Catholics towards me. I think I have set my platform quite nicely with such people. My tone will mirror anyone's tone. There is a better way, if we choose that better way.

David,

When we believe in Him, we shall have eternal life. Where does this put "dead" people? Where does this put the faithful who have passed on? Dead? I don't believe this; they are alive in eternal life.

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


The unsaved dead know nothing; The true believers are in Heaven, The unsaved are in Hades.

I do not believe a Romanist is a true Christian, that is why I cannot believe that you can pray to dead saints because they cannot hear you.

Mary no doubt is in Heaven, but she is not omniscient like Jehovah God and cannot hear billions of prayers. Satan can (if prayed outloud), by means of his demons communicatings to him.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


rod,

I have always seen you as a Romanist.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Hi David.

That was probably the very reason I left the Church--"Romanist". But, the term was not a buzz word that it is today. I was around your age when I left the Catholic faith. I began to question everything about the catechism. The answers were not as readily available as they are today. Where was I going to find a library of Catholic writings or diverse theology? The resources were limited for us back then. The idea of lurking into heresy was also a damnable action. The internet has provided an ocean of resources. My full circle is almost complete, but one thing will destroy that completion. Time will tell where I will eventually settle my repose in the faith. It is gonna be a big awakening for me; I pray that it doesn't destroy my faith in God. I'm serious about the truth. I've been swayed before, but I'm older now and more determined.

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


The first time I met Elpidio he made a comment. It was more of a premonition. He knew where I was at in my quest or struggle. He understands. I'm probably trodding right over the same paths he has trodded. Each of us has certain paths that seem like the right path. As we cross each other, we can try to teach or understand what we have encountered along the way. We may even walk along side, for awhile, but ultimately we each must choose which path is the right one to take. Sometimes things happen in our lives that we can't understand until time passes and the message becomes very clear. We act on those messages.

rod..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Has anyone else noticed how David has called me a heretic in his round about usage of the title "Romanist"? Does anyone else see what I have endured for so long?

Protestant
Romanist
Catholic
Heretic and the many other titles attributed to me.....the list goes on.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


....and the inability to edit my own posts is a real problem!

...

..rod..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


David,

You are the Very Biased moderator around here ~ you yourself give people titles and descriptions like "ROMANIST." You have a DOUBLE STANDARD! You even use BLUE COLOR on your posts! The Nerve! You do not play fair! When I call someone Anti-Catholic, you delete my titles and descriptions for that individual! Play like one of us! Stop having DOUBLE STANDARDS!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Romanist: (One who follows Roman doctrine.)

vs.

Evil Anti-Christian Romanist enemy of the Christian Church heretical blasphmeous misinterpreter blah blah etc...

Yes, I see your point.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


I do not consider you guys "Catholic" because your church is not universal like it proclaims and it is certainly not "Holy" as you say.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.

Blue Color? What's wrong with me using blue color? Anyone can use blue color if they want, they just need to know the right html code.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.

David,

Send James packing back to his Catholic forum where he can heap name calling and verbal attacks on those who post in that forum. He just like most Catholics are good at making assertions, but when they fail to prove them and are proven WRONG by God's Word, they lash out (almost every time) and call people names. Just look at the verbal abuse that Gail used on me several weeks ago. This is typical Catholic behavior and they call themselves Christians??? Tsk...Tsk....Tsk.....

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


Hi Brad,

James doesn't have Biblical proof of the false doctrines that he and the Catholic Church espouse because many of them have NO basis in God's Word.

I am sure that if he had the proof, he would offer it. I showed from the Bible where he (and the Catholic Church) do err in their belief that Mary was first without sin, and that she was a virgin and has there been any reply from God's Word showing that I am wrong??? No, all that is offered in return is that I am a MISINTERPRETER of the Bible. You will find that this is a typical response from Catholics whose man-made doctrines have no basis in God's Word.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


Rod, A Catholic Christian,

I speculate that the "one thing" you are talking about is that you are thinking of the possibility that the Most Holy Catholic Church might not accept you back. In this case, you are very wrong ~ because just like the Story of the Prodigal Son ~ the Most Holy Catholic Church will run to you and welcome you, and rejoice over your long-awaited return (in the solemn Catholic way, that is).

You've done your shopping around ... some were good, some were bad ... clearly God is calling you back into the 2000 year old ROCK ~ His Most Beloved Most Holy Catholic Church, and you have been obedient to His call so far ... why do things half-way? You obviously are not the type to do things half-way. Settle for the BEST. All the signs are there ~ the Most Holy Catholic Church is the One True Church of Jesus Christ since his lifetime. Aren't you longing to unite yourself Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity with Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist (Yes, protestant style Pressure used for the Catholic Church !) ?

Take the one easy(!) step.

Smell the incense!

Peace, my friend.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


I think they get like that because they are "always" attacked by some many "Protestants" each claiming they have the truth. Their pride gets in the way. That was a response I got from members of the Roman Catholic Church (Romanists) in my school.

They think we are not informed enough about Romanism and that we have so many "misconceptions" about their church. One even called me a Satan worshipper.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


DAVID,

STOP using DOUBLE STANDARDS!

I never used the title Evil on anyone, although they might have merited it for being Blasphemous against the Very Mother of God!

I never used the title anti-Christian on anyone, although he is anti- me, a true Catholic Christian.

Misinterpreter is a very deserved title for someone who Misinterpret the Word of God just based on fantastic personal misinterpretations without the backing of the top holy men of The Magisterium of the Most Holy Catholic Church.

David you are SO WRONG!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

I don't see how someone can call himself a christian and pick and choose bible verses that suits him.

Why don't you swallow John 6 as a whole. Then you will start to believe in the Most Holy Eucharist.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

Let us not forget you belong to a 1 year old church, fresh out of the oven ~ still trying to determine which bible verses to support your NEW DOCTRINE.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Yes David, these Catholics get offended by being called a "Romanist" (your words) but yet look at all of the titles we are given in return.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.

Kevin,

And you expect me to side with you for Blaspheming The Very Sacred Nature of The Blessed and Perpetually Virgin Mary, The Very Mother of God who is in Heaven Frowning at you right now.

Mary's Enemy and My Enemy ~ your friend ~ uses people exactly like you.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James wrote, "I don't see how someone can call himself a christian and pick and choose bible verses that suits him."

He has yet to PROVE that I am guilty of picking and choosing which Bible verses suit me. I have shown CLEARLY and PLAINLY through the Word of God where Catholics are WRONG on many different doctrines.

I have obeyed the gospel James and therefore I am a Christian. You on the other hand can NOT make this claim because you have NOT obeyed the gospel and are NOT a Christian. You think that you are a Christian, but you have been DECEIVED by the Catholic Church. One CANNOT be "of Christ" UNTIL they are baptized INTO Christ. If you were baptized as an infant without FAITH, then all you did was get wet.

James wrote, "Why don't you swallow John 6 as a whole. Then you will start to believe in the Most Holy Eucharist."

Why don't you READ John 6:63 which states, "It is the SPIRIT WHO GIVES LIFE; the FLESH PROFITS NOTHING. The WORDS that I SPEAK TO YOU ARE SPIRIT, and THEY ARE LIFE."

To claim that Jesus body and blood actually and miraculously appear in the form of a wafer is nothing more than Catholic HOCUS POCUS.

You have been DECEIVED.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


David,

Which of the 34,000 protestant half-truths are you talking about?

and now 34,001 with Kevin's freshly baked half-truth?

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James,

You have YET to PROVE from God's Word that I am guilty of blaspheming as you assert. If I am guilty of it, why don't you back up your words and SHOW everyone here how I am guilty of this FROM THE WORD OF GOD.

Since the Word of God IS the Sword of the Spirit, you should have NO problem doing this very thing.

If not, then I would like to suggest to you that you keep your calling of names such as "blasphemy" and other titles that you continue to wish calling me to yourself for all you do is make yourself look silly.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

you dont't like the taste of this verse that's why you spit it out:

I am the living bread (Sacred Host) which has come down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread (Sacred Host) will live for ever. John 6:51

and you deny this

I tell you most solemnly, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man (Sacred Host) and drink His Blood (Sacred Wine), you will have no life in you. John 6:53

and you hate this

For my flesh is real food (Sacred Host) and my blood is real drink (Sacred Wine). He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in him. John 6:55,56

Open you mouth wide, and Swallow John 6 as a whole not just nit- picking.

See, Kevin, ALL CHRISTIANS Believe This for 2000 years now and counting. Where were you?

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

You are a Blasphemer against the very sacred Nature of the Mother of God. Do not deny it. And you called Mother Teresa as a non-christian.

I could have called you worse, but Blasphemer suits you just fine.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

One of your biggest problems is that you believe only in Sola Scriptura and you dumped the Holy Traditions of the 12 Holy Apostles ~ how ARROGANT of you to dump All those 2000 year old Sacred Traditions! and you ARROGANTLY decided to start from scratch, namely your fresh out of the oven Radical Fantastic Doctrine based on an incomplete bible with only 66 books instead of 73 ~ are you allergic to Incense? do Candles blind you? Are you afraid of Holy Water? Well, the Enemy is.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James,

Jesus compared Himself several times to lifeless objects, a temple in John 2:18-22, a door in John 10:7, a vine in John 15:1-11.

And to BREAD in John 6:35. To claim that this is LITERAL is just NOT what the Word of God teaches.

Was Jesus a LITERAL temple, a LITERAL door, or a LITERAL vine???

NOT AT ALL!!!

I have YET to see you PROVE from the Word of God that I am a "blasphemer" and UNTIL you do, your words mean absolutely NOTHING. Even those found GUILTY in a court of Law have to be PROVEN GUILTY.

James you have done NOTHING of the sort.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


James,

There is NO such thing as HOLY water and I CHALLENGE you to PROVE otherwise.

Catholics TRY to prove the infallibility of the Catholic Church by stating that the Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of the Bible.

Their CLAIM makes the church EQUAL, if not SUPERIOR, to the Bible and is another of their efforts to present the Catholic Church as the authority in religion instead of the Bible ONLY (what Catholics call Sola Scriptura).

Please notice the following from Catholic sources:

"To make it in any sense an infallible revelation, or in other words a revelation that shall have equal author-ity with that testament itself." (The Question Box, p. 95).

"An infallible Bible is no use without an infallible interpreter. " (My Catholic Faith, p. 145).

"...The Scriptures can never serve as a complete Rule of Faith and a complete guide to heaven in-dependently of an authorized, living interpreter. " ( The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 68).

"The Church is the only divinely constituted teacher of Revelation. Now, the Scripture is the great depository of the Word of God. There-fore, the Church is the divinely appointed Custodian and Interpreter of the Bible. For, her office of infallible Guide were superfluous if each individual could interpret the Bible for itself...God never intended the Bible to be the Christian's rule of faith independently of the living au-thority of the Church." (Ibid, p. 77).

There are NO PASSAGES IN THE BIBLE which state that Christ made his church the infallible interpreter of his word. There are NONE that mention an infallible interpreter and none that hint or remotely imply that Christ wanted one. How, then, do the Catholics officials go about proving their tremendous claim?

First of all, they try to do so by IMPLYING that the Bible CANNOT be understood.

Notice the following:

"For the Scripture is not like other books, dictated by the Holy Ghost, it contains things of deepest importance, which in many instances are very difficult and obscure. To understand and explain such things there is always required the coming of the same Holy Ghost. " (Great Encyclical Letters of Leo Xll, p. 227).

"We must, therefore, conclude that the Scriptures alone cannot be a sufficient guide and rule of faith... because they are not of themselves clear and intelligible even in matters of the highest importance. ." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 73).

"Is it possible to misunderstand the Bible? Yes, even the Bible itself says so. 'In these epistles there are certain things difficult to understand, which the unlearned and the unstable distort, just as they do the rest of the Scriptures also, to their own destruction' (2nd Pet. 3:16)." (A Catechism for Adults, p. 10).

Catholic officials follow up this claim by stating that one can get the true meaning ONLY from the Catholic Church. The Catechism for Adults on page ten says, "How can you get the true meaning of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church."

Catholics have NO PASSAGES which mention an official interpreter and, thus, try to support their claim through HUMAN LOGIC and REASONING. Anytime men do such, it amounts to NOTHING more than HUMAN PHILOSOPHY rather than Scriptural proof.

The Bible WARNS, "See to it that no one deceives you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ" (Col. 2:8).

The inspired writers taught that we most certainly CAN UNDERSTAND the Scriptures. "For we write nothing to you that you do not read and understand. " (2 Cor. 1: 13).

"How that, according to revelation the mystery has been made known to me, as I have written above in few words, as you reading may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ " (Eph. 3:34 Douay Rheims Version).

"Therefore do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is" (Eph. 5:17).

2 Peter 3: 15 16 alluded to above does say that Paul wrote some things hard to be understood and no one denies it; however, that verse nor any other does NOT tell us that we must go to the infallible interpreter for the true meaning.

Instead, we are COMMANDED and EXHORTED to: GROW IN KNOWLEDGE (2 Pet. 3:18), STUDY (2 Tim. 2:15), EXERCISE SENSES (Heb. 5:14), SEARCH (Acts 17:11), RECEIVE (James 1:21), READ (Eph. 3:3 4), DESIRE IT (2 Pet. 2:2), LET IT UNFOLD (Psalm 119:130), MEDITATE ON IT DAY AND NIGHT (Psalm 1:2), HEAR IT READ (Rev. 1:3), HAVE IT PREACHED (2 Tim. 4:34; 1 Pet. 4:11), TEST WHAT IS SAID (1 John 4:1; Matt. 7:15 16), PROVE ALL THINGS (1 Thess. 5:21).

This is God's way the ONLY ONE he gives for understanding the Holy Scriptures.

The next step by which Catholics TRY to support their claim that the Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of the Bible is the argument of "interpretation." They say that an individual CANNOT make a private interpretation of Scripture and is therefore dependent on the Catholic Church for the correct interpretation.

One can EASILY see the similarity between this and their first argument. They often use 2 Pet. 1:20 in EFFORT to prove that one cannot have a private interpretation.

Please notice the following:

"How can you get the true mean-ing of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church. 'This, then, you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation' (2nd Pet. 1: 20)." (A Catechism for Adults, p. 10).

"No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit. . (From the footnote on 11 Pet. 1:20, Douay Rheims Version, p. 582).

"... St. Peter... declared against private interpretation of the Scriptures (1 Pet. 1, 20)..." (Father Smith Instructs Jackson, p. 53).

We call your attention to the fact that THEY WANT YOU TO MAKE A PRIVATE INTERPRETATION OF THE ABOVE VERSE.

What kind of rule is it that says we can make a private interpretation of a verse which says we can't make a private interpretation???

Catholics are ALWAYS INCONSISTENT ON THIS POINT.

They quote Scripture to support their doctrine expecting us to understand and expecting us to make a private interpretation.

However, when we quote a passage which REFUTES their doctrine, they tell us that it is wrong to make private interpretations!!!

In the following we quote 2 Pet. 1:20 and the verse which follows it from two Catholic Versions. Please examine them carefully.

"This, then you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation. For not by will of man was prophecy brought at any time; but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (Confraternity Version).

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. " (Catholic Edition, Revised Standard Version).

Catholic writers usually ONLY quote the first verse (vs. 20). However, putting the two verses together it is EASY TO SEE that Peter is NOT saying that one cannot have a private interpretation of Scripture, but IS TEACHING that no prophecy of Scripture ever came by private interpretation. W.E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words says the word "prophecy" signifies "the speaking forth of the mind and counsel of God. In the N.T. it is used...either of the exercise of the gift or of that which is prophesied. ."

Thus, Peter is saying that no prophecy of Scripture (divine utterance of a prophet in writing) is a matter of one's own interpretation (i.e., not a matter of the prophet's own interpretation) because no prophecy (divine utterance of a prophet) ever came by the impulse of man, but it came as the prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The passage AFFIRMS the inspiration of the Scriptures; they did not originate from private interpretations or from private wills of men, but they came from holy men of God who were moved by the Holy Spirit.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


It is AMAZING that someone can read a book and UNDERSTAND what they read but when it comes to reading a book given from our Creator (the Bible), we need an INTERPRETER (the Catholic Church) to UNDERSTAND what God actually said.

Who can believe it???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


David,

You said, "I don't believe Luther is in Hell today, you know why? Because Hell is the final place for those who rejected Christ. Only after the Great White Throne judgement will Hell be filled."

This is the 2000 year old Catholic teaching:

After death, our spirits IMMEDIATELY separate from our bodies.

Our bodies go to the grave.

IMMEDIATELY, Our spirits either go to, if we are just, to Heaven or Purgatory.

If we are unjust, to Hell.

Spirits in Heaven are Happy with Mary and Jesus and the entire Holy Heaven.

Spirits in Hell are in anguish because of eternal damnation and eternal Fire.

Spirits in Purgatory are being purified for a finite/limited time with the same quality as the fires of hell, but the spirits here have joy and hope in their sufferings and purifications because they are about to enter Heaven.

Now the spirits in Heaven, are mere spirits, without bodies (since the bodies are in the grave), except for Mary who had been Assumed Body and Soul. (christians here cannot hug Jesus yet)

During the Second Coming, "the resurrection of the dead of both the just and unjust" will happen

Then The Last Judgment ~ the resurrected Bodies of those spirits in heaven, will be united with their Spirits in eternal bliss. (At This time christians can hug Jesus and Mary.) The resurrected Bodies of those spirits in hell, will be united with their Spirits in eternal damnation. (Now goats can gnash teeth with one another.)

Based on these Catholic Teachings, since Luther was excommunicated by the Most Holy Catholic Church, he might very well be in Hell today.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

You are so full of ERROR, it is beyond comprehension.

All Christians have Celebrated the Sacrifice of the Mass since the Last Supper with Christ and have eaten his actual Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity Really Present in the Most Holy Eucharist ~ this has been happening for 2000 years.

The top guy in your freshly baked fantastic church FORGOT to include this practice ~ No wonder your 1 year old church does not do this.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


The Bible warns us of these men (like James and Catholics) who make FALSE CLAIMS:

"For they are false prophets, deceitful workers, distinguishing themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself disguises himself as an angel of light. It is not great thing, then, if his ministers disguise themselves as ministers of justice." (2 Cor. 11:13- 15).

The Catholic Church CLAIMS that they are successors to the Apostles and this verse CERTAINLY fits.

There is NO such thing as a "Eucharist".

Satan is the great DECEIVER just like the Catholic Church!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

You are So Lost.

The Most Holy Catholic Church uses THE MOST HOLY WATER for BAPTISM

and for BLESSINGS.

What kind of water does your church use? I hope it doesn't come from the refuse.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


James wrote, "Kevin,You are So Lost."

Please notice that this is his OPINION and is NOT based on the Word of God.

James wrote, "The Most Holy Catholic Church uses THE MOST HOLY WATER for BAPTISM"

I am still waiting for James to tell everyone what "Holy water" consists of????

There is NO such thing as "Holy water" this is another FIGMENT of the Catholic imagination.

James wrote, "What kind of water does your church use? I hope it doesn't come from the refuse."

We use regular everyday water. There are NO magical properties in the water that is used for someone to be baptized. If there is magical properties in the water as Catholics ASSERT, then they ought to be able to PROVE IT!!!!

But, I am sure that this proof will NOT be forthcoming as this is all they (Catholics) can do is make ASSERTIONS.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 26, 2003.


Kevin,

Your Doctrine Is The Newest

Of The 34,001 Protestant Doctrines.

And You Do A Very Good Job Of Blabbering About It.

Because It Is Your Own Invention

And You Are Very Proud Of It.

My Doctrine Is From ***The One***

And ***Oldest Christian Doctrine***

Of The Most Holy Catholic Church

Who Has Produced So Many

True Saints

For Two [Millenniums].

Mother Teresa

Being One Of The Latest.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


james wrote,"You are very biased for Kevin, as expected because your souls intertwine." james wrote,"You are very biased for Kevin, as expected because your souls intertwine."

I am not biased for Kevin, and if you hadn't figured it out we don't see each other as fellow Christians. To him, It's because I don't "obey the gospel"; To me, It's because of his "plan" of salvation I don't agree with.

james wrote,"Your deletions as a moderator are unfounded."

Really now, would you prefer me to do as Paul does in the "Catholic" forum and just delete your whole post?

james wrote,"Those are not name calling as you label them but they are obvious titles of the person."

Well whatever it is I am getting really tired of it. Attack the message, not the messenger.

james wrote,"Is to call you anti-Catholic name calling? Heck no. Is to call you an enemy of the Most Holy Catholic Church name calling?"

Ok, I'll find a better phrasing for it. Also, I am not anti-Cathlic; I am a Christian. I censored your posts because you are using tactics that give people negative images about other people.

james wrote,"Is to call Kevin a Staunch Enemy of the Most Holy Catholic Church name calling?"

Yes.

james,"So your very biased decision to delete those titles and descriptions is a very bad decision on your part as a moderator."

That's your opinion. In my opinion, it is libel.



-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.

Kevin,

Your Doctrine Is The Newest

Of The 34,001 Protestant Doctrines.

And You Do A Very Good Job Of Blabbering About It.

Because It Is Your Own Invention

And You Are Very Proud Of It.

My Doctrine Is From ***The One***

And ***Oldest Christian Doctrine***

Of The Most Holy Catholic Church

Who Has Produced So Many

True Saints

For Two Millenniums:

Holy Mary, Mother of God

Saint John the Baptist

Saint Joseph

Saint Peter and Paul

Saint Andrew

Saint John

Saint Mary Magdalene

Saint Stephen

Saint Ignatius of Antioch

Saint Lawrence

Saint Perpetua and Saint Felicity

Saint Agnes

Saint Gregory

Saint Augustine

Saint Athanasius

Saint Basil

Saint Martin

Saint Benedict

Saint Francis

Saint Dominic

Saint Francis Xavier

Saint John Vianney

Saint Catherine

Saint Theresa of Jesus

and

Mother Teresa

Being One Of The Latest.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


David said, "Attack the message, not the messenger."

David, Mr. Moderator, when you said this you Kevin, is this attacking the message or the messenger? :

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST (denomination of) IS A DANGEROUS CULT WHOSE MEMBERS WERE DECEIVED BY SATAN.

Isn't that attacking Kevin himself and his entire church???

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


james wrote,"Isn't that attacking Kevin himself and his entire church???"

No it's not. And you'll probably find others messages where I get into a personal attack with members of the Roman church.

I'd like to thank the members of the "Catholic" forum for rubbing that off on me.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


Are you including me in that group, David? I don't think I ever exhibited such hostility towards you, have I?

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 26, 2003.


No, the ones I'm talking about are Gecik, Chavez, Paul, Gail and others I might have forgotten.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.


When a person's faith is being challenged, it is the same as destroying the person. If the person is strong enough, they will survive and gain a stronger understanding. Their faith might survive. I know that a person's temperment is only a guage of their frustrations in understanding or explaining their doctrine/beliefs.

I usually feel stupid, igonored, confused, naive, boring, intrusive, and clumsy in the Catholic Forum. Other than that, I'm ok. (grin). But, I do learn from them who you've mentioned. I mostly get a feeling of caution in the wording of my posts. Hey, those guys have giant degrees hanging in their homes. I have a dictionary and over a dozen Bibles for digging up verses. They seem to have it in memory (brain cells).

I am impressed with you and Kevin. You guys know your Bible. Uh, Kevin, I read mine even if it seems that I don't.

The only people I've play hardball with are these satan lovers. I have a tendency to go out of my way to push them off the cliff.

rod..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 26, 2003.


David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David

I take your word, David,

that when you said this to Kevin :

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST (denomination of) IS A DANGEROUS CULT WHOSE MEMBERS WERE DECEIVED BY SATAN ~

You were not attacking Kevin himself nor his entire church ~

but You were merely saying the TRUTH about Kevin and his entire church.

Peace.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


I don't believe either of you. You say the Roman Catholic denomination is the only true church and he says his Churches of Christ denomination is the true church. Both of you say that only your church members are going to heaven. Both of you claim to be God's only church. I don't believe either one of you because the True Church of our Lord Jesus Christ is not confined to corrupt organizations.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David

David, and you say your church is the true church.

I don't believe you either.

Most Especially the $$$ corrupt Protestant $$$ Televangelism with

Dramatic Gibberish ~

all 34,001 of them and growing by the minute.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


james,

Would you please stop inserting images in your posts. Once in a while is ok, but it fustrates people with slow internet.

I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ, the invisible church. It is Not owned by any denomination or sect (i.e. Churches of Christ, Roman Catholic). This True Church is made up of the True Believers in Christ.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


No problem, David.

David, if you call yourself a christian,

can anyone else see you? can your mom see you?

are you invisible?



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


For the record:

The Catholic Church acknowledges that Salvation can be found in other churches outside of the Catholic Church. So, does the Pentecostal doctrine claim the same thing.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 27, 2003.


David,

Please tell me how the church of Christ is a corrupt organization?

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 27, 2003.


For David,

SACRED TRUTH :

THE ROCK ~

THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE 2000 YEAR OLD MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH SAYS :

THE CHURCH IS VISIBLE

As He hung upon the Cross, Christ Jesus not only appeased the justice of the Eternal Father which had been violated, but He also won for us, His brethren, an ineffable flo of graces. It was possible for Him of Himself to impart these graces to mankind directly; but He willed to do so only through a VISIBLE CHURCH MADE UP OF MEN, so that through her all might cooperate with Him in dispensing the graces of Redemption. As the Word of God willed to make use of our nature, when in excruciating agony He would redeem mankind, so in the same way throughout the centuries He makes use of the Church that the work begun might endure.

That the Church is a body is frequently asserted in the Sacred Scriptures. "Christ," says the Apostle, "is the Head of the Body of the Church." If the Church is a body, it must be an unbroken unity, according to those words of Paul: "Though many we are one body in Christ." But it is not enough that the Body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses as Our predecessor of happy memory, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum asserts:

"THE CHURCH IS VISIBLE BECAUSE SHE IS A BODY. HENCE THEY ERR IN A MATTER OF DIVINE TRUTH, WHO IMAGINE THE CHURCH TO BE INVISIBLE, INTANGIBLE, A SOMETHING MERELY "PNEUMATOLOGICAL" AS THEY SAY, BY WHICH MANY CHRISTIAN COMMUNITIES, THOUGH THEY DIFFER FROM EACH OTHER IN THEIR PROFESSION OF FAITH, ARE UNTIED BY AN INVISIBLE BOND.

But a body calls also for a multiplicity of members, which are linked together in such a way as to help one another. And as in the body when one member suffers, all the other members share its pain, and the healthy members come to the assistance of the ailing, so in the Church the individual members do not live for themselves alone, but also help their fellows, and all work in mutual collaboration for the common comfort and for the more perfect building up of the whole Body. For the Divine Redeemer began the building of the mystical temple of the Church when by His preaching He made known His Precepts; He completed it when he hung glorified on the Cross; and He manifested and proclaimed it when He sent THE HOLY GHOST AS PARACLETE IN VISIBLE FORM on His disciples.

The Church which He founded by His Blood, He strengthened on the Day of Pentecost by a special power, given from heaven. For, having solemnly installed in his exalted office him whom He had already nominated as His Vicar, He had ascended into Heaven; and sitting now at the right hand of the Father He wished TO MAKE KNOWN AND PROCLAIM HIS SPOUSE THROUGH THE VISIBLE COMING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT with the sound of a mighty wind and tongues of fire. ~ MYSTICI CORPORIS CHRISTI, ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XII ON THE MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST

For The Complete Vatican Document of Mystici Corporis Christi

For More on the Visible Church

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003.


The Gospel REVEALS the kingdom of God to mankind.

The phrase "kingdom of God" is used 71 times in the New Testament. Most of those times are in the Gospels (54 times). The phrases "kingdom of heaven," "heavenly kingdom" and "kingdom of Christ" are also used in the New Testament. They are used interchangeably with the phrase "kingdom of God."

The kingdom of God is a New Testament concept, and was part of the "Good News" or Gospel that Jesus and the Apostles taught. In fact, it can rightly be said, that the gospel is the message that Jesus brought to reveal the kingdom of God to mankind. (see Matthew 4: 23) Mark's gospel tells us that as soon as Jesus left the wilderness to begin his ministry, the first thing he preached about was the kingdom of God. "Now after John was put into prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the kingdom of God. And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe the gospel." (Mark 1: 14-15) So, whatever the kingdom of God is, it was a new concept when Jesus came, and was the very reason why the Gospel was preached. To understand it, we must answer some pertinent questions.

Where was this kingdom to be located?

When was this kingdom founded?

Who are the citizens of this kingdom?

When we answer these questions, we will know what the kingdom of God is.

WHERE is the kingdom of God?

The first thing we usually want to know about any kingdom is, "Where is it?" Alexander's kingdom was located in Greece. Ghengis Khan's kingdom was centered in Mongolia. The kingdom of the Ottomans was located in and around Asia Minor.

Is the kingdom of God such a kingdom?

Does (or will) it have national borders?

Will it have a capital city?

Will there be an actual throne on which its king will sit?

You might be surprised to know that there are many who teach that the kingdom of God will be such an earthly kingdom. Jesus, who came to reveal the kingdom to us, tells a very different story.

"And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them." (Luke 17: 20 - 23).

The kingdom of God is not a physical kingdom like kingdoms of this world!

The kingdom of God is a SPIRITUAL kingdom, unbounded by physical borders and limitations.

It is "within."

It is a kingdom of the spirit.

Jesus made it very clear that his kingdom was not an earthly, physical kingdom when he was being questioned by Pontius Pilate shortly before the crucifixion.

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice." (John 18:36-37).

Paul affirmed the spiritual nature of God's kingdom. "Now I say this brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God: neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." (1 Corinthians 15:50).

It is very evident that the kingdom of God is not to be found in any particular city or country. Its king, Jesus, does not sit on an earthly throne, as if he were just another common king among men. The kingdom of God is spiritual, consisting of people of every nation who have OBEYED THE WILL OF CHRIST.

It's king is seated at the right hand of God, where He rules over all of creation.

Where is the kingdom of God to be found?

In the hearts and minds of faithful men and women, wherever they may dwell.

So, when was this spiritual kingdom actually founded?

Read on and see what the scriptures say....

When was the kingdom of God to be established?

There are many so-called Bible experts who say that they do not know when the kingdom of God will come.

Why not?

Jesus was pretty specific about when his kingdom would be established.

Remember what we read in Mark? "Now after John was put into prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the kingdom of God. And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe the gospel." (Mark 1:14-15).

The kingdom of God was at hand! Now normally when someone says that something is at hand, they mean that it will happen very soon. Was this what Jesus meant? Consider the following verse. "And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." (Mark 9:1).

What does that mean?

Well, when we combine the statement that the kingdom was "at hand" with the declaration that it would come before some of his listeners "taste of death," it must mean that the kingdom of God was to come during the lifetime of that particular generation, I.E., sometime shortly after 28 or 29 A.D.

The kingdom of God was to come -- ACCORDING TO JESUS' OWN WORDS -- during the first century, A.D.

There are many who teach that the kingdom of God has not yet come. In order for that to be true, some of those people who were listening to Jesus must still be alive!

Is there anyone who really believes that?

If so, I beg you, show me those 2000 year old people.

I want to meet them!

The kingdom was to be delivered during the lifetime of Jesus' listeners.

Is it possible to determine the time more precisely?

The Apostle Paul made a statement to the church at Colossae which helps us further in saying just when the kingdom of God was to come. "Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:" (Colossians 1:12-13).

Paul tells the church at Colossae that God HATH TRANSLATED them "into the kingdom of his dear son." This is not something that would happen, but something that HAD ALREADY HAPPENED! Paul wrote this letter around the middle of the first century. At that time THE KINGDOM HAD ALREADY COME.

When specifically did it come? The Bible also tells us that, if we have the wisdom to listen to its testimony.

Remember what Jesus had said about the kingdom?

He said it would come with power. He also said that that power would come upon the disciples in Jerusalem. (See Luke 24:49).

Was there an event between his day (28 - 30 A.D.) and the day of Paul's letter to the Colossians (50-60 A.D.) when the power of God was clearly seen in Jerusalem?

Yes, there was!

It was on the Jewish festival day of Pentecost, less than 2 months after Jesus ascended to Heaven! "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues..... And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?....Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them....Men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh............" passages from: (Acts 2:1-19).

On the day of Pentecost Peter preached his first Gospel sermon. As a result, 3000 people repented and were baptized FOR the forgiveness of their sins.

This was the beginning of the church.

Was it also the beginning of the kingdom of God?

It seems obvious that it was. As Jesus had foretold, the kingdom of God had indeed come with power.

Well, who are the citizens of the kingdom of God?

Read on and see what the scriptures say......

What manner of people inhabit the kingdom of God? "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of God." (Matthew 5:3). "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:10).

The kingdom of God is made up of godly people. Not everyone can qualify for the kingdom of God, but only those who are willing to do God's will and stand up for TRUTH, even in the face of persecution.

"Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 7:21).

The citizen of the kingdom of God is first of all a believer. Not a casual believer whose faith is worthless, but one whose faith causes him or her to follow God's Word -- to be a disciple of Christ. Jesus taught about the kingdom of God in many of his parables. Some of the best known parables of the kingdom are in Matthew 13. In that chapter Jesus tells the well-known "Parable of the Sower" and the "Parable of the Wheat and the Tares." In both of these parables, He likens one who comes into the kingdom of God to good seed that is sown.

Note what he says about this "good seed." "He that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it: which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty." (Matthew 13:23). "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one." (Matthew 13:38).

The ones who hear the word of God, OBEY IT, and then BEAR FRUIT are the children of the kingdom.

Today, we would call such people faithful Christians.

Are Christians the citizens of this kingdom of God of which Jesus spoke?

Let's see what the Apostle Paul had to say to the Thessalonians. "Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe: As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, as a father doth his children, That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews." (1 Thessalonians 2:10-14).

The citizens of the kingdom of God are Christians!

Those who are called into the kingdom by hearing God's word, following its teachings, and bearing righteous fruit. As Paul said, these are "followers of the churches of God."

We now know where the kingdom exists, when it was founded, who its king is, and who its citizens are. Surely the Bible has clearly revealed to you what the kingdom of God is.......

What is the kingdom of God?

Our study of the scriptures has revealed the following things about the kingdom of God:

Jesus came to preach the "gospel of the kingdom," which revealed what the kingdom of God was to be.

No one can point to a specific place and say "there is the kingdom of God."

Jesus declared his kingdom to be a spiritual kingdom when he said "the kingdom of God is within you."

Jesus further affirmed that his kingdom is "not of this world."

The KING of the kingdom of God is Jesus, the Christ of God.

According to Jesus the kingdom was to come in the first century, before some of those who heard him teach would "taste of death."

The kingdom of God came "with power" in Jerusalem, on Pentecost, around the year 29 A.D.

Paul said that the Colossians HAD BEEN "translated" into the kingdom of God.

Not everyone will be in the kingdom of God. It will be made up of the faithful.

The citizens of the kingdom of God are the "brethren," the "followers of the church of God" -- CHRISTIANS -- according to the first epistle to the Thessalonians.

Therefore, we can safely say that THE KINGDOM HAS COME. The kingdom of God was never meant to be a physical kingdom. The kingdom of God is what it was always meant to be: THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, THE FAMILY OF GOD, THE CHURCH OF GOD, THE HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH!

"To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Ephesians 3:8-11).

PRAISE GOD! THE KINGDOM OF GOD HAS COME INDEED!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 28, 2003.


Kevin, [Deleted by Moderator]

Kevin said, "You are correct, please forgive my error."

NEW FRESHLY BAKED DOCTRINE !!!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003.


Let's get this thread about Mary back on track.

FROM GOD WE LEARN ...

Relatively LITTLE is said of Mary who was to become our Lord's earthly mother. In the Old Testament, in Genesis 3:15; 12:1-3, we can rightly assume she was already in the mind of God and the scheme of redemption for which He was laying the groundwork. While she was not mentioned by name, Isaiah (7:14) definitely speaks o her and that is affirmed by the words of Matthew 1:23. Micah 5:2,3 alludes to Mary.

When it came time for her to step out into the prominence of fulfilled prophecy regarding the coming Savior, Inspiration becomes a bit more specific. We learn the virgin of Isaiah 7:14 was to be Mary. Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-2:51 teach that (1) the child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit, she declared, "I know not a man"; (2) she was "blessed among women" and' (3) her earthly husband was named Joseph.

In Matthew's account (1:1-17) of our Lord's genealogy, Mary is mentioned only as the wife of Joseph and in Luke's account of the genealogy (3:23-28), Mary was not even mentioned.

Inspiration informs us Mary was a virgin through the birth of Jesus. He was the FIRST of her children, THERE WERE OTHERS.

Mary CONCEIVED THOSE CHILDREN BY NATURAL MEANS, thus she was NO LONGER A VIRGIN. (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21).

Other than that which has been discussed to this point, the Scriptures are silent about Mary.

"BUT IN VAIN THEY DO WORSHIP ME, TEACHING FOR DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN" (Matthew 15:9).

The Catholic Church, over the years, has ADDED to the Biblical teachings on Mary, making a very elaborate doctrine.

The result is HERESY.

Their ASSUMPTIONS have given Mary a preeminence which is at ODDS with the revelations of inspiration.

FALSELY, the Catholics teach that every baby born into this world since Adam and Eve have been born sinners - the doctrine of Original sin. According to Cardinal Gibbons in THE FAITH OF OUR FATHERS, Mary was exempted from original sin. This doctrine they have termed the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The same Cardinal Gibbons enunciates the Catholic doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. She died a virgin. Yet the Bible tells us she (Mary) HAD OTHER CHILDREN.

In November of 1950, Pope Pius XII declared that Mary was bodily assumed. That shortly after her death she was raised from her grave and taken up to heaven where she now reigns as Queen of Heaven and, she, as well as others, are mediating the making intercession for the children of God. As Gibbons says, her mediation is "superior to that of the Angels and Saints." This doctrine is simply entitled the Bodily assumption of Mary, with its implications.

Where is all the proof for this?

Not in the Bible.

The Catholic Church has simply decided this is the way they want it to appear. It is their ATTEMPT to RE-WRITE HISTORY and substantiate their HERETICAL positions on a number of subjects.

Please notice that there was mention of the "Queen of Heaven" in the Old Testament (Jer 7:18, 44:18, 44:19, 44:25) however these are references to the PAGAN goddess Ishtar (Ashtarte). It is NOT surprising that Catholics have incorporated these PAGAN rituals into their doctrines.

It is OBVIOUS, that the Mary of the Catholic Church is NOT the Mary of the New Testament.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 14, 2003.


Kevin continues to SPIT at the Most Holy Mary and malign her Most Holy Character.

The Most Holy Mary is Most Beloved by her Son, Jesus Christ.

Kevin's faulty doctrine insists the Mary had other children. If she had other children she would have committed adultery against the Most Holy Spirit her Holy Spouse.

Jesus Christ is Against the Enemies of His Beloved Mother.

Kevin continues to misinterpret the Most Holy Catholic Bible by insisting that Mary lost her virgintiy.

The Most Holy Mary is forever a Virgin.

Kevin quoted from the Most Holy Catholic Bible:

"BUT IN VAIN THEY DO WORSHIP ME, TEACHING FOR DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN" (Matthew 15:9).

Matthew speaks about the man-made religion of Luther and his offsprings Not the God-made religion of Jesus Christ ~ the Most Holy Catholic Church. After all, the Most Holy Catholic Church Wrote the Most Holy Catholic Bible with the Guidance of the Most Holy Spirit.

The Protestants, over the years, have ADDED and Perverted the Biblical teachings on Mary, making many false doctrines.

The result is HERESY on a Grand Scale ~ 34,001 conflicting denominations.

Their ASSUMPTIONS have desecrated Mary which are at ODDS with the revelations of the Most Holy Catholic Bible and Sacred Traditions of the Holy Apostles.

Protestants have maligned the Sacred Traditions of the Holy Apostles.

FALSELY, the new protestant denomination of Kevin teaches that every baby born into this world since Adam and Eve have Not been born sinners - against the HOLY doctrine of Original sin. According to Cardinal Gibbons in THE FAITH OF OUR FATHERS, Mary was exempted from original sin. This is the HOLY doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The same Cardinal Gibbons enunciates the HOLY Catholic doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. She indeed died a Virgin. The Correct Interpretation of the Holy Catholic Bible and Sacred Tradition of the Holy Apostles tells us that Mary HAD NO OTHER CHILDREN.

In November of 1950, the Most Holy Pope Pius XII declared that Mary was bodily assumed. That shortly after her death she was raised from her grave and taken up to heaven where she now INDEED reigns as Queen of Heaven and, she, as well as other Holy Saints, are mediating and making intercession for the children of God ~ the Holy Catholics. As Gibbons RIGHTLY says, her mediation is "superior to that of the Angels and Saints." This Holy doctrine is entitled the Bodily assumption of Mary.

The Unwritten Word of God, the Sacred Tradition of the Most Holy Apostles tells us that the Immaculate Conception, and Perpetual Virginity, and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary are all Holy and Eternally True.

The baby protestant "church" of Kevin has simply decided against the Truth. It is its ATTEMPT to RE-WRITE HISTORY and substantiate its HERETICAL positions on many number of subjects.

Kevin misinterpreted AGAIN The Most Holy Catholic Bible in Jer 7:18, 44:18, 44:19, 44:25. It is NOT surprising that Kevin's protestant "church" has incorporated PAGAN beliefs into its doctrines.

It is very common for individual private interpreters of the Most Holy Catholic Bible to misinterpret the Most Holy Catholic Bible.

It is OBVIOUS, that the MOST HOLY Mary of the MOST HOLY Catholic Church IS the Same MOST HOLY Mary of the New Testament.

ANCIENT PRAYER TO THE VIRGIN :

+

WE TURN TO YOU FOR PROTECTION

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD.

LISTEN TO OUR PRAYERS

AND HELP US IN OUR NEEDS

SAVE US FROM EVERY DANGER,

GLORIOUS AND BLESSED VIRGIN.

+



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.


Mary is the mother of our Lord jesus Christ, James.

Just don't lose sight of who died for us and why are we in this world. (Jesus, Yavé).

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), November 15, 2003.


It is repugnant to hear you calling Jesus as your Lord when you deny his very Divinity, His Nature. The Gospel declares that He is God. All Mary is saying is, "Follow whatever Jesus says." (Wedding at Cana)



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.


It is INTERESTING to note that James STILL does NOT provide any Biblical PROOF that Mary was ever sinless!!!

James has NOT provided nor will he ever provide this information because it does NOT exist in the word of God!!!

The TRUTH of the matter is that Mary was NOT sinless NOR did she remain a virgin after she gave birth to Jesus.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 15, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ