Mary, Salvation, and Sin Offering

[DHK]

Sorry, but we sincerely believe WE are in the Church Jesus established here on earth, and you are the one's who reject that.

How do you expect to prove this statement? What evidence can you provide?
The only thing that you have provided thus far is arrogance. The RCC is good with that. Can you do better?

 

[Zenas]

How do you expect to prove this statement? What evidence can you provide?
The only thing that you have provided thus far is arrogance. The RCC is good with that. Can you do better?

May I suggest a book called "Tried by Fire: The Story of Christianity's First Thousand Years" by William J. Bennett. This is not an apologetics book, it's a history book written by a cabinet member in the Reagan administration.

 

[BobRyan]

In a recent post, DHK wrote the following about Mary's visit to the Temple after the birth of Jesus: "The entire reason for this offering was to admit that she was a sinner. She was unclean and needed to be purified, not only physically, but spiritually. She was a sinner. This was a sin offering, an admission that she was a sinner in need of a Savior which she already admitted in Luke 1 :47". I have to ask the question then; sin offering for what, having a baby? This is an incredible statement by anyone as I have ever seen.. Imagine that, it is a sin to have a baby. Incredible, simply incredible!

Maybe the true explanation for this is that this was done simply for purification after childbirth, that this had only to do with a ritual uncleanliness which in and of itself did not imply any moral fault. Mary was simply fulfilling all the precepts of the Law, (which, clearly wasn't written to make allowances for a sinless man like Jesus, who also followed the Law or his sinless mother). .

1. The Bible never says Mary was sinless - so the RCC "makes that up"
2. The Bible DOES say Jesus was sinless. The RCC claims for itself the same authority as the Bible so it does not care that some of its errors are not taught in the Bible.
3. All sin offerings are defined in Leviticus - and the sin offering of Lev 12 is specific to this case.
4. Mary was a sinner long before she gave birth to Christ according to the Bible "ALL have sinned" Romans 3 - that includes Mary. And she had a sinful nature to boot!

She had a son which added the burden of being "unclean" for 33 or 66 days depending on giving birth to boy or girl. during that time she was not allowed to worship in the temple and would be staying away from normal contact with people.The text is specific about this being related to bleeding.

 

[BobRyan]

Sorry, but we sincerely believe WE are in the Church Jesus established here on earth, and you are the one's who reject that. We hope that your eyes will be opened and you will stop believing in the words of men and their fallible interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. We rely on the Church and it's over 2000 year history, not one man or our individual selves, but on the whole Church and all who have come before us.

The idea that Jesus has been reduced to grape juice and crackers is not going to cut it.

The idea that man can "confect the body soul and divinity of God" will never "cut it" - it does not pass the test of scripture, logic or reason. It is not approved or taught in the NT and is instead a product of the dark ages.

 

[BobRyan]

Look at this sister bowing before a statue of Mary.

now let's read God's commandment -

4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me,

 

[DHK]

May I suggest a book called "Tried by Fire: The Story of Christianity's First Thousand Years" by William J. Bennett. This is not an apologetics book, it's a history book written by a cabinet member in the Reagan administration.

I have a few history books. I find that men like J.T. Christian and Thomas Armitage do a fairly good job of tracing Baptists or those who held Baptists beliefs back down to the Apostles. They even quote a Catholic Bishop agreeing to the fact.
Most Catholics have their own revised history born out of false premises that cannot be proved--i.e., Peter was a bishop/Pope in Rome. The fact is: he wasn't. And there is no evidence that he was. It is a myth. So this history, built on Peter, is all built on fables and nothing more.

 

[annsni]

Not a lie, but the truth. Why bother because communion means nothing to you folks. It's just an example, a going through the motions, an utterly and totally meaningless action despite Jesus's own words on the matter.

Interesting view. We had communion yesterday. It was far from what you explain. Can you show me maybe a link to a church that says that communion means nothing? I'd love to see how they actually word it.

 

[annsni]

Look, when Jesus said "This is My body and this is My blood", He was in their presence. He did not mean it to be taken as being literally His body and blood, but that it typified His body and blood.

One must also understand what the supper was that they were celebrating and just what the cup meant. It wasn't just the drink on the table at the time and Jesus decided to grab it. Maybe it would be good to have a thread on the meaning of the elements of a seder.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

No, the wine and bread are the elements that contain the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ.

If that were the case, why did the Church of Rome deny the blood of Christ to the laity. If I have read it right, from some time in the Middle Ages until Vatican 2, only the priests drank the wine. In the light of your church's ridiculous interpretation of John 6:53, for hundreds of years the laity had no life in them.

The grape juice and crackers are just that, they mean nothing but that in the non-orthodox faith traditions. So in the end, why bother?

The Church of Rome is the one that does not use bread but a wafer. My church uses real bread. Did Jesus use a wafer? Also, if you are going to criticize someone else's religion, you should at least know what they believe so that you don't make a fool of yourself. Go and study 'Communion' in the 1689 Baptist Confession.

 

[DHK]

Adonia said:

The idea that Jesus has been reduced to grape juice and crackers is not going to cut it.

It doesn't cut it for us either. The Lord's Supper is one of the most worshipful services of the church. It is more than just quickly and flippantly downing some juice and swallowing a cracker.
But for your sake let's examine this more closely. The Lord's Supper (Table) was instituted by Christ. The RCC does not observe this remembrance or service, but totally neglects it.

Instead they have "The Sacrifice of the Mass," during which they observe transubstantiation, a very superstitious practice not taught anywhere in the Bible. The Lord's Supper is not observed in the RCC. It is the sacrifice of the Mass where Christ is sacrificed again--an act which is blasphemous.
What does the Scripture say?
1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
--He suffered once for sins, and only once. The sacrifice of the mass, by its very name, infers that he is sacrificed every time the mass is said--over and over and over again.
This is not the Lord's Table. It is transubstantiation.

The Lord's Table is for believers, not for believers in the RCC, but for those who have trusted Christ as their Lord and Savior by faith and faith alone.
A believer in Christ is thankful for what Christ has done in their life.
He is justified by faith alone.
He is made righteous by the blood of Jesus.
He has been forgiven of all his sins: past, present, and future.
He has been adopted into the family of God.
He has become His child and can never lose that status as His son or daughter.
He is an heir of God and joint heir with Jesus Christ.
As Christ has made him righteous, when God looks down upon this sinful believer he does not see the sin, but rather the righteousness of Jesus Christ.
He has sanctified him--set him apart for His glory and service.
In sanctification he has made him a saint (he doesn't have to wait).
He knows for sure that he has a home in heaven, that eternity is his.
His sins have been washed, put under the blood, to be remembered no more.
He will be given a new body, a resurrected body, one like unto Christ's.
He needs not to confess to a priest for he is a priest and Christ is his Great High Priest.
He needs not the Magesterium for the Bible is his authority and God has given him the Holy Spirit for his understanding.
The Holy Spirit dwells within him permanently.
He has been given the fruit of the Holy Spirit; the power of the Holy Spirit, the availability of the power of the Holy Spirit, and much more.

There is so much more that God has given the believer when he came to Christ that day and was saved by the blood as he trusted Christ as his Lord and Savior. What a day it was for him. How precious is that salvation.

Therefore the Lord's Supper is a very special time of remembrance

It is a time of remembrance because it is an ordinance to observe and not a sacrament.
1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

It is a time of remembrance and it is called the Lord's Supper, not "Mass" or transubstantiation, or any other such thing:
1 Corinthians 11:20 When ye come together therefore into one place,... the Lord's supper.

It is a time of remembrance because he commanded us to remember it:
1 Corinthians 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Again, the command is given: REMEMBER
1 Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

In the next verse:
1 Corinthians 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
The word "shew" in other translations is more accurately translated "proclaim." As one remembers the Lord's death, in the offering of his body, and the shedding of his blood, one is proclaiming the gospel message, and we do so until he comes again. It is a proclamation of the gospel.

But take note!
This is not for everyone. This is for those who have trusted Christ; those who have been justified by faith and faith alone; those who are absolutely sure they are right with God. Otherwise they are in danger. God takes this service very seriously.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

Therefore:
1 Corinthians 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
--The people in our church are warned. Make sure you are a believer in Christ, that you have been born again by the Spirit of God (not baptism), and nothing stands between you and God. The onus; that responsibility lies upon you. Examine yourself.
--We then have a time of silent prayer, before what you call "those crackers and juice" are served.

However, if one is not as serious as they ought to be, or is rather flippant in their attitude as the Corinthians were, God is a just God and does not take things lightly:
1 Corinthians 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
Some were weak; some sick. And God killed others because of their attitude toward this most worshipful service.
Why?
We remember. We remember what He did, for sinful creatures like us, in giving us not only salvation but all the blessings we don't deserve such as listed at the beginning of this post.

 

[annsni]

If that were the case, why did the Church of Rome deny the blood of Christ to the laity. If I have read it right, from some time in the Middle Ages until Vatican 2, only the priests drank the wine. In the light of your church's ridiculous interpretation of John 6:53, for hundreds of years the laity had no life in them.

I grew up Catholic and received my first communion in 1972. I went to Catholic school from 7th through 12th grades. I never saw the congregation partake of the wine ever. It wasn't until recently that I've seen it when I've been to funerals and that is optional. Why would it be optional if partaking of the blood of Christ is so important?

 

[Yeshua1]

Mary was a sinner, as she spoke of herself, as she rejoiced in God her Savior...

Paul stated that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and the Holy Spirit approved that message, so was HE wrong, and the catholic Church right regarding mary?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

In all the parishes I have been I have never seen such things happen. The closest we have come is the veneration of the Cross, the very same type of Cross used to hang our Savior on. I don't particularly like what is shown in those pictures, but if that is the worst thing that happens it's no big deal to me - I don't engage in such actions. I believe that from the Apostolic Succesion right down to how we worship with Jesus being the focus of the Mass and with his real presence in the Holy Eucharist, the Catholic Church is more right than wrong on all the pivotal Christian issues and biblical teachings.

Adonia -

The men and women here are contending here with you for the glory of God and for the love of your neverdying soul. What has deceived you has been the belief in the RCC and submitting your mind and conscience to their authority over the authority of Holy Scripture. You will not give an account on the day of judgement to how you obeyed the RCC but how you obeyed the Word of God. And look, even your own conscience has testified to you that idolatry you see popes and other Catholics engaged is wrong...yet you close your eyes and ears. Friend, repent of these things. Simply not engaging in such actions doesn't spare you the judgement coming against these things. You have stated its no big deal. Rather than contend against, you have given your approval.

Romans 1
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

See how the Lord charges those with sin who both commit and have pleasure in them that do them.

Everything that folks are contending for here leads you back to the Scriptures. To the Law and to the Testimony, says the prophet of God to you, if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them. See Isaiah 8:20

 

[SovereignGrace]

Yes Adonia, Brother Reformed has told you the truth in the above post. Please, heed the words of the scriptures...as they are our sole authority...Sola Scriptura.

 

[Adonia]

Yes Adonia, Brother Reformed has told you the truth in the above post. Please, heed the words of the scriptures...as they are our sole authority...Sola Scriptura.

Only in your own opinion. Good grief, if that were true Jesus would have just written the whole of the New Testament himself and been done with it! Man interprets the Scriptures, you do it and we do it, the only difference is our interpretation is the amalgamation of all the Bishops of the Church that have come before us from the beginning of the newly emerging Christian Church. The real problem began when man started making his own interpretations and that was the start of the now thousands upon thousands of new Christian sects.

 

[Adonia]

Adonia -

The men and women here are contending here with you for the glory of God and for the love of your neverdying soul. What has deceived you has been the belief in the RCC and submitting your mind and conscience to their authority over the authority of Holy Scripture. You will not give an account on the day of judgement to how you obeyed the RCC but how you obeyed the Word of God. And look, even your own conscience has testified to you that idolatry you see popes and other Catholics engaged is wrong...yet you close your eyes and ears. Friend, repent of these things. Simply not engaging in such actions doesn't spare you the judgement coming against these things. You have stated its no big deal. Rather than contend against, you have given your approval.

Romans 1
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

See how the Lord charges those with sin who both commit and have pleasure in them that do them.

Everything that folks are contending for here leads you back to the Scriptures. To the Law and to the Testimony, says the prophet of God to you, if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them. See Isaiah 8:20

I submit because that is what the Scriptures say to do, to submit to the authority of those God has placed over us. What do you want me to do. go to some church where the pastor just gives his own interpretation of the Scriptures, and if I start to disagree with what he is saying then move on to another church? That could be an endless proposition. No! I accept the teachings of Christian orthodoxy and the Roman Rite's interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The only other church I could attend would be the Eastern Orthodox as their biblical interpretation closely mirrors that of the Latin Rite. Your brand of Christianity could never replace either of those for me.

 

[Adonia]

Adonia said:

It doesn't cut it for us either. The Lord's Supper is one of the most worshipful services of the church. It is more than just quickly and flippantly downing some juice and swallowing a cracker.
But for your sake let's examine this more closely. The Lord's Supper (Table) was instituted by Christ. The RCC does not observe this remembrance or service, but totally neglects it.

Instead they have "The Sacrifice of the Mass," during which they observe transubstantiation, a very superstitious practice not taught anywhere in the Bible. The Lord's Supper is not observed in the RCC. It is the sacrifice of the Mass where Christ is sacrificed again--an act which is blasphemous.
What does the Scripture say?
1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
--He suffered once for sins, and only once. The sacrifice of the mass, by its very name, infers that he is sacrificed every time the mass is said--over and over and over again.
This is not the Lord's Table. It is transubstantiation.

The Lord's Table is for believers, not for believers in the RCC, but for those who have trusted Christ as their Lord and Savior by faith and faith alone.
A believer in Christ is thankful for what Christ has done in their life.
He is justified by faith alone.
He is made righteous by the blood of Jesus.
He has been forgiven of all his sins: past, present, and future.
He has been adopted into the family of God.
He has become His child and can never lose that status as His son or daughter.
He is an heir of God and joint heir with Jesus Christ.
As Christ has made him righteous, when God looks down upon this sinful believer he does not see the sin, but rather the righteousness of Jesus Christ.
He has sanctified him--set him apart for His glory and service.
In sanctification he has made him a saint (he doesn't have to wait).
He knows for sure that he has a home in heaven, that eternity is his.
His sins have been washed, put under the blood, to be remembered no more.
He will be given a new body, a resurrected body, one like unto Christ's.
He needs not to confess to a priest for he is a priest and Christ is his Great High Priest.
He needs not the Magesterium for the Bible is his authority and God has given him the Holy Spirit for his understanding.
The Holy Spirit dwells within him permanently.
He has been given the fruit of the Holy Spirit; the power of the Holy Spirit, the availability of the power of the Holy Spirit, and much more.

There is so much more that God has given the believer when he came to Christ that day and was saved by the blood as he trusted Christ as his Lord and Savior. What a day it was for him. How precious is that salvation.

Therefore the Lord's Supper is a very special time of remembrance

It is a time of remembrance because it is an ordinance to observe and not a sacrament.
1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

It is a time of remembrance and it is called the Lord's Supper, not "Mass" or transubstantiation, or any other such thing:
1 Corinthians 11:20 When ye come together therefore into one place,... the Lord's supper.

It is a time of remembrance because he commanded us to remember it:
1 Corinthians 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Again, the command is given: REMEMBER
1 Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

In the next verse:
1 Corinthians 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
The word "shew" in other translations is more accurately translated "proclaim." As one remembers the Lord's death, in the offering of his body, and the shedding of his blood, one is proclaiming the gospel message, and we do so until he comes again. It is a proclamation of the gospel.

But take note!
This is not for everyone. This is for those who have trusted Christ; those who have been justified by faith and faith alone; those who are absolutely sure they are right with God. Otherwise they are in danger. God takes this service very seriously.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

Therefore:
1 Corinthians 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
--The people in our church are warned. Make sure you are a believer in Christ, that you have been born again by the Spirit of God (not baptism), and nothing stands between you and God. The onus; that responsibility lies upon you. Examine yourself.
--We then have a time of silent prayer, before what you call "those crackers and juice" are served.

However, if one is not as serious as they ought to be, or is rather flippant in their attitude as the Corinthians were, God is a just God and does not take things lightly:
1 Corinthians 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
Some were weak; some sick. And God killed others because of their attitude toward this most worshipful service.
Why?
We remember. We remember what He did, for sinful creatures like us, in giving us not only salvation but all the blessings we don't deserve such as listed at the beginning of this post.

A completely wrong assessment of Holy Communion. Gotta give you an "A" for effort though, you remain a "true believer" in non-orthodox Christian thought.

"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord". Jesus said it is his body and blood and this passage confirms those words. That's how we remember him, through the ingestion of his body and blood. Jesus was clear and so were the Apostles and the Christian Church throughout the ages. This was accepted until the 15th century until men (Zwingli) changed the doctrine. I'll stick with orthodox teaching on this one, thank you very much.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I submit because that is what the Scriptures say to do, to submit to the authority of those God has placed over us. What do you want me to do. go to some church where the pastor just gives his own interpretation of the Scriptures, and if I start to disagree with what he is saying then move on to another church? That could be an endless proposition. No! I accept the teachings of Christian orthodoxy and the Roman Rite's interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The only other church I could attend would be the Eastern Orthodox as their biblical interpretation closely mirrors that of the Latin Rite. Your brand of Christianity could never replace either of those for me.

Adonia -

The Scriptures never command you to follow a Latin Rite, pray to saints, have seven sacraments, or a host of other additions. What I would want you to do is submit to the Lord Jesus Christ, the only Head of the Church, and to the Holy Scriptures as the sole authority over you and all people. You will not be judged by your submission to popes and rites. You will be judged by the Word of God. Consider:

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. - John 12:48

This is what the Son of God says to you and to me. We will be judged by the words of our Lord Jesus. You see Adonia, this is the issue. You think leaving your trust in the papal authority puts your soul in a dangerous place and the alternative is to submit to another's interpretation. I have not called you to another man-made authority, but to God Himself according to His Holy Scriptures.

What you call "your brand of Christianity" is what is found in both the Old and New Testament Scriptures. The brand of Christianity we should submit to is that of the Apostles and prophets. We have the Scriptures now in our own language by God's grace and the faithful sacrifice of men and women who spilled their blood at the hand of the papacy so we could. And so we can follow the Apostles doctrine and practice as seen in Scripture.

 

[DHK]

A completely wrong assessment of Holy Communion. Gotta give you an "A" for effort though, you remain a "true believer" in non-orthodox Christian thought.

"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord". Jesus said it is his body and blood and this passage confirms those words. That's how we remember him, through the ingestion of his body and blood. Jesus was clear and so were the Apostles and the Christian Church throughout the ages. This was accepted until the 15th century until men (Zwingli) changed the doctrine. I'll stick with orthodox teaching on this one, thank you very much.

"Jesus said 'it is his body,'" so you say. Your misled opinion is wrong. You don't see the metaphor when it is set right before you. You are blind to it.

Jesus also said:
I am the light. (but he is not a candle).
I am the door (but we don't literally knock on him).
Note, that Jesus says in Rev.3:20 Jesus says you have a door (in your life--body, soul and spirit). He says to you: "I stand at the]door and knock, if any man open the door I will come into him..."
Where is that door? Do you hear the knock? Does it sound the same as the rap on the door of your house? How do you know when Jesus is knocking on your door? How big is that door?
Perhaps you would like to explain that verse to me:

Revelation 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
--Please explain.

Jesus spoke in many metaphors. You deny some and and accept others. Your method of interpretation is very inconsistent. It is a method only convenient to RCC theology and not to true Biblical hermeneutics which "rightly divides the Word of truth (2Tim.2:15).
Thus the RCC, as well as yourself, is just plain wrong. We can say that standing on the authority of the Word of God.

If I had a wrong assessment you would be able to through my post point by point and demonstrate how it is wrong. Instead you find just one point of disagreement and instead of showing how it is wrong you simply parrot the RCC position. Sad.

 

[annsni]

Additionally we know it is a sin to eat or drink blood.

But when we realize the meaning behind the third cup served at the Passover dinner, it makes SO much more sense. This is the cup that is offered after the dinner is finished. It is the cup of redemption. Jesus is our redeemer and it was His blood that bough our redemption. It was not the wine but the symbolism of what the cup represented in the Passover remembrance.