Mary mother of God

[katiemygirl]

For me it is the assurance that the Bible is true. One example, How do I know that Paul's words are true and not some uninspired words of a natural man? The Gospels never mention him. If the (at least 3) Gospels were written after him, those Gospel writers must have surely known him. Why did they never mention him ? Sure, Paul is written about in other places...like Acts. But Acts was not written by an Apostle. How do I assure any of those people are who they claim to be, without turning to other sources, that will back up that belief ?

Also, there are other Codices out there that contain NT writings and include letters such as the Epistle of Barnabus (note: Not the same as the Gospel of Barnabus). Why isn't that Epistle in our NT? How do I know that that isn't the true Bible? but the winds of war let the one I have in my lap be the one that won out, just as you said.

To say the Bible is true because it is true, is to have blind faith in the men who claim to be writing for God. And my faith does not have to be that blind, when I can merely examine history to see how the Bible was formed.
I will admit though, there is a little blindness that does go on because I am not a Bible Scholar. I was just a history buff whose study of history reverted her back to being a Catholic Christian. You could say, that is how the Holy Spirit talked to me. We all take different journeys.

(edit to correct spelling...I am not an english major lol)

I like your post. I think you have expressed the way many people feel. I appreciate your honesty. Even though the early church fathers were not inspired writers, we can still look to them to get a clearer picture of what the early church was like. We just need to be careful to not go beyond what is written when it comes to doctrine.

You said none of the gospels mention Paul. This is true. However, Luke, who wrote Acts, also wrote the gospel of Luke, and he was not an apostle. Jesus' life, His death and resurrection, His miracles and teachings are the focus of the gospels. Paul did not enter the picture until a long while later when he meets Jesus on the road to Damascus. There would have been no need for the gospel writers to include Paul when the subject of the gospels was Jesus.

I personally have found that reading the Bible truly does build faith. I don't consider what I have to be blind faith. I think of it more as a deep, trusting and abiding faith. If I had to reccommend what books of the Bible for someone to read, they would be the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Slap a headset on, and listen to these books being read aloud on Biblegateway or some other such program. It's awesome. And it goes very quickly. You can get through both books in a few days. What's amazing is that each time you read or listen, you hear something you didn't pick up on before.

As for the early church fathers, I like the Didache, and the very very early writings.

 

[kepha31]

I SEE THE CHURCH IN THE HOUSE.
(Rom 16:5 KJV) Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my wellbeloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

church= G1577-ek-klay-see'-ah- From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.

house=G3624 Of uncertain affinity; a dwelling (more or less extensive, literally or figuratively); by implication a family (more or less related, literally or figuratively): - home, house (-hold), temple.

CHURCH IN THE HOUSE
(Phile 1:2 KJV) And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:

(1 Cor 16:19 KJV) The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in YHWH-YaH, with the church that is in their house.

(2 Cor 5:2 KJV) For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

MARY THE MOTHER OF YEHOSHUA WENT TO CHURCH IN JOHN'S HOUSE
Yehoshua while suffering on the cross saw the church as in the house also. Yehoshua had the apostle John take Mary into his house. Would not John's house be a church also?

(John 19:27 KJV) Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

Yehosua said in (Mat 18:20 KJV) For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Yehoshua certainly would be in the midst of John and Mary and not only was Yehoshua in the midst of them but YHWH-YaH and Yehoshua made their abode in them and would be with all believers.

(John 14:23 KJV) Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

No mention by Yehoshua of the Holy Ghost making abode within the believer because there is no trinity.
....................................................................................................................................................................................
[kepha31, post: 4195552, member: 30332"]You accept the 27 books of the New Testament as belonging in the Written Tradition, but refuse to acknowledge how they got there
....................................................................................................................................................................................
I ACCEPT THE 66 BOOKS FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION AS THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN AND PERSERVED BY YHWH-YaH AND GIVEN TO THE ISRAEL THE FIRSTBORN SON OF YHWH-YaH ( EXO 4:22) AS I HAVE STATED BEFORE IN THIS THREAD.

The Word of God was written by YHWH-YaH before man was created , before man could read or write, before any written tradition or Roman Catholic church existed.

(Exo 32:31 KJV) And Moses returned unto YHWH-YaH, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold.

(Exo 32:32 KJV) Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me ( Moses )hee, out of thy ( YHWH-YaH'S ) book which thou ( YHWH-YAH ) hast written.

(Exo 32:33 KJV) And YHWH-YaH said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

willyah

The family is a domestic church, as explained by the last 3 popes, so you are not telling me anything new. Your definition excludes a one, infallible, supernatural, hierarchical and visible CHURCH.

Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word "ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and authoritative Church.

Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests ("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the Church.

Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church. The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation.

Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles.

1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops ("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles.

1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops.

1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons ("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back to Peter and the apostles.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 - Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those with private opinions such as yours call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift.

Matt. 18:17-18 - the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 - Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus' presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Matt. 5:14 - Jesus says a city set on a hill cannot be hidden, and this is in reference to the Church. The Church is not an invisible, ethereal, atmospheric presence, but a single, visible and universal body through the Eucharist. The Church is an extension of the Incarnation.

John 17:21 - Jesus states that the visible unity of the Church would be a sign that He was sent by God. This is an extremely important verse. Jesus tells us that the unity of the Church is what bears witness to Him and the reality of who He is and what He came to do for us. There is only one Church that is universally united, and that is the Catholic Church. Only the unity of the Catholic Church truly bears witness to the reality that Jesus Christ was sent by the Father.
Scripture Catholic - The Church

No mention by Yehoshua of the Holy Ghost making abode within the believer because there is no trinity.

How revealing.

 

[kjv4me2you]

This is where you deny the divine characters of the Church, you see her as a mere human institution. Yes, she is made up of sinners, but has divine protection from teaching error. You accept the 27 books of the New Testament as belonging in the Written Tradition, but refuse to acknowledge how they got there. Ignatius is teaching what was taught to him by John against Gnostic heretics (who forbade marriage and fasted excessively, apart from the teachings of Jesus and Paul).

We read the Early Church Fathers not as inspired like the Bible but because they give us insights as to what the early church believed, how they dealt with false scriptural interpretations, and we look for consistency of faith.
The Fathers of the Church were those saintly writers of the early centuries whom the Church recognizes as her special defenders of orthodoxy. And the Patristic Age is the period during which they lived.
It is generally held that the last of the Western Fathers (Latin) was St. Bede the Venerable (673-735), and the last of the Eastern Fathers (Greek) was St. John Damascene (675-749).


Pitting the Early Church Fathers against the Bible? How do you think heresies (spawned by a private Bible-alone approach) were confronted?
Ignatius of Antioch was trained by the Apostle John, ordained by Peter, and the third bishop of Jerusalem and you are telling me he is not "born again" and a mere "natural man" Why? because his views on the Eucharist conflict with your private opinions?


That's circular reasoning; it doesn't wash with skeptics. The Bible is true because the Church says so. We know a church existed before the Written Tradition was formalized. We know this by history, sources outside the Bible, and reason. Only an infallible Church can compile an inspired book. This is not circular reasoning.

kepha 31 said in: post #499:

This is where you deny the divine characters of the Church, you see her as a mere human institution. Yes, she is made up of sinners, but has divine protection from teaching error. You accept the 27 books of the New Testament as belonging in the Written Tradition, but refuse to acknowledge how they got there. Ignatius is teaching what was taught to him by John against Gnostic heretics (who forbade marriage
and fasted excessively, apart from the teachings of Jesus and Paul).
...............................
KJV replies: to post #499

Question for you. Are a part of KEPHA The Brotherhood of the Iron Will?

DIVINE PROTECTION FROM ERROR?
Did the seven churches of Revelation have divine protection from error? Nope, but they could repent of their unscriptural false doctrines but if they didn't their candlestick was removed. I think the RCC is now the combining of those churches of Revelation that had their candlesticks removed.(Rev 2:5 KJV) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

You stated the RCC has divine protection from teaching error. Your statement in and of itself is teaching error.

Yehoshua chose the 12 apostles and one of them was a devil and Yehoshua knew it.(John 6:70 KJV) Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

Does not a devil speak the words of a devil? False doctrine.
(John 8:44 KJV) Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

(John 8:45 KJV) And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Did YHWH-God confront the serpent-devil in Eden, so as, to give divine protection for the first Adam Son of God and Eve a daughter of YHWH--YaH? Nope. The serpent started the first heresy by adding one word "not" to the word of God that was given to Adam.

If anyone could have given divine protection for His Word in Eden it would have been YHWH-YaH, but he did not.

(Gen 2:17 KJV) But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

(Gen 3:4 KJV) And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall "not" surely die:

One added word to the word of God and they surely died just as the word of God said they would.

(1 Cor 11:19 KJV) For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you .

Nothing makes the truth more evident then heresies.

DIVINE PROTECTION FROM ERROR IS NOT KILLING THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU IS IT?
How did the RCC deal with the saints they felt disagreed with them? Hoe did the RCC deal with many who disagreed with their interpretations. Need I say more? I'll let Holy Scripture speak of such things. (Rev 18:24 KJV) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

(Rev 17:6 KJV) And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

(Rev 16:6 KJV) For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou ( YHWH-YaH) hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.

I suggest you stay with the prophets of Israel who wrote by the spirit Son Christ in them. Stay with them and with the apostles and Luke wrote being guided by the Spirit of truth. Stay with that which is perfect,the Holy Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, that YHWH-YaH gave to the Israel of God ( Gal 6:16 ) unto its completion Revelation 90 AD.

(1 Pet 1:11 KJV) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them (the Israel of God ) did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
...........................
kepha 31 said in post #499:
We read the Early Church Fathers not as inspired like the Bible but beause they give us insights as to what the early church believed, how they dealt with false scriptural interpretations, and we look for consistency of faith.
The Fathers of the Church were those saintly writers of the early centuries whom the Church recognizes as her special defenders of orthodoxy. And the Patristic Age is the period during which they lived.
It is generally held that the last of the Western Fathers (Latin) was St. Bede the Venerable (673-735), and the last of the Eastern Fathers (Greek) was St. John Damascene (675-749).
Holy Scripture does not mention anything about a church parent age nor any early church fathers. Again I say STICK WITH WHAT THE inspired WORDS OF SCRIPTURES TEACH.
........................
KJV replies:

GNOSTICS

I am not gnostic, rcc, jw, muslim nor a reformer for any organized religion. I do not believe in killing anyone who disagrees with my interpretations and faith. I have NO DOMINION over another's faith but rather I am a helper of the joy of those who are of a like faith.

(2 Cor 1:24 KJV) Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.

The rcc needs to understand they do not have dominion over another's faith period nor over heresy

THE APOSTLES PAUL WAS CONDSIDERED A HERETIC
(Acts 24:14 KJV) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my heredity-G3971 believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Israel worshipped one YHWH-YaH not a trinity as Paul clearly affirms in Acts 24:14 of Holy Scripture.

GNOSTICS WERE A SECT WITHIN THE CHURCHES AFTER 90 A.D. WHO AS BABES IN CHRIST DISAGREED WITH OTHER BELIEVERS IN THE THOSE CHURCHES.THE GNOSTICS WERE BULLIED BECAUSE THEY DISAGREED WITH THE ROMAN CHURCH THAT WAS GAINING POLICTIAL WITHIN THE ROMAN GOVERNING BODY. GNOSTICS AND PROTEST REFORMERS BOTH FELT THE WRATH OF THOSE LOVING ROMANS IN THE ROMAN CHURCH WHO BULLIED AND MARTYRED THEM.

The statements below were taken from: The Gnostic Society Library,The Nag Hammadi Library

In the first century of the Christian era the term “Gnostic” came to denote a heterodox segment of the diverse new Christian community. Among early followers of Christ it appears there were groups who delineated themselves from the greater household of the Church by claiming not simply a belief in Christ and his message, but a "special witness" or revelatory experience of the divine. It was this experience or gnosis that set the true follower of Christ apart, so they asserted. Stephan Hoeller explains that these Christians held a "conviction that direct, personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings, and, moreover, that the attainment of such knowledge must always constitute the supreme achievement of human life."

A prime characteristic of Gnostics was their claim to be keepers of sacred traditions, gospels, rituals, and successions – esoteric matters for which many Christians were either not properly prepared or simply not inclined.
........................

willyah

 

[kjv4me2you]

kepha 31 said in: post #499:

This is where you deny the divine characters of the Church, you see her as a mere human institution. Yes, she is made up of sinners, but has divine protection from teaching error. You accept the 27 books of the New Testament as belonging in the Written Tradition, but refuse to acknowledge how they got there. Ignatius is teaching what was taught to him by John against Gnostic heretics (who forbade marriage
and fasted excessively, apart from the teachings of Jesus and Paul).
...............................
KJV replies: to post #499

Question for you. Are a part of KEPHA The Brotherhood of the Iron Will?

DIVINE PROTECTION FROM ERROR?
Did the seven churches of Revelation have divine protection from error? Nope, but they could repent of their unscriptural false doctrines but if they didn't their candlestick was removed. I think the RCC is now the combining of those churches of Revelation that had their candlesticks removed.(Rev 2:5 KJV) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

You stated the RCC has divine protection from teaching error. Your statement in and of itself is teaching error.

Yehoshua chose the 12 apostles and one of them was a devil and Yehoshua knew it.(John 6:70 KJV) Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

Does not a devil speak the words of a devil? False doctrine.
(John 8:44 KJV) Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

(John 8:45 KJV) And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Did YHWH-God confront the serpent-devil in Eden, so as, to give divine protection for the first Adam Son of God and Eve a daughter of YHWH--YaH? Nope. The serpent started the first heresy by adding one word "not" to the word of God that was given to Adam.

If anyone could have given divine protection for His Word in Eden it would have been YHWH-YaH, but he did not.

(Gen 2:17 KJV) But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

(Gen 3:4 KJV) And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall "not" surely die:

One added word to the word of God and they surely died just as the word of God said they would.

(1 Cor 11:19 KJV) For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you .

Nothing makes the truth more evident then heresies.

DIVINE PROTECTION FROM ERROR IS NOT KILLING THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU IS IT?
How did the RCC deal with the saints they felt disagreed with them? Hoe did the RCC deal with many who disagreed with their interpretations. Need I say more? I'll let Holy Scripture speak of such things. (Rev 18:24 KJV) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

(Rev 17:6 KJV) And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

(Rev 16:6 KJV) For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou ( YHWH-YaH) hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.

I suggest you stay with the prophets of Israel who wrote by the spirit Son Christ in them. Stay with them and with the apostles and Luke wrote being guided by the Spirit of truth. Stay with that which is perfect,the Holy Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, that YHWH-YaH gave to the Israel of God ( Gal 6:16 ) unto its completion Revelation 90 AD.

(1 Pet 1:11 KJV) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them (the Israel of God ) did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
...........................
kepha 31 said in post #499:
We read the Early Church Fathers not as inspired like the Bible but beause they give us insights as to what the early church believed, how they dealt with false scriptural interpretations, and we look for consistency of faith.
The Fathers of the Church were those saintly writers of the early centuries whom the Church recognizes as her special defenders of orthodoxy. And the Patristic Age is the period during which they lived.
It is generally held that the last of the Western Fathers (Latin) was St. Bede the Venerable (673-735), and the last of the Eastern Fathers (Greek) was St. John Damascene (675-749).
Holy Scripture does not mention anything about a church parent age nor any early church fathers. Again I say STICK WITH WHAT THE inspired WORDS OF SCRIPTURES TEACH.
........................
KJV replies:

GNOSTICS

I am not gnostic, rcc, jw, muslim nor a reformer for any organized religion. I do not believe in killing anyone who disagrees with my interpretations and faith. I have NO DOMINION over another's faith but rather I am a helper of the joy of those who are of a like faith.

(2 Cor 1:24 KJV) Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.

The rcc needs to understand they do not have dominion over another's faith period nor over heresy

THE APOSTLES PAUL WAS CONDSIDERED A HERETIC
(Acts 24:14 KJV) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my heredity-G3971 believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Israel worshipped one YHWH-YaH not a trinity as Paul clearly affirms in Acts 24:14 of Holy Scripture.

GNOSTICS WERE A SECT WITHIN THE CHURCHES AFTER 90 A.D. WHO AS BABES IN CHRIST DISAGREED WITH OTHER BELIEVERS IN THE THOSE CHURCHES.THE GNOSTICS WERE BULLIED BECAUSE THEY DISAGREED WITH THE ROMAN CHURCH THAT WAS GAINING POLICTIAL WITHIN THE ROMAN GOVERNING BODY. GNOSTICS AND PROTEST REFORMERS BOTH FELT THE WRATH OF THOSE LOVING ROMANS IN THE ROMAN CHURCH WHO BULLIED AND MARTYRED THEM.

The statements below were taken from: The Gnostic Society Library,The Nag Hammadi Library

In the first century of the Christian era the term “Gnostic” came to denote a heterodox segment of the diverse new Christian community. Among early followers of Christ it appears there were groups who delineated themselves from the greater household of the Church by claiming not simply a belief in Christ and his message, but a "special witness" or revelatory experience of the divine. It was this experience or gnosis that set the true follower of Christ apart, so they asserted. Stephan Hoeller explains that these Christians held a "conviction that direct, personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings, and, moreover, that the attainment of such knowledge must always constitute the supreme achievement of human life."

A prime characteristic of Gnostics was their claim to be keepers of sacred traditions, gospels, rituals, and successions – esoteric matters for which many Christians were either not properly prepared or simply not inclined.
........................

willyah

kepha 31 said in post #499:
We read the Early Church Fathers not as inspired like the Bible but beause they give us insights as to what the early church believed, how they dealt with false scriptural interpretations, and we look for consistency of faith.
The Fathers of the Church were those saintly writers of the early centuries whom the Church recognizes as her special defenders of orthodoxy. And the Patristic Age is the period during which they lived.
It is generally held that the last of the Western Fathers (Latin) was St. Bede the Venerable (673-735), and the last of the Eastern Fathers (Greek) was St. John Damascene (675-749).

.......................
KJV replies to post #499
Holy Scripture does not mention anything about a church parent age nor any early church fathers. Again I say STICK WITH THE WORDS OF SCRIPTURES AND WHAT THEY TEACH.

All believers are the sons and daughters of YHWH_YaH Shaddai.
(2 Cor 6:18 KJV) And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith YHWH-YaH Shaddai.


None of those terms EARLY CHURCH FATHERS, SAINTLY FATHERS, PATRISTIC AGE, WESTERN FATHERS, EASTERN FATHERS, CAN BE FOUND IN HOLY SCRIPTURE REGARDING THE NEW TESTAMENT CUP-FATE THAT IS IN THE BLOOD OF JESUS.

(Luke 22:20 KJV) Likewise also the cup-fate after supper, saying, This cup-fate is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

The cup-fate after supper, this fate is the new testament in my blood.

I believe when you read any of the 27 books written by the Hebrew Apostles and Luke your drinking the cuo-fate of Yehoshua. I know that Jeremiah the prophet ate the word of YHWH.

(Jer 15:16 KJV) Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.


(1 Cor 11:25 KJV) After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup-fate is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.


THE TERM FATHER OR FATHERS REFERS TO MORTAL PARENTAL HERITAGE

The title father or fathers refers to a parent or parents. Yehoshua said to Mary ( Magdalene a disciple ) that I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Can there be an earlier Father God a Spirit than YHWH-YaH Elohim Shaddai? Can there be any father holier than
YHWH-YaH the Abba Father and God or Yehoshua and all believers?

(John 20:17 KJV) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

WHY READ WHAT IS NOT INSPIRED
As I said before, why would anyone read what was not inspired in order to see what the early church believed?
Why not read about the early church in the Holy Scriptures concerning what it believed? There can be no early church than Israel the church in the wilderness and the church in the house of which Christ is the head. Yehoshua and those earliest believing church we can read about in the inspired word of God?

Not all churches are believing churches that have the candlestick.The churches mentioned in Holy Scripture such as the Roman, Colossian, Galatian, Ephesian, Philippians,Thessalonian and others no longer exist having met the same fate of (Rev 2:5 KJV) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

Your speaking of a early church as if there was no earlier church from which to learn. Your not meaning the earliest church found in the inspired word of God.
You read what is not the inspired word of God in order to see what an early church did whereas you should be reading the inspired word of God to see what the earliest of churches did during the apostolic age of churches.

(Eph 5:25 KJV) Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

(Acts 7:38 KJV) This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our parents: who received the lively-LIVE oracles to give unto us:


The church Israel existed, if the church did not exist what did Christ give himself for????

All the Apostles and disciples of Jesus were Hebrews and some proselyte Gentiles who believed in the YHWH-YaH of Israel such as Nicolas in Acts 6:5. The gospel was not sent to the Gentiles heathen until 64 AD. (Acts 28:28 KJV) Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

.............................................................................

kepha 31 said in post #499: Your saying that the words of a natural man are going to explain to the spiritual man who was born again by the word of God that the word of God is true.

Pitting the Early Church Fathers against the Bible?
...................................................

KJV replies to post #499: No I am pitting the word of God against your saying " early church fathers" while referring to Ignatius and others as these early church fathers while to me the apostles of Jesus Christ are the church elders not your so called early church fathers.

There are no earlier church ELDERS other than the apostles that HWH-YaH gave for Yehoshua's choice of the 12.
(John 17:6 KJV) I have manifested thy name ( YHWH-YaH ) unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Of course this excludes Judas a devil who like Pharaoh will be used by YHWH-YaH for the purpose of YHWH.
(Rom 8:28 KJV) And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

.............................
kepha 31 said in post #499:
How do you think heresies (spawned by a private Bible-alone approach) were confronted?
Ignatius of Antioch was trained by the Apostle John, ordained by Peter, and the third bishop of Jerusalem and you are telling me he is not "born again" and a mere "natural man" Why? because his views on the Eucharist conflict with your private opinions?
.............................

KJV replies to post # 499

(1 Cor 11:19 KJV) For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

Did YHWH-God confront the serpent in Eden? No. The serpent-devil started the first heresy by adding one word "not" to the word of God that was given to Adam.
After Adam and Eve sinned is when YHWH-YaH confronted the serpent-the devil but not before Adam and Eve sinned.

willyah

 

[kjv4me2you]

The family is a domestic church, as explained by the last 3 popes, so you are not telling me anything new. Your definition excludes a one, infallible, supernatural, hierarchical and visible CHURCH.

Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word "ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and authoritative Church.

Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests ("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the Church.

Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church. The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation.

Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles.

1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops ("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles.

1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops.

1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons ("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back to Peter and the apostles.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 - Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those with private opinions such as yours call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift.

Matt. 18:17-18 - the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 - Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus' presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Matt. 5:14 - Jesus says a city set on a hill cannot be hidden, and this is in reference to the Church. The Church is not an invisible, ethereal, atmospheric presence, but a single, visible and universal body through the Eucharist. The Church is an extension of the Incarnation.

John 17:21 - Jesus states that the visible unity of the Church would be a sign that He was sent by God. This is an extremely important verse. Jesus tells us that the unity of the Church is what bears witness to Him and the reality of who He is and what He came to do for us. There is only one Church that is universally united, and that is the Catholic Church. Only the unity of the Catholic Church truly bears witness to the reality that Jesus Christ was sent by the Father.
Scripture Catholic - The Church

How revealing.

..........................
kepha 31 said on post #502
Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word "ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and authoritative Church.
..........................
KJV replied to post #502
The Spirit Son Christ said church-ecclesia 77 times in 76 verses and since he is the head of the body consisting of many churches. Seven of them are mentioned in Revelation with many other addressed in the epistles.

(Gal 4:6 KJV) And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

(1 Cor 2:16 KJV) For who hath known the mind of YHWH-YaH, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

The saints have the mind of Christ and they know what is the word of Christ's Father and God.

(Rev 1:4 KJV) John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

(1 Cor 12:20 KJV) But now are they many members, yet but one body.

The many members are found in the many churches that make up the one body of Christ of which he is the Head.

The head of Christ is God.

(1 Cor 11:3 KJV) But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

(Col 1:18 KJV) And he is the head of the body, the assembly-G1577: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

G1577
ek-klay-see'-ah
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.

willyah

 

[kjv4me2you]

I like your post. I think you have expressed the way many people feel. I appreciate your honesty. Even though the early church fathers were not inspired writers, we can still look to them to get a clearer picture of what the early church was like. We just need to be careful to not go beyond what is written when it comes to doctrine.

You said none of the gospels mention Paul. This is true. However, Luke, who wrote Acts, also wrote the gospel of Luke, and he was not an apostle. Jesus' life, His death and resurrection, His miracles and teachings are the focus of the gospels. Paul did not enter the picture until a long while later when he meets Jesus on the road to Damascus. There would have been no need for the gospel writers to include Paul when the subject of the gospels was Jesus.

I personally have found that reading the Bible truly does build faith. I don't consider what I have to be blind faith. I think of it more as a deep, trusting and abiding faith. If I had to reccommend what books of the Bible for someone to read, they would be the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Slap a headset on, and listen to these books being read aloud on Biblegateway or some other such program. It's awesome. And it goes very quickly. You can get through both books in a few days. What's amazing is that each time you read or listen, you hear something you didn't pick up on before.

As for the early church fathers, I like the Didache, and the very very early writings.

Luke was an apostle as was Andronicus but neither of them were of the 12 apostle that YHWH-YaH gave to Yehoshua to chose.

(Rom 16:7 KJV) Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

(John 17:6 KJV) I have manifested thy name (YHWH-YaH) unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

(John 15:16 KJV) Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

The 11 apostles cast their lots for the 12th replacement apostle Matthias but their were other apostles.

Even Jesus was called an apostle.
(Heb 3:1 KJV) Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

(Acts 1:26 KJV) And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; a
nd he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

willyah

 

[kepha31]

Mothers are the most difficult people to study. They elude our scrutiny. By nature and by definition, they are relational. They can be considered as mothers only in their relationship with their children. That is where they focus their attention, and that is where they would focus ours.

Nature keeps mother and child so close as to be almost indistinct as individuals through the first nine months of life. Their bodies are made for each other. During pregnancy, they share the same food, blood, and oxygen. After birth, nature places the child at the mother's breast for nourishment. The newborn's eyes can see only far enough to make eye contact with Mom. The newborn's ears can clearly hear the beating of the mother's heart and the high tones of the female voice. Nature has even made a woman's skin smoother than her husband's, the better to nestle with the sensitive skin of a baby. The mother, body and soul, points beyond herself, to her child.

Yet as close as nature keeps us to our mothers, they remain mysterious to their children. They remain as mysteries. In the words of G. K. Chesterton's Father Brown, "A thing can sometimes be too close to be seen."

As the Mother of God, Mary is the mother par excellence. So, as all mothers are elusive, she will be more so. As all mothers give of themselves, she will give more. As all mothers point beyond themselves, Mary will to a much greater degree.

A true mother, Mary considers none of her glories her own. After all, she points out, she is only doing God's bidding: "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word" (Lk 1:38). Even when she recognizes her superior gifts, she recognizes that they are gifts: "All generations will call me blessed" (Lk 1:48). For her part, Mary's own soul "magnifies" not herself but "the Lord" (Lk 1:46).

How, then, are we to approach this elusive subject, if she must always be relational? How can we begin to study this woman who always deflects attention away from herself and toward her Child?
Hail Holy Queen, Mother of God in the Word of God, pg. 17
by Scott Hahn

 

[katiemygirl]

Luke was an apostle as was Andronicus but neither of them were of the 12 apostle that YHWH-YaH gave to Yehoshua to chose.

(Rom 16:7 KJV) Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

(John 17:6 KJV) I have manifested thy name (YHWH-YaH) unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

(John 15:16 KJV) Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

The 11 apostles cast their lots for the 12th replacement apostle Matthias but their were other apostles.

Even Jesus was called an apostle.
(Heb 3:1 KJV) Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

(Acts 1:26 KJV) And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; a
nd he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

willyah

Yes I know Luke was not one of the twelve, but he was a gospel writer and the author of Acts. I believe I made that clear in my post.

 

[kjv4me2you]

Yes I know Luke was not one of the twelve, but he was a gospel writer and the author of Acts. I believe I made that clear in my post.

You did. I was saying that there were other apostles beside Yehoshua and the 12 Apostles he chose and ordained.
(John 15:16 KJV) Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

The other apostles were not personally chosen by Yehoshua in the same way as the 12 Apostles nonetheless they were called apostles. I think some denominations refuses to accept the scriptures that say there were other apostles besides the 12 Apostles. I guess I did not make that clear.

willyah

 

[Desert Snake]

Jesus, being called the creator in the book of Hebrews, is actually the creator of His own mother when born unto Mary. Mary is the mother of God in the sense that when Jesus manifested as man, He utilized Mary as an earthly mother. Still a mother. So the expression doesn't bother me.

Hail Jesus!

 

[kjv4me2you]

Jesus, being called the creator in the book of Hebrews, is actually the creator of His own mother when born unto Mary. Mary is the mother of God in the sense that when Jesus manifested as man, He utilized Mary as an earthly mother. Still a mother. So the expression doesn't bother me.

Hail Jesus!

Jesus said in (Luke 10:21 KJV) In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, YHWH-YaH of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
(John 20:17 KJV) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

What would you think of a mother who tells her son that he is her creator, her husband, her son and his own beloved son of himself.

Scripture says Mary was the mother of Yehoshua.
(Acts 1:14 KJV) These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
No scripture verse says "Mary mother of God." NONE.


willyah

 

[Desert Snake]

What would you think of a mother who tells her son that he is her creator, her husband, her son and his own father.

(John 20:17 KJV) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

willyah

I'm not really sure what you're arguing here, actually. There is all sorts of things in the Bible that could be metaphor, or literal, etc. It's how one reads the text. When Jesus is called the creator, and other titles of God, that could be literal or not, or even something else, as Jesus, when He spoke of the father didn't make a hard distinction between himself and the father. So why should I. That's not some cultural zeitgeist hurdle I have to get over, I have no problem with a pluralistic Deity who is referred to as one title, we get this in the Old Testament as well, so why is it some ''problem'', in the NT.

 

[kjv4me2you]

I'm not really sure what you're arguing here, actually. There is all sorts of things in the Bible that could be metaphor, or literal, etc. It's how one reads the text. When Jesus is called the creator, and other titles of God, that could be literal or not, or even something else, as Jesus, when He spoke of the father didn't make a hard distinction between himself and the father. So why should I. That's not some cultural zeitgeist hurdle I have to get over, I have no problem with a pluralistic Deity who is referred to as one title, we get this in the Old Testament as well, so why is it some ''problem'', in the NT.

Jesus said
(Mark 12:29 KJV) And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; YHWH-YaH our Elohim is one YHWH-YaH:

Jesus said OUR God is ONE YHWH-YaH.

not two or three.

willyah

 

[Desert Snake]

Jesus said
(Mark 12:29 KJV) And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; YHWH-YaH our Elohim is one YHWH-YaH:

Jesus said OUR God is ONE YHWH-YaH.

not two or three.

willyah

So, your argument is not really about Mary being the mother of God, then, is it. It's about Jesus not being God. Why the extra context in the OP, is what I'm wondering. If Jesus isn't God, then of course Mary isn't the mother of God, just the mother of some wandering, wacky, quasi-Rabbi.
There are a lot, and I mean really a lot, of titles used for Jesus in the Bible that, if Jesus is just some fisherman who speaks in riddles, makes the Scripture pretty wild and I would assume, metaphorical to the extent that I don't know why you would quote it as having one meaning, anyway.

 

[katiemygirl]

You did. I was saying that there were other apostles beside Yehoshua and the 12 Apostles he chose and ordained.
(John 15:16 KJV) Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

The other apostles were not personally chosen by Yehoshua in the same way as the 12 Apostles nonetheless they were called apostles. I think some denominations refuses to accept the scriptures that say there were other apostles besides the 12 Apostles. I guess I did not make that clear.

willyah

Agree.

 

[katiemygirl]

Jesus said
(Mark 12:29 KJV) And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; YHWH-YaH our Elohim is one YHWH-YaH:

Jesus said OUR God is ONE YHWH-YaH.

not two or three.

willyah

God is a title. The Father is God. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. There is one God, not two, not three.

 

[kjv4me2you]

God is a title. The Father is God. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. There is one God, not two, not three.

You just said typed God 3 times. Are you saying 3-2=1?

willyah

 

[kjv4me2you]

You just said typed God 3 times. Are you saying 3-2=1?

willyah

The word Father is a title, the word God is a title, the word Jesus is a name, the words holy spirit is an attribute.

willyah

 

[kepha31]

How, then, are we to approach this elusive subject, if she must always be relational? How can we begin to study this woman who always deflects attention away from herself and toward her Child?

To understand the Mother of God, we must begin with God. All Mariology all Marian devotion, must begin with solid theology and firm credal faith. For all that Mary does, and all that she is, flows from her relationship with God and her correspondence to His divine plan. She is His mother. She is His spouse. She is His daughter. She is His handmaid. We cannot begin to know her if we do not, first, have clear notions about Him—about God, His providence, and His dealings with His people.

And that's not as easy as some people would lead us to believe. We, after all, are dependent upon language that engages our imagination, which makes invisible things understandable by comparing them to things that we see: God is boundless, like the sky; He is illuminating, like a fire; He is everywhere, like the wind. Or we contrast God's qualities with our own: we are finite, but He is infinite; we are limited in our power, but He is all-powerful.

Analogy and contrast are as far as most people go in their consideration of God—and these are true, as far as they go. Yet they don't go far enough. God is pure spirit, and all our earthly analogies fall far short of describing Him as He really is.
katie said:

"God is a title. The Father is God. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. There is one God, not two, not three."

Amen.
Theology is the way we approach God on His terms rather than our own. Thus, though there's no easy way of going about it, we can't go deep in our faith unless we're willing to take on the task of theology to some degree.

The ultimate truth about God cannot be dependent on anything other than God. We cannot define God in terms of something contingent, as in analogies with creation. God does not depend upon creation for His identity. So even His tide of creator is something relative and not absolute. Though He is eternal and He is the creator, He is not the eternal creator. Creation is something that takes place in time, and God transcends time. So, though creation is something God does, it does not define Who He is. The same goes for redemption and sanctification. Though God is redeemer and sanctifier, these tides do not define His eternal identity, but rather certain of His works. The terms "creator," "redeemer," "lawgiver," and "sanctifier" are all dependent upon the world—upon something that needs to be created, redeemed, ruled, and sanctified.

 

[kjv4me2you]

Mothers are the most difficult people to study. They elude our scrutiny. By nature and by definition, they are relational. They can be considered as mothers only in their relationship with their children. That is where they focus their attention, and that is where they would focus ours.

Nature keeps mother and child so close as to be almost indistinct as individuals through the first nine months of life. Their bodies are made for each other. During pregnancy, they share the same food, blood, and oxygen. After birth, nature places the child at the mother's breast for nourishment. The newborn's eyes can see only far enough to make eye contact with Mom. The newborn's ears can clearly hear the beating of the mother's heart and the high tones of the female voice. Nature has even made a woman's skin smoother than her husband's, the better to nestle with the sensitive skin of a baby. The mother, body and soul, points beyond herself, to her child.

Yet as close as nature keeps us to our mothers, they remain mysterious to their children. They remain as mysteries. In the words of G. K. Chesterton's Father Brown, "A thing can sometimes be too close to be seen."

As the Mother of God, Mary is the mother par excellence. So, as all mothers are elusive, she will be more so. As all mothers give of themselves, she will give more. As all mothers point beyond themselves, Mary will to a much greater degree.

A true mother, Mary considers none of her glories her own. After all, she points out, she is only doing God's bidding: "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word" (Lk 1:38). Even when she recognizes her superior gifts, she recognizes that they are gifts: "All generations will call me blessed" (Lk 1:48). For her part, Mary's own soul "magnifies" not herself but "the Lord" (Lk 1:46).

How, then, are we to approach this elusive subject, if she must always be relational? How can we begin to study this woman who always deflects attention away from herself and toward her Child?
Hail Holy Queen, Mother of God in the Word of God, pg. 17
by Scott Hahn

Israel is the firstborn Son of YHWH-YaH Exodus 4:22.
Who was the mother of Israel the firstborn Son of YHWH-YaH? Not Mary .

Scripture answer:
JERUSALEM ABOVE is the mother of us all that would include Mary the mother of Jesus.

willyah