Syncan:

St. Paul...not me... differentiated between his word and the lord's word to him. Why did he do that amidst his preaching, is left for I and you to think about.

no, you havent answered my question.

Since Paul was fallible in that statement (and could be wrong)....
......should that part of the bible be doubted?

Syncan:
Now:

Do women preach in your church? considering 1Tim2:12, 1Cor14:34.

Yes, women preach in my church.

italo: @ adsonstone, I dont exactly know what you mean by "compromise."

I remember telling you that we must see Scripture through the eyes of Tradition...since, even Scripture was created by Tradition.

There can be no compromise when it comes to doctrine.

compromise=agreement.

What we reached a compromise on was 'tradition has its roots in scripture'
lie?

By the way, you said the bold but you did not explain.

Tradition created scripture....you mean tradition made the prophets, apostles and other inspired men write the scriptures.

adsonstone:

compromise=agreement.

I prefer "agreement."

adsonstone:

What we reached a compromise on was 'tradition has its roots in scripture'
lie?

By the way, you said the bold but you did not explain.

Tradition created scripture....you mean tradition made the prophets, apostles and other inspired men write the scriptures.

it could be interpreted inaccurately! To say what you have in inverted commas above could mean that Tradition came from Scripture...and that would be a LIE.

There's nothing in Sacred Scripture that contradict anything in Sacred Tradition. Everything in Sacred Tradition and/or the principles behind them are in Sacred Scripture to one degree or another. They are in Scripture, not because they were derived from Scripture, but because Scripture was born by Tradition.

In the Old Testament era, people already worshipped God before Gen 1.1 was ever written. In the new Testament, the Church existed for years before and of the Apostles ever put pen to paper.

And when these men wrote, they wrote based on Church Tradition - practise. So to interpret Scripture in isolation from Tradition is to take it out of context. You will often come to the wrong conclusion.

This is as clear as i can make my position for now.

@ Italo, Syncan and Woky.

Back to Mary.

If only Mary is referred to as 'mother of God', what happens to other women Jesus called his mother?
Should you not declare them 'mother of God' too?
Including the Nuns in covents, Priestly Sisters....etc....they are entitled to being the 'mother of God'.

italo:

I prefer "agreement."




it could be interpreted inaccurately! To say what you have in inverted commas above could mean that Tradition came from Scripture...and that would be a LIE.

There's nothing in Sacred Scripture that contradict anything in Sacred Tradition. Everything in Sacred Tradition and/or the principles behind them are in Sacred Scripture to one degree or another. They are in Scripture, not because they were derived from Scripture, but because Scripture was born by Tradition.

In the Old Testament era, people already worshipped God before Gen 1.1 was ever written. In the new Testament, the Church existed for years before and of the Apostles ever put pen to paper.

And when these men wrote, they wrote based on Church Tradition - practise. So to interpret Scripture in isolation from Tradition is to take it out of context. You will often come to the wrong conclusion.

This is as clear as i can make my position for now.

alright, I get your point.

Scripture also assures us as individuals that we can read and understand it....hence, we wont misinterpret.

Are/is the scripture(s) wrong to have said that?

@truthislight

Don't forget also that the following was said by a "pope" ---- Adrian VI


"If by the Roman Church is understood its head, that is the pope, it is certain that it can err, even in those matters which concern the Faith, by publishing heresy in its decisions and decrees. For many Roman Pontiffs have been heretics. Of recent times it is reported that Pope John XXII publicly taught, declared, and commanded to be believed by all, that purified souls do not have the clear vision of God before the Final Judgment."

adsonstone: @ Italo, Syncan and Woky.

Back to Mary.

If only Mary is referred to as 'mother of God', what happens to other women Jesus called his mother?
Should you not declare them 'mother of God' too?
Including the Nuns in covents, Priestly Sisters....etc....they are entitled to being the 'mother of God'.

May God forgive u

adsonstone: @ Italo, Syncan and Woky.

Back to Mary.

If only Mary is referred to as 'mother of God', what happens to other women Jesus called his mother?

A woman is a man's mother if she carried him in her womb.. If u blv that Jesus christ is God then Mary is the mother of God.

truthislight:

Is that word in the sriptures ? Show me, let me read it up.

Thank you.

Peace.

You've just proved me right again.

Thanks.

adsonstone:

no, you havent answered my question.

Since Paul was fallible in that statement (and could be wrong)....
......should that part of the bible be doubted?



Yes, women preach in my church.

So you doubt these:

1Tim2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence".

1Cor14:34 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law".

Is it that he was wrong?

adsonstone: @ Italo, Syncan and Woky.

Back to Mary.

If only Mary is referred to as 'mother of God', what happens to other women Jesus called his mother?
Should you not declare them 'mother of God' too?
Including the Nuns in covents, Priestly Sisters....etc....they are entitled to being the 'mother of God'.

Adsonstone, When you are told to write the name of your mum, please write all the women you've called mum in this world, young and old, Ok.

Next question pls.

Let us not wish him hell. Let us leave antagonism for our adversaries. Let us revel in "The Joy of the Gospel" (Evangelii Gaudium) that Jesus has given us. Let us not allow anyone take this joy from us.

To despise or hate so much that it beclouds ones reasoning is indeed to be in hell and darkness already.

POPE II:
May u rot in hell

POPE II:
May u rot in hell

Please.

woky:
A woman is a man's mother if she carried him
in her womb.. If u blv that Jesus christ is God
then Mary is the mother of God.

Syncan:

Adsonstone, When you are told to write the name of your mum, please write all the women you've called mum in this world, young and old, Ok.

Next question pls.

That does not answer my question.

Jesus said this:

Matthew 12:49
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father,
that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister,
and mother.

(I'm trying as much as possible to quote the douay-rheims version of the bible since Italo believes thr KJV is mutilation of the original bible)

I did not doubt Jesus...and I can NEVER doubt Him.

If you have declared Mary 'mother of God' other women too should be declared 'mother of God' eg Nuns, Priestly Sisters.....

Stop being partial/hypocritical.


Or do you believe women that do the will of the Father are not Jesus' true mother....in other words, do you doubt Jesus in that passage?

adsonstone:





That does not answer my question.

Jesus said this:

Matthew 12:49
[color=#99000]For whosoever shall do the will of my Father,
that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister,
and mother.[/color]

I did not doubt Jesus...and I can NEVER doubt Him.

If you have declared Mary 'mother of God' other women too should be declared 'mother of God' eg Nuns, Priestly Sisters.....

Stop being partial/hypocritical.


Or do you believe women that do the will of the Father are not Jesus' true mother....in other words, do you doubt Jesus in that passage?

I will answer questions, but I will not answer here the type... like when a child sees the palm tree and remembers to ask me which tree produces palm fruits. My statement earlier, says it all.

Syncan:


So you doubt these:

1Tim2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence".

1Cor14:34 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law".

Is it that he was wrong?

He is not wrong, however, women are not forbidden to teach!

The forbidden point is 'usurping' 'authority over a man'

Remember Priscilla, Aquilla's wife in acts 18, she, alongside her husband, taught Apollos 'more perfectly'.....and Apollos learned.

Appllos, a fellow teacher/preacher with Paul was taught 'more perfectly' by a woman.


Infact, Paul referred to Priscilla (and Aquilla) as His helpers in Jesus Christ. (Romans 16:3)

Are you ok?


You have not answered my question....but I have answered yours.

Can you answer mine now?

Could Paul be wrong in those teachings of his because you indicated that he's fallible in that part....hence the bible should not be trusted in such parts.
Is that what you mean?

adsonstone:


He is not wrong, however, women are not forbidden to teach!

The forbidden point is 'usurping' 'authority over a man'

Remember Priscilla, Aquilla's wife in acts 18, she taught Apollos 'more perfectly' alongside her husband.
Appllos, a fellow teacher/preacher with Paul was taught 'more perfectly' by a woman.


Infact, Paul referred to Priscilla (and Aquilla) as His helpers in Jesus Christ. (Romans 16:3)

Are you ok?


You have not answered my question....but I have answered yours.

Can you answer mine now?

Could Paul be wrong in those teachings of his because you indicated that he's fallible in that part....hence the bible should not be trusted in such parts.
Is that what you mean?

From the very beginning I preached honesty, Our Lord himself gives back to those who ask him questions, only with ulterior motives, what they deserve.

You look at a post that says "for it is not permitted unto them to speak(in the churches)"; and you tell me "it is not forbidden" quoting for me passages of women who rendered help in their homes. If you can answer this question honestly, you won't ask me that question again.

There is no mention of "individual" reading or interpretation there.

In fact, 2 Peter 1:20 condemns private interpretation.

adsonstone:

alright, I get your point.

Scripture also assures us as individuals that we can read and understand it....hence, we wont misinterpret.

Are/is the scripture(s) wrong to have said that?

Catholic doctrine declares Mary "the Mother of God."

Is it right or wrong? That, we are 'obliged' to answer.

To start to say we must declare the "crowds" as "the mother of God" is nothing more than trolling.

If you want us to trade silly questions, there are 1001 I can ask you in return but I doubt that is the way to go.

adsonstone:
That does not answer my question.

Jesus said this:

Matthew 12:49
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father,
that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister,
and mother.

(I'm trying as much as possible to quote the douay-rheims version of the bible since Italo believes thr KJV is mutilation of the original bible)

I did not doubt Jesus...and I can NEVER doubt Him.

If you have declared Mary 'mother of God' other women too should be declared 'mother of God' eg Nuns, Priestly Sisters.....

Stop being partial/hypocritical.


Or do you believe women that do the will of the Father are not Jesus' true mother....in other words, do you doubt Jesus in that passage?

Syncan:


From the very beginning I preached honesty, Our Lord himself gives back to those who ask him questions, only with ulterior motives, what they deserve.

You look at a post that says "for it is not permitted unto them to speak(in the churches)"; and you tell me "it is not forbidden" quoting for me passages of women who rendered help in their homes. If you can answer this question honestly, you won't ask me that question again.

I'm being honest in my answers to your questions.

Deuteronomy 4:23 says

Beware lest thou ever forget the covenant of
the Lord thy God, which he hath made with
thee: and make to thyself a graven likeness of those things which the Lord hath forbid to be made:

Yet, you said images are not forbidden.


Women teachers are not forbidden.
If they were, Priscilla won't have taught Apollos neither will Apostle Paul refer to her as His helper in Christ.

Be honest, you called for it.


Now, my question again.
I hope you will answer this time....I'm even beginning to wonder if you're scared of answering.

Could Paul be wrong in those teachings of
his because you indicated that he's fallible
in that part....hence the bible should not be
trusted in such parts.
Is that what you mean?

italo: There is no mention of "individual" reading or interpretation there.

In fact, 2 Peter 1:20 condemns private interpretation.

So, was Apostle Paul wrong in his letter to timothy when He said this in 2 Timothy 2:15

Carefully study to present thyself approved
unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.


Or was he speaking 'fallibly' in that part?

italo: Catholic doctrine declares Mary "the Mother of God."

Is it right or wrong? That, we are 'obliged' to answer.

To start to say we must declare the "crowds" as "the mother of God" is nothing more than trolling.

If you want us to trade silly questions, there are 1001 I can ask you in return but I doubt that is the way to go.

This in no silly question neither is it a joke.

Jesus was not joking when he said those things neither was He speaking 'fallibly'....He was not also deceiving people.

It is gross hypocrisy to accept that the 'communion bread' as the true body of Christ when Jesus said that and refer to His followers that He called His mother as 'crowd'.

If you have declared Mary 'mother of God', other women that truly obey God are also 'Mother of God' because when Jesus declared that, he meant His TRUE mother....and they deserve the same respect/adoration/devotion as Mary.



Infact, lemme ask a question.

The Nuns in covents, are they also the 'Mother of God'??

SO Jesus has a true and a false mother?
May God save us

How in the world does "study" mean "apply your personal interpretation?"

Do you study a Biology textbook by applying your personal interpretation to it or do you try to understand the interpretation of the authors?


Again, there is nowhere Christians interpreted Scripture privately.

If it were so, those early Christian communities wouldn't need teachers. They'd just need the letters and they'd be fine.

adsonstone:


So, was Apostle Paul wrong in his letter to timothy when He said this in 2 Timothy 2:15

Carefully study to present thyself approved
unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.


Or was he speaking 'fallibly' in that part?

Enigma: @truthislight


Of recent times it is reported that Pope John XXII publicly taught, declared, and commanded to be believed by all, that purified souls do not have the clear vision of God before the Final Judgment."

that was what i was saying, that they have away of showing the other hand whenever the pope blunders.

Worst case, they let the pope die and they tag him a "heretic". "infallibility" indeed!

Na their way.

adsonstone:


I'm being honest in my answers to your questions.

Deuteronomy 4:23 says

Beware lest thou ever forget the covenant of
the Lord thy God, which he hath made with
thee: and make to thyself a graven likeness of those things which the Lord hath forbid to be made:

Yet, you said images are not forbidden.


Women teachers are not forbidden.
If they were, Priscilla won't have taught Apollos neither will Apostle Paul refer to her as His helper in Christ.

Be honest, you called for it.


Now, my question again.
I hope you will answer this time....I'm even beginning to wonder if you're scared of answering.

Could Paul be wrong in those teachings of
his because you indicated that he's fallible
in that part....hence the bible should not be
trusted in such parts.
Is that what you mean?

I did not say anything contrary to the commandment. God gave the commandment in Ex20:4-6, for the avoidance of doubt, God showed what he abhorred by commanding the making of Images,(the cherubs, the seraphs etc) yet never commanding the worshiping.

Yours is different. Something Paul clearly says "is not permitted in churches" you say it is "not forbidden" Show me where he encouraged a woman to preach in the church? The examples you gave are women helping out in the homes, he never prevented them from teaching their children or household, nor their being of help to him automatically become "preaching in the church".

As per your question, permit me to leave your insinuations to you, for I am careful what I say even in arguments, but just so you do not say I did not answer yours:

This with the one I asked you, is a typical illustration where private interpretation of scripture by the unlearned falls short. Scripture interpretation is not just a literal based venture, it requires knowledge of the speaker/writer and things that may have influence on him. St. Peter made it clear that it is not all that Paul writes that is hard to understand, neither is it all he wrote that is literal (2Pet 3:16). He actually confirms what Paul wrote, when he differentiated between his words and that of the lord 1Cor 7:12.
Moses told the people to give writ of divorce... it is scripture, yet Jesus told the people it is due to their hard hardheartedness (Mk 10:5). We now cannot disparage scripture because of what Moses wrote for Jesus Interpreted scripture and has given the church(with peter as the chief shepherd) the key to do same. It is the church now that is the pillar and foundation of truth 1 tim 3:15.

italo: How in the world does "study" mean "apply your personal interpretation?"

Paul tells Timothy (an individual, not the church) to study.

However, I'm not disputing the fact that it is advisable to consult the church for interpretation of any 'difficult' part....and even other parts.

Syncan:

I did not say anything contrary to the commandment. God gave the commandment in Ex20:4-6, for the avoidance of doubt, God showed what he abhorred by commanding the making of Images,(the cherubs, the seraphs etc) yet never commanding the worshiping.

Did God abhor Killing?
Yes, He did.
Yet, He commanded people to kill.....does that change the fact that He abhors it?

Thats left to you.

Syncan:
Yours is different. Something Paul clearly says "is not permitted in churches" you say it is "not forbidden" Show me where he encouraged a woman to preach in the church? The examples you gave are women helping out in the homes, he never prevented them from teaching their children or household

is the bold another infallible interpretation of the RCC.
If it is, I'll recommend a more comphrensive study.

Need I tell you: Priscilla did not teach her child, neither did she teach Her household....neither did the whole thing happen at home!

Guess where it all happened?
It happened in the synagogue at Ephesus...

....Need I tell you another awesome fact?
Apostle Paul himself took them with Him to the church.....to help Him.

Syncan:
nor their being of help to him automatically become "preaching in the church".

Paul was teaching the word of God, He took Aquilla and Priscilla to help him (In Christ just as he indicated in the Corinthian epistle).....now, do you think the the 'help in Christ was making tents'?

No, they were helping him teach the 'word of God' as He was doing before He left them there to continue.

How are we sure they were teachers, they taught Apollos what he did not know 'more perfectly'.....

Again, women teachers are 'not forbidden', If they were, Priscilla will never teach... they are only forbidden to 'usurp authority over a man....they should be submissive'

Syncan:
As per your question, permit me to leave your insinuations to you, for I am careful what I say even in arguments, but just so you do not say I did not answer yours:

This with the one I asked you, is a typical illustration where private interpretation of scripture by the unlearned falls short. Scripture interpretation is not just a literal based venture, it requires knowledge of the speaker/writer and things that may have influence on him. St. Peter made it clear that it is not all that Paul writes that is hard to understand, neither is it all he wrote that is literal (2Pet 3:16). He actually confirms what Paul wrote, when he differentiated between his words and that of the lord 1Cor 7:12.
Moses told the people to give writ of divorce... it is scripture, yet Jesus told the people it is due to their hard hardheartedness (Mk 10:5). We now cannot disparage scripture because of what Moses wrote for Jesus Interpreted scripture and has given the church(with peter as the chief shepherd) the key to do same. It is the church now that is the pillar and foundation of truth 1 tim 3:15.

sorry, but bro Syncan, you did not answer my question.

Oh, I see. It's trolling time.

Jesus is called Son of Man and Son of God. Is man God?

He's also called Son of David. Do you call David God?

Going by your perverted reasoning, David would deserve all the adoration you give God since we know that Jesus' Father is God. No?

adsonstone:
This in no silly question neither is it a joke.

Jesus was not joking when he said those things neither was He speaking 'fallibly'....He was not also deceiving people.

It is gross hypocrisy to accept that the 'communion bread' as the true body of Christ when Jesus said that and refer to His followers that He called His mother as 'crowd'.

If you have declared Mary 'mother of God', other women that truly obey God are also 'Mother of God' because when Jesus declared that, he meant His TRUE mother....and they deserve the same respect/adoration/devotion as Mary.



Infact, lemme ask a question.

The Nuns in covents, are they also the 'Mother of God'??

Again, when you "study" a science textbook, you dont read it and apply your own private interpretation to it. You read and try to understand the interpretation of the author which, in-turn, conveys the teaching of the relevant Science body the writer belongs to.

Your private interpretation is only valid if it conforms to the interpretation of the body. If your "study" leads you to a contradiction with the body's teaching, you're wrong.

Same with the books of the Bible.

The Apostles were the authors and the Church is the body the belonged to. The Church has never stopped existing and teaching its interpretation.

adsonstone:

Paul tells Timothy (an individual, not the church) to study.

However, I'm not disputing the fact that it is advisable to consult the church for interpretation of any 'difficult' part....and even other parts.

italo: Oh, I see. It's trolling time.

Jesus is called Son of Man and Son of God. Is man God?

He's also called Son of David. Do you call David God?

Going by your perverted reasoning, David would deserve all the adoration you give God since we know that Jesus' Father is God. No?

I know you'll like to turn the whole thing over.
For your questions.

Is Jesus truly the son of David? Yes.
Why: He is a descendant of David.

Is Jesus truly the son of God? Yes.
Why: He came out from God.

Thats not trolling.
You're the one trolling.....perhaps, because you have no reasonable answer.

Jesus, (referring to the bread He broke) He said, 'this is my body'

You did not disbelieve Him?

Why do you seem to disbelieve Him when He said anyone that does God's will is His mother?

.....or was Jesus lying/joking when He said that?

Na wah for nowadays christians oh. Are these people still drinking agbo for another persons headache?


Since Mary gave birth to Jesus, he 'honours' her like any child shoud do his/her parents

Catholics chose to also honour Mary as our own mother because Jesus says she is. No catholic worships mary abeg.