Posted on 05/01/2015 2:36:22 PM PDT by NYer
And I repeat myself “All the world’s evils are caused by lukewarm Catholics”. Do yourself a favor and don’t bother me anymore with the drivel.
Mary made no divinity whatsoever.
Why do you put such a narrow definition on what a mother is? There is no denying that Mary made no divinity. No mother makes in her child what comes from the father. But a woman becomes a mother by the very fact of conceiving and giving birth to a child. And Mary did conceive and give birth to this child who is God in the second person of the Trinity.
Peter did say that God had made this same Jesus both Lord and Christ. This is the same Jesus that Elisabeth called “the mother of my LORD.”
At least we “Prots” are now off the hook.
The evils within Catholicism will NEVER be addressed as long as *faithful* Catholics turn a blind eye to them and defend them.
Looks like the gates of hell are proceeding nicely against Catholicism.
The other questions I’ve asked remain unanswered.
Why do Catholics change what the Holy Spirit inspired the authors of the NT to write?
What’s the rationale behind essentially saying that the Holy Spirit did an inadequate job of inspiring Scripture?
Don’t you think that if the Holy Spirit thought that *mother of God* was a better, more accurate term that would clear up confusion, that He would have used it?
Lukewarm Catholics turned their back on Jesus. Lukewarm Catholics NEVER BELIEVED in the Real Presence. Lukewarm Catholics fell to the forces of Satan and he smiles every time every time he wins over. Been going on for 2,000 years. Satan laughs while Jesus weeps. But we know how it ends. Christ and His church will never be defeated no matter how much Satan tries.
The Bible was given to us by God himself, so many are confused by that. God being who he is, I’m sure he was able to not only give us his word, but preserve it as well.
Catholicism is scary because there are many ways it is similar to Christianity, but in the end it is another product from the father of lies.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.or in Koine Greek -- 17 και αποκριθεις ο ιησους ειπεν αυτω μακαριος ει σιμων βαρ ιωνα οτι σαρξ και αιμα ουκ απεκαλυψεν σοι αλλ ο πατηρ μου ο εν τοις ουρανοις
It would be illogical for Christ to say "you are rock and on me, this rock, I will build my Church" -- HE would have said "you are rocky and on me I will build my Church"
This is why we have Protestant groups like the Oneness Pentecostals who say the belief in the Trinity is false and why you have Monothelites who consider the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as just different phases (like ice, water and steam). I suppose that you, mamaB believe in the Trinity, right? But others don't -- and that's one example of differing interpretations
The Holy Spirit inspired it to be written in Greek. The Holy Spirit made the distinction of Petros and Petra and we can be sure He knew what He was doing.
>>The living Word comes not from Peter, but he is a foundation stone upon which the Church is built<<
Ephesians 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
No singular Peter there.
Thank you for correcting my error.
Don’t you think that if the Holy Spirit thought that *mother of God* was a better, more accurate term that would clear up confusion, that He would have used it?
I guess I’ve gotten carried away and forgotten what Zuriel pointed out, that Peter was the original subject of this thread. (Sorry, NYer)
So I will give my take on your questions, then defer conversations about Mary to another thread.
First, I do not presume to try to understand what the Holy Spirit thought.
As to the phrase “mother of Jesus,” it appears only three times in the Bible, twice in Luke 2, and once in Acts 1.
If you look at Luke 2, you will see that, while Mary in not called the mother of God, neither is Jesus called God. He is identified as Jesus throughout the chapter.
In Acts 1, Mary is identified as the mother of Jesus to distinguish her from the other women. I suppose she could have been called the mother of God, but the Holy Spirit did not choose to inspire Luke to use that term. I do not know why.
This will be my last post about Mary on this thread.
It's accurate to say that of the Twelve, Jesus appeared to St. Peter first. St. Paul tells us:
1 Cor 4:8-14
He [Jesus] was buried,
and He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve.
After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep;
then He appeared to James,
then to all the apostles;
and last of all, as to one untimely born,
He appeared to me also.
Another example of the pattern of prominence of Peter (Cephas).
I just learned that my dear Mother's descriptive nickname or an honest, stalwart guy ("a good Joe") is actually a stock phrase from a couple of centuries ago. That's how I think of St. Joseph.
In "Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible" (and Gill was not a Catholic, but an 18th century English Baptist pastor) he says that Jesus' commission to Peter to "confirm" the brethren was carried out in at least three ways: in Peter's gathering of all the disciples who had fled in one direction and another at Christ's crucifixion; in Peter's marvelous inauguration of the pubic preaching on Pentecost; and in Peter's leaving "two exceeding useful epistles for the strengthening of his brethren in all ages of time."
The text does not limit Peter to strengthening the Jewish brethren only; and apparently Gill sees no reason to do so.
I personally like the fact that he first strengthened his "brethren," the other Apostles who had fled. They also were Jews, of course; more importantly, they were Jesus' select men, the leaders of His Church. It is they whom Peter strengthens.
I’m referring to your postings regrading the Greek in Luke 1:28.
Similarly, I gave you my opinion; but mine was better founded. I said that "Chaire" (Hail) is used before either a name or a title; in English this name or title would usually be capitalized.
If you look up "Chaire" in a Bible Concordance (LINK) you'll see it's used 5 times in the NT, and each and every time it comes before a title: Rabbi, Master, King, King of the Jews, and Kecharitomene
Now turn your attention to this title "Kecharitomene." You'll find that this word is absolutely unique. It is used only once, to address Mary of Nazareth. The root word, "charitoo" (grace) is probably used hundreds of times in various combinations, but this form, "Kecharitomene," is not used at any other point in the NT ~or~ in the OT (for instance in the LXX Greek translation) ~or~ in any example of secular Greek literature.
That's why I was so painstaking about parsing the grammatical indicators.
The phrase "full of grace" (in English) is used, as I explained, of three NT persons (Stephen, Mary, and Jesus) and yet different terms are used in Greek in all three cases. A distinction is being made --- as one would expect, since they are related, but not equal or identical.
So I think my opinion of "Chaire Kecharitomene" is well-founded; and (so far!) neither you nor anybody else has yet been able to fault the grammatical analysis.
But perhaps you can do better with the grammar. I'm here to learn.
Not so. It's right there in the New Testament. Timothy and Titus were successors ordained by Paul. Ignatius of Antioch, a couple of decades later, is recognized as a successor of Paul, and Antioch has had bishop/patriarch successors continuously from then until now. The latest of the Orthodox successors in John X, who became Patriarch of Antioch in 2013.
Here is a link to the Oblates of St. Joseph website that gives information on it, if you are interested. We pray this rosary on our men’s ACTS retreat.
http://osjusa.org/prayers/st-joseph/st-joseph-rosary/
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.