Discussing Mary

[justasking4]

Tantum ergo;2641043]IF Catholics actually worshipped Mary in the way you claim, why would we deny it? If Mary was so important to us that we believed she was a goddess, WHY WOULD WE HIDE IT?

Do you deny your church worships Mary?
If so, you may want to look at this quote from the catechism-

971 “All generations will call me blessed”: "The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."

Really, especially from somebody who says he WAS once a Catholic, you seem to have either received very poor Catholic teaching if you actually believe there is some sort of secret ‘Mary worship’ going on, that we are supposed to deny in public but practice in private. . .or else you have, for whatever reason, chosen to completely disregard the truth regarding Catholicism and to attempt to calumnate an entire group of your fellow Christians, knowing that they are not guilty of what you accuse them.

If the catholic church claims to be the only true church, the only one that has authority to interpret the scriptures, never errored in matters of faith and morals and to possess the fullness of the truth then we have a responsiblity to tests these claims. I know the scriptures and they don’t line up with some the catholic doctrines and that is very troubling. Lets see if the claims of the catholic church really do stand up.

I have yet to see a reasonable explanation for this supposed ‘disconnect’.

What would be a reasonable explanation in these issues?

Either Catholics worship Mary, for good reason, and are proud of the fact and give the same type of ‘reasoning’ behind it that we give about every OTHER practice we are questioned on. . . or we do NOT worship Mary, and our denials are truth.

You appear to think that we worship Mary, for no good reason, and lie about it, again for no good reason. Over and over you’ve been told we don’t, you insist we do.

What i have yet to see refuted here are the characteristics of worship in regards to Mary. I have shown that these elements do exist i.e. kneeling before statutes, praying to, praising Mary, imploring her help, even your catechism implies it does etc. You can say all you want this is not want but the evidence says otherwise.

Well, I have news for you. No amount of your saying, “You worship Mary” is ever going to have Benedict XVI call the news conference, “People of the world, Justasking has forced me to reveal that secretly the Catholics of the world really DO worship Mary, and have lied about it for centuries”. . .because that really would BE a lie.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I notice you still haven’t answered.

Because to you the ‘trappings’ of head bowing etc. should only be done to God (I surely do hope that you never meet a Head of State, square dance, or travel to Japan with this ‘bowing’ problem you have), you insist that ‘bowing’ equates to worship. That is your comprehension problem.

Further, being ‘intrinsic to worship’ does not mean the ‘devotion’ itself is ‘worship’ in the sense you are giving it. And over and over you have been told that **your narrow and contemporary definitions ** are just that, ‘narrowed’ from the original ones (context, context, context–from one who claims to be such a Bible scholar one should most assuredly be scrupulous in observing the context of what is written–not just in the Bible but in any writing), and ‘contemporary’–i.e., changeable. Revision and retro’ing a ‘new’ definition and insisting that it applies to a time ‘before’ the definition existed is unscrupulous and disingenuous. I’ve noted the trend in ‘revision history’ in the secular area too.

Again, if we worship Mary, why DO we ‘deny it’, in your words? If we believe Mary is a goddess, why do we not proudly declare it?

You cannot answer, because there is no answer to such a charge, only a blind parroting of what you think the ‘reason’ is. . .that we are both too ‘stupid’ to comprehend that we ‘worship’ someone, yet somehow we are so ‘smart’ that we’re trying to ‘trick’ all the people of the world into following our heinous practice!

You cannot have it both ways and the illogic behind your charges is astounding.

You ignore everything that has been taught in Christianity for 2000 years, Scripture after Scripture which support Catholic teaching and interpretation, from much better ‘scholars’ than you or I could hope to be, ignore explanations, and obstinately insist,

"I don’t care that you say that bowing is not something for God alone and that there are countless examples where people have bowed as a sign of respect but not ‘God worship’. I say ** bowing is ** God worship ALONE.
I don’t care that **you say ** that veneration is not the same as “God worship”. **I say ** it is.

I don’t care that you say the definition of words like prayer and worship did not mean the same thing that certain groups have ‘narrowed it down to’ on their own authority. I say when the Bible was written the definition means that narrow definition, no matter what evidence exists to the contrary.

Above all, I don’t care that **you say ** that you are trying to follow the word of God to your understanding. I say that unless you’re following it to my understanding, you’re not only wrong, you’re lying hypocrites. "

 

[stranger_1991]

I don’t think its as straight forward as you state here. The reason can be found in Romans 5:12, 18 and 19.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

These verses tell us that all men are sinners and the reason why. Even Paul who wrote that Christ lived in him still sinned. If Mary did not sin, then we should expect the scriptures to say so and make an exception to this principle that all men are sinners.

Hi justasking4,

What you are saying is that: *Christians are in Adam AND in Christ. *

What I am saying is that: Christians are redeemed out of Adam and put into Christ.

Q Would you agree with this analysis?

So all that remains is to test each propostion with scripture and see what the result is. Come, let us reason together in the Word.

Though simple the axioms may be I believe they cover the frameworks that have come up. It may save you time, and help you to argue against what I say if I explain where I am coming from. It is derived from baptism as described in Romans 6:1-4. You see the Christian is brought into the death of Christ, united in his death, buried with Christ, united in His burial, and raised with Christ, united to His resurrection. Notice in this there is no Adam only Christ - we are not baptised into Adam AND Christ but only into Christ. Nor can you remain in Adam if you want to be baptised - shall we sin that grace might abound?

As I have pondered this mystery - I asked:
‘Can the old man SURVIVE cruxifiction?’

In truth he cannot unless of course our Lord did not really die. But because we know that His dying PRECEDES our dying with Him, and our dying with him IS His death on the cross. . . I have great confidence that the old man, flesh, Adamic nature, call it what you will - was dealt with by Jesus as an event prior to my believing and unification with Him.

So when we return to the statement in Galatians 2:

‘It is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me’ - why is it that I no longer live? Could it be that in baptism I was united to my Lord’s death? He died so I died. That is why I no longer live - I have died. I cannot live in Adam. Now I understand how Christian experience can conspire and say that I live. . . that this happens I do not deny. But I do claim that the statement is a LIE and if I believe it I am believing a lie. Why - becaus the ‘I’ or ‘old man’ cannot survive cruxifiction and burial (unless as I have stated, our Lord did not actually die on the cross - that is how insiduous the lie really is).

So this is why I don’t believe it is possible to be in Adam AND in Christ at the same time. It is akin to serving two masters, and producing good and evil fruit from the same tree. A good tree produces good fruit and an evil tree produces evil fruit. Mary’s sinlessness presupposes a breaking of the chain to Adam. Your argument presupposes that chain cannot be broken in this life. If the chain of Adam cannot be broken I am a dead man writing to another dead man.

Back to Romans 5: 12-19. .

blessings

 

[MariaG]

What does this sentence mean?

This sounds so much like one of the psalms in praise of God.

How is it different?

Wow, half an hour answer, all lost to bad internet connection and a hasty send:crying:

 

[stranger_1991]

I don’t think its as straight forward as you state here. The reason can be found in Romans 5:12, 18 and 19.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

These verses tell us that all men are sinners and the reason why. Even Paul who wrote that Christ lived in him still sinned. If Mary did not sin, then we should expect the scriptures to say so and make an exception to this principle that all men are sinners.

Romans 5 tells us how sin and death entered through one man and reigned UNTIL a the free gift brought the justification of life though one man to many. So if anything what you quote shows that Christians are free from Adam’s sin. After all what is greater ‘justification of life’ or death’?

From Romans 5. . . I can say that:

One act of righteousness by Christ resulted in the justification of life to Mary.

So through the obedience of the One (Christ offering Himself) Mary was made righteous. I do not comment on when she was made righteous except to say that she had found favour with God before the angel met her. What does this suggest? I am also addressing Mary as she is found in the scriptures. . .

If you argue that Mary was nevertheless still a sinner because all men sinned:

Are you not saying *that the reign of sin and death in Mary was greater than the reign of righteousness and life? *

Furthermore, *are you not saying that Adam’s sin prevailed over Christ’s obedience? *

The weight of textual evidence is to the contrary:

1. Mary found favour in God’s sight before the angel visited her.
2. Each generation was to count her blessed, (and if blessed then pure in heart for noone is blessed who is not also pure in heart).
3. Filled with the Holy Spirit
4. She was the woman in Genesis 3:15. If her seed was to be the Messiah who would crush the serpent’s head don’t you think that her Son’s flesh and blood would have to be derived from a new creation and not from ‘in Adam’?

The evidence suggests that Mary was in Christ and free from Adam’s sin. Other scriptures will also support the beginning of a new creation!

• red highlights and Italics added for emphasis.

blessings:

 

[MariaG]

971 “All generations will call me blessed”:"The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515

What does this sentence mean?

Let’s break it down, shall we? I pray that you can actually listen to the explanation although it appears that you seem to think in a later post it “proves” we worship Mary.

“All generations will call me blessed”:"

This is straight from Scripture itself. It is prophetic words uttered by Mary and recorded by the apostles in God’s sacred word in Luke 1.

If you look up the footnotes, it even says Luke1:48. (It also includes a reference to a church writing but I did not include it since it is not scripture.)

515 Lk 1:48

So unless you say that scripture sounds like it is worshipping Mary, you should have no problem with those prophetic words in scripture. Although an interesting question for you to ask yourself is in what church is this prophecy primarily fulfilled in? I know I never heard Mary referred to as “blessed” in any Christian Church I attended until I went to the Catholic Church.

The next part.

":"The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515

To understand this phrase one first has to understand what Christian worship is. Christian worship, as you probably know, is Christ centered. And in all things, we are to imitate Christ. Christ certainly honored His mother above all other women as per the commandments, honor thy father and mother.

But if that were not enough reason, we also see in scripture, as we interpret it, that on the cross, Christ gave His mother to John. But we believe this was more than just that. Scripture, as you know can have many layers of meaning. And we believe that in these verses, Christ was giving the entire Church His mother. Mary was given to us all as Mother. So we must need honor her since Christ gave her to us.

But let’s break it down even further. I somehow feel you have a problem with the word “devotion”. Many non-Catholic Christians use that word exclusively in relation to God.

However, we can see that one can be “devoted” to one’s husband, wife, children, family etc, without making the mistake of worshipping those same things. Of course, if a person is unable to separate the kind of devotion/worship that should be given to God alone, and their devotion to their family turns into worship, they should refrain from marrying or having Children. Very few fall into this last category.

You need to understand that most people can be devoted to family without worshipping them. The same is true with Mary, as she is our family, given to us by Christ Himself and recorded in Sacred Scripture.

515 The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . .

This sounds so much like one of the psalms in praise of God.

Could you please be more specific? Honors the Blessed Virgin with special devotion sounds like a psalms? Mother of God sounds like a psalm? Whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs sounds like a psalm in praise of God?

and greatly fosters this adoration."516

I assume you realize on careful reading that the adoration that is being fostered is for God?

How is it different?

The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an “epitome of the whole Gospel,” express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.517

Are you a Jehovah Witness? Do you not celebrate birthdays? How is a special day, celebrating something worship?

How is meditating on the life of Christ, the Rosary, worship?

I guess you need to be more specific here also since I don’t understand exactly what you see that is falling into worship.

God bless,
Maria

 

[JoeyWarren]

Originally Posted by MariaG forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
971 “All generations will call me blessed”:"The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515

Originally Posted by justasking4 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*What does this sentence mean? *

He probably believes devotion is the same thing as worship.

He is reading it as “The Churches worship to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Chirstian wroship”

JustAGuess4 you?

 

[justasking4]

Tantum ergo;2643205]I notice you still haven’t answered.

Answered what?

Because to you the ‘trappings’ of head bowing etc. should only be done to God (I surely do hope that you never meet a Head of State, square dance, or travel to Japan with this ‘bowing’ problem you have), you insist that ‘bowing’ equates to worship. That is your comprehension problem.

When a catholic bows before the alter, is that a form of worship?

Further, being ‘intrinsic to worship’ does not mean the ‘devotion’ itself is ‘worship’ in the sense you are giving it. And over and over you have been told that **your narrow and contemporary definitions ** are just that, ‘narrowed’ from the original ones (context, context, context–from one who claims to be such a Bible scholar one should most assuredly be scrupulous in observing the context of what is written–not just in the Bible but in any writing), and ‘contemporary’–i.e., changeable. Revision and retro’ing a ‘new’ definition and insisting that it applies to a time ‘before’ the definition existed is unscrupulous and disingenuous. I’ve noted the trend in ‘revision history’ in the secular area too.

Don’t fault me if words have meanings. I went to a source that all would agree is an authority (dictionary) and that is what it said.

Again, if we worship Mary, why DO we ‘deny it’, in your words?

Don’t catholics use a couple of words like dulia and hyperdulia to describe the different types of worship given to Mary and the saints? We i have read in a number of posts is a denial that catholics worship Mary and yet these words are used to describe worship given to her.

If we believe Mary is a goddess, why do we not proudly declare it?

Catholics do not believe she is a goddess.

You cannot answer, because there is no answer to such a charge, only a blind parroting of what you think the ‘reason’ is. . .that we are both too ‘stupid’ to comprehend that we ‘worship’ someone, yet somehow we are so ‘smart’ that we’re trying to ‘trick’ all the people of the world into following our heinous practice!

i can’t speak for catholics on this. Those that i know would not admit to worshipping her and the saints. However, the evidence shows otherwise in many catholic writings and practices.

You cannot have it both ways and the illogic behind your charges is astounding.

What specific charges have i made outside that no one who follows Christ should pray to Mary or the saints? If you know the scriptures you know then they do not teach this but rather that all that we need can be found directly in Christ. (This however does not mean we don’t need the encouragement and prayers of those who live on this world).

You ignore everything that has been taught in Christianity for 2000 years, Scripture after Scripture which support Catholic teaching and interpretation, from much better ‘scholars’ than you or I could hope to be, ignore explanations, and obstinately insist,

What see so much here in so many posts is a lack of exgesis of verses and passages that catholics use to support their claims about Mary. Instead i’m called ignorant, lying hypocrite, lock jaw of the brain and couple of more things i can’t think of right off hand.

"I don’t care that you say that bowing is not something for God alone and that there are countless examples where people have bowed as a sign of respect but not ‘God worship’. I say ** bowing is ** God worship ALONE.
I don’t care that **you say ** that veneration is not the same as “God worship”. **I say ** it is.

Again, go look the various words up in a dictionary and what the catholic church teaches about dulia and hyperdulia.

I don’t care that you say the definition of words like prayer and worship did not mean the same thing that certain groups have ‘narrowed it down to’ on their own authority. I say when the Bible was written the definition means that narrow definition, no matter what evidence exists to the contrary.

Above all, I don’t care that **you say ** that you are trying to follow the word of God to your understanding. I say that unless you’re following it to my understanding, you’re not only wrong, you’re lying hypocrites. "

Not sure what you are saying here. Can you clarify?

 

[justasking4]

Should I consider this hymn of praise to Mary a song of worship?

O Living Fountain
(Flemish, 15th century, arrangement by Karl Marx, 1947, translated from the German by M Jane Hoehne)
O living fountain, purest Virgin,
Flower of graces, crowned with virtues.
We sing your praise eternally.
You bore the Savior, Virgin Mother,
Holy land and frutiful garden.
We sing your praise eternally.
With joy we offer warm thanksgiving
Mary, you source of endless blessing.
We praise the name of Jesus Christ.
You lead us to the world’s Redeemer.
Take our total self-surrender
and grant us vict’ry through your Child.
We want to love God’s fav’rite flower,
Gentle reflection of his power,
You bring salvation to us all.

The source for this is
We are an international center of study and research on Mary,
the Mother of Jesus Christ.
Our Address
The Marian Library
University of Dayton
Dayton, Ohio 45469-1390
937-229-4214

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Did she bring Christ, who is our salvation, to us all?

Yes, she did.

Is she worthy of ‘worship’ in the sense that ‘worship’ was used back in the time it was written, that of respect and veneration but not the formal honor due to God Himself and none other?

Yes she is.

Did you know that if you had gotten married years ago you might have prayed regarding your SPOUSE, “With my body, I thee worship”. Scandalous!!

You know what, JK, I’ll keep on ‘praying’ for you too, just the way that prayer was originally intended, a request or a communication to someone.

 

[NotWorthy]

Should I consider this hymn of praise to Mary a song of worship?

JA4, do you have a problem with that song?

I think you asked the question wrong:
*Should I consider this
a) a hymn of praise to Mary
or
b) a song of worship?
or
c) Both a and b.
*
If you asked it that way, I’d say A.

 

[MariaG]

He probably believes devotion is the same thing as worship.

He is reading it as “The Churches worship to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Chirstian wroship”

JustAGuess4 you?

Yeah, I agree.

 

[MariaG]

When a catholic bows before the alter, is that a form of worship?

Yes. Because Catholics are bowing to God, whom is present physically at the altar.

But the same ACTION can have different intentions. Is a Catholic Christian worshipping a Japanese personage by bowing to them in their cultural greeting?

Don’t fault me if words have meanings. I went to a source that all would agree is an authority (dictionary) and that is what it said.

We can fault you. You are looking at a source that is not defining words according to the teachings of the CAtholic church.

Language means different things today than it did even 50 years ago. How many people go around saying they are happy and gay?

Don’t catholics use a couple of words like dulia and hyperdulia to describe the different types of worship given to Mary and the saints? We i have read in a number of posts is a denial that catholics worship Mary and yet these words are used to describe worship given to her.

Wrong. We use those words to describe the different kinds of devotion including the adoartion that is given soley to God.

Since I am assuming you have read my previous post, your inability to distinguish between “devotion” that God alone deserves and the “devotion” that people can feel for their spouse children without worshipping them, means that you should seriously consider never marrying or having children since you may end up having the same “devotion” to them as you do God.

I am truly sorrry.

Catholics do not believe she is a goddess.

We worship her, but don’t think she is a goddess?

Or maybe we mistakenly worship her, not realizing what we are doing?

i can’t speak for catholics on this. Those that i know would not admit to worshipping her and the saints. However, the evidence shows otherwise in many catholic writings and practices.

Nope. But clearly you are blinded to the truth. I pray that Satan releases his grip on your mind.

What specific charges have i made outside that no one who follows Christ should pray to Mary or the saints?

Since you won’t even admit that we don’t pray to Mary in the same manner as we pray to God and that with the language shift today, it is only appropriate for a non-Catholic Christian to say we ask Mary to pray for us, since they define “pray” as something done to God alone, contrary to the older definition Catholics use.

If you know the scriptures you know then they do not teach this but rather that all that we need can be found directly in Christ. (This however does not mean we don’t need the encouragement and prayers of those who live on this world).

We do not agree with you, and we do infact believe that Scripture teaches that the whole body of Christ cannot be separated even in death. The fact that you have chosen to follow the teachings of men rather than that of the apostles as to what the communion of saints means, is not within our control.

Again, go look the various words up in a CAtholic dictionary, encyclopedia or the Catechism to see what the catholic church teaches about dulia and hyperdulia.

If not, ask yourself why it is so important to you that you continue to define the Catholic Church from sources other than herself?

And why is it that Christians who go to bible studies for years, become Catholic and yet those who leave the Catholic Church never having read scripture on their own, say they were not really born again until they left? Another thread perhaps.

May God bless you and keep you safe. May He lead you to all truth.

Maria

 

[NotWorthy]

Maria, you’ve just explained why the Church was wise enough to record all of Her teachings in Latin. Since Latin is a dead language, a word today means the same thing it meant 100 years ago, means the same thing it meant 1000 years ago.

To illustrate the difference, look at the following sentence.
That car is hot.
In 1987, you’d assume the air conditioner was broke in the car.
In 1997, you’d assume the car was stolen.
In 2007, you’d assume the car is good looking.

This does not happen in Latin.

 

[justasking4]

JA4, do you have a problem with that song?

I think you asked the question wrong:
*Should I consider this
a) a hymn of praise to Mary
or
b) a song of worship?
or
c) Both a and b.
*
If you asked it that way, I’d say A.

How about this verse from the hymn:
Mary, you source of endless blessing.

Do you believe this?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, of course she is the source of endless blessing. God blessed us, endlessly, through sending us His Son, through Mary.

Duh.

 

[justasking4]

Well, of course she is the source of endless blessing. God blessed us, endlessly, through sending us His Son, through Mary.

Duh.

Don’t you find it troubling that none of the aposltes nor anyone for centuries knew that Mary was the “source of endless blessing”?

 

[LilyM]

Don’t you find it troubling that none of the aposltes nor anyone for centuries knew that Mary was the “source of endless blessing”?

They knew that she was Jesus’ mother - the source of His entire human nature (what other human could it have come from, after all?) And that that human nature was an endless blessing to us. Ergo they knew she was the source of endless blessing.

What makes you think that anyone writes down everything they know? You don’t, I’m certain, why do you expect that the Apostles or ECFs did? How do you know we have all their writings even?

Do you think if we took all of your writings end to end it would equal all that you knew? I mean you’ve never written, to my knowledge, that 2+2=4. Am I then to presume you didn’t know that fact? You’ve never written, to my knowledge, that you have a spouse, siblings, parents. Am I to assume then that you have none of these things?

And yet you presume, on the flimsy basis of the limited writings we have left of the Apostles, to know everything that the Apostles knew?

So clearly we CANNOT say they didn’t know these things. We can’t even say they didn’t write about 'em - they were persecuted by the Romans remember, some writings were probably destroyed.

Secondly - as an example - they didn’t know Einstein’s theory of relativity either. Does that mean that relativity is untrue? Of course not.

Neither are such ideas as that Mary is the source of endless grace. If she is the source of the humanity of Jesus, who is endless grace, then it’s a logical truth. Since as Christians we want to know ALL truth - in fact we are promised ALL truth - then we must believe what we can logically deduce about Him - and her - as well. To do otherwise is to deny that the Holy Spirit leads us in the ways of logic as well as revelation.

 

[justasking4]

They knew that she was Jesus’ mother - the source of His entire human nature (what other human could it have come from, after all?) And that that human nature was an endless blessing to us. Ergo they knew she was the source of endless blessing.

What makes you think that anyone writes down everything they know? You don’t, I’m certain, why do you expect that the Apostles or ECFs did? How do you know we have all their writings even?

Do you think if we took all of your writings end to end it would equal all that you knew? I mean you’ve never written, to my knowledge, that 2+2=4. Am I then to presume you didn’t know that fact? You’ve never written, to my knowledge, that you have a spouse, siblings, parents. Am I to assume then that you have none of these things?

And yet you presume, on the flimsy basis of the limited writings we have left of the Apostles, to know everything that the Apostles knew?

So clearly we CANNOT say they didn’t know these things. We can’t even say they didn’t write about 'em - they were persecuted by the Romans remember, some writings were probably destroyed.

Secondly - as an example - they didn’t know Einstein’s theory of relativity either. Does that mean that relativity is untrue? Of course not.

Neither are such ideas as that Mary is the source of endless grace. If she is the source of the humanity of Jesus, who is endless grace, then it’s a logical truth. Since as Christians we want to know ALL truth - in fact we are promised ALL truth - then we must believe what we can logically deduce about Him - and her - as well. To do otherwise is to deny that the Holy Spirit leads us in the ways of logic as well as revelation.

If you don’t have any support for your claims you don’t have a case. What you do have are the speculations of men. As its been shown this idea was unknown for centuries.

 

[Mannyfit75]

If you don’t have any support for your claims you don’t have a case. What you do have are the speculations of men. As its been shown this idea was unknown for centuries.

No, the guidance of the Holy Spirit by preserving the Magisterium of the Church from error. It was the Church that defended the divinity of Jesus and defined His nature in the Trinity. Atheist use the same argument to discredit the Bible itself.