/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>637510

They vanished during Lent. The BO wanted less denominational fighting. Tbh, it has worked a bit.

This was part of why I was led to the Orthodox Church.

>>637516

No it hasn't, now people either just assume what denom you are or they ask halfway through arguing with you.

>P*lish

>>637510

Due to false flagging to stir up division.

Both from inside and outside the board. It's deletion is a necessary evil, in my view.

>le anal vortex man

>>637510

>Where does the Protestant dislike of the Blessed Virgin Mary come from?

>Not praying to Mary means you dislike her

Where does the Catholic dislike of the Bible come from? John 14:6 clearly states that Mary worship won't save you, yet they still pray to Her.

>Jesus told one apostle to treat Mary as if she were his own mother to look after her while he was gone

>This means she is the mother of all humanity

This is what vortex enthusiasts actually believe.

>>637552

>everyone burst into treats because of it

Sounds delicious, but also potentially cannibalism.

>>637859

>these Cathodox peoples are missing the point. Worshiping and putting your Faith in Mary to save you is as silly as putting your faith in Thor to save you.

You're part right. We don't worship or put our faith in Mary, that would be silly, but we do ask her to save us. Why? It's no different then the Baptist who goes out 'soul winning'; he could think of himself as having helped to save that person. Just as we think that Mary has an active role in saving us.

>>637510

Church Militant TV's Michael Voris Reveals His Dark Past

>>637868

>But mary is dead

Long time protestant, this scripture made me realize we're wrong about this:

"Now about the dead rising–have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!""

Mark 12:26-27

To say Mary is dead is to say she didn't believe. But she clearly did. All the saints are alive in heaven, our God is God of the living.

If you are comfortable with asking any living person to pray for you, there is nothing wrong with asking Mary or the saints for they are alive too.

That's the fundamental mistake I was making for years- true Christians don't die, so communicating with them isn't communicating with the dead, it's communicating with heaven, where they are.

That being said, worship the Lord your God and serve him only.

The Catholics are wrong when they genuflect or bow to saints, that's what the Greek term for worship is derived from.

You can ask for saints prayers, communication is fine, but any reverence or obeisance you wouldn't give to a fellow brother in the church should be reserved for God alone.

Protestants forget the literal promise of eternal life, Catholics forget that the saints eternal life doesn't make them worthy of worship (latria and dulia I understand, lesser worship is still inappropriate worship)

Utmost love for Mary and the Saints, dwelling on their accomplishments and talking to them in prayers is spiritually beneficial, but never will I bow to anyone but God.

>>637882

>"Now about the dead rising–have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!""

That is about the resurrection, which hasn't happened yet.

>>637886

Jesus said unto her,

<"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:"

John 11:25

>>637886

>>637887

To break down my point, though you may not need it, resurrection already happened, and is happening, and will happen continually through Jesus Christ. He already came, the resurrection is everlasting because Christ is the resurrection.

If you're looking for a singular event that will happen physically, it feels a lot like the mistaken Pharisetical idea that the Messiah would create and Earthly kingdom. Heck when asked about the resurrection Jesus states:

<For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Matthew 22:30

>>637902

You're not relying on them, you're asking for their intercession the same way you ask a brother or sister in church to pray for you.

If you ask people in church to pray for you, there is nothing wrong with asking the saints.

God doesn't say to -pray- only to him, pray is just a request, you can pray for a person to forgive your loan, or pray they'll purchase your wears, or ask them to pray to God to heal you.

God does expect us to worship him only. I won't bow to Saints or their statutes. I won't give them obeisance or worship, but I can ask them to pray for me the way I ask a brother or sister in church.

You don't -have- to ask for intercession. Sometimes, if I'm not making the connection, reflecting on how my brothers and sisters worshipped God, and asking them about it, strengthens my connection to God because he is harder to comprehend. You don't have to go that route if it isn't useful for you, but there is nothing biblically wrong with that.

Mary and the saints are not necessary, only Christ was necessary, but they are helpful. That's all I'm saying.

If you can be filled with the Holy Spirit 24/7 as you continually pray to God then, sure, asking for intercession wouldn't be helpful… but, if that was the case, you'd be Jesus Christ. Since we're not our Lord and Savior, I'm willing to take all the help I can get.

>>637552

>tbh still better than shills pretending to be [denom] to discredit [denom]

And what is stopping them from continuing to do it?

Anyway nobody did that unironically, the post was always constructed to be obvious.

>>637889

There is a specific event called the resurrection which is still to come wherein we will be given spiritual bodies .Jesus is the firstfruits of the resurrection. Our bodies will be as his is now. In that sense the resurrection has happened already, to one man, Christ. All the other dead including Mary are asleep in the grave, awaiting the resurrection. Please refer to the Bible for more info.

>>637917

So, you're going to take a couple of lines in Revelation, a very allegorical book full of symbology and mysticism, and say the Evangelical/Baptist pet-interpretation trumps the specific words of our Lord and Savior that I posted?

Christ said he was the resurrection, are you saying he was wrong?

>>637919

>and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead

>and the life of the world to come. Amen.

>>637887

>>637951

>and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.

I do, both when my body passes and other brothers and sisters pass and they too are resurrected. It has happened, is happening, and will happen.

But it's not a single event, it's the reality of our world embodied in Jesus Christ.

>Can you give me a quote supporting this claim?

>>637886

>>637887

>day of judgment

You mean the day each of us die? Of course Christ judges each of us on our day of judgment. That's why no one knows when it is and it sneaks up on us like a thief in the night.

Please realize the futurist interpretation of the Book of Revelation is only a few hundred years old at most. For the longest time, everyone thought the events in Revelation happened at the end of the Roman Empire- that it was foretelling its collapse.

>>637956

>You mean the day each of us die? Of course Christ judges each of us on our day of judgment.

Matthew 25:31-33

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all his angels are with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. The people of every nation will be gathered in front of him. He will separate them as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right but the goats on his left.

>>637952

Are you alive when you sleep? I would certainly hope so.

Mark 5:38-42

When they came to the home of the synagogue leader, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. 39 He went in and said to them, “Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep.” 40 But they laughed at him.

After he put them all out, he took the child’s father and mother and the disciples who were with him, and went in where the child was. 41 He took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha koum!” (which means “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”). 42 Immediately the girl stood up and began to walk around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished.

John 11:11

These things He said, and after that He said to them, "our friend sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up."

>>637925

Luke 1:28

And having come in, the angel said to her "Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!"

Luke 1:42

Then she spoke out with a loud voice an said, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!"

And shortly after this we have one of the most beautiful prayers in the entire bible, the Magnificat, said by Mary no less. 1:46-55.

>>637713

Those dag gone Catholics; hating the Bible they wrote. It just gets me so worked up.

>>637968

Right, so you don't think this is a symbolic representation? I agree that judgment will jappen but you literally think everyone in the world will be gathered at a single physical place, just to be put on his right side or his left?

This is Mormon level of thinking God the Father means, literally, a dude living on another planet that came down to Earth, physically and had spirit-sex with Mary.

I agree the verse is true, 100%, it impart spiritual truth and reality- but it is also poetic descriptive, not describing a single physical event but describing the truth of how Jesus will judge us.

And, you ask, how can we tell the difference? By looking at the whole Bible together. Your scripture runs counter to the other scriptures I cited that are more direct and specific. It makes sense that this one is taking some poetic license to impart truth.

>>637873

while I do not always like him, this video shows one thing: sinners can change. I used to do awful things with my own body and in time I learnt to stop harming myself. I am far from cured, but realizing you were on the wrong track and changing is a good start…even Saul killed Christians before he became Paul in Christ.

>>638578

No it's not just a symbol. It's a specific event that happens at one time at the second coming, after the last trumpet. The Bible goes on and on about this.

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/15-52.htm

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+15%3A12-20&version=KJV

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/15-23.htm

Also your verse does not contradict this, Jesus is the resurrection because he is the firstfruits of the resurrection, our elder brother, the first and only one so far to get a perfected resurrection body like the ones we will all get at the future resurrection, and also it is through Christ that we will all be resurrected - he is the source of our eternal life.

>>638048

None of those passages say that the blessed theotokos is a mediator of saving grace.

>>638833

>we are all saved by Jesus THROUGH Mary

No wonder Mohammad though the trinity was God Jesus and Mary

>>638833

Jesus was shown to be sinless THROUGH the Law. Therefore, we are all save by Jesus THROUGH the Law. It is a cause of our salvation. Simple.

>>638828

Well I posted those in response to your statement that Mary "is not exalted to this extent in the scriptures". What higher extent is there than for an angel of the Lord to say you are blessed? To carry the Lord himself as His mother?

Furthermore, as >>638833 states, without Mary to mediate Christs entry into the world as a man, there would be no salvation.

>>638969

>>638833

>Jesus became incarnate THROUGH Mary.

>She is the cause of our salvation

>without Mary to mediate Christs entry into the world as a man, there would be no salvation.

If you say that, then you have to say that Mary saved herself since she is "the cause of our salvation" which is unscriptural.

<Luke 1:46-47

(46)  "And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

(47)  And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour."

<Hebrews 10:5

(5)  "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:"

>>638988

>Nothing in the entire New Testament about praying to Mary or Christ having a Co-Redemptrix.

>Prottards cannot into logic.

>>638974

>you have to say that Mary saved herself

no I don't, God went to her and told her these things, it is because she agreed to follow His plan that she is upheld as she is. If Mary had not consented, as was within her power with free will, then maybe it would have been a Rebekah, Judith, or Ruth who we would uphold as the Mother of God. God was going to save us through His Son not matter what, except that he wasn't going to force anyone to accept His will.

>>639000

>Tell me how I am in contempt of her by recognizing that Christ is God, and that beside Him there is no saviour?

Where did I say that Mary was our Saviour? WHERE? Cause of our salvation =/= our salvation.

>>639011

>shifting the goalpost this hard

You're right. You can't into logic. But that's because you hate the Mother of God so much that you won't acknowledge that without Her, there would be no Saviour.

>>639165

>God alone saves

>"B-but thats heresy"

>>639169

That's not what monergism is.

>>639173

Monergism in the context of theology means that there is only one operator in salvation, that's God.

>>639175

The Catholic/Orthodox is synergistic and we don't believe in "irresistible grace". Either way, this has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.

>>639180

>The Catholic/Orthodox is synergistic

Glad we agree

>Either way, this has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.

Yes it does, because if God is the sole operator in salvation, then we cannot call Mary a mediator of saving grace. And the scripture teaches just that.

>Isaiah 43:11

(11)  I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

>Isaiah 63:5

(5)  I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me.

>Isaiah 48:9-11

(9)  For my name's sake will I defer mine anger, and for my praise will I refrain for thee, that I cut thee not off.

(10)  Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.

(11)  For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.

>>639183

>Glad we agree

We don't. Monergism and synergism are opposedt to eachother.

>Yes it does, because if God is the sole operator in salvation, then we cannot call Mary a mediator of saving grace.

>"hurrr mediator means operator"

Nice try but no.

>>639184

>We don't. Monergism and synergism are opposedt to eachother.

Well duh, I said I agree that the cathodox are not monergistic.

>mediator means operator

Again with the irony >>638988

Mary cannot operate as a mediator of saving grace.

>1 Timothy 2:5 KJV

(5)  For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

>Acts 4:10-12 KJV

(10)  Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

(11)  This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

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

>>639189

>Mary cannot operate as a mediator of saving grace.

When did I say she could?

>>639190

Wait, I misread. She is a mediator because it is through Her that we received our salvation. However, God alone is our salvation.

>>639190

>"She is the cause of our salvation"

What else could you possibly mean by this?

>>639191

>it is through Her that we received our salvation

>1 Timothy 2:5 KJV

(5) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

>>639194

Did the word became flesh through Mary?

Without Mary, and therefore Jesus not being born, would we have a way to salvation right now?

If not, then you have to admit that our salvation has come through Mary.

>>639196

>Did the word became flesh through Mary?

Not by her operation, but by the power of the Holy Spirit:

>Luke 1:34-35 KJV

(34)  Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

(35)  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.

>Without Mary, and therefore Jesus not being born

God was not dependent on Mary to bring Jesus into the world:

>Romans 10:6 KJV

(6)  But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)

>>639200

>>639197

>>639200

>God was not dependent on Mary to bring Jesus into the world:

How then would the prophecy about Jesus' birth have been fulfilled? Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:23

Are you saying God is capable of not being true to his word?

>>639202

>How then would the prophecy about Jesus' birth have been fulfilled?

If not in choosing Mary, then by choosing some other woman, and by His own power ensuring Christ's birth.

Mary is contingent in all this.

>>639204

>by His own power

That is by God's own power.

>>639204

>Mary is contingent in all this.

No, God chose Her to bear His Son before She was even conceived by preserving her of original sin. He didn't pick some random woman.

>>639206

>God chose Her to bear His Son before She was even conceived

Amen, doesn't mean He had to choose her.

Also why capitalize the 'S' in she? Hmmmm?

>by preserving her of original sin

Woah there sparky, you wanna back that up with scripture?

>He didn't pick some random woman.

Even if He didn't, it still doesn't mean He had to choose her. He could have created some other woman instead, or chosen out another pious woman from among the people.

>>639210

>Amen, doesn't mean He had to choose her.

God doesn't change his mind. It was going to be Her from the beginning and no other.

>Also why capitalize the 'S' in she? Hmmmm?

Because She bore JESUS, GOD IN THE FLESH.

>Woah there sparky, you wanna back that up with scripture?

Mary is called FULL OF GRACE (Kecharitomene), a term used for her and her alone! Kecharitomene she "who has been perfectly and completely graced by God.”

Gregory Thaumaturgus (205-270 AD):

O purest one

O purest virgin

where the Holy Spirit is, there are all things readily ordered.

Where divine grace is present

the soil that, all untilled, bears bounteous fruit

in the life of the flesh, was in possession of the incorruptible citizenship,

and walked as such in all manner of virtues, and lived a life more excellent than man's common standard

thou hast put on the vesture of purity

has selected thee as the holy one and the wholly fair;

and through thy holy, and chaste, and pure, and undefiled womb

since of all the race of man thou art by birth the holy one,

and the more honourable, and the purer, and the more pious than any other:

and thou hast a mind whiter than the snow, and a body made purer than any gold

>>639219

>God doesn't change his mind. It was going to be Her from the beginning and no other.

So God did not have a choice huh?

>Mary is called FULL OF GRACE (Kecharitomene), a term used for her and her alone!

Wouldn't this be better understood as referring to the simple grace of being chosen as Theotokos? In fact it would make more sense as she would literally be carrying Christ, the grace of God to the world, in her womb by His power. We don't need to shove in the concept of the immaculate conception to understand this passage.

>>639219

And caths wonder why prots think know they worship Mary

Protestants hate of saints and of Mary stems ultimately from Sola Fide.

We must remember protestantism is "so you think you're better than me, huh?": the religion.

They don't wish to do anything for the Kingdom of God and they kid themselves that true faith doesn't sacrifice, naturally they hate those who did and do.

>>641744

I'm not roman catholic and literally no one in this board likes this literal anti-Christ. Is that your point?

Now you might not have understood what I meant in the previous post, because you're under sophistry spells.

Your very personal theology is sophistry, that's why you deflected and didn't address the issue. Not that you meant to do it, I know it made perfect sense to you to do such a thing. I hope you reflect over that.

But tell me, is it not the protestant who disregards faithful works? Is it not such flawed interpretation that breeds apathy and is very convenient to the lazy and slothful?

Wanting to work for God is completely incompatible with Sola Fide, one of the main pillars of your faith. I find it funny that evangelizing is not considered "works" and incompatible with Sola Fide by you and protestant doctrine, very convenient for growing the following.

Protestantism is convenient. It was convenient for kings in history to disregard church authority and it is convenient for you to disregard faith and works.

That convenience translates into a blind hatred of those who don't follow Sola Fide such as saints and Mary.

>>641699

Tell yourself whatever confirms your anti-catholic bias. Don't be expected to withstand the anger of the Lord at your final judgement, though.

>>641854

>pro-elder bias

I… what?

>>641863

>implying

>>641870

>implying implications that implying im implying