Protestant disinfo debunked-Catholics are also Christians

I personally take no issue with people reading and interpreting scripture, but the downside is that it opens the door to Christian cults and heresies, as we've seen in this thread.

Education means something. Someone who is completely ignorant of say, church history, or the Greek language, is vulnerable to inaccurate claims made by someone on those subjects. Church doctrine may serve a purpose that people don't like, or it may be something that people disagree with or don't understand, but one cannot argue that it was created or implemented in ignorance -- many very smart people discussed, debated and developed it over time so that it works, theologically, and is in harmony with the rest of theology, as well as scripture.

To me, some guy that has a dream in the early 1900s at a campground and runs around shouting "The name of God is Jesus" does not rationally invalidate the Doctrine of the Trinity. The UPC has attempted to develop supporting theology, but what I've seen hasn't been particularly compelling, and the even more fringe Gary Reckart says some downright laughable things, like claiming that the Didache was written in 1000AD. In the end, both are attempting to refute theology that has weathered the storm of heresy for almost 2,000 years, and the reason that it has is that it is sound doctrine, developed by intelligent and insightful people.

In the end, we are people of faith, not theology, but when one speaks theologically, they cannot be ignorant of it.

reply to post by Snsoc

(Supposed) worship of Mary, images, popes, etc

No supposed to it. Seen people weeping all over Madonna's, praying to and worshipping Mary (hail Mary). Now if i hadn't seen these things with my own eyes, you might be able to convince me. Litany's to Mary declare her the Queen of Heaven (ancient title given to Isis, Ishtar, Hera, Ashera, Ashtoreth, Astarte the list is exhaustive etc.), title of Co-redemptrix (also dates back to Babylon, title of Ishtar). Title "Bright and Morningstar" taken from Christ and given to Mary. Top that off with the Vulgate version of Genesis 3 (Douy Rheims knock off):


15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.


Now i am not saying there aren't any "good" catholic folks, but your clergy has done a pretty fair job of brainwashing you folks over the millenia into doing stuff the Apostles forbid in the Council of Jerusalem.

Your Pope's robes, are the robes the highpriest of Dagon would wear, the fishtail hasn't been worn ina long time, maybe since the Renaissance, but the Mitre is still there:





In what way in the Monstrance not a giant sun idol?



But sticking a cross ontop of it makes it appear kosher, right? Symbolism all around you.

BTW Latin Citta del Vaticano means "city of prophecy", What city is constantly spoke of in prophecy by the prophets?

Revelation 17:18 And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.”

You should really start digging into the rituals you do. Just sayin'.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Wow that's absurd blasphemy.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Wow that's absurd blasphemy.

Hi NTT,

Those words are not absurd but the original words St. Jerome copied. It was King James' translators who
completely changed Genesis 3:15. Absurd, is they changed she to "it", to make it mean, Our Lord, imagine
calling Our Lord "it." By God's power, we realize... The Trinity's plan is Mary crushes the head of the serpent.

And....

Genesis 3:15 shows Scriptural proof Mary was Immaculately conceived, no sin. God's beautiful exception.

"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall crush your head, and you shall strike at His heel."

In this verse God addresses Satan. The Seed here is Christ. The Woman is His Mother, that is, Mary. Thus Satan has perfect enmity with Christ and with His Mother. The Catholic Church has interpreted this as indicating the sinlessness of Christ and Mary. If either actually committed sin, then they would not be at enmity with Satan but actually a cooperator with Satan at times.

www.taylormarshall.com...


p.s. Thank you Taylor Marshall. Taylor was an Anglican priest who converted to Catholicism. You can too NTT, I wish before the "awakening" (Rev 6:15-17, 1 Cor 3:13).

Taylor Marshall used another translation of Genesis 3:15. To be exact, here is the English (word for word translation of the Latin Vulgate), the first Bible. www.drbo.org...

I can't speak Latin.

Our Lord and His mother are sinless. Mary is the exception, God's plan.

+ + +

"I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."

In this verse God addresses Satan. The Seed here is Christ. The Woman is His Mother, that is, Mary. Thus Satan has perfect enmity with Christ and with His Mother. The Catholic Church has interpreted this as indicating the sinlessness of Christ and Mary. If either actually committed sin, then they would not be at enmity with Satan but actually a cooperator with Satan at times. www.taylormarshall.com...

+ + +

p.s. Thank you Taylor Marshall. Taylor was an Anglican priest who converted to Catholicism. You can too NTT, I wish before the "awakening" (Rev 6:15-17, 1 Cor 3:13).

reply to post by lonewolf19792000



Just because a Catholic may commit the sin of idolatry, this does not mean it is the official position of the Church, or the behavior of the majority of Catholics. It would be wrong for me to say that Protestants support fornication just because some of them have sex before marriage.

The official position of the Catholic Church is firmly against idolatry. From the Catechism:

2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of “idols, [of] silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see.” These empty idols make their worshipers empty: “Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them.”42 God, however, is the “living God”43 who gives life and intervenes in history. (210)

Saying a Hail Mary is not Mary worship any more than asking your pastor to pray for you is Pastor worship.

So what if Catholicism uses symbols from other faiths? When a king conquers another king, he sits in his throne, eats his food, and wears his clothes. It is a sign of ultimate defeat of one's enemies. Christ defeated Satan at the cross and the tomb; He and his followers can wear whatever they like. Do not Protestants wear a cross-a symbol of murder, torture and oppression?

BTW, Jerusalem would better qualify as the "City of Prophecy,"

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

No supposed to it. Seen people weeping all over Madonna's, praying to and worshipping Mary (hail Mary). Now if i hadn't seen these things with my own eyes, you might be able to convince me. Litany's to Mary declare her the Queen of Heaven

Is this what you are speaking of? I think you are mistaken. But that is what happens when someone watches and then "thinks" they know what is going on. Try learning instead of just watching with "your eyes" next time.

Hail Mary, full of grace.
Our Lord is with you.
Blessed are you among women,
And blessed is the fruit of your womb,
Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
Now and at the hour of our deaths

I must ask you, Are you Catholic? Have you studied the Catholic religion or are you just repeating what others have told you?

Originally posted by colbe
Taylor Marshall used another translation of Genesis 3:15. To be exact, here is the English (word for word translation of the Latin Vulgate), the first Bible. www.drbo.org...

I can't speak Latin.

Our Lord and His mother are sinless. Mary is the exception, God's plan.

+ + +

"I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."

In this verse God addresses Satan. The Seed here is Christ. The Woman is His Mother, that is, Mary. Thus Satan has perfect enmity with Christ and with His Mother. The Catholic Church has interpreted this as indicating the sinlessness of Christ and Mary. If either actually committed sin, then they would not be at enmity with Satan but actually a cooperator with Satan at times. www.taylormarshall.com...

+ + +

p.s. Thank you Taylor Marshall. Taylor was an Anglican priest who converted to Catholicism. You can too NTT, I wish before the "awakening" (Rev 6:15-17, 1 Cor 3:13).

Dear non-Catholic Christian brothers and sisters,

There you have it, where does it say in Scripture Mary is Immaculate, free from sin....is answered.
Do you see now, God makes exceptions. Some divine exceptions you accept. Accept this fact about Mary.

Satan was given revelation about the Incarnation, it made him so angry, a mere person, Mary, would
help in mankind's redemption. This is why he despises Mary. Do not be one of his gang, he laughs
at the anti-Marian beliefs, at some Christians fooled by those who wish to distance themselves from
Catholicism. Instead, draw close to Our Lord's mother, speak to her in prayer.

Would someone reply about the above verse, Jesus and His mother are sinless.

reply to post by colbe


So, if I am reading this correctly, there is a "seed of Satan" and a "seed of Mary," implying that Mary was not of Satan, and therefore not of sin?

Originally posted by Snsoc
reply to post by colbe

 

So, if I am reading this correctly, there is a "seed of Satan" and a "seed of Mary," implying that Mary was not of Satan, and therefore not of sin?

You could say it this way. It is God's doing. Look at the meaning of enmity and notice, it is plural.
en·mi·ty
/ˈenmitē/ Noun
The state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.


Genesis 3:15
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. www.drbo.org...


It is God's grace that causes Mary to oppose Satan. She opposes Satan as her Son does. Jesus is
sinless, so is she. It's by God's power, Mary has this enmity. I've read the same elsewhere but I like how
Taylor Marshall explains Mary being sinless, proof of the Immaculate Conception.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Seen people weeping all over Madonna's, praying to and worshipping Mary (hail Mary).

Oh dude .. 'hail mary' isn't worship. It's the words of scripture and it's asking someone to pray for you. We all are supposed to pray for each other and ask each other to pray to God for us. That's it. Nothing more.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Wow that's absurd blasphemy.

Vulgate style the Dhouay-Rheims being a derivitive of, which is taken from the older Latin Vulgate. I was surprised to find that in there myself. Now you see where catholics get confused with the "co-redemptrix" junk. Apparently someone let a heretic with a pen near an ancient manuscript without knowing it and it has rippled through time to effect millions.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Wow that's absurd blasphemy.

Vulgate style the Dhouay-Rheims being a derivitive of, which is taken from the older Latin Vulgate. I was surprised to find that in there myself. Now you see where catholics get confused with the "co-redemptrix" junk. Apparently someone let a heretic with a pen near an ancient manuscript without knowing it and it has rippled through time to effect millions.

Could you dumb that down for me? Seriously. I have no idea what you're talking about. Thx.

reply to post by Snsoc


Not really. No.

reply to post by Snsoc

Dear Snsoc,

I'm only butting into your conversation with lonewolf19792000 because I suspect his answer didn't satisfy you. May I give it a try?

Vulgate style the Dhouay-Rheims being a derivitive of, which is taken from the older Latin Vulgate.

The Vulgate was the first translation into Latin from the Greek. It was done about 380-410 A.D. The Douay-Rheims came out about 1570-1610 and was the first officially approved translation into English.

lonewolf19792000, seems to be saying that the King James version is correct in saying "it shall bruise thy head," and the Douay-Rheims is the result of a heretic who wrote it as "she shall crush thy head."

What I'm not able to explain is why lonewolf19792000, sees this as heresy, or even a big deal.

As an example, say a woman gets beaned by a foul ball hit by a Chicago Cubs batter. She screams, "I'll get you." her son, grows up to play baseball for another team and strikes out that same batter to win the World Series. Ok, the son "got" the batter, but didn't the mother also fulfill her threat to "get" the batter? Both verses point to Jesus as the "pitcher," and I think everybody accepts that Jesus came, at least in part, from Mary, so what's the problem?

Co-redemptrix? That's the problem? I suppose it depends on what you think the word means. No informed Christian thinks it means "Equal to the Redeemer," so again, I just don't see the problem.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


No problem; that makes it a little clearer. So is the part supporting the Immaculate Conception in the Vulgate or just the newer one?

Not that I think it matters too much: I seriously doubt that the transcribing of Holy Scripture was conducted with such a slack approach that a "heretic with a pen" could get in and make changes without someone noticing.

reply to post by Snsoc

Dear Snsoc,

I know this seems like I'm running away from the problem, actually, I am.

I've seen Bibles that translate it as "she," "he," "they," "it," and "you." According to Wiki, the first celebration of the feast of her conception (but not referred to as "Immaculate," goes back to the 300s. The idea of the Immaculate Conception grew over the centuries as the Church listened to arguments for and against it. (One thing I like about Catholicism is that it takes it's time. It knows its words affect billions of eternal souls.) Its acceptance continued to grow, but it wasn't infallibly declared until 1858.

Let me add a little more from Wiki:

By the 7th century the feast of her conception was widely celebrated in the East, under the name of the Conception (active) of Saint Anne. In the West it was known as the feast of the Conception (passive) of Mary, and was associated particularly with the Normans, whether these introduced it directly from the East or took it from English usage.

The spread of the feast, by now with the adjective "Immaculate" attached to its title, met opposition on the part of some, on the grounds that sanctification was possible only after conception. Critics included Saints Bernard of Clairvaux, Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas. Other theologians defended the expression "Immaculate Conception", pointing out that sanctification could be conferred at the first moment of conception in view of the foreseen merits of Christ, a view held especially by Franciscans.

Writers such as Mark Miravalle and Sarah Jane Boss interpret the existence of the feast as a strong indication of the Church's traditional belief in the Immaculate Conception.

en.wikipedia.org...

But, as to your question about Vulgate versus Douay-Rheims, I'm not enough of a Latin scholar to have any opinion on whether the translation from the Latin to English is valid.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


You don't see why "she shall crush your head, and you shall bruise her heel" is heresy? Charles, c'mon man. Did Mary have her achilles heels nailed to the cross? One look a that should send bells and whistles going off in your head, because the hebrew says he and yeah i backchecked it against Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.

In hebrew Genesis 3:15 translates as:

and enmity i-am-setting between you and between the woman and between the seed-of you and between the seed-of her he he-shall-hurt you head and you-shall-hurt him heel

Not saying her in there anywhere, but a him. Refering to Christ, not Mary.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Dear lonewolf19792000,

Thanks for going to all that trouble. I'm impressed and grateful. Strong's, and everything.

You're right that it would be heresy if Christians believed that Mary saved us from our sins, and I would run from that as well. But no matter how it is translated, I don't see anyone using that verse to claim that Mary is the Savior. To be honest, I don't see right now how any person's belief would be affected by the gender (or number) of that pronoun.

If that verse were isolated from the rest of the Bible, then I can see a problem, But as it is, I still think my baseball analogy holds up pretty well.

I'm wondering, what heretical idea do you think that verse creates? That Mary was the Savior? That Jesus wasn't? Sure, you're right that that verse could cause confusion if taken in isolation and interpreted improperly. But what result in modern Christianity do you object to?

Remember that I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer, and I could be missing something obvious.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952

Remember that I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer

Is that similar to not being the brightest tool in the shed?