Who made God?

[Jim Parker]

It is applied intellect.

That assumes that there is an adequately trained intellect to be applied to the questions. I have found that commodity to be increasingly rare.

Do you believe everything that you are taught in church? If you do, why did you leave the protestant church after 18 years? Was it because they taught things that were not inline with the truth? How did you come to that conclusion?

I came to it by searching for the original teachings of the church and finding the Early Church Fathers; the people who defined the basics of Christian faith in the 7 great councils; the people who laid out in so many words for us the doctrines of the Trinity, the deity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, the dual nature of Christ, etc. They were the ones who refuted the early heresies which continue to pop up today. (Because the devil has no need to invent new heresies since far far too many believers are ignorant of the fact that they up to their necks in one that was refuted multiple centuries ago.)

There has to be a reason why she is believed to be a perpetual virgin. We do not find it in the Bible, so someone, at some point, had to start teaching it for some reason.

It was widely held to be the truth by the time that the Protoevangelium of James was written by mid 2nd century.
The notion that someone just made it up is a much greater stretch of the imagination than the probability that it was already generally known but not written down until after her death. (Which is when you make sure that you have a record of the facts since the individual can no longer attest to it.)

Arrogance comes from thinking that what has been taught for so long must be right - regardless of the reason it is taught.

No. Arrogance is thinking that one knows better than what has been taught by authoritative sources for almost 2000 years because one possesses a KJ Bible and a fourth grade reading level.

 

[Gregg T]

Yeah. Goody goody for you.
Every heresy is based on reinventing the meaning of God's word and modern ones very often include religious bigotry against them dang KATH-licks.
And you have no idea that I have not based anything I have said on any teaching that originated in the Roman Catholic Church.
Typical

The point is that you have based belief in Mary's perpetual virginity on some extrabiblical tradtion that contradicts Scripture; holding to tradition of men above what Scripture [as listed in post #544] clearly says.

Who are "Cappadocians, Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, et. al. " that I should believe them over the Spirit and the Scriptures?

 

[Gregg T]

That assumes that there is an adequately trained intellect to be applied to the questions. I have found that commodity to be increasingly rare.

I have also found this to be true, and it may be because of this mindset:

We can't just "go to the scriptures" because that's were we are having the problem.

 

[Northman]

So, since we have such a wide diversity of interpretations, who do we go to to get the best one?

I'm not 100% on what you mean here. From what is being talked about here recently to do with the Mary ordeal, what is actually being interpreted? All I see is someone has an idea and the other does not. When I read the Word, I only see something being said about a virgin birth. There is nothing that actually states Mary remained a virgin for her whole life. Since it is not written, I don't see how that can be stated with surety simply because she was a mortal woman with a mortal husband. The husband is going to have desires. While not utterly shunning the idea that even if Mary did confide that Joseph never touched her after(or even if Joseph himself said so) it's not a concept that can or should be taught with force or people should be made to agree to under any circumstance, it simply isn't written. Whats written is everything.

We can't just "go to the scriptures" because that's were we are having the problem.

I think this is a lot more manufactured than it appears.

So how about going to people who were the closest to the events, who speak the language of the writers of the NT and their native tongue and who live in the same culture as the NT writers?

Well that's fine, and has a hint of wisdom. Remember though, those people are our equals. They were pastors and labourers and all manners of in-between. They were not prophets or apostles.

Or we could wait for someone like J. Vernon McGee to come along and enlighten us. (I really liked that guy!) Or Joyce Myers or Creflo Dollar or Jimmy Bakker or John McArthur or Chuck Smith.

I really do not know about any of these people, with the exception of one, and that is Joyce Meyer. I got through a fraction of one of her books before deducing that whoever was writing this thing was a psychology hack. Anyway, I think at the core of this problem is that people need to stop clamoring for human leaders. The weirdos get enabled by peoples' "need" for leaders and if folks focused on God more as their leader and just worked together like they are supposed to instead of trying vie for power of force or words or doctrine or anything else, than things would roll along just fine. These types are written about though and there is absolutely NO stopping them from coming and doing what they do. Actually if I remember correctly, the Word states to leave them be, blind leading the blind so to speak.

We accept the conclusions of the 7 great councils as definitive for orthodox Christianity but we reject the opinions of the same people because modern reformed, evangelical, protestants don't agree?

Opinions aren't scripture though. You can gather an entire conclave of folks from coast to coast and everyone is going to agree on John 3:16, its plain and written. Ideas of a lifetime of virginity when you have a husband? Not so much, simply because it's not stated.

 

[Papa Zoom]

The correct understanding of scripture is found in the apostolic tradition as recorded by the early church fathers.

That's just another way of saying the correct way of understanding Scripture is found in the Church's traditions.

 

[Nathan]

That assumes that there is an adequately trained intellect to be applied to the questions. I have found that commodity to be increasingly rare.

I came to it by searching for the original teachings of the church and finding the Early Church Fathers; the people who defined the basics of Christian faith in the 7 great councils; the people who laid out in so many words for us the doctrines of the Trinity, the deity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, the dual nature of Christ, etc. They were the ones who refuted the early heresies which continue to pop up today. (Because the devil has no need to invent new heresies since far far too many believers are ignorant of the fact that they up to their necks in one that was refuted multiple centuries ago.)

It was widely held to be the truth by the time that the Protoevangelium of James was written by mid 2nd century.
The notion that someone just made it up is a much greater stretch of the imagination than the probability that it was already generally known but not written down until after her death. (Which is when you make sure that you have a record of the facts since the individual can no longer attest to it.)

No. Arrogance is thinking that one knows better than what has been taught by authoritative sources for almost 2000 years because one possesses a KJ Bible and a fourth grade reading level.

Do you think Mary not being a perpetual virgin is a heresy? Here sis in the church were defined by their contradiction to the word of God - not the tradition of man. Seems to me some people wanted Mary to be a perpetual virgin for a reason. I'm just curious why. The idea had to start/come from somewhere.

Arrogance -

1. offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.
   

 

[Randy]

The apostles started (by Gods grace and command) to preach a new message of salvation in a world with many false Gods and different customs. NO NT existed no 2000 years of depth. Its all new in regard to the gentiles. Even the one true God had to be made known to these peoples and instructions of righteous living.

One thing it does NOT mean is that you may ignore the clear words of Jesus Christ who said that you will be judged by your works. (In the scripture which I have repeatedly posted.)


What do you think it means to "hold to Jesus' testimony"?
Do you think that it means to agree with Him that He is Lord?
Jesus never asked for anyone's agreement that He is Lord.
What He DID ask is: “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,' and not do the things which I say?" (Luk 6:46)

Bearing fruit means doing Jesus will that you “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven." (Mat 5:16) The fruit is "good works." If believers just automatically did those good works then Jesus would not have had to tell anyone to do them.

It continues to amaze me how much resistance I get when I tell people that if we are going to call ourselves Christians we need to act like Christ.

Jesus said, “For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.
Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." Jhn 5:26-29

By those words, Jesus, our LORD, told us that the basis on which He will judge us is whether we did good or we did evil. If we did good (works) we will have (eternal) life and if we did evil (works) we will be condemned (to the second death in the lake of fire.)

Why would anyone want to diminish the importance of that statement by Jesus our LORD?

But that's what I get every time I post Jesus' very own words.

I don't understand.


iakov the fool

I think those who continue to sin don't belong to Jesus. Who are those who "continue" to disobey? You are right we are not free to sin so why then do these people have to continue to ask forgiveness of sin after they claim to have come to the Lord? They are either being mislead by the catholic church that they need to do so to maintain the state of forgiven or they don't belong to the Lord and they sin thinking I just confess again and again to be forgiven. Thats not a sign of someone who loves the Lord as the Lord stated, "if you love me you will obey me".

"And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments"

Abstain from sexual immorality
Love one another sums up the law with the greatest love for God. A loving God our Father for whom we exist and from whom all things came. A loving Lord through whom all things exist and in whom we live and never die.

A good tree doesn't bear bad fruit.

So either your church is full of people who don't love the Lord and don't have the Spirit of Christ in them or more likely they are being mislead that they need to continue to confess to men to maintain their salvation.

Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”

66From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

67“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.

68Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”

70Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” 71(He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)


Randy

 

[Randy]

It is the teaching of the church since at least the 2nd century.
You think you know better because you have an modern western intellect and a feble if any grasp at all of the ancient eastern intellect.
That is not the result of applied intellect as you propose. It is the result of arrogance (presumption) that you know better than the entire Christian church has known for almost 2000 years.

Why is it so important for Protestants that they must dwell on what they imagine to be the sex life of the Mother of God???

I believe if Mary were here on earth she would be the first and loudest to object in being put on a "pedestal".
She was a ordinary women who wasn't much in this world and God blessed her in that she would give birth to the Christ Child the Son of God. So all generations will call her blessed but she is still that same women. Someone who loved the Lord. A fellow servant of the Lord.

Hail Mary -what is that?
Again I believe if Mary could actual hear those prayers (I don't believe that) Mary would be the first and loudest to tell you to go to the actual mediator between God and men Christ Jesus. For she is a fellow servant of God like us.

I have joked about praying to saints. As it was embarrassing as they answered "who are you" and then I would sigh "Oh Lord" and then I heard another voice who seemed to know me "Yes" (smile)


Randy

 

[Randy]

Some of us are free to serve one master. Not entirely so in those who receive their pay from a church. So even if a priest believes what we believe they must follow the leaders of their church or be booted from their position. That doesn't mean they don't believe but I doubt you are going to have 100% in any denomination.

Case in point. I once went to a greek festival. All were allowed into the inner sanctuary for the festival. But a priest stated only those who are baptized in the greek orthodox tradition church could enter as a worshiper. I asked did that apply to those who were baptized in other churches and those who already had the Spirit of Christ in them. The priest answered I would need to baptized in their church to worship in their inner sanctuary with the congregation. I doubt that priest made that rule but he had to follow their law. I answered so then the baptism is for you not me. The answer appeared to startle him.

I was baptized in a Lutheran church but not in Martin Luther's name. They baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and Holy Spirit. But ask what I believe and it may not be the same a ML as the source of my understanding is the NT and OT. I am sure many can state the same but you get the point.

I visited a catholic church, (as my sister and her family were catholic), and the body was singing praises and worshipping God and His Christ. Seemed ok to me. But they read and the congregation as one responds. Practiced and well known by catholics. But as a visitor you don't know the correct response.

 

[Jim Parker]

That's just another way of saying the correct way of understanding Scripture is found in the Church's traditions.

It's similar but not the same.
The tradition of the undivided church which dealt with all the heresies of the fist 8 centuries maintained the tradition of the apostles.
Now there are many traditions competing with each other and each saying they are the correct one.
Calvinist, Anglican, various Baptist, various Pentecostal, Methodist, RC, etc.
I became Orthodox because, as best as I can discover, they alone have attempted to keep the earliest teaching of the Church.

 

[Jim Parker]

Do you think Mary not being a perpetual virgin is a heresy? Here sis in the church were defined by their contradiction to the word of God - not the tradition of man. Seems to me some people wanted Mary to be a perpetual virgin for a reason. I'm just curious why. The idea had to start/come from somewhere.

Arrogance -

1. offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

I don't think it's a heresy. I don't think it has a bearing on one's salvation.

"Some people" is the entire Church for almost 2000 years.
The assumption that "some people wanted Mary to be a perpetual virgin for a reason" but that you know better (you or anyone else) is IMO an example of what I see as arrogance. The basis of "arrogance" is "assuming." It can be accompanied by "offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride" but it is not a necessary accompaniment.

 

[Nathan]

I don't think it's a heresy. I don't think it has a bearing on one's salvation.

"Some people" is the entire Church for almost 2000 years.
The assumption that "some people wanted Mary to be a perpetual virgin for a reason" but that you know better (you or anyone else) is IMO an example of what I see as arrogance. The basis of "arrogance" is "assuming." It can be accompanied by "offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride" but it is not a necessary accompaniment.

If the basis for arrogance is assumption, then what does that say for the ones who started teaching Mary was a perpetual virgin?

Asking questions is not arrogance. Assuming something is true without factual support is.

 

[Jim Parker]

The apostles started (by Gods grace and command) to preach a new message of salvation in a world with many false Gods and different customs. NO NT existed no 2000 years of depth. Its all new in regard to the gentiles. Even the one true God had to be made known to these peoples and instructions of righteous living.

I think those who continue to sin don't belong to Jesus. Who are those who "continue" to disobey? You are right we are not free to sin so why then do these people have to continue to ask forgiveness of sin after they claim to have come to the Lord?

So, are you saying that, since you have become a Christian, you have not sinned even once?
People ask for forgiveness of sin because they actually do sin. I have met NO ONE who has led a perfectly sinless life. Have you?
That's why John told us:
1Jo 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.
John is talking to believers there.

They are either being mislead by the catholic church that they need to do so to maintain the state of forgiven or they don't belong to the Lord and they sin thinking I just confess again and again to be forgiven.

Your religious bigotry against your brothers and sisters in the RCC and your erroneous assumption that you know what they believe are duly noted.

So either your church is full of people who don't love the Lord and don't have the Spirit of Christ in them or more likely they are being mislead that they need to continue to confess to men to maintain their salvation.

That you for that arrogant and ignorant assessment of my church of which you know absolutely nothing.

 

[Jim Parker]

If the basis for arrogance is assumption, then what does that say for the ones who started teaching Mary was a perpetual virgin?

How do you know that some people just started that teaching?
You ASSUME you know that to be the case.
It never occurs to you that it may well have been common knowledge in the Christian community.

For 9 months, Mary bore in her womb the One God, the creator of Heaven and Earth, Yahweh Elohiym, the Alpha and Omega.
For 9 months, Mary was the living Holy of Holies in which the physical presence of Almighty God dwelt.
She was the one human vessel of all creation consecrated to be the Throne of God With Us and the Ark of the New Covenant.

Consider: 1Ch 13:9-10: And when they came to Chidon's threshing floor, Uzza put out his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. Then the anger of the LORD was aroused against Uzza, and He struck him because he put his hand to the ark; and he died there before God.

So, the LORD struck Uzza dead for just touching the Ark of the Covenant, and Joseph, a devout Jew, would know that story very well.

And Joseph, as a righteous Jew, would also be aware of the Law which states; "If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen, both of them shall bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the evening." Lev 15:18

So, you assume that, after Jesus was born, that Joseph figured it would be OK to have sex with the Ark of the New Covenant; for him to sexually enter God's Holy of Holies and to make unclean that which had been the very Throne of God.

I find that quite astonishing.

 

[Nathan]

Ah, I figured there had to be a reason it began being taught.

So the thought is Mary is a perpetual virgin because it would be unclean to be intimate.

Then I guess she also never sinned? I think I do remember that also being a part of the same idea.

Equating Mary as the same as the Ark of the New Covenant - even though there is zero truth in this? Where would this come from? Is this just your opinion, or is this apart of the teachings you speak of?

We are the temple of God ourselves. Does that mean we do disgrace to have intimate relationships with our spouses?

I'm not assuming anything. The teaching had to begin somewhere because we read nothing about it in the NT letters/Gospels.

 

[Randy]

So, are you saying that, since you have become a Christian, you have not sinned even once?
People ask for forgiveness of sin because they actually do sin. I have met NO ONE who has led a perfectly sinless life. Have you?
That's why John told us:
1Jo 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.
John is talking to believers there.

Your religious bigotry against your brothers and sisters in the RCC and your erroneous assumption that you know what they believe are duly noted.

That you for that arrogant and ignorant assessment of my church of which you know absolutely nothing.

No I am not a slave to sin as the Son set me free. I keep nine of the 10 commandments (i don't NOT work on the sabbath). I am not sexually immoral and I don't drink or smoke as if that was a sin. So if you strain out a gnat in what you think sinning is then everyone sins. John though it was possible not to continue to sin.

You wrote =Your religious bigotry against your brothers and sisters in the RCC....
You mean a guy from the "primitive" church -you hypocrite

Randy

 

[Jim Parker]

So the thought is Mary is a perpetual virgin because it would be unclean to be intimate.

Ok. You totally missed what I said.

Then I guess she also never sinned? I think I do remember that also being a part of the same idea.

I never said she never sinned.
And it is not "part of the same idea."
Please don't make up crap just to mock people you don't agree with.

We are the temple of God ourselves.

OH. Do you have the incarnate Son of God in your womb right now?
That's a red Herring.

Equating Mary as the same as the Ark of the New Covenant - even though there is zero truth in this?

So Mary DIDN'T bear the Son of God?
That's your story??

Does that mean we do disgrace to have intimate relationships with our spouses?

Are you a Jew under the Law of Moses?
Another Red Herring.

I'm not assuming anything. The teaching had to begin somewhere because we read nothing about it in the NT letters/Gospels.

So it couldn't have been common knowledge because Nathan says so.
Is everything that the apostles taught to be found in the NT?
Paul says "no."
2TH 2:15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.

IF you cannot respond to the beliefs of other Christians in a respectful manner I'd prefer you did not respond to me at all. I do not appreciate you mockery and adolescent cheap shots.

 

[Randy]

I don't know about parker but this guy (me) from the "primitive" church puts his hope in the righteousness that was "credited" to Him by faith in Christ Jesus. Not by works.

Randy

 

[Jim Parker]

No I am not a slave to sin as the Son set me free.

That's not what I asked.
I asked: "So, are you saying that, since you have become a Christian, you have not sinned even once?"

John though it was possible not to continue to sin.

Then please explain the verses I quoted you from John.
Here they are again:
1Jo 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.
It is possible and necessary that a Christian cease to live as he used to live when sin was his normal way of life. A believer is required to leave that life behind.
But to expect a believer who is still breathing air and pumping blood to never sin in the slightest manner was not what John was talking about.

You mean a guy from the "primitive" church -you hypocrite

I am not the one condemning the RCC. That is you.

 

[Jim Parker]

I don't know about parker but this guy (me) from the "primitive" church puts his hope in the righteousness that was "credited" to Him by faith in Christ Jesus. Not by works.

Randy

OK, so you have no idea what the reference to the "primitive" church meant.

Have you ever read: Jas 2:20-24?
But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?
And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God.
You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

Or maybe you have stumbled across the following words of Jesus in you study:
… the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—
those who have done good, to the resurrection of life,
and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation (John 5:28-29 NKJV)

I'm sure you've read what Paul has to say about salvation by grace through faith.
Do you understand what Paul was talking about in the following passage?
(God) will render to each one according to his deeds;
eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek;
but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (Ro 2:6-10 NKJV)

So, don't call Jesus your LORD unless you do what He commands. (Luk 6:46)