S
Sherlock
Guest
Then you won’t have any problems with any teachings of the Catholic Church, because they don’t contradict the Bible.
- Status
H
herry
Guest
Enoch, Moses, and Elijah were specifically mentioned as being taken up into heaven.
L
Lillith
Guest
As are all who die in Christ…
H
herry
Guest
I really have learned alot in this forum. Its great! Im sorry I voiced my opinion. After all, this is apologetics forum
I am afraid still no one has answered my original question. The only reason we should pray to Mary is if she loves us more than Christ, or Christ needs to outsource His redemptoral work.
And come on now. Why would I be destroying your faith and confusing you, if the only alternative I am advocating puts greater emphasis on Christ? And singles Him alone out as our only mediator. Is this such a heresy? Scripture says “There is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus” 1 Tim 2:5. Not two, not 3, not as many saints as go to heaven, but only one.
–Herry
K
Kay_Cee
Guest
That’s great–we can all learn from each other.I really have learned alot in this forum. Its great! Im sorry I voiced my opinion. After all, this is apologetics forum
I can’t help wondering why you assume this is the reason. Where in the world did you get this idea? Where does Catholic theology say this? I suspect this is why you don’t understand what we’re trying to tell you. You’re making assumptions that have no basis in fact.
Well, if that’s the case, Herry, you should never ask anyone to pray for you. Ever. After all, you shouldn’t ask someone else to be a mediator between you and God.
Except that the Bible tells us to pray for each other.
And that, of course, is what we’re asking Mary to do–pray for us.
A
adrift
Guest
Enoch and Elijah yes Moses no
He died and was burried yet he appeared with Elijah.
P
Psalm45_9
Guest
Asking the Saints to pray for us in no way interferes with the mediatorship of Christ, just like you asking your friends and family members to pray for you does not interfere with 1 Timothy 2:5. It is not requried, all prayers can be directly made to Jesus, but asking for someone else to pray for and with you doesn’t hurt.
Jesus is the only person I know that is both God and Man, thus he is the only mediator between God and Man (1 Timothy 2:5). But that doesn’t mean we can’t ask others to pray for us.
E
Eireann
Guest
Jesus but Mary said yes to God and she was the vessel that the word was formed and became flesh, are you saying thats’ no big deal ?
Mary always directs us to Her Son Jesus, “like Cana, do whatever He tells you”.
Who did the sinners goto to get Jesus to manifest Himself before His time, (Mary- sinless) why didn’t the Apostles (sinners) goto Jesus ?
Yes your right that is in the scriptures, and the point.
NO !
NO !
All Mary desires is to point us to Her Son.
Who says Jesus loves sinners more than Mary ?
H
herry
Guest
The ‘Textus Receptus’ of Lucian’s school of Antioch, translated word for word before the Vulgate is the Protestant Bible. Protestants did not translate thier Bible form a Catholic Bible. “The Bibles produced by the Syrian scribes, presented the text of the school of Antioch, and this text became the form that displaced all others in the eastern Churches, and is indeed the textus receptus from which our authorized version is translated: this of course only applies to the New Testament” Syriac Church and Fathers p. 49This does not in any way apply to Christ’s Church. You can’t prove that it does, you only want it to say that it does. Hardly convincing.
Peter is saying that someday, many will follow wrong ways because they trust who is teaching them. That is all Im saying. This can apply to any Church Protestant or Catholic. Peter seems to be specifically warning us of the teachers who have us convinced they cannot be wrong.
No doubt copies of portions of the NT and the OT were circulated throughout the known world, but they hardly made up any sort of “Protestant Bible.” There was no such a thing until the 16th century, and they were a decimation of the Bible confirmed by the Church in the 4th century. If this De Lacy is anything like your other sources of information about the Church, I think I’ll pass. I read plenty of bogus histories when I was in the Assemblies of God. Been there, done that, got the tee shirt.
Anyway, the Protestants do not owe the Latin Church for thier Bible. What are these ‘other bogus sources’ you are talking about? So far, I have only used the writings of Cardianals, and the Bible.
In Christ,
–Herry
S
Superstar905
Guest
Truly major differences between the KJV and modern translations of the New Testament are primarily due to the inaccuracy of the so-called *Textus Receptus *TR], the Greek text upon which the KJV’s New Testament was based. According to Bruce Metzger (*The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, Third Edition, *Oxford University Press, 1992, pages 95-118), **the *TR ***primarily resulted from the work of a Dutch Roman Catholic priest and Greek scholar by the name of Desiderius Erasmus, who published his first Greek New Testament text in 1516. The first edition of Erasmus’ text was hastily and haphazardly prepared over the extremely short period of only five months. (ibid., page 106) That edition was based mostly upon two inferior twelfth century Greek manuscripts, which were the only manuscripts available to Erasmus “on the spur of the moment” (ibid., page 99).
bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm
N
NotWorthy
Guest
A little background on Lucian may be of benefit.
Very little is known about the life of Lucian, though few men have left such a deep print on the history of Christianity. The opposition to the allegorizing tendencies of the Alexandrines centred in him. He rejected this system entirely and propounded a system of literal interpretation which dominated the Eastern Church for a long period. In the field of theology, in the minds of practically all writers (the most notable modern exception being Gwatkin, in his “Studies of Arianism”, London, 1900), he has the unenviable reputation of being the real author of the opinions which afterwards found expression in the heresy of Arius. In his Christological system — a compromise between Modalism and Subordinationism — the Word, though Himself the Creator of all subsequent beings was a creature, though superior to all other created things by the wide gulf between Creator and creature. The great leaders in the Arian movement (Arius himself, Eusebius, the court bishop of Nicomedia, Maris, and Theognis) received their training under him and always venerated him as their master and the founder of their system.
During the persecution of Maximinus Daza he was arrested at Antioch and sent to Nicomedia, where he endured many tortures and, after delivering a long oration in defence of his faith, was finally put to death. The most enduring memorial of the life of Lucian, next to the Christological controversy which his teachings aroused was his influence on Biblical study. Receiving the literal sense alone he laid stress on the need of textual accuracy and himself undertook to revise the Septuagint on the original Hebrew. His edition was widely used in the fourth century.
Notworthy
Very little is known about the life of Lucian, though few men have left such a deep print on the history of Christianity. The opposition to the allegorizing tendencies of the Alexandrines centred in him. He rejected this system entirely and propounded a system of literal interpretation which dominated the Eastern Church for a long period. In the field of theology, in the minds of practically all writers (the most notable modern exception being Gwatkin, in his “Studies of Arianism”, London, 1900), he has the unenviable reputation of being the real author of the opinions which afterwards found expression in the heresy of Arius. In his Christological system — a compromise between Modalism and Subordinationism — the Word, though Himself the Creator of all subsequent beings was a creature, though superior to all other created things by the wide gulf between Creator and creature. The great leaders in the Arian movement (Arius himself, Eusebius, the court bishop of Nicomedia, Maris, and Theognis) received their training under him and always venerated him as their master and the founder of their system.
During the persecution of Maximinus Daza he was arrested at Antioch and sent to Nicomedia, where he endured many tortures and, after delivering a long oration in defence of his faith, was finally put to death. The most enduring memorial of the life of Lucian, next to the Christological controversy which his teachings aroused was his influence on Biblical study. Receiving the literal sense alone he laid stress on the need of textual accuracy and himself undertook to revise the Septuagint on the original Hebrew. His edition was widely used in the fourth century.
Notworthy
M
mlchance
Guest
Actually, your question has been answered several times.
The issue here is one of authority in matters pertaining to faith and morals. The Catholic Church has that authority. You do not. I do not. The SDA church – haunted by a line of bogus prophets all the way down to SDA spin-off David Koresh – certainly doesn’t.
– Mark L. Chance.
M
mercygate
Guest
Mm. Quite so. Herry’s question has been answered many times.
Herry’s last question was “Does Mary love us more than Christ?”
Since she is in heaven (I doubt that even the most rabid anti-Catholic would challenge that), she is perfect in charity; she is fully in possession of “the mind of Christ.” Therefore, the question should be “Does Mary love us less than Christ?” and the answer would be: All of the saints, of whom Mary is the first, love us with the full and perfect love of Christ. It is not a question of loving “more than Christ;” it is a question of loving as Christ and in union with him.
H
herry
Guest
Indeed, Lucian did focus on textual accuracy. Regarding all His sins and even the origin of our Bibles can be dicussed elsewhere. but I want to talk about Mary.
I read the CA tracts, but they do not contain alot of scripture, just ECF. In an effort to better understand what the church teaches, I have been reading Faith of our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons. Its a great book, well written, which he seems to have written for Protestants, in that he limits almost all of His sources to scripture. But I found something in the section on Mary that I thought I might discuss,
“Do you ask me, is Mary willing to assist you? Does she really take an interest in your welfare? Or is she so much absorbed by the fruitation of God to be indifferent to our miseries? “Can a woman forget her infant child so as not to have compassion on the son of her womb?” Even so Mary will not forget us” p. 225
The cardinal quotes Isaiah 49:15. Was this a hidden prophecy of Mary? To find out for myself I read the text and it says,
“But Zion hath said, my Lord hath forsaken me, my Lord hath forgotten me. Can a woman forget her infant child, so that she will not have compassion on the son of her womb? YES she will forget, But I will not forget thee (Saith the Lord)” Isaiah 49:14, 15
He uses a scripture about God to describe Mary.
“But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through His subtility, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For He that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him” 2 Corinthians 11:3-4
I read the CA tracts, but they do not contain alot of scripture, just ECF. In an effort to better understand what the church teaches, I have been reading Faith of our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons. Its a great book, well written, which he seems to have written for Protestants, in that he limits almost all of His sources to scripture. But I found something in the section on Mary that I thought I might discuss,
“Do you ask me, is Mary willing to assist you? Does she really take an interest in your welfare? Or is she so much absorbed by the fruitation of God to be indifferent to our miseries? “Can a woman forget her infant child so as not to have compassion on the son of her womb?” Even so Mary will not forget us” p. 225
The cardinal quotes Isaiah 49:15. Was this a hidden prophecy of Mary? To find out for myself I read the text and it says,
“But Zion hath said, my Lord hath forsaken me, my Lord hath forgotten me. Can a woman forget her infant child, so that she will not have compassion on the son of her womb? YES she will forget, But I will not forget thee (Saith the Lord)” Isaiah 49:14, 15
He uses a scripture about God to describe Mary.
“But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through His subtility, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For He that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him” 2 Corinthians 11:3-4
K
Kay_Cee
Guest
Herry, you seem to think that when the Bible says Christ is our one mediator, it is a mediatorship of exclusiveness.
Let’s see what happens if we apply that definition.
Why did Jesus comission Paul to convert the Gentiles? Why did He use Paul as a “go-between,” that is, a mediator? Why didn’t he go directly to each Gentile Himself?
God, and God alone, is the author of the Bible. So why didn’t He pen it directly instead of using mediators like Matthew and Luke?
What about priests and ministers nowadays? Why does God work through such mediators instead of going to each believer directly?
Look at it another way. God is the Creator of Heaven and earth. He created everything.
Did He create the computer you’re reading this on? Well, yes. But people were involved in the creation of that computer. In other words, they were co-creators with God.
God created you, but your parents had something to do with it. God chose them to be co-creators with Him.
The Church interprets Christ’s being the one mediator as a mediatorship of primacy.
And He chooses us to be co-mediators with Him. Just like He chose Paul to be a mediator to the Gentiles. Just like He chose the writers of scripture to be mediators to us.
God allows us the great joy of participating in His work, like the work of creation and the work of mediatorship. As is only fitting. After all, God created us in His image. Therefore, we share some attributes with Him. Like the ability to create. Like the ability to love. Like the ability to be a mediator who draws others closer to Him.
Now it seems to me that anybody who begins a thread here at Catholic answers, like one intended to draw us Catholics closer to God, is acting as a go-between, a mediator.
So, you see, Herry, **you yourself are a co-mediator. **You are acting as an instrument between us and God.
D
davethecatholic
Guest
How you get from the school of Lucian to the textus receptus is “bogus” as mentioned by Della above. This is a classic modern day case described in Matthew 24: 11. I will pray for you.
Please read the following on the T.R.
skypoint.com/~waltzmn/TR.html
E
Eliza10
Guest
My understanding is that when people used the word “women” in those days they used it as a term of great respect, unlike today. And you can be sure that Jesus said it with the highest respect!
You say, “…He wanted to banish the idea of any of His followers ever going to anyone but He himself for intercession.”
But he said no such thing. And you can’t base your beleifs on what you think he must have thought. You have to base them on His actual actions. And his actions show His honor of her - perfect honor - as He has His first miracle come through her request. His actions - and all His actions have meaning - show us a way to His miracles - and this one happened thru the request of His Blessed Mother.
I have confidence when I turn to Mary and ask her to pray for me, that Jesus is THIS responsive to her requests.
You also said, “”…there is none other name given among men whereby we must be saved" Acts 4:12 Amen to this! It is our Catholic belief, in the scriptures we canonized, and will never refute. .
But you surmise: “This verse tells me that if I never knew another name besides ‘Jesus’, I would find the fullness of salvation.” I say you are adding to that verse from Acts by adding the word “fullness”.
E
Eireann
Guest
No it isn’t, it was because Jesus didn’t want to reveal His Glory at that time, this reveals Her Motherly role, and your summing up is in opposition to this.Mark :10:19 Thou knowest the commandments: Do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, bear not false witness, do no fraud, honour thy father and mother. drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=50&ch=2&l=11&f=s#x
Where do you get this from ?
True, and it’s been pointed out to you that Mary said, “do as He tells you”------ Mary didn’t say do as I tell you.
-Herry
E
estesbob
Guest
The very term “textus receptus” is nothing more than a publishers blurb in the forward of the Second edition of another version of the Greek New Testament published in 1633. Since it was published 13 years AFTER the KJV was published it is hard to see how it is the basis of the Prostestant Bible. In reality it was another rather poor , haphazard, translation by the Dutch Elzivir brothers of the aforementioned Greek New Testament.
The Erasmus translation you mention was, BTW, dedicated to Pope Leo X-not a very good start , one would assume, for a book that is the basis for the KJV.
A lot of the attacks on so called “Catholic Bible” are rather tedious-for instance whether the word Jesus is used in a particualr passage instead of “Christ”
E
Eireann
Guest
And can you tell me/us what prayers we say to Mary that you have a problem with ?
And what prayers you say, and to whom ?
- Status