Our salvation is in Mary

[Who Me]

And Mary is the telescope lk 1:46

And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

That is a miss understanding and miss application of scripture.
Mary praised God, it gave her no special function other than that of wife and mother to zjesus and his siblings.

 

[Who Me]

As stated, we do not worship man-made idols.
Again, I ask you, do you believe in the Communion of the Saints?

In your post 62 you wrote
" The intent to worship as one's God, obviously. "

As stated, we do not worship man-made idols.
Again, I ask you, do you believe in the Communion of the Saints?

In your post 62 you wrote,
" The intent to worship as one's God, obviously. "
This was in regard to the worship of idols, you intend to worship the Almighty Holy Creator God through objects, through that which is not God, in other words idols.

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

In your post 62 you wrote
" The intent to worship as one's God, obviously. "

In your post 62 you wrote,
" The intent to worship as one's God, obviously. "
This was in regard to the worship of idols, you intend to worship the Almighty Holy Creator God through objects, through that which is not God, in other words idols.

Icons are simply not worshipped in Orthodoxy. You have precisely zero right to judge the intent of my heart, or any other Orthodox. Who do you think you are?
And why do you keep avoiding my question?
You are engaging me in bad faith by refusing to answer my simple question. Here it is again:
Do you believe in the Communion of the Saints?

 

[Who Me]

Icons are simply not worshipped in Orthodoxy. You have precisely zero right to judge the intent of my heart, or any other Orthodox. Who do you think you are?
And why do you keep avoiding my question?
You are engaging me in bad faith by refusing to answer my simple question. Here it is again:
Do you believe in the Communion of the Saints?

I have responded to what you wrote.
If you find yourself being angered by my responses, ask your self why?

The question about communion of Saints is meaningless as we have different u derstandings of what it means. As seen by the fact I did put my understanding of it and you missed it.

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

I have responded to what you wrote.
If you find yourself being angered by my responses, ask your self why?

The question about communion of Saints is meaningless as we have different u derstandings of what it means. As seen by the fact I did put my understanding of it and you missed it.

You are again assuming and projecting your assumptions onto me. I am not angry. I am simply telling you that you have no right to judge my heart, and you don't. I am a professing Christian and according to the Scriptures you have no right to judge me. That belongs to Christ because He is my Master and not you.
I could do the same to you as you have done to me and level all sorts of accusations against you. But I don't because it is not my place to judge your heart.
As for your answer I scrolled back and saw that you said we are part of an unseen body. That would be the same as the Communion of Saints.
Orthodoxy teaches, and has taught so from the Kerygma of the Apostles, that Communion makes all Christians one. Past present and future. That includes those already reposed in the Lord and awaiting Resurrection with Him.
That means something very important.

 

[donadams]

Did Mary give birth to the fullness of the Godhead?

Not the mother of the divinity
Nor of the father or Holy Spirit but mother of the son who is fully God!

Lk 1:43
Thks

 

[donadams]

That is a miss understanding and miss application of scripture.
Mary praised God, it gave her no special function other than that of wife and mother to zjesus and his siblings.

What siblings? Perpetual virgin!

 

[donadams]

I have responded to what you wrote.
If you find yourself being angered by my responses, ask your self why?

The question about communion of Saints is meaningless as we have different u derstandings of what it means. As seen by the fact I did put my understanding of it and you missed it.

Are images forbidden?

 

[JLB]

Not the mother of the divinity
Nor of the father or Holy Spirit but mother of the son who is fully God!

Lk 1:43
Thks

Mary gave birth to flesh. The flesh and blood Man, Jesus Christ.


That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:6


Mary is flesh. Mary gave birth to the flesh and blood Man Jesus Christ.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit, because Mary is not the Spirit.


God is Spirit.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit.

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

Did Mary give birth to the fullness of the Godhead?

No, she gave birth to Christ, in Whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. He is of One Essence with the Father and Holy Spirit.

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

Mary gave birth to flesh. The flesh and blood Man, Jesus Christ.


That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:6


Mary is flesh. Mary gave birth to the flesh and blood Man Jesus Christ.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit, because Mary is not the Spirit.


God is Spirit.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit.

No one is saying "Mary gave birth to Spirit". That is a straw man. What is being stated is that she gave birth to Christ, Who had united HIS DEITY to Flesh in MARY'S WOMB.
Thus she is the Theotokos; the God-Bearer, because she gave birth to the Incarnation of God in the Flesh.
It is God Who melded His Spirit with earthly Flesh and Mary gave birth to that Union.

 

[donadams]

Mary gave birth to flesh. The flesh and blood Man, Jesus Christ.


That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:6


Mary is flesh. Mary gave birth to the flesh and blood Man Jesus Christ.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit, because Mary is not the Spirit.


God is Spirit.


Mary did not give birth to Spirit.

Mary gave birth to the person Jesus Christ!

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

Mary gave birth to the person Jesus Christ!

This conversation is the very reason that Sola Scriptura is an insidious and evil doctrine.

 

[Free]

This conversation is the very reason that Sola Scriptura is an insidious and evil doctrine.

Yet, properly understood, it is correct. Sola scriptura doesn't mean Scripture alone is our authority, as is commonly believed, but rather that Scripture is the ultimate and only infallible authority. That some have different or incorrect understandings of the Bible doesn’t mean sola scriptura is false, much less "an insidious and evil doctrine."

Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (ESV)

What is the standard here? Apostolic authority? No. The Church? No. Angels? No. It's Scripture—that which was already taught, which no apostle could change. Paul could not come back and teach something different, nor could Peter or any of the other apostles. In other words, Paul and the rest of the apostles are held to the standard of Scripture--sola scriptura--as the final and infallible authority.

1Co 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. (ESV)

Paul even admits that he doesn't see perfectly, that he sees as "in a mirror dimly." That would apply to Peter and the rest of the Apostles, which means that none of them can be an infallible authority; it means that no person, including every Pope and Patriarch, could be, ever.

Those are the nails in the coffin of any idea that the Catholic or Orthodox Churches, or the leaders of them, are the highest authorities or infallible authorities on Scripture. Scripture alone is the highest and only infallible authority to which all Church leaders are subject.

 

[Dyonisius the Areopagite]

Yet, properly understood, it is correct. Sola scriptura doesn't mean Scripture alone is our authority, as is commonly believed, but rather that Scripture is the ultimate and only infallible authority. That some have different or incorrect understandings of the Bible doesn’t mean sola scriptura is false, much less "an insidious and evil doctrine."

Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (ESV)

What is the standard here? Apostolic authority? No. The Church? No. Angels? No. It's Scripture—that which was already taught, which no apostle could change. Paul could not come back and teach something different, nor could Peter or any of the other apostles. In other words, Paul and the rest of the apostles are held to the standard of Scripture--sola scriptura--as the final and infallible authority.

1Co 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. (ESV)

Paul even admits that he doesn't see perfectly, that he sees as "in a mirror dimly." That would apply to Peter and the rest of the Apostles, which means that none of them can be an infallible authority; it means that no person, including every Pope and Patriarch, could be, ever.

Those are the nails in the coffin of any idea that the Catholic or Orthodox Churches, or the leaders of them, are the highest authorities or infallible authorities on Scripture. Scripture alone is the highest and only infallible authority to which all Church leaders are subject.

You said:

Scripture alone is the highest and only infallible authority to which all Church leaders are subject.

My response:

And who holds them accountable in that manner? Me, or you? If you and I disagree on Scripture, who then decides between you and I?

Your quotations of Galatians is referring to the Kerygma (preaching) of the Gospel by the Apostles. That was ORALLY SPOKEN long before it was all written down. St. Paul was merely saying that even if he came back and PREACHED something different than what he had already preached, that the Church was not to heed him.
Nothing about Scripture there. You are forcing that on the text.
And St Paul is talking about how we will see when we have put off mortality for immortality in the next life.
The Apostles had perfect knowledge of the Gospel in order to preach it to the world.