Why was Mary necessary?

[Josiah]

Why do you Josiah want her to be called "the mother of God "

Quote me where I said anyone should call anything or anyone anything.


.

we can only assume

So you have nothing.
You can't find where I stated that anyone should call anything or anyone anything.


Recall that old proverb about the word "ASSUME"........


It would REALLY, REALLY help if you would read. READ the WORDS in the Bible - rather than deleting them and inserting instead what YOU ASSUME God should have said but didn't. READ the words in posts - rather than deleting what is said and then YOU ASSUMING what was intended to be posted but wasn't. It's IMPOSSIBLE to have a discussing if you ASSUME rather than READ. Recall the proverb about assume.

Why do you Josiah want her to be called "the mother of God " -something The Lord never called her?

QUOTE ME where I said anyone should call anything or anyone anything.


I defend the theology because I agree with the Bible, with the First and Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils and with nearly all Christians: that Mary bore Jesus and that this Jesus whom she bore may correctly be called God. It's what the Bible specifically states. It's been affirmed by 3 of the 7 Ecumenical Councils. And because I denounce the two heresies you've promoted: Arianism and Nestorianism, as well as the heretic you specifically referenced (the only person you have) as one agreeing with your repudiation of these truths.


It doesn't matter if a title or term is not known to have been used by Jesus. Yes, I use words like Trinity, Bible, Protestant, Evangelical, Sunday School, Bible Study, Computer, America, Automobile, Television, Babysitter, Website, Restaurant, and indeed many many words that I used which as far as I know Jesus never once used. SO DO YOU. Even if you have NEVER uttered the word "Bible" or "Evangelical" or "Protestant" or "Website," you have uttered words and used titles that Jesus likely never did. So since you don't limit yourself to terms and words known to have been stated by Jesus, it's just silly of you to suggest others must do what you yourself do NOT do.


Did MATTHEW call Mary the mother of Jesus? Yes. Verbatim.
Did Paul (and others) call this Jesus specifically "GOD?" Yes. Verbatim.
The two truths affirmed by the title are STATED in Scripture.

I accept these truths.
I reject your Arianism and Nestorianism..



Why do YOU use terms and titles that "god" has not seen fit to use?
Words like Bible.... Protestant.... Evangelical...... Sunday School.... Bible Study...... Youth Group..... Reverend...... Computer..... America...... Automobile...... Television...... Wednesday...... Website.....
All words it seems God never saw fit to use, at least that we can document in Scripture.
If it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did, then it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did.
But you do. So either you don't believe your own silly argument or you condemn yourself.

his is far less combative

Bill -


You made an accusation to the nearly 2 billion Christians who affirm these two truths.
Your premise is this title is "false, wrong and blasphemous" BECAUSE those who believe it THEREFORE pray TO Mary.
You made the accusation. Repeatedly.
It is the centerpiece of your apologetic against these teachings.

But you refuse to document it as true.
It's called "hit and run" - making a flame and then RUNNING away from showing it's true.
You need to either apologize and withdraw the apologetic
Or you need to document that it's true.

I made it EASY for you.
There are two here who in this thread have affirmed the teachings.
And who have used the title.
Lamm and myself.
So, just PROVE that the two of us ERGO, THEREFORE pray TO Mary AND the sole reason is that we affirm the teachings.
Prove it,
Or apologize and take back your apologetic.
Don't continue the "hit and run"
Bill, you are WAY above such tackics. Don't let others drag you down to such.





- Josiah




.

 

[Full O Beans]

I swear, the font and the pretty colours are getting more and more noticeable, but the message is the same old, tired sawdust.

 

[Alithis]

So you have nothing.
You can't find where I stated that anyone should call anything or anyone anything.


Recall that old proverb about the word "ASSUME"........


It would REALLY, REALLY help if you would read. READ the WORDS in the Bible - rather than deleting them and inserting instead what YOU ASSUME God should have said but didn't. READ the words in posts - rather than deleting what is said and then YOU ASSUMING what was intended to be posted but wasn't. It's IMPOSSIBLE to have a discussing if you ASSUME rather than READ. Recall the proverb about assume.









QUOTE ME where I said anyone should call anything or anyone anything.


I defend the theology because I agree with the Bible, with the First and Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils and with nearly all Christians: that Mary bore Jesus and that this Jesus whom she bore may correctly be called God. It's what the Bible specifically states. It's been affirmed by 3 of the 7 Ecumenical Councils. And because I denounce the two heresies you've promoted: Arianism and Nestorianism, as well as the heretic you specifically referenced (the only person you have) as one agreeing with your repudiation of these truths.


It doesn't matter if a title or term is not known to have been used by Jesus. Yes, I use words like Trinity, Bible, Protestant, Evangelical, Sunday School, Bible Study, Computer, America, Automobile, Television, Babysitter, Website, Restaurant, and indeed many many words that I used which as far as I know Jesus never once used. SO DO YOU. Even if you have NEVER uttered the word "Bible" or "Evangelical" or "Protestant" or "Website," you have uttered words and used titles that Jesus likely never did. So since you don't limit yourself to terms and words known to have been stated by Jesus, it's just silly of you to suggest others must do what you yourself do NOT do.


Did MATTHEW call Mary the mother of Jesus? Yes. Verbatim.
Did Paul (and others) call this Jesus specifically "GOD?" Yes. Verbatim.
The two truths affirmed by the title are STATED in Scripture.

I accept these truths.
I reject your Arianism and Nestorianism..



Why do YOU use terms and titles that "god" has not seen fit to use?
Words like Bible.... Protestant.... Evangelical...... Sunday School.... Bible Study...... Youth Group..... Reverend...... Computer..... America...... Automobile...... Television...... Wednesday...... Website.....
All words it seems God never saw fit to use, at least that we can document in Scripture.
If it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did, then it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did.
But you do. So either you don't believe your own silly argument or you condemn yourself.









Bill -


You made an accusation to the nearly 2 billion Christians who affirm these two truths.
Your premise is this title is "false, wrong and blasphemous" BECAUSE those who believe it THEREFORE pray TO Mary.
You made the accusation. Repeatedly.
It is the centerpiece of your apologetic against these teachings.

But you refuse to document it as true.
It's called "hit and run" - making a flame and then RUNNING away from showing it's true.
You need to either apologize and withdraw the apologetic
Or you need to document that it's true.

I made it EASY for you.
There are two here who in this thread have affirmed the teachings.
And who have used the title.
Lamm and myself.
So, just PROVE that the two of us ERGO, THEREFORE pray TO Mary AND the sole reason is that we affirm the teachings.
Prove it,
Or apologize and take back your apologetic.
Don't continue the "hit and run"
Bill, you are WAY above such tackics. Don't let others drag you down to such.





- Josiah




.

ok .. let me first quote myself .. I said " i cant quote what you have not said " ..obviusly in your rage you missed that .

then I said -

umm- have you not defended calling Mary "the mother of God "for most of this thread ..or are we all reading some imaginary posts ?

As you have been consistent and even aggressive in the defense of the title .. we can only assume you WANT her to be called that ,.even though the lord never does .

then i asked

please clarify ,as your stance is now confusing -.. are you now saying you DON'T want Mary to be called "the mother of God " ?- that would be wonderful as it would align with the scripture which Also doesn't do so.

if however you desire to persist in the defense of the title that God has never given her . then address the question ..

and this is the question -

.. Why do you ,Josiah ,want her to be called "the mother of God " -something The Lord never called her?

 

[Josiah]

Jesus never called her mother

Matthew did in Matthew 1:18, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Why do you think the Bible is wrong here?

elevates her to God status

No. The teaching is that JESUS is God. It says nothing whatsoever about MARY being God rather than Jesus.

We know that Jesus was present with our Father before the foundation of the world. We know that He visited Abraham (some would debate that).

Yes - the same Jesus that Mary bore, that the Bible says has Mary as his "mother."

So, Jesus may be called God (as you seem to be affirming.... and as the Bible itself so often does).

Now, Matthew 1:18 calls Mary.... what? Mother?


So, which do you regard as false, wrong as blasphemy? Matthew 1:18 where it verbatim calls Mary Jesus' "MOTHER?" Or Titus 2:13 where it verbatim calls Jesus "GOD?" Which of these two teachings is "false, wrong and blasphemy?"



- Josiah

 

[Alithis]

I swear, the font and the pretty colours are getting more and more noticeable, but the message is the same old, tired sawdust.

psychology 101 ...

 

[psalms 91]

Josiah you still dont see it? You just posted it. She was called mother, not blessed mother nor mother of God

 

[Josiah]

.. Why do you ,Josiah ,want her to be called "the mother of God " -something The Lord never called her?

QUOTE ME where I said anyone should call anything or anyone anything.
You already ADMITTED I never say any such thing, YOU rather ASSUMED it.
I can't defend your assumptions.


I defend the theology because I agree with the Bible, with the First and Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils and with nearly all Christians: that Mary bore Jesus and that this Jesus whom she bore may correctly be called God. It's what the Bible specifically states. It's been affirmed by 3 of the 7 Ecumenical Councils. And because I denounce the two heresies you've promoted: Arianism and Nestorianism, as well as the heretic you specifically referenced (the only person you have) as one agreeing with your repudiation of these truths.


It doesn't matter if a title or term is not known to have been used by Jesus. Yes, I use words like Trinity, Bible, Protestant, Evangelical, Sunday School, Bible Study, Computer, America, Automobile, Television, Babysitter, Website, Restaurant, and indeed many many words that I used which as far as I know Jesus never once used. SO DO YOU. Even if you have NEVER uttered the word "Bible" or "Evangelical" or "Protestant" or "Website," you have uttered words and used titles that Jesus likely never did. So since you don't limit yourself to terms and words known to have been stated by Jesus, it's just silly of you to suggest others must do what you yourself do NOT do.


Did Matthew specifically call Mary the mother of Jesus? Yes. Verbatim.
Did Paul (and others) call this Jesus specifically "GOD?" Yes. Verbatim.
The two truths affirmed by the title are STATED in Scripture.


I accept these truths.
I reject your Arianism and Nestorianism.



Why do YOU use terms and titles that "god" has not seen fit to use????????
Words like Bible.... Protestant.... Evangelical...... Sunday School.... Bible Study...... Youth Group..... Reverend...... Computer..... America...... Automobile...... Television...... Wednesday...... Website.....
All words it seems God never saw fit to use, at least that we can document in Scripture.
If it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did, then it's wrong to use words you can't prove GOD specifically did.
But you do. So either you don't believe your own silly argument or you condemn yourself. Which is it ??????









.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah you still dont see it? You just posted it. She was called mother, not blessed mother nor mother of God

Read Matthew 1:18. Is Mary the mother of Jesus? Does SCRIPTURE call Mary specifically, verbatim the "mother" of Jesus? Yes/no?

Read Titus 2:13. Is this Jesus specifically, verbatim, called "God?" Yes/no?

For these teachings to be "false, wrong and blasphemy" they would need to be wrong and false, which if you answered 'Yes' to the above, they are not.



BTW, the term "blessed" does not belong to either the Greek or Latin forms of the title, although the Bible DOES say all generations called her "blessed." The Bible verbatim says that. See Luke 1:48. But denying that verse is another issue for another day, the word "blessed" does not appear in this title and is not one of its teachings.


Bill.... still awaiting for you to confirm that Lamm and I pray TO Mary and this is mandated by the reality that we both affirm the teachings of Matthew 1:18, Titus 2:13 and that we agree with the First, Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils rather than with the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism. Please confirm your premise, apologetic and flaming as true.... or apologize and withdraw it.




- Josiah

 

[psalms 91]

Read Matthew 1:18. Is Mary the mother of Jesus? Does SCRIPTURE call Mary specifically, verbatim the "mother" of Jesus? Yes/no?

Read Titus 2:13. Is this Jesus specifically, verbatim, called "God?" Yes/no?

For these teachings to be "false, wrong and blasphemy" they would need to be wrong and false, which if you answered 'Yes' to the above, they are not.



BTW, the term "blessed" does not belong to either the Greek or Latin forms of the title, although the Bible DOES say all generations called her "blessed." The Bible verbatim says that. See Luke 1:48. But denying that verse is another issue for another day, the word "blessed" does not appear in this title and is not one of its teachings.


Bill.... still awaiting for you to confirm that Lamm and I pray TO Mary and this is mandated by the reality that we both affirm the teachings of Matthew 1:18, Titus 2:13 and that we agree with the First, Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils rather than with the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism. Please confirm your premise, apologetic and flaming as true.... or apologize and withdraw it.




- Josiah

When you two let me live with you for a prolonged time then maybe I can confirm one way or the other your rants and attacks on me do nothing to further your points so just stop, you present a strawman that you well know I cant prove or disprove and then expect that to be the end all ofa disagreement, most anyone can see through this so again just stop it

 

[Josiah]

Read Matthew 1:18. Does SCRIPTURE call Mary specifically, verbatim the "mother" of Jesus? Yes/no ??????

Read Titus 2:13. Does Scripture specifically, verbatim, called this Jesus "God?" Yes/no ??????

For these teachings to be "false, wrong and blasphemy" they would need to be wrong and false, which of the above teachings is wrong, false ??????



BTW, the term "blessed" does not belong to either the Greek or Latin forms of the title, although the Bible DOES say all generations called her "blessed." The Bible verbatim says that. See Luke 1:48. But denying that verse is another issue for another day, the word "blessed" does not appear in this title and is not one of its teachings.


Bill.... still awaiting for you to confirm that Lamm and I pray TO Mary and this is mandated by the reality that we both affirm the teachings of Matthew 1:18, Titus 2:13 and that we agree with the First, Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils rather than with the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism. Please confirm your premise, apologetic and flaming as true.... or apologize and withdraw it.



.

When you two let me live with you for a prolonged time

You didn't answer any of my questions or address any of my points.

your rants and attacks on me

Friend, YOU HAVE IT REVERSED!

YOU are the one whose premise AND ATTACK is that if one embraces these two things as truths, ERGO... THEREFORE... they pray TO Mary. You've made that apologetic and attack several times in this thread. But while you've "HIT" .... you've then RAN. As you still are. I don't understand.

If you can't prove that your accusation, your flame is true - why keep repeating it? (You made it several times in this thread). Why not simply apologize. And note that your apologetic here is something you cannot support as true?



Now, I did ask you some questions. Discussion might advance if you answer them.



Thank you.


- Josiah




.

 

[Alithis]

ok .. let me first quote myself .. I said " i cant quote what you have not said " ..obviusly in your rage you missed that .

then I said -

umm- have you not defended calling Mary "the mother of God "for most of this thread ..or are we all reading some imaginary posts ?

As you have been consistent and even aggressive in the defense of the title .. we can only assume you WANT her to be called that ,.even though the lord never does .

then i asked

please clarify ,as your stance is now confusing -.. are you now saying you DON'T want Mary to be called "the mother of God " ?- that would be wonderful as it would align with the scripture which Also doesn't do so.

if however you desire to persist in the defense of the title that God has never given her . then address the question ..

and this is the question -

.. Why do you ,Josiah ,want her to be called "the mother of God " -something The Lord never called her?

also see if you can answer without dissecting the post into ambiguous pieces .

 

[Josiah]

My stance is not "confusing." It's just you seem to not READ the posts. And you seem to ASSUME so very, very, very much instead.


Let's try this..... please READ each of the words here. Please do NOT read any invisible "words", only the ones that actually appear here. ASSUME nothing. Just READ the words, the words as they appear. And yes, I will be using English words because we use English on this website.


You have had two apologetics AGAINST these teachings:

1. The teachings of this title are "false, wrong and blasphemy."

There are two (and only two) teachings in these words, in this title:

1. Mary bore Jesus and may be correctly called his "Mother"

For this: See Matthew 1:18. What, specifically and verbatim, does Matthew call Mary in this verse?

2. This Jesus whom Mary bore may correctly be called "God."

For this: See Titus 2:13. What, specifically and verbatim, does Paul call Jesus in this verse?


For your apologetic #1 to be correct, the two teachings would need to be shown to be "false, wrong and blasphemous." But actually, they have been shown to be biblical, true and correct. Furthermore, your rebukes of these (coming verbatim from two ancient, universally condemned heresies - Arianism and Nestorianism) are indeed false.



2. We are forbidden to use terms, words and titles that JESUS did not specifically use in the Bible.

You have presented nothing to support this claim. Nothing.

And it seems unlikely that you regard it as anything other than silly or that you follow your own mandate here. If you have EVER used words that you can't prove JESUS used (such as "Bible, Trinity, Evangelical, Protestant, Sunday School, Bible Study, Praise Band, Website, Internet, Automobile, Television") then obviously you don't agree with yourself.



Now, you have TRIED at times to absurdly CHANGE the title. Here is your fundamental problem of not reading the words.... of paying no attention to what is actually said but rather deleting that and substituting instead your enormous, incredible ability to ASSUME. Crazy, laughable things such as "Mary - The Creator of the Creator" or "Mary - the Source of the Trinity" and other equally amazing, absurd things that no one has EVER actually said or written (again, the problem being your seeming inability to READ). Several of us have posted to you that NO ONE has EVER said or written or believed or affirmed or even dreamed up such crazy ideas or titles - but I don't think you READ any of those posts.

And you've TRIED to change it into other things, too. Such as "Jesus - The Goddess Mary's Son" As if the title is saying MARY may be called God when if you would just actually READ THE WORDS, it clearly is indicating that Jesus is the one who may be called "GOD." Here too, the problem is not with the Bible. It's not with Matthew 1:18 or Titus 2:13. It's in your inability or unwillingness to READ.... and perhaps the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism that you keep alluding to and promoting... maybe you have a teacher(s) who is teaching you those heresies, I don't know. But the problem is not with these truths. It's with you.



I might add that Bill has added a third: These teachings are wrong, false and blasphemous because they make those who accept them pray TO Mary. But it seems he now states he cannot show this is true. Indeed, while this flame is thus directed to several here at CH (including Lamm and I), he will not show that it's true even for us two.



And again: I NEVER said that anyone should or must call Mary anything. I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild "assumptions."

I hope this helps.... But all this has been said MANY, MANY times over the past 58 pages.



Josiah




.

 

[psalms 91]

You didn't answer any of my questions or address any of my points.






Friend, YOU HAVE IT REVERSED!

YOU are the one whose premise AND ATTACK is that if one embraces these two things as truths, ERGO... THEREFORE... they pray TO Mary. You've made that apologetic and attack several times in this thread. But while you've "HIT" .... you've then RAN. As you still are. I don't understand.

If you can't prove that your accusation, your flame is true - why keep repeating it? (You made it several times in this thread). Why not simply apologize. And note that your apologetic here is something you cannot support as true?



Now, I did ask you some questions. Discussion might advance if you answer them.



Thank you.


- Josiah




.

As I have opointed out before agreeing to those two points does not mean that I agree with the third premise. The title is wrong, dead wrong and you can attack me and spin it any way you like, I told you bfore that I am done you yourself have presented verses that show what I am saying. and when you type in caps it is shouting and bolding is much the same thing so dont tell me that you havent attacked not only me but iothers. You will reach a point where a lot of people wuill have you on ignore and then you will have to argue with yourself

 

[Alithis]

My stance is not "confusing." It's just you seem to not READ the posts. And you seem to ASSUME so very, very, very much instead.


Let's try this..... please READ each of the words here. Please do NOT read any invisible "words", only the ones that actually appear here. ASSUME nothing. Just READ the words, the words as they appear. And yes, I will be using English words because we use English on this website.


You have had two apologetics AGAINST these teachings:

1. The teachings of this title are "false, wrong and blasphemy."

There are two (and only two) teachings in these words, in this title:

1. Mary bore Jesus and may be correctly called his "Mother"

For this: See Matthew 1:18. What, specifically and verbatim, does Matthew call Mary in this verse?

2. This Jesus whom Mary bore may correctly be called "God."

For this: See Titus 2:13. What, specifically and verbatim, does Paul call Jesus in this verse?


For your apologetic #1 to be correct, the two teachings would need to be shown to be "false, wrong and blasphemous." But actually, they have been shown to be biblical, true and correct. Furthermore, your rebukes of these (coming verbatim from two ancient, universally condemned heresies - Arianism and Nestorianism) are indeed false.



2. We are forbidden to use terms, words and titles that JESUS did not specifically use in the Bible.

You have presented nothing to support this claim. Nothing.

And it seems unlikely that you regard it as anything other than silly or that you follow your own mandate here. If you have EVER used words that you can't prove JESUS used (such as "Bible, Trinity, Evangelical, Protestant, Sunday School, Bible Study, Praise Band, Website, Internet, Automobile, Television") then obviously you don't agree with yourself.



Now, you have TRIED at times to absurdly CHANGE the title. Here is your fundamental problem of not reading the words.... of paying no attention to what is actually said but rather deleting that and substituting instead your enormous, incredible ability to ASSUME. Crazy, laughable things such as "Mary - The Creator of the Creator" or "Mary - the Source of the Trinity" and other equally amazing, absurd things that no one has EVER actually said or written (again, the problem being your seeming inability to READ). Several of us have posted to you that NO ONE has EVER said or written or believed or affirmed or even dreamed up such crazy ideas or titles - but I don't think you READ any of those posts.

And you've TRIED to change it into other things, too. Such as "Jesus - The Goddess Mary's Son" As if the title is saying MARY may be called God when if you would just actually READ THE WORDS, it clearly is indicating that Jesus is the one who may be called "GOD." Here too, the problem is not with the Bible. It's not with Matthew 1:18 or Titus 2:13. It's in your inability or unwillingness to READ.... and perhaps the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism that you keep alluding to and promoting... maybe you have a teacher(s) who is teaching you those heresies, I don't know. But the problem is not with these truths. It's with you.



I might add that Bill has added a third: These teachings are wrong, false and blasphemous because they make those who accept them pray TO Mary. But it seems he now states he cannot show this is true. Indeed, while this flame is thus directed to several here at CH (including Lamm and I), he will not show that it's true even for us two.



And again: I NEVER said that anyone should or must call Mary anything. I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild "assumptions."

I hope this helps.... But all this has been said MANY, MANY times over the past 58 pages.



Josiah




.

yup i know its said often.. doesnt mean we "HAVE " to agree with your added "premise " that 1 + 1 =your particular 3 just because you say it does .
the title does not appear in the scriptures and God never declares the title to her or of her . thats a fact .-you cannot deny that .

but as i said .. because it reached an impasse and could go no further wirehtout being boringly repetitive

i desired to look into the motives behind the stance .

so - are you now clarifying that you "want " us to admit that mary is the "mother of God" ? you WANT her to be caled that ? YES? that is what you are saying ..correct ?

If So .. and it "appears to be so "

I ask the question your thus far not answering ..

- Why do YOU .. ,Josiah, want mary to be called "the mother of God " when Even the lord NEver gives her that title .

 

[Josiah]

1 + 1 = your particular 3

There is no #3. You're ASSUMING such. Do you know the proverb about "assume?" Do you know what is said about "assume?"


You've TRIED to delete the title and substitute a plethora of silly, absurd strawmen that we've told you NO ONE on the planet Earth has ever said or proclaimed or believed or even been wild enough to image: they are YOUR substitute assumptions, your strawmen, products of your wild imagination.

And recall, you never said that your silly, absurd strawman, your ASSUMPTION, your invention is "false, wrong and blasphemy" (I'd agree with that!) you said that the teachings (what you call #1 and #2) are "false, wrong and blasphemy." Yes, I know, all your crazy assumptions, substitutions, strawmen, your invented "# 3" are most certainly among the most absurd things every dreamed up - but then you haven't been rebuking yourself, you've been rebuking the two teachings.

And again: I NEVER said that anyone should or must call Mary anything. I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild "assumptions."


.

so - are you now clarifying that you "want " us to admit that mary is the "mother of God" ? you WANT her to be caled that ? YES? that is what you are saying ..correct ?

Read what you quoted. READ it. The words. You have your answer.

2. We are forbidden to use terms, words and titles that JESUS did not specifically use in the Bible.


You have presented nothing to support this claim. Nothing.

And it seems unlikely that you regard it as anything other than silly or that you follow your own mandate here. If you have EVER used words that you can't prove JESUS used (such as "Bible, Trinity, Evangelical, Protestant, Sunday School, Bible Study, Praise Band, Website, Internet, Automobile, Television") then obviously you don't agree with yourself.


.

- Why do YOU .. ,Josiah, want mary to be called "the mother of God " when Even the lord NEver gives her that title .

Read what you quoted from me. If you continue to refuse to read the words but instead delete them and substitute your wild, wild assumptions and strawmen - then you've simply shut yourself off from discussion.




- Josiah





.

 

[Full O Beans]

 

[Alithis]

josiah..adress the question put to you..its not a difficult one

 

[Alithis]

share...

 

[Josiah]

josiah..adress the question put to you..its not a difficult one

READ the posts instead of eating popcorn. It's been answered MANY times.

READ for example where I asked you to quote me stating that I think Mary should be called something..... and READ where you said you couldn't quote me because I never said any such thing.... and READ where you admitted you made it up, you "assumed" something.

READ the many times I stated:

And again: I NEVER said that anyone should or must call Mary anything. I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words of Scripture against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild "assumptions."

I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words of Scripture against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. You admitted that. Then you keep asking - over and over and over - why I want Mary to be called something. Then you admit I never said any such thing. Then you ask over and over why I want that.

Let's try this yet again - yet again - I NEVER said that anyone should or must call Mary anything. You admitted I never did. But in lieu of responding to my posts, you just eat popcorn and constantly ask over and over and over and over why I want Mary to be called something. I wish you would actually READ THE WORDS written to you. I'm defending the theology against your Arianism and Nestorianism, I'm defending the words against your (absurd, laughable) substitutions, I'm disagreeing with your protests of what Matthew and Paul do in Scripture, but I've never remotely told you or anyone what they should or should not call anyone. It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild "assumptions." It's SO frustrating when you don't READ THE WORDS but in stead of them, in lieu of them, in place of them, create your wild self-described assumptions[/B]." That has been stated repeatedly - you just don't read.


READ post 572 rather than eating your popcorn.

READ post 575 rather than eating your popcorn.


You asked me to state my case.... I did in post 572.... All you did ignore all I posted and admit to your ASSUMING, your creation of a strawman, your invention of an invisible " # 3" .... and then ask AGAIN why I'm insisting Mary be called something. When you admitted I never have.





.

 

[Alithis]

Would some one please point me to where this question has been simply answered and not buried in a barrage of colourful text that distracts from it.

Why do YOU .. ,Josiah, want mary to be called "the mother of God " when Even the lord NEver gives her that title ?

-and pass the popcorn