Mary.

[Guest LadyC]

the same way the Holy Spirit can tell the Catholics that mary is a co-redemptrix, that she was immaculately concieved, that she was without sin, that she remained a virgin til the day she died (thus violating God's command to wives, which is in and of itself a sin), etc. etc.

in other words, that ain't the Holy Spirit telling them these things. that's why protestants and catholics alike should rely on scripture to be the final authority on what they are being taught. if it aint scriptural, it ain't worth listening to.

by the way, no offense but i'm not interested in reading all the links you post... not even one of them. why? because the arguments they pose (which reflect your own) do not have their basis in scripture.

yes, God established a church. but before He established His Church (which is the body of all believers, not the body of all catholics alone), in fact, before He established the earth itself, there was God's Word.... His Son, Jesus Christ, is The Word. then, lo and behold, he inspired men with the words to transcribe, so that His Word would be available to all who would take the time to read it.

[Yahsway]

One of the pillars created by the vatican on which they base their eligious authority is called "Apostolic Succession. They claim that Peter was the first pope.Everything hinges on Peter.

The Roman catholic system bases everything on St. Peter being in Rome and being the first pope. Peter is their foundation..

Jesus said to Peter in Matt. 16:18-19 "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail againsy it." The papacy and priesthood and the whole catholic system hinges on their interpetation of this verse.

Jesus had asked Peter who He(Jesus) was, and Peter replied: Thou art the Christ the son of the living God. Then Jesus said to Peter, "And I say unto thee, thou art Peter, (Petros, meaning little peeble or moveable stone) and upon this rock(Petra, huge boulder or bedrock) I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In essence Jesus was saying Peter you are a stone,...But it is on this bedrock foundation (meaning Himself) that I will build my church.

Jesus couldnt have called Peter the rock, because that would contradict His word which says 1. Cor.3:11- "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. and also Psalms 18:31- "For who is God save the Lord?or who is a rock save our God?"

The true church was founded upon Jesus Christ, the rock. not Peter, the pebble. Where in the bible does Jesus call Peter a Pope? He doesnt. The catholic theologians cooked it up to give themselves clout. But it also gives them a problem.

Christianity started in Jerusalem, NOT Rome. Paul was an apostle to the gentiles. It was Paul who wrote the epistles to the Christians in Rome. Why would Paul need to write to them to instruct them if Peter was there? In the book of Romans, Paul salutes over 25 different members of the church at Rome but never mentions Peter. Peter wasnt there. Peter was in Jerusalem. He was the apostle to the JEWS. Gal. 2:7

When the apostles and elders met in Jerusalem to decide how to handle the question of circumcision, James was in charge. Peter spoke yes, but James handed down the decision. Paul spoke of James as a pillar Gal.2:9-14., but he rebuked Peter to the face because he was in error. Peter wasnt infallible and wasnt a pope.

Peter wasnt a pope. He even had a wife. Mark1:30.

Under Pope Hadrian 1, Constantine made the popes heir to the entire Roman Empire. The popes declared that they were the successors of St. Peter and that they held the keys to life and death.

The kings and emperors looked to Rome as the Spritual leader, and they were decieved into believing that the pope was head of the kingdom of God ON THIS PLANET.

But some centuries later some of the kings and nobelmen were not recognizing that authority and refused to pay tribute. Even some priests (such as Martin Luthur) had begun to read the scriptures for themselves in open defiance of "Church Law".

And all over Europe, brave men of God were standing up and proclaiming that the pope was anti-christ. Men such as Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer, John Knox, John Calvin, Roger Williams, and Cotton Mather who said in the Prophetic Faith of our Fathers Vol.3, p.113 quote:

"The oracles of God foretold the rising of an anti-christ, and in the Pope of Rome, all characteristics of that anti-christ are so marvellously answered that if any who read scripture do not see it, there is a marvellous blindness upon them"

During the Reformation, the Protestant christians called the papacy the dynasty of the antichrist, ruling from the vatican.

After the fiasco of Pius X11 (world war 11), the vatican needed a face lift. Preparations for the vatican 11 council were set in motion. Protestantism became unpopular. It was a no-no to talk about the vatican or its bloody history.

The pope has become the most respected man on earth. Today he is called the man of Peace. No other individual on earth gets more world-wide publicity than this man.

It reminds of that verse in Daniel 8:25 "And he shall magnify himself in his heart and by PEACE shall destroy many."

I know Pope John Paul is very ill, and may not live until the end of the year. I do not know his heart, at all appearances he seems to be a very pious man. I pray he truly knows the ONE TRUE Life and Way to eternal life. Jesus Christ.

But I think we should all keep our spiritual eyes opened for whoever is appointed to be the next Pope. I love all who for whatever reason want to line up with the teachings of the catholic church. I know as a protestant they call me an erring brother. Be that as it may, I love all the ones who have aligned themselves with the universal church. But I do not agree with its teachings.

I am a Protestant!

[BobTriez]

Greetings Bob...I am trying to do as you ask...

So, would you mind answering my question?

[ServingHim]

that's why protestants and catholics alike should rely on scripture to be the final authority on what they are being taught.

so what did the early Christians do without the Scriptures? They weren't compiled until the mid-late 300s; and then at that, the printing press wasn't invented until the 1500s...how did all those people for all those centuries rely on Scripture alone?

It's an empty discussion to answer your questions when the Bible clearly says they are false.

Bob...surprising. So you believe NO ONE of the early church. You're right...it's an empty discussion when one refuses to look at history. You know, our faith IS from history! And it is useless to discuss when one thinks that they know it all based on their own reasoning...that's all I see on this thread. I rely on the church, however horrible you all think that is. You are welcome to rely on yourselves...

I won't be back for a while, so you can rest ALL of your anti-catholic bones and go forward with your discussions...I'm sure you're not too sad to see me go. God bless... :il:

[Guest LadyC]

you were right when you said this is a fruitless conversation and you wouldn't participate in it anymore. i think i should do what you suggested you would. it is fruitless.

but, i dare ask one last question... you said the church doctrine is on a three legged stool, the Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, Magisterium.

tell me, when sacred tradition and the magisterium conflict with the sacred scripture, which prevails?

oh, and the torah existed before Christ's earthly ministry.... LONG before. i don't know dates, i'm not a history major. but i do know that with the first man and woman and for many, many generations to come, God spoke directly to His people. only very learned men knew how to read and write, and given their fear of God's wrath, i don't imagine those who were literate were prone to misleading those who were less learned. and when the occasion arose, God's punishment was witnessed by all who were around.

[BobTriez]

Bob...surprising. So you believe NO ONE of the early church. You're right...it's an empty discussion when one refuses to look at history. You know, our faith IS from history! And it is useless to discuss when one thinks that they know it all based on their own reasoning...that's all I see on this thread. I rely on the church, however horrible you all think that is. You are welcome to rely on yourselves...

I won't be back for a while, so you can rest ALL of your anti-catholic bones and go forward with your discussions...I'm sure you're not too sad to see me go. God bless... :il:

ServingHim,

While I was a bit on the "tough" side of things in my last post, I DO believe I remained respectful through it all. You are of course free to go if you please, but my intent was to invoke thought, not offence. I would encourage you to take a closer look at what you are saying though; Jesus said that there's no other way to the Father except through Him - SO, that being said, how can you follow a religion who claims absolution through the church and not through Christ ( don't deny it - that's what the RCC teaches ) ?

Think about it.....

Your's in Christ,

Bob

[Guest Berkana]

How is this not idolatry?

A closer look at some of the practices of "venerating" Mary

ServingHim: Since you are Catholic, you believe the deuterocannon (a.k.a. the Apocrypha) to be authoritative. Why then do Catholics ignore it's exhortations?

Baruch 6:3-12

And now in Babylon you will see borne upon men's shoulders gods of silver and gold and wood, which cast fear upon the pagans. Take care that you yourselves do not imitate their alien example and stand in fear of them, when you see the crowd before them and behind worshiping them. Rather, say in your hearts, "You, O YHWH, are to be worshiped!"; for my angel is with you, and he is the custodian of your lives. Their tongues are smoothed by woodworkers; they are covered with gold and silver-but they are a fraud, and cannot speak. People bring gold, as to a maiden in love with ornament, and furnish crowns for the heads of their gods. Then sometimes the priests take the silver and gold from their gods and spend it on themselves, or give part of it to the harlots on the terrace. They trick them out in garments like men, these gods of silver and gold and wood; but though they are wrapped in purple clothing, they are not safe from corrosion or insects. They wipe their faces clean of the house dust which is thick upon them.

Indeed they do these things in Babylon. I challenge you to look at each of the links above.

1 Peter 5:12-13

With the help of Silas [a.k.a. Silvanus], whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it. She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark.

(Peter wrote this when he was in Rome; we know this because Silas was last in Rome as we track him through Acts, and also because the writings of the early church fathers record that Peter wrote this from Rome.) She who is in Babylon has been unfaithful, engaging in spiritual prostitution to goddesses of old.

The Origins of Marian Devotion

Marian devotion does indeed have ancient roots. . . but the roots are Pagan, not Christian

The Catholic church declares that Mary is the Queen of Heaven:

Pope Pius XII,

in the Papal Encyclical Ad Caeli Reginam

(On Proclaiming the Queenship of Mary. Promulgated on October 11, 1954)

"From the earliest ages of the Catholic Church a Christian people, whether in time of triumph or more especially in time of crisis, has addressed prayers of petition and hymns of praise and veneration to the Queen of Heaven. [what a brazen lie.] And never has that hope wavered which they placed in the Mother of the Divine King, Jesus Christ; nor has that faith ever failed by which we are taught that Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, reigns with a mother's solicitude over the entire world, just as she is crowned in heavenly blessedness with the glory of a Queen . . . Our tongue cannot worthily praise thee, O Lady; for thou who hast borne Christ the king art exalted above the seraphim. . . Hail, O Queen of the world; hail, O Mary, Queen of us all.'

In doing so, the Catholic church has co-opted a practice God has condemned. Look:

Jeremiah 44:16-17

"We will not listen to the message you have spoken to us in the name of YHWH! We will certainly do everything we said we would: We will burn incense to the Queen of Heaven and will pour out drink offerings to her just as we and our fathers, our kings and our officials did in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem."

A catholic bishop burning incense to the Queen of Heaven:

The declaration that Mary was the "Mother of God" happened at the council of Ephesis in A.D. 431, with the support of a large party of devotees of Mary. The writings of the early church fathers say that after Jesus comitted Mary to John's care, the two of them settled in Ephesis, the location of the Temple of the goddess Artemis (one of the seven wonders of the ancient world):

Acts 19:23-28

About that time there arose a great disturbance about the Way. A silversmith named Demetrius, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought in no little business for the craftsmen. He called them together, along with the workmen in related trades, and said: "Men, you know we receive a good income from this business. And you see and hear how this fellow Paul has convinced and led astray large numbers of people here in Ephesus and in practically the whole province of Asia. He says that man-made gods are no gods at all. There is danger not only that our trade will lose its good name, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will be discredited, and the goddess herself, who is worshiped throughout the province of Asia and the world, will be robbed of her divine majesty."

Edited August 24, 2004 by Berkana

[ServingHim]

Bob...surprising.  So you believe NO ONE of the early church.    You're right...it's an empty discussion when one refuses to look at history.  You know, our faith IS from history!  And it is useless to discuss when one thinks that they know it all based on their own reasoning...that's all I see on this thread.  I rely on the church, however horrible you all think that is.  You are welcome to rely on yourselves...

I won't be back for a while, so you can rest ALL of your anti-catholic bones and go forward with your discussions...I'm sure you're not too sad to see me go.  God bless...  :il:

ServingHim,

While I was a bit on the "tough" side of things in my last post, I DO believe I remained respectful through it all.

bob, yes you were...and thank you. Frankly, I was speaking of the many others on this board. You, as always, have been kind to everyone. God bless...

God judges the heart! :il:

[ServingHim]

Jesus said that there's no other way to the Father except through Him - SO, that being said, how can you follow a religion who claims absolution through the church and not through Christ ( don't deny it - that's what the RCC teaches ) ?

bob, the Church IS the MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST!

The Church is Infallible and Supernatural - The Church IS CHRIST, THE SPOUSE, HIS BODY, the TWO BECOME ONE!!!!

Isa. 35:8, 54:13-17 - this prophecy refers to the Church as the Holy Way where sons will be taught by God and they will not err. The Church has been given the gift of infallibility when teaching about faith and morals, where her sons are taught directly by God and will not err. This gift of infallibility means that the Church is prevented from teaching error by the power of the Holy Spirit (it does not mean that Church leaders do not sin!)

Acts 9:2; 22:4; 24:14,22 - the early Church is identified as the "Way" prophesied in Isaiah 35:8 where fools will not err therein.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 - Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. Since the Catholic Church was the only Church which existed up until the Reformation, those who follow the Protestant reformers call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift.

Matt. 18:17-18 - the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 - Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus' presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Mark 8:33 - non-Catholics sometimes use this verse to down play Peter's authority. This does not make sense. In this verse, Jesus rebukes Peter to show the import of His Messianic role as the Savior of humanity. Moreover, at this point, Peter was not yet the Pope with the keys, and Jesus did not rebuke Peter for his teaching. Jesus rebuked Peter for his lack of understanding.

Luke 10:16 - whoever hears you, hears me. Whoever rejects you, rejects me. Jesus is very clear that the bishops of the Church speak with Christ's infallible authority.

Luke 22:32 - Jesus prays for Peter, that his faith may not fail. Jesus' prayer for Peter's faith is perfectly efficacious, and this allows Peter to teach the faith without error.

John 11:51-52 - some non-Catholics argue that sinners cannot have the power to teach infallibly. But in this verse, God allows Caiaphas to prophesy infallibly, even though he was evil and plotted Jesus' death. God allows sinners to teach infallibly, just as He allows sinners to become saints. As a loving Father, He exalts His children, and is bound by His own justice to give His children a mechanism to know truth from error.

1 & 2 Peter - for example, Peter denied Christ, he was rebuked by his greatest bishop (Paul), and yet he wrote two infallible encyclicals. Further, if Peter could teach infallibly by writing, why could he not also teach infallibly by preaching? And why couldn't his successors so teach as well?

Gen. to Deut.; Psalms; Paul - Moses and probably Paul were murderers and David was an adulterer and murderer, but they also wrote infallibly. God uses us sinful human beings because when they respond to His grace and change their lives, we give God greater glory and His presence is made more manifest in our sinful world.

John 14:16 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would be with the Church forever. The Spirit prevents the teaching of error on faith and morals. It is guaranteed because the guarantee comes from God Himself.

John 14:26 - Jesus promises that the Holy Spirit would teach the Church (the apostles and successors) all things regarding the faith. This means that the Church can teach us the right moral positions on such things as in vitro fertilization, cloning and other issues that are not addressed in the Bible. After all, these issues of morality are necessary for our salvation, and God would not leave such important issues to be decided by us sinners without His divine assistance.

John 16:12 - Jesus had many things to say but the apostles couldn't bear them at that point. This demonstrates that the Church's infallible doctrine develops over time. All public Revelation was completed with the death of the last apostle, but the doctrine of God's Revelation develops as our minds and hearts are able to welcome and understand it. God teaches His children only as much as they can bear, for their own good.

John 16:13 - Jesus promises that the Spirit will "guide" the Church into all truth. Our knowledge of the truth develops as the Spirit guides the Church, and this happens over time.

Acts 15:27-28 - the apostles know that their teaching is being guided by the Holy Spirit. He protects the Church from deception.

Gal. 2:11-14 - non-Catholics sometimes use this verse to diminish Peter's evident authority over the Church. This is misguided. In this verse, Paul does not oppose Peter's teaching, but his failure to live by it. Infallibility (teaching without error) does not mean impeccability (living without sinning). Peter was the one who taught infallibly on the Gentile's salvation in Acts 10,11. With this rebuke, Paul is really saying "Peter, you are our leader, you teach infallibly, and yet your conduct is inconsistent with these facst. You of all people!" The verse really underscores, and not diminishes the importance of Peter's leadership in the Church.

Eph. 3:10 - the wisdom of God is known, even to the intellectually superior angels, through the Church (not the Scriptures). This is an incredible verse, for it tells us that God's infinite wisdom comes to us through the Church. For that to happen, the Church must be protected from teaching error on faith and morals (or she wouldn't be endowed with the wisdom of God).

Eph. 3:9 - this, in fact, is a mystery hidden for all ages - that God manifests His wisdom through one infallible Church for all people.

Eph. 3:20 - God's glory is manifested in the Church by the power of the Spirit that works within the Church's leaders. As a Father, God exalts His children to roles of leadership within the body of Christ.

Eph. 5:23-27, Col. 1:18 - Christ is the head of the Church, His Bride, for which He died to make it Holy and without blemish. There is only one Church, just as Christ only has one Bride.

Eph. 5:32 - Paul calls the Church a "mystery." This means that the significance of the Church as the kingdom of God in our midst cannot be understood by reason alone. Understanding the Church also requires faith. "Church" does not mean a building of believers. That is not a mystery. Non-catholics often view church as mere community, but not the supernatural mystery of Christ physically present among us.

1 Thess. 5:21 - Paul commands us to test everything. But we must have something against which to test. This requires one infallible guide that is available to us, and this guide is the Catholic Church, whose teachings on faith and morals have never changed.

1 Tim. 3:15 - Paul says the apostolic Church (not Scripture) is the pillar and foundation of the truth. But for the Church to be the pinnacle and foundation of truth, she must be protected from teaching error, or infallible. She also must be the Catholic Church, whose teachings on faith and morals have not changed for over 2,000 years. God loves us so much that He gave us a Church that infallibly teaches the truth so that we have the fullness of the means of salvation in His only begotten Son.

Matt. to Rev. - finally, we must note that not all Christian doctrines are explicit in Scripture (for example, the dogma of the Blessed Trinity). However, infallibility is strongly inferred from the foregoing passages. Protestants should ask themselves why they accept the Church's teaching on the three persons of the Trinity, the two natures of Christ in one divine person, and the New Testament canon of Scripture (all defined by the Catholic Church), but not other teachings regarding the Eucharist, Mary, the saints, and purgatory?

Something to ponder...I know you think I'm crazy...and I'm okay with that. You are on a journey just as everyone else is, and Christ knows exactly where we all are at this point in our lives. He doesn't chose YOU over ME (or vice versa). He loves us ALL...and wants us ALL to be in the ONE FOLD, with ONE SHEPHERD. Christ is the Shepherd, but Christ TOLD PETER (COMMANDED HIM, in fact) to FEED HIS SHEEP! Wow...a mere moral man to FEED CHRIST'S SHEEP. Wonder how Peter does that today? Why did Peter & the others chose Matth'ias to replace Judas' "OFFICE" (Acts 1:20)? I've yet to hear anyone explain this to me from the anti-catholic POV.

The great Augustine, whom I know that ALL Christians look to for the ancient faith, said ... "If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them [the bishops of Rome] from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said,

[ServingHim]

The declaration that Mary was the "Mother of God" happened at the council of Ephesis, with the support of a large party of devotees of Mary.

do YOU believe that Mary IS the Mother of God? Why, or why not?