Mary was a good person and had a sinful nature like all of us.

[concretecamper]

Good day,

Not being a member of that Church what they say and they assertions fall as meaningless.

The Gospel is inspired because of it's it's origin, some Church does not have to say that they just recognize it as so.

A Church can say lots of things... but that does not make them true. A Church can play the name it claim it game and some may fall for it.

To error is human.

In Him,

Bill

He that hears you hears Me, he that rejects you rejects Me and the One who sent Me. The Church cannot error in doctrine, that is Jesus' promise.

 

[concretecamper]

The Gospel is inspired because of it's it's origin

Prove to me the Gospel of Matthew is inspired.

 

[JulieB67]

The Church cannot error in doctrine, that is Jesus' promise.

We are told to "hold" to the teachings and traditions taught by the Word/Christ/apostles/disciples, not add to them. The true church is the many membered body of Christ that hold to his teachings brought forth by the apostles/disciples, not a church that has branched off and started their own traditions that simply void out the word of God. It doesn't matter who brought forth the books, etc. If you've branched off and are a far cry from what the early churches taught than I don't see how you can consider yourself the "true" church. Your church did exactly the opposite of what Paul taught. You ceased to hold onto the teachings and the traditions they taught. And other churches have done so as well of different denominations.

We don't need to add anything to what they taught. Christ has foretold us all things and the disciples/apostles brought that forth. That is what we hold to period. If Mary was to be raised in the fashion she is today, Christ and the disciples would have certainly done so and taught us to do so. They did not. She was a righteous woman who was blessed to bring forth our savior but that is it.

 

[concretecamper]

It doesn't matter who brought forth the books,

So can you prove that The Gospel of Matthew is inspired text?

If you can't, the rest of your post is superfluous.

 

[BBAS 64]

Prove to me the Gospel of Matthew is inspired.

Good day,

What kind of poof would it take for you you even consider it has because of it's origin it is inspired.

IN Him,

Bill

 

[BBAS 64]

He that hears you hears Me, he that rejects you rejects Me and the One who sent Me. The Church cannot error in doctrine, that is Jesus' promise.

Good day, concretecamper

The name it claim it Fallacy of any Church is not very useful IMHO.

Now you may believe what they tell you.... but you have errored in doing so.


In Him,

Bill

 

[JulieB67]

If you can't, the rest of your post is superfluous.

Of course it is to you because you know your church has branched off of the original "true" church and went into it's "own" direction. This is exactly what Paul taught us not to do.

So can you prove that The Gospel of Matthew is inspired text?

Why do you need proof? As Christ states, blessed are those that haven't seen (need proof) but believe. That's what faith is. The prophecy of Christ was foretold long before in the manuscripts we have from the OT. So yes, I believe it's true and inspired text of that prophecy coming true. We don't need anyone tell us it's inspired. You either believe or you dont.
Stephen gives a perfect sermon tying everything perfectly together from the old and the new in Acts when it comes to to the Savior.

Sadly your church put together the books (leaving some out that probably were inspired as well but that's another matter) but then ceased to hold to the books teachings and traditions. So you have no claim to stand on. You can't just say you either accept it all, etc. That's putting more trust into your church than to God himself and the written word which is what the true church is based on to begin with. People searched the scriptures daily to see if what is being taught was true and that's the same standard today. It's the only standard we have. Or you're putting your entire salvation into men's hands rather than God's.
When you branch off and start your own religion that don't hold to their teachings anymore you are no longer part of the 'true church" period. And that has happened with many other denominations as well.

 

[concretecamper]

Good day,

What kind of poof would it take for you you even consider it has because of it's origin it is inspired.

IN Him,

Bill

Any proof you can offer.

 

[concretecamper]

Of course it is to you because you know your church has branched off of the original "true" church and went into it's "own" direction. This is exactly what Paul taught us not to do.



Why do you need proof? As Christ states, blessed are those that haven't seen (need proof) but believe. That's what faith is. The prophecy of Christ was foretold long before in the manuscripts we have from the OT. So yes, I believe it's true and inspired text of that prophecy coming true. We don't need anyone tell us it's inspired. You either believe or you dont.
Stephen gives a perfect sermon tying everything perfectly together from the old and the new in Acts when it comes to to the Savior.

Sadly your church put together the books (leaving some out that probably were inspired as well but that's another matter) but then ceased to hold to the books teachings and traditions. So you have no claim to stand on. When you branch off and start your own religion that don't hold to their teachings anymore you are no longer part of the 'true church". And that has happened with many other denominations as well.

In brief, you believe the Gospel of Matthew is inspired because that is what you were taught, and you choose to believe it. There is nothing contained in Sacred Scripture that tells us Matthew is inspired text. You simply accept the decision of the Early Church. You accept by faith, the decision of men.

The Western Church has had the same canon since the late 4th Century (when the canon was first put together). So I'm not sure what you are trying to advance on your last paragraph.

 

[concretecamper]

The name it claim it Fallacy of any Church is not very useful IMHO.

Let's see, was your Church around on the year 500 AD?

I don't think so. The choice are much more limited than you think.

 

[BBAS 64]

Any proof you can offer.

Good day, concetecamper

It is the very breath of God (inspired) there for it is by definition ...

Strong's Greek: 2315. θεόπνευστος (theopneustos) -- God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God

biblehub.com

In Him

Bill

 

[BBAS 64]

Let's see, was your Church around on the year 500 AD?

I don't think so. The choice are much more limited than you think.

Good day,

I guess that would depend how one defines the church:

Clement of Alexandria
"For it is not now the place, but the assemblage of the elect, that I call the Church." (The Stromata, 7:5)

The elect of God always existed.

Justin Martyr

Moreover, that the word of God speaks to those who believe in Him as being one soul, and one synagogue, and one church, as to a daughter; that it thus addresses the church which has sprung from His name and partakes of His name (for we are all called Christians), is distinctly proclaimed in like manner in the following words, which teach us also to forget our old ancestral customs, when they speak thus: 'Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline thine ear; forget thy people and the house of thy father, and the King shall desire thy beauty: because He is thy Lord, and thou shalt worship Him.'" - Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, 63)

I know your denomination names and claims some things for itself... They are just mistaken may be some day By God's Grace they will learn.

In Him,

Bill

 

[Divide]

"Mary was a good person and had a sinful nature like all of us."

That sounds incorrect to me. Mary didn't have the Adamic nature she was purified and prepared to bring forth holiness before she conceived.

 

[BBAS 64]

That sounds incorrect to me. Mary didn't have the Adamic nature she was purified and prepared to bring forth holiness before she conceived.

Good day, Divide

Are you suggesting she existed before she was conceived?

Let's remember she was born in the line of David,

In Him,

Bill

 

[Divide]

Good day, Divide

Are you suggesting she existed before she was conceived?

Let's remember she was born in the line of David,

In Him,

Bill

I think that everyone existed before they were conceived on earth, but that's a different thread. I see what you're saying, the adamic nature is passed on in the bloodline so Mary had to have it and that is logical for sure.

But how often is God logical?! Let me ask you something, can a bad tree bear good fruit?

Mary had to be prepared by purification in the blood line since before Mary was born. SHe is a very speacial lady and had a very special purpose for God. I don't know how God accomlished this in Mary's bloodline, I just know that something took place.

Scripture never says even one thing wrong that Mary did. She came here set apart for a purpose and God did what He had to do to ensure good fruit. He might have strted the process of purification process a few generations before Mary even? We know one thing for sure because God does not lie. And He said, a bad tree can not bear good fruit. Was the fruit of Mary's womb one which had the adamic nature? Certainly not! So something happened to Mary's bloodline that didn't make it into print, lol.

 

[Divide]

Are you suggesting she existed before she was conceived?

Let's remember she was born in the line of David,

Does God ever change? No. Ok. Has God ever forced you to do anything? No. He does not force Himself upon anyone. We know that.

So why would God change and make you born upon a evil panet? We've all heard people say, I didn't ask to be here! Right? But why would God force us to be here beyond our wishes? He would not do that to us! Conclusion: He knew us before we were in the womb. I think we could have even chosen who our parents were going to be. Or at the very least, we agreed to come here.

Because God doesn't force things on people and God never changes.

 

[concretecamper]

Good day, concetecamper

It is the very breath of God (inspired) there for it is by definition ...

Strong's Greek: 2315. θεόπνευστος (theopneustos) -- God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God

biblehub.com

In Him

Bill

Haha, we all know what inspired means. Try again.

Prove to me that The Gospel of Matthew is Inspired.

 

[concretecamper]

Good day,

I guess that would depend how one defines the church:

Clement of Alexandria
"For it is not now the place, but the assemblage of the elect, that I call the Church." (The Stromata, 7:5)

The elect of God always existed.

Justin Martyr

Moreover, that the word of God speaks to those who believe in Him as being one soul, and one synagogue, and one church, as to a daughter; that it thus addresses the church which has sprung from His name and partakes of His name (for we are all called Christians), is distinctly proclaimed in like manner in the following words, which teach us also to forget our old ancestral customs, when they speak thus: 'Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline thine ear; forget thy people and the house of thy father, and the King shall desire thy beauty: because He is thy Lord, and thou shalt worship Him.'" - Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, 63)

I know your denomination names and claims some things for itself... They are just mistaken may be some day By God's Grace they will learn.

In Him,

Bill

Your unwillingness to address the issue head on speaks volumes.

 

[BBAS 64]

Haha, we all know what inspired means. Try again.

Prove to me that The Gospel of Matthew is Inspired.

No need..

 

[concretecamper]

No need..

Then don't challenge those who say "there is no need" to prove that Mary was Immaculately conceived.