Is Maryology Idolatry?

[Spock]

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

That's what happens when someone is getting their talking points from a book. They can't actually refute your points, because they don't own the argument they are making.  It's not the result of their own study, but the result of just parroting someone else from a book.  Explains why my posts are met with silence.

To be honest Scott Hahn is supposed to be Roman Catholicism's, #1 apologist, he is supposed to be the best apologist they have, and frankly, Hahn's arguments are full holes.  It's worse than Swiss cheese.   If he is the best they've got, I am not impressed.

Well, as we can see, people like Judas here and my brother hang on to every word and there doesn't seem to be any interest by either men to compare scripture with Scott Hahn's words because what Scott says, rules. If Scott says RCC evolving oral traditions rule, and he cites one verse from Paul as their authority, then they rule- don't bother showing me the word.  

Maybe Hahn can be commended for finding one verse from Paul to try to support his position that RCC oral traditions can rule.  He could have not had any scripture to support this position, which would have been worse, don't you think? 

 

[kwikphilly]

Blessings Judas

    I'm sorry I was not able to reply before now but I was catching up & I thinkj I could not have sad it any better than Shiloh did

Quote

Well, it's more than that.  Catholic "doctrine"  is theologically inconsistent with what is in the Bible.  For example:

Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. But according to the Roman cult, Mary was born sinless and lived sinless. Funny how Paul forgot to mention that.

The Roman cult says that Mary remained a perpetual virgin and that the references to Jesus brothers and sisters are either cousins or children of Joseph by a previous wife or maybe a different "Mary."

The Bible is clear that Jesus had brothers and sisters.

"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?" (Matt. 13:55-56).  The word for "cousin" is "anepsios"  used only one time in the NT in Col. 4:10.   The word "brother" is adelphos and does not refer to cousins, regardless of what the Roman cult says.   In fact, that is further refuted because the text refers to his brothers and sisters, and adelephe is used for sisters, so it cannot refer to cousin as as both adelphos and adelphe refer to those born of the same womb.

Those are just a couple of examples of how Roman Catholic theology isn't only not only found in the Bible, but theologically contradicts what the Bible says.

Quote

  Sola Scriptura is doctrine and NOT man made tradition because Protestants say so. 

No, as you can see in my previous post, that was NOT the argument for Sola Scriptura being doctrine.  It has been demonstrated that Sola Scriptura is demonstrated in Scripture and that the Bible is our authority for claiming it.

Quote

IF Catholic doctrine MUST be found in the bible than Protestant doctrine MUST be found in scripture. But that's not the case. Kwik you admitted that Sola Scriptura is not found in scripture. That's why no one can quote a bible verse. 

No, that is not we determine how a doctrine is found in the Bible.    I cannot quote a verse that mentions the Trinity.   But the Trinity is a Bible doctrine because we can find the Trinity in operation.   There are no discussions or teachings on the Trinity in the Bible, but all mainline denominations affirm the Trinity.    So the argument that we must produce a verse in the Bible doesn't hold any water.

Quote

Catholic Doctrine to be valid must be found in scripture. 

Any doctrine, to be valid, as to be found in Scripture.   The errant doctrines of the Roman cult espouses about Mary are not only NOT found in Scripture, but actively contradict what we find in Scripture                                        Shiloh

Yes,I could not have said it better......I did say you will not find a verse that says SOLA SCRIPTURA but the point is that you will not find where it condradicts anything in Scripture either but it is demonstrated with continuity

Quote

2 Corinthians 13:1

 

KJ21

This is the third time I am coming to you. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”

Jesus quoted Scripture as the basis for His own teachings,His ethics were the same as w4hat was already Written...As you will find throughout the Gospels of Matthew,Mark & Luke   He warned AGAINST replacing it with something else or subtracting or adding to it(As the rcc does) The Jewish leaders of His Day added to it with their Oral Traditions   Matt5:17,5:43-44,13:1-9,22:29& Mark  7:1-12     https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/on-the-infallibility-of-scripture/

"Destroying faith in the Bible as God’s Word will open the door today to a “new” Tradition".....(quoted from above link)

                                                                                                                   With love-in Christ,Kwik

[Marilyn C]

Hi Judas,

I do appreciate a lot of Scott Hahn`s teaching. Now recently I went to a funeral of my friend`s husband. It was a Catholic funeral, & though I didn't agree with some of the mass part, the minister`s homily was excellent. He focussed on the Lord, His sacrificial death & resurrection. Actually most of the service was focussed on the Lord. So uplifting. We sang the Lord`s prayer & also `How Great Thou art.` The speeches were kept for when people had a cuppa etc.

Now my question to you is `If God made Mary perfect just after conception, then why couldn`t He do that for everyone?

regards, Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

18 minutes ago, Davida said:

Interesting Marilyn , that sure wasn't the case at the Funeral mass I went to recently. No mention of Jesus at all, only Mary.

Hi Davida,

It depends a lot on the people involved whether they know the Lord or not. Same in all of man`s organisations.

regards, Marilyn.

[SisterActs2]

Hello brothers and sisters

I wholeheartedly concur with shiloh357.  Just a small point - why would Mary not have gone on to have other children?  Of course she did.  She was a married woman.  (Maybe someone has already said this.)  The Bible calls her blessed.  However, I also am blessed, having been born again and now a daughter of the Most High.

 

[4LdKHVCzRDj2]

33 minutes ago, SisterActs2 said:

why would Mary not have gone on to have other children?  Of course she did.  She was a married woman.

I believe the same:

"But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit." - Matthew 1:20

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

5 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Now my question to you is `If God made Mary perfect just after conception, then why couldn`t He do that for everyone

We can ask Why does God....... questions till the cows come home. He's God and He decides what He does and how He does it. We have to follow the rules he sets out. He doesn't have to follow them. I've heard different speakers give various reasons. Mary is sometimes referred to as the new ark of the covenant. 

In the OT the ark was made from pure gold. Inside it where three items. The 10 commandments (The Word), a jar of Mana (living bread), and Aaron's staff (Priesthood). 

Mary obviously could not be made of gold but God could still purify her perfectly. Because inside her would be the same things that the OT ark carries except Perfected. In her womb she carried the Word made Flesh, our living bread and our High Priest. 

So why did God choose immaculate conception for Mary. I don't know, the analogy I gave is one; I think makes sense and can be drawn from scripture. I think that because Jesus was going to get his human body from Mary that it would have to be perfect and without sin. Otherwise Jesus would be receiving flesh tainted with sin. 

Here is why I believe in the immaculate conception. And most if not all of what I am about to say is highly contested here I know that. 

I believe scripture teaches that Jesus created a visible authoritative Church. He built this Church upon Peter and the Aposltes and promised the Holy Spirit to protect and guide the Church. I believe that Church is the Catholic Church.

So if I believe scripture is the Word of God than I have to believe that the Catholic Church is Christs Church being guided and protected in all its dogmas by the Holy Spirit. 

Cheers and God Bless

[Marilyn C]

53 minutes ago, Judas Machabeus said:

 

So why did God choose immaculate conception for Mary. I don't know, the analogy I gave is one; I think makes sense and can be drawn from scripture. I think that because Jesus was going to get his human body from Mary that it would have to be perfect and without sin. Otherwise Jesus would be receiving flesh tainted with sin. 

 

Cheers and God Bless

Hi Judas,

I did think you would say something like God can do what He desires. However I am pleased to see that you then went on to say -

`...because Jesus was going to get his human body from Mary that it would have to be perfect and without sin. Otherwise Jesus would be receiving flesh tainted with sin.`

And that is the reason I believe that people thought this concerning Mary, that she had to be without sin so as not to pass sin on to the Lord. However that thinking is flawed. Now we know that Mary was of Adam`s race & thus would inherit his race`s sin. So logically we see that a baby born of Mary would also inherit that sin. But.....it was the Holy Spirit that gave the `life` aspect of the baby Jesus. Mary only gave the physical side.

The life is in the blood (Gen. 9: 4) & that is the part that the Spirit gave, while Mary gave the Adam physical side but not the `life` part which carried the sin. Jesus was no super man that never felt pain or suffering. That is the physical side, but Christ`s life from the Father by the Holy Spirit was holy. That is why He is called the second Adam as it is His precious blood that is pure.  

Note also that a mother`s blood never touches her baby. There is a thin lining between mother & the uterus, food passes through to the baby & the babies waste passes back, but the two bloods NEVER touch. So that is how God kept baby Jesus from being contaminated by Adam`s blood line.

As people didn`t realise that fact, they needed to come up with something to make Mary pure. But her impurity NEVER touched the Lord.

regards, Marilyn.

 

[Guest shiloh357]

3 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

We can ask Why does God....... questions till the cows come home. He's God and He decides what He does and how He does it. We have to follow the rules he sets out. He doesn't have to follow them. I've heard different speakers give various reasons. Mary is sometimes referred to as the new ark of the covenant. 

In the OT the ark was made from pure gold. Inside it where three items. The 10 commandments (The Word), a jar of Mana (living bread), and Aaron's staff (Priesthood). 

Mary obviously could not be made of gold but God could still purify her perfectly. Because inside her would be the same things that the OT ark carries except Perfected. In her womb she carried the Word made Flesh, our living bread and our High Priest. 

Let's dismantle this  unbiblical analogy of Mary being the new Ark of the Covenant.

Everything about the Ark of the Covenant points to Jesus and never to Mary.   The ark was a wooden box that pictures Jesus' humanity and it the box is overlaid with gold which symbolized Jesus' deity.  Jesus was/is 100% man and 100% God.  Mary falls far, far short of that.

The Mercy Seat on top of the Ark is made of pure gold and speaks to both Christ's redeeming work on the cross and his ministry as our Great High Priest It was sprinkled with blood every year on the Day of Atonement, which foreshadowed the shedding of Jesus' blood on the cross.  Just as the animal blood was sprinkled on the earthly mercy seat, so the blood of Jesus was also applied to the Ark of Covenant in Heaven (Rev. 11:9), which is what the earthy ark was patterned after.    Jesus took his own blood and entered into the Holy of holies in in Heaven and obtained eternal redemption  (Heb. 9:12).    Jesus is our Great High Priest in Heaven and is ministering on our behalf with his own sinless blood applied to the heavenly Ark of the Covenant.

And on top of that, the Ark was where God met with His people.  It was God who came to rest above the blood-covered Ark and from there he spoke to Moses and to the people.    This is important because it means that God has nothing to say to us apart from Jesus and His blood.

And that takes us to the three items within the Ark of Covenant.  It had the tablets of the law.  Jesus is the personification of everything contained in the Law, but more than that, Jesus kept the law perfectly, sinlessly.   Jesus is the only person ever born sinless, and the only person ever to live sinlessly.  It was Jesus' perfect keeping/observing of God's Law  that qualified him to be our sinless substitute on the cross.  Had Jesus sinned only once, mankind would be doomed.   The manna is Jesus who is the bread of eternal life from Heaven and the budding rod of Aaron, rich in symbolism, was for Israel, proof that God had chosen Moses and Aaron to lead them from bondage, but it also speaks to the supernatural aspect of Jesus' ministry AND it speaks to his resurrection. (Numb. 17:7-9).

So the Ark of the Covenant itself is Jesus as sinless man, eternal King, final offering for sin and Great High Priest. And contained in the Ark are the 3 main aspects of Jesus ministry and our relationship with Him, as the perfect Word of God, the Giver of Eternal life and our Risen Lord.  Prophetically, it pictures Jesus as Messiah/King, as well.

To make this about Mary, to make Mary the Ark of the Covenant, borders on blasphemy.  Every type and shadow pertains either directly or indirectly to Jesus.   There are no types for any one else in the Bible.  Typology of Scripture has Jesus as its focus, not Mary, not anyone else.

Quote

So why did God choose immaculate conception for Mary. I don't know, the analogy I gave is one; I think makes sense and can be drawn from scripture. I think that because Jesus was going to get his human body from Mary that it would have to be perfect and without sin. Otherwise Jesus would be receiving flesh tainted with sin. 

Biblically and spiritually speaking, this is a farce.   Jesus' sinlessness was the product of Jesus being God.  Sin does not come through the flesh.  Sin is not part of human DNA; it is a spiritual condition that is passed down spiritually to those are the sons of Adam.   But Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit.  He had a human nature, but not a sin nature.   Jesus was 100% man, but without sin, so he was not a son of Adam.   So Mary did not have to be sinless to bear Jesus because Jesus conceived in Mary supernaturally and thus circumvented any possibility that Jesus would be born with the taint of sin.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

5 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

The life is in the blood (Gen. 9: 4) & that is the part that the Spirit

You loose me on this. How did the spirit give only blood. Blood is a physical component that doesn't appear until well have conception. So Jesus wasn't  Jesus from the moment of conception? All of Jesus's DNA and physical component came from Mary. The divine nature has no physical component. God doesn't have blood, DNA or chromosomes. 

 

5 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Note also that a mother`s blood never touches her baby

This I had to look up because I didn't believe it. Now mind you I didn't dig too deep, but it appears this might be true. 

I still stand by my line of reasoning and here is why. There was no sperm (the Holy Spirit is Spirit and has now body) Jesus came from Mary's egg. Once conceived that egg began to divid and continued to divid until a circulatory system developed. Jesus blood came from Mary's egg. There was no blood was later injected into the egg by the Holy Spirit. 

-----------------------------

Lets explore Gen 9:4

-----------------------------

your argument about the soul being in the blood is an interesting one. One I have not heard and therefore considered. At first thought this seems unlikely. By saying the soul is in the blood than if you removed the blood from a person and put it into a container (a bit morbid to think I know) than you would have the persons soul trapped. What about blood transfusion, are you also injecting someone's soul into another person than? What about when a person dies peacefully than, are you saying that as long as the blood is in the person their soul doesn't leave? These are the questions that first come to mind. So I got out my google-fu and started looking. 

Bible Hub (which is NOT Catholic) has a bunch of commentaries and they list them one after another for easy comparison. it's seems what is happening here is few ideas: prohibition against cruelty, With out the blood the animal will not live, The blood is for God and God alone, in the atoning of sins. The idea that our eternal soul is contained in our blood is not supported by the commentaries. So it boils down to who is interpreting that verse correctly, you or them.

I was also curious to see what a Jewish commentary had to say on the subject. 

4But, flesh with its soul, its blood, you shall not eat. דאַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ:

flesh with its soul: He prohibited them [to eat] a limb [cut off from] a living creature; i.e., as long as its soul is in it, you shall not eat the flesh. — [from Sanh. ad loc.] [i.e., if the limb is cut from the animal while it is alive, it is forbidden to be eaten even after the animal expires.] בשר בנפשו: אסר להם אבר מן החי, כלומר כל זמן שנפשו בו לא תאכלו הבשר:

with its soul, its blood: As long as its soul is within it. בנפשו דמו: בעוד נפשו בו:

flesh with its soul…you shall not eat: This refers to a limb of a living creature. And also, its blood, you shall not eat-This refers to blood of a living creature. — [from above source]

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8173/jewish/Chapter-9.htm#showrashi=true

I believe Our soul is our consciousness, our awareness, our intellect. It is not contained in our blood vessels. There are not red blood cells, white blood cells and soul blood cells. Our blood is blood our muscles are muscles etc etc. The soul does not have a physical component. There isn't pools of blood floating around in heaven.

So I will continue to believe that the merits of Christ sacrifice was applied to Mary at the moment of her conception and was purified perfectly, she was filled full of grace and with that grace was able to remain sinless creating a perfect vessel for which Jesus would get his physical form from.

Cheers and God Bless