Catholicism vs Protestantism

[Bede]

My brother bede,
1. I believe in Jesus though Paul never come and preach in my church. I am not like Thomas that only believe Jesus back to live if he put his finger on Jesus body.
But in this real story Jesus come to him and let him put his finger on Him, and make him believe His resurrection.

So yes in this story people change after see miracle,

But you are saying that God has to send Paul back to earth before you will believe he is alive in heaven and interceding for us.

On Jesus parable about Lazarus and abraham, seem to me this story is only parable.

Only a parable! Are you suggesting Jesus taught a falsehood in a parable?

This is big different, my brother. I able to talk to my living friend on earth that life next to me, it doesn't mean I able to talk to him when he die.
Abraham able to talk to the rich man in hades doesn't mean he able to talk to living human on earth.

The point is that he was able to hear the requiests of those not on earth and respond to them.

Than you believe Mary appear to human on earth.

You also believe the appearance of the dead will not change living human, there is moses book, if living human do not believe Moses book, they not going to believe when the dead back to earth talk to them

Than why you believe Mary talk to living human?

In Jesus' story Abraham judged that they would not listen.
That is not an absolute. In other circumstances people may have listened.
If God sends Mary to warn us then we should listen. But most will not.

Yes I never read on the Bible the Lord send abraham or other prophet back to life to preach. I don't know why you believe Mary back to earth as a prophet? On earth, Mary wasn't a prophet.

I called Mary a prophet because she does what prophets do - speak out about God and call for repentance.

 

[Bede]

What is your basis for saying this? Mary was selected to give birth to Jesus, nothing more; how did she keep the Word of God so perfectly in your opinion?

There is a big problem in discussing Mary with the majority of Protestants (not all).
They have expelled Mary from their theology and regard her as little more than a surrogate womb for Jesus, borrowed from Joseph and handed back to him after Jesus' birth.

As an Othohodox put it
There is no room for the Mother of God in a "reduced Christology." Protestant theologians simply have nothing to say about her. Yet to ignore the Mother means to misinterpret the Son. On the other hand, the person of the Blessed Virgin can be properly understood and rightly described only in a Christological setting and context. Mariology is to be but a chapter in the treatise on the Incarnation, never to be extended into an independent "treatise." Not, of course, an optional or occasional chapter, not an appendix. It belongs to the very body of doctrine. The Mystery of the Incarnation includes the Mother of the Incarnate.

To understand Catholic (and Orthodox) Mariology (not Mariolotry) is a big topic. It's like trying to explain Christianity to an atheist. I don't mean that to be insulting but I see the gap as that wide. Moreover to some extent the different topics within Mariology interlock so that addressing one piece needs some understanding of the others.

Mary was chosen and ordained to serve in the mystery of the Incarnation in a unique way. She was set apart and given a unique privilege and position. She was given a unique relationship with God even before the Incarnation and a unique role in the salvation of mankind.

To answer your question, Mary was immaculately conceived (without the effects of original sin). She remained sinless all her life and was assumed directly into heaven at the end of her life.

Mary is unique as a creature of God. She was carefully prepared and her role did not stop at just giving birth to and bringing up Jesus. Her being “ever-virgin” is not just a physical thing but spiritual or inner attitude. She was totally given over to God. “She ever preserved virginity in mind, and soul, and body” as St. John of Damascus put it.

But, and this is important “What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 487)

 

[WithinReason]

Where do they differ and why?

Where: [1.] Soteriology (matters salvation). Why: [1.] Final Authority.

Do both lead to salvation?

No. The theological (especially matters soteriological) differences are as night and day.

Why or why not?

Salvation is in Christ Jesus alone.

Can a Catholic be a Christian? Yes. Are all Catholics Christian? No.
Can a Protestant be a Christian? Yes. Are all Protestants Christian? No.

How should we treat each other?

With Christ Jesus' love and truth.

 

[Dan_473]

Why: [1.] Final Authority.

interesting situation when it comes to final authority, imo.

for Catholics I think that would be the Pope.

most Protestants would say the Bible.
an observation, though:
the Bible is a set of words, so in practice it's the reader of those words that becomes the final authority.

I don't know much about the Orthodox.
I think I heard an Orthodox priest say one time that the entire church cannot be in error.
I think in that case the entire church would become a kind of final authority.

 

[Bede]

Can a Catholic be a Christian? Yes. Are all Catholics Christian? No.

On what definition of Christian do you base that judgement?

 

[jaybo]

There is a big problem in discussing Mary with the majority of Protestants (not all).
They have expelled Mary from their theology and regard her as little more than a surrogate womb for Jesus, borrowed from Joseph and handed back to him after Jesus' birth.

As an Othohodox put it
There is no room for the Mother of God in a "reduced Christology." Protestant theologians simply have nothing to say about her. Yet to ignore the Mother means to misinterpret the Son. On the other hand, the person of the Blessed Virgin can be properly understood and rightly described only in a Christological setting and context. Mariology is to be but a chapter in the treatise on the Incarnation, never to be extended into an independent "treatise." Not, of course, an optional or occasional chapter, not an appendix. It belongs to the very body of doctrine. The Mystery of the Incarnation includes the Mother of the Incarnate.

To understand Catholic (and Orthodox) Mariology (not Mariolotry) is a big topic. It's like trying to explain Christianity to an atheist. I don't mean that to be insulting but I see the gap as that wide. Moreover to some extent the different topics within Mariology interlock so that addressing one piece needs some understanding of the others.

Mary was chosen and ordained to serve in the mystery of the Incarnation in a unique way. She was set apart and given a unique privilege and position. She was given a unique relationship with God even before the Incarnation and a unique role in the salvation of mankind.

To answer your question, Mary was immaculately conceived (without the effects of original sin). She remained sinless all her life and was assumed directly into heaven at the end of her life.

Mary is unique as a creature of God. She was carefully prepared and her role did not stop at just giving birth to and bringing up Jesus. Her being “ever-virgin” is not just a physical thing but spiritual or inner attitude. She was totally given over to God. “She ever preserved virginity in mind, and soul, and body” as St. John of Damascus put it.

But, and this is important “What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 487)

Where in the Bible does it say that Mary was immaculately conceived? And where does it say in the Bible that she was "without the effects of original sin"? And where in the Bible does it say that Mary is unique as a creature [?] of God?

 

[Bede]

Where in the Bible does it say that Mary was immaculately conceived? And where does it say in the Bible that she was "without the effects of original sin"? And where in the Bible does it say that Mary is unique as a creature [?] of God?

Where does it say in the Bible that everything has to be explicitly stated in the Bible?
It doesn't.
Sola scriptura is unbiblical never mind sola explicita.

 

[Wansvic]

Thomas Aquinas was explaining why Mt 28:19 uses "name" in the singular.



You have given your personal opinion on water baptism but you keep ignoring the plain words of Jesus "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" .

You quote why some human being thought Jesus used a singular name in Matt. 28:19. And you neglect to answer my question; how did the great catholic theologian come to his conclusion?

I provided scripture that witnesses the truth of what Jesus' comment concerning the use of a singular name meant.

 

[Wansvic]

Why? What do you think I will find there that you cannot?

My response was in answer to erroneous comments you made. I know what is there.

 

[Wansvic]

There is a big problem in discussing Mary with the majority of Protestants (not all).
They have expelled Mary from their theology and regard her as little more than a surrogate womb for Jesus, borrowed from Joseph and handed back to him after Jesus' birth.

As an Othohodox put it
There is no room for the Mother of God in a "reduced Christology." Protestant theologians simply have nothing to say about her. Yet to ignore the Mother means to misinterpret the Son. On the other hand, the person of the Blessed Virgin can be properly understood and rightly described only in a Christological setting and context. Mariology is to be but a chapter in the treatise on the Incarnation, never to be extended into an independent "treatise." Not, of course, an optional or occasional chapter, not an appendix. It belongs to the very body of doctrine. The Mystery of the Incarnation includes the Mother of the Incarnate.

To understand Catholic (and Orthodox) Mariology (not Mariolotry) is a big topic. It's like trying to explain Christianity to an atheist. I don't mean that to be insulting but I see the gap as that wide. Moreover to some extent the different topics within Mariology interlock so that addressing one piece needs some understanding of the others.

Mary was chosen and ordained to serve in the mystery of the Incarnation in a unique way. She was set apart and given a unique privilege and position. She was given a unique relationship with God even before the Incarnation and a unique role in the salvation of mankind.

To answer your question, Mary was immaculately conceived (without the effects of original sin). She remained sinless all her life and was assumed directly into heaven at the end of her life.

Mary is unique as a creature of God. She was carefully prepared and her role did not stop at just giving birth to and bringing up Jesus. Her being “ever-virgin” is not just a physical thing but spiritual or inner attitude. She was totally given over to God. “She ever preserved virginity in mind, and soul, and body” as St. John of Damascus put it.

But, and this is important “What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 487)

The problem with accepting the Catholics view off Mary is that scripture does not support the claims that Mary was sinless and remained a virgin:

"For ALL have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" Rom 3:23


In an effort to assist you, the meaning of the statement that Joseph "knew" her not in the scripture below refers to sexual intercourse.

"Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS." Matt 1:24-25


Also, Jesus had siblings:

Mark 6:3
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Matt 13:55-56
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
And his sisters, are they not all with us?

 

[jaybo]

Where does it say in the Bible that everything has to be explicitly stated in the Bible?
It doesn't.
Sola scriptura is unbiblical never mind sola explicita.

So people can invent any kind of story that they want and, since it doesn't appear in the Bible, it must be accepted as true? Sorry, but if somebody claims something to be true and has nothing to back it up most rational people won't accept it. Otherwise you can make up anything that you want, claim it's true, and expect sane people to believe it?

 

[jaybo]

I repeat my questions in a different form: 1) Where does it say that Mary was immaculately conceived? 2) where does it say that she was "without the effects of original sin"? and 3) where does it say that Mary is unique as a creature [your word, Bede] of God?

If you can't verify these statements in an authoritative source (not because Pope xxxx said so) then they must be considered false.

 

[jaybo]

Where does it say in the Bible that everything has to be explicitly stated in the Bible?
It doesn't.
Sola scriptura is unbiblical never mind sola explicita.

BTW, Bede, keep in mind that these posts are in the Bible Discussion Forum. Since you're not willing to discuss Scripture why are you here?

 

[Wansvic]

Where does it say in the Bible that everything has to be explicitly stated in the Bible?
It doesn't.
Sola scriptura is unbiblical never mind sola explicita.

"Of course, there were many deeds and sayings of the Lord not recorded in Scripture. Nonetheless, Scripture is the authoritative record that Holy God has given His people. We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word. To appeal to a tradition for authority, when Holy God did not give it, is futile. The idea that somehow sayings and events from the Lord have been recorded in tradition is simply not true." Excerpt from Christiananswers

One's belief system must be backed up with scripture for therein is the truth as stated in the inspired word.

John 17:17
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Matt 22:29
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Prov 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Matt 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Isa 8:20
To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.


Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


Ps 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.


John 10:35
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;


2 Tim 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

 

[Bede]

You quote why some human being thought Jesus used a singular name in Matt. 28:19. And you neglect to answer my question; how did the great catholic theologian come to his conclusion?

I provided scripture that witnesses the truth of what Jesus' comment concerning the use of a singular name meant.

You provided no scriptures that witnesses the truth of what Jesus' comment concerning the use of a singular name meant, just your opinions.

 

[Bede]

My response was in answer to erroneous comments you made. I know what is there.

But can't (or won't) provide it.

 

[Bede]

I repeat my questions in a different form: 1) Where does it say that Mary was immaculately conceived? 2) where does it say that she was "without the effects of original sin"? and 3) where does it say that Mary is unique as a creature [your word, Bede] of God?

If you can't verify these statements in an authoritative source (not because Pope xxxx said so) then they must be considered false.

You are still effectively asking for explicit scriptures. I know the game. if I provided something you would then ask for something nore specific.

Why don't you just tell me the exact wording you want scripture to saY.

 

[Bede]

BTW, Bede, keep in mind that these posts are in the Bible Discussion Forum. Since you're not willing to discuss Scripture why are you here?

I'm willing to discuss the scriptural basis for any belief but I'm not accepting I have to provide a few explicit verses. Often many scriptures have to be used to explain or even infer something that is not explicit. Evidence is sometimes cumulative.

Nor do I accept the false doctrine of sola scriptura. It was not the way of the apostles, of the early Church nor indeed the Church for 1500 years until the "reformers" invented it.

I also suggest that this is not the right thread for a major discussion on Mariological beliefs. A new one would be better.

 

[Bede]

"Of course, there were many deeds and sayings of the Lord not recorded in Scripture. Nonetheless, Scripture is the authoritative record that Holy God has given His people. We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word. To appeal to a tradition for authority, when Holy God did not give it, is futile. The idea that somehow sayings and events from the Lord have been recorded in tradition is simply not true." Excerpt from Christiananswers

One's belief system must be backed up with scripture for therein is the truth as stated in the inspired word.

John 17:17
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Matt 22:29
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Prov 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Matt 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Isa 8:20
To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.


Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


Ps 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.


John 10:35
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;


2 Tim 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

See post #2658

 

[Wansvic]

But can't (or won't) provide it.

See what comment of yours I responded to for the answer. Or, If you have a bible look it up.