To set the Record straight Catholics do not worship Mary!

  • Thread starter Thread starter ufamtobie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmmm, so why then did they separate in the Great Schism and today don’t recognize your Eucharist as valid and disregard the Supreme Pontificate and dismiss the Catholic dogmas of Mary?
Why are you trying to deflect the mainline topic of discussion?

Do you even really have a clue about what you are even talking about here? Can you point to a single Orthodox Council meeting that convenes after the partially accepted Synod in Jerusalem on March, 1672 that formally condems Catholic Marian doctrine that do not come until centuries later?

Catholic Dogma of Immaculate Conception declared in 1854
Catholic Dogma of Mary’s Assumption into Heaven declared in 1950

The Orthodox suffer from the same lack of unifying authority as do the Protestants. They often fight among themselves and boycott each others calls’ for meetings etc. So it is really difficult to really know precisely what the “official” Orthodox position is on any newer doctrines - since they do not have a unified consensus. Ask them how many books are in their bible and some will point to the Catholic cannon and some will point to that plus a few other books and still others will point to even more works. They are in sore need of reunification with Rome to prevent further divisions.

So given the lack of cohesion among Orthodox it is hard to know precisely what the Orthodox accept and reject from more contemporary Catholic teaching since they have not had a council meeting in over 4 centuries by which to state what their official position is!

But more germane to the OP - when was the last time Protestants all came together to unify their 32,000 different sects and denominations and take each to the woodshed on their contradicting solas and beliefs? It’s a rabble.

Does the secular head of the governing committee of World Council of Churches (WCC) speak as the Protestant Pope for you? 😃

Please stick to the OP and account for how you can rationally claim an infallable self interpreting scripture (sola scriptura) in the face of 32,000+ Protestant Denominations at odds with each other all while at the same time condeming the pope for claiming infallibility? You have a very conspicuous double standard when it comes to bible interpretation.

And the real question is why would you trust your eternity to your own scriptural competence when you can’t even adequately defend your beliefs against mild inquiries presented by Catholics in these forums? 🤷

James
 
Why are you trying to deflect the mainline topic of discussion?

Do you even really have a clue what you are even talking about? Can you point to a single Orthodox Council meeting that convenes after the partially accepted Synod in Jerusalem on March, 1672 that formally condems Catholic Marian doctrine that do not come until centuries later?

Catholic Dogma of Immaculate Conception declared in 1854
Catholic Dogma of Mary’s Assumption into Heaven declared in 1950

The Orthodox suffer being seperated from the Catholic Church but substantially the same apostolic faith suffer from the same lack of unifying authority as do Protestants. They often fight among themselves and boycott each others calls’ for meetings etc. So it is really difficult to really know precisely what the “official” Orthodox position is on any newer doctrines - since they do not have a unified consensus. Ask them how many books are in their bible and some will point to the Catholic cannon and some will point to that plus a few other books and still others will point to even more works.

So given the lack of cohesion among Orthodox it is hard to know precisely what the Orthodox accept and reject from more contemporary Catholic teaching since they have not had a council meeting in over 4 centuries!

When was the last time Protestants all came together to unify their 32,000 different sects and denominations? Does the secular leader of the governing committee of World Council of Churches (WCC) speak as the Protestant Pope for you? 😃

Stick to the OP and account for how you can rationally claim an infallable self interpreting scripture (sola scriptura) in the face of 32,000+ Protestant Denominations at odds withe each other all while at the same time condeming the pope for claiming infallibility?

Why would you trust your eternity to your own scriptural competence when you can’t even adequately defend your beliefs against mild inquiries in these forums? 🤷

James
Since this thread is about Mary worship, can I ask a question? I found this quote on another thread. Is this notion commonly held in the RCC?

*Simeon Blessed them and said to Mary His Mother: “This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Isreal, a sign that will be opposed and YOU YOURSELF shall be PIERCED with a SWORD-so that the THOUGHTS of MANY HEARTS be LAID BARE.”

Mary is is going to be Pierced with a Sword FOR THE MANY hearts yours mine and the china man overseas, everyone!

I ask you don’t go there and say that Virgin Mary was not Pierced for the Many when the Bible said she will be.*
 
Simeon Blessed them and said to Mary His Mother: “This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Isreal, a sign that will be opposed and YOU YOURSELF shall be PIERCED with a SWORD-so that the THOUGHTS of MANY HEARTS be LAID BARE.”
Mary is is going to be Pierced with a Sword FOR THE
MANY hearts yours mine and the china man overseas, everyone!
I ask you don’t go there and say that Virgin Mary was not Pierced for the Many when the Bible said she will be.
I’m not sure what you’re asking. . .

The first paragraph is Scripture, from the gospel of Luke. Certainly we believe the gospel. Scripture does say, directly, that Mary will be pierced with a sword so that the thoughts of many hearts will be laid bare.

Now, what does that mean? It is a prophecy, of course, but it does say Mary will be pierced so that the thoughts of many hearts will be laid bare. There is no getting around that passage. . .it refers to Mary. It doesn’t say, “And your child shall be pierced with a sword” (though of course Jesus was pierced by the soldier’s lance). . .it says Mary. And right there that should give some Protestants pause because if Mary was just a vessel, why would her being pierced lead to something so momentous as having the thoughts of many hearts laid bare?
 
And I would suggest that you read Luke 11 in its entirety…and digest the meaning of the entire chapter, as opposed to trying to take one snippet out of scripture and twist it to your design.

Likewise, I’m sure… 🙂
You know, I re-read Luke 11 for context. What was your point to nbtb? It says Jesus was casting out demons just before she spoke. Did one of them run into the woman who elevated Mary? I remember when Paul silenced the demon possessed woman in Acts who was proclaiming that Paul was a prophet of the most high God. He cast the demon out of her and she shut up. Then after Jesus corrects the woman elevating Mary, he rebukes her generation as wicked for always seeking signs. Would weeping statues or Jesus-imprinted tacos qualify? What do you see in Luke 11 besides Jesus’ correction of this woman?
 
You know, I re-read Luke 11 for context. What was your point to nbtb? It says Jesus was casting out demons just before she spoke. Did one of them run into the woman who elevated Mary? I remember when Paul silenced the demon possessed woman in Acts who was proclaiming that Paul was a prophet of the most high God. He cast the demon out of her and she shut up. Then after Jesus corrects the woman elevating Mary, he rebukes her generation as wicked for always seeking signs. Would weeping statues or Jesus-imprinted tacos qualify? What do you see in Luke 11 besides Jesus’ correction of this woman?
Maybe that he or she should “extract cranium from rectal defilade or arrange for a abdominal plasiectomy” so as to see where he/she/ it is going when in motion…

Simply put: You misunderstood the entire chapter, as did he/she/it, or you sought to “interpret” it to fit your agenda…whatever that may be.

Bottom line though: You missed the points, and if I have to explain it, you wouldn’t understand it anyway… 😃

Oh, by the way…your trite allusions to attempted “sarcasm” paint you well for what you really are…😦 Christ, I am sure, is most “thrilled” with you…for sure…yeah, totally dude…:rolleyes:
 
Simply put: You misunderstood the entire chapter, or you sought to “interpret” it to fit your agenda…whatever that may be.

Bottom line though: You missed the points, and if I have to explain it, you wouldn’t understand it anyway… 😃

Oh, by the way…your trite allusions to attempted “sarcasm” paint you well for what you really are…😦 Christ, I am sure, is most “thrilled” with you…for sure…yeah, totally dude…:rolleyes:
I don’t think you have anything to say about that chapter!
 
I don’t think you have anything to say about that chapter!
And I’ll say that you are entitled to your opinion…even if you are wrong. 😃

And you are wrong…both where I am concerned, and where Luke 11 is concerned…

Care to “try again”?

Oh…I’ll be back in a few… I have to take the dogs out for a short walk…
 
I’m not sure what you’re asking. . .

The first paragraph is Scripture, from the gospel of Luke. Certainly we believe the gospel. Scripture does say, directly, that Mary will be pierced with a sword so that the thoughts of many hearts will be laid bare.

Now, what does that mean? It is a prophecy, of course, but it does say Mary will be pierced so that the thoughts of many hearts will be laid bare. There is no getting around that passage. . .it refers to Mary. It doesn’t say, “And your child shall be pierced with a sword” (though of course Jesus was pierced by the soldier’s lance). . .it says Mary. And right there that should give some Protestants pause because if Mary was just a vessel, why would her being pierced lead to something so momentous as having the thoughts of many hearts laid bare?
All right. I’m glad that is brought up. Two questions:
Was Mary physically pierced?
How do you see the fulfillment of that prophecy? How were the thoughts of many hearts laid bare?
 
And I’ll say that you are entitled to your opinion…even if you are wrong. 😃

And you are wrong…both where I am concerned, and where Luke 11 is concerned…

Care to “try again”?

Oh…I’ll be back in a few… I have to take the dogs out for a short walk…
I don’t have to try again. You just proved my point, Rob. You don’t have anything to say about that chapter, so you chose sarcasm to divert attention. The woman who put the focus on Mary gave Jesus the perfect opportunity to bale the RCC out of it’s heresy. He could have invited people to pray to her once she was gone, or He could have mentioned that she was so blessed she had no sin in her…but lo and behold, he took the focus right off of Mary. But let’s not worry about that verse…it’s only Scripture! We have popes to take care of such bothersome matters. Yuck.
 
Since this thread is about Mary worship, can I ask a question? I found this quote on another thread. Is this notion commonly held in the RCC?

*Simeon Blessed them and said to Mary His Mother: “This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Isreal, a sign that will be opposed and YOU YOURSELF shall be PIERCED with a SWORD-so that the THOUGHTS of MANY HEARTS be LAID BARE.”

Mary is is going to be Pierced with a Sword FOR THE MANY hearts yours mine and the china man overseas, everyone!

I ask you don’t go there and say that Virgin Mary was not Pierced for the Many when the Bible said she will be.*
I am not sure I quite get what you are asking for.

Let me assume you want to know what the scriptures mean here:

Well its very simple really and has to do with the very plain scriptural fact that Mary IS the new Eve (as well as the Queen Mother of Heaven). You see as new Eve and helper of the new Adam (Jesus) Mary DID have to co-suffer with Christ to share in the restoration of humankind. It was the righting of ancient wrongs - a reversal of the original disobedience - both the male and the feminine had to suffer. Mary’s was not in the same equivalent dimension her Divine Son suffered (that was beyond her human nature) did to the extent of her fullness of God’s spirit (full of grace) and in her sinless human dimension. This is why it is correct to call her co-redemptrix. God too had to suffer also so He could fully “be with us” as Emanuel in intimately joining Himself to humanity. Mary is the fulfillment of Abraham’s faith in fully accepting God - so much so that Abraham was willing to give up his only blood son Isaac to be sacrificed. Mary did the same thing - but God did not withhold His hand this time! Mary gave up EVERYTHING she was to God from the very beginning in her great fiat “let it be done according to Thy Word”. Most don’t also get it why God so cares for widows - Mary was a widow. And why Jesus gave “The Woman” (an honor title) to all Christians represented by John. We are Her seed.

When one comprehends the depth and fullness of the OT and its fulfillment in the NT one MUST see Mary’s role as Arc of the Covenant (bearer of God’s Word); one MUST see Mary as “Daughter of Zion” - Spouse of Yahweh, Mother of the People of God (Mother Zion), the Virgin Israel; one MUST see Mary in the character and face of all of Zion’s strongest Jewish Women.

See Mary in ALL the strong women of Israel: Sarah (not a slave mother/ Mary free of slavery to sin) , Rebecca (Mary is the seed of multitudes of Christians), Rachael (Mary’s son is sold for silver like Rachel’s but also becomes a savior), Miriam (Mary is associated with God’s High Priest just as the sister of the Moses), Deborah (Mary’s Magnificat mirrors Deborah’s Song of Praise in Judges 5), Ruth (both handmaids and servants), Abigail (both Queen of the House of David yet both servants of The Lord I Samuel 25:41), Esther (both as Queens are instrumental in defeating the King’s enemies).
OT-NT Parallels of Mary as Daughter of Zion:
“Rejoice, Daughter of Zion, the King of Israel, Yahweh, is IN you. Do not be afraid Zion, Yahweh your God is in your womb as a strong Savior.” [Zephaniah 3:14-17]

"Rejoice so highly favored. The Lord is WITH you. Do not be afraid, Mary … Listen, you are to conceive in your womb and bear a son and you must name him “Yahweh Savior.” He will reign [Luke 1:28-33].
Mary is also the “Anawim” - the OT Hebrew name for the “poor of God” - the faithful “remnant” taught by God to live in total dependence on Him - “Blessed are the poor for the Kingdom shall be theirs”, “Hail full of Grace”, “I am a lowly handmaid of the Lord”. In fact Mary is the living Beatitude.

Now that we can see that Mary is the fulfillment of the OT prophesies and prefigurements it is easy to see how she is pierced for our sins in sorrow. Catholics have long recognized the fulfillment of Simeon’s prophesies in what we call The 7 Dolors of Mary or The Seven Sorrows of Mary.
  • First Septet: The Prophecy of Simeon.
  • Second Septet: The Flight into Egypt.
  • Third Septet: The Missing of Jesus (in the temple)
  • Fourth Septet: Mary Meets Jesus on the Way of the Cross
  • Fifth Septet: Jesus Dies on the Cross
  • Sixth Septet: Jesus is Taken from the Cross (and laid in her arms)
  • Seventh Septet: Jesus is Laid in the Tomb
Luke 2:19 And Mary kept all these things, reflecting on them in her heart.
40.png
Lamentations:
Weeping she hath wept in the night, and her tears are on her cheeks: there is none to comfort her among all them that were dear to her: all her friends have despised her, and are become her enemies. Lamentations 1:2

To what shall I compare thee? Or to what shall I liken thee, O daughter of Jerusalem? To what shall I equal thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter Sion? Lamentations 2:13
James
 
**THE PROBLEM IS ‘FUNDAMENTALISM’ **
Code:
 Mary obviously is to be revered. But, frankly, too many well-meaning Catholics carry it too far and do worship her. And some of these are otherwise sophisticated, even theologians and priests.     

 Hm! I find that hard-line Catholics and Bible-thumping Protestants share the same disease. They both are 'fundamenalists'. They both are eager to quote bits and pieces of scripture to prove their points. I love the Bible, but - please! - it contains a whole lot of stuff that shouldn't be taken literally.

 There are millions of us out here, sincere and devout Christians, who do our best to follow Christ, but simply don't insist that one church or this or that belief system has a monopoly on the truth. I know that provides comfort and boosts the ego of many who think like that but I believe it is a sin - well, at least a mistaken view. (God will likely forgive, so relax.) The Bible clearly states that God's ways are not our ways and that his ways are beyond our understanding. So, why do we keep on arguing that we have access to the truth and that those who don't believe as we do don't? We're all pilgrims seeking to be worthy disciples. I hope so, anyway.

 One of my pleasures in life over the years - I'm elderly - has been to participate in Bible study groups where different people have presented different interpretations of this or that passage. I think that must make God smile. I'm quite sure he isn't some narrow-minded, mean old dogmatist who doesn't tolerate and actually enjoy honest discussion of the mysteries of existence. After all, he gave us a brain to use and the Bible challenges us to walk by faith and not by knowledge. That's what I've tried to do all these years. Try it. You'll like it.
 
There are millions of us out here, sincere and devout Christians, who do our best to follow Christ, but simply don’t insist that one church or this or that belief system has a monopoly on the truth. I know that provides comfort and boosts the ego of many who think like that but I believe it is a sin - well, at least a mistaken view.

(God will likely forgive, so relax.) The Bible clearly states that God’s ways are not our ways and that his ways are beyond our understanding. So, why do we keep on arguing that we have access to the truth and that those who don’t believe as we do don’t? We’re all pilgrims seeking to be worthy disciples. I hope so, anyway.
Thanks for your opinion Roy - there are literally billions of them out there. And yes God’s ways are above our ways - far above mere human opinions. God knew this and this is why He revealed to His Church the one opinion that is correct - His.

And if one has read the opinions of all the Early Church Fathers they agree that there is only ONE Correct Belief and only One True Faith and One Church - The Catholic Church:

The Church is Visible and One

“Those, therefore, who desert the preaching of the Church, call in question the knowledge of the holy presbyters…It behooves us, therefore, to avoid their doctrines, and to take careful heed lest we suffer any injury from them; but to flee to the Church, and be brought up in her bosom, and be nourished with the Lord’s Scriptures. For the Church has been planted as a garden (paradisus) in this world; therefore says the Spirit of God, ‘Thou mayest freely eat from every tree of the garden,’ that is, Eat ye from every Scripture of the Lord; but ye shall not eat with an uplifted mind, nor touch any heretical discord." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5:20 (A.D. 180).

“I shall at once go on, then, to exhibit the peculiarities of the Christian society, that, as I have refuted the evil charged against it, I may point out its positive good. We are a body knit together as such by a common religious profession, by unity of discipline, and by the bond of a common hope. We meet together as an assembly and congregation, that, offering up prayer to God as with united force, we may wrestle with Him in our supplications. This violence God delights in…We assemble to read our sacred writings, if any peculiarity of the times makes either forewarning or reminiscence needful. However it be in that respect, with the sacred words we nourish our faith, we animate our hope, we make our confidence more steadfast; and no less by inculcations of God’s precepts we confirm good habits.” Tertullian, Apology, 39:1 (A.D. 197).

“To sum up all in one word–what the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are not of the world. The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible.” Letter to Diognetus, 6:1 (A.D. 200).

“You may learn, if you will, the crowning wisdom of the all-holy Shepherd and Instructor, of the omnipotent and paternal Word, when He figuratively represents Himself as the Shepherd of the sheep…Such are the promises of the good Shepherd. Feed us, the children, as sheep. Yea, Master, fill us with righteousness, Thine own pasture; yea, O Instructor, feed us on Thy holy mountain the Church, which towers aloft, which is above the clouds, which touches heaven.” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, I:9 (A.D. 202).

We are not to give heed to those who say, Behold here is Christ, but show him not in the Church, which is filled with brightness from the East even unto the West; which is filled with true light; is the ‘pillar and ground of truth’; in which, as a whole, is the whole advent of the Son of Man, who saith to all men throughout the universe, ‘Behold, I am with you all the days of life even unto the consumption of the world.’” Origen, Commentary on Matthew, Tract 30 (A.D. 244).

"The spouse of Christ cannot be adulterous; she is uncorrupted and pure. She knows one home; she guards with chaste modesty the sanctity of one couch. She keeps us for God. She appoints the sons whom she has born for the kingdom. Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress, is separated from the promises of the Church; nor can he who forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is a stranger; he is profane; he is an enemy. He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother. If any one could escape who was outside the ark of Noah, then he also may escape who shall be outside of the Church. The Lord warns, saying, ‘He who is not with me is against me, and he who gathereth not with me scattereth.’ Cyprian, On Unity, 6 (A.D. 251).

“Separate a ray of the sun from its body of light, its unity does not allow a division of light; break a branch from a tree,–when broken, it will not be able to bud; cut off the stream from its fountain, and that which is cut off dries up. Thus also the Church, shone over with the light of the Lord, sheds forth her rays over the whole world, yet it is one light which is everywhere diffused, nor is the unity of the body separated. Her fruitful abundance spreads her branches over the whole world. She broadly expands her rivers, liberally flowing, yet her head is one, her source one; and she is one mother, plentiful in the results of fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her spirit we are animated.” Cyprian, Unity of the Church, 5 (A.D. 256).

[continued]

James
 
[continued from above]

“‘A city built upon a mountain cannot be hid’ The light, or lamp of Christ, is not now to be hidden under a bushel, nor to be concealed by any covering of the synagogue, but, hung on the wood of the Passion, it will give an everlasting light to those that dwell in the church. He also admonishes the apostles to shine with like splendour, that by the admiration of their deeds, praise may be given to God.” Hilary of Poitiers, Commentary on Matthew, 5:13 (A.D. 355).

“‘And his throne as the sun before me.’ Understand, by the ‘throne’ of Christ, the Church; for in it he rests. The Church of Christ, then, he says, shall be refulgent and enlighten all under heaven, and be abiding as the sun and the moon. For this passage says so: ‘His throne as the sun before me, and as the moon perfect forever, and a faithful witness in heaven.’” Athanasius, Exposition in the Psalms, 88 (ante A.D. 373).

“‘And in the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be prepared on the top of the mountains’ The house of the Lord, ‘prepared on the top of the mountains,’ is the church, according to the declaration of the apostle, ‘Know,’ he says, ‘how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God’ Whose foundations are on the holy mountains, for it is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets. One also of these mountains was Peter, upon which the rock the Lord promised to build his church.” Basil, Commentary on Isaiah, 2:66 (A.D. 375).

“Not therefore on that Mount Zion does Isaias look down upon the valley, but on that holy mountain which is the church, that mountain which lifts its head over the whole Roman world under heaven…a church which is throughout the world, wherein there is one Catholic church.” Optatus of Mileve, Against the Donatist, 3:2 (A.D. 384).

"Petilianus said: ‘If you declare that yon hold the Catholic Church, the word ‘catholic’ is merely the Greek equivalent for entire or whole. But it is clear that you are not in the whole, because you have gone aside into the part.’ Augustine answered: I too indeed have attained to a very slight knowledge of the Greek language, scarcely to be called knowledge at all, yet I am not shameless in saying that I know that means not ‘one,’ but ‘the whole;’ and that means “according to the whole:” whence the Catholic Church received its name, according to the saying of the Lord, ‘It is not for you to know the times, which the Father hath put in His own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole earth.’ Here you have the origin of the name ‘Catholic.’ Augustine, Answer to Letters of Petilian, 2:38 [90] (A.D. 400).

"It is an easier thing for the sun to be quenched, than for the church to be made invisible." John Chrysostom, In illud: vidi Dom. (ante A.D. 407).

For the church is in lofty and conspicuous, and well known to all men in every place. It is also lofty in another sense; for her thoughts have nothing earthly, but she is above all that is earthly, and with the eyes of the understanding, looks upon, as far as it is possible, the glory of God, and glories in doctrines truly exalted, concerning God … Wherefore, with justice may the house of God be called a mountain (known) by the understanding, and it is perfectly visible, as being raised upon the hills; and one may say of it, and with great cause, what as a notable illustration was uttered by the mouth of the Saviour: ‘A city placed upon a hill cannot be hidden’” Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Isaias, (ante A.D. 429).

More here: scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html#scripture_VI

James
 
CENTRALFLJAMES

Hi. Gosh, I don’t want to offend you, but you’re the sort of Christian I mean. This notion of One True Church gets in the way of helpful discussion. I know you don’t have the same respect for individual opinions in the way that I do, but fortunately we have separation of church and state.
Code:
 A few centuries ago I probably would have been tried for heresy and burned at the stake because the Catholic Church (or bigoted Protestants in some instances) would have considered me very dangerous. I recall how Thomas Aquinas wrote that heretics should be delivered up to civil authorities to be executed because their heresies might infect others!

  Oh, and one of my ancestors (I come from Catholic and Protestant ancestry, both) fled Belgium in the 16th century because he had become a Huguenot and he and his family had to leave before the local heretic-hunters caught him, tortured and likely killed him. So, he and his family crossed the channel to join the Puritans in England, then to early Massachusetts.

   Isn't it a shame that religion has been such a source of hatred and war? We see it today with Muslims who think their scripture is the only correct one and we all had better conform or watch out. We see it with Jews who are convinced that God is in the real estate business and has given every acre of the Holy Land to them. Some Catholics and some born-again Protestants live under the same sort of delusion. Sad, sad, sad. We should be living together in mutual respect. When somebody tells me he or she embraces a different faith, my response is: "That's interesting. Tell me more." 

 I believe that there are different paths to God. I like my path, though that has changed some over the years, and I respect your path and that of others. Except, in all honesty, I am not happy with those who consider their faith right and all the others wrong. Frankly, I don't care what the early church Fathers said. Most of them believed that the world was flat along with many other ideas that we now know are foolish. 

  Sorry, to get off the topic. Yes. Mary must have been a superb young woman. As for her saying 'yes' to bearing Jesus, I don't recall that she had a choice. But "Hail Mary' - except that I don't repeat the second part of that pray which is not found in scripture.. My prayers are directed to God the Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, my hope and my salvation. But I'm sure He isn't troubled by those who say all of the "Hail Mary' sincerely.
 
I don’t have to try again. You just proved my point, Rob.
I would have to say that is “wishful thinking” on your part. 🙂
You don’t have anything to say about that chapter, so you chose sarcasm to divert attention.
I didn’t see anything “sarcastic” in my response… I was just making a simple statement… Perhaps you should try being a little more “Christian” and a lot less “defensive”…and stop trying to read emotion into a post that contains none… Trust me, if I wanted to get “sarcastic”… I really could do that well enough that there would be absolutely no doubt that I was… OK?
The woman who put the focus on Mary gave Jesus the perfect opportunity to bale the RCC out of it’s heresy. He could have invited people to pray to her once she was gone, or He could have mentioned that she was so blessed she had no sin in her…but lo and behold, he took the focus right off of Mary.
Actually, no he didn’t, but that is the point that you missed…
But let’s not worry about that verse…it’s only Scripture!
Hmmm, I always thought it was “the inerrant word of God”… 🙂 But I guess you would rather attempt to be sarcastic or denigrate scriptures…
We have popes to take care of such bothersome matters. Yuck.
My friend, once again you do a very “un-Christian” thing or too. You show your abject lack of knowledge regarding the Pope, and the Church as well… And you show your hostility and bigotry openly… I think that is very sad. I rather doubt that Christ views that kind of conduct as “appropriate” for a person who claims to be one of His…😦

Maybe a little later…I’ll come back and give you my take on the chapter…
 
And I’ll say that you are entitled to your opinion…even if you are wrong. 😃

And you are wrong…both where I am concerned, and where Luke 11 is concerned…

Care to “try again”?

Oh…I’ll be back in a few… I have to take the dogs out for a short walk…
Are you saying that Titus 3:5 doesn’t say anything about being saved by God’s mercy alone?
 
And so what?? I never said that icons are wrong and idolotry. Those are your words and your assumptions. Who’s ignorant here? You never bothered to answer my question from earlier either. You need to spend more time showing us how it is that the Catholic church is the Church Christ founded and far less time trying to find bits and pieces to insult our intelligence. I’m sure that you also believe that all Protestants are sola scriptura as well.
 
I would have to say that is “wishful thinking” on your part. 🙂

I didn’t see anything “sarcastic” in my response… I was just making a simple statement… Perhaps you should try being a little more “Christian” and a lot less “defensive”…and stop trying to read emotion into a post that contains none… Trust me, if I wanted to get “sarcastic”… I really could do that well enough that there would be absolutely no doubt that I was… OK?

Actually, no he didn’t, but that is the point that you missed…

Hmmm, I always thought it was “the inerrant word of God”… 🙂 But I guess you would rather attempt to be sarcastic or denigrate scriptures…

My friend, once again you do a very “un-Christian” thing or too. You show your abject lack of knowledge regarding the Pope, and the Church as well… And you show your hostility and bigotry openly… I think that is very sad. I rather doubt that Christ views that kind of conduct as “appropriate” for a person who claims to be one of His…😦

Maybe a little later…I’ll come back and give you my take on the chapter…
"…our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places."–Eph 5

That is why I get angry about the heresy I see in you. There is a colossal unseen battle going on for the souls of men and women and their minds. Satan hates the word of God and will do all he can to change it, cast doubt on it, undermine it and add to it.
 
"…our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places."–Eph 5

That is why I get angry about the heresy I see in you. There is a colossal unseen battle going on for the souls of men and women and their minds. Satan hates the word of God and will do all he can to change it, cast doubt on it, undermine it and add to it.
That is very true.
 
That is very true.
It is why the JW’s have the Watchtower and their own translation of the Bible. It is why the Mormon’s have the Book of Mormon. And it is why the Roman Catholics have their popes creating “truth” equal to scripture. It’s as old as serpent in the garden of Eden.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top