Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire a new religious thread, because they just keep on coming.

Many like to think they are and will be listed in that book....however,

Exodus 32:33
" And the Lord said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book"

So ones only hope is Gods grace, for all humans are born into sin and can never
make themselves worthy of God.

If Gus, or anyone wants to see a miracle, all they need to do is look around.

Yes, that is Catholic Tradition. It would seem highly odd if it were the actual case, though. The Bible doesn't say that.

Of course Jesus is what Christianity rests on but the Bible is the word of God. If it's wrong in even one place, then God's word is wrong. How could we rely on a faulty God?

Yes, that's pretty stupid Catholic tradition since the Bible does mention Jesus's siblings. Mary either had more immaculate conceptions or she had sex.

I'm with you on this, but the Catholic position isn't completely without reasonable argument, i.e., they claim that the original word used was a word that can either mean cousin or sibling. Chinese, likewise, only has one word that covers both relations. Chinese people will often introduce a cousin as a brother or sister, because their language only has the one word for it, and they often carry that over to when they're speaking English, too.

The immaculate conception wasn't Jesus' birth. It was the unBiblical idea that Mary was born without sin. There's nothing whatever in the Bible to support that. It's part of the Catholic theology that Mary is a co-redeemer with Christ which is equally unBiblical.

The Bible flat out states that Joseph kept Mary as a virgin until Jesus was born and then had sex with her afterwards.

Late to the party as usual, and haven't yet read the rest of the thread, but this is really all that needs to be said. You either believe it or you don't. No need to overthink things. "For with God nothing shall be impossible."

Yep, I missed that. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is indeed a reference to Mary being conceived and born without the stain of original sin on her soul, and does not refer to the virgin birth of Jesus. It's an early tradition, not corroborated in the Bible, that the Catholic Church eventually adopted as a doctrine of faith.

Naturally, the Catholics do offer evidence from the Bible supporting their position, however. They also argue that it was not the New Testament Scriptures that God gave authority to teach believers, but rather God gave teaching authority to the Church, and the Church then wrote the New Testament Scriptures to advance that mission, but that the Church also retains authority to teach other truths not found therein.

It's a hard argument to deny, since for several decades there wasn't a New Testament set of scriptures at all, and even after there were New Testament Scriptures, Christians didn't agree as to what that set actually was till centuries later, when the Church used its teaching authority to decide the question. So, in the meantime, during that early period, the teaching authority on questions Christian was with the Church alone, or else there was no teaching authority during that early period.

Valid arguments on each side of this question, but I tend to believe that Mary wasn't without original sin, since it's not in the Bible (in fact, the Bible says nobody is without original sin but Christ), and it was only centuries later that the Catholic Church made this an actual doctrine, rather than simply what some Catholics believed.

Looks like what I was alluding to cannot be seen. Lots of Church and Religious Theology cloaking used to cover up the intent and the truth of what transpired back in Genesis then in Gospels. Ezekiel 12:2 and Revelation 3:17 seem to apply now days.
Staying out of the debates or arguments concerning the "Traditions of Men" is my preference.

I bow out of this discussion.

there are two ways to live:
you can live as if nothing is a miracle;
you can live as if everything is a miracle
albert einstein


we've pretty much cleared things up on this thread and come to terms with the fact and/or understanding that god will save whomever he chooses.

Not at all. I think that's Calvinist doctrine,to which I do not subscribe. Scripture clearly states that God wills that all be saved.

I think the only thing you could say for sure is that you could put 100 Christians in a room and read the Bible to them and only about 70 would agree about what it said.

[quote=Gus}
we've pretty much cleared things up on this thread and come to terms with the fact and/or understanding that god will save whomever he chooses.
[/quote]

I must differ: God will save who ever chooses him. God is not willing that any should die, but that all should come to repentance (perhaps not an exact quote, but accurate in meaning.)

Nope. Wrong. Catholic theology is that Christ is the sole redeemer. Mary is is a person in the story. An admirable person but one of us none the less.

Agreed, but he also knows from the dawn of time who will and will not choose salvation. Seems contradictory, but it's not actually. Closest comparison is that I can see from a distance a child running between two parked cars into the road after a bouncing ball where there's an oncoming car that will arrive just as he runs into the street (not quite prescience, but close), but at the same time the child is still operating with free will. So prescience (being able to see what's going to happen) doesn't negate free will.

The Catholic Church specifically permits the belief that Mary is co-redeemer, but doesn't bind Catholics to believe it. It's considered a pious opinion. I can understand Protestant objection, however, even to holding officially that such an opinion is permissible. Co-Redemptrix is also an official title the Catholic Church approves for Mary for devotional purposes, which also scandalizes non-Catholic Christians.

"Mary’s role as Co-Redeemer and Mediatrix of grace is not a formally defined dogma of the Catholic Church. It remains a pious opinion." - Catholic Answers

So how many Catholics have been condemned to hell because they followed a 'pious opinion' and relied on Mary to redeem them instead of Christ? It's an extremely dangerous opinion when your salvation depends on knowing the truth. We might not see it much in the US but there are numerous places in the world where Mary is worshiped instead of Christ.

Yep.

The words in the Bible were scribed by men who thought they were being guided by The Holy Spirit. Some undoubtably were.

Other men , who believed they were being led by The Holy Spirit, determined the validity of the writings. Among this second group, a man has to be willfully ignorant to deny that politics and a lust for power are what motivated many of them.

The Holy Spirit can teach from a comic book if it suits His purposes. He is not dependent on, nor restricted to, a book compiled by man. It is blasphemous to believe otherwise. And..... if you believe the Bible..... blasphemy against The Holy Spirit is the big Nono.

Christians who place the Bible ahead of the Spirit are much like Muslims and their Koran.