Posted on 01/24/2015 3:23:43 PM PST by NYer
Meant to say the pre trib rapture paled in comparison..
However I do understand that of late Rome may very well attempt to make it official in their doctrine that she is definately, for them, co-equal with Jesus Christ and God.
Where did you get that understanding?
The Holy Spirit chose the words “mother of Jesus” rather than the “mother of God”. One would think replacing the words of the Holy Spirit would not be wise. But alas, Catholics do it all the time.
Are you familiar with the Third Ecumenical Council? Would you have identified with Nestorius? Do you agree or disagree with his beliefs?
No, it doesn't. The wife of the Father is Israel not Mary.
Isaiah 66:7 "Before she goes into labor, she gives birth; before the pains come upon her, she delivers a son.
Who was that?
Isaiah 66:8 Who has ever heard of such things? Who has ever seen things like this? Can a country be born in a day or a nation be brought forth in a moment? Yet no sooner is Zion in labor than she gives birth to her children.
Who is that Zion?
Isaiah 66:10 "Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad for her, all you who love her; rejoice greatly with her, all you who mourn over her.
Now, who is our mother and the mother of Christ?
Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Catholics corrupt the words of scripture.
Cynical, you just can’t get it through that everything you were ever taught about the savior of the world has a greco roman latin bent to it..
And not just a greco roman latin bent, but a roman catholic bent..
His name, the day Rome says is his birthday, the day Rome tells you He died, the day Rome tells you He was raised. Those aren’t just catholic things.. those are christian things.. and those christian things are nothing but traditions..
All birthed from Rome...
You have to blame modern translators for putting two ‘Joshua’ verses in the new testament where there were none as far back as 1599.
Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 in my 1599 bible still says Jesus in those two places’,
But every other bible I have shows Joshua has replaced those two originla Jesus verses..
And that has nothing to do with translating Greek/Latin to English..
That has everything to do with screwing up two verses and making it possiible to have some scrub like me question the very precious greco roman latin name for Rome’s savior.. and have that same scrub wonder why the other 900 plus verses couldn’t be changed from Jesus to Joshua of translators deemed that an appropriate name for two Jesus verses.
If one ever gets to the realization that Rome’s savior is a counterfeit and there isn’t another Jesus or another mary for protestants, that protestants share in her abominations, it may make them sick...or angry....
It isn’t the name that is just an issue.. it is everything that is associated with that name... and everything associated with the name Jesus begins in Rome..
Unless protestants have been boycotting rome’s december 25 and rome’s good Friday and rome’s easter Sunday and nobody told us..
That sort of messes up the whole christian calendar if those days have o meaning..
I guess people could reject Rome’s December 25, Rome’s good Friday and Rome’s easter Sunday and be called christian.. they certainly wouldn’t be called a Roman Catholic if they rejected so much of what Rome teaches and preaches..
How much of Rome do you follow? You may get sick if you studied it.. I have studied it.. and that is why Rome is exactly what the first reformers said Rome is..
And why I don’t accept Rome having anything to do with the Genuine Messiah of Israel..
She is just responsible for counterfeiting Him.. you and protestants can’t say the same because it is that counterfeit that you have your faith in..
I just gave you what the Old Testament says.
I love it. Thank you.
Do you have some scripture for that??? No??? Just some Catholic mythology??? We will have a glorified body...
The Church and the Bible tell us that Mary is the "Queen of Heaven."
Only in Catholic fables...
Jesus is the King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom, the "Kingdom of God," or Christ's Church.
David's Kingdom is NOT the Kingdom of God...Nor, is it your 'Church'...
Step away from your catechism and Staples and Hahn and read a bible...It's full of truth that's a mystery to them...
He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, (Luke 1:32)
Mary is the mother of the King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom. She is the Queen Mother of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom, or the "Kingdom of God."
That's just biblical ignorance...If Mary is the mother of God, we Christians are more so...
(The Ark, which contained the manna, Aaron's staff, and the decalogue, was a type for Mary, who held within her womb "the bread of life," the eternal High Priest, and the Eternal Word.)
Really??? How'd she find room in there for manna, Aaron's staff, the Ten Commandments and Jesus???
Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a severe hailstorm. A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” (Rev 11:19-12:1-5)
By claiming this is Mary, your religion is talking out of both sides of it many mouths...Your religion claims there was no pain in childbirth for Mary while claiming that this woman who undergoes pain at childbirth is the Mary who doesn't experience pain...What's up with that???
You need a catechism to explain the catechism!
There is such a book. It is called the “Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”
http://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
What??? You can't do that!!! You have something to base that on???
Those silly non Catholics. They think that those who originally used the word knowing exactly what the original meaning was didn't understand what the word really meant. Right? NO! They knew exactly what the origin of the word was and what it meant.
No one denigrates Mary...That's another false accusation on your part...What we do is reveal the false teaching of your false religion...
Why do people believe that junk? I do not understand. The more I learn, the more thankful I am that I grew up with Bible believing parents, relatives, friends and teachers. I also think it is a cult of the highest degree. Thanks.
Another false accusation by you...There are many types and figures and shadows in the O.T...But Mary and the Ark of the Covenant is not one of them...
So do you have a response to my comment in http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3250321/posts?page=171#171
There is exactly zero authority for a Christian in your Catholic catechism...
Your history is filled with lies and forgeries...And you may as well leave the bible out of the equation since you guys don't even believe most of it...
Mary is called the Theotokos. This is properly translated as God-bearer. Mother of God is a poor translation choice.
Mary is the God-bearer because Jesus is one person and not divided. The title Theotokos is important because of what is says about Jesus, and not what it says about Mary.
Mother of God is a poor translation because it starts with the mother, while God-bearer is the proper translation because it starts with God.
The council of Chalcedon includes the following the Virgin Mary, the Theotokos, as regards his manhood.
So Mary is the God-bearer because she bore the manhood of Jesus. The Mother of God nonsense is tiresome. It is used an an honorific to increase the prestige of Mary, when the origin title Theotokos was to acknowledge the true nature of Jesus.
It's not about Mary, it's about Jesus.
People should. There is a church here where members go on mission trips all over this country and the world. They get the best reception in Israel. They were invited to a church where no other group had been invited.
And thus constitutes another gospel and as Paul said we should consider those who teach it accursed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.