dolphinheart:


To say I understand you, na lie.

Are you saying that these events where passed through oral tradition and not recorded down?

Yes. Luke and Mark were not direct disciples of Christ so they could not know what exactly happened and was said at The last supper unless some one told them.

It was later that they were recorded down in written form.

dolphinheart:

Bro, what is to be interpretated is recorded in the scriptures. You are not going to say or interpret something different from what is recorded or are you.? Even the things to be revealed later are recorded so that some group of people with political powers will not come up with something claiming its divine and has oral tradition .

Very funny. So a list was needed to compile the bible abi? Someone gave you a list and you started looking for the scriptures in that list right? Abeg were that list come from?
So if the bible where not compiled from a list, it definitely shows the work of the holy spirit in compiling the books, so that you can be fully equipped for every good work.

What is the difference between the two "word of God." Never knew it has different definitions. Has jesus ever told you what the father did not tell him to tell you?
Is there part of the scriptures that was recorded and its not by Gods inspiration.?

Never said the scriptures gives you salvation, the scriptures shows you all that you need and need to do to gain salvation. It tells you all you need to do in other to gain evalasting life which is the knowledge of the true God, the father, and the one he sent to us, jesus Christ.
so what other knowledge do you have that is neccessary for salvation that is not in the scriptures.

Bro pls, tell me what is needed for salvation that is not in the scriptures and stop talking about interpretation of what is already written in the scriptures. The holy spirit will give you understanding, but it wunt tell you something different for salvation that is not already recorded in the scriptures. That is one way to seperate fake people who claim their utterances is through the holy spirit.

1. You are overlooking the difference in many protestant teachings all formed from reading the bible and claiming the right to personal interpretation. E.g. Females should not wear trousers/Females should not wear trousers.
There is no hell because God is merciful/ There is hell because God is just.
Jesus is God/ Jesus is not God.

2. Jesus as the Word in John 1:1 is not the same as the bible (word of God). Abi was it through the bible that all things were made?

3. To be saved requires worshipping the TRUE GOD (THE MOST HOLY TRINITY). God asked us to worship him in truth and in Spirit.(John 4:24) The truth is revealed by the Spirit. The bible does not contain the fullness of the truth(God's Revelation) but points to the Church which is The Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

And here are some examples:
a. The reference to "He shall be called a Nazarene"
cannot be found in the Old Testament, yet it was
"spoken by the prophets" (Matt. 2:23). Therefore, this
prophecy, which is considered to be "God's word," was passed down orally rather than through
Scripture.

b. In Matthew 23:2-3, Jesus teaches that the scribes and Pharisees have a legitimate, binding authority based "on Moses' seat," but this phrase or idea cannot be found anywhere in the Old Testament. It is found in the (originally oral) Mishnah, which teaches
a sort of "teaching succession" from Moses on down.

c. In 1 Corinthians 10:4, Paul refers to a rock that "followed" the Jews through the Sinai wilderness. The Old Testament says nothing about such miraculous movement. But rabbinic tradition does.

d. "As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses" (2 Tim. 3:. These two men cannot be found in the related Old Testament passage (cf. Ex. 7:8ff.) or anywhere else in the Old Testament.

4. Baptism is necessary for salvation/Baptism is not necessary for salvation. Both claim to inspired by the Holy Spirit (although the first one is correct).
The Eucharist is the Body And Blood of Jesus and is necessary for Eternal Life(John 6)/ The Eucharist is just a symbol. (Although we know the first is correct).

Jolliano:


At least, the people who read this thread can see and judge for themselves. Unlike allowing the threads be filled with Anti-Catholicism

Jolliano:


At least, the people who read this thread can see and judge for themselves. Unlike allowing the threads be filled with Anti-Catholicism

Op well done you see dat is part of the problem we have as Christians always judging others from white garment churches to catholics and of course jehovah witnesses and deeper life makes me wonder if people who judge truly read the Bible. Putting on the holier than thou attitude y not let the one true righteous judge do his work hmmm may God help us :POp well done you see dat is part of the problem we have as Christians always judging others from white garment churches to catholics and of course jehovah witnesses and deeper life makes me wonder if people who judge truly read the Bible. Putting on the holier than thou attitude y not let the one true righteous judge do his work hmmm may God help us

Jolliano:


1. You are overlooking the difference in many protestant teachings all formed from reading the bible and claiming the right to personal interpretation. E.g. Females should not wear trousers/Females should not wear trousers.

You excluded ur church teachings formed from reading the bible also.!
1.Can you tell me ur view or church view on females wearing trousers and
2. show me there scriptures that those who banned female trousers used.? That is, where they formed there teaching to ban females from wearing trousers.

There is no hell because God is merciful/ There is hell because God is just.[/quote]
Pressumptions and assumptions. Pls be specific, which organization made such statement and do you think the scriptures support it.

Jesus is God/ Jesus is not God.

Now you are going back to the issue of translation, what did jesus say? What did jesus call himself?

2. Jesus as the Word in John 1:1 is not the same as the bible (word of God). Abi was it through the bible that all things were made?

ur statement would have been correct if jesus had been named word of God cus all things where made through him. But that is not the case.

So jesus being called word of God means the father evidently used his Son to convey information and instructions to others of his
family of spirit sons, even as he used that Son to deliver his
message to humans on earth.
Showing that he was God’s
Word, or Spokesman, Jesus
said to his Jewish listeners:
“What I teach is not mine, but
belongs to him that sent me. If
anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the
teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality.”

Same with the bible, it contains Gods instruction for mankind.

Unless you want to say God does not have his own personal voice. Even God has spoken to the word to show you they are two distinct persons.

3. To be saved requires worshipping the TRUE GOD (THE MOST HOLY TRINITY).

John 17: 1-3
"After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:“Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

That above is a member of ur trinity telling you who the only true God is!.

1 cor 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

And maybe you want ur first pope to talk.
1peter 1:3
All praise to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is by his great mercy that we have been born again, because
God raised Jesus Christ from
the dead. Now we live with
great expectation,

If you have contrary view , pls first explain the scriptures quoted.

God asked us to worship him in truth and in Spirit.(John 4:24) The truth is revealed by the Spirit. The bible does not contain the fullness of the truth(God's Revelation) but points to the Church which is The Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

So ur church contains the fulness of the truth abi.?
Hence the sanctioned killings and imprisonments!

And here are some examples:
a. The reference to "He shall be called a Nazarene" cannot be found in the Old Testament, yet it was "spoken by the prophets" (Matt. 2:23). Therefore, this prophecy, which is considered to be "God's word," was passed down orally rather than through Scripture.

I bow for you o! , you are quoting the scriptures to find evidence of oral tradition. That attempt is so wrong Bro.
Show me oral traditions that you know that not written down, dnt you know what oral tradition is again?
Not all prophecy where written down for us, or orally passed down.

b. In Matthew 23:2-3, Jesus teaches that the scribes and Pharisees have a legitimate, binding authority based "on Moses' seat," but this phrase or idea cannot be found anywhere in the Old Testament. It is found in the (originally oral) Mishnah, which teaches a sort of "teaching succession" from Moses on down.

So you are saying that jesus is wrong abi?
And if it was initially passed down orally, it was written down , that's how you got to know it and talk about it.

c. In 1 Corinthians 10:4, Paul refers to a rock that "followed" the Jews through the Sinai wilderness. The Old Testament says nothing about such miraculous movement. But rabbinic tradition does.

So the cloud and fire that guided them through the wilderness was not recorded abi? Maybe you where expecting a physical rock! Well, paul told us who that rock is!.

d. "As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses" (2 Tim. 3:. These two men cannot be found in the related Old Testament passage (cf. Ex. 7:8ff.) or anywhere else in the Old Testament.

And it was recorded later in the inspired scriptures. They did not continue to tell it orally. Now you are getting the idea of the work of the holy spirit when it inspired the words " all scripture is inspired"

4. Baptism is necessary for salvation/Baptism is not necessary for salvation. Both claim to inspired by the Holy Spirit (although the first one is correct).
The Eucharist is the Body And Blood of Jesus and is necessary for Eternal Life(John 6)/ The Eucharist is just a symbol. (Although we know the first is correct).

I dnt understand you here.

Jolliano:


Yes. Luke and Mark were not direct disciples of Christ so they could not know what exactly happened and was said at The last supper unless some one told them.

It was later that they were recorded down in written form.

Bro, you urself said it, they where recorded down!

You did not come to know it through oral traditions, the scriptures told you.!

@ jolliano, pls you have to modify your last post on mary and the ark. Its not posted correctly

dolphinheart:


Bro, you urself said it, they where recorded down!

You did not come to know it through oral traditions, the scriptures told you.!

you're missing the point. The bible itself is part of tradition that has been handed down from generations upon generations. There are many books in this world but the bible was compiled, copied and given special TLC by the church and handed down along with the sacraments and other oral traditions.

You contradict yourselves when you say that catholics only know what they know because 'scriptures told them'. Only a minute ago all I was hearing was how Catholics never read the bible and disregard the bible. So it is either they got their knowledge from the bible or they didn't. You have to decide which one it is that you believe, because there are still many christians in this world who are illiterate and I hope you are not condemning them because they cannot read the bible.

PastorAIO:


you're missing the point. The bible itself is part of tradition that has been handed down from generations upon generations. There are many books in this world but the bible was compiled, copied and given special TLC by the church and handed down along with the sacraments and other oral traditions.

You contradict yourselves when you say that catholics only know what they know because 'scriptures told them'. Only a minute ago all I was hearing was how Catholics never read the bible and disregard the bible. So it is either they got their knowledge from the bible or they didn't. You have to decide which one it is that you believe, because there are still many christians in this world who are illiterate and I hope you are not condemning them because they cannot read the bible.

You, my friend, are not a very nice person. I've read through your posts here, and all you've done to poor dolphinheart is box him to a corner using his own submissions, then let him go without knocking him down, only to catch him again on another claim; and repeat same thing. Indeed you, my friend, are a very "unfriendly" person.

i have been following u guys and just discovered that this argument will never end as long as it conscines a JW. just like pastor pointed out, if he is defeated in one he goes on to point another one. dats the way this will continue. i thank u all once again cos i hv learnt alot.i dont belive solely on the bible so i wont argue here. trying to argue with the bible to defend d church teachings just to please sola scripturas is not easy.

you want to know d oral traditions not in d NT but when they give them to you, you link them to one occultic history or a pagan tradition.

PastorAIO:


you're missing the point. The bible itself is part of tradition that has been handed down from generations upon generations. There are many books in this world but the bible was compiled, copied and given special TLC by the church and handed down along with the sacraments and other oral traditions.

You contradict yourselves when you say that catholics only know what they know because 'scriptures told them'. Only a minute ago all I was hearing was how Catholics never read the bible and disregard the bible. So it is either they got their knowledge from the bible or they didn't. You have to decide which one it is that you believe, because there are still many christians in this world who are illiterate and I hope you are not condemning them because they cannot read the bible.

To make it clearer;
2 Thessalonians 2:15--- "Because of that, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions that we taught you by word or letter."

The Bible is a compilation of those letters. Which makes it a part of the Apostolic Tradition Paul was talking about.

PastorAIO:


you're missing the point. The bible itself is part of tradition that has been handed down from generations upon generations.

You have now removed the "oral " from "oral traditions" so as to fit the scriptures in. At the moment We are talking about oral traditions!. And I want to be shown just one of them that is not know from the scriptures.

There are many books in this world but the bible was compiled, copied and given special TLC by the church and handed down along with the sacraments and other oral traditions.

Are all these many books inspired ? If yes why where they not included in the compilation, and pls mention one of these inspired books not compiled.

You contradict yourselves when you say that catholics only know what they know because 'scriptures told them'. Only a minute ago all I was hearing was how Catholics never read the bible and disregard the bible. So it is either they got their knowledge from the bible or they didn't.

At bold, pls show me where I said those words and let's look at it.

You have to decide which one it is that you believe, because there are still many christians in this world who are illiterate and I hope you are not condemning them because they cannot read the bible.

Bro, the discussion was on the use of the scriptures to defend the use of the image of mary.
I've asked on occasions to show me how the scriptures support the use of the image. All I've seen is to point to some similarity between when mary got pregnant and some occassions involving the ark. This does not mean mary is the ark of covenant!, and the scriptures never implied so!
Then there was an attempt to use the perfection of the church to say you have right to use the image, I thus showed you instances where the church is not perfect.
Then the claim went on that since the church compiled the scriptures it has the knowledge to make the Image. On these I asked: show prove that ur church compiled the scriptures ? Are all the scriptures ur church compiled inspired? Did your church compile all the inspired books? If not why?

Now its on oral tradition.
You are the one that's jumping left and right just to find justification for the use mary's image. Show me one oral tradition that is neccessary for salvation that is not initially or eventually written down in the scriptures!.

I do/will not condemn illiterate christians. I dnt have such power or authority. And I will never support the killing, imprisonment, burning of people just because they have a contrary view to the state church!

lacum:
you want to know d oral traditions not in d NT but when they give them to you, you link them to one occultic history or a pagan tradition.

If it has conflites with the scriptures, if its based on pagan worship, its not mentioned in the scriptures. I will say so!
I'm still waiting to hear just one!

dolphinheart:


You have now removed the "oral " from "oral traditions" so as to fit the scriptures in. At the moment We are talking about oral traditions!. And I want to be shown just one of them that is not know from the scriptures.


Are all these many books inspired ? If yes why where they not included in the compilation, and pls mention one of these inspired books not compiled.


At bold, pls show me where I said those words and let's look at it.



Bro, the discussion was on the use of the scriptures to defend the use of the image of mary.
I've asked on occasions to show me how the scriptures support the use of the image. All I've seen is to point to some similarity between when mary got pregnant and some occassions involving the ark. This does not mean mary is the ark of covenant!, and the scriptures never implied so!
Then there was an attempt to use the perfection of the church to say you have right to use the image, I thus showed you instances where the church is not perfect.
Then the claim went on that since the church compiled the scriptures it has the knowledge to make the Image. On these I asked: show prove that ur church compiled the scriptures ? Are all the scriptures ur church compiled inspired? Did your church compile all the inspired books? If not why?

Now its on oral tradition.
You are the one that's jumping left and right just to find justification for the use mary's image. Show me one oral tradition that is neccessary for salvation that is not initially or eventually written down in the scriptures!.

I do/will not condemn illiterate christians. I dnt have such power or authority. And I will never support the killing, imprisonment, burning of people just because they have a contrary view to the state church!

1. yes, some of them were inspired. They were not added because the Church decided to choose only books from Peter, the Apostles, Paul and the four Gospels.

2. Is it not part of what they heard (Oral tradition) that they wrote down as Scripture? Where was it stated that they wrote down all they taught? Just a straight answer please.

3. Please show me from the Scriptures how the Church is not perfect.

4. Show me from the scriptures which books are to be regarded as scripture. Dont point to table of content o. Because Moses who wrote the first book did not write table of content.

5. According to Jesus, in order to offer God an offering/worship/e.t.c. , you must be at peace with your brother. This peace is therefore necessary for salvation. Where did Jesus say that he peace will come from? Read for yourself.

"Mat 18:15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
Mat 18:16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
Mat 18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican"

Jesus did not say take your brother and do bible study and you will find peace. SO this Peace which is necessary to worship God, which makes it necessary for salvation is not found in Scriptures.

6. By the way, i thought you guys said the world supposed to end in 1914, then, 1925 , then e.t.c. Why are we still here? Where did you see it in the bible?

dolphinheart:


You have now removed the "oral " from "oral traditions" so as to fit the scriptures in. At the moment We are talking about oral traditions!. And I want to be shown just one of them that is not know from the scriptures.

Oral means by word of mouth. abi? Now I believe that you are saying you accept that the church has traditions but not oral traditions. Well Jolliano has addressed that adequately here:

Jolliano:

To make it clearer;
2 Thessalonians 2:15--- "Because of that, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions that we taught you by word or letter."
The Bible is a compilation of those letters. Which makes it a part of the Apostolic Tradition Paul was talking about.

Is that enough for you or must you hear one such oral tradition spelt out before you accept what the bible says about the church having oral traditions.

Are all these many books inspired ? If yes why where they not included in the compilation, and pls mention one of these inspired books not compiled.

I'm not talking about the inspiration of the books. I'm stating that the very bible that you're talking about is a part of the church tradition.

At bold, pls show me where I said those words and let's look at it.

Not you specifically but I've heard it said a lot here and elsewhere. I was being presumptuous, Sorry. Perhaps you can set me straight by stating your position clearly. Simply say: I, Dolphinheart, do not believe that Catholics disregard the bible.

Bro, the discussion was on the use of the scriptures to defend the use of the image of mary.
I've asked on occasions to show me how the scriptures support the use of the image.

Thank you. Now think about this carefully. Read what you've said once again. And then ask yourself the question that you've been asking in your last couple of post. 'Is there an instance of Oral tradition that Catholics teach'? You see that you don't need to go round and round in circles. As the catholics here have pointed out, if they tell you, you will say it is occult. Are you not demonstrating exactly what they predicted of you. Even since the start of this thread?

All I've seen is to point to some similarity between when mary got pregnant and some occassions involving the ark. This does not mean mary is the ark of covenant!, and the scriptures never implied so!
Then there was an attempt to use the perfection of the church to say you have right to use the image, I thus showed you instances where the church is not perfect.
Then the claim went on that since the church compiled the scriptures it has the knowledge to make the Image. On these I asked: show prove that ur church compiled the scriptures ? Are all the scriptures ur church compiled inspired? Did your church compile all the inspired books? If not why?

Now its on oral tradition.
You are the one that's jumping left and right just to find justification for the use mary's image. Show me one oral tradition that is neccessary for salvation that is not initially or eventually written down in the scriptures!.

You are free to interpret the bible any which way you choose. You asked for an oral tradition.

What tradition necessary for salvation was eventually written down, and what happened to the poor souls who practiced christianity before it was written down?

I do/will not condemn illiterate christians. I dnt have such power or authority. And I will never support the killing, imprisonment, burning of people just because they have a contrary view to the state church!

I don't know what is the relevance of killing people with contrary view to state church, but I'm glad that you're not condemning illiterate christians because they cannot read bible.

PastorAIO:


Oral means by word of mouth. abi? Now I believe that you are saying you accept that the church has traditions but not oral traditions. Well Jolliano has addressed that adequately here:



Is that enough for you or must you hear one such oral tradition spelt out before you accept what the bible says about the church having oral traditions.




I'm not talking about the inspiration of the books. I'm stating that the very bible that you're talking about is a part of the church tradition.



Not you specifically but I've heard it said a lot here and elsewhere. I was being presumptuous, Sorry. Perhaps you can set me straight by stating your position clearly. Simply say: I, Dolphinheart, do not believe that Catholics disregard the bible.





Thank you. Now think about this carefully. Read what you've said once again. And then ask yourself the question that you've been asking in your last couple of post. 'Is there an instance of Oral tradition that Catholics teach'? You see that you don't need to go round and round in circles. As the catholics here have pointed out, if they tell you, you will say it is occult. Are you not demonstrating exactly what they predicted of you. Even since the start of this thread?



You are free to interpret the bible any which way you choose. You asked for an oral tradition.

What tradition necessary for salvation was eventually written down, and what happened to the poor souls who practiced christianity before it was written down?



I don't know what is the relevance of killing people with contrary view to state church, but I'm glad that you're not condemning illiterate christians because they cannot read bible.

Again, he leaves the topic to talk about killing people which I have shown was done not because of Christianity by Emperor Theodosius. It is irrelevant but he must talk against Catholicism.

dolphinheart:


If it has conflites with the scriptures, if its based on pagan worship, its not mentioned in the scriptures. I will say so!
I'm still waiting to hear just one!

i think u mean to say, "if it conflicts with my interpretation of scriptures". An open book on a temple hardly read and interpretes itself.

dolphinheart:

Bro, I asked for the source itself.
If you feel oral traditions are being passed down and not written in the scriptures and that you know it, pls let us hear one of them.

the canon of scripture. That is one tradition dat wasn't in scripture.

Do you need all revealed truth to gain salvation? What revealed truth do you know that was not in the scriptures and let's see if it is neccessary for salvation, not man made ritual, not taken from pagan worship and does not contradict the scriptures.

do u nid d scriptures 4 salvation? If yes, then its canon can't be found therein.

And d revealed truths were revealed so we will know dem. If ur jw doctrines is preventing u from knowing a truth God as revealed under d guise of irrevant then u shuld b scared sum1 is trying to lead u astray.

You are still quoting the scriptures Bro. Give us an example that is not included in the scriptures.

u said i should giue u an xample of an appetizer letter, dat shows d apostles didnt try to commit everytin to paper. I did just that.

dolphinheart:


Simple question I asked you Bro, u re turning it into something else . Pls tell us, what do we need for salvation that is not written in the scriptures.?

the very canon of scriptures.

bro pls stick to our discussion , ur reply changes the direction of my discussion with pastor

Jolliano:



1. yes, some of them were inspired. They were not added because the Church decided to choose only books from Peter, the Apostles, Paul and the four Gospels.

Give us an example.
Are there no gospels in the others?
Why did they chose the books of those people and left others.

2. Is it not part of what they heard (Oral tradition) that they wrote down as Scripture? Where was it stated that they wrote down all they taught? Just a straight answer please.

Never said they wrote down all they taught! So I dnt know why you are asking me the question.

3. Please show me from the Scriptures how the Church is not perfect.

Burning people on a stake for not following ur doctrine shows you are not perfect .

4. Show me from the scriptures which books are to be regarded as scripture. Dont point to table of content o. Because Moses who wrote the first book did not write table of content.

Bro, I did not claim to compile the scriptures, you did! So I want to know about how the selection went.

5. According to Jesus, in order to offer God an offering/worship/e.t.c. , you must be at peace with your brother. This peace is therefore necessary for salvation. Where did Jesus say that he peace will come from? Read for yourself.

"Mat 18:15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
Mat 18:16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
Mat 18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican"

Jesus did not say take your brother and do bible study and you will find peace. SO this Peace which is necessary to worship God, which makes it necessary for salvation is not found in Scriptures.

Bro , you just read the scripture again, this time about what to do in finding peace with your brother.
The scripture is fully equippt for every good work!

6. By the way, i thought you guys said the world supposed to end in 1914, then, 1925 , then e.t.c. Why are we still here? Where did you see it in the bible?

You trying to change direction again? Wunt do that again with you on these thread . And Pls go back to our own discussions.

dolphinheart:
bro pls stick to our discussion , ur reply changes the direction of my discussion with pastor

Give us an example.
Are there no gospels in the others?
Why did they chose the books of those people and left others.


Never said they wrote down all they taught! So I dnt know why you are asking me the question.


Burning people on a stake for not following ur doctrine shows you are not perfect .


Bro, I did not claim to compile the scriptures, you did! So I want to know about how the selection went.


Bro , you just read the scripture again, this time about what to do in finding peace with your brother.
The scripture is fully equippt for every good work!

You trying to change direction again? Wunt do that again with you on these thread . And Pls go back to our own discussions.

LOL. I already answered all the questions you wrote.

But you keep repeating burn people and kill people..........

There is no other Gospel written by actual disciples and apostles. What you have are rubbish books written by Gnostics and attached with an apostolic name e.g The Gospel of Peter and The Gospel of Thomas.

They were not trying to compile an encyclopedia so they did not need to include all books. If they had done so,they would have never finished the bible because everyone more than ten people would write new books which they would also have to add and so, they use a limit to choose those books.

PastorAIO:


Oral means by word of mouth. abi? Now I believe that you are saying you accept that the church has traditions but not oral traditions. Well Jolliano has addressed that adequately here:

You well know that the discussion is based of if the scriptures contains all we need for salvation. Such knowlege, devoid of the scriptures will prove me wrong.

Is that enough for you or must you hear one such oral tradition spelt out before you accept what the bible says about the church having oral traditions.

Bro, again I feel you should look at what I've been saying since to understand my views. Remember the issue started with the request for scripture on the use of the image of mary and the attempt to find it outside the scriptures. Ill probably have kept quiet if I've been told that the reasons for making the image of mary is from outside the scriptures.

I'm not talking about the inspiration of the books. I'm stating that the very bible that you're talking about is a part of the church tradition.

Ok , maybe jolliano will give me details on that.

Not you specifically but I've heard it said a lot here and elsewhere. I was being presumptuous, Sorry. Perhaps you can set me straight by stating your position clearly. Simply say: I, Dolphinheart, do not believe that Catholics disregard the bible.

Ok, no problem.
As to the question, I feel that some of their doctrines do not follow scriptural injunctions,examples and directives. An example is the use of the image of mary.

Thank you. Now think about this carefully. Read what you've said once again. And then ask yourself the question that you've been asking in your last couple of post. 'Is there an instance of Oral tradition that Catholics teach'? You see that you don't need to go round and round in circles. As the catholics here have pointed out, if they tell you, you will say it is occult. Are you not demonstrating exactly what they predicted of you. Even since the start of this thread?

I like ur view. I feel I should not have or continue to ask the questions over and over again .why? Since they already view that I will reject or classify any of their answers as OCCultic. Ill try not to ask for answers on the source for the use of the image again.

But if they tell me and I say its occultic, then we will enter another phase to see if my statements are true or false.

You are free to interpret the bible any which way you choose. You asked for an oral tradition.

What tradition necessary for salvation was eventually written down, and what happened to the poor souls who practiced christianity before it was written down?

The traditions recorded down in the scriptures.

Those souls will be judged with justice.

I don't know what is the relevance of killing people with contrary view to state church, but I'm glad that you're not condemning illiterate christians because they cannot read bible.

Its just to show that that state church is doing something very very wrong.

Ubenedictus:
i think u mean to say, "if it conflicts with my interpretation of scriptures". An open book on a temple hardly read and interpretes itself.

Ur interpretation and mine can be discussed using the scriptures as a guide.

Jolliano:


LOL. I already answered all the questions you wrote.

Bro you have not, pls go back to our discussion, quote me there and show how you have answered the questions. This one is a discussion between me and pastor.

[qoute]But you keep repeating burn people and kill people..........
[/quote]
Go to that post and let know if I'm right or wrong.

There is no other Gospel written by actual disciples and apostles. What you have are rubbish books written by Gnostics and attached with an apostolic name e.g The Gospel of Peter and The Gospel of Thomas.

Thus they where not inspired since they are rubbish! I'm asking for an inspired scripture that is not included in the compilation and why?

They were not trying to compile an encyclopedia so they did not need to include all books. If they had done so,they would have never finished the bible because everyone more than ten people would write new books which they would also have to add and so, they use a limit to choose those books.

Bro, how did they do the selection, what is the criteria for selecting one and removing another.?

dolphinheart:

You well know that the discussion is based of if the scriptures contains all we need for salvation. Such knowlege, devoid of the scriptures will prove me wrong.


Bro, again I feel you should look at what I've been saying since to understand my views. Remember the issue started with the request for scripture on the use of the image of mary and the attempt to find it outside the scriptures. Ill probably have kept quiet if I've been told that the reasons for making the image of mary is from outside the scriptures.


Ok , maybe jolliano will give me details on that.


Ok, no problem.
As to the question, I feel that some of their doctrines do not follow scriptural injunctions,examples and directives. An example is the use of the image of mary.


I like ur view. I feel I should not have or continue to ask the questions over and over again .why? Since they already view that I will reject or classify any of their answers as OCCultic. Ill try not to ask for answers on the source for the use of the image again.

But if they tell me and I say its occultic, then we will enter another phase to see if my statements are true or false.


The traditions recorded down in the scriptures.

Those souls will be judged with justice.



Its just to show that that state church is doing something very very wrong.

You don't nEed arguments but a simple bible study.

Let Me Show You Who Mary Is From Scripture using typology as Jesus and his Apostles used.
Remember,the OT is a Prefiguration of the NT. All or most israelites knew the OT by Heart which is why they never quoted it. They would simply say it is written in the Scriptures because they expected that the other person knew what the OT contained.

Look at Gen 1 and John 1.
Anybody with even small sense can see that John is connecting his Gospel directly to Genesis.

"In the beginning" and "In the beginning". Verse 1.
"God saw that the light was good..." And "The light shined in the...... " Verse 5.
"Spirit and water" Gen 1:2 / "Spirit and water" John 1:32-33.

First, John shows that The Word was God and that the Word was made flesh. This shows that Jesus is the Word and since the Word is God, Jesus is God.

Back to Mary:

Genesis 1 and 2:
God created Man (Adam) on the sixth day, saw that he was lonely, put him in a deep sleep and then created the woman. On the Seventh day, Adam saw her and called her "WOMAN" because they were "Flesh of flesh and blood of blood".

John 1 and 2:
(Please count with me)
John's first mention of the Messiah- Day 1
John 1:29- The next day - Day 2
John 1:35- The next day - Day 3
John 1:43- The next day - Day 4
John 2:1- On the third day - Day 7

On the seventh day at Cana, Jesus calls Mary "WOMAN" - John 2:4. Mary and Jesus are "flesh of flesh and blood of blood".
Note, that everytime Jesus talks to Mary, he calls her WOMAN even at the cross- John 14:26. Do you now see why John would refer to her as The WOMAN in Revelations 12.

NOW, Looking at Mary and Eve:
Eve listened to an evil angel and brought sin and death.
Mary listened to a good angel and brought grace and life.

Eve pushed adam to his first sinful deed.
Mary pushed Jesus to his first Glorious deed.

Eve - Mother of all living. - Gen 3:20
Mary - Mother of JESUS in whom was life - John 1:4 and through Jesus,mother of all Christians (people living in Christ) - Rev 12:17 and specially symbolized through John in John 14:26.
(Remember the reference to the WOMAN and her seed in Gen 3:15).

What Eve Caused adam to do at a tree.
Mary brought forth Jesus and he undid it on a WOODEN CROSS(Tree of Life).

Eve was cursed by God for disbelief. - Gen 3:14
Mary was blessed for believing. - Luke 1:45

I have already shown that she is the Ark of the Covenant.
Eve carried the old covenant and brought forth children. One of which was killed by his brother (Jesus betrayed by Judas). "The blood of Jesus and the blood of Abel...."- Luke 12:24.
Mary is the Ark of the New and everlasting covenant.
(All covenants had and have Arks).

Read 1 Chronicles 15 and 16 and you will see the high honour and veneration the Israelites including David payed to the Ark of the Covenant which was so holy that touching it caused Uzzah's death.

That same honour and veneration is what we pay to Mary (The Ark Of The New Covenant). The same honour payed to her by the Early Christians and even the first Protestants (Martin Luther even has an image of Mary at his grave till now, Zwingli and Calvin).


EXTRAS:-
1. Mary was ever virgin.
A. The Ark was too holy to be touched by humans (Count how many people died for treating the Ark anyhow). We understand from this that Joseph understanding this would not try to sleep with her.

B. Before you mention Matthew 1:25 "....until...".
Until in the bible does not mean it occured after that time.
2 Sam 6 (Still ark of the covenant chapter) verse 23 - "Michal had no child until her death". Does it she gave birth after she died?
Psalm 110:1- "My Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I have made your enemies your footstool".
Does it mean that he will leave the right hand after the enemies are made his footstool?

So you see, until does not mean it occured.

C. Brothers of Jesus:
They were called adelphos of Jesus and was translated as brother.
The word "Adelphos" is used to represent close relations whether from the same parents, related by blood or not.
Lot was called Abraham's adelphos but we know they were not brothers.
Acts 1:13 - 15 - "the 12 apostles, Mary, the women and the brethren of Jesus..... And they were 120 in number".
12 + 1 + 20(assuming the women were twenty) = 33.
That would mean the brothers of Jesus were 87. How Mary take born 87 children wey don grow up when Jesus him first born still dey 33 to 34 years old?

Obviously, Jesus had no brothers.

2. Mary was conceived without sin and remained sinless. From Rev 12, the dragon(devil) chased(tempted) her but he never caught her because she was given two wings of a great eagle (very symbolic of holiness and purity) to fly into the wilderness, into her place.
Ever wondered why the dragon could not follow her into the wilderness? She went to her place in heaven and the dragon cannot chase her there. So he comes to chase her children on earth.
Psalm 132:7 - 8 - "Arise, O LORD... You and Your Ark."

3. Mary as Queen.

Jesus was of Royal blood. A descendant of David. In the Davidic Kingdom(Kingdom of Israel), the queen was always the mother of the king and not the wife. All mention of Queens in Israel were Queen Mothers (Mother of the King).

Read luke 1:32. Jesus is The KING. And as a King from David's generation. The queen is His Mother, Mary. Rev 12:1 shows her with a crown of 12 stars. The same number as the tribes of Israel!

Read Psalm 45:9, 1 Kings 2: 19 and especially 2 Chron. 15:16.

The Mother of The King is the Queen.

You see the beauty of Bible Study (Treating the bible as a whole) and not just taking one verse and giving it any meaning you like.

IMAGE OF MARY:
When you read commandments from Exodus, you read a summary. The full version is in Deuteronomy chapter 4.
Deut 4:15-16 -- "Because you did not see any form.....".
It means you do not know my form so making an image of me would be foolish and wrong. Don't make an image of the Sun and anyother thing thinking that they are my image or form. That is what the commandment means.

Jesus is God and the people saw Jesus. They made diagrams of him in the caves and catacombs. And not just Jesus but Mary, Peter, the Apostles and a lot of other things.
When we use images, we don't worship them. That would be foolish. We use them as a reminder of the people in them or the events they represent.

When you look at a relative's picture, is it the picture you're fond of or the person whose picture you are holding?

dolphinheart:

Bro you have not, pls go back to our discussion, quote me there and show how you have answered the questions. This one is a discussion between me and pastor.

[qoute]But you keep repeating burn people and kill people..........

Go to that post and let know if I'm right or wrong.

There is no other Gospel written by actual disciples and apostles. What you have are rubbish books written by Gnostics and attached with an apostolic name e.g The Gospel of Peter and The Gospel of Thomas.
Thus they where not inspired since they are rubbish! I'm asking for an inspired scripture that is not included in the compilation and why?


They were not trying to compile an encyclopedia so they did not need to include all books. If they had done so,they would have never finished the bible because everyone more than ten people would write new books which they would also have to add and so, they use a limit to choose those books.
Bro, how did they do the selection, what is the criteria for selecting one and removing another.?

The Didache is one of them. The Apology of St Justin Martyr is another.

Like I said, they read through all the books, selected all the inspired ones and then from the inspired ones chose those written by Peter, The Apostles, Paul and the Gospels.

they did this because producing and reproducing the bible would require people sitting down to write all of the books again and again. They would write with feather and ink on animal skin or papyrus. Their alphabets were very different from ours. The work would have been too much. So they limited the number to that which I have mentioned.

Jolliano:


You don't nEed arguments but a simple bible study.

Bro again I say, stop jumping into the discussion between me and pastor. You have not quoted my reply to you and you keep quoting my reply to someone else post.

Let Me Show You Who Mary Is From Scripture using typology as Jesus and his Apostles used.
Remember,the OT is a Prefiguration of the NT.

The above is not true.

All or most israelites knew the OT by Heart which is why they never quoted it. They would simply say it is written in the Scriptures because they expected that the other person knew what the OT contained.

So they dnt quote what is written? Pls what do you understand by the word "quote"?

Look at Gen 1 and John 1.
Anybody with even small sense can see that John is connecting his Gospel directly to Genesis.

Bro, they are talking about two different begginings.
All these connections and similarities you are looking for will not allow someone to know what the scriptures really says.
The scripture is not understood by similarities, it is understood by context and meanings Bro.

"In the beginning" and "In the beginning". Verse 1.
"God saw that the light was good..." And "The light shined in the...... " Verse 5.
"Spirit and water" Gen 1:2 / "Spirit and water" John 1:32-33.

Failure to quote the whole sentence shows you are wrong and trying to prove something that does not exist. There are a lot of similarities in the scriptures, but it does not mean that they are talking about the same thing.

]First, John shows that The Word was God and that the Word was made flesh. This shows that Jesus is the Word and since the Word is God, Jesus is God.

So God was with God, then we have two Gods.

Back to Mary:

Genesis 1 and 2:
God created Man (Adam) on the sixth day, saw that he was lonely, put him in a deep sleep and then created the woman. On the Seventh day, Adam saw her and called her "WOMAN" because they were "Flesh of flesh and blood of blood".

John 1 and 2:
(Please count with me)
John's first mention of the Messiah- Day 1
John 1:29- The next day - Day 2
John 1:35- The next day - Day 3
John 1:43- The next day - Day 4
John 2:1- On the third day - Day 7

Bros pls provide proof that God created eve on the seventh day .

On the seventh day at Cana, Jesus calls Mary "WOMAN" - John 2:4. Mary and Jesus are "flesh of flesh and blood of blood".
Note, that everytime Jesus talks to Mary, he calls her WOMAN even at the cross- John 14:26. Do you now see why John would refer to her as The WOMAN in Revelations 12.

You are looking for similarities in woman abi, pls add this people.

Luke 13:12
When Jesus saw her, he
called her forward and said to
her, "Woman, you are set free
from your infirmity."

John 4 :21
must worship is in Jerusalem.”
“Woman,” Jesus replied,
“believe me, a time is coming
when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.

John 20:15
He asked her, “Woman,
why are you crying? Who is it
you are looking for?”

And if you still believe that the woman in rev 12 is mary , pls tell us

1.when did mary become pregnant in heaven and who give her belle?
(2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth.)

2.when did mary give birth to a second son?
(5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” a And her child
was snatched up to God and
to his throne.

3. When did mary have offprings
(17 Then the dragon was
enraged at the woman and
went off to wage war against
the rest of her offspring—
those who keep God’s
commands and hold fast their
testimony about Jesus.)

To be continued.......

dolphinheart:

Bro again I say, stop jumping into the discussion between me and pastor. You have not quoted my reply to you and you keep quoting my reply to someone else post.


The above is not true.


So they dnt quote what is written? Pls what do you understand by the word "quote"?


Bro, they are talking about two different begginings.
All these connections and similarities you are looking for will not allow someone to know what the scriptures really says.
The scripture is not understood by similarities, it is understood by context and meanings Bro.


Failure to quote the whole sentence shows you are wrong and trying to prove something that does not exist. There are a lot of similarities in the scriptures, but it does not mean that they are talking about the same thing.


So God was with God, then we have two Gods.


Bros pls provide proof that God created eve on the seventh day .


You are looking for similarities in woman abi, pls add this people.

Luke 13:12
When Jesus saw her, he
called her forward and said to
her, "Woman, you are set free
from your infirmity."

John 4 :21
must worship is in Jerusalem.”
“Woman,” Jesus replied,
“believe me, a time is coming
when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.

John 20:15
He asked her, “Woman,
why are you crying? Who is it
you are looking for?”

And if you still believe that the woman in rev 12 is mary , pls tell us

1.when did mary become pregnant in heaven and who give her belle?
(2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth.)

2.when did mary give birth to a second son?
(5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” a And her child
was snatched up to God and
to his throne.

3. When did mary have offprings
(17 Then the dragon was
enraged at the woman and
went off to wage war against
the rest of her offspring—
those who keep God’s
commands and hold fast their
testimony about Jesus.)

To be continued.......

1.So John and Genesis are talking about 2 beginnings. Wow? Can you tell me the difference between the two beginnings? And tell me which of the Apostles or Early Christians believed or taught this blasphemy you are spewing?

2.I don't quote completely because it would make it longer. That is why I put the verses of the bible for everyone to check the full sentence from the bible.

3. One God, 3 persons. Simple illustration is A candle. When you light a candle, you originally have fire. But the fire brings light and the light brings heat. You cannot seperate the fire from the light,the light from the heat or the heat from the fire. Though they look different, they are ONE.
Why did Jesus ask them to baptize in the name of The Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?
He did not say names. He said name. That shows you that they are one.

4. I never said Eve was created on the seventh day. The first time Adam saw Eve was on the Seventh day.

5. I didn't say Jesus referred to Mary everytime he said woman. I said Jesus referred to Mary as WOMAN which is suprising since she was his MOTHER.

6. Your questions about REV 12, I have already answered.

Actually, you ought to restart. But continue if you want.

@ Jolliano

continued.......

NOW, Looking at Mary and Eve:
Eve listened to an evil angel and brought sin
Mary listened to a good angel and brought grace and life.

Good.

Eve pushed adam to his first sinful deed.
Mary pushed Jesus to his first Glorious deed.

So the appointment of disciples is less glorious than turning water into wine.?

Eve - Mother of all living. - Gen 3:20
Mary - Mother of JESUS in whom was life - John 1:4 and through Jesus,mother of all Christians (people living in Christ) - Rev 12:17 and specially symbolized through John in John 14:26.
(Remember the reference to the WOMAN and her seed in Gen 3:15).

The scriptures never made reference to such, christians are jesus brothers and jesus said they where giving to him by God, not by his association to mary. Remember who jesus himself calls his mothers, or was he lying?!

Are you saying the "woman in genesis 3:15 is mary?

”And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over
you.”

What Eve Caused adam to do at a tree.
Mary brought forth Jesus and he undid it on a WOODEN CROSS(Tree of Life).

Bro, all that jesus did was from the father, even jesus did not do anything by his own initiative, that mary gave birth to jesus does not mean she was the one who told jesus what to do.

Eve was cursed by God for disbelief. - Gen 3:14
Mary was blessed for believing. - Luke 1:45

Disobedience Bro, not disbelief.

I have already shown that she is the Ark of the Covenant.
Eve carried the old covenant and brought forth children. One of which was killed by his brother (Jesus betrayed by Judas). "The blood of Jesus and the blood of Abel...."- Luke 12:24.
Mary is the Ark of the New and everlasting covenant.
(All covenants had and have Arks).

False analogy, eve did not carry any ark or covenant.
Eve never had any covenant with God.
Mary is not the ark of any new covenant. The scripture never said so.
You had tried to link mary with the ark of covenant using similarities, now you are on ur
Own trying to give mary a new ark.

Read 1 Chronicles 15 and 16 and you will see the high honour and veneration the Israelites including David payed to the Ark of the Covenant which was so holy that touching it caused Uzzah's death.

That same honour and veneration is what we pay to Mary (The Ark Of The New Covenant). The same honour payed to her by the Early Christians and even the first Protestants (Martin Luther even has an image of Mary at his grave till now, Zwingli and Calvin).

1. Did the ark marry like mary did?
2. Did those who touched mary die?
3. Did God instruct you to venerate and honour mary?
4. Did God instruct you to make an image of mary.?
If the ark of the covenant was an image, was mary an image? How can she now be compared to an image?

5. Was any of these venerations you do to mary's image done to mary during her life time?

EXTRAS:-
1. Mary was ever virgin.
A. The Ark was too holy to be touched by humans (Count how many people died for treating the Ark anyhow). We understand from this that Joseph understanding this would not try to sleep with her.

Look at what you said again, they treated the ark anyhow ? Or they broke the laws concerning the ark?
Now what laws where giving concerning touching mary, since you are looking for similarities.

Na lie, mary gave birth, had other children. Joseph did not touch her until....

B. Before you mention Matthew 1:25 "....until...".
Until in the bible does not mean it occured after that time.

I have mentioned it, "until" means "until"
Until : up to (a particular time)
—used to indicate the time
when something will happen,
become true, etc.
—used as a function word
to indicate continuance (as of
an action or condition) to a
specified time <stayed until
morning>.

but knew her not until she had
given birth to a son. And he
called his name Jesus.
It means that after these events he knew her!

Stop twisting the scriptures.

2 Sam 6 (Still ark of the covenant chapter) verse 23 - "Michal had no child until her death". Does it she gave birth after she died?[/quote]
Will you stop this, looking for a particular translation to suit ur views will not help.

And Michal daughter of Saul
had no children to the day of her death.

Psalm 110:1- "My Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I have made your enemies your footstool".
Does it mean that he will leave the right hand after the enemies are made his footstool?
That question will be answered by you when you tell me if jesus was still sitting at Gods right hand when he came back to earth?

[quote]So you see, until does not mean it occured.

You are wrong.

C. Brothers of Jesus:
They were called adelphos of Jesus and was translated as brother.
The word "Adelphos" is used to represent close relations whether from the same parents, related by blood or not.
Lot was called Abraham's adelphos but we know they were not brothers.
Acts 1:13 - 15 - "the 12 apostles, Mary, the women and the brethren of Jesus..... And they were 120 in number".
12 + 1 + 20(assuming the women were twenty) = 33.
That would mean the brothers of Jesus were 87. How Mary take born 87 children wey don grow up when Jesus him first born still dey 33 to 34 years old?

At bold, it therefore means that the context will determine the true meaning of brother, if it is of the same parent or not.

Mat 12:46
While Jesus was still talking to
the crowd, his mother and
brothers stood outside,
wanting to speak to him

Is the mother the literal mother mentioned here? If yes, why are you not believing that the brothers are not jesus literal brothers.?

Jesus would not have made the statement he made in verse 48 to 50 if the brothers in verse 48 where not literal like the mother in verse 48 .

People who knew jesus family said
Matt 15:55:57
“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James,
Joseph, Simon and Judas?
56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man
get all these things?”

If mary is the literal mother of jesus, wonder why you view that those mentioned here are not jesus' literal brothers and sisters. Mary had up to 30 years or little less to give birth to them.

"For even his own brothers did not believe in him.

In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples.
The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.
Some Roman Catholics
claim that these “brothers”
were actually Jesus’
cousins. However, in each
instance, the specific
Greek word for “brother” is
used. While the word can
refer to other relatives, its
normal and literal meaning
is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” (anepsios),and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to
see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-
brothers.
Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers
and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical. Mary was a married woman, and the scriptures did say a wife should not deny her husband his due, and their is no record of any injunction that mary or Joseph should not know each other or have children .

Obviously, Jesus had no brothers.

you re wrong.

2. Mary was conceived without sin and remained sinless.

Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.


Unless your traditions teaches you that mary is not a descendant of adam , then this scripture applies to her.

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered
the world through one man, and death through sin, and in
this way death came to all people, because all sinned.


To be continued......

@ Jolliano

continued.......

From Rev 12, the dragon(devil) chased(tempted) her but he never caught her because she was given two wings of a great eagle (very symbolic of holiness and purity) to fly into the wilderness, into her place.
Ever wondered why the dragon could not follow her into the wilderness? She went to her place in heaven and the dragon cannot chase her there. So he comes to chase her children on earth.

You need to read rev 12 again .

Psalm 132:7 - 8 - "Arise, O LORD... You and Your Ark."

American Standard Version
Arise, O Jehovah, into thy
resting-place; Thou, and the
ark of thy strength.

Darby Bible Translation
Arise, Jehovah, into thy rest,
thou and the ark of thy
strength.

World english Bible
Arise, Yahweh, into your
resting place; you, and the ark
of your strength.


Dnt know why you omitted parts of the verse.

3. Mary as Queen.

Jesus was of Royal blood. A descendant of David. In the Davidic Kingdom(Kingdom of Israel), the queen was always the mother of the king and not the wife. All mention of Queens in Israel were Queen Mothers (Mother of the King).

You should have given us a scriptural example na.

Read luke 1:32. Jesus is The KING. And as a King from David's generation. The queen is His Mother, Mary. Rev 12:1 shows her with a crown of 12 stars. The same number as the tribes of Israel!

Read Psalm 45:9, 1 Kings 2: 19 and especially 2 Chron. 15:16.[/quote

Psalm 45:19
Daughters of kings are among
your honored women; at your
right hand is the royal bride in
gold of Ophir.

1 ki 2:19
When Bathsheba went to King
Solomon to speak to him for
Adonijah, the king stood up to
meet her, bowed down to her
and sat down on his throne.
He had a throne brought for
the king's mother, and she sat
down at his right hand.

2 chr 15:16
King Asa also deposed his
grandmother Maakah from her
position as queen mother,
because she had made a
repulsive image for the
worship of Asherah. Asa cut it
down, broke it up and burned
it in the Kidron Valley.

[quote]The Mother of The King is the Queen.

You see the beauty of Bible Study (Treating the bible as a whole) and not just taking one verse and giving it any meaning you like.

Now let's go back to those scriptures and see if the throne king Solomon established brought about good for the isrealites.

(1)2 chr 15:16
King Asa also deposed his
grandmother Maakah from her
position as queen mother,
because she had made a
repulsive image for the
worship of Asherah. Asa cut it
down, broke it up and burned
it in the Kidron Valley.

Was this queen mother good ? No.

(2)2 ki 10:13
he met some relatives of Ahaziah king of Judah and asked, “Who are you?”
They said, “We are relatives
of Ahaziah, and we have come
down to greet the families of
the king and of the queen
mother.”
2 chr 22:3
He too followed the ways of
the house of Ahab, for his mother encouraged him to act wickedly.

Was this queen mother good?
No.

(3)Let's look at another mention of queen mother.

Jeremiah 13:18
Say to the king and to the
queen mother, "Come down
from your thrones, for your
glorious crowns will fall from
your heads."

Was these a good thing? No.

Pls if you know of any other "queen mother" mentioned in the scriptures, pls let us know. Note, queen mother is different from mother of the king.

What was the outcome of barthshebas request when she sat down on the throne .

“I have one small request to make of you,” she said. “Do
not refuse me.”
The king replied, “Make it, my mother; I will not refuse
you.”
21 So she said, “Let Abishag the Shunammite be given in marriage to your brother Adonijah.”
22 King Solomon answered
his mother, “Why do you
request Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah?
You might as well request the
kingdom for him—after all, he
is my older brother—yes, for
him and for Abiathar the priest
and Joab son of Zeruiah!”
23 Then King Solomon swore by the LORD: “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely, if Adonijah does not pay with his life for this request!....
25 So King Solomon gave orders to Benaiah son of Jehoiada, and he struck down Adonijah and he died.

No wonder jehovah only appointed and anointed males to have rulership positions.

IMAGE OF MARY:
When you read commandments from Exodus, you read a summary. The full version is in Deuteronomy chapter 4.
Deut 4:15-16 -- "Because you did not see any form.....".
It means you do not know my form so making an image of me would be foolish and wrong. Don't make an image of the Sun and anyother thing thinking that they are my image or form. That is what the commandment means.

"You shall not make for
yourself a carved image or
any likeness of anything that is
in heaven above or that is on
the earth beneath or that is in
the water below.

Never make your own carved
idols or statues that represent
any creature in the sky, on the
earth, or in the water.

Jesus is God and the people saw Jesus.

Jesus is the son of God and no one has seen God at any time.

They made diagrams of him in the caves and catacombs. And not just Jesus but Mary, Peter, the Apostles and a lot of other things.
When we use images, we don't worship them. That would be foolish. We use them as a reminder of the people in them or the events they represent.

So the scriptures does not give you enough reminders.

When you look at a relative's picture, is it the picture you're fond of or the person whose picture you are holding?

Haha! (an illustration)Holding my great great granpa picture and no emotions cus I no sabi the guy. But if I get to read about him, ill know him better, and that is exactly what the disciples did.
Moreover we are talking about carved image not picture of the real person.

dolphinheart:
@ Jolliano

continued.......


Good.


So the appointment of disciples is less glorious than turning water into wine.?


The scriptures never made reference to such, christians are jesus brothers and jesus said they where giving to him by God, not by his association to mary. Remember who jesus himself calls his mothers, or was he lying?!

Are you saying the "woman in genesis 3:15 is mary?

”And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over
you.”



Bro, all that jesus did was from the father, even jesus did not do anything by his own initiative, that mary gave birth to jesus does not mean she was the one who told jesus what to do.


Disobedience Bro, not disbelief.


False analogy, eve did not carry any ark or covenant.
Eve never had any covenant with God.
Mary is not the ark of any new covenant. The scripture never said so.
You had tried to link mary with the ark of covenant using similarities, now you are on ur
Own trying to give mary a new ark.


1. Did the ark marry like mary did?
2. Did those who touched mary die?
3. Did God instruct you to venerate and honour mary?
4. Did God instruct you to make an image of mary.?
If the ark of the covenant was an image, was mary an image? How can she now be compared to an image?
5. Was any of these venerations you do to mary's image done to mary during her life time?


Look at what you said again, they treated the ark anyhow ? Or they broke the laws concerning the ark?
Now what laws where giving concerning touching mary, since you are looking for similarities.

Na lie, mary gave birth, had other children. Joseph did not touch her until....


I have mentioned it, "until" means "until"
Until : up to (a particular time)
—used to indicate the time
when something will happen,
become true, etc.
—used as a function word
to indicate continuance (as of
an action or condition) to a
specified time <stayed until
morning>.

but knew her not until she had
given birth to a son. And he
called his name Jesus.
It means that after these events he knew her!

Stop twisting the scriptures.

2 Sam 6 (Still ark of the covenant chapter) verse 23 - "Michal had no child until her death". Does it she gave birth after she died?
Will you stop this, looking for a particular translation to suit ur views will not help.

And Michal daughter of Saul
had no children to the day of her death.


Psalm 110:1- "My Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I have made your enemies your footstool".
Does it mean that he will leave the right hand after the enemies are made his footstool?
That question will be answered by you when you tell me if jesus was still sitting at Gods right hand when he came back to earth?


You are wrong.


At bold, it therefore means that the context will determine the true meaning of brother, if it is of the same parent or not.

Mat 12:46
While Jesus was still talking to
the crowd, his mother and
brothers stood outside,
wanting to speak to him

Is the mother the literal mother mentioned here? If yes, why are you not believing that the brothers are not jesus literal brothers.?

Jesus would not have made the statement he made in verse 48 to 50 if the brothers in verse 48 where not literal like the mother in verse 48 .

People who knew jesus family said
Matt 15:55:57
“Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James,
Joseph, Simon and Judas?
56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man
get all these things?”

If mary is the literal mother of jesus, wonder why you view that those mentioned here are not jesus' literal brothers and sisters. Mary had up to 30 years or little less to give birth to them.

"For even his own brothers did not believe in him.

In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples.
The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.
Some Roman Catholics
claim that these “brothers”
were actually Jesus’
cousins. However, in each
instance, the specific
Greek word for “brother” is
used. While the word can
refer to other relatives, its
normal and literal meaning
is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” (anepsios),and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to
see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-
brothers.
Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers
and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical. Mary was a married woman, and the scriptures did say a wife should not deny her husband his due, and their is no record of any injunction that mary or Joseph should not know each other or have children .

you re wrong.


Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.


Unless your traditions teaches you that mary is not a descendant of adam , then this scripture applies to her.

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered
the world through one man, and death through sin, and in
this way death came to all people, because all sinned.


To be continued......

PART 2:

1. Turning water to wine is a miracle and you want to compare it with calling disciples?

2. Firstly, your arguments show that you know nothing about typology and I'm suprised because it was used a lot by Jesus and the Apostles in the NT.
Read Revelations 12 again.

3. Again, TYPOLOGY. Which woman's seed(Child) crushed the head of Satan? This one is too obvious for you to try arguing against.

4. I never said Mary told Jesus what to do. The First Eve and First Adam sinned on a tree. The Second Adam undid it on a wooden Cross(Tree of Life) and the Second Eve was there beside him.

5. Believing the devil means Disbelieving God. She could not have believed both of them at the same time, could she?
Or did she still believe God and obeyed devil at the same?

6. You have never heard of the Adamic or Edenic covenant? With all the bible you are quoting here! Read Genesis 1 and 2.
God had a covenant with all humans which was carried and represented by Eve and Adam. That is why all humans share in the sin and punishment which occur as a result of the broken covenant.

7.

A. Did the ark marry like mary did?
B. Did those who touched mary die?
C. Did God instruct you to venerate and honour mary?
D. Did God instruct you to make an image of mary.?
If the ark of the covenant was an image, was mary an image? How can she now be compared to an image?
E. Was any of these venerations you do to mary's image done to mary during her life time?

A. Irrelevant question. Jesus is the new Adam according to the bible. Did Jesus marry and have children like Adam?
B. Again, irrelevant question. The point is not touching but defiling and irreverence. The ark was attached with poles for the Priests to carry it with. That was reverence. Knowing that arrangement, doing something else would be irreverence.
C. "Honour your father and mother". Physically? Yes. Spiritually? Yes.
D. Irrelevant question. Did God instruct you to snap a picture of anyone? Images and statues are used to remember people and events. I don't know how you think that God who gave us a brain and memory will be against us using them to remember ourselves.
E. Firstly,we don't venerate Mary's image. We venerate Mary. I could use this argument against the bible but that is irrelevant.
We treat the image specially, yes. Because of who it represents. Would you throw a picture of a relative you love on the floor? Or would you keep it in a special place?
A major part of the veneration given to Jesus was not given to him during his lifetime on earth. Same for Mary. I don't see how that is a problem.
The early christians (without whom you would never have heard of Jesus, being a Christian or seen the bible and yet you chose to disregard and ignore) show all these things in their writings and their carvings and paintings in the Catacombs.

8. You seriously want to argue Theology with a dictionary?
Well, until, to and unto serve the same purpose. They show a range or period of time.
So "to the day of her death". What happened after her death? Did she have children? No.

Jesus was always in heaven. Even when he came in human form, he was still in heaven. The Trinity cannot, has never and will never be seperated. You forget that God(The Trinity) is everywhere.

So till,until,to and unto does not mean something different occured.

9. There were not brothers of Jesus or children of Mary.
Jesus and the apostles spoke Aramaic/Hebrew and in that language and there was no word for cousin or nephew. They would have to say "son of my father's brother" and to avoid that they simply said kinsman or brother. The disciples who wrote the bible wrote it with that sense and even Matthew wrote his Gospel in Aramaic/Hebrew.

James in Gal 1:19 is called brother of the Lord but we all know that James the apostle was not his brother. Same as those written in Acts.

Also, we know that James the younger’s mother was named Mary. Look at the descriptions of the women standing beneath the cross:
"among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee" (Matt. 27:56);
"There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome" (Mark 15:40).

Then look at what John says: "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene" (John 19:25). If we compare these parallel accounts of the scene of the crucifixion, we see that the mother of James and Joseph must be the wife of Clopas. So far, so good.

An argument against this, though, is that James is elsewhere (Matt. 10:3) described as the son of Alphaeus, which would mean this Mary, whoever she was, was the wife of both Clopas and Alphaeus. But Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person, since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek either as Alphaeus or as Clopas. Another possibility is that Alphaeus took a Greek name similar to his Jewish name, the way that Saul took the name Paul.

So it’s probable that James the younger is the son of Mary and Clopas. The second-century historian Hegesippus explains that Clopas was the brother of Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. James would thus be Joseph’s nephew and a cousin of Jesus, who was Joseph’s foster son.

10. Sinlessness.
Mary like all humans was bound to fall into sin. But God saved her from grace from the very creation of her and so she has been sinless right from her creation, birth till now.

Look at it this way.
A woman on a boat is carrying a baby in her arms and then she trips and throws the babies as she falls. If one baby land in the water and I jump into the water and bring the baby out, I saved the baby.
If I catch the baby before he falls into the water, I still saved the baby.

All fell into sin from birth thanks to Adam (Original sin). And Christ saved them by his Death.
Christ saved Mary from falling into the sin as Noble And Perfect Gate which he was to pass through. God cannot stay near sin. His eyes are too holy to behold sin.

Angel Gabriel said "Hail, full of grace".
Full of Grace = Empty of Sin.

In fact, the angel said Kecharitomene, which is a past perfect participle.
This means:
Full of Grace in the past and forever(continuously) full of Grace.