Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?

[Aunty Jane]

I tend to believe that the brothers were from a prior marriage of Joseph.
Clement of Alexandria, 195AD writes that Jude was a brother of Jesus through Joseph.

Origen 245AD The Protoevangelium of James (writings of James) "that the brothers of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary.

I will break my replies up into bite sized pieces and keep them as concise as I can….

There is not even a brief mention of this in Scripture. I do not consider anything written after the first century to be inspired by God, especially in view of Jesus prediction of the devil sowing “weeds” in among the “wheat”.

If you understand that parable through Jewish eyes, you would know that the weed was a common enemy of farmers in the Middle East…it is a noxiuos weed, with which an enemy could oversow his neighbors crop to ruin his harvest.
“Bearded darnel” is called “wheat’s evil twin” because in the early growing stages it is impossible to tell the two plants apart…..but once the difference was discerned, it was too late to pull out the weeds. Their root systems were too intertwined and they would pull the wheat out with the weeds. All the farmer could do was wait till the harvest time when the reapers could clearly identify the weeds and dispose of them, separating the wheat and bringing in what was left of the farmers harvest into his storehouse.

The devil did not sow his weeds recently…..they were beginning to sprout whilst the apostles were still alive and acting as a “restraint”….but once the restraint was gone with the death of the last apostle John, the weeds did exactly what Jesus and his apostles predicted. This is why we cannot trust anything the ECF’s wrote as if it was on the same level as the inspired Scriptures.

 

[Aunty Jane]

If it wasn't MARY....the other woman would have been "Mary"....
what's the difference?

That was my point….if it wasn’t “Mary”, it would have been an equally favored woman with the right circumstances. If her name has been Phoebe, then statues of Phoebe would adorn the Catholic Churches…..And the rosary would sound a little different.
Adoration of Mary is against every teaching of Scripture…..but strangely it fits mother goddess worship seen in pagan religions all around the world. Those mother goddesses were presented as perpetual virgins.

Whoever was the MOTHER OF GOD would have had the same honor of being so.

God is an eternal being…he cannot have a mother. Jesus is called God’s son…..he even described himself that way. (John 10:31-36) Jesus is what he says he was….not what the church says he became. The God of the Jews was not a threesome. (Deut 6:4) Jesus was Jewish not Catholic.

 

[Aunty Jane]

You don't believe in the Trinity so this ends here.
For those that DO believe that Jesus is GOD....
it must be accepted that Mary is the Mother of God...

Not all who believe Jesus is God do accept Mary as “the mother of God”….it is a pagan title along with Mary’s other titles. Isn’t it enough to be chosen as the mother of God’s son? Is that not enough of a privilege?

otherwise serious theological problem will surface.

And they have for centuries….where have you been hiding? The nature of God has been argued by scholars and theologians since time immemorial. This teaching did not enter the Church without controversy because even the CC admits it’s not scriptural. If it doesn’t come from Scripture, where did it originate? Jesus never mentioned it.

You've touched on an important point.
But it goes to the birth of Jesus and not Mary's.....so I'll end it here.

The Bible never says Mary was sinless….so why should we believe something the Bible never said?
The Catholic Church said it, why should we believe a church that has altered so many Bible teachings, whilst adding their own…..unsubstantiated.

Oh my gosh.
You would want that ALL of the writings of the ECFs should have made it into the NT?
There are VOLUMES of their writings. You should read some....you might actually become Christian.
One of the requirements for acceptance as "scripture" was that the writer had to be an eyewitness of the life of Jesus.

Is that what I said? I simply said that what is not “inspired of God“ should not be accepted as part of Scripture. If God had wanted it included, he would have put it in there. There are no writings of any Scripture that were not penned by Jews. Not a single syllable was penned by a gentile.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Agreed. However, we must acknowledge that not EVERYTHING was written down. You mention John....John is the Apostle that stated that not everything is written.....

But if “ALL Scripture is inspired of God“, then what was written was what we needed to know. Do you think God would leave vital information out of his instruction manual? (2 Tim 3:16-17)

Agreed. Thus the need for creeds, which some Christians won't even accept.

Creeds are written by men….the words are theirs, not God’s. He has what we need to learn written for our instruction by his trusted hand picked servants. (Rom 15:4) If you believe that the Bible is the word of God, then what needed to added?

The CC kept heresies out of the church.
Could you post some heresies that you believe were retained in the early church?
By early, I mean till about 325 or shortly thereafter.

The CC invented their own heresies and passed them off as truth. No one could argue with them if they didn’t want punishment. The absolute authority that they gained for themselves resulted in a “Christianity” that Christ would never recognize. (Matt 7:21-23) They were even more powerful than some Monarchs in some lands.

What are some of the things they altered early in the piece that set them up to alter things doctrinally?

One example….was the priesthood that Jesus assigned to his first century disciples, which was not to be served on earth…it was reserved in heaven for them when their resurrection took place…..so firstly there was no priesthood served on earth….yet the Church made a big deal of the priesthood…and still does.

Rev 20:6-8 tells us….
“Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them. THEY WILL BE priests of God and of Christ, and THEY WILL REIGN WITH HIM for a thousand years. When the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison and will emerge to lead astray the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—in order to gather them for battle. They are as numerous as the sands of the sea.. . . .(NCB)

“They will be priests of God”….not that they already are. They are ”resurrected first”. (1 Thess 4:13-17) But only at the second coming.

 

[Aunty Jane]

What you state is heresy.
There are not 3 EXPRESSIONS of Christ.
This is modulism.

There seems to be no end of “isms”…..God has no “expressions” listed in the Bible….but he does have personal qualities……the God whom Jesus served was “one” not three. (Deut 6:4)
Even in heaven, the Father is the “God” of Jesus Christ.

Speaking of heavenly rewards, John recorded Jesus as saying…
“Anyone who is victorious I will make into a pillar in the temple of my God, and never again will he depart from it. I will inscribe on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God, as well as my own new name.” (NCB)

Four times in that one verse Jesus calls his Father “my God”. This is said in heaven, not while he was a man on earth. Can God have a God? He is still God’s son….and the Father is still his God.

Maybe you could start a couple of new threads.
We either have a soul or we don't.

There are numerous threads where this subject is thoroughly discussed.
There is no mention of immortal souls in the Bible for a very good reason….they don’t exist.
The soul is mortal (Ezek 18:4) and is the living, breathing creature. Both animals and man are called “souls” in Scripture. (Eccl 3:19-20)
It is to be noted as well, that Adam was not “given“ a “soul”, but “became” one when God forget started him breathing. (Gen 2:7)

 

[Aunty Jane]

Hell is throughout the NT.

Actually it isn’t…..there is no such word as “hell”….and there is no concept of it in either Judaism or Christianity. It does exist in pagan religions however….the concept was adopted later by both Judaism and apostate Christianity….along with invented places for them to go.

Hell is the translation of a few words that all mean different things.
”Hades“ is one of them…..and it is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew “Sheol” which in the Tanakh is rendered “the grave”. Hades is not a place of conscious existence because the dead are actually dead. (Eccl 9:5, 10)

Jesus used the term “Gehenna” (also translated as “hell”) to indicate a certain form of punishment to which the Jews were familiar.
”Gehenna” was the Valley of Hinnom, outside the walls of Jerusalem, used in ancient time for child sacrifice and a place where renegade Jews sacrificed their own children to a false god. God made them turn it into a rubbish tip where fires were kept burning day and night to consume the garbage …. Sulphur (brimstone) was added to make sure that the fire never went out. The dead carcasses of animals and at times, the bodies of executed criminals were cast into the flames for disposal.

This pictorial image is referred to in the Revelation as “the lake of fire”.

For a Jew not to have a marked burial place was a sure indication that they would not be considered by God, worthy of a resurrection. So to be consigned to “gehenna”, simply meant no resurrection for that person, and therefore no eternal life. It was not a place of eternal suffering because nothing alive was ever cast there. It became the symbol of eternal death…the very opposite of eternal life.
Christendom’s “hell“ does not exist. The church adopted it as fear was their greatest weapon in gaining obedience and stifling dissent.

And posting the OT for the soul is not very fair, is it?
The Sadducees did not believe in life after death.
The Pharisees did.
Who was right?
Perhaps JESUS was right?

The ancient Jews knew full well what the soul was. Their Scripture left them in no doubt.
There was never a contrast between “heaven and hell”….only between “life and death”.

Deut 30:19…
” I call upon the heavens and the earth to witness today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life, so that you and your descendants might live”. (NCB)

This was their only choice. Adam was never told that he would go to hell….only that he would die if he disobeyed. The CC filled a lot of conjecture into the Bible’s clear and simple statements.

 

[Aunty Jane]

As I said....please post some of the ideas that were cooked up after the death of the Apostles.

Altering the nature of God from the Jewish conception of “one God” to three separate persons in one godhead. This idea is not found in any of Jesus teachings. (John 17:3)
Failing to see how the redemption of the human race was carried out...and why God could not himself redeem humanity.
Elevating Mary to a status that Jesus never did.
Adopting idolatry whist claiming it isn’t.
Adopting beliefs in an immortal soul when the Bible never mentions those two words together in a single verse.
Inventing awful places for wanton sinners to go in the afterlife, as if the God of love was a fiendish, sadistic torturer.
Creating a celebrate earthly priesthood.…and a monastic lifestyle that takes vows of silence….silence was the last thing Jesus commanded his disciples to do. (Matt 28:19-20) He commanded them to go out into the world and boldly preach about his kingdom. (Matt 24:14)
Giving priests the right to give absolution, when only God can absolve one from sins. He gave that right exclusively to the one he appointed as judge of all mankind. (John 5:22)

The Father draws all...
those who accept are given to the Son for salvation.
There is NO CONFLICT in the NT.

You are correct…there is no conflict in the NT….because it all has to agree as one book. It has one author…it is one story….and contains one truth….not many.

Jesus said that no one can come to the Father except through him (John 14:6)….and the Father “draws” them”. (John 6:44) Not everyone is “drawn” by the truth or else we would all be in agreement. …but then he says that no one can come to the son unless the Father invites them. (John 6:65)

On what grounds do humans receive an invitation from the Father, to get to know his son? There are not two gods, and certainly not three, so how does this work if there is only one God, who stays in heaven while he sent his son to earth to redeem the human race? These are two separate beings in intimate communication with one another. Only one prays to the other. Only one is a mediator for the other. Only one is a High Priest for the other. So one is superior to the other. Jesus admitted…..“The Father is greater than I am”.
Hard to explain those things without a lot of tap dancing….

 

[NotTheRock]

What I'm saying is that Catholic teachings and beliefs have been passed down orally and traditionally from Jesus, His Mother, the apostles, and their successors for over two thousand years. We have reasons to show that they have. It's hard to find a practicing lay-Catholic who believes this or that without understanding why those are taught, and doesn't choose to believe because they see it's the truth, but rather out out of fear because they they're told to or else.

Many non-Catholics like Mathias have misunderstandings about Catholicism. Having said that, I've met Catholics ignorant of or mistaken about about this or that concerning Catholicism as well. Not all Catholics and non-Catholics are accurately knowledgeable of the Church history or inner-workings.

So you think that Popes are the "Vicar of Christ"?

 

[GodsGrace]

Just repeated your Circular Reasoning.



I have a VERY positive view on denomination. No other religion has such flowering, attempting to be all things to all people.

In my view, the denominational differences tend to be more on culture (Russian Orthodox, Southern Bapist, Church of England) and focus than doctine. Now hear me. This does not mean there is no doctrinal difference. It's that there is far more that unites than divides. As Ronald Reagan said, someone who agrees with you 80% of the time is not your enemy.


What you call silly is putting down where the Bible is not a specific guide. Sure, it is a specific moral guide but we need more guidance than that as I showed.

We need MORE guidance than the bible on morality??
And where do we get that from?

No.

I may be terrible with my circular reasoning,,,but you sure are terrible at replying to questions.
I've had to go back to my post for each of your answers. Hows about putting the question in your reply -- that would be nice.

No to OSAS.
Agreed.

No.

No to good works being necessary for salvation.
I don't agree.
NOW what do we do?
How do we come to the TRUTH?

Faith = Belief + Works

Agreed.

Some say all you need to do is believe but this is treating synonymously sense of words that are taken to be different. True faith has works. If you truly believe, it will be seen in your fruit, in your transformed life. Just saying the words is not enough.

I think I agree.
It's in the word BELIEVE....

To be clear, there is the general term "work" that is different from the Biblical term "works." We are not saved by our works. However, in the general sense, true believe involves "work," the work of the transformed, transformed by the grace extended by your true belief. If you truly believe, you will follow God's will and commands, PERIOD.

Agreed.

This is different from building a church or donating to the poor so that by your own glorious works, you are saved. No one is saved by their own effort so no man may brag.

Building a church could be a work. Donating to the poor is a work.
Anything good we do is a work.
See John 5:28-29

It's a symbolic and public sacrement of what has already taken place in the heart.

Hmmm. I don't think so.
I believe it's for the forgiveness of sins.
Now what do we do?
How can we know the TRUTH?

Yup. There is more and none of this illogical attempt at distraction takes away from the minor Biblical truth that Mary had other children. (I say minor because it is not a salvation issue.)

Not going back to see what I stated to which you're responding.

The original idea was:
If the NT is SUFFICIENT.....HOW do we come to know THE TRUTH?
(if there are differing OPINIONS).

 

[Wrangler]

We need MORE guidance than the bible on morality??
And where do we get that from?

1st, What the hell is this "we" crap?

2nd, how you got that from what I wrote is a mystery for the ages since I basically wrote the exact opposite.

3rd, I'll repeat for the final time that the Bible deals with general or fundamental moral issues, not specifics, like technology options not available then. The specific is what car or phone to buy, or what roads to take to go from Point A to Point B. If you don't get what I'm saying, move on. First, you have to understand what I'm saying before you disagree with it.

 

[Wrangler]

No to good works being necessary for salvation.
I don't agree.
NOW what do we do?
How do we come to the TRUTH?

Friend, you are fundamentally confused. There is truth and judgment of that truth. You not agreeing is a judgment, an opinion. We have a difference of opinion.

What we do is move on. I can only lead a horse to water, I cannot make it think.

 

[GodsGrace]

I will break my replies up into bite sized pieces and keep them as concise as I can….

There is not even a brief mention of this in Scripture. I do not consider anything written after the first century to be inspired by God, especially in view of Jesus prediction of the devil sowing “weeds” in among the “wheat”.

If you understand that parable through Jewish eyes, you would know that the weed was a common enemy of farmers in the Middle East…it is a noxiuos weed, with which an enemy could oversow his neighbors crop to ruin his harvest.
“Bearded darnel” is called “wheat’s evil twin” because in the early growing stages it is impossible to tell the two plants apart…..but once the difference was discerned, it was too late to pull out the weeds. Their root systems were too intertwined and they would pull the wheat out with the weeds. All the farmer could do was wait till the harvest time when the reapers could clearly identify the weeds and dispose of them, separating the wheat and bringing in what was left of the farmers harvest into his storehouse.

The devil did not sow his weeds recently…..they were beginning to sprout whilst the apostles were still alive and acting as a “restraint”….but once the restraint was gone with the death of the last apostle John, the weeds did exactly what Jesus and his apostles predicted. This is why we cannot trust anything the ECF’s wrote as if it was on the same level as the inspired Scriptures.

My replies will be more concise than yours.

I agree with most of what you've stated.
You wrote too much for me to go back and forth to MY post...so I'm only answering what is apparent in your reply.

You don't consider what Ignatius wrote on his way to his death in Rome to be inspired by God?

Perhaps you could define the word INSPIRED for us?

I, OTOH, consider many of the ECFs to be inspired by God.
Some of those writings BARELY missed being included in the NT.

What makes something be inspired?
WHY were some writings NOT included and some were?

Interesting stuff.

 

[GodsGrace]

That was my point….if it wasn’t “Mary”, it would have been an equally favored woman with the right circumstances. If her name has been Phoebe, then statues of Phoebe would adorn the Catholic Churches…..And the rosary would sound a little different.

Exactly....the OFFICE would have been the same.
So your point was moot.

Adoration of Mary is against every teaching of Scripture…..but strangely it fits mother goddess worship seen in pagan religions all around the world. Those mother goddesses were presented as perpetual virgins.

JWs are very concerned with pagan religions and beliefs.
I like to stick to what the Christian church has taught from the beginning.
And, yes, I LOVE to adore Mary.
She deserves it.

I don't worship her, however.

God is an eternal being…he cannot have a mother. Jesus is called God’s son…..he even described himself that way. (John 10:31-36) Jesus is what he says he was….not what the church says he became. The God of the Jews was not a threesome. (Deut 6:4) Jesus was Jewish not Catholic.

This is YOUR problem because you don't believe in the Trinity.
Jesus IS GOD.
If we're to believe He's God,,,,then Mary is the Mother of God.
NOT GOD FATHER....but God nonetheless.

 

[GodsGrace]

Not all who believe Jesus is God do accept Mary as “the mother of God”….it is a pagan title along with Mary’s other titles. Isn’t it enough to be chosen as the mother of God’s son? Is that not enough of a privilege?

Right. But they have a theological canundrum that cannot be answered.
Jesus is God or He isn't. You want to believe He was created and became God's Son.....you can....but you shouldn't call yourself a Christian.
Period.

And they have for centuries….where have you been hiding? The nature of God has been argued by scholars and theologians since time immemorial. This teaching did not enter the Church without controversy because even the CC admits it’s not scriptural. If it doesn’t come from Scripture, where did it originate? Jesus never mentioned it.

Actually, I don't like hiding.
You could read the NT again.
I'm not getting into the Trinity here with you for 2 reasons:
1. I'm not interested in converting you....that's between you and the Holy Spirit (who is also God).
2. It seems to be against forum rules and I try my best not to break rules for various reasons...not the least of which is that we're supposed to follow rules.

The Bible never says Mary was sinless….so why should we believe something the Bible never said?
The Catholic Church said it, why should we believe a church that has altered so many Bible teachings, whilst adding their own…..unsubstantiated.

Let's see.
Is the CC wrong about EVERYTHING?
If it weren't for the CC....you and I wouldn't be h aving this conversation.

Is that what I said? I simply said that what is not “inspired of God“ should not be accepted as part of Scripture. If God had wanted it included, he would have put it in there. There are no writings of any Scripture that were not penned by Jews. Not a single syllable was penned by a gentile.

?? So only Jews are inspired?
Anyway,,,,I've read stuff this is inspired by God....
like I've said before...find out what inspired means and be thankful that THE CATHOLIC CHURCH gave you the NT.

 

[GodsGrace]

But if “ALL Scripture is inspired of God“, then what was written was what we needed to know. Do you think God would leave vital information out of his instruction manual? (2 Tim 3:16-17)

Creeds are written by men….the words are theirs, not God’s. He has what we need to learn written for our instruction by his trusted hand picked servants. (Rom 15:4) If you believe that the Bible is the word of God, then what needed to added?

All creeds are biblical.
Are there any trusted hand-picked servants today?
And did these trusted servants not teach others what Jesus and the Apostles taught them?

If everything we need to know is written down
then WHY do you and I disagree?

The CC invented their own heresies and passed them off as truth. No one could argue with them if they didn’t want punishment. The absolute authority that they gained for themselves resulted in a “Christianity” that Christ would never recognize. (Matt 7:21-23) They were even more powerful than some Monarchs in some lands.

What are some of the things they altered early in the piece that set them up to alter things doctrinally?

One example….was the priesthood that Jesus assigned to his first century disciples, which was not to be served on earth…it was reserved in heaven for them when their resurrection took place…..so firstly there was no priesthood served on earth….yet the Church made a big deal of the priesthood…and still does.

Rev 20:6-8 tells us….
“Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them. THEY WILL BE priests of God and of Christ, and THEY WILL REIGN WITH HIM for a thousand years. When the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison and will emerge to lead astray the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—in order to gather them for battle. They are as numerous as the sands of the sea.. . . .(NCB)

“They will be priests of God”….not that they already are. They are ”resurrected first”. (1 Thess 4:13-17) But only at the second coming.

Well, Jesus may not recognize it today....but He would have in the beginning.
ALL denominations have their own teachings..as does yours.

And why all this talk about the CC?
You were either an atheist or came, most probably, from the CC, which never taught you anything.
One day someone rings your bell with a bible under their arm and tells you they USE ONLY THE BIBLE and so, gee, everything they tell you must be THE TRUTH.

See AJ....You don't have all the truth.
And we all think we have all the truth.
This is why MAYBE the NT is just not enough....
not that it needs help,,,,but for clarification purposes.

 

[GodsGrace]

There seems to be no end of “isms”…..God has no “expressions” listed in the Bible….

Of course. That's what I stated.

but he does have personal qualities……the God whom Jesus served was “one” not three. (Deut 6:4)
Even in heaven, the Father is the “God” of Jesus Christ.

That's your opinion.

Speaking of heavenly rewards, John recorded Jesus as saying…
“Anyone who is victorious I will make into a pillar in the temple of my God, and never again will he depart from it. I will inscribe on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God, as well as my own new name.” (NCB)

Four times in that one verse Jesus calls his Father “my God”. This is said in heaven, not while he was a man on earth. Can God have a God? He is still God’s son….and the Father is still his God.

God Father WAS JESUS' GOD while Jesus was on earth..
BUT NOT when He is in the "office" of 2nd Person of the Trinity.
Those that don't understand the Trinity cannot grasp this.

There are numerous threads where this subject is thoroughly discussed.
There is no mention of immortal souls in the Bible for a very good reason….they don’t exist.
The soul is mortal (Ezek 18:4) and is the living, breathing creature. Both animals and man are called “souls” in Scripture. (Eccl 3:19-20)
It is to be noted as well, that Adam was not “given“ a “soul”, but “became” one when God forget started him breathing. (Gen 2:7)

Again, you're using the OT...I do believe I've already addressed this.
And yes,,,we all BECOME SOULS. A soul is part of our being which has 3 parts:
BODY
SOUL
SPIRIT

1 Thessalonians 5:23
23Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[GodsGrace]

Actually it isn’t…..there is no such word as “hell”….and there is no concept of it in either Judaism or Christianity. It does exist in pagan religions however….the concept was adopted later by both Judaism and apostate Christianity….along with invented places for them to go.

Hell is the translation of a few words that all mean different things.
”Hades“ is one of them…..and it is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew “Sheol” which in the Tanakh is rendered “the grave”. Hades is not a place of conscious existence because the dead are actually dead. (Eccl 9:5, 10)

Jesus used the term “Gehenna” (also translated as “hell”) to indicate a certain form of punishment to which the Jews were familiar.
”Gehenna” was the Valley of Hinnom, outside the walls of Jerusalem, used in ancient time for child sacrifice and a place where renegade Jews sacrificed their own children to a false god. God made them turn it into a rubbish tip where fires were kept burning day and night to consume the garbage …. Sulphur (brimstone) was added to make sure that the fire never went out. The dead carcasses of animals and at times, the bodies of executed criminals were cast into the flames for disposal.

This pictorial image is referred to in the Revelation as “the lake of fire”.

For a Jew not to have a marked burial place was a sure indication that they would not be considered by God, worthy of a resurrection. So to be consigned to “gehenna”, simply meant no resurrection for that person, and therefore no eternal life. It was not a place of eternal suffering because nothing alive was ever cast there. It became the symbol of eternal death…the very opposite of eternal life.
Christendom’s “hell“ does not exist. The church adopted it as fear was their greatest weapon in gaining obedience and stifling dissent.

The ancient Jews knew full well what the soul was. Their Scripture left them in no doubt.
There was never a contrast between “heaven and hell”….only between “life and death”.

Deut 30:19…
” I call upon the heavens and the earth to witness today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life, so that you and your descendants might live”. (NCB)

This was their only choice. Adam was never told that he would go to hell….only that he would die if he disobeyed. The CC filled a lot of conjecture into the Bible’s clear and simple statements.

Nice lesson. All good.
Except that the CONCEPT of hell IS in the NT.
It is a place where there will be weeping an gnashing of teeth.
WHAT it is we cannot really say.

But for sure it's a place far away from God.

 

[GodsGrace]

Altering the nature of God from the Jewish conception of “one God” to three separate persons in one godhead. This idea is not found in any of Jesus teachings. (John 17:3)

Let me be blunt:
Jesus was either God or He was crazy.
He healed persons and only God can heal.
He went to the cross thinking He was the I AM.
Thomas called Him MY GOD....
I could go on, but prefer not to.

Failing to see how the redemption of the human race was carried out...and why God could not himself redeem humanity.

This I've never heard before - or at least, not in your words.
Could you please expound on this?

Elevating Mary to a status that Jesus never did.
Adopting idolatry whist claiming it isn’t.
Adopting beliefs in an immortal soul when the Bible never mentions those two words together in a single verse.
Inventing awful places for wanton sinners to go in the afterlife, as if the God of love was a fiendish, sadistic torturer.

All of the above is biblical, but I'm not intending to write a book here.

Creating a celebrate earthly priesthood.…and a monastic lifestyle that takes vows of silence….silence was the last thing Jesus commanded his disciples to do. (Matt 28:19-20) He commanded them to go out into the world and boldly preach about his kingdom. (Matt 24:14)

A vow of silence is so that prayer can take place.
Like about 8 hours a day.
Jesus DID SAY to pray.
These persons are CALLED to pray.

Re the priesthood....I think you meant celebate. This didn't happen until the 13th century and not for faith reasons.

Giving priests the right to give absolution, when only God can absolve one from sins. He gave that right exclusively to the one he appointed as judge of all mankind. (John 5:22)

Absolution is a STATEMENT that sins are forgiven...it's for the sinner.
Only God can forgive sins, as you've stated.
Jesus did say to ask forgiveness and if some want to go to confession...I have no problem with this.

You are correct…there is no conflict in the NT….because it all has to agree as one book. It has one author…it is one story….and contains one truth….not many.

Jesus said that no one can come to the Father except through him (John 14:6)….and the Father “draws” them”. (John 6:44) Not everyone is “drawn” by the truth or else we would all be in agreement. …but then he says that no one can come to the son unless the Father invites them. (John 6:65)

Everyone is drawn by the Father.
John 3:16 says WHOEVER believes....this means that salvation is extended to all men.
Also, God gives to ALL men the grace necessary to KNOW HIM....
See Romans 1:19-20

On what grounds do humans receive an invitation from the Father, to get to know his son? There are not two gods, and certainly not three, so how does this work if there is only one God, who stays in heaven while he sent his son to earth to redeem the human race? These are two separate beings in intimate communication with one another. Only one prays to the other. Only one is a mediator for the other. Only one is a High Priest for the other. So one is superior to the other. Jesus admitted…..“The Father is greater than I am”.
Hard to explain those things without a lot of tap dancing….

Not 2 separate beings.
Another great reason for Jesus being God.
In the OT God said that HE HIMSELF would save .... HE HIMSELF.
Ezekiel

Not difficult at all to explain....
Just when you don't want to accept what the NT teaches.

 

[LuxMundy]

A practicing Catholic believes BECAUSE he understands?
Many practicing Catholics DO NOT believe what the church teaches.
Maybe we need a definition for "practicing Catholic".

I don't know any Catholic that "believes" a dogma for fear of being told to.
They either do or they do not.

I was saying that most people who become or choose to remain a Catholic do so because they believe what the Catholic Church teaches to be the truth for the reasons that they do. Inspired by the Gospel and sustained by God's grace, a "practicing Catholic" will give sincere external expression to their interior faith through specific religious, moral and ethical behavior which is in accordance with the teaching of Christ and the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church doesn't tell Catholics that they must believe this or that without question. I think the people who think that, like Mathias, just misunderstand what a Catholic dogma is.

I DO have a problem with the Assumption...I find no idea of it anywhere but it comes as an outgrowth of the IC and the desire to keep the body from deteriorating.

You find no mention of the Blessed Virgin Mary's bodily assumption into Heaven in Scripture? That doesn't mean it didn't happen, because when The Bible was compiled, there were writings that weren't included, which means that there's true information out there that isn't found in The Bible. Additionally, there's the fact that Jesus has continued to speak to people throughout time. Regarding the Assumption of Mary, while the Catholic Church has always had reasons for teaching that, in more recent times Jesus has reconfirmed the truth about it by giving a vision of it, as well as His Mother, Mary, commenting on it, to Jesus's spokesperson Maria Valtorta.

and purgatory developed and is nowhere to be found in scripture.

The idea of Purgatory is scriptural: "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins" (2 Macc. 12:46). Also, for example, in Jesus's parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, He spoke of "Abraham's Bosom" which is another name for Purgatory. Some may say it's not evidence for such a place to be real, but Heaven is also referred to in Jesus's parables, and that's a real place. While the Catholic Church has always had reasons for teaching about Purgatory, in more recent times Jesus has reconfirmed the truth about it by speaking to His spokesperson Maria Valtorta about it. Maria Simma has also received revelations about Purgatory, and here's a good quote of hers:

"Sister Emmanuel has a good way of explaining Purgatory: Let us suppose that one day a door opens, and a splendid being appears with an overwhelming and fascinating beauty never seen on this earth, full of light and radiance. What is amazing is this being shows that he is madly in love with you with a love you have never known before. And you sense that he has a great desire to draw himself to you. At the same time you also sense a great desire to draw yourself to him and to throw yourself into his arms. But suddenly you realize that you haven’t washed for months and months, that you smell bad, that your hair is matted and greasy and your clothes stained with dirt and mud. Then you say to yourself, “No, I can’t present myself like this to him. I must wash, take a good bath, change my clothes, make myself smell good and then I will come back straight away.”

Purgatory is exactly like this. It is a delay imposed by our impurity, a delay before God’s embrace which causes intense suffering. It is said that at death, your life will be presented to you as if in a film and you will be aghast when you realize your unworthiness. Suddenly, you yourself will be in a hurry to run to Purgatory for purification because you would not want that delay to be one second longer. It is the soul itself upon realizing its unworthiness to want to hurry up his cleansing in Purgatory so that it can embrace its God at the earliest possible time".

 

[GodsGrace]

Friend, you are fundamentally confused. There is truth and judgment of that truth. You not agreeing is a judgment, an opinion. We have a difference of opinion.

What we do is move on. I can only lead a horse to water, I cannot make it think.

You're a very nice person Wrangler.
Will try to remember this in the future.