fb

Reply To: New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate

Forums Fiction General Writing Discussions New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate Reply To: New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate

#143414
Cathy
@this-is-not-an-alien

Dang I’m really late..

Ack sorry it’s taken a bit for me to get back here XD. Where was I –ah yes the Pit of Despair. Lol jk. Ok church hierarchy and Mary coming up, I’m gonna focus on Mary since we all kinda agree (at least @noah-cochran agrees with me (: ) that we need ministers to be overseers and elders and bishops are a logical conclusion the rest of the Catholic hierarchy pretty much continues that logical conclusion on the worldwide scale requiring a little more hierarchy to keep it universal and the pope is the biggy there but I’m gonna start with Mary and her “Immaculate Conception”
*disclaimer* I’m not going to try to convince you, arguments are at best informative and that’s how I’m gonna use them *disclaimer end*
Now to start the basics we believe that Mary gave birth to Jesus–Both God and Man, therefore she is Mother of God; we do not divorce His Humanity from His Divinity.
We believe she is the “New Eve” as Jesus is the “New Adam”
So without further ago, the first Scriptural reference to Mary’s Immaculate Conception is in the “Hail Mary” which Catholics regularly pray that finds its basis in Luke 1:26-38 where the angel Gabriel appears to her and says “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” (just wanna note how “greatly troubled” she was with the saying not the fact that an angel just appeared to her and angels are notably pretty dang terrifying when they do that!)
Now “full of grace” here the word is Kecharitomene and isn’t found anywhere else, and it acts as a title like a name and we all know what kinda trouble comes to anybody who gets a new name from God ;). But “Full of Grace” implies full receptivity to grace and full receptivity necessitates human perfection made so entirely by God’s intervention. Interestingly enough it also acts as the superlative (Greek doesn’t have superlatives) to Hannah which simply means “Grace” it’s also a noun not a verb so that cuts out “be filled with grace” as a sweet little greeting that she was greatly troubled by. So the angel hails her by a new name “Full of Grace” the superlative for Grace and that’s one indication she is indeed perfect.
There’s also Revelation 12 that we interpret the “woman” as Mary but Scriptures has so many layers of symbolism and interpretation too, it’s an interesting read for this. Next we go all the way back to Genesis 3:15, remembering that we see Mary as the New Eve “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head (/seed, decendences etc) and you shall bruise his heel.” He tells the snake all that and so we interpret His Words to be “The Woman (=remember how Jesus always called Mary “Woman” which btw was a term of respect that was even kinda awkward to use to your mother but not unheard of) will crush the devil’s heel” but this sounds utterly stupid if the Son of Man is the one who crushes the Serpent, but it actually doesn’t at a second glance with the understanding that Mary is perfect and therefore can have perfect enmity with Satan because he holds no control over her through sin and by virtue of her perfection she crushes the devil’s plans by her receptivity to grace.
“Finally” (bc I’m lazy and this is already a super long post but you can get like 6 DVDs more if you search The Bible and the Virgin Mary-Journey Through Scriptures, demonstrated by Matthew Leonard) it was just fitting for Mary to be perfect because she carried Perfection Itself in her being. As Catholics we believe that baptism takes away not just Original Sin but all previous sin and if this can be done by water and the Spirit how much more so His Presence in human flesh without any constraints of time. So it’s just very fitting and beautiful for us, the Virgin’s Immaculate Conception.
Anyway back to Church hierarchy *thunks head on desk* yeah I’ll get back to that this is already gonna be super long…


@r-m-archer

WE HAVE A CALVINIST!!!!
Lol, hello fellow ENFP! *bowls over with hug*

Medjugorje. Wow okay where do I begin? I’ve never been there myself, but if God intends for me to go He will make sure of it Just bear in mind that the Vatican hasn’t recognised these apparition reports as authentic (i’m not sure what the official consensus is, I could be wrong) but they have recognised Medjugorje as a pilgrimage site. Some of the visionaries allegedly still see her and some allegedly don’t. —-So I personally think there is something incredible there. Still my advice is to question everything no matter what

Wow that sounds really interesting! And yeh, always always be careful of supernatural events. But is it just me, or is this becoming more common lately, I mean, I met a survivor of the Rwanda Massacre who wrote some books about visionaries she lived near at Kibeho and about a boy who allegedly met Jesus and it seems like it’s just getting more common or something which I’m not sure is a good omen XDD.
But yeah, be wary but also really neat!!

Why celibacy, when deacons are described as married men in 1 Timothy 3?

Good question! Now I actually had to look this up a while ago one time and priest celibacy is not actually indisputable Church canon; it’s a particular discipline priests and those who choose to consecrate themselves to God as virgins and religious in that particular manner do that. There are some exceptions within the priesthood but as St Paul said somewhere or other for several chapters “married life is good, but to remain free to serve God is better for those who are called to it”. Additionally, all the Apostles–which we believe modeled bishops and the priesthood as a whole–were all single by the end of it. Peter was married but after we followed Jesus his wife is referred to as his sister in the original language, indicating a lack of sexual intercourse afterward plus “anyone who has left mother and father and wife and children for My Sake” and Peter proclaiming they’d all done that. So it’s a dedication, a discipline Catholic holy orders (priesthood, convent life etc) take to offer themselves entirely to God and His service in this very specific way.

That seems like a Pharisaical addition to the law. The Passover, as biblically instructed, was the responsibility of the heads of households.

Lol, see golden calf and the Levities hacking everybody who fell into paganism and God saying “ok, you guys [non-Levities] just get away from My offerings and holy places and anybody who’s not a Levite will be put to death if they come near, now it’s the Levites’ jobs to do this offering”

Cathy wrote: But the point is, the entire universe cried out at Christ’s Death That’s really cool!

IKR!!! I’m a total geek for that stuff!!

Because the New Covenant is a spiritual fulfillment of the Old Covenant. We don’t circumcise anymore because we now experience circumcision of the heart in a spiritual sense. Jesus as the “new manna” is no less miraculous and supernatural; He fills and satisfies us like the manna filled and satisfied the Israelites in the desert. Now, it is interesting that there are so many references to a consumption of Christ and I think that bears further study (what would that mean in a spiritual sense?), but I still think it’s a metaphor. One that ought to be taken seriously according to its character as metaphor rather than simile—implying it was to be a very close comparison—but still metaphor. We’re also told we don’t live on bread alone, but on the Word of God (interestingly enough, Jesus was the Word, which wouldn’t have been nearly so meaningful when that passage was first introduced in Deuteronomy), which is evidently a spiritual satisfaction rather than physical. There are similar metaphors equating Jesus with water, but we understand them to be metaphor. What makes the bread different?

Alright I see you point there, tho I still think it’s literal. The spiritual sense that we believe for the references to the consumption of Christ is that His Life lives in our souls and that in eating His Flesh and Drinking His Blood we are given His Nature inasfar as we receive Him in a very real sense, in a very spiritual sense and the whole nine yards I guess.
As for the metaphors equating Jesus with water we do believe God the Holy Spirit does in fact become present in a very real sense during the sacrament of baptism to purify us of Original Sin, so I mean, it can vary on the different verses you’re thinking of but we don’t see those as just metaphors either. But that said the bread and wine have more of the focus usually for all the various arguments above that I will not retype lol.
But the bread is given God’s Nature in the Eucharist while the water is given as the washing of the Holy Spirit in what we Catholics also take in a very real sense so there’s not as much difference as you think there for us. They’re both sacraments and both bring about a very real spiritual change and involve God’s Presence. 🙂

To be completely fair, this is something that I have struggled with more than once. And I solidly believe in predestination. So I understand the struggle here. But here’s the thing. Without sin, we can’t understand grace. Without separation from God, we can’t understand salvation. Without fear and hate, we can’t understand love and peace. Without injustice, justice is meaningless. The contrast of a fallen world with a glorious God is necessary to our understanding of His character. And we still have to come to an understanding of God in our own way. He chooses us, not the other way around, but He does reveal Himself in ways that He knows will connect with us personally. He designed us; He knows how to reach us. And those unique personal experiences with Him are part of what build and strengthen our relationship with Him. But again, they have to have something to contrast with.

Eh fair. Disagree with predestination still but I can definitely agree with without sin we can’t understand grace or mercy, and pain I think deepens our capacity for love if we allow it to.

Yes. Because our character is developed due to our salvation, not for our salvation. Our character grows as we strive to be more like Christ, until we come to full spiritual maturity (or as near as we can get before Heaven). Kind of getting into what you asked about “why aren’t we all sent to either Heaven or Hell right away?” again… God created Earth on purpose. He created Earth and made mankind stewards over it. That stewardship is now the responsibility of His Church, and we must have Christ-like character in order to be faithful stewards of that calling. His Kingdom is not limited to Heaven; His will is to be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. His Kingdom is a spiritual reality overlapping with a physical world.

Ok, that makes sense, interesting read 🙂

Lol, it wasn’t a typo. Seems pretty fitting. I approve. XD

Lol thanks!

I wondered if the title was on purpose, it seemed like something you would do.

What have I done to you? You are already so acclimated to me you don’t even flinch! How am I even supposed to surpass the bar of my insanity, I don’t think we’ve even known each other for more than a month or two and you’re already completely immune!! This is a new record guys!!!
Lol yeah, I am pretty predictable 😂

First of all, what are you’re thoughts on the verses and points I made? How would you explain them?

Heheh *hides huge pile of notes just from all of Romans connecting with the whole of the Bible and…researchs lotta researchs on all those verses very invested now…*
Uh, just a sec! *will probably be weeks, or months, or years or minutes…*

I’m a little confused…xD A rapid dog does not have the conscious soul like a human, I can say that much.

My point is the primary different between the conscious soul of a human and the soul of an animal is freewill, we can even go back and forth on intelligence the way animals are so smart and have so much personality. But we can’t really hold animals responsible for misbehavior generally because they don’t have the freewill to go against instinct, so an animal can’t be condemned to hell. I don’t see there level of intelligence as a real factor there as much as appreciation for the depravity of evil and we know different people have different levels of understanding there, but they still couldn’t be held any more accountable than an animal for their bad actions unless they had the capacity to choose those actions. So if someone’s predestined to be evil then how can they be held accountable for being evil, especially if animals can’t be held accountable for their evil deeds?

There is sin because not all are elected, and even the elected and born again ones are still sinners, but now they are sinners that can also bear fruits of the spirit (duel natured creature). As for why God doesn’t just send his elect to heaven and his non-elect to hell, their are two equally important answers: One, for His glory. — And it is a hate from humans, so I’m not sure that applies to anything here.

Lol there’s probably no way where gonna reach an agreement here but I see your logic. Still don’t agree with it but at least we now know both sides of the argument.

I have another question for you Cathy, as I we rap up some of our other major subjects. Why do you believe in baptism by sprinkling? In fact, using the word “baptism” and “sprinkling” in the same sentence is kinda a paradox. Baptism means to immerse, and is a symbol of Jesus going into the ground in death and coming out again in victory over death and sin. In addition to this, all the examples found in the bible are by immersion, so why biblically unprecedented sprinkling?

Why’s the manner of baptism important?
*shrug* I guess we started the baptism by sprinkling because we baptize babies and it was safer that way. I bet there’s probably some Vatican council on it somewhere (I mean, honestly, there was a council on whether or not it was sinful to drink coffee lol) I’ll just look it up *one brief search later* Council of Ravenna in A.D. 1311 I haven’t taken the time to actually look it up lol but here’s a very quick link  

As for the Peter = Pope controversy verse, here is the full verse: “And I say also unto thee, That though art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” He is saying that Peter is Peter, but He, Jesus, is the foundation of the church. In Matt. 16:20, a couple verse later in the same context, it says: “Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.” Why would Jesus say that if the context was talking about Peter’s great responsibility? It wouldn’t. Jesus says that because He was talking about himself.

I guess, but wasn’t the even bigger context that being when Peter announced ‘You are the Christ”? I always figured He was talking about that 🙂
You know something…when I invent a time machine I’m gonna go back and ask Jesus, that might make this whole argument easier 😏 Lol…sorry…XD. I bet we’ll be exchanging I told you sos in Heaven forever…

Let me clarify before you take my words in the opposite direction I intended. xD Belief and good works are indeed evidence (or reflection as you used) that we are born again, that we are the elect, that we are bound for the ultimate end of heaven. Now, before I get to the KoH, let me clarify my points, because I articulated them atrociously. What do good works and believing do for us in this life? They allow us to feel the presence and blessings of God (enjoy His grace), and they glorify Him. Do you agree with me there Archer? As for the KoH, I must admit, it is hard to draw exact lines on what it is. I will say this though, if you are in the KoH, you are enjoying the grace and closeness of God, and you cannot be sinning (one very common way to be in the KoH or press into as some would say is to be in church service, without sin of course). I kinda mixed up two different concepts, so I probably shouldn’t have even brought up the KoH.

Oh that sounds like the Catholic “being in a state of grace”, except “plus” the prior sins have been confessed and forgiven too so it’s not just “not doing anything sinful right now coz I don’t have any inclination” which was probably what you were saying anyway XD.

Okay, so I’m gonna kinda concede a point here. Other than Jesus being the one to lead the Lord’s Supper and Foot Washing (which are two ordiances that are explicitly prescribed to be done by all Christians), there are not other places that clearly say ministers should oversee those ordiances. However, we do read that all things should be done decently and in order (1 Cor. 14:40), and that ministers are to be overseers (Acts 20:28), and taking both of those things together, I believe that elders/bishops should be the ones administering those ordiances. Can it be done without them in an orderly and decent way? Possibly, but I still believe that to keep things running properly and ideally, ministers should be the ones to do it. @rusted-knight is welcome to bring other verse if he finds any.

I agree with @noah-cochran, the more I’ve looked at it the more you see examples of it in effect rather than commands to do so because the Apostles frequently address their epistles to elders, pastors, bishops (depending on the translation, sigh, I’ve beginning to get your point there too Noah!). The Catholic hierarchy of priests and bishops is just a little more complex than most Christian elders and leaders because we really focus on trying to have united beliefs in every part of the world and still have care and ability to adjust to the needs of individuals in every parish, all that without compromising any matters of Faith and morals by giving in to peer pressure.

Two questions about absolute predestination: First, if I sin, and God predestined that it would happen, He is then causing me to sin, so thus He would be sinning (even if I am still responsible, God sinned as well). How do you explain that? Secondly, I find no verses stating that absolutism is true. We find predestination in the context of sending his elect to heaven one day, but that is it. What verse would you use in support of this belief of absolutism?

*My little Catholic butt that don’t believe in no predestination gleefully reading over here*😇

Don't let the voices in your head drive you insane;only some of them can drive; most are underage

Pin It on Pinterest