In Christ and the Blessed Virgin

Hi John,

The Pope has elevated himself above scripture by inventing a sinless virgin.

It's a misconception that the pope "creates" doctrine; he's just defining the faith once and for all handed to the saints (Jude 3).

I noticed that you're a Lutheran. True to him who fashioned the origins of your church, I urge you to listen to Luther:

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin. (Sermon: "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," December of 1527)

NB: Mary wasn't invented. God fashioned her to carry his beloved Son as his inviolate tabernacle.

 

'Mary wasn't invented. God fashioned her to carry his beloved Son as his inviolate tabernacle.'

Mary was a virgin, she was and remains blessed in Heaven because she was the person who brought to birth, our Lord Jesus. She was and is blessed among all women who ever lived or will live in this world.

Mary does not presently have any significant, function in Heaven, as far as we know from Scripture, except to praise and worship her Savior, Jesus Christ. She is not in, around, under or through any mercy-seat or tabernacle. Christ does real well all by Himself as He sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven.

Hebrews 1:3 intimates to us that Christ is ' . . . the brightness of His glory, and the express Image of His Person, upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.'

 

Therefore, the Gift of God's grace is his Son and not grace.

I would think you would be tired by now after all of this hoop jumping, Yelsew. Suggestion: avoid the circus acts and take Scripture at its face value. Don't wear yourself out chasing the wind, which has just about as much substance as your novel and innovative idea that grace isn't God's gift to us.

Here are two more verses for you to pull the blinders over:

But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift (Eph 4:7)

As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace (1 Pet 4:10)

 

Hi Ray,

Mary does not presently have any significant, function in Heaven, as far as we know from Scripture

Except, of course, for John the Seer's portrayal of Mary as the Queen Mother of the Heavenly Kingdom in Revelation, Chapter 12 - the job of which is chief intercessor for the people in Jewish Tradition (and 1 Kings).

Christ does real well all by Himself as He sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven.

All by himself? I suggest reading Revelation (Gk. Apocalypsis) and see for yourself whether Jesus is "all by Himself" in the heavenly court.

Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads. (Rev 4:4)

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed. (Rev 20:4)

Perhaps your eschatological vision isn't exactly the Biblical one?

 

Brother Carson,

You either need to update your theology or let some light into your mind. Hebrews 1:3 is not dealing with eschatology. Christ is telling us that He alone has purged our sins and that all final judgment rests solely on the decision of the Son of God our Savior. [John 5:22b] There is mention of Him upholding the universe by His sole power and the resplendent glory of the Son of God our Savior.

Do you understand the concept of ' . . . around His throne', the throne of Christ, are the twenty-four elders? [Revelation 4:4] God does not say that the Elders are judging who gets to Heaven and who goes to Hell. Around the royal seat of authority that Jesus is seated on are these representatives of the church of all ages. They are perhaps twelve of the O.T. heroes of the faith, and twelve from the better covenant, maybe the apostolate.
In Revelation 4:10 you do not find them judging, mediating, or even prayer for struggling
Christians on the earth. They were wearing crowns which soon after were cast at the feet of the worthy One, our Redeemer, Jesus Christ.

As you have said this particular verse Rev. 20:4 is eschatological by nature of John's writing. The scene is the earth because vs. 3 says that Satan is bound so he will not deceive the nations anymore until the Millennial Kingdom has ended and we are taken to the New Heaven. [Rev. 21:1]

In Christ's 1,000 year theocracy on this earth is where the thrones of Rev. 20:4 will appear in the future. Some saints will judge from thrones because in the N.T. you read of the Judgment of Gentiles, Judgment of the nations which is a whole study in itself.

St. Augustine has led mega-millions of learning Christians astray as to the doctrines of the end times. He thought that the Christian Church would be so successful that the Kingdom of God would be set up on the earth. After two world wars, the Korean, Vietnam War plus the Gulf War plus this most recent one, plus the fact that most of the near east is Muslim, the great theologian has ended up with a 'red face' of embarrassment.

Jesus said that the coming Kingdom of God on earth [Zechariah chapter 14] would be brought into reality at His Second Coming [Revelation 19:11-21] as duly noted in Revelation 20:2e; 3e; 4j; 5a; 6d]

 

Hi Ray,

Christ is telling us that He alone has purged our sins and that all final judgment rests solely on the decision of the Son of God our Savior.

And am I supposed to be in disagreement with these dogmas of the Catholic Church, which you're pointing out?

St. Augustine has led mega-millions of learning Christians astray as to the doctrines of the end times. He thought that the Christian Church would be so successful that the Kingdom of God would be set up on the earth.

I have one question for you, Ray. Have you ever read Augustine firsthand? I mean, really read Augustine? I'm not talking about a quote here or a chapter there, but entire books.

The reason I ask is because Augustine in no way thought that "success" had anything to do with immanent eschatology. In fact, Augustine speaks quite frankly about the difference between the Catholic churches and the Donatist/Arian churches; the heretics had better preachers, greater attendance, and seemed to have a greater rate of increasing membership. He lamented the lax clergy, the Catholics who professed the name and failed with regard to faith, and the various corruptions around him at the time.

Augustine saw - quite frankly - that the New Testament builds upon the Old Testament, and in doing so, Christ came as the Davidic King to establish his reign over the renewed Davidic Kingdom, and his enthronement began with the resurrection. See Peter's speech at Pentecost.

Jesus said that the coming Kingdom of God on earth [Zechariah chapter 14] would be brought into reality at His Second Coming

I disagree with you, and so does Jesus, who said, "Amen I say to you, that there are some of them that stand here, who shall not taste death, till they see the kingdom of God coming in power" (Mark 8:39).

I suggest a paper I wrote on this subject at:

http://carson.boerne.com/catholic/kingdom_ecclesiology.html

 

The Lutheran Church (or, more properly, the Church of the Augsburg Confession) has repudiated many of Luther's writings. The Church of the Augsburg Confession has never considered Luther to be infallible. Holy Scripture is the only infallible guide. "Other writings of ancient and modern teachers, whatever their names, should not be put on a par with Holy Scriptures." Formula of Concord, 1580.

The Church of the Augsburg Confession (like the Roman Catholic Church until 1854) has never recognized the "immaculate conception." Many Catholic and Lutheran teachers have said things that were contrary to scripture but these false teachings were eventually removed from their respective churches. However, by creating the papal infallibility dogma, the Roman Catholic church has cut off any possibility of reform. The Roman church is in a downward spiral from which there is no escape.

 

Carson Weber,

Origen can be credited with the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture which started in Alexandria, Egypt. St. Augustine went along with this non-literal interpretation of the Word of God subverting any literal exegesis of Scripture, especially in the Book of Revelation. Present day Reformed Baptists also have adopted a non-literal method of exegesis in the Book of Revelation. When this is done the sky is the limit as to how to interpret the Word of God.

Augustine in his "City of God" set forth the idea that the church visible was the Kingdom of God on earth. Dr. Oswald T. Allis, in his "Prophecy and the Church," in Volume I page 3 wrote these words. 'He {meaning Augustine} ' . . . taught that the Millennium is to be interpreted spiritually as fulfilled in the Christian Church. Living in the first half of the first millennium of the Church's history, Augustine naturally took the 1000 years of Revelation XX literally, and he expected the second advent to take place at the end of that period. But since he somewhat inconsistently identified the Millennium with what then remained of the sixth chiliad of human history he believed that this period might end about A.D. 650 with a great outburst of evil, the revolt of Gog, which would be followed by the coming of Christ in judgment.'

Roman Catholics and Reformed Baptists, for example, believe that this church age is the Kingdom of God, and we do too, but we do not accept this present church age as the Kingdom Age/ the Millennial Kingdom. You might ask why?

Zechariah 14 points to the event of the Second Coming of Christ. Jesus when He returns will set his holy feet down on the Mount of Olives near Jerusalem. As you remember Jesus ascended into Heaven from this same place. [Acts 1:12]

Zechariah 14:2 and Revelation 19:11 are the same event and time. The reason we know, one hundred percent sure, that this distinct Millennial Age has not started yet is because of at least two reasons. Zechariah 14:9 declares that one day Jesus the Lord will be king over the earth. As I said earlier all of the middle east is Muslim. On an average 98% of the population is non-Christian of any flavor. Secondly, and with even more conviction we can say that Christ's theocratic Kingdom on earth is not even started because Jesus is not yet seated in His Millennial Temple in Jerusalem as Zechariah 14:16 declares and requires.

Never in human history up until June 13, 2003 has Jesus ever sat in authority in Jerusalem, Israel as ' . . . the King the Lord of hosts.' During the Old Testament times Jehovah Lord was in Heaven; during Jesus life time on earth He told us that His kingdom was not of this world, and most strongly turned down the peoples offer to make Him King in Israel. His mission was our redemption on the Cross. But, one day in the future He will fulfil His eschatological promise by setting up His Kingdom reign of 1,000 years on this earth.

The Davidic Kingdom and Christ's enthronement has not yet started and it did not begin with His resurrection. Jesus real life theocratic Kingdom will take place after the Second Coming of Christ and the Apostle John says that the Great Tribulation martyrs [Revelation 7:14] will live and reign with Christ the King for ' . . . a thousand years.' [Rev. 20:4]

'The fact that history has proved that Satan was not bound, that we are not in the millinimum, experiencing all that was promised to those who enter it, and that Christ did not come in A.D. 650, has not been sufficient to dissuade the adherents of this system. In spite of its obvious failure it is still held widely.' Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost, "Things To Come" page 382.

This above noted text has everything one needs to know about the doctrines of the end time, which theologians call eschatology. It is published by Zondervan Publishing House.

I have read some of Augustine's views and ideas as to theology.

 

Ray,


"Origen can be credited with the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture which started in Alexandria"

Meethinks it can be traced back a bit earlier to a guy named Paul.

1 Corinthians 10:4
and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.

Of course Jesus did a bit of it himself:

John 3:14
"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;

Blessings

 

thessalonian,

I agree with your post. Those illustrations or examples we do understand in the way they were presented. However, at the School of Alexandria in Egypt they allegorized nearly every part of the Word of God, bringing disarray and confusion as to the true meaning of the words coming to us from the Bible. Look it up for yourself as to this errant theological center and system of understanding.

Catholics and Reformed Baptists allegorize away the Davidic Kingdom where Christ will sit on the throne of His father, David. Revelation 20 does not mean to these erring brethren that the 1,000 years is indeed what John the Apostles declares it to be a Millennium of His theocracy on this earth, yet to be experienced. [Zechariah chapter 14]

 

Ray:

"I agree with your post. Those illustrations or examples we do understand in the way they were presented. However, at the School of Alexandria in Egypt they allegorized nearly every part of the Word of God, bringing disarray and confusion as to the true meaning of the words coming to us from the Bible. Look it up for yourself as to this errant theological center and system of understanding. "

Ah, so your not against alagorizing. I am well aware of Origen's problems and excessive alagorizing. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Allagory has it's place. Yet when it gets outside the valid tradition of the Church ("hold fast to the traditions you have recieved, whether by word of mouth or letter from us". 2 thes 2:15, it can be a cancerous sore.


"Catholics and Reformed Baptists allegorize away the Davidic Kingdom where Christ will sit on the throne of His father, David. Revelation 20 does not mean to these erring brethren that the 1,000 years is indeed what John the Apostles declares it to be a Millennium of His theocracy on this earth, yet to be experienced. [Zechariah chapter 14] "

Jesus said "the kingom of God is at hand.". Christ reigns in our hearts today. The hearts of the faithful. Does he not reign in your heart? I would hope he does. Where in the Old Testament does he speak of this reign. Show me why the 1000 years is supposed to be taken literally. Did God stop using allegory in the New Testament? If so show me where it says that.

By the way, make sure you go to the servants of Mary thread. I responded to your OSAS post.

Thanks

Blessings

 

Hi John,

You wrote, "The Church of the Augsburg Confession (like the Roman Catholic Church until 1854) has never recognized the "immaculate conception."

That's really interesting. The same Catholic Church that supposedly 'never recognized the "immaculate conception"' before 1854 declared Mary as "Patroness of the United States" under the title of her Immaculate Conception in 1847. That's a bold move to make concerning a doctrine you supposedly don't confess.

Or, perhaps, your understanding of Catholic doctrine and dogma is flawed?

 

Hi Ray,

You wrote, "Origen can be credited with the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture which started in Alexandria, Egypt."

It's interesting that you think so considering that Paul wrote this in his Epistle to the Galatians, "Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children".

It looks to me like Paul was at it long before the school at Alexandria.

St. Augustine went along with this non-literal interpretation of the Word of God subverting any literal exegesis of Scripture, especially in the Book of Revelation.

I believe that you are confusing a literal from a literalist interpretation of Scripture. To always read Scripture in a literalist fashion may be to avoid reading it from a literal standpoint.

If I say, "It is raining cats and dogs," the literal interpretation is that it is raining really hard. The literalist interpretation is that cats and dogs are falling from the sky.

Apocalyptic imagery is a particular genre of Scripture that employs symbolism to convey historical truth. Interpreting the symbols for the realities that they convey is far from avoiding a literal reading of the Scriptures.

Augustine in his "City of God" set forth the idea that the church visible was the Kingdom of God on earth.

Actually, he didn't set it forth. Jesus did. I suggest reading the Parables of the Kingdom in chapter 13 of Matthew's Gospel. I've convered this in my paper at:

http://carson.boerne.com/catholic/kingdom_ecclesiology.html

I really do suggest reading this paper I wrote. I believe you may find many of its points quite striking and very Biblical - of course, they contrast your thesis, which is all the more reason to read it. Be challenged.

He {meaning Augustine} ' . . . taught that the Millennium is to be interpreted spiritually as fulfilled in the Christian Church.

To go from what an author meant to be a symbol to the reality meant to be conveyed by the original author is hardly spiritual exegesis. This is historical-literal exegesis.

Zechariah 14:9 declares that one day Jesus the Lord will be king over the earth.

Why would we want to make the same mistake that the Jews made? That is, looking for an earthly (what you call "theocratic") kingdom?

Jesus promised his generation of listeners the kingdom, and he promised that it would be immanent, and, according to Albert Schweitzer, all he left us was the Church. Hmmm..

Jesus said (and I repeat myself here), "Amen I say to you, that there are some of them that stand here, who shall not taste death, till they see the kingdom of God coming in power" (Mark 8:39).

What do you make of this, Ray?

The Davidic Kingdom and Christ's enthronement has not yet started and it did not begin with His resurrection.

Are you sure of that Ray? Is that what the New Testament teaches?

Let's see what Peter says in his first Pentecostal sermon:

But since [David] was a prophet and knew that God had sworn an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants upon his throne, he foresaw and spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah (Acts 2:30)

From what I see, Peter equates Jesus' resurrection with his Davidic enthronement upon the throne of David. This is what the New Testament states explicitly. This is what Peter teaches.

 

Who said the Pope is a descendant of Christ? I wouldn't agree with that either.

 

Please enlighten me regarding Roman Catholic doctrine. My understanding is that when the Pope declared Mary to be "Patroness of the United States" there was still the possibility, however remote, that he was in error. However, when in 1854, he pronounced the "immaculate conception" ex cathedra he was infallible. Also when the Pope pronounced the "Assumption of the Virgin" ex cathedra in 1950, the church was forever committed to that doctrine as well. So the Pope has formulated two new irrevocable dogmas in the space of less than 100 years. What have these doctrines accomplished except to obscure the Gospel of Christ and create a Marian cult?

[ June 13, 2003, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]

 

Carson Weber,

You said, ' . . . stand here, who shall not taste death, till they see the kingdom of God coming in power" (Mark 8:39).

What do you make of this, Ray?

I said, ' The Davidic Kingdom and Christ's enthronement has not yet started and it did not begin with His resurrection.

Are you sure of that Ray? Is that what the New Testament teaches?

Let's see what Peter says in his first Pentecostal sermon:

But since [David] was a prophet and knew that God had sworn an oath to
him that he would set one of his descendants upon his throne, he foresaw
and spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah (Acts 2:30)

From what I see, Peter equates Jesus' resurrection with his Davidic
enthronement upon the throne of David. This is what the New Testament
states explicitly. This is what Peter teaches.

Ray says, 'You must come to the understanding that the Kingdom of God is distinct from the Davidic Kingdom meaning that Christ's Millennial Kingdom of 1,000 years is separate. You only quoted until verse 30 which says that from the lineage of David--- Christ would be born and after His death on the Cross God ' . . . would raise Christ to sit on His throne.' [vs.30]

I gladly agree with you that as Christians we are in the Kingdom of God and or in the security of the blessings of the church. Yes! Yes! But this is not the Davidic enthronement/the Messianic Kingdom of 1,000 years. Now let me tell you why? You did not go far enough in your reading and so missed the context of what Peter was preaching about.

Peter was saying that God raised Jesus from the dead and in verse 32 says also that the Apostolate were all witness of this most monumental event. Keep reading. To what position of authority was Jesus exalted. Answer: Verse 33 of Acts chapter two. Jesus was being elevated to 'the right hand of God exalted . . . . David is not exalted there only Jesus Christ as duly known and warranted in Scripture. Notice Hebrews 1:3 says the same thing. ' . . . when He {Christ} had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.'

Please, explain Zechariah chapter fourteen. You seemed to have ignored my exposition of this passage. The exhaltation of the seed of David, meaning Christ, will take place just after the Second Coming of Christ and as Scripture announces He will sit in Jerusalem in His theocratic Millennial Kingdom for 1,000 years and all nations will come to worship and adore the one Mediator, [I Timothy 2:5] Jesus Christ. [Zechariah 14:9 & especially verse 17. Up until now Christ has never ascended a throne on this cosmos, but He will after His coming in power and resplendent glory. This will start the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth.

 

Thessalonian,

You said, Christ reigns in our hearts today. The hearts of the faithful. Does he not reign in your heart?

I am saying, 'You and I and Carson Weber and the rest of us on the board are in the Kingdom of God/the church. Yes, He reigns in our hearts to the extent that we acknowledge, love and serve Him.

You said, 'Where in the Old Testament does he speak of this reign.'

My answer: Isaiah 9:6-7 God speaking through Isaiah speaks of ' . . . the government being on the shoulder of Christ . . . . He will be the Prince of Peace . . . . and His spiritual and on sight and on site Millennial Kingdom will ' . . . increase and His government of peace shall never end.' This 1,000 year reign will extend into eternity in the New Heaven. [Revelation 21:1]

Ezekiel chapter 40-48. In chapter 48 each of the 12 tribes of Israel will be alotted a certain area of land in which to live.

Micah 5:2. Up until now Jesus never was a ruler in Israel; but He will in the 1,000 year reign of Christ on this earth at the time of the Second Coming of Christ.

Zechariah 13:1

Zechariah chapter 14.

Show me why the 1000 years is supposed to be taken literally.

During this age of grace since the Cross the Bible says that only the relative few will be saved. [Matthew 7:14 d] Of all the billions and billions of men and women born in all of what we call time only the few enter the Kingdom of God/the church. Many go in at the 'strait gate.'

During the Millennial Reign/the 1,000 year reign of Christ on the earth all of Israel will be saved. [Romans 11:26]

During the Millennial Reign the Israelite people will be grafted into their own olive tree, as natural branches. [Romans 11:23 & 24] Today only a few Israelites here and there accept Christ as personal Savior. Do you see the difference?

You said, 'Did God stop using allegory in the New Testament? If so show me where it says that.'

I said, 'God did not totally deny the use of allegory or illustrations of His truth. But we have to know when it is legitimate and when it only portrays error and confusion of thought. One must be a master of the Scriptures to review all the possibilities of eschatology and then under the guidance of the Holy Spirit begin to put the whole panorama of truth together in a unified conceptualization of end times events.

 

Hi John,

Please enlighten me regarding Roman Catholic doctrine.

Doctrine is irrevocable and unchangeable; however, it can develop. Our understanding of the Blessed Trinity has increased by leaps and bounds over the centuries, and so the doctrine has developed, yet has not changed. We have always confessed that God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God and somehow God remains one. Yet, the precise terminology to express this theological doctrine comes into place when dogma is defined. Dogma is the precise definition of doctrine, which is - for the most part - more broadly expressed.

Another example is Jesus the man being divine. What does this mean precisely? Well, the dogma of the Hypostatic Union was defined at Chalcedon in 451, which precisely gives the definition of what the Church has always believed from the beginning. Of course, the Church didn't always confess the Christological Definition of Chalcedon because it hadn't been defined, but the general and broad belief of what it specifically narrows down had been confessed from the beginning.

What have these doctrines accomplished except to obscure the Gospel of Christ and create a Marian cult?

If you know your history, you would have already recognized the Marian cult from the early Church, esp. that which succeeded the Council of Ephesus.

The promulgation of these dogmas (1) further defines what is already taught and believed and (2) encourages the Marian devotion, which has always been a strong component of the Christian faith.

I personally have a strong devotion to our Blessed Mother, and I am a stronger Christian for it. Her prayers have been powerful and instrumental in my Christian life, and I can only thank Jesus for sharing such a beautiful and loving mother as his own with me (Cf. John 19:26-27).