Friends, what do you think of our Lady of Fatima?

[Scotth1960]

Dear friends, Did you read my other two threads, THE APPEARANCES AT FATIMA AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN and FATIMA APPEARANCES AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY?

What do you think of our Lady of Fatima? Do you believe the real and true Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, the mother of Jesus Christ, appeared to three Portuguese shepherd children in Fatima, Portugal, in 1917 AD?

Take care.

In Erie PA USA July 3, 2011 AD Scott R. Harrington

PS God bless you! Amen.

 

[dscherck]

Considering that most people here think us Catholics and Orthodox are borderline pagans, I doubt you'll get many positive responses.

 

[Warrior44]

Personally, I believe them. However (somone correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think the Catholic Church requires that anyone believe saintly apparitions ever occured. The Church leaves it up to each person if they believe it or not. They aren't part of Canon Law or the Catechism of the Catholic Church which Catholics are required to believe, however a belief in them is strongly encouraged as the more famous ones have been meticulously scrutinized for their authenticity and many miracles have come about in some cases. Lastly, if belief in them is an impediment to ones belief in more important principles of the Faith then the Catholic Church even says it is better to focus on these truths rather than the apparitions.

 

[IQ]

I know I like the rosary. It's a good meditation at least for me. Some parts feel a bit 'weird', a lot of stuff I have chosen to practice as a Christian felt 'weird' till I got comfortable with them. The whole thing with the kids and the vision... I don't know if it's important enough to me really.
The Meditations between the decades are AWESOME!

 

[shroom2]

Mary cannot have appeared to them. She is dead, awaiting the return of Christ.

 

[jimmydiggs]

Mother of God? I thought God was eternal.

 

[Scotth1960]

Mary cannot have appeared to them. She is dead, awaiting the return of Christ.

Dear shroom2, While I do not believe it is a priori impossible for the Ever-virgin Mary to appear to anyone whom God wills her to appear, I question whether or not it is God's will for her to appear to anyone, and, if so, under what circumstances and for which reason(s) in the plan of salvation ordained (pre-ordained/predestined) by Almighty God; Mary is very much ALIVE now in Heaven, and she is not dead. The dead in Christ are ALL ALIVE now in Heaven, awaiting the resurrection of their bodies. Also, Fatima contains FALSE DOCTRINES, so it cannot be from Christ. Also, it speaks about the Conversion of Russia, when Russia, in the Russian Orthodox Church, is ALREADY CONVERTED TO JESUS CHRIST. It is the Russian SOVIET GOVERNMENT that NEEDED TO CONVERT TO GOD IN CHRIST. Are the SOVIETS ALL OF RUSSIA? NO. NOT AT ALL. Fatima is WRONG because it teaches the error of the immaculate heart of Mary. We should be devoted and respectful and blessing of Mary herself, not to her heart, immaculate as it surely is. It is against Orthodox tradition to speak of the sacred heart of Jesus or the immaculate heart of Mary. Take care. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Mary cannot have appeared to them. She is dead, awaiting the return of Christ.

Yes. No one, Including Mary, Has been ressurected yet. Thus no one has their ressurected body to go anywhere or do anything. They all await the return of their savior. Even Mary.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Considering that most people here think us Catholics and Orthodox are borderline pagans, I doubt you'll get many positive responses.

Well considering "mother of God" Queen of heaven" were pagan terms for pagan Gods which originated with Babylon after the flood. It would lead many to question where this term came from, especially since it is not found in Scripture except to be condemned by OT prophets for its worship. And was practiced largly by the romans up until the church became the church of the state. You can't exactly blame people who see this for questioning this doctrine!

 

[Scotth1960]

Well considering "mother of God" Queen of

heaven" were pagan terms for pagan Gods which originated with Babylon

after the flood. It would lead many to question where this term came from,

especially since it is not found in Scripture except to be condemned by OT

prophets for its worship. And was practiced largly by the romans up until the

church became the church of the state. You can't exactly blame people who

see this for questioning this doctrine!

Dear eternallygratefull,

The modern day Protestant Evangelicals reproduce the ancient heresy of the

sect of the Antidicomarianites by denying the ever-virginity and holiness of

the Virgin Mary, and refusing to call her blessed, or at least implying she

should not be venerated, or viewed as different from all other women. The

Roman Catholics reproduce the ancient heresy of the sect of the Collyridians,

in making the Virgin Mary equal to God, to God the Son. A second Christ in

female form. They also teach the heresy that Mary was conceived without

any sin. And thus she's a goddess. Mary needed to be saved by Christ

from the curse of sin. She was born mortal and thus with the knowledge of

sin. She just resisted temptation and overcame sin by the grace of her Son

Jesus. She was the first person to be saved by Jesus Christ.

Take care. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Dear eternallygratefull,

The modern day Protestant Evangelicals reproduce the ancient heresy of the

sect of the Antidicomarianites by denying the ever-virginity and holiness of

the Virgin Mary, and refusing to call her blessed, or at least implying she

should not be venerated, or viewed as different from all other women.

1. She is not a virgin, He husband "knew here" This is a sexual term. If Joseph did not "know mary" then the scripture lied.

2. The queen of heaven or mother of God is found in pagan writting which pre-date the NT and even Christ. It is not a protestant reproduction of anything. It is known the romans at the aime of Augustone where deeply engrained and worshiping these Gods.

3. Mary is blessed. She was seen as a fornicator. and gave birth to a bastard Child because it is impossible to get pregnant without having sex. People did not believe she was supernaturally impregnated. and also because she is a sinner, And the fact that a sinner could give birth to our savior. how much more blessed can you be? You can't be, Even abraham did not get this blessing. She is not only blessed among all woman as scripture says. she is prety much blessed more than all men if we really look at it.

4. No one should be venerated or worshiped. Look at daniel and revelation when both men attempted to fall on their knees. The angel said. No no. Not me, Only God gets that honor. I am created just like you. If an angel of God refuses this honor. I doubt mary would agree with this honor either. Especially since she was a sinner, and the angel was never a sinner.

The Roman Catholics reproduce the ancient heresy of the sect of the Collyridians, in making the Virgin Mary equal to God, to God the Son. A second Christ in female form. They also teach the heresy that Mary was conceived without any sin. And thus she's a goddess. Mary needed to be saved by Christ from the curse of sin. She was born mortal and thus with the knowledge of sin. She just resisted temptation and overcame sin by the grace of her Son Jesus. She was the first person to be saved by Jesus Christ.

Take care. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

Mary was neither sinless. nor did she overcome sin. And yes she had to be saved by her son. And no she was not the first person saved. When christ said it is finished. At that point all mankind before this time was saved at the same time. And our salvation was completed.

 

[Scotth1960]

1. She is not a virgin, He husband "knew here" This is a sexual term. If Joseph did not "know mary" then the scripture lied.

2. The queen of heaven or mother of God is found in pagan writting which pre-date the NT and even Christ. It is not a protestant reproduction of anything. It is known the romans at the aime of Augustone where deeply engrained and worshiping these Gods.

3. Mary is blessed. She was seen as a fornicator. and gave birth to a bastard Child because it is impossible to get pregnant without having sex. People did not believe she was supernaturally impregnated. and also because she is a sinner, And the fact that a sinner could give birth to our savior. how much more blessed can you be? You can't be, Even abraham did not get this blessing. She is not only blessed among all woman as scripture says. she is prety much blessed more than all men if we really look at it.

4. No one should be venerated or worshiped. Look at daniel and revelation when both men attempted to fall on their knees. The angel said. No no. Not me, Only God gets that honor. I am created just like you. If an angel of God refuses this honor. I doubt mary would agree with this honor either. Especially since she was a sinner, and the angel was never a sinner.



Mary was neither sinless. nor did she overcome sin. And yes she had to be saved by her son. And no she was not the first person saved. When christ said it is finished. At that point all mankind before this time was saved at the same time. And our salvation was completed.
Dear eternally gratefull,
If Mary did not overcome sin, she was lost, and Christ did not save her. So you make God into a liar, as Christ says He loves His Mother when He asks St. John to take care of her. And she is pictured in Heaven in the Book of Revelation.
So you are preaching heresy.
Of course you are right when you say she was saved by her Son. But you place it in a way she "had" to be saved. You say it in a slanderous way. No one "has" to be saved. Christ saves because He wants to, not because people need it, but because He wills it, Thus He says, "I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy." God is love: He wills the salvation of all (2 Peter 3:9). Certainly He wills the salvation of the holy Mother of God. Mary was saved during the ministry of Christ. Before He saved the OT saints. They were saved after Pentecost.
St. Mark 6:3 proves the ever-virginity of Mary. Thus saith the Scripture, thus saith the LORD: "Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon."
Note: It says Christ is "THE" Son of Mary, no "A" Son of Mary. If Mary had had other sons, it would have said "a" Son of Mary, and not "the" Son. Since Christ is the Only-begotten Son of God (John 3:16), He must be the only-begotten Son of Mary. These brothers of Jesus, James, Joses, Judas, and Simon, are cousins. Often Scripture uses the word "brothers" of any close male relatives, including cousins or uncles, etc. The modern Protestant Evangelical heresy which denies the ever-virginity of Mary against Ezek. 44:1-3 and Mark 6:3 and the testimony of all of the early Church is the heresy of the ancient heretical sect, the Antidicomarianites, who also refused to bless, honor, venerate and respect the ever-virgin Mary, and they rejected the belief of the Christian Church in her ever-virginity. They too thought Mary had sexual relations with Saint Joseph.
But then Christ would not be the only-begotten Son of Mary, the only-begotten Son of God, but only "a" son of Mary, and not THE Son of God, THE Son of Mary.
For more on the Antidicomarianites and the ever-virginity of Mary, see "THE APPEARANCES AT FATIMA AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY" in "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism (Ephesians 4:5_. Thirty Years of Witness to Orthodox Christianity. Boston, Massachusetts, Holy Orthodox Metropolis of Boston, 2001. See also: Facing Up to Mary, in Gillquist, Peter E. (1992). Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Christian Faith. Revised and expanded edition. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.). Take care. God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

 

[Scotth1960]

1. She is not a virgin, He husband "knew here" This is a sexual term. If Joseph did not "know mary" then the scripture lied.

2. The queen of heaven or mother of God is found in pagan writting which pre-date the NT and even Christ. It is not a protestant reproduction of anything. It is known the romans at the aime of Augustone where deeply engrained and worshiping these Gods.

3. Mary is blessed. She was seen as a fornicator. and gave birth to a bastard Child because it is impossible to get pregnant without having sex. People did not believe she was supernaturally impregnated. and also because she is a sinner, And the fact that a sinner could give birth to our savior. how much more blessed can you be? You can't be, Even abraham did not get this blessing. She is not only blessed among all woman as scripture says. she is prety much blessed more than all men if we really look at it.

YOU ARE RIGHT TO SAY THAT. But you do not go far enough in UNDERSTANDING the meaning of the blessedness of the Virgin Mary. She is to be blessed "BY ALL GENERATIONS", ALL GENERATIONS WILL CALL ME BLESSED". And thus they will venerate her and remember her always in their prayers to Christ Who alone is the Sole Mediator between God and men, the Man Jesus Christ. And many intercessors, prayers, through Christ Jesus: Mary His Mother and His Saints. In Erie Scott


4. No one should be venerated or worshiped. Look at daniel and revelation when both men attempted to fall on their knees. The angel said. No no. Not me, Only God gets that honor. I am created just like you. If an angel of God refuses this honor. I doubt mary would agree with this honor either. Especially since she was a sinner, and the angel was never a sinner.
NO ONE EXCEPT GOD SHOULD BE WORSHIPPED. There is a difference between veneration and adoration. Adoration is worship of God as God. Veneration is respect and honor for worthy saints. God commands everyone to love their neighbors as themselves. God commands the second commandment, and our love for people does not TAKE AWAY from our love for God. God ALONE is to be WORSHIPPED and LOVED in this sense, the highest sense of love. But veneration and love for our neighbors who are Mary and the Saints in Heaven does NOT take away from our WORSHIP of CHRIST ALONE. Take care. In Erie Scott


Mary was neither sinless. nor did she overcome sin. And yes she had to be saved by her son. And no she was not the first person saved. When christ said it is finished. At that point all mankind before this time was saved at the same time. And our salvation was completed.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Dear eternally gratefull,
If Mary did not overcome sin, she was lost, and Christ did not save her. So you make God into a liar, as Christ says He loves His Mother when He asks St. John to take care of her.

You sort of have this backwards there Scott. God saved her because she had sin. If she overcame sin, she would not need a savior. Of Course Christ loved her. Who does not love there mother. this does not prove anything except that Christ was a good son who took care of his mother. As ALL men should!

And she is pictured in Heaven in the Book of Revelation.

No she is not pictured in revelation. The nation of Israel is pictured in Revelation. The nation that gave birth to our savior and hated by the world and antichrist. Who tries to destroy her. Mary does not go to the mountains to be protected by God. she no longer needs protected. The nation does.

So you are preaching heresy.

I am not teaching heresy. I am telling it as it is.

Of course you are right when you say she was saved by her Son. But you place it in a way she "had" to be saved. You say it in a slanderous way. No one "has" to be saved. Christ saves because He wants to, not because people need it, but because He wills it, Thus He says, "I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy." God is love: He wills the salvation of all (2 Peter 3:9). Certainly He wills the salvation of the holy Mother of God. Mary was saved during the ministry of Christ. Before He saved the OT saints. They were saved after Pentecost.

Sorry Scott. I really do not know where you get this stuff.

1. No one needs to be saved? Sorry But I sure did. You need to be saved. Mary needed to be saved, even abraham needs to be saved. If we did not need to be saved, we would not need Christ.
2. No one was saved until Christ paid the price. How could someone be saved when the sacrifice which could save them has not yet been provided? Until that sacrifice was complete. people had the promise of being saved, But no one was saved. When Christ gave that sacrifice. Everyone before that time was saved. No one was saved first. This is not supported by scripture or by anything else.
3. Save after pentecost? WHAT?? Do you study scripture at all? do you look at logic?? Did Christ die at pentecost? It is death burial and ressurection of Christ that saved us. It saved them too. Jesus said IT IS FINISHED. He did not say IT HAS JUST BEGUN.

St. Mark 6:3 proves the ever-virginity of Mary. Thus saith the Scripture, thus saith the LORD: "Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon."
Note: It says Christ is "THE" Son of Mary, no "A" Son of Mary.

If Mary had had other sons, it would have said "a" Son of Mary, and not "the" Son. Since Christ is the Only-begotten Son of God (John 3:16), He must be the only-begotten Son of Mary.

Jesus was called THE son of David. The son of abraham. Are you trying to tell me these men did not have any other sons? Jesus is never called the ONLY Begotten Son of Mary. You should stop adding to scripture.

How about this verse??

Matthew 4:21
Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them,

So is James the ONLY son of Zebedee because he was not called A Son?

Instead of blindly following your church, You aught to study scripture. you would nopt make these mistakes.

These brothers of Jesus, James, Joses, Judas, and Simon, are cousins.

Opinion not supported by scripture. You can not prove this.

Often Scripture uses the word "brothers" of any close male relatives, including cousins or uncles, etc. The modern Protestant Evangelical heresy which denies the ever-virginity of Mary against Ezek. 44:1-3 and Mark 6:3 and the testimony of all of the early Church is the heresy of the ancient heretical sect, the Antidicomarianites, who also refused to bless, honor, venerate and respect the ever-virgin Mary, and they rejected the belief of the Christian Church in her ever-virginity. They too thought Mary had sexual relations with Saint Joseph.

As I have said many times. Just because something COULD be true does not make it true. You can not prove they were cousins. You can only assume or guess. Your doctrine is not based on facts, it is based on might be. We do not base our doctrinal truths on maybe or might be's. we base our doctrines on proven facts!

But then Christ would not be the only-begotten Son of Mary, the only-begotten Son of God, but only "a" son of Mary, and not THE Son of God, THE Son of Mary.
For more on the Antidicomarianites and the ever-virginity of Mary, see "THE APPEARANCES AT FATIMA AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY" in "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism (Ephesians 4:5_. Thirty Years of Witness to Orthodox Christianity. Boston, Massachusetts, Holy Orthodox Metropolis of Boston, 2001. See also: Facing Up to Mary, in Gillquist, Peter E. (1992). Becoming Orthodox: A Journey to the Ancient Christian Faith. Revised and expanded edition. Ben Lomond, CA: Conciliar Press.). Take care. God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

Jesus is never called the only begotten of Mary. This is your opinion. Not supported by scripture. It is opinion not supported by facts.

The mother of God and queen of heaven are pagan terms given to pagan Gods which was worshiped by many at the time of augustine. You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually being his cousins.

 

[Scotth1960]

[quote=eternally-gratefull;483321]
You sort of have this backwards there Scott. God saved her because she had sin. If she overcame sin, she would not need a savior. Of Course Christ loved her. Who does not love there mother. this does not prove anything except that Christ was a good son who took care of his mother. As ALL men should!
[/B] Dear eternallygratefull, That is not what I said. I did not say Christ saved her because she overcame sin; I said she overcame sin because Christ saved her. God does not save people because they have sin. He saves them because He loves them, and He hates their sins. In Erie Scott H.

No she is not pictured in revelation. The nation of Israel is pictured in Revelation. The nation that gave birth to our savior and hated by the world and antichrist. Who tries to destroy her. Mary does not go to the mountains to be protected by God. she no longer needs protected. The nation does.
Dear eternallygratefull, That is at best a half-truth. The Theotokos is also meant. See OSB, page1730: Revelation 12: 1: "The great sign in heaven, the woman, is either the Theotokos of true Israel, the Church (Isaiah 7:14). Orthodoxy sees the Theotokos as the perfect symbol of Israel and the Church. She is the antithesis of the harlot of ch. 17, for she is a radiant bride (SS 6:4,10) and adorned with splendor. The twelve stars indicate the twelve tribes (and possibly the twelve apostles) and the moon under her feet symbolizes her preeminent role over creation. He birth-giving ("a male child", v. 5) is that of the Messiah, and she bears other offspring as well (12:17), a likely reference to the Church."
(This does not mean that the Theotokos is not ever-virgin; it means that Israel has many offspring in the Church. And if it is meaning the Theotokos, in a spiritual sense, the Theotokos is indeed the Mother of the whole Church, and thus she has offspring in a spiritual but not a literal physical sense; all the members of the holy Orthodox Church are the spiritual children of Mary, the ever-virgin Theotokos, the Mother of God. SRH Erie PA July 4, 2011 AD)


I am not teaching heresy. I am telling it as it is.
What do you make of Mark 6:3? Is Mary "a" son of Christ, and therefore Mary is not ever-virgin, or is Mary "the" Son of Christ, and therefore Mary had no other sons or daughters? If Mary had other sons (or daughters), how could Christ be the ONLY-begotten Son of God, for He would not be the only begotten Son of Mary? In Erie Scott H.

Sorry Scott. I really do not know where you get this stuff.

1. No one needs to be saved? Sorry But I sure did. You need to be saved. Mary needed to be saved, even abraham needs to be saved. If we did not need to be saved, we would not need Christ.
Again, I did not say that no one needs to be saved. I said not one "has" to be saved.
No one "deserves" to be saved. It is God's free gift, and no one can earn it or merit it, or have to be by something other than the sovereign will and choice of Christ the Saviour.
Of course we need Christ. But it come from God's free will, not something God is compelled to do because we need it. In Erie Scott H.

2. No one was saved until Christ paid the price. How could someone be saved when the sacrifice which could save them has not yet been provided? Until that sacrifice was complete. people had the promise of being saved, But no one was saved. When Christ gave that sacrifice. Everyone before that time was saved. No one was saved first. This is not supported by scripture or by anything else.
3. Save after pentecost? WHAT?? Do you study scripture at all? do you look at logic?? Did Christ die at pentecost? It is death burial and ressurection of Christ that saved us. It saved them too. Jesus said IT IS FINISHED. He did not say IT HAS JUST BEGUN.
I was only saying the OT portion of the saved did not find Christ until after Christ had preached to them when He was in the tomb, and after He gave the Holy Spirit to the Church. Doesn't that make sense. Here, I'm not offering a dogma or necessary doctrine, I'm just offering a theologoumenon, a theological opinion. I could be wrong. I was wrong about a lot of things, and committed many sins. And false dogmas. I used to believe in the Filioque at one time. God save me. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS As for when people were saved in the NT, doesn't it depends on when they believed? Not all of the Apostles believed at the same time. Mary was the first one to believe in Christ, for she said yes to God. She was called blessed because she agreed with God that through her the Messiah would be born. She cooperated with the Holy Spirit, with God the Father, and so Christ is Her Only-begotten Son, the Only-begotten Son of God. I believe Mary was saved when she said yes to being the Mother of God.
That happened before the days of the Apostles of Christ.



Jesus was called THE son of David. The son of abraham. Are you trying to tell me these men did not have any other sons? Jesus is never called the ONLY Begotten Son of Mary. You should stop adding to scripture.

How about this verse??

Matthew 4:21
Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them,

So is James the ONLY son of Zebedee because he was not called A Son?

Instead of blindly following your church, You aught to study scripture. you would nopt make these mistakes.




Opinion not supported by scripture. You can not prove this.
Dear eternally gratefull, Are you "the pillar and ground of the truth", or is the Church of the living God "the pillar and ground of the truth"? (1 Tim. 3:15). Do you get your interpretation of Scripture from private, man-made traditions, as against 2 Peter, or do you want to believe Orthodox Christian Apostolic Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15) believed "always, everywhere, and by everyone" (St. Vincent of Lerins, "Commonitories), the "faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 3)? What about people who blindly follow their own personal opinions as to what Scripture means? Isn't that false? Isn't that what Martin Luther did when he added the word "alone" to Scripture in Rom. 3:28? And you don't just go to the Scriptures by yourselves. You read the Scriptures the same way other Protestants do, and you interpret Scripture according to one or more of the 30,000 private Protestant traditions. Which all contradict each other and contradict all or part of the OT and NT Scriptures! In Erie PA Scott H. PS The places where I go wrong is where I do not listen to the Church. The Church doesn't err, but I can err. The Church alone is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15), and it is not "my" Church; it is God's (Christ's) Church. I need the Church more than the Church needs me. I pray to God I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. Take care.




As I have said many times. Just because something COULD be true does not make it true. You can not prove they were cousins. You can only assume or guess. Your doctrine is not based on facts, it is based on might be. We do not base our doctrinal truths on maybe or might be's. we base our doctrines on proven facts!



Jesus is never called the only begotten of Mary. This is your opinion. Not supported by scripture. It is opinion not supported by facts.

Mistake here: She's called "the Son of Mary". Not "a" Son. In Mark 6:3. That makes her the only Son that Mary begot. So that, logically speaking, would make her the only begotten Son of Mary, and thus also the only Begotten Son of God, since God manifested His Son through cooperation with the Theotokos.
In Erie Scott H.

The mother of God and queen of heaven are pagan terms given to pagan Gods which was worshiped by many at the time of augustine.
Wrong again. Mother of God means Christ is God. If the Son of Mary isn't God, then we are in our sins. She is the Mother of Christ, and she must be the mother of God the Son, as Christ is God. The term mother of God preserves the divinity of Christ. Queen of heaven is based not on paganism, but the queen of Psalm 45, which is certainly a psalm that says the queen, the ever-virgin Mary Theotokos, stands at the right hand of Christ in Heaven. So both terms are thoroughly biblical. Just because a word is used in another sense doesn't mean it can't be used in a good sense. Mary is the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven. There are also false gods ("goddesses") called the queen of heaven. The Morning Star is a reference to both Christ, the Son of God, and the morning star, Lucifer, the devil, so the same terminology can have different meanings and senses in the Scripture. In Erie Scott H.

You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually being his cousins.

Yes I can blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. Not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God, ye do greatly err. You can't get past Mark 6:3 which says Christ is "the" Son of Mary, not "a" Son. See how much you want Mary not to be ever-virgin? You're trying to make the Scriptures fit your will and beliefs, not the traditions and "faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). Quote any writer after the NT was written that believed Mary was not ever-virgin, who was demonstrably not a heretic? The whole early Church believed in the ever-virginity of Mary, and if they all were wrong, then Christ was wrong, for the gates of hell would have prevailed against His Church, and there would have been a Church preaching heresy, if it's a heresy to believe that Mary is ever-virgin. Take care. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Dear eternallygratefull, That is not what I said. I did not say Christ saved her because she overcame sin; I said she overcame sin because Christ saved her. God does not save people because they have sin. He saves them because He loves them, and He hates their sins. In Erie Scott H.

Scott. God saves us because we need saved. If we do not have sin we would not need saved. Think my friend. God loved the world. yet he did not save the world. He just offered salvation to the world. Unfortunately many reject his gift of eternal life and either work to earn it, or do not believe it at all.

Dear eternallygratefull, That is at best a half-truth. The Theotokos is also meant. See OSB, page1730:

Scott. I do not follow the OSB, or the Catholic catechism. or any theological book. I follow the word of God. I suggest you do the same Men will lead you wrong. Scripture will lead you right..

Revelation 12: 1: "The great sign in heaven, the woman, is either the Theotokos of true Israel, the Church (Isaiah 7:14). Orthodoxy sees the Theotokos as the perfect symbol of Israel and the Church. She is the antithesis of the harlot of ch. 17, for she is a radiant bride (SS 6:4,10) and adorned with splendor. The twelve stars indicate the twelve tribes (and possibly the twelve apostles) and the moon under her feet symbolizes her preeminent role over creation. He birth-giving ("a male child", v. 5) is that of the Messiah, and she bears other offspring as well (12:17), a likely reference to the Church."
(This does not mean that the Theotokos is not ever-virgin; it means that Israel has many offspring in the Church. And if it is meaning the Theotokos, in a spiritual sense, the Theotokos is indeed the Mother of the whole Church, and thus she has offspring in a spiritual but not a literal physical sense; all the members of the holy Orthodox Church are the spiritual children of Mary, the ever-virgin Theotokos, the Mother of God. SRH Erie PA July 4, 2011 AD)

The church did not give birth to Christ. Christ gave birth to the church. This in itself makes this quote from the OSB in error.

Isreal gave birth to Mary, who gave birth to Christ. This is why Christ is called the son of Abraham and the son of Adam. Mary would be called the Daughter of Abraham and the Daughter of Adam. Scripture calls you the son of God. not the Son of mary. Where do they come up with this crap?

Either way. Rev is not speaking of Mary, it is speaking of Israel as a nation. Mary is just one of the children. But she is not even spoken of here. For to john this is a future event. mary has been long since gone when this happens.

Try using some logic once scott. You will see it is true.

What do you make of Mark 6:3? Is Mary "a" son of Christ, and therefore Mary is not ever-virgin, or is Mary "the" Son of Christ, and therefore Mary had no other sons or daughters? If Mary had other sons (or daughters), how could Christ be the ONLY-begotten Son of God, for He would not be the only begotten Son of Mary? In Erie Scott H.

Answer me this. Jesus is the SON of david. Did david have other sons? Jesus is the son of Abraham, did abraham have other sons? John is THE SON of zebbedee Did Zebedee have other sons?

When you answer these questions. you will find your answer.

Again, I did not say that no one needs to be saved. I said not one "has" to be saved.
No one "deserves" to be saved. It is God's free gift, and no one can earn it or merit it, or have to be by something other than the sovereign will and choice of Christ the Saviour.
Of course we need Christ. But it come from God's free will, not something God is compelled to do because we need it. In Erie Scott H.

Then why do you try to earn it with all your sacraments??

I was only saying the OT portion of the saved did not find Christ until after Christ had preached to them when He was in the tomb, and after He gave the Holy Spirit to the Church. Doesn't that make sense. Here, I'm not offering a dogma or necessary doctrine, I'm just offering a theologoumenon, a theological opinion. I could be wrong. I was wrong about a lot of things, and committed many sins. And false dogmas. I used to believe in the Filioque at one time. God save me. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS As for when people were saved in the NT, doesn't it depends on when they believed? Not all of the Apostles believed at the same time. Mary was the first one to believe in Christ, for she said yes to God. She was called blessed because she agreed with God that through her the Messiah would be born. She cooperated with the Holy Spirit, with God the Father, and so Christ is Her Only-begotten Son, the Only-begotten Son of God. I believe Mary was saved when she said yes to being the Mother of God.
That happened before the days of the Apostles of Christ.

Then no one in the OT was ever saved, Because unless they believed in the messiah (christ) which would be sent by God to remove theri sin. They would never be saved.

2. Mary is not the first person to believe in Christ. That would be Adam. For he was the first person to believe God.

Dear eternally gratefull, Are you "the pillar and ground of the truth", or is the Church of the living God "the pillar and ground of the truth"? (1 Tim. 3:15). Do you get your interpretation of Scripture from private, man-made traditions, as against 2 Peter, or do you want to believe Orthodox Christian Apostolic Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15) believed "always, everywhere, and by everyone" (St. Vincent of Lerins, "Commonitories), the "faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 3)? What about people who blindly follow their own personal opinions as to what Scripture means? Isn't that false? Isn't that what Martin Luther did when he added the word "alone" to Scripture in Rom. 3:28? And you don't just go to the Scriptures by yourselves. You read the Scriptures the same way other Protestants do, and you interpret Scripture according to one or more of the 30,000 private Protestant traditions. Which all contradict each other and contradict all or part of the OT and NT Scriptures! In Erie PA Scott H. PS The places where I go wrong is where I do not listen to the Church. The Church doesn't err, but I can err. The Church alone is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15), and it is not "my" Church; it is God's (Christ's) Church. I need the Church more than the Church needs me. I pray to God I don't blindly follow anyone or anything. Take care.

Scott. Your blindly following men who claim to be the church. And rejecting scripture and what it says. I noticed how you completely disregarded my proof to you about "the son of" why is this? Because your following men. And not willing to study for yourself.

When you stand in front of God, You will be judged on how YOU interpreted scripture. It does not matter what anyone else says, You will be judged on your personal interpretation. Not any churches. If you do not believe this. There just might be no help for you

Mistake here: She's called "the Son of Mary". Not "a" Son. In Mark 6:3. That makes her the only Son that Mary begot. So that, logically speaking, would make her the only begotten Son of Mary, and thus also the only Begotten Son of God, since God manifested His Son through cooperation with the Theotokos.
In Erie Scott H.

Who is SHE that is called the son of mary?

John was called THE SON of zebedee. Was John the only son? NO! Sorry Scott. Not letting you get away with this untruth.

Wrong again. Mother of God means Christ is God. If the Son of Mary isn't God, then we are in our sins. She is the Mother of Christ, and she must be the mother of God the Son, as Christ is God. The term mother of God preserves the divinity of Christ. Queen of heaven is based not on paganism, but the queen of Psalm 45, which is certainly a psalm that says the queen, the ever-virgin Mary Theotokos, stands at the right hand of Christ in Heaven. So both terms are thoroughly biblical. Just because a word is used in another sense doesn't mean it can't be used in a good sense. Mary is the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven. There are also false gods ("goddesses") called the queen of heaven. The Morning Star is a reference to both Christ, the Son of God, and the morning star, Lucifer, the devil, so the same terminology can have different meanings and senses in the Scripture. In Erie Scott H.

Jesus was before abraham. He did not have mother or father, he is the eternal God. Saying Jesus had a mother makes him a created being and not God. Your wording contradicts itself.

You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually being his cousins.

Yes I can blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. Not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God, ye do greatly err. You can't get past Mark 6:3 which says Christ is "the" Son of Mary, not "a" Son. See how much you want Mary not to be ever-virgin? You're trying to make the Scriptures fit your will and beliefs, not the traditions and "faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). Quote any writer after the NT was written that believed Mary was not ever-virgin, who was demonstrably not a heretic? The whole early Church believed in the ever-virginity of Mary, and if they all were wrong, then Christ was wrong, for the gates of hell would have prevailed against His Church, and there would have been a Church preaching heresy, if it's a heresy to believe that Mary is ever-virgin. Take care. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

No Scott. You can't get passed Matt 4: 21

Matthew 4:21
Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them,

Your argument falls on its face unless matt 4: 21 is removed.

Again scripture trumps tradition!!

 

[Scotth1960]

Scott. God saves us because we need saved. If we do not have sin we would not need saved. Think my friend. God loved the world. yet he did not save the world. He just offered salvation to the world. Unfortunately many reject his gift of eternal life and either work to earn it, or do not believe it at all.
Dear eternallygratefull, God saves us not because of our needs, but because of His love. Remember the verse in the NT that says that people who are born again are born of God, not the will of a husband or the will of the flesh, or because of any human need to be saved. It's all because of God's love (John 3:16)! Of course God knows we need saved, but that is not why we get saved; we are saved when God chooses us and brings His prevenient grace toward us, the Father draweth us, and then He saves us when we believe in His only begotten Son (John 3:16).
We cannot earn eternal life by our works. We are saved only because of God's mercy, and God requires faith, for without faith it is impossible to please God. What saves us is not faith alone however (James 2:24), but faith hope and love are all required in our salvation in Christ (1 Cor 13:13). We are to believe in God, have hope in God, and most of all love God, to be saved by Christ's blood. In Erie Scott H.



Scott. I do not follow the OSB, or the Catholic catechism. or any theological book. I follow the word of God. I suggest you do the same Men will lead you wrong. Scripture will lead you right..Dear eternallygratefull, I follow the Bible, the word of God too. You may claim to follow "the Bible alone", but inevitably you follow it according to some theological tradition. Every reading of Scripture can be biased by one's manifest or hidden theological presuppositions. Thus, one can be not so much reading the Bible and finding what is there, but reading into the Bible and taking out of it whatever one wants to take out of it. That is why people can't agree whether there or 2 sacraments, 7 sacraments, more than 7 sacraments, or no sacraments at all. Traditions of men cloud things.
Scripture is not its own interpreter. It has to be interpreted according to some form of Christian tradition. In Erie PA Scott H.



The church did not give birth to Christ. Christ gave birth to the church. This in itself makes this quote from the OSB in error.
I did not say, nor does the OSB, say the church gave birth to Church. Yes, Christ founded the Church. In Erie PA Scott H.

Isreal gave birth to Mary, who gave birth to Christ. This is why Christ is called the son of Abraham and the son of Adam. Mary would be called the Daughter of Abraham and the Daughter of Adam. Scripture calls you the son of God. not the Son of mary. Where do they come up with this crap?

Either way. Rev is not speaking of Mary, it is speaking of Israel as a nation. Mary is just one of the children. But she is not even spoken of here. For to john this is a future event. mary has been long since gone when this happens.

Try using some logic once scott. You will see it is true.



Answer me this. Jesus is the SON of david. Did david have other sons? Jesus is the son of Abraham, did abraham have other sons? John is THE SON of zebbedee Did Zebedee have other sons?

Those verses don't prove that Mary had other sons besides Jesus. You are fishing far afield from the truth. The early Church believed Mary was ever-virgin. The belief that she was not did not come until later, with the heretical sect of the Antidicomarianites.
These were heretics. Modern Evangelicalism, in its rejection of the Tradition of God, the Apostolic traditions (2 Thess. 2:15) in the Church of the Apostolic Succession, the Orthodox Church, follows the ancient heresy of the Antidicomarianites. When you understand Church history, you will know how to understand and believe the Bible correctly. Otherwise, you will follow your own private man-made tradition of men, which interprets the Bible any way you personally want to interpret it, according to your own subjective private feelings, and not the way the early Christian Church interpreted Scripture, where always, everywhere, and everyone Christian believed Mary is ever-virgin (Ezek. 44:1-3). Today much of Protestantism misinterprets the writings of St. Paul, of the 4 Gospels, and much else of the Bible (see 2 Peter 3:14-18). Take care. In Erie PA USA Scott Harrington

When you answer these questions. you will find your answer.



Then why do you try to earn it with all your sacraments??



Then no one in the OT was ever saved, Because unless they believed in the messiah (christ) which would be sent by God to remove theri sin. They would never be saved.

2. Mary is not the first person to believe in Christ. That would be Adam. For he was the first person to believe God.




Scott. Your blindly following men who claim to be the church. And rejecting scripture and what it says.
I don't reject Scripture and what it says. I reject what YOU say that the Scripture says! Can't you understand that? Why should I believe what you say the Scripture says, when your teaching wasn't taught in the early Church? Show me one Christian Church Father who believed Mary had physical relations with Joseph? Why should I believe your private tradition? You are following your own teaching as a man, and not getting your teaching from the tradition of the Church. It's the Church that's the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). Not you or me as individuals. Take care. In Erie PA USA Scott Harrington


I noticed how you completely disregarded my proof to you about "the son of" why is this? Because your following men. And not willing to study for yourself.

When you stand in front of God, You will be judged on how YOU interpreted scripture. It does not matter what anyone else says, You will be judged on your personal interpretation. Not any churches. If you do not believe this. There just might be no help for you
Dear friend,
2 Peter 1:20 merely says no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation. It's how God interprets Scripture IN THE CHURCH (1 Tim. 3:15, 2 Thess. 2:15), not ourselves, lest we twist Scripture (2 Peter 3:16). Private interpretation of Scripture is forbidden by God. So God is going to correct and tell people the Truth.
We are not to be willing to study "for ourselves". Study is for God, not for our own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Martin Luther was one of the first who claimed the right to study the Bible "for himself", as was the pope of Rome in 1014 AD, who claimed the papal "right" to say "AND THE SON", in defiance of Christ in Scripture (JOHN 15:26). Take care. In Erie PA Scott H.




Who is SHE that is called the son of mary?

John was called THE SON of zebedee. Was John the only son? NO! Sorry Scott. Not letting you get away with this untruth .

Dear friend, You are twisting the Scriptures! You bring up non sequiturs in the vain search for proof of your heresy. There is plenty of reason to believe that Christ is the only Son of Mary. God was in the womb of Mary. There was no other purpose Mary needed to fulfill than to bring the Messiah into the world. It saves no one if Mary were to have other children. It was against God's will for her to be anything other than the Mother of God, not the mother of other children with St. Joseph. Jewish tradition would have forbid her to do anything other than what she did: She consecrated herself wholly unto God, and she was betrothed unto Joseph, and betrothal is not a marriage in the ordinary sense. She was the property of God. Joseph was an honorable man and understood this, and he did not think of his own selfish needs or the will of the flesh. Yes, marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled. It's not the only part of God's will. It's not God's will that Mary was not set apart wholly for the birth of Christ. In Erie PA Scott H.




Jesus was before abraham. He did not have mother or father, he is the eternal God. Saying Jesus had a mother makes him a created being and not God. Your wording contradicts itself.

You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually being his cousins.



No Scott. You can't get passed Matt 4: 21

Matthew 4:21
Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them,

Your argument falls on its face unless matt 4: 21 is removed.

Again scripture trumps tradition!! Wrong again. Matthew 4:21 doesn't say Joseph had marital relations with Mary. You are being illogical in your search for "proof texts"!
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS You still can't get past Mark 6:3, which says "the" Son of Mary, not "a" Son of Mary. Can't you take God at His word? As a child would?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

2 Peter 1:20 merely says no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation. It's how God interprets Scripture IN THE CHURCH (1 Tim. 3:15, 2 Thess. 2:15), not ourselves, lest we twist Scripture (2 Peter 3:16). Private interpretation of Scripture is forbidden by God. So God is going to correct and tell people the Truth.
We are not to be willing to study "for ourselves". Study is for God, not for our own private interpretations of the Scriptures. Martin Luther was one of the first who claimed the right to study the Bible "for himself", as was the pope of Rome in 1014 AD, who claimed the papal "right" to say "AND THE SON", in defiance of Christ in Scripture (JOHN 15:26). Take care. In Erie PA Scott H.

Your right. Scripture is not up to private interpretation. There is only one true interpretation. And God has promised he will send his holy spirit to teach us all things concerning him, Including the true interpretation of scripture. This promise goes to you to, if you are saved, you have the HS, which means you have the ability to properly interpret scripture. We can not just translate scripture any way we want. It does not leave away the fact that God will judge us as to how we interpret scripture. Not how someone else.

If your church is wrong, are they going to go to hell for you because they taught you wrong? No. Neither is any church which misinterprets scripture. You are responsible for your own belief. Not men. If you get it wrong because you blindly follow them. That is your fault. Same with me and anyone else.

Dear friend, You are twisting the Scriptures! You bring up non sequiturs in the vain search for proof of your heresy. There is plenty of reason to believe that Christ is the only Son of Mary. God was in the womb of Mary. There was no other purpose Mary needed to fulfill than to bring the Messiah into the world. It saves no one if Mary were to have other children. It was against God's will for her to be anything other than the Mother of God, not the mother of other children with St. Joseph. Jewish tradition would have forbid her to do anything other than what she did: She consecrated herself wholly unto God, and she was betrothed unto Joseph, and betrothal is not a marriage in the ordinary sense. She was the property of God. Joseph was an honorable man and understood this, and he did not think of his own selfish needs or the will of the flesh. Yes, marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled. It's not the only part of God's will. It's not God's will that Mary was not set apart wholly for the birth of Christ. In Erie PA Scott H.

No Scott. You used an example saying that since Jesus was not called A son of mary to prove your point. I proved you wrong by using James and Zebedee as an example. and I am twisting?

As for this post. Quite the contrary. There is no need for Mary to be a virgin. She had to be a virgin up to the point of Jesus birth. After which God did not need to hold the thing he made precious between a man and wife. Nore did she need to be childless, her job was done. Sorry but you have not proved your point. Your doctrine is based on misinterpretation of scripture. and facts which have been proven to be in error.

Thanks. But you have yet again failed to prove your point.




Jesus was before abraham. He did not have mother or father, he is the eternal God. Saying Jesus had a mother makes him a created being and not God. Your wording contradicts itself.

You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually being his cousins.



No Scott. You can't get passed Matt 4: 21

Matthew 4:21
Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He called them,

Your argument falls on its face unless matt 4: 21 is removed.

Again scripture trumps tradition!! Wrong again. Matthew 4:21 doesn't say Joseph had marital relations with Mary. You are being illogical in your search for "proof texts"!
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS You still can't get past Mark 6:3, which says "the" Son of Mary, not "a" Son of Mary. Can't you take God at His word? As a child would?

[/quote]

 

[Scotth1960]

Your right. Scripture is not up to private

interpretation. There is only one true interpretation. And God has promised he will send

his holy spirit to teach us all things concerning him, Including the true interpretation of scripture. This promise goes to you to, if you are saved, you have the HS, which means you have the ability to properly interpret scripture. We can not just translate scripture any way we want. It does not leave away the fact that God will judge us as to how we interpret scripture. Not how someone else.

If your (sic)?

church is wrong, are they going to go to hell for you because they taught you wrong?

No. Neither is any church which misinterprets scripture. You are responsible for your

own belief. Not men. If you get it wrong because you blindly follow them. That is your

fault. Same with me and anyone else.


Can you prove from Scripture that the Church is the property of individuals,

or is it the Body of Christ? Why do you keep talking about "your church".

There is no "your church" or "my church". There is only the Church (1 Tim.

3:15; Ephesians 4).

Also, what about private interpretation of Scripture? Does it come from

personal responsibility for private interpretation?

Scott


[/b]

No Scott. You used an example saying that since Jesus was not called A son

of mary to prove your point. I proved you wrong by using James and Zebedee

as an example. and I am twisting?

Not so. James and Zebedee have nothing at all to prove that Jesus was "a"

Son of Mary. The text you brought up doesn't prove Mary is not ever-virgin.

You're grasping desperately at straws!

Scott H.

As for this post. Quite the contrary. There is no need for Mary to be a virgin.


What Scripture is there that says Mary needs to have other children with

Joseph in order for God's will to be done? How does that save any Christian.

It's the blood of Christ only that saves Christians, not the marital relations

of Mary and Joseph.

In Erie Scott


She had to be a virgin up to the point of Jesus birth. After which God did not

need to hold the thing he made precious between a man and wife. Nore did

she need to be childless, her job was done. Sorry but you have not proved

your point. Your doctrine is based on misinterpretation of scripture. and facts

which have been proven to be in error.


No. I haven't failed. You have failed to show that the Church that Christ

founded believes Mary was not ever-virgin? Do you have a writing from any

Church Father that says Mary had relations with Joseph? Or are you going to

say that the Church didn't exist until people started believing that the Virgin

Mary had sex? Can you find any Scripture that says, "The children of Mary

and Joseph?"


In Erie Scott

Thanks. But you have yet again failed to prove your point.




Jesus was before abraham. He did not have mother or father, he is the

eternal God. Saying Jesus had a mother makes him a created being and not

God.

That's illogical. Christ is God manifest in the flesh. You're denying He had a

Mother makes Him God only, and not a man. Every human being has a

mother; Christ is human being; therefore Christ had a mother. Christ is not a

created being. He is uncreated.


He is begotten of the Father before all ages, and born of human virgin in

time. Do you deny Christ is One Person, in two natures, Divine and human,

True God, and true man?

In Erie Scott

Your wording contradicts itself.

Not true!

Scott


You can't blame people for thinking this is a pagan term. There is more

evidence which supports this theory than there is Jesus brothers actually

being his cousins.

No Scott. You can't get passed Matt 4: 21

Matthew 4:21

Going on from there, He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and

John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. He

called them,

Your argument falls on its face unless matt 4: 21 is removed.

Again scripture trumps tradition!!

Not according to Scripture. See:

2 Thess. 2:15; 2 Thess. 3:6.


Wrong again. Matthew 4:21 doesn't say Joseph had marital relations with


Mary. You are being illogical in your search for "proof texts"!

In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS You still can't get past Mark 6:3, which says

"the" Son of Mary, not "a" Son of Mary. Can't you take God at His word? As a

child would? Please produce now a long list of Church Fathers from between

70 AD and 370 AD who all believed Mary is not ever virgin. If you can't do

that, you can't show the Church that Christ founded ever believed Mary had

relations with Joseph. If it wasn't taught in the early Church, it is not true. If

the early Church didn't teach it and it is true, the early Church is in error, and

Christ is a liar, for the gates of hell would have prevailed against the Church

He founded, for the early Church would have failed to teach the truth that

Mary had physical relations with Joseph.

A belief can't be true if it doesn't agree with Scripture and apostolic tradition.

How do you know that the early Church believed that Mary had physical

relations with Joseph? Can you produce any evidence of that? If you can't,

your belief doesn't come from the Church that Christ founded. The correct

interpretation of the Bible can be found only in the same Church that Christ is

the founder of. God bless you. In Erie Scott Harrington

 

[loveschild]

Dear friends, Did you read my other two threads, THE APPEARANCES AT FATIMA AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN and FATIMA APPEARANCES AND ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY?

What do you think of our Lady of Fatima? Do you believe the real and true Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, the mother of Jesus Christ, appeared to three Portuguese shepherd children in Fatima, Portugal, in 1917 AD?

Take care.

In Erie PA USA July 3, 2011 AD Scott R. Harrington

PS God bless you! Amen.

I think Satan will suck in all the fools he can. I'm sorry to say.