Reminder that if you’re cut off from Apostolic Christianity, you’re cut off from Christ’s Gospel

Reminder that if you’re cut off from Apostolic Christianity, you’re cut off from Christ’s Gospel.

Attached: 24C1834F-A579-4FB1-AA8C-030B2214D6B2.jpeg (1024x964, 148.79K)

Other urls found in this thread:

philvaz.com/apologetics/a116.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Woah dude awesome shitpost!

are there any prots still left here?

etc, etc.

Me and a few others

Yeah but the church added fallible teachings to its beliefs, so there’s not much room to talk

I don't need the Catholic Church or that pathetic God of yours. My Lord is Lucifer.

why tho please go away

based

Attached: 1533193862899.png (423x500, 312.73K)

The Roman Church was founded in the 11th century by a fallible man after schisming from the church founded by Jesus Christ.

Attached: 1555694562992.jpg (563x651, 226.35K)

The Roman Church is the one that changed their doctrine and became schismatic. The Orthodox Church did not change.

Yes.

You already have your own board, you stupid chimp.

Yes, it's this one. Your reject gathering place can be found here → /christianity/

Also personal insult, very hurtful and reported.

Naaaaaah. I don’t like echo chambers, so I’ll challenge your ideas every once and awhile

sweet, very christian of you, thanks buddy

The hypocrisy of that statement is laughable
No I just think that the same idea repeated over and over again with no challenge is stupid. That’s how totalitarian states form

please just go to the other board, why would you do this to yourself and us

The state church of today was founded by Constantine the Great, 300 A.D.
Christ's apostles got killed for their faith.

The fact that you’re this upset over one person disagreeing with you proves that more of us need to come to this board

To be perfectly honest I think I like you guys better than I like the Easterns, thanks for sticking around protanon.

protestant logic

Your logic

Nope, this board is for all Nicene Christians. I’m sick of the worst Apostolics here practicing literal Jew tactics to Shoah Protestants off the board.

Attached: Catholics_Protestants_no_difference.jpeg (1024x964, 192.47K)

No u.

>>>/christianity/

Put Charlemagne there instead. Poor Leo stood his ground against Charlemagne's reforms until his death.

kek

Alright.

Attached: Catholics_Protestants_no_difference.jpeg (1024x964, 221.65K)

wew lad

When the Roman pope crowned his own emperor that was truly the beginning of papism. Orthodoxy is closest to the early church.

who founded the dogma of the immaculate conception

I'm still here to watch the sad whimpering remains of 2015-16 era "trad larp cathodox" who still cri because "momma Mary angry at me when i touch peepee".

You all need to realize your own depravity. Repent and believe in Christ. The papacy cannot save you.

Kecharitomene
Gratia Plena
Full of grace (predates the KJV translation)
She had special grace before the Annunciation - she was already sinless before Christ's death. Think about how Gabriel, an Archangel, someone who has lived in Heaven for a ridiculously long time, could not help but exclaim "Hail, full of grace" to a mere human.
philvaz.com/apologetics/a116.htm

Attached: Mary_hail.png (556x920 550.22 KB, 102.79K)

Mary was also a sinner in need of salvation.

Justin Martyr (120-165 AD) was the first Church Father to draw an explicit comparison between Eve and Mary: "For Eve, being a virgin and undefiled, conceiving the word that was from the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death; but the Virgin Mary, taking faith and joy, when the Angel told her the good tidings, that the Spirit of the Lord should … overshadow her, and therefore the Holy One that was born of her was Son of God, answered, "Be it done to me according to Thy word."

The concept of Genesis 3:15 being the Proto-evangelium or "First Gospel" is attributed to St. Irenaeus of Lyons (135-202) from his work Against Heresies: "For this end did He put enmity between the serpent and the woman and her seed, they keeping it up mutually: He, the sole of whose foot should be bitten, having power also to tread upon the enemy's head; but the other biting, killing, and impeding the steps of man, until the seed did come appointed to tread down his head, - which was born of Mary, of whom the prophet speaks: 'Thou shalt tread upon the asp and the basilisk; thou shalt trample down the lion and the dragon (Psalm 91:13).'"

- St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 23, Number 7 23

"Christ has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as thou can perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, 'And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for thy head, and thou on the watch for his heel.' For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, namely from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Letter to the Galatians, 'that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made (Galatians 3:19).' This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle where he thus speaks: 'But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman (Galatians 4:4).' For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man born of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man's opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned, in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanqushed man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm of victory against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death."

- St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, 21, 1

St. Jerome (347-420) translated the Hebrew texts while living an ascetic life in Bethlehem and completed his work in 405. St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible was the standard Bible in Western civilization for over 1000 years! He employed the word she for the epicene form in Genesis 3:15. This of course had a profound effect on Marian devotion. St. Jerome captured the meaning at the time through an expression: "Death through Eve, life through Mary." One still sees images today of Mary trampling the head of the serpent.

Mary is the co-redemptrix because of her relation to the Christ, Jesus. Without her there is no Jesus. That is also why she is the Queen of Heaven, her relation to Jesus. Even if it's supposed to be a man (Jesus) trampling the head of the serpent, Mary is part of that insofar as how she contributes to redemption by giving the second person of the Trinity His humanity, which was used to redeem us. That does not mean she's equal in performing the redemption, but that she was a unique part of it. In Revelation 11-12, take note of how St John clearly identifies a woman (the new Eve, Mary - also the Ark of the New Covenant), her seed (the Christ, Jesus) the serpent (Satan) and the enmity between them (the followers of her Son). Keep in mind that the description of the Ark in 11:19 would have continued into chapter 12 without a chapter break when it was written… meaning it is indeed Mary who is the Ark of the New Covenant. Her crown can represent the 12 tribes of Israel, the 12 apostles, the 12 patriarchs, but it's absurd to say that the woman is just the Church, or Israel, because the parallels to the Proto-evangelium don't make sense then, and a symbol would not need to literally give birth.

Attached: Mary_gold.png (1920x1080, 2.8M)

Attached: average_Ortho.png (852x419, 382.17K)

burn in hell

The Catholic church is a church of pagan idolatry. If Catholics were ever taught to understand the symbology of babylonian/ satanic cults throughout history they would be shocked at what the symbology of the catholic church reveals about the true beliefs of their leaders.

then Jesus was also a sinner in need of salvation.

but if you cede that Our Lord wasn't (and He most definitely wasn't), you'd quote other scripture that mentions Christ is free from sin…but then, you'd also have to consider that both Zecharias and Elizabeth were called "just", so you'd be stuck in your proof-text trying to justify how Mary is a sinner, but not Christ, and how also Zachiaras and Elizabeth are sinners despite being justified by Scripture…

so, it's all a terrible, self-refuting argument, no?


You speak to deaf ears my friend, if only they would listen to the Tradition!

1 Peter 2:22

2 Corinthians 5:21


wew lad

What is easier, to believe only Christ was without sin or to provide scripture that says Mary was also sinless.

Where did they sin? Did Scripture lie?


Christ gave His Church all authority to bind on Heaven and Earth, this Church therefore proclaimed Mary sinless. If you deny the latter, then you deny the former. To be frank, there are many things about Christianity not contained in Scripture alone, nor does Scripture itself ever teach that Scripture alone is sufficient.

The absolute state of nu-protestantism.

Protestantism never changed, bud.

Attached: luther-copy.jpg (1400x1635, 285.08K)

(1) Jesus is God
(2) God can't sin
(3) Jesus couldn't have sinned

(1) Mary isn't God
(2) Everyone who isn't God isn't perfect
(3) So when it's said that she's righteous, that means relative to the rest of our species

The reason God is her savior is because He prevented her from contracting the stain of sin, original and actual. (Evident from Gabriel's salutation "full of grace" - she was already perfectly graced _before_ being pregnant with Jesus.) Jesus perfectly followed the ten commandments, so He would honor His mother perfectly - by making her perfect. Psalm 132, the Proto-evangelium, the Magnificat, and Apocalypse 12 clearly show her status.

Attached: QueenAngels.jpg (798x544, 163.32K)

Protestants, ladies and gentlemen.

1) Jesus is God (John 10:30)
2) Jesus is first-begotten of all creatures, before all creatures (Colossians 1:15)
3) Thus, Mary was made sinless; being made by Christ Himself; preordained and foreknown at all time, - we dare to say - even before time (Ephesians 1:5)

Now, you must either accuse Christ of making a sinner for His Mother, or work up some odd lottery system Mary happened to "win" for the virgin birth, being neither created explicitly for the task or never being foretold in the Sacred Scriptures.

When one realizes that Mary was always going to be the Virgin Mother, it's hard to even comprehend how important She is. It is because of Luke 11:27-28 that we realize Mary is the Queen of All Saints, for She is the Queen of all of creation that heard the Word of God and chose to kept it; all the angels and the saved.

What exactly does honor thy father and mother mean? This one time Our Lord snuck out to chill with the dudes at the temple, which could be construed as disobedience.

Revelations 12 refers to her as Our Mother and the secret place she hid may connect to Psalm 132. It doesn't claim she had irresistible grace.

"Hail Mary, full of grace" doesn't imply sinlessness, only sainthood.

Sinlessness puts her on the same level as God. Maybe she never committed a mortal sin or acted out a sinful impulse, but sinlessness has severe ramifications for moral theology, as if St. Paul should have said "All but St. Mary fall short of the glory of God".

In the end, the point of Christianity isn't what's in the Bible or implied by revelation but the moral theology and the practical salvation of souls.

...

Jesus once complained about the sinful generation he was born into, in a sinful nation, in a sinful age. Why doesn't God make everyone sinless, Did He not have enough creation points to max out everyone's character sheets? We're arguing about what would have been fitting for God to have done, which St. Thomas Aquinas pointed out isn't an argument that can be settled definitively. If sinlessness of the Theotokos was obvious, why was it only enshrined in dogma in 1850 after Duns Scotus was made fun of for preaching it hundreds of years earlier?

No, it doesn't.

Lutherans really like Romans 3:20 and 3:28. Calvinists think Romans 7 means St. Paul doesn't have irresistible grace. Are we supposed to think St. Mary had irresistible grace and was justified under the law?

Were St. Mary's parents or friends when she was growing up without sin?

Luke has Gabriel saying full of grace as a title. Some prots have a once saved, always saved idea, but pretty much everyone refers to people who are especially charitable as "filled with the Spirit".

How many humans did God make with free will who never willed anything against reason choosing the mutable good? Only one, to let us know that He could?

Some sins are almost inadvertent. How scrupulously are we supposed to purge our minds of them to be like St. Mary?

What is God trying to tell us about moral theology by making His mother without sin, and why did it take so long after He founded His church for us to figure it out?

...

Yes, Our Mother is the Theotokos, salvation entered the world through her obedience where sin entered the world through Eve. We're arguing about whether the authors of the New Testament or early church fathers believed she was completely without sin, as opposed to "merely" being a saint particularly full of grace.

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
–Galatians 3:22

– Gal. 4

– Gal. 3

It quite literally does. Jesus was the only person ever born without sin. If Mary was like you said she was, she would have served at the untainted sacrifice that God made of Himself.