Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

[kujo313]

No CCC, no bible quotations, no scorn, only a simple question.

How are you so sure of yourself?

My answer would be, because I trust God. I put my soul in the hands of my creator. I belive there is a reason for everything, so there must be a reason why I find so much truth, so much comfter, so much acceptence, in the arms of God’s church. I went astray once, and I found nothing but emptiness. Mary brought me back. She brought me back into the arms of the Church. She helped me through hard times, even now. She brings me closer to God. She helps me understand. You belive only Jesus can do that. Well, I belive that if i was praticeing a heretical faith, then my prayers shouldn’t be answered. But they are. And I am filled with gladiness. I find peace in my religion, in my faith. Do you? Because if you do, why work so hard to persucute mine? I wouldn’t be here if you didn’t attack my faith, my mother, my church. You started it. So how much peace can you have within your faith if you have to question mine?

Look at the name of the thread. I didnt start it. I’m being told that if I don’t agree with the RCC, I’m hellbound. Not true. I’m told that living according to Scripture is not good enough. Not true.

Putting it like this: you’re a soldier in battle and the enemy jumps you. You have your gun and he’s telling you that it’s not loaded. Do you argue with him or do you just pull the trigger to show him?

I dont have to explain anything, the Bible is enough.

Tell whoever invited non-Catholics in these threads to stop it if they don’t expect us to speak up and defend the Word.

I encourage you to go here:

justforcatholics.org/salvation.htm

 

[kujo313]

No, we listen to the words of the Pope and Bishops precisely *because *THE WORD (Jesus, through the Holy Spirit) guides them (not so much the Pope as an individual) and protects them from error, as he promised to do. So The Word speaks now through their words - how else do you think he is still with us and still guiding us? Through your thousands of separate churches no two members of whom agree on even the most basic points if you ask them?

This is yet another argument designed to bolster the authority of Rome and to undermine the authority of the Bible. For, as you say, what’s the use of having an infallible Bible if we cannot understand it correctly? Hence the need for an ‘infallible interpreter,’ the Roman magisterium, which is supposedly infallible (cannot make a mistake) and therefore consistently interprets God’s Word correctly. The average Roman Catholic could blindly trust the magisterium and keep his Bible closed on the shelf.

Evangelicals frankly admit that they are fallible. We can, and often we do, make mistakes. Our teachers are fallible, and they too are liable to make mistakes. Sometimes they disagree among themselves, and there is a measure of error in the best Christian churches. We are not dissimilar from the early Christians in the apostolic churches. Sometimes their leaders disagreed too (Acts 15:39), and there was a measure of error and false doctrines in the churches of Colosse, Galatia and Corinth.

Yet we, like the early Christians, also uphold the essential truth of the Gospel. To be fallible is to be liable to error; it does not mean that one must always be in error! We thank God that He uses weak and fallible instruments – like our teachers and our fallible understanding – to teach us His truth. Being aware of our limitations should make us more diligent in our study of the Scriptures, and more humble and willing to be corrected, thus becoming more mature in our understanding.

Despite the claim of an infallible magisterium, our Roman Catholic friends are not better off. Some Catholics frankly admit that Catholic bishops have been mistaken, and that there is a diversity of beliefs and opinions among the Catholic people similar to the situation in the Evangelical camp.

Even if the magisterium was infallible (in fact, it is not), the Catholic is still caught up in a dilemma. If, as you argue, there is no use for an infallible Bible if there isn’t an infallible magisterium, then there isn’t much use for an infallible magisterium either. You may not realize this, but your belief in the infallibility of the magisterium is itself a fallible opinion. You may have been indoctrinated since childhood or you may have studied the issue yourself and came to this conclusion about the magisterium. Whatever the case may be, it is still your fallible decision, your fallible belief. Also, Catholic doctrine is taught to the laity by fallible priests, fallible teachers, and fallible catechists. Their teaching may not accurately reflect the official Catholic position. And finally, Catholic doctrine is received by the individual who is also fallible and liable to misunderstand and misinterpret the official teaching.

Protestants have no delusions about infallibility, and I hope that many Catholics would come to realize this evident reality in their church too.

(continued)

 

[kujo313]

(part 2)

You probably don’t realize the inconsistency of your argument. You try to persuade me not to interpret the Bible for myself by showing me a Bible verse that supposedly proves your point. But if I cannot interpret the Bible for myself, how can I understand the meaning of the verse you quoted? Moreover you don’t even abide by your own rule. For you read the Scriptures and use your mind to understand the meaning of the text.

What you really want to say is this: Read the Bible as much as you like, as long as you don’t question any doctrine taught by the Roman Catholic magisterium. And if you find any variation between the teaching of the Bible and the teaching of the Vatican, then surely you must be misunderstanding the Bible. The Roman magisterium refuses to be held accountable and to be examined in the light of God’s Word!

The Roman Church has had a long history of withholding the Bible from the common people. One effective way was to give the Bible in Latin, an unknown tongue to the great majority. For centuries it was a sin to possess and read the Bible in one’s own native language. The Council of Toulouse (1229) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Various Bible translations were included in the Index of Forbidden Books (Index Librorum Prohibitorum), first published in 1559. Pope Pius IV instructed bishops to refuse permission to lay persons to read even Catholic versions of Scripture unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such reading was likely to prove beneficial. [Appendix 1]

It was Protestants - men like Wycliff, Tyndale and Luther - who first gave the Bible in the common language of the people, at the same time when the Roman authorities were busy burning every copy of the Bible they could lay their hands on.

History forced the Roman Church to change tactics. Today many Catholics have their personal copy of the Bible at home and many are reading the Bible for themselves. However, the Word of God is rendered void and ineffective by the presuppositions in the Catholic mind. For example, the Catholic is not bothered by the fact that the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, auricular confession, purgatory and the veneration of statues are absent from the pages of the Bible. They have been convinced from infancy that God’s revelation does not come in the Bible alone, but also in Sacred Tradition; and since no-one can check the contents of oral Tradition, they have no way to verify whether a particular doctrine is really based on the Word of God or not. They simply have to trust the magisterium.

Another method that Rome employs is to persuade the people that the Bible is too difficult to understand by oneself. Interpretation is not for the common people but for the wise and intelligent leaders of the Church alone. “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God…has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone…This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome” (Catechism, paragraph 85). With one hand Rome gives the Bible to the people, and with the other hand, Rome takes it away!

Now let us see what the apostle Peter meant by saying that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. To do so, we must open our Bible and read that verse in its context and employ the familiar rules of language to discover its meaning. In other words, we must interpret the Bible for ourselves! The apostle Peter writes:

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21).

The verb “is” in verse 20 is the translation of the word ‘ginomai’ which according to Strong’s Lexicon means, “to cause to be, to become, come into being.” Hence the sense of this verse is this: “no prophecy of Scripture ‘came into being’ by any private interpretation.” The apostle Peter is here speaking about the process by which the Scriptures came into being, namely, their origin, and not about the understanding of Scripture already given.

(continued)

 

[kujo313]

No, we listen to the words of the Pope and Bishops precisely *because *THE WORD (Jesus, through the Holy Spirit) guides them (not so much the Pope as an individual) and protects them from error, as he promised to do. So The Word speaks now through their words - how else do you think he is still with us and still guiding us? Through your thousands of separate churches no two members of whom agree on even the most basic points if you ask them?

(part 3 of 3)

Peter says that no scripture came into being by ‘private interpretation’ - that is by one’s own explanation. Whom does he have in mind? Is it the reader, or the men who penned the Scriptures? Since Peter is speaking about the origin of Scripture, it seems likely that he is talking about the prophets themselves. In other words, Peter is saying that the Scriptures did not originate in the prophets’ own understanding. This could be confirmed if we read the following verse since the apostle Peter gives the reason why scripture did not come into being of the prophets’ own understanding, “for” he continues, “prophecy never came by the will of man.” The prophets did not invent the scriptures. Rather, they were God’s instruments to write his Word: “…holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

So, rather than discourage us from reading and understanding the Bible for ourselves, this verse give us full confidence why we should trust the Scriptures. Though written by men, the Scriptures do not have their origin in the human mind but in the mind of God the Holy Spirit. The Bible is the Word of God!

I need to make some final comments, especially to my Evangelical brethren. We need to reiterate to our Catholic friends the elementary truth that the Bible was written in such a way that it can be understood. In the meantime, we must continually remind ourselves the equally basic fact that the Bible can be misunderstood! The apostle Peter later on in his epistle warns us that in the Scriptures “are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). Therefore we must be diligent in our studies, and make use of all the God-given means, especially listening to godly teachers.

Let us read and study the Bible, both privately and publicly, and exercise our minds to understand it correctly. Let us listen attentively to biblical sermons, and read books that expound the Word. “As newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby, if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.” (1 Peter 2:2,3).

 

[kujo313]

No, we listen to the words of the Pope and Bishops precisely *because *THE WORD (Jesus, through the Holy Spirit) guides them (not so much the Pope as an individual) and protects them from error, as he promised to do. So The Word speaks now through their words - how else do you think he is still with us and still guiding us? Through your thousands of separate churches no two members of whom agree on even the most basic points if you ask them?

(one more after part 3)

Forbidding the Bible to the people

“In early times the Bible was read freely by the lay people…New dangers came in during the Middle Ages…To meet those evils, the Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Pius IV required bishops to refuse lay persons leave to read even Catholic versions of Scripture unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such reading was likely to prove beneficial.” (Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, The Catholic Publications Society Co., N.Y., 1887, p. 82).

“In early times, the Bible was read freely by the lay people, and the Fathers constantly encourage them to do so, although they also insist on the obscurity of the sacred text. No prohibitions were issued against the popular reading of the Bible. New dangers came during the middle ages. When the heresy of the Albigenses arose there was a danger from corrupt translations, and also from the fact that the heretics tried to make the faithful judge the Church by their own interpretation of the Bible. To meet these evils, the Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Pius IV required the bishops to refuse lay persons leave to read even Catholic versions of the Scripture, unless their confessors or parish priests judged that such readings was likely to prove beneficial.” (Shea John Gilmary Ed, The Catholic Educator: A Library of Catholic Devotion and Instruction, New York, Peter J. Ryan, p 61).

Council of Toulouse, 1229, Canon 14: “We prohibit the permission of the books of the Old and New Testament to laymen, except perhaps they might desire to have the Psalter, or some Breviary for the divine service, or the Hours of the blessed Virgin Mary, for devotion; expressly forbidding their having the other parts of the Bible translated into the vulgar tongue” (Pierre Allix, Ecclesiastical History of Ancient Churches of the Albigenses, published in Oxford at the Clarendon Press in 1821, reprinted in USA in 1989 by Church History Research & Archives, P.O. Box 38, Dayton Ohio, 45449, p. 213).

Council of Trent: Rules on Prohibited Books, approved by Pope Pius IV, 1564: “Since it is clear from experience that if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without discrimination in the vernacular, there will by reason of the boldness of men arise therefrom more harm than good, the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing. Those, however, who presume to read or possess them without such permission may not receive absolution from their sins till they have handed them over to the ordinary. Bookdealers who sell or in any other way supply Bibles written in the vernacular to anyone who has not this permission, shall lose the price of the books, which is to be applied by the bishop to pious purposes, and in keeping with the nature of the crime they shall be subject to other penalties which are left to the judgment of the same bishop. Regulars who have not the permission of their superiors may not read or purchase them.”

 

[kujo313]

If you think there’s any relationship between the modern Pentecostal denomination and what the Apostles were teaching at Pentecost you’re sadly deluded

Tell me, then, what was the Apostles teaching? They was speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Salvation through Jesus was preached.

Look it up in Acts and tell me.

 

[LilyM]

This is yet another argument designed to bolster the authority of Rome and to undermine the authority of the Bible. For, as you say, what’s the use of having an infallible Bible if we cannot understand it correctly? Hence the need for an ‘infallible interpreter,’ the Roman magisterium, which is supposedly infallible (cannot make a mistake) and therefore consistently interprets God’s Word correctly. The average Roman Catholic could blindly trust the magisterium and keep his Bible closed on the shelf.

Evangelicals frankly admit that they are fallible. We can, and often we do, make mistakes. Our teachers are fallible, and they too are liable to make mistakes. Sometimes they disagree among themselves, and there is a measure of error in the best Christian churches. We are not dissimilar from the early Christians in the apostolic churches. Sometimes their leaders disagreed too (Acts 15:39), and there was a measure of error and false doctrines in the churches of Colosse, Galatia and Corinth.

Yet we, like the early Christians, also uphold the essential truth of the Gospel. To be fallible is to be liable to error; it does not mean that one must always be in error! We thank God that He uses weak and fallible instruments – like our teachers and our fallible understanding – to teach us His truth. Being aware of our limitations should make us more diligent in our study of the Scriptures, and more humble and willing to be corrected, thus becoming more mature in our understanding.

Despite the claim of an infallible magisterium, our Roman Catholic friends are not better off. Some Catholics frankly admit that Catholic bishops have been mistaken, and that there is a diversity of beliefs and opinions among the Catholic people similar to the situation in the Evangelical camp.

Even if the magisterium was infallible (in fact, it is not), the Catholic is still caught up in a dilemma. If, as you argue, there is no use for an infallible Bible if there isn’t an infallible magisterium, then there isn’t much use for an infallible magisterium either. You may not realize this, but your belief in the infallibility of the magisterium is itself a fallible opinion. You may have been indoctrinated since childhood or you may have studied the issue yourself and came to this conclusion about the magisterium. Whatever the case may be, it is still your fallible decision, your fallible belief. Also, Catholic doctrine is taught to the laity by fallible priests, fallible teachers, and fallible catechists. Their teaching may not accurately reflect the official Catholic position. And finally, Catholic doctrine is received by the individual who is also fallible and liable to misunderstand and misinterpret the official teaching.

Protestants have no delusions about infallibility, and I hope that many Catholics would come to realize this evident reality in their church too.

(continued)

Similar to the situation in the Evangelical camp? Don’t make me laugh! You guys aren’t even agreed on the very nature of God or Christ himself (ever heard of the ‘oneness’ Pentecostals within your own denomination, kujo?). That particular little issue is one which we sorted out by the time the Arian heresy finished in about the 5th or 6th century. You’re 1500 odd years behind us on that one.

And where’s your Pentecostal Catechism to which you refer in cases of doubt on an issue? We have our positions worked out and defined, some of us to be sure are too stubborn to accept them as a practical matter, which is a bit different to saying the truth hasn’t been proclaimed.

Sounds like the disagreements within the evangelical camp are just a wee bit more serious than Peter and Paul nutting out procedural matters such as whether non-Jews needed to be circumcised. Or Catholics nutting out procedural matters such as whether the Mass should be in Latin or not.

And in case you hadn’t noticed, the disagreements among the Apostles were resolved definitively and speedily, if not easily. Guess how - by a church council. Exactly how the Catholic Church governs itself today. Do the Pentecostals do the same, kujo? Councils of bishops? Doubt it.

One Lord, one Church, one Rock, one Truth! It cannot be any other way. And your way is chaos and fragmentation.

 

[Good_Fella]

Kujo, I see that you find the dogma of the Immaculate Conception hard to digest. Keep in mind
Mary has a vital role to play in God’s eternal plan of salvation and so spiritually she is not con-
strained by time. She has always been significant by the Father’s decree in anticipation of the
fall of man in the garden of Eden. Before Christ was born, and even conceived by Mary, the
angel Gabriel appeared to her and said, “Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee.” Note that
the mother-to-be was not addressed by her given name, Mary, but by the expression “full of
grace”; for she is no mere creature, but the Mother of God by the Lord’s decree. The angel
Gabriel could not possibly call our Blessed Mother ‘Mary’ as God’s messenger, for she
was a “blessed daughter” {Book of Judith} of the eternal Father before time began. And since
she was predestined to become the mother of the Son of the Father by the power of the
Holy Spirit, God desired that she be conceived in a state of sanctifying grace free from
original sin. To passively co-operate with the Lord in our redemption, she had to be
in the original state of grace Adam and Eve were in before they disobeyed God, a state of
pure innocence in like manner of the human nature of her divine Son. The entire Paschal
mystery in which Mary participates demands that she be entirely like her son in his human
nature: free from original sin. St. Paul excluded Jesus and Mary when he taught “all men
have sinned”. The Greek “all” is used in its qualifying form.

The phrase “full of grace” in Luke 1:28 is a translation of the Greek word ‘kecharitomene’.
It thus expresses a characteristic quality of Mary. She is indeed a highly favoured daughter
of God the Father, but the Greek term implies more than that. The divine grace given to
Mary is constant and of a singular kind. ‘Kecharitomene’ is a perfect passive participle
of ‘charitoo’ meaning to fill or endow with grace. Since this term is in the perfect tense, it in-
dicates that Mary was graced in the past, before she was even born, but with continuing
effects in the present state of her existence both in heaven and on earth. So the sanctifying
grace Mary enjoyed in her natural existence and eternally enjoys in her heavenly existence was
not the result of the angel Gabriel’s visit; it originated with her conception - the moment God
created her and it remained with her throughout her sinless natural life until her death.
Because God so highly exalted her with this singular privilege of grace, he took Mary into
heaven body and soul to be with her divine Son.

The Immaculate Conception is prophesized in the Book of Genesis. The woman
mentioned with child could not possibly crush the serpent’s head with her own heel and
undo the sin of Eve if she herself had inherited the stain of original sin from our first maternal
parent. Mary’s role in God’s eternal plan of our redemption necessitates that she be
free from original sin and so the inclination to sin, unlike Eve who was responsible for the Fall
along with Adam.

 

[LilyM]

Tell me, then, what was the Apostles teaching? They was speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Salvation through Jesus was preached.

Look it up in Acts and tell me.

In Acts they were speaking in actual intelligible foreign languages - earthly tongues - which the uneducated and un-Holy-Spirit-filled foreigners around them could understand perfectly well. Nothing like any ‘speaking in tongues’ I’ve ever heard of.

 

[kujo313]

Similar to the situation in the Evangelical camp? Don’t make me laugh! You guys aren’t even agreed on the very nature of God or Christ himself (ever heard of the ‘oneness’ Pentecostals within your own denomination, kujo?). That particular little issue is one which we sorted out by the time the Arian heresy finished in about the 5th or 6th century. You’re 1500 odd years behind us on that one.

And where’s your Pentecostal Catechism to which you refer in cases of doubt on an issue? We have our positions worked out and defined, some of us to be sure are too stubborn to accept them as a practical matter, which is a bit different to saying the truth hasn’t been proclaimed.

Sounds like the disagreements within the evangelical camp are just a wee bit more serious than Peter and Paul nutting out procedural matters such as whether non-Jews needed to be circumcised. Or Catholics nutting out procedural matters such as whether the Mass should be in Latin or not.

And in case you hadn’t noticed, the disagreements among the Apostles were resolved definitively and speedily, if not easily. Guess how - by a church council. Exactly how the Catholic Church governs itself today. Do the Pentecostals do the same, kujo? Councils of bishops? Doubt it.

One Lord, one Church, one Rock, one Truth! It cannot be any other way. And your way is chaos and fragmentation.

Come on over and find out. by the way, there’s rifts within the RCC (before and after Vatican II for example). Many are Mariologists while the others deny their existance.

Your “church” cannot follow the Truth as long as it continues to go outside Scripture.
Consider first of all, the form of the rosary. It is 10 repetitions of the ‘Hail Mary’ for five times. What did our Lord say about repetitious prayer? “When you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly. And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:6,7). Prayer is the spontaneous expression of the heart before God - of praise and thanksgiving, confession and petition. Repeating the same prayer over and over again tends to dull the mind. Such repetitions are vain and pagan.

Secondly, and more importantly, note that Jesus told us to address our prayer to God. “Pray to your Father.” There is no example or permission in the whole Bible of Christians praying to anyone except God. And for a good reason. God is able to hear our prayers from heaven (there must be thousands of people praying at this very moment), because He knows all things. “whatever prayer, whatever supplication is made by anyone…then hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and forgive, and act, and give to everyone according to all his ways, whose heart You know - for You alone know the hearts of all the sons of men” (1 Kings 8:38,39). God knows our heart and He hears our prayer. But Mary is not God. She is a finite human being. She does not know the hearts of all people. God alone knows them. “For You ALONE know the hearts of all the sons of men.”

Thirdly, when Catholics pray to Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of our death,” they are placing their trust for salvation in the hands of a creature, rather in the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Mary herself did not do so because she acknowledged God as her Savior (Luke 1:47). The Catholic Catechism explains the significance of the ‘Hail Mary’: ‘Our trust broadens further, already at the present moment, to surrender the hour of our death wholly to her care’ (paragraph 2677). Please find Act 7:59 in your Bible and read about a Christian at the very moment before his death. To whose care did he commit his spirit before he died? And then ask yourself, to whom am I surrendering the hour of my death - to Mary (a saved creature) or to the Lord Jesus (our God and Savior)?

 

[LilyM]

Come on over and find out. by the way, there’s rifts within the RCC (before and after Vatican II for example). Many are Mariologists while the others deny their existance.

Your “church” cannot follow the Truth as long as it continues to go outside Scripture.
Consider first of all, the form of the rosary. It is 10 repetitions of the ‘Hail Mary’ for five times. What did our Lord say about repetitious prayer? “When you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly. And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:6,7). Prayer is the spontaneous expression of the heart before God - of praise and thanksgiving, confession and petition. Repeating the same prayer over and over again tends to dull the mind. Such repetitions are vain and pagan.

Secondly, and more importantly, note that Jesus told us to address our prayer to God. “Pray to your Father.” There is no example or permission in the whole Bible of Christians praying to anyone except God. And for a good reason. God is able to hear our prayers from heaven (there must be thousands of people praying at this very moment), because He knows all things. “whatever prayer, whatever supplication is made by anyone…then hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and forgive, and act, and give to everyone according to all his ways, whose heart You know - for You alone know the hearts of all the sons of men” (1 Kings 8:38,39). God knows our heart and He hears our prayer. But Mary is not God. She is a finite human being. She does not know the hearts of all people. God alone knows them. “For You ALONE know the hearts of all the sons of men.”

Thirdly, when Catholics pray to Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of our death,” they are placing their trust for salvation in the hands of a creature, rather in the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Mary herself did not do so because she acknowledged God as her Savior (Luke 1:47). The Catholic Catechism explains the significance of the ‘Hail Mary’: ‘Our trust broadens further, already at the present moment, to surrender the hour of our death wholly to her care’ (paragraph 2677). Please find Act 7:59 in your Bible and read about a Christian at the very moment before his death. To whose care did he commit his spirit before he died? And then ask yourself, to whom am I surrendering the hour of my death - to Mary (a saved creature) or to the Lord Jesus (our God and Savior)?

I’ve said this before - take the cotton wool out of your ears. There IS NO competition nor contradiction between Mary or the Saints and God. Mary is creature, God is creator. Mary is, as she always has been, his obedient servant in all things. Perfectly so now that she sees him face to face in heaven. And God graciously gives her some powers and honours of her own and some tasks to do. He always has honoured and favoured certain people to be his messengers in special ways. One of those tasks for Mary is to be, as she always has been, a conduit, and one many Christians have profitably used, between Christ and ourselves, through which he comes close to us, and we him.

He graciously gives her and the other saints certain powers (not on the scale that he himself possesses them) just as he graciously permits human parents a share in his powers of creation when they unite to create a child. And just as he graciously gave Gabriel the privilege and power of passing his message on to Mary and Joseph. Certainly Mary answered Gabriel directly and didn’t ignore him and only speak to God directly, so obviously this heavenly messenger service goes both ways.

As for no specific permission - well there’s no permission in the Bible to use cars or computers, to watch tv or listen to popular music, to use electricity or postage stamps. Lack of specific mention means nothing in this regard.

By the way - he was thought to have called on Elijah from the cross. And he mentions the rich man praying to Father Abraham. So clearly Jews of his time were familiar with the concept of calling upon the righteous dead, and didn’t see such as blasphemy or impossibility.

 

[kujo313]

I’ve said this before - take the cotton wool out of your ears. There IS NO competition nor contradiction between Mary or the Saints and God. Mary is creature, God is creator. Mary is, as she always has been, his obedient servant in all things. Perfectly so now that she sees him face to face in heaven. And God graciously gives her some powers and honours of her own and some tasks to do. He always has honoured and favoured certain people to be his messengers in special ways. One of those tasks for Mary is to be, as she always has been, a conduit, and one many Christians have profitably used, between Christ and ourselves, through which he comes close to us, and we him.

He graciously gives her and the other saints certain powers (not on the scale that he himself possesses them) just as he graciously permits human parents a share in his powers of creation when they unite to create a child. And just as he graciously gave Gabriel the privilege and power of passing his message on to Mary and Joseph. Certainly Mary answered Gabriel directly and didn’t ignore him and only speak to God directly, so obviously this heavenly messenger service goes both ways.

As for no specific permission - well there’s no permission in the Bible to use cars or computers, to watch tv or listen to popular music, to use electricity or postage stamps. Lack of specific mention means nothing in this regard.

Consider first of all, the form of the rosary. It is 10 repetitions of the ‘Hail Mary’ for five times. What did our Lord say about repetitious prayer? “When you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly. And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:6,7). Prayer is the spontaneous expression of the heart before God - of praise and thanksgiving, confession and petition. Repeating the same prayer over and over again tends to dull the mind. Such repetitions are vain and pagan.

Secondly, and more importantly, note that Jesus told us to address our prayer to God. “Pray to your Father.” There is no example or permission in the whole Bible of Christians praying to anyone except God. And for a good reason. God is able to hear our prayers from heaven (there must be thousands of people praying at this very moment), because He knows all things. “whatever prayer, whatever supplication is made by anyone…then hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and forgive, and act, and give to everyone according to all his ways, whose heart You know - for You alone know the hearts of all the sons of men” (1 Kings 8:38,39). God knows our heart and He hears our prayer. But Mary is not God. She is a finite human being. She does not know the hearts of all people. God alone knows them. “For You ALONE know the hearts of all the sons of men.”

Thirdly, when Catholics pray to Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of our death,” they are placing their trust for salvation in the hands of a creature, rather in the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Mary herself did not do so because she acknowledged God as her Savior (Luke 1:47). The Catholic Catechism explains the significance of the ‘Hail Mary’: ‘Our trust broadens further, already at the present moment, to surrender the hour of our death wholly to her care’ (paragraph 2677). Please find Act 7:59 in your Bible and read about a Christian at the very moment before his death. To whose care did he commit his spirit before he died? And then ask yourself, to whom am I surrendering the hour of my death - to Mary (a saved creature) or to the Lord Jesus (our God and Savior)?

 

[LilyM]

Thirdly, when Catholics pray to Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of our death,” they are placing their trust for salvation in the hands of a creature, rather in the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Mary herself did not do so because she acknowledged God as her Savior (Luke 1:47). The Catholic Catechism explains the significance of the ‘Hail Mary’: ‘Our trust broadens further, already at the present moment, to surrender the hour of our death wholly to her care’ (paragraph 2677). Please find Act 7:59 in your Bible and read about a Christian at the very moment before his death. To whose care did he commit his spirit before he died? And then ask yourself, to whom am I surrendering the hour of my death - to Mary (a saved creature) or to the Lord Jesus (our God and Savior)?

Paul constantly refers to this or that person or people who he’s helped to save. Just one example: ‘I became all things to all men, **that I might by all means save some **’ (1 Corinthians 9). So there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging that Paul or Mary, or our pastors or our parents, by leading us to Christ, also lead us to salvation.

And you must know not all repetitive prayer is vain - Jesus himself prayed the same words three times in Gethsemane, and speaks approvingly of the tax collector who over and over repeated ‘God have mercy on me, a sinner’.

 

[Mary3]

Some of the canons and traditions of the RCC contradicts Scripture and yet, because your pope says so, you put his words above the Word.

An example, please?

 

[Mary3]

Repeating the same prayer over and over again tends to dull the mind. Such repetitions are vain and pagan.

The key work here is “vain” repetition. Psalm 136 is perhaps the most repetitious writing of the Hebrew prayer book. Literally every other line says “His love endures forever”. This Psalm, a litany of thanksgiving and praise to God, is undeniably repetitious. Yet, is the repetition “vain”?. Is it vain repetition to repeat God’s praises to Him over and over again? Is it vain repetition to tell your spouse every day, “I love you.”?

There is no example or permission in the whole Bible of Christians praying to anyone except God.

Well, yes there is. Read the story of the rich man and Lazarus, found in Luke 16. To whom does the rich man direct his prayers? To Father Abraham.

In Revelation 5:7-9, we see the 24 elders in heavens holding golden bowls of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.

And of course the thief on the cross next to Jesus prayed directly to Him. Luke 23:42.

But Mary is not God. She is a finite human being.

None of the Catholics here disagree with you.

Thirdly, when Catholics pray to Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of our death,” they are placing their trust for salvation in the hands of a creature, rather in the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

No, they are asking Jesus mother to pray for them, not to save them. If my earthly mother preceeds me in death, I trust she will be looking down on me from heaven, and asking God to help me. Just as Father Abraham looked down on the rich man who implored his help, and the 24 elders are presenting our prayers in golden bowls at the throne of God.

And then ask yourself, to whom am I surrendering the hour of my death - to Mary (a saved creature) or to the Lord Jesus (our God and Savior)?

We surrender ourselves to God, through the loving hands of Jesus’ mother. She loves us because we love her Son, and she will surely ask her Son to assist us in all our needs. I do the same for my children here on earth, where I am walking solely by faith. How much more powerful are the prayers of those who no longer need faith, because they can see God clearly?

 

[Mommyof02green]

Who needs to force? Mary was visited by an angel. What would YOU do? Say “no”? She submitted to God’s Will. That’s it.

So what did you mean by this statement:

By doing otherwise is simply saying “no” to God and His one and only plan for Salvation. The angel Gabriel did NOT ask Mary her permission but said “you will conceive.” If Mary would’ve said “no”, God’s plan would not have stopped.

How could Mary submit to the will of God if she did NOT give permission and/or was NOT asked to do so? What did you mean by if Mary would have said “no” God’s plan would NOT have stopped?

Thanks and God Bless.

 

[kujo313]

So what did you mean by this statement:

Mary: O most tender Mary, most loving Mother! This is just what you desire. You want us to become children and call out to you in every danger. For you long to help and save us, as you have saved all your children who had recourse to you (The Glories of Mary).

The Bible teaches no such thing. On the contrary, God’s Word tells us to have recourse to the Lord, who is our help and our salvation: “Help me, O LORD my God: O save me according to thy mercy” (Psalm 109:26).

Here are a few excerpts from the book “The Glories of Mary” written by St. Alphonsus Liguori. All quotations are taken from the chapter entitled “Mary Our Mediatrix.”

Mary, the most faithful mediatrix of salvation.
She has been made the ladder to paradise, the gate to heaven, the most true mediatrix between God and human beings.
No creature has since received any grace from God except through the hands of Mary.
Are we then going to scruple to ask her to save us when (as St. Germanus says) no one is saved except through her?
Moreover, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 969, affirms that Mary is a mediatrix:

Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation… Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.

In contrast, the Bible declares that there is one mediator:

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5,6).

Catholic apologists invent all sort of excuses to explain how Mary could be a mediator when the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is the only mediator. Mary, they say, is a mediator because she prays for us, just as we pray for one another.

Apart from the fact that the Bible does not mention anything about Mary and the saints in heaven praying for us, our intercessions does not make us as mediators of salvation. Jesus is mediator because he gave himself on the cross as a ransom, paying the price for the liberty of his people. He reconciles man with God because He took away sin.

How could Mary submit to the will of God if she did NOT give permission and/or was NOT asked to do so? What did you mean by if Mary would have said “no” God’s plan would NOT have stopped?

Thanks and God Bless.

God didn’t ask Noah to build an ark. God never asked David if he wanted to be king. God’s plan was that a virgin was to give birth. In the Old Testament, the name of the virgin was not given so God would’ve used ANY virgin.

 

[Mommyof02green]

The original New Testament was complete before A.D. 100; the Gothic Bible must have been translated immediately to fill the need of the nearby Gothic Christians…

The Gothic Bible had to be translated into the Gothic language. This means that it was NOT written in Gothic. This means the Gothic Bible would have been a “second” translation. What language was the Bible written in?? What language did they use to get the translation from??

There is no doubt that the Gothic Bible was translated from Greek
wulfila.be/gothic/browse/

 

[kujo313]

We surrender ourselves to God, through the loving hands of Jesus’ mother. She loves us because we love her Son, and she will surely ask her Son to assist us in all our needs. I do the same for my children here on earth, where I am walking solely by faith. How much more powerful are the prayers of those who no longer need faith, because they can see God clearly?

“through” = Mediator.

Here are a few excerpts from the book “The Glories of Mary” written by St. Alphonsus Liguori. All quotations are taken from the chapter entitled “Mary Our Mediatrix.”

Mary, the most faithful mediatrix of salvation.
She has been made the ladder to paradise, the gate to heaven, the most true mediatrix between God and human beings.
No creature has since received any grace from God except through the hands of Mary.
Are we then going to scruple to ask her to save us when (as St. Germanus says) no one is saved except through her?
Moreover, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 969, affirms that Mary is a mediatrix:

Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation… Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.

In contrast, the Bible declares that there is one mediator:

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5,6).

Catholic apologists invent all sort of excuses to explain how Mary could be a mediator when the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is the only mediator. Mary, they say, is a mediator because she prays for us, just as we pray for one another.

Apart from the fact that the Bible does not mention anything about Mary and the saints in heaven praying for us, our intercessions does not make us as mediators of salvation. Jesus is mediator because he gave himself on the cross as a ransom, paying the price for the liberty of his people. He reconciles man with God because He took away sin.

We may certainly pray for one another, but ultimately your salvation or damnation depends on your personal relationship with Jesus Christ. “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36). All the prayers of all the saints in heaven and earth, and all the curses of all the lost and all the demons in hell, cannot secure or threaten your salvation if you are resting by faith on Christ Jesus.

Contrary to the fanciful human imaginations, the Bible teaches that Jesus is the mediator of the new coventant (Hebrews 12:24); He is the door to salvation (John 10:9); and all God’s grace and kindness are given “through Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:7); no-one is saved through Mary; all are saved who call on the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13).

Dear friend, since you believe that Jesus is the only mediator, and that Mary is not, what are you going to do now? Would you remain in the Catholic Church that places a host of “mediators” along with Christ, or join an Evangelical church where people really believe in Christ as the one and only mediator?

All Christians are saints. We do not need to be appointed by any pope.
Again and again the Bible calls ordinary living believers “saints” - as can be seen from the following scriptures:

Acts 9:13
Acts 9:32
Acts 9:41
Acts 26:10
Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 8:27
Romans 12:13
Romans 15:25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints.
Romans 15:26
Romans 15:31
Romans 16:2
Romans 16:15
1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours.
1 Corinthians 6:1
1 Corinthians 6:2
1 Corinthians 14:33
1 Corinthians 16:1 .
1 Corinthians 16:15
2 Corinthians 1:1
2 Corinthians 8:4
2 Corinthians 9:1
2 Corinthians 9:12
2 Corinthians 13:13
Ephesians 1:1
Ephesians 1:15
Ephesians 1:18
Ephesians 2:19
Ephesians 3:8
Ephesians 4:12
Ephesians 5:3
Ephesians 6:18 .
Philippians 1:1
Philippians 4:22
Colossians 1:2
Colossians 1:4
Colossians 1:12
1 Timothy 5:10
Philemon 1:5
Philemon 1:7
Hebrews 6:10
Hebrews 13:24
Jude 1:3

All believers that are alive are saints.

 

[LilyM]

God didn’t ask Noah to build an ark. God never asked David if he wanted to be king. God’s plan was that a virgin was to give birth. In the Old Testament, the name of the virgin was not given so God would’ve used ANY virgin.

So what. He didn’t ask Adam and Eve not to eat the apple, he ordered them not to. That didn’t make it any less a free choice when they DID eat, hence the Fall. Would it have somehow NOT been a free choice if they’d not eaten, and only when they chose to disobey? Doesn’t make sense. Obedience or disobedience was equally a free choice for them.

So were Noah’s, David’s and Mary’s actions all free choices, not forced upon them in any way.