So if Mary said “no” God would of used the virgin next door?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.
However, it is NOT written that God said, “Mary? Can I use you to give birth to the Messiah?” “David? Do you want to be king?” “Adam? Would you PLEASE don’t eat the apple?”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.
Popes don’t make saints. You’ve been here long enough to know that. They DO speak with Christ’s own assurance toward the Good Thief, as to the fact that certain people have been revealed by God to be in heaven. Their declaration doesn’t put those people there, neither do we belive that it does.“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:
All believers that are alive are saints.
Are you using tools outside from Scripture to help make your point?
Yes you (catholic religion) do. There is just way too much to mention here.We say no more nor less for Mary.
Thanks for telling me what I believe and what I know for a fact my fellow Catholics believe. Bottom line - we don’t claim anything improper for Mary. It’s for you to prove otherwise. And copypasting word for word from websites isn’t going to cut it.Yes you (catholic religion) do. There is just way too much to mention here.
I suggest you go to
justforcatholics.org/answers.htm#7
and go to the section “Mary and the Saints”. By your end quote, you’re rebelling against your own religion. By following your religion, you’re following down a path that is not the True Path made by God but by man.
Nope! It’s Scripture in a way that catholics can understand it.Are you using tools outside from Scripture to help make your point?
I encourage you to go here: biblechristiansociety.com/page/DebatesI encourage you to go here justforcatholics.org/salvation.htm
Why not? No name is mentioned in the Law or Prophets nor does it say what to do with her or give her a title or anything.So if Mary said “no” God would of used the virgin next door?
And in a way that you don’t have to actually think about and can simply regurgitate without having to engage your critical faculties.Nope! It’s Scripture in a way that catholics can understand it.
Lord, open the blind eyes! Unlock the deaf ears! In Jesus Name, Amen.
Actually, the OPPOSITE is true: It’s up to YOU to prove, from Scripture: the Word of God, the Foundation of our faith, to prove the catholic’s position on Mary.Thanks for telling me what I believe and what I know for a fact my fellow Catholics believe. Bottom line - we don’t claim anything improper for Mary. It’s for you to prove otherwise. And copypasting word for word from websites isn’t going to cut it.
You are going outside the Bible to make your points with all these links you continue to post. Can’t you use the Bible alone to refute Catholics instead of posting others false interpretations?Nope! It’s Scripture in a way that catholics can understand it.
The Catholic Church has led me to Christ and has showed me how to love our neighbors. To step out from the Church would be downgrading my faith which I will never do.Lord, open the blind eyes! Unlock the deaf ears! In Jesus Name, Amen.
So if Mary said “no” God would of used the virgin next door?
So why did God, in what seems to be my opinion, wait for Mary? I mean why didn’t God use a virgin in David’s time? Why didn’t he use a virgin in Adam’s and Eve’s time? Or Noah’s? Or Moses’?Why not? No name is mentioned in the Law or Prophets nor does it say what to do with her or give her a title or anything.
If you would read our posts and stay in context you would see that we were discussing the Arianism heresy. Since this heretical belief was taught by Arius around 300AD, Protestansts had nothing to do with refuting this heresy. Scripture was not cannonized at this time so it was the Church who defeated Arianism. So the Body of Christ at this time was strictly Catholic.Then what was the point of saying that Protestants only went back 500 years or so? In SiB’s theology, the Body of Christ could quite easily exist long before there were any Protestants.
I didn’t think you would follow that form of theology.I do not agree with this theology–I’m just describing it. I grew up believing it, until a professor in college challenged it in ways I could not refute.
Edwin
First of all, regarding “foundation of our faith”: You may want to look up 1 Timothy 2:15, to find out what the foundation of truth is actually supposed to be.Actually, the OPPOSITE is true: It’s up to YOU to prove, from Scripture: the Word of God, the Foundation of our faith, to prove the catholic’s position on Mary.
Quoting anybody outside the Bible isn’t going to cut it. Quotes from “popes” isn’t going to, either.
I am quite aware of that. The point remains the same. SinginBeauty said that the Body of Christ defeated Arianism. She did not say that Protestants defeated Arianism, so your response was irrelevant.If you would read our posts and stay in context you would see that we were discussing the Arianism heresy.
No one said they did.Since this heretical belief was taught by Arius around 300AD, Protestansts had nothing to do with refuting this heresy.
That is false. There were still disagreements about the exact limits of the canon, but if you would actually bother reading the writings of Athanasius or any of the other writers of that period you would see that they repeatedly appeal to the canonical Scriptures as authoritative.Scripture was not cannonized at this time
What do you mean by “strictly Catholic”?so it was the Church who defeated Arianism. So the Body of Christ at this time was strictly Catholic.
While I agree with your general point, this particular argument is unfair. First of all, Pentecostalism is not a single denomination but many denominations and independent churches (this points up yet again the importance of defining “denomination” before you use it in an argument with Protestants). In the second place, all the major evangelical umbrella organizations I’m aware of include the Trinity as part of their statement of faith–the first two that come to mind in this country are the National Association of Evangelicals and the Evangelical Theological Society. Oneness Pentecostals may consider themselves evangelicals, but Trinitarian evangelicals do not accept them. The evangelical camp to which Trinitarians belong is not generally defined as one that also includes non-Trinitarians, so you have no case here.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?).
We all are called to be Saints…All Christians are saints. We do not need to be appointed by any pope. All believers that are alive are saints.
*]First of all, we can understand “communion of saints” as referring to ourselves as the community of believers.
*]There is a second way in which we use the term “communion of saints,” namely, to designate those who have entered through death into the fullness of God. Thus, the communion of saints in this context refers to the blessed in heaven:
*]There is a third way in which we use the term “communion of saints.” It is really a combination of the first two. This combined communion of saints includes all of us who are more or less saints (some more, some less) plus all those who have entered into full communion with God.
Thanks. I’d forgotten to mention this earlier. This is why there is not only “All Saints’ Day,” but “All Souls’ Day,” in recognition of this point.We all are called to be Saints…
I just wanted to thank everyone for your support after the post i listed above, and helping guide me through my questions. Thanks so much.Well I just wanted to tell everyone that I took the next step. I called the Priest at the church we attend and he put me in contact with the person in charge of the RCIA and I put my name on the list! I felt a deep sense of satisfaction when doing so, and I’m actually looking forward to the process. Thanks everyone.
Kevin