-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christians: the doctrines of Mary
- Thread starter -Peacemaker-
- Start date
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
I thought the catholic encyclopedia was a catholic source
Considering you do not post the link, makes one wonder what website did you quote that supposedly had this from the encyclopedia.
You wont give the link, must be because of the legitimacy of the website is questionable.
We all are not stupid, and know a JW would not read the Catholic Encyclopedia. You are being very deceitful and dishonest.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
i didnt get it from a website... i got it out of a published WT article.
that is not true at all. The WT society have a libarary full of published works from all sources, the Catholic encyclopedia being one of them. In the article where I quote from, the quote was taken directly from that encyclopedia as evidence of the fact that catholic scholars acknowledge that the greek word means 'full blood' relation.
You are free to go straight to the source and look for yourself. I cannot find an online NCE anywhere so am not able to provide a link to the encyclopedia itself...i can only provide the reference and page number to it.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
YEAH, because we ALL know that something published from WT is unbiased and truthful! LOL
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
absolutely, always.
But i dare you to find a copy of your encyclopedia and prove the quote wrong.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Pegg - Catholic doctrine does not and never has taught that Mary had other biological children. Period.
If you found some source on some non Catholic site that tells you otherwise, YOUR SOURCE IS WRONG. Instead of clinging to this erroneous "factoid" for dear life, why don't you read all the other legitimate Catholic sources which clearly state the Catholic doctrines of Mary?
If you found some source on some non Catholic site that tells you otherwise, YOUR SOURCE IS WRONG. Instead of clinging to this erroneous "factoid" for dear life, why don't you read all the other legitimate Catholic sources which clearly state the Catholic doctrines of Mary?
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
that is not what the quote is about
The quote acknowledges the fact that the greek word used in the NT does mean 'blood brothers' in the verses where Jesus is said to have 'brothers'
but the article also goes on to explain that in jesus case, it must mean 'cousin'
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
absolutely, always.
But i dare you to find a copy of your encyclopedia and prove the quote wrong.
I also read a WT pamphlet that said JW's have mass orgies on sundays.
Prove me wrong
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Well, of COURSE the word CAN mean "blood brothers." But it is also used throughout the New Testament in a wide variety of contexts - and hardly any of those mean "blood brothers." It can mean "cousin" and "kinsperson" and "friend" and "soul mate" among other things.
Do a word search and read all the passages or verses that use this Greek word. You will see that MOST of them are not discussing "blood brothers."
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
I also read a WT pamphlet that said JW's have mass orgies on sundays.
Prove me wrong
give me the reference and i'll prove you wrong
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
give me the reference and i'll prove you wrong
Already told you. A pamphlet from WT.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
lol alrighty then ....
See how "sources" like that are illegitimate?
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I probably could've cooled it with the idolatry accusations. I should've raised the question asking if some of the Catholic doctrines were idolatrous or if the have the potential to lead people to idolatry without making accusations. I've seen too much good fruit out of the Catholic church, especially from people that adore Mary. Catholics and Catholicism deserved better. My apologees to all my Christian bros and sisses rockin' the rosaries.
Last edited:
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
lol
perhaps if you provide me a reference, i can find out how illegitimate it is because i would take the risk to actually check the reference myself
and i would do so even if i believed you were wrong.
Hey, maybe you can tell me if Mary is considered by catholics to be Queen of heaven? I've heard that expression, is that how she is viewed??
Last edited:
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
lol
perhaps if you provide me a reference, i can find out how illegitimate it is because i would take the risk to actually check the reference myself
and i would do so even if i believed you were wrong.
LOL its the same thing you did a page ago!
Why should I talk about that with you?
Seems like throwing pearls to swine.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
The title Queen of Heaven implies royalty. Royalty as we understand the concept on Earth are those who govern and rule us. I don't think Catholics believe she rules or has some authority in Heaven so why name her that?
The pagan king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, is called the king of kings by Daniel (Dn 2:37), yet this doesn't preclude Jesus from being called by the same title (Rv 17:14; 19:16).
Since the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven (Eph 2:12; Rv 1:6; 5:10), and since Mary is the preeminent Christian, there's nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her in making Mary his mother.
Since the destiny of all Christians is to reign as kings and queens with Christ in heaven (Eph 2:12; Rv 1:6; 5:10), and since Mary is the preeminent Christian, there's nothing wrong with giving her the title which Christ, the King of Kings, bestowed upon her in making Mary his mother.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
A Queen who does not rule, but follows her Son in unity and brings us closer to him through her intercession
But to be fair, Mary has many names. Star of the Sea, Our Lady of Charity, Our Lady of (Insert name), Mother of the Church, etc
But to be fair, Mary has many names. Star of the Sea, Our Lady of Charity, Our Lady of (Insert name), Mother of the Church, etc
kepha31
Active Member
That is not the point, Pegg. Giving a source is fine for those who have access to the source, but giving a source that no one can check is dishonest. No Catholic encyclopedia teaches that Mary had other children. Plus, encyclopedias are intended to be used as tools for further research, they are not doctrinal. If you want to quote official Catholic teaching, use the Catechism which is a condensation of Vatican documents. Both are available on line.I thought the catholic encyclopedia was a catholic source
The first clue to gross misrepresentation...is the use...of butchered sentences, and the JW's and the SDA's are guilty of doing this quite frequently. The quote found in Wikipedia was hacked up by a disgruntled anti-Catholic who hasn't a clue to what Catholic teaching is. So why didn't they use official documentation that everyone can check? Because who ever engineered that quote is a deceiver. They know darn well it can't be easily refuted, that is why they use obscure hacked up "sources" with no context. Why not quote from New Advent?
You can't post the full paragraph or the ones before and after because you don't have access to the New Catholic Encyclopedia either. And you wouldn't because I am confident it says the opposite of what it has been forced to mean. The only way to disprove the quote is to scan the encyclopedia and post it, which I am not prepared to do because it would be a waste of time anyway.
Last edited: