The Perfection of Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
The Perfection of Mary

When Catholics surrendered to the Protestants in the Wars of Religion that were threatening their very survival, certain conditions were agreed upon and implemented at the Council of Trent. One of these conditions would be to say that Catholics do not worship Mary, but that we venerate Her. The same was to be in our surrender of the Saints – that we do not pray ‘to’ them but ‘with’ them.


Of course all such non-sense is word play. Certainly the Protestants would have rather seen every Catholic dead, but since the Papists kept up at least some level of fight, the Prots were amendable to compromise.

However, the Catholics, negotiating from duress, were certainly not being sincere. Afterall, though the brain may be able to distinguish, between “worship” and “venerate”, I do not believe that the Heart can split hairs that fine. For instance, take the Love of a Mother for her baby – is not such a love as infinite as it can be? There is no love greater than the love of a mother for her Baby. Now, are we to blame that mother if she can find in her heart not a greater love for God. No! But would God recent the Equality? Such is the case of Our Love for Mary. The Protestants expect us, on the conditions of our surrender at Trent, to hold back something of our Love for Mary. The Heart does not work like that. And God does not resent our love for His Highest Creation.

Praying to the Saints, was also an odd surrender in word play only. In fact Catholics do Pray to the Saints. When we lose our car keys, we pray to St. Anthony to find them for us. We do not ask St. Anthony to go off and bother Christ about such a trivial thing. That would be ridiculous! But, if St. Anthony is not too busy, or can delegate an Angel for the job, then we would really prefer to have our car keys back and would be so very grateful, Amen. Christ does not need to be bothered about everything, particularly when the Saints have proven that enough Grace can flow through them from Heaven to satisfy much of our Spiritual and Material needs.

Much of Protestant Hatred for Mary and the Saints comes from a cultivated ignorance. Mary is nothing but Totally Obedient to God. She reigns as Queen of Heaven entirely at God’s Pleasure and in utter submission to His Will. The Way it works is that God the Creator delegates His Authority and Graces. Anyone familiar with the Bible already knows that God is Providential through the Agency of His Angels. So, in exercising Authority over His Creation, He has appointed The Highest Creature, Mary, to be Mediatrix of All Grace. Being Mediatrix goes both ways – Love of God flows from God through Her to us, and our Love of God flows through Her to God. As a medium for Love Mary is the quintessential Superconductor – She offers absolutely no resistance.

The Saints, in their Life Times have proven that they had opened a channel within themselves to the Holy Spirit. Why should this Channel close up simply because they die? Their Souls do not die. If a Saint still wishes to be Helpful, why should we hate that? Why should we adopt doctrines that place Our Saints into segregated ghettos where all communication must necessarily be cut off? It is only in the interest of Satan that all these Saints be rendered useless.

At the practical level every Protestant would understand Marian Devotion if they were just to do one Rosary. It starts with the Creed, then an Our Father Prayer, then 3 Hail Mary’s, then a Glory be to the Father Son and Holy Spirit, and then five decades consisting each of another Our Father, 10 more Hail Mary’s, and another Glory Be… and since 1917 the added pray “O My Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of Hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need of thy mercy” – Mary, at Fatima Portugal had insisted that this prayer be added to each decade. So, if Protestants would open their minds only a crack they would see that Marian Devotion is inextricably bound up in Her Queenship of God’s Heaven, and Her acknowledgment that All Created Beings must bow before The Holy Trinity of God.

Protestants pretend that it does no harm to bypass Mary. Actually it does. Mary is the Woman of Revelations 12 – ‘dressed in the splendor of the Sun, with a crown of 12 Stars’. She has appeared just this way in Her Appearances. She is to fulfill the Prophecy of crushing the head of the serpent with Her heel. Now, if we would all obey Her and coordinate our attack against Satan, we could be that ‘heel’ – we could be Her Army. But the majority of nominal Christians have exiled Our Lady to the Wilderness – also Revelations 12.

You must consider why you insist that Catholic should renounce Our Lady and why you maintain a hatred for Our Lady. You must examine your hearts and decide why it is that you hate the Saints. Protestants seem to want to go to Heaven while hating everybody who is already there. There reasoning is that Christ is sufficient. Yes, certainly, but as King of Kings Christ is far above us all and may certainly set up levels of Authority. The Old Testament was familiar enough with the concept of Angels being ‘messengers of God’. God has always been seen as the most Holy, Sacred, Highest and Most Transcendent Being – the Ultimate Unapproachable. So, what is it but Pride that thinks all of that Hierarchy can be brushed aside for their ‘personal relationship’. Is this not claiming an Equality with God? Now, certainly there have been Saints beloved of God, to whom Christ has shown great condescension. But these Saints were known rather for their Humility then for their Pride. It was by their bowing before the lowest Soul in Heaven , and, yes, praying to them, that Christ came to Love them so heartily.
 
I'm going to get this out of the way for all the prots on the board ... Leo where's the scripture

As a Catholic I'm going to ask you to stop using pre-Vatican II arguements ... try using the faith as it stands today otherwise your painting an untrue image of the faith
biggrin.gif
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Much of Protestant Hatred for Mary
Leo I really wish I could yell at you so I could wake you up out of this dream. However that is not possable. So please listen to what I am about to say. We do not hate Mary! To say such is arrogence or maby ignorence if you truly have misjudged us. There glad we got that out of the way.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (4t0p @ Nov. 07 2003,10:35)]I'm going to get this out of the way for all the prots on the board ... Leo where's the scripture

As a Catholic I'm going to ask you to stop using pre-Vatican II arguements ... try using the faith as it stands today otherwise your painting an untrue image of the faith
biggrin.gif
What you should say is "Where is the Word of God?"

Look at the Scripture. It is a mere handful of pamphlets stapled together. These pamphlets were assembled in an Age when practically all knowledge was being orally transmitted. The Printing Press would not be invented for another 12 hundred years. the Oral Teaching WAS the Word of God. This Oral Transmission is the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

Prots are ever running into a contradiction. They treat as Holy and inviolable the Catholic Church's Publication of a few pamphlets that only go as far as commemorating the Life of Christ and just a few instances regarding the first generation of Apostles. But the Oral Teachings of this same Church are treated as anathema. It is a Satanic contrivance of logic.

Next. Divine Revelation never ceased. There was a solid continuation of Divine Revelation through all the centuries. They All supported the Doctrines of Christ from the Gospels accentuating the importance of Righteousness, Penance, Humility. The Licentiousness of Paul's Doctrines were not in any Saint. So it was that when the Protestant Reformation wished to renounce all Righteousness, it was necessary to throw out the Teachings of the Saints and the Apparitions of Our Lady. By pretending that Church History never happened and that Divine Revelation died with Paul, Protestants would have greater latitude to base all their doctrines on Paulian Theology. I find it satanically miraculous, though, that Protestants can believe in Paul while the Gospels which so contradict him are only pages away.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I find it satanically miraculous, though, that Protestants can believe in Paul while the Gospels which so contradict him are only pages away.
Show me these contrdictions.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]So it was that when the Protestant Reformation wished to renounce all Righteousness,
Again you falsly accuse prots. Have I got through your skull yet that we do not hate Mary?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (4t0p @ Nov. 07 2003,10:35)]I'm going to get this out of the way for all the prots on the board ... Leo where's the scripture

As a Catholic I'm going to ask you to stop using pre-Vatican II arguements ... try using the faith as it stands today otherwise your painting an untrue image of the faith
biggrin.gif
Dear 4top

I just caught your Pre-Vatican II thing.

Honesty! Are you really going along with this ploy of the Bishops to pretend that they are Infallible too? It was ridiculous enough for a Pope to claim infallibility, but for the council of fat cats, infiltrated to the brim with Free Masons, for them to claim the Necessary Inspiration of the Holy Spirit -- that would be the 'insult against the Holy Spirit' if ever there was one.

Look at where such arguments lead. First the Pope claims infallibility through the Holy Spirit. Then the Bishops. What stops the rest of us? But ask yourself, WHERE IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?

The Holy Spirit has appeared to us in the First Magnitude Saints. The Holy Spirit is nothing short of Christ Like. In fact, what Christ said of the Holy Spirit was true -- that we have seen greater Wonders from the Holy Spirit in the Saints then in even Christ Himself.

Have we seen this Holy Spirit in any Pope? Have we seen this Holy Spirit in any modern Bishop? No.

4Top, you can be a team player all you want, but I am going to be a Marian Catholic. Do you pay any attention to Mary? If you did you would know that Mary is asking the laity to pray for the clergy. She isn't asking the clergy to pray for the laity. This tells me one thing -- that it is the Clergy that has all the problems. Its not the laity that is infiltrated with Free Masons.

Now there are many things about Vatican II that I have no problem with. But I am not ready to say that it was a REWRITING OF ABSOLUTE TRUTHS. Church Councils are not doctrinally Infallible. When Vatican I reneges on Trent and Vatican II reneges on Vatican I is only goes to show that they are fishing around in moral and theological relativism.

If you want to know TRUE CATHOLICISM, the only sources you need to study is the Lives of the Saints. The Saints are the PROOF of the Catholic Religion. See what the Mystics did to enter the Presence of God, and do the same thing (at least in reference to your individual circumstances).

But I can concede one point.... if you can follow the stupid fat cat bishops while realizing that they are just stupid fat cat bishops, but follow them simply out of holy obedience, then I can see the merit. Obedience is a good thing in itself. God will know that He can count on you in Heaven.

However, I am caught in the dilemma presented by Marian/Catholic Prophecy -- that the Church in the End Times will be hijacked by antichristian elements. So, in these times it is better to take our Lead from Our Lady Herself then to okey the orders of Free Masons in Cardinal Hats.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The Saints are the PROOF of the Catholic Religion
Then I want no part in it and I dont see why anyone else would. Saint Jacinta was possessed by a demon yet you regard her as a saint why?
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]if you can follow the stupid fat cat bishops while realizing that they are just stupid fat cat bishops, but follow them simply out of holy obedience, then I can see the merit. Obedience is a good thing in itself. God will know that He can count on you in Heaven.
So now out of obedience to men we can follow false doctrine and be smiled upon for believing false doctrine because we are obedient?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 07 2003,10:50)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Much of Protestant Hatred for Mary
Leo I really wish I could yell at you so I could wake you up out of this dream. However that is not possable. So please listen to what I am about to say. We do not hate Mary! To say such is arrogence or maby ignorence if you truly have misjudged us. There glad we got that out of the way.
Dear Messeur Mrpopdrinker,

I am so glad that you don't hate Mary. So you must now accept her Queenship of Heaven and Earth, and you must certainly now accept membership into Her Church. You will no longer doubt her Perpetual Virginity. And in token of your new friendship with Our Lady you will study up on all of Her recent Apparitions so that you may discern what your duty will be in regards to the wishes of Our Queen.

But.... more than likely you say that you don't hate Mary simply because you're feelings aren't that strong one way or another. But that is not how it works. You either love or you hate. You are either attracted or you are repelled. So, are you willing to rephrase your statement to say that you are experiencing a spiritual attraction to Our Lady and that you are certain you are not repelling Her? I don't think you can. I think you are still full of contempt, and insult. Practically all Protestants are. Luther himself was taken aback by the spontaneous hatred for Mary that sprang up among his dumb followers -- without being taught to do it, they all seemed to grow in hate against Her.
 
yea, we know who Mary is. We don't hate her. But we do know that:
1. she had other children besides Christ
2. she was not a perpetual virgin
3. Christ alone can save us


You keep going on and on and on and on about all of this stuff about Mary this and Mary that. Leo do you even believe in Christ as the Messiah? Or is Mary your Messiah? Is she the only way your going to get to Heaven?

Yeesh...atleast Timor brings different things to throw at us.

Cory
 
I love Mary she is my sister in Messiah. She was a blessed woman and gave a birgen birth to our Messiah. However she did not remain a virgin. I do not believe she is the queen of heaven. She is a sinner like everyone else. She like me and hopfully you rejoices in God her saviour. Yeshua is were my eyes are they will not be set upon anyone else.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 07 2003,11:09)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I find it satanically miraculous, though, that Protestants can believe in Paul while the Gospels which so contradict him are only pages away.
Show me these contrdictions.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]So it was that when the Protestant Reformation wished to renounce all Righteousness,
Again you falsly accuse prots. Have I got through your skull yet that we do not hate Mary?
Messeur,

Contradictions are easy to find. Look at any pamphlet and see where Paul is quoted. If Paul must be quoted to demonstrate a theological proposition, it means that Christ would not support such a thing.

Christ gave only a few major sermonal Teachings -- the Sermon of the Mount, The Our Father Teachings, the Teachings of the Last Supper, and the Ascension Address. In all of these Teachings we have the emphasis on Works, Charity, Righteousness, and continuity with the Jewish Law.

Paul, on the otherhand, preaches that Righteousness is a boast and that works are a debt, that Grace cannot be earned, and that Salvation is a free gift of Faith. Paul teaches that there can be Salvation outside the Church -- that is, outside the Messianic Jewish Tradition of Law.

Indeed, there is alot to look at. You can read Church History -- both Catholic and Protestant and whenever you find a Doctrine that has lead to sin or conflict then rest assured that there is a quote from Paul somewhere behind it.

Read Acts. Read the Letters of Paul. It's all there, if you have eyes to see. Acts documents the first schism of the Original Church. It presents Paul as a murderous and contemptible liar. Paul's letters are a confession to the same. the trick is to forget for a moment that Paul is Worshipped as a Deity. Think of Paul as Sun Mung Moon or John Smith the Mormon. When Sun Mung Moon says that it is not he that speaks but Christ speaking through him, do you believe him? Why should you believe Paul? Why do you think Luke tells us Paul is a murderer, when he is the Apostle who wrote in his Gospel that we should know a Tree by its Fruit and that the False Apostle would be a wolf in sheeps clothing. Why do you think Luke tells us that Paul gave two different versions of his conversion story -- chapters 8 or 9 and then Chapter 23 -- one story with witnesses, and the later story where he could no longer claim any witnesses.

Acts tells us that Paul walked out on the Church -- despising both Barnabas and Mark who had been Real Disciples of Christ. Paul in Galatians makes it clear enough that he considers the Real Apostles to be his enemies. He gloats that he is the Pope of the Gentiles while Peter is only the head of the Church of the Circumcized as he contemptuously refers to the People of the Promise by a particularity of their penises.

No, really, if you had any discernment you wouldn't need to be asking me questions. Christ said that there would be a Wide Way and a Narrow Way. That there would be Tares amoung the Wheat. Paul is the Wide Way. Paul is the Tares among the Wheat. Its easy enough to see.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Paul, on the otherhand, preaches that Righteousness is a boast and that works are a debt, that Grace cannot be earned, and that Salvation is a free gift of Faith.
Well it is 1:00 here so I am not going to ho into it but I will make one point. Grace cannot be earned. What is the definition of grace? I am glad you asked! Grace is unmerited favor.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 08 2003,12:02)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Paul, on the otherhand, preaches that Righteousness is a boast and that works are a debt, that Grace cannot be earned, and that Salvation is a free gift of Faith.
Well it is 1:00 here so I am not going to ho into it but I will make one point. Grace cannot be earned. What is the definition of grace? I am glad you asked! Grace is unmerited favor.
Messeur,

Only Satan would have you believe that because Grace cannot be earned, then one should do nothing. This is Paul's Doctrine -- the acts of Righteousness are an actual insult to the Grace of God.

What is wrong with it. Well, first -- everyone owes God Obedience. Not for Grace. We are not to make demands of God, but God to make demands of us. This is perhaps the most Satanic aspect of Paul, that he wishes to relate to God simply on the terms of personal self interest. Who cares about Grace! If we do not deserve Grace then why are we even thinking about it? But it does not give us the option of not obeying the injunctions of Christ. The Spiritual World is God-Centric -- not Ego Centric.
 
Three questions:

I asked this before, but I didn't get a good answer:

1. Why is Mary's virginity so important? I mean, what is the big deal if she had other children? And I am serious about this. (And I'd really like to hear from 4top on this one too)

2. For the Protestants: (and I'm not talking about Emmerich, Joseph Smith, nor Mohammed) Why is it not possible for a person to write inspired books, along the lines of Paul and the other Apostles? I mean it. Why does God not speak to people, or if he does, then why aren't they holy scriptures?

3. For Leo: You speak of all of these Masons in the RCC. It is my understanding that: A. If someone becomes a Freemason, then they are excommunicatred, and B. that in Europe (unlike the US) Masons are very secrative, and would never wear a masonic ring or any similar token outside a lodge. So how do you know that a given Bishop is a mason?

Thank you all, and I hope that these questions will be answered in the spirit that they were asked...in a nice, seeking answers sort of way.
wink.gif
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Big J @ Nov. 08 2003,3:53)]Three questions:

I asked this before, but I didn't get a good answer:

1.  Why is Mary's virginity so important?  I mean, what is the big deal if she had other children?  And I am serious about this.  (And I'd really like to hear from 4top on this one too)

2.  For the Protestants:  (and I'm not talking about Emmerich, Joseph Smith, nor Mohammed)  Why is it not possible for a person to write inspired books, along the lines of Paul and the other Apostles?  I mean it.  Why does God not speak to people, or if he does, then why aren't they holy scriptures?

3.  For Leo:  You speak of all of these Masons in the RCC.  It is my understanding that:  A.  If someone becomes a Freemason, then they are excommunicatred, and B.  that in Europe (unlike the US) Masons are very secrative, and would never wear a masonic ring or any similar token outside a lodge.  So how do you know that a given Bishop is a mason?

Thank you all, and I hope that these questions will be answered in the spirit that they were asked...in a nice, seeking answers sort of way.  
wink.gif
Why is Mary's Virginity important? Firstly, because Religion is Real. It is more than a belief system where all the details are optional. Yes there are ditzes out there who design a Religion that they are willing to 'believe' in -- without ever realizing that their subjective concurrance to all the ingredients do not in the least way make them True. So, it is important to acknowledge Mary's Virginity because She insists upon it. All the Mystic Saints who have been to Heaven and back insist upon the Perpetual Virginity. And then we can see that Mary had to be Perpetually Virgin or Christ would not be God. Mary had to be Immaculately Conceived so that She could be the New Eve -- the Spiritual Woman that God had originally Created to procreate the New Angels. The Christ could not be born out of the Animal Nature of Original Sin. I suspect that Mary did not have animal genitalia -- that Her organs of generation were internal and spiritual. In this Way Christ was not a Man of Original Sin, but He was both the New Adam and the Son of God. To say that Mary was an ordinary woman who could go back to copulating with Joseph to have ordinary monkeychildren would be to make Jesus just another monkeybaby.

For question number two -- the Prots are in a double bind. By renouncing the Catholic Saints and Divine Revelation -- which was most inconvenient to their own doctrines -- they have renounced the right to declare their own revelations. The second problem is that when they renounced Our Lady -- who is Mediatrix of All Grace -- She in turn renounced them. Now, Protestants receive their consolations only from Satan. This reminds me of an interesting point -- that other non-Catholic Religions, where they don't preclude a Perfect Female Creation of the Creator -- a Mary Type -- then they also share in Grace. The Hindu Saints call Her Shakti -- and describe Her more as a Necessary Spiritual Entity -- That God is Male and Creator, and that there would need be a Divine Female -- a Creature through which the Providence of the Creator could flow -- a transduction point between the Spiritual and the Material.

3. The Freemasons. If they catch them being a Free Mason then they are excommunicated. But the Masons are a secret society. Only the little dues paying smucks have those little symbol things on their bumpers. The high eschalons -- the Illuminati are organized like Secret Cells. They really do have those secret signs. That is how Bush gets all those damned election contributions -- when he does one of those dinners or goes on TV and does the secret Mason nose-pick or whatever, every Mason in American goes "Oh Crap" and reaches for their check books, because they have to obey the sign.

How do I know there are Masons in the Church. Well, Europe is full of them. And Pope Leo in the Nineteenth Century was convinced that sincere Catholic Bishops could not possibly be acting the way that many of his bishops were acting, without being Masons. Was he paranoid? (aren't all Leo's paranoid?) But if he wasn't, it is difficult for any organization to ever shake out Masons. A Mason Cardinal will bring up Mason Bishops who will give the best Parishes to Mason Priests.

Why would a Mason even become a priest. This involves the Nature of Free Masonry -- they are dedicated to Worldly Success -- almost like a Faustian Deal with the Devil. When still in college a young mason will be confronted by an old man who will give him the highest Sign and say non-chalantly "Young man, you should go into the Church". That is it. The young man, no matter how stupid or secular he is at heart, will know that at least he will one day be a Bishop, if not Cardinal -- maybe even Pope. Why do you think Bishops make so much money -- the Masons in the Church insist upon it -- so that Masons assigned to infiltrate the Church won't complain that they are being deprived out of their promised success. The Church could shut down Mason Infiltration tomorrow if they would insist upon universal Clerical Poverty. But it will never happen -- not unless we have another Pope Leo.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Leo Volont @ Nov. 08 2003,1:08)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 08 2003,12:02)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Paul, on the otherhand, preaches that Righteousness is a boast and that works are a debt, that Grace cannot be earned, and that Salvation is a free gift of Faith.
Well it is 1:00 here so I am not going to ho into it but I will make one point. Grace cannot be earned. What is the definition of grace? I am glad you asked! Grace is unmerited favor.
Messeur,

Only Satan would have you believe that because Grace cannot be earned, then one should do nothing.  This is Paul's Doctrine -- the acts of Righteousness are an actual insult to the Grace of God.

What is wrong with it.  Well, first -- everyone owes God Obedience.  Not for Grace.  We are not to make demands of God, but God to make demands of us.  This is perhaps the most Satanic aspect of Paul, that he wishes to relate to God simply on the terms of personal self interest.   Who cares about Grace!  If we do not deserve Grace then why are we even thinking about it?  But it does not give us the option of not obeying the injunctions of Christ.  The Spiritual World is God-Centric -- not Ego Centric.
I nor Paul never said that. Maby you are thinking of Martin Luther when you say Paul? He is the one that said we are saved by faith alone. A doctrine I have problems with. Of course we should obey God! No one would deny this. Who cares about grace? Are you so misguided you cant see it? Without grace we would all most likly be going to hell. It is by his grace that his son died painfully that I may enter the gates of heaven. It is not through Mary nor anyone else I can enter but through Yeshua alone.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]the Prots are in a double bind.  By renouncing the Catholic Saints and Divine Revelation -- which was most inconvenient to their own doctrines
Well yes we have renounced those. As we are all saints. However we never renounce nor will we renounce divine revelation. Kenneth Hagin himself said he had visions. Not that it is his visions that make me believe.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]It presents Paul as a murderous and contemptible liar.  Paul's letters are a confession to the same.  the trick is to forget for a moment that Paul is Worshipped as a Deity.
No Paul is not worshipped as deity. Yes Paul was at first a murderer. But then he was converted and his name changed from Saul to Paul.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Big J @ Nov. 08 2003,3:53)]1.  Why is Mary's virginity so important?  I mean, what is the big deal if she had other children?  And I am serious about this.  (And I'd really like to hear from 4top on this one too)
Currently the Catholic Church doesn't maintain this perpetual Virginity nonsense that Leo speaks of, since Mary did have other children with Jospeh, her husband. The importance of Mary still lays in the fact that for some reason God chose her above all other women of the world to bear His Son, thus us crazy Catholic's believe that if God chose this one person she's probably pretty important thus she is held at a level of esteem [poorly phrased but it's early and I have to go to work =o] above most others.

When dealing with her it is the Immaculate Conception that we celebrate. When you celebrate the conception of God's Child in Human form it's somewhat difficult to leave out the mother =o
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Leo Volont @ Nov. 07 2003,11:16)]Honesty!  Are you really going along with this ploy of the Bishops to pretend that they are Infallible too?  It was ridiculous enough for a Pope to claim infallibility, but for the council of fat cats, infiltrated to the brim with Free Masons, for them to claim the Necessary Inspiration of the Holy Spirit -- that would be the 'insult against the Holy Spirit' if ever there was one.

Look at where such arguments lead.  First the Pope claims infallibility through the Holy Spirit.  Then the Bishops.  What stops the rest of us?  But ask yourself, WHERE IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?
Research your Church papal infallibility has only been invoked twice in nearly 2000 years ... (1) Jesus being the only Son of God was both Human and divine and being One with the Holy Spirit and God the Father devises the Holy Trinity ~ (2) I don't remember two off the top of my head but I'll try to find it at some point this weekend


Find a Christian who will argue against #1 Leo, infallibility is not an on going thing, everything that the Bishop of Rome says is NOT neccesarily the Word of God given to us through men, that is not what the infallibility doctrine states, kthnx ;D
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 08 2003,6:13)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Leo Volont @ Nov. 08 2003,1:08)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mrpopdrinker @ Nov. 08 2003,12:02)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Paul, on the otherhand, preaches that Righteousness is a boast and that works are a debt, that Grace cannot be earned, and that Salvation is a free gift of Faith.
Well it is 1:00 here so I am not going to ho into it but I will make one point. Grace cannot be earned. What is the definition of grace? I am glad you asked! Grace is unmerited favor.
Messeur,

Only Satan would have you believe that because Grace cannot be earned, then one should do nothing.  This is Paul's Doctrine -- the acts of Righteousness are an actual insult to the Grace of God.

What is wrong with it.  Well, first -- everyone owes God Obedience.  Not for Grace.  We are not to make demands of God, but God to make demands of us.  This is perhaps the most Satanic aspect of Paul, that he wishes to relate to God simply on the terms of personal self interest.   Who cares about Grace!  If we do not deserve Grace then why are we even thinking about it?  But it does not give us the option of not obeying the injunctions of Christ.  The Spiritual World is God-Centric -- not Ego Centric.
I nor Paul never said that. Maby you are thinking of Martin Luther when you say Paul? He is the one that said we are saved by faith alone. A doctrine I have problems with. Of course we should obey God! No one would deny this. Who cares about grace? Are you so misguided you cant see it? Without grace we would all most likly be going to hell. It is by his grace that his son died painfully that I may enter the gates of heaven. It is not through Mary nor anyone else I can enter but through Yeshua alone.
See, Messeur, you insist on slapping the Virgins face. She asks for your service against Satan and you openly despise Her, and then think that Her Son will take your side against Her. Only Satanic Pride can make you think that Christ would pick you over The Creator's Most Perfect Creation.

About Paul. You need to read Paul. It has been the Catholic party line to tell Prots that they were taking Paul out of context. but after carefully reading Paul, I decided that was simply disingenuous. Paul's arguments against the law, against good works, and for an empty and actionless Faith are simply too structured, too much repeated and too much refined from first letter to last for us to suppose he does not mean what he says -- that Christianity is a huge Free Ride to Heaven as long as you support the Ministry of Paul with those Gold and Silver Coins.
 
Back
Top