Mary- other children

[Lisa4Catholics]

********

Let’s see, how about the ability to hear and answer prayers?
****When we look in the Bible we find that **prayer is directed to God alone. To set up a person as a recipient for our prayers, no matter how great they are is making them out to be deity. Asking a saint to help and guide or protect is something only God can do. As someone once put it, why go to the branch office when you can go to the president. There is not one example of a Christian addressing prayers to Mary or saints, or those who are dead passing from our world. There is much to be said of those who practice Spiritism that use this method. Catholic defenders suggest that Mary is not part of “the dead”, since she’s spiritually alive in Heaven. The passages in Deuteronomy 18 and Isaiah 8 are referring to the physically dead, not the spiritually dead. There are hundreds of prayers and passages about prayer in scripture, and none of them instruct prayers to the dead. The scriptures forbid attempting to contact the dead, yet the Catholic Church teaches people to do it. **

---

**********This is not like asking someone on earth to pray for you, since they are physically here to converse. What the Roman Catholic is doing is asking those who are not physically here and are unable to see or affect the affairs of mankind on earth to do what is attributed to God only. :bowdown2: **

Nope you are wrong They didn’t cease to be part of the body of Christ at physical death.They are able to pray for us and God responds to their prayers and intercession.We do not make them diety’s you on the other hand attempt to take the diety of God away from God.You are attempting to put the sting back into death,and take the fruits of the ressurection and bring them to naught.You are saying that death seperates of from God when scripture states nothing can do that via the merits of Christ.God Bless

 

[MaggieOH]

John1717:

Mattie, the only grave errors are those which you have been taught!
I’ve noticed that you have a double standard. When a non-Catholic goes “off topic” you are the first to bring it to their attention but you are quite often guilty of this same practice!

It is the same old Sandra.

It is never different because you try the diversionary tactics all the time.

You are trying it again with this comment.

It is off topic and I will not give any further comment to someone who is so error prone as to be a total joke

Maggie

 

[John1717]

MaggieOH:

Sandra,

you always loved to twist what other people are saying.

How can we make it any clearer than the fact that Jesus is both God and Man, and that the whole purpose of THEOTOKOS is to recognize not just the Divinity of Jesus, but also His humanity.

Those who deny that Mary is THEOTOKOS are in grave error on this one. The terminology is very specific and it is directed to who Jesus is, that is Jesus is not just a man, and Jesus is not just God. Jesus is the MAN-GOD.

---

If this is what you truly believe than why do you continue to call Mary the "mother of God?"

You rely on the traditions of men, yet you deny what you are doing. Nothing has changed since you began your excursions onto the Internet has it. Instead of doing careful reading you continue to do selective reading. You deny the authority of the Catholic Church yet you accept the non-authority of the likes of James White, Dave Hunt and Eric Svendsen, even when these men are in gross error.

Actually these men have discovered the truth found in the Scriptures. They do not bow to Rome and its unbiblical “traditions.”

For 47 years I blindly followed Rome, then because of a brush with death, I started to read the bible for myself. I discovered, like so many others, that the church of Rome does not teach according to the Word of God! I praise God for opening my eyes to the truth!
:bowdown2:

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

********

Let’s see, how about the ability to hear and answer prayers?
****When we look in the Bible we find that **prayer is directed to God alone. To set up a person as a recipient for our prayers, no matter how great they are is making them out to be deity. Asking a saint to help and guide or protect is something only God can do. As someone once put it, why go to the branch office when you can go to the president. There is not one example of a Christian addressing prayers to Mary or saints, or those who are dead passing from our world. There is much to be said of those who practice Spiritism that use this method. Catholic defenders suggest that Mary is not part of “the dead”, since she’s spiritually alive in Heaven. The passages in Deuteronomy 18 and Isaiah 8 are referring to the physically dead, not the spiritually dead. There are hundreds of prayers and passages about prayer in scripture, and none of them instruct prayers to the dead. The scriptures forbid attempting to contact the dead, yet the Catholic Church teaches people to do it. **

---

**********This is not like asking someone on earth to pray for you, since they are physically here to converse. What the Roman Catholic is doing is asking those who are not physically here and are unable to see or affect the affairs of mankind on earth to do what is attributed to God only. :bowdown2: **

Start another thread. This is off topic. If you want a response to your heinous accusations then you need to start your own topic and get a response there.

Anyway you forgot the bit about the grave rubbings, it used to be a favourite of yours. Oh well maybe you learned that what you said then was rubbish.

 

[John1717]

MaggieOH:

It is the same old Sandra.

It is never different because you try the diversionary tactics all the time.

You are trying it again with this comment.

It is off topic and I will not give any further comment to someone who is so error prone as to be a total joke

Maggie

You must be using some Australian humor-calling me Sandra! So maybe from now on I’ll call you Harry! OK?

As for being error prone, the Catholic Church is full of errors!

Here’s a quote I found recently that I thought you might enjoy!

**“New Testament exegesis for the Roman Catholic interpreter is not an exercise in ascertaining the meaning of the biblical text through examination of the Greek words, the literary context, and the original intent of the writer. Far from it; it consists rather in listening to what the Roman Catholic Magisterium has already said the meaning is, and then looking for ways that that meaning can be defended from Scripture.” **

In Christ Alone,
John

 

[mtr01]

Lisa4Catholics:

Nope you are wrong They didn’t cease to be part of the body of Christ at physical death.They are able to pray for us and God responds to their prayers and intercession.We do not make them diety’s you on the other hand attempt to take the diety of God away from God.You are attempting to put the sting back into death,and take the fruits of the ressurection and bring them to naught.You are saying that death seperates of from God when scripture states nothing can do that via the merits of Christ.God Bless

You are exactly right, Lisa. If we think of Christ as the vine, and we his branches John would be saying that we are cut off from the vine at our physical death. That would be a very strange interpretation of Scripture indeed. The members of the Body of Christ are not dead, for our God is not the God of the dead, but the living (Matt 22:32). The living saints in heaven actually are witness to our actions here on earth (Heb 12:1), and can indeed see and hear us pilgrims. In fact, they pray (Rev 5:8), and since they are our witnesses whose to say they can’t pray for us? In fact Scripture makes it plain that others besides God hear prayers (Rev 8:3-4)

 

[John1717]

Lisa4Catholics:

Nope you are wrong They didn’t cease to be part of the body of Christ at physical death.They are able to pray for us and God responds to their prayers and intercession.We do not make them diety’s you on the other hand attempt to take the diety of God away from God.You are attempting to put the sting back into death,and take the fruits of the ressurection and bring them to naught.You are saying that death seperates of from God when scripture states nothing can do that via the merits of Christ.God Bless

Communicating with the dead is clearly condemned in the Scriptures. The only reason you believe in it is because the self-proclaimed, infallible Roman Catholic Church, tells you it is OK.

Death separates our lines of communication! Read Luke 16:19-31

In Christ Alone,
John

 

[Benadam]

John1717:

Communicating with the dead is clearly condemned in the Scriptures. The only reason you believe in it is because the self-proclaimed, infallible Roman Catholic Church, tells you it is OK.

Death separates our lines of communication! Read Luke 16:19-31

In Christ Alone,
John

I recognize that scripture reveals that almost everyone ends their earthly life in an unnatural way called death. I also recognize that scripture teaches that those who die in Christ continue their lives in Him. I read where Christ when rebuking the unbelief in the resurrection He said God is not God of the dead but of the living. Yet you say He is also God of the dead. Why do you think the dead can worship Our Lord? Why do you believe that a bond with God is not divine?

My understanding of Holy Scripture is Catholic and the source of my understanding is Holy Scripture.

 

[mtr01]

John1717:

Communicating with the dead is clearly condemned in the Scriptures. The only reason you believe in it is because the self-proclaimed, infallible Roman Catholic Church, tells you it is OK.

Death separates our lines of communication! Read Luke 16:19-31

In Christ Alone,
John

That’s an odd interpretation of “Lazarus and the Rich Man”. First of all, Abraham and the rich man hear each other from across the chasm that cannot be crossed. Second, Abraham never says anything about not hearing the people on the earth, he simply states that the rich man’s relatives wouldn’t believe if someone rose from the dead to warn them. In fact, they must know what’s going on on earth to even have the possibility of warning people. At best, this passage is irrelevent to your claim; at worst it is evidence for the opposite.

Oh yeah, as for the “self-proclaimed” infallibility of the Church, Christ himself tells the Church leaders that The Holy Spirit, which he will send to them will lead them to all truth (Jn 16:13), and as St. Paul states, the Church is the pillar and ground of all truth (1 Tim 3:15). If that’s not Divinely ordained infallibility, I don’t know what is.

 

[MaggieOH]

John1717:

Communicating with the dead is clearly condemned in the Scriptures. The only reason you believe in it is because the self-proclaimed, infallible Roman Catholic Church, tells you it is OK.

Death separates our lines of communication! Read Luke 16:19-31

In Christ Alone,
John

You are correct to point out that there is a form of communication with the dead that is condemned by the Catholic Church. It is called Necromancy and it is normally practised at Seances, and such things are forbidden to Catholics. The spirits that appear at seances are not necessarily of those who have gone to heaven.

However the saints and Mary are alive in Heaven, because they have, as Scripture says reached their eternal reward:

“After this I seemed to hear the great sound of a huge crowd in heaven, singing Alleluia! Victory and glory and power to our God!” (Rev 19:1)

Now this is getting off the topic again. If you want to discuss this interesting topic then start a new thread.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

John1717:

You must be using some Australian humor-calling me Sandra! So maybe from now on I’ll call you Harry! OK?

As for being error prone, the Catholic Church is full of errors!

Here’s a quote I found recently that I thought you might enjoy!

**“New Testament exegesis for the Roman Catholic interpreter is not an exercise in ascertaining the meaning of the biblical text through examination of the Greek words, the literary context, and the original intent of the writer. Far from it; it consists rather in listening to what the Roman Catholic Magisterium has already said the meaning is, and then looking for ways that that meaning can be defended from Scripture.” **

In Christ Alone,
John

Your subject is off topic. If you want to discuss this topic then start a new thread

 

[MaggieOH]

John1717:
What you discussed about not reading the Bible for 47 years is off topic. If you want to discuss why you left the Catholic Church to follow Fundamentalism or is that Oneness Pentecostalism, then start a new thread.

You keep attempting to hijack this thread with all of your diversionary tacts, but it will not work in your favour.

MaggieOH

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

John1717:

Communicating with the dead is clearly condemned in the Scriptures. The only reason you believe in it is because the self-proclaimed, infallible Roman Catholic Church, tells you it is OK.

Death separates our lines of communication! Read Luke 16:19-31

In Christ Alone,
John

Hello! Then the little girl Jesus brought back from the dead really was just sleeping,right?Why did Jesus make a distinction with the young man who wanted to follow him and he wanted to bury his father first and Jesus said let the dead bury the dead.So you come up on a problem either Jesus mislead the people about the little girl:nope: Or he is making a distinction on the true meaning of death.Scripture says if you die in Christ you live in Christ.If we are united in Christ not even physical death can seperate us,you are trying to put the sting back into death.God Bless
Ps.Sorry Maggie:nope: Hey, John start another thread you are taking the thread away from the origional subject with your ficticious assertions:tsktsk:

 

[Benadam]

John1717:

You must be using some Australian humor-calling me Sandra! So maybe from now on I’ll call you Harry! OK?

As for being error prone, the Catholic Church is full of errors!

Here’s a quote I found recently that I thought you might enjoy!

**“New Testament exegesis for the Roman Catholic interpreter is not an exercise in ascertaining the meaning of the biblical text through examination of the Greek words, the literary context, and the original intent of the writer. Far from it; it consists rather in listening to what the Roman Catholic Magisterium has already said the meaning is, and then looking for ways that that meaning can be defended from Scripture.” **

In Christ Alone,
John

that can be done when your primary enterpretation is authentic and the results of exegesis that follows the rules you mentioned.

That seems to be common sense to me. It must be common in the sense of intelligence because I’m no scholar and I know that.

 

[sfp]

MaggieOH:

…:tsktsk: Well I have to correct you because you are wrong…

I beg your pardon, I am not “wrong,” Maggie.

SOME discussion of sola scriptura vs. church authority and sacred tradition is absolutely necessary if they are to even “consider” the Catholic understanding of Mary’s perpetual virginity.

You might actually get somewhere with these guys if you had a more charitable delivery. (then again, maybe you wouldn’t) As of now, all I see is a very arrogant Catholic that is only interested in “proving” our understanding of Church teaching without any regard for helping them to understand it.

If we can at least teach them WHY the Catholic point of view of Mary is reasonable, biblical, and historical, then we can have a reasonable debate.

I would like to ask Dave, John, and Xavier (and all else who are opposing the Catholic point of view to answer this question) …

*1. *If you were wrong about the perpetual virginity of Mary, would you want to know it?

Please answer honestly.

 

[sfp]

John1717:

God can use me present the Gospel to others but I myself do not have the ability to get them to heaven. Only the Holy Spirit can convict their heart!

John, do you believe that you have the ability to “save” others? The Bible (specifically St. Paul) says you and I do. Did you know this?

 

[MaggieOH]

sfp:

I beg your pardon, I am not “wrong,” Maggie.

SOME discussion of sola scriptura vs. church authority and sacred tradition is absolutely necessary if they are to even “consider” the Catholic understanding of Mary’s perpetual virginity.

You might actually get somewhere with these guys if you had a more charitable delivery. (then again, maybe you wouldn’t) As of now, all I see is a very arrogant Catholic that is only interested in “proving” our understanding of Church teaching without any regard for helping them to understand it.

If we can at least teach them WHY the Catholic point of view of Mary is reasonable, biblical, and historical, then we can have a reasonable debate.

I would like to ask Dave, John, and Xavier (and all else who are opposing the Catholic point of view to answer this question) …

*1. *If you were wrong about the perpetual virginity of Mary, would you want to know it?

Please answer honestly.

SFP,

I wonder how much time you have spent with apologetics. You see, over the years I have discovered the necessity of keeping people like Xavier and Oudave on track because if you let them they will take every opportunity to divert a topic when it is not going their way. I have already seen this happening with certain postings in this thread.

Take for instance the one who came into the thread decrying Catholics with the claim that we are idol worshippers. That kind of thing, is a diversionary tactic, and it is a thread hijacker.

If it is relevant to the thread to discuss authority then if in this case it concerns the “Whore of Babylon” then we can discuss the authority of the Church in that context. However, these people deliberately skew the topic to take our attention away from the subject in hand.

This is a very generous forum as far as threads are concerned. These people do have the opportunity to discuss their claims in their own threads. If we want to challenge them about the issue of the authority of the Catholic Church then we can start a new thread.

These people are not interested in becoming Catholic. They have another agenda in mind.

Maggie

 

[sfp]

John1717:

,The Holy Spirit!

…"The term that was picked was kataholos, which means according to the whole or universal in Greek. The thought was apparently that these were Christians who believed and practiced according to what body of Christians as a whole did, in contrast to what some particular group thought or did. Over the course of time, kataholos came to be represented by the parallel English word “Catholic.” (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0202qq.asp)

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains *. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Ignatius of Antioch’s *Letter to the Smyrneans *8:2 **[A.D. 110]). (http://www.catholic.com/library/what_catholic_means.asp)

Since 1519, there have been more than 30,000 new “Christian” denominations instituted, all of which have differing interpretations of scripture regarding matters of faith, morals, salvation, marriage, artificial contraception, Mary’s perpetual virginity, etc.

All are being guided by “their own” interpretations of scripture. Now, I ask you, and I hope you will think about this for a second…

Is the Holy Spirit mis-leading 99.99% of the self-proclaiming Christians on earth, who all truly think they are following the holy spirit’s guidance?

1. If so, then how do you know that you aren’t one of the mis-lead?

2. If not, then you must think the Holy Spirit does this intentionally because you and I both agree that He doesn’t make mistakes.

Which is it?

John, it is not just out of “blind faith” that we trust our Church’s teaching, since many of us can obviously explain the reasonable defenses of the attacks against it. It is also due to our use of history, the Bible, and human reason…

1. One Catholic Church with 2,000 years of constant teaching (including re: Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.)

---

2. 30,000+ other “Christian” denominations for ONLY the last 486 years claiming their own interpretations of scripture (including re: Mary’s Perpetual Virginity and her importance in salvation history.)

Where do you really think the Holy Spirit resides? The Bible says there is “ONE FAITH, ONE HOPE, ONE BAPTISM, ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL.”

Do you REALLY think that he intends for all these people to have ALL these differing beliefs on such matters of our souls’ eternity?

Really?

If there is any glimpse of hope here, then maybe you can start to wonder if the Church just “might” be right about Mary. After all, no one disputed this belief until well after the 16th century. Does this not mean anything to you?*

 

[MaggieOH]

sfp:

…"The term that was picked was kataholos, which means according to the whole or universal in Greek. The thought was apparently that these were Christians who believed and practiced according to what body of Christians as a whole did, in contrast to what some particular group thought or did. Over the course of time, kataholos came to be represented by the parallel English word “Catholic.” (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0202qq.asp)

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains . Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Ignatius of Antioch’s *Letter to the Smyrneans *8:2 **[A.D. 110]). (http://www.catholic.com/library/what_catholic_means.asp)

Since 1519, there have been more than 30,000 new “Christian” denominations instituted, all of which have differing interpretations of scripture regarding matters of faith, morals, salvation, marriage, artificial contraception, Mary’s perpetual virginity, etc.

All are being guided by “their own” interpretations of scripture. Now, I ask you, and I hope you will think about this for a second…

Is the Holy Spirit mis-leading 99.99% of the self-proclaiming Christians on earth, who all truly think they are following the holy spirit’s guidance?

1. If so, then how do you know that you aren’t one of the mis-lead?

2. If not, then you must think the Holy Spirit does this intentionally because you and I both agree that He doesn’t make mistakes.

Which is it?

John, it is not just out of “blind faith” that we trust our Church’s teaching, since many of us can obviously explain the reasonable defenses of the attacks against it. It is also due to our use of history, the Bible, and human reason…

1. One Catholic Church with 2,000 years of constant teaching (including re: Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.)

2. 30,000+ other “Christian” denominations for ONLY the last 486 years claiming their own interpretations of scripture (including re: Mary’s Perpetual Virginity and her importance in salvation history.)

Where do you really think the Holy Spirit resides? The Bible says there is “ONE FAITH, ONE HOPE, ONE BAPTISM, ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL.”

Do you REALLY think that he intends for all these people to have ALL these differing beliefs on such matters of our souls’ eternity?

Really?

If there is any glimpse of hope here, then maybe you can start to wonder if the Church just “might” be right about Mary. After all, no one disputed this belief until well after the 16th century. Does this not mean anything to you?
and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary was believed by both John Calvin and Martin Luther as well as most of the reformers.

Maggie

 

[sfp]

MaggieOH:

SFP,

I wonder how much time you have spent with apologetics.

only 2 years* (not sure why this is relevant, though)*

You see, over the years I have discovered the necessity of keeping people like Xavier and Oudave on track because if you let them they will take every opportunity to divert a topic when it is not going their way. I have already seen this happening with certain postings in this thread.

No argument here.

Take for instance the one who came into the thread decrying Catholics with the claim that we are idol worshippers. That kind of thing, is a diversionary tactic, and it is a thread hijacker.

This is where I humbly and respectfully disagree with you…

---

The attack of idol worshipping is a very relevant topic with regards to Mary’s place in salvation history to a fallen away Catholic (or to any other separated brother, but especially to a fallen-away Catholic). Why? Because they TRULY think that we elevate Mary to a “divine” status with Jesus when we honor her and ask for her prayers.

---

I believe that it is crucial to help them understand that this is simply not true. I know you know this, but hopefully they’ll read this exchange and possibly break down that barrier that’s been placed some time ago.

---

**To understand the Church’s teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity, I believe it is essential for them to understand Her as the N.T. fulfillment of the O.T. type (the ark). **And to explain this, we have to go into “why” she is the fulfillment of that O.T. type. Along with that, we have to go into “why” we can’t just rely on the “words” in scripture, because we all know how easy it is to take those words out of context (sola scriptura). Then we need to go into “why” we should even listen to the Church’s interpretation over our own private interpretations (Church Authority). And in between all this, we have to explain that by believing Mary was an ever-virgin, that this DOES NOT suggest that we believe her to be “divine” or on a level with God or Jesus Christ (idol worshipping).

---

See where I’m going? You can’t have this discussion without overlapping topics, as long as we correlate those other topics back to the topic at hand. I think it’s absolutely essential.

If it is relevant to the thread to discuss authority then if in this case it concerns the “Whore of Babylon” then we can discuss the authority of the Church in that context. However, these people deliberately skew the topic to take our attention away from the subject in hand.

This is a very generous forum as far as threads are concerned. These people do have the opportunity to discuss their claims in their own threads. If we want to challenge them about the issue of the authority of the Catholic Church then we can start a new thread.

These people are not interested in becoming Catholic. They have another agenda in mind.

Maggie

(See my responses above inside your reply)