- This topic has 858 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Nick,
That is not speaking of humans. It is speaking of the sons of God for the flesh is nothing and the Spirit is all.
Hi C,
Your use of what you think is logic is a perfect example of the foolish results of trust in human wisdom.
Hi KW,
You offer
”That is not speaking of humans. It is speaking of the sons of God for the flesh is nothing and the Spirit is all”
Do you skip to other possibilities and assume they are correct if you do not agree with the simple explanation?
Hi KW,
Not humans?
Speaking of the angelic sons?
Scripture does not say flesh is nothing but it contributes nothing.
Men have souls to be saved. Salvation is not offered to angels. But it is not your hope?
Which other scriptures are directed towards the angels?
Nick,
Being a son of the Spirit trumps being a son of the flesh.
I merely applied the lesser title to those that reject the greater one.
Put a cover on either end and you have written a book.
But it is full of gnostic nonsense
And that is after asking us to produce scripture!
2 jn 9 is the only one you need.
Nick,
AGAIN BULLYING!!!!
THAT’S ALL YOU ARE INTERESTED IN!!!!
INDIRECTLY YOU CLAIMED THAT I DIDN’T PRODUCE SCRIPTURES, SO TO MAKE YOU AWARE,
I PRODUCED: AT LEAST 30 VERSES OF SCRIPTURES, PLUS DEFINITION, FOR YOU TO SPECIFICALLY CONTRADICT!
Now here is what you suggested!
2 John9
Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.
He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son.
It is as clear as crystal why you don’t produce scriptures, and also not ready to discuss, or define it!
As you can read, 2 John 9 has TWO STATEMENTS NOT ONE
Now If in the truth you know WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT It would only be more appropriate, and DECENT if you were to
COMMIT YOURSELF AND INDICATE WHICH OF THE TWO STATEMENTS YOU REFERRED IT TO MY POST, AND MORE IMPORTANT
CLARIFY YOURSELF SPECIFICALLY WHERE!!!!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi C,
Stay within what is written.
Your own ideas add nothing useful.
We cannot dialogue about your fanciful additions
2Jn9
Hi KW,
You offer
“Being a son of the Spirit trumps being a son of the flesh.
I merely applied the lesser title to those that reject the greater one.”
So please explain this too.
Have you fallen for the folly that says MARY IS THE MOTHER OF GOD?
That is about as big an insult as you can offer God.
Nick,
ARE YOU EXPERT AS WELL IN THE FOLLIES?
Read if you are interested in the truth, and in order to DISCERN what for you is THE INSULT I CAN OFFER GOD!
UNDERSTAND MORE OF GOD’S WORK REGARDING MARY,
DUE TO THE FACT THAT
NO MARY NO JESUS
THE WAY GOD ALMIGHTY OPTED TO ACHIEVE HIS KINGDOM FOR THE SAKE OF THE LOST
WELL DECLARED BY PAUL IN:
1 Corinthians 11:11 But yet neither is
the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man,
in the Lord “THE WORD MADE FLESH” in
THE HOLY SPIRIT
BOTH BY “THE WORD” JESUS’ SPIRIT! THE DIVINE HUMAN BEING
THE SON
MARY’ SOUL,and JESUS’ FLESH to respect what happened in the garden.
ADAM’ S SOUL, and EVE’S FLESH RESPECTIVELY,
ALSO BOTH BY “THE WORD” THE FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE, SINCE ALL IN HIM…..
IN THE MAN ADAM WHEN HE WAS CREATED!!
WELL DECLARED HEREUNDER!
12 For as the woman MARY, is of the man, JESUS, so also is the man JESUS by the woman:MARY.
but all things of God.
THE FATHER
so the above is my CONFESSION REGARDING JESUS/MARY, OR MARY/JESUS
SINCE THEY ARE BOTH THE SAME SPIRIT OF GOD, OBVIOUS ALL OF GOD!
“THE WORD”, JESUS, THE SON, SLAIN FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE WORLD. REV 13:8
Hereunder is an excerpt, which I copied and pasted, related to
Saint Cyril of Alexandria’s Defense of Mary
Saint Cyril of Alexandria was the Patriarch of Alexandria during the early part of the 5th century and a key figure in the Christological controversies of his time. His debate with the heretic Nestorius was the impetus for the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD where the Church officially adopted the long held understanding that Mary is Theotokos, “Mother of God.” Because of Saint Cyril’s steadfast defense of orthodoxy, he is called a Pillar of Faith and a Doctor of the Church.
To some, even today, this argument may seem like bickering over semantics. But St. Cyril saw, keenly, that what we say about Mary is crucial for how we understand her son, Jesus. If Mary were the mother of Jesus’ physical body but somehow not the mother of God, then this would mean Christ was divided into two separate natures, one human and one divine. And while Jesus is both fully divine and fully man, he is not divided. The human and divine natures of Jesus are unified in a single, undivided person. We say this not just because we value technical accuracy but because the truth of this mystery has an incredible impact on how we understand Jesus, his incarnation, ministry, and power to redeem humanity. This is why, in a letter to Nestorius, Saint Cyril writes, “for our sake and for our salvation, he assumed his human nature into the unity of his Person and was born of a woman; this is why it is said that he was born according to the flesh.”(Cyril of Alexandria, Letter II to Nestorius) In other words, our very salvation depends on two natures united into one person, Jesus Christ.
The Church has always held to the truth of the unity of Christ’s human and divine natures. But Saint Cyril gave an invaluable apology of this truth and expressed it with clarity, shedding light on its implications for how we ought to understand Christ’s mother, the Theotokos, the Blessed Virgin Mary. Cyril understood that if what we say about Christ is true -that from the moment of his incarnation he was fully man and yet remained fully G0d- than Mary ought to be venerated the one who gave flesh to and bore the King of the Universe. So Saint Cyril proclaims boldly that Mary is Theotokos as well as “Virgin-Mother, lightbearer, uncorrupt vessel.” He praises her saying, “Hail, Mary, you are the most precious creature in the whole world; hail, Mary, uncorrupt dove; hail, Mary, inextinguishable lamp; for from you was born the Sun of Justice.” (Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church, p. 243) If Christ was merely a man or was not divine from the moment of incarnation, then Mary would not deserve such praise. The same is true if Christ were divine but not human since Mary’s role would be a strange illusion. But, if we hold to the orthodox belief that Jesus was both fully divine and fully man, then the praise is not only allowable but inevitable
Despite the rightness of Saint Cyril’s praise for Mary, it’s strange to see such tender words coming from his mouth. Cyril did not hesitate to call Nestorius “wretched” and “blasphemous” and he was often quite stern and severe with other bishops who strayed from an orthodox faith. Yet this disposition softens greatly when he turns his words to the Virgin Mary. In Ephesus, during a homily in which he strongly criticized Nestorius, Cyril joyfully proclaimed of Mary, “But who among men is capable of celebrating Mary most glorious? The virginal womb: such a great wonder! This miracle has me enraptured.” (Cyril of Alexandria, Homily IV at Ephesus preached against Nestorius) In this same homily, Cyril trumpets:
“Hail, you who held the Uncontainable One in your holy and virginal womb! Through you, the Holy Trinity is glorified; the precious Cross is celebrated and adored throughout the world; heaven exults, the angels and archangels rejoice, the demons are put to flight, the devil, the tempter, falls from heaven, the fallen creation is brought back to paradise, all creatures trapped in idolatry come to know of the truth.”
Such effusive praise is not mere sentimentality or poetic hyperbole. Saint Cyril, Doctor of the Church, always reasoned and wrote with surgical precision and careful accuracy. And so his devotion to Mary was the result of his understanding of who Christ is and, in turn, what his mother must be. Cyril saw the beauty of this mystery and couldn’t help but be moved. His writing is a testament not just to orthodoxy but also to Mary’s ability to soften even the roughest exteriors. Fortunately for all of us, Saint Cyril’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, theologically sound and orthodox, became official Church doctrine at the Council of Ephesus. Father Luigi Gambero , describing the development of our understanding of Mary in his book Mary and the Fathers of the Church, writes, “Cyril’s preaching and his attitude, redolent with admiration, greatly contributed to the growth of Marian devotion.” (Gambero, p. 239) Because of Saint Cyril’s keen insights and steadfast devotion to the truth, we are able to name Mary “Mother of God” without reservation.
May Mary soften our hearts just as she did to Saint Cyril of Alexandria.
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi C,
You may revere Cyril of Alexandria but history seems to define him not by any works of power and love but by his malignant political behaviours.
Is that the sort of fruit that should be admired?
Nick,
Hi KW,
You offer
“Being a son of the Spirit trumps being a son of the flesh.
I merely applied the lesser title to those that reject the greater one.”
So please explain this too.
1 Corinthians 3:3Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
other versions like to stick adjectives in the verse that are not in Koine in order to make the meaning more clear.
1 Corinthians 3:3New English Translation (NET Bible)
3 for you are still influenced by the flesh. For since there is still jealousy and dissension among you, are you not influenced by the flesh and behaving like unregenerate people?
You may revere Cyril of Alexandria but history seems to define him not by any works of power and love but by his malignant political behaviours.
Is that the sort of fruit that should be admired?
Nick,
IRONICALLY YOU ME AND ALL CHRISTIANS RELY ON PAUL, MORE THEN ON JESUS!!!!
SINCE HE GAVE US OUR BELIEF!
WE DO NOT KNOW JESUS AT ALL!
SO
DOES THIS ALSO APPLY TO
SOUL OF TARSUS ?????
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi C,
There is no division between Jesus Christ and Paul.
It is no longer I that liveth but Christ that liveth in me.
There is no division between Jesus Christ and Paul.
It is no longer I that liveth but Christ that liveth in me.
Nick,
Your statement above is void,
Considering that my 2000 posts on heavennet are enough EVIDENCE of my belief!
But the fact that Paul history wise was a killer of Christians,
and Jesus Christ took him AND MADE HIM HIS SERVANT, it is clear enough that,
NOT JUST HISTORY IS IRRELEVANT, and has nothing to do with THE WORK OF JESUS CHRIST!
BUT THE WHOLE WORLD, WHICH HE ALREADY WON!
So in the same way your argument hereunder is also VOID regarding Cyril of Alexandria!
You may revere You may revere Cyril of Alexandria but history seems to define him not by any works of power and love but by his malignant political behaviours.
Is that the sort of fruit that should be admired?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi C,
Yes we are convinced of your belief in yourself.
But your relationship to truth is far less certain.
Grow up Nick
and dig your head outta the sand…YOU are the one projecting YOUR OWN fabrications onto others…!!
..convinced of YOUR OWN belief in yourself
When indeed it’s really YOUR relationship to truth that is FAR less certain..!!Do you have any desire to understand truth..?
Or just get kicks out of spouting off your own load of religious garbage…!?!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
