Posted on 05/09/2015 7:44:31 AM PDT by RnMomof7
Millions of sincere Catholics wear the brown scapular thinking by doing so it will help them spiritually. They believed the report that Mary made and is backing a salvation promise in connection with the brown scapular hundreds of years ago based on their religious traditions. Over the years wearing the brown scapular has been perpetuated by sincere Catholic leaders, such as the one in this video, but it is in complete futility that it is worn. It is a false hope and a spiritual snare. 
It is not based on God’s truth and is, therefore, just as deadly for the sincere Catholic as it is for the Hindu who bathes in the Ganges River thinking his sins will be washed away in the water or for the Muslim who kisses the black stone of Kaaba to be forgiven! [The picture to the right is Mel Gibson, the director of the Passion of Christ, wearing a brown scapular as he smokes.]
I too once wore the brown scapular as an Ex Roman Catholic. I know what it is like to be taught something and accept it as truth to find out later it is not only unscriptural, but anti-scriptural. It hurts, but TRUTH is what we must stand on to be safe. It takes humility in such cases to turn.
NOTE: At about 2:23 time-wise into the video, the speaker is quoted below. How could anyone deny that Mary is deified in Catholicism? Surely, this rampant idolatry is grieving to the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father. This is what Catholicism teaches about the brown scapular:
And so, wearing of the brown scapular reminds us, should remind us, of three things. First, that we are children of Mary. Second of all, that we need to work for our Lady. And finally, it should be a garment of humility and penance. First, by the brown scapular we profess ourselves to be children of Mary. The scapular of our Lady is a badge or a uniform so to speak by which we profess to whom we belong and who we serve. Likewise, our Lady in turn by wearing the brown scapular, she recognizes us as her children, as her special children. And because of that, she consequently protects us and watches over us. The brown scapular should also remind us that we need to work for our Lady because the scapular, which means shoulder garment, was originally that, it was a garment worn by religious in order to protect their habit, their religious habit that they wore on a daily basis during those periods of work to keep it from getting dirty, stained, from ripping, etc. and so therefore the scapular is a working garb. And so this should remind us that there’s no room for lazy piety. If we wear the brown scapular and we consider ourselves our Lady’s children, there’s no place for lazy piety but rather we should fill our lives with good works. This brown scapular should remind us the need to faithfully fulfill our daily duties, and to make another adaptation of Scripture, to labor as good soldiers of the Immaculate. Finally, the third place, the brown scapular is also a garment of humility and of penance. So in a spirit of penance, we should accept all the difficulties of our state of life and all the sufferings that our Lady may want to send us. And the scapular will give us the strength to do this. In all of our difficulties, we can always grab onto our brown scapular, remind ourselves of our Lady’s protection, her watchfulness, her presence and especially at the moment of death, when we can call to mind our Lady’s promise of salvation. Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.
* Not a single word about Jesus was mentioned there.
* The brown scapular is 100% religious mythology and idolatry, as Mary is deified as a type of Savior.
* No Bible light shines from such brown scapular Catholic tradition.
Indeed that is true. That is why I said it was speculation, and not to be worried about. Now, I ask you. Are there any other people in the world, who build religions on speculation?
There's nothing to quibble about. Your definition was wrong.
I did address your comment regarding the OT on genocide, slavery, etc.
YOU: And if you insist on literal fundamentalism, isn’t there all of the Old Testament genocide, slavery, rape and torture to reinstate?
>>ME: Wow...I have no reply to this statement that has no support in the New Testament. <<
There is nothing in the NT to suggest any of this would/should be reinstated. In fact, you're the first person I've encountered who has suggested this.
Not sure what your background is but it has a different understanding of the NT than mine for sure.
Don't your jaws hurt?
.
Scripture is not silent on the definition of sin (transgression of Torah) and since an infant cannot transgress a law they’ve not received, I believe that they’ve nothing to worry about.
I think we kicked this around here about a dozen years ago or so.
.
.
Moo!
.
Had they already bloomed for that season?
Me?
Plagiarist Boy??
Which ones?
Sorry; but the Book says she doesn't even know I exist.
Ecclesiastes 9:1-6
1 But all this I laid to heart, examining it all, how the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God. Whether it is love or hate, man does not know; both are before him.
2 It is the same for all, since the same event happens
to the righteous and the wicked,
to the good and the evil,
to the clean and the unclean,
to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice.
As the good one is, so is the sinner, and
he who swears is as he who shuns an oath.
3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that the same event happens to all. Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. 4 But he who is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten. 6 Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I'll 'disrespect' Rome's lady all day long; and she'll do NOTHING about it.
GOD is not gonna zap me for it and your veiled threats to me about it are not having any effect.
Do not infer that a poster has posted a lie, that implies motive and if a form of making it personal.
Now now...
You'll upset our FR Mormons and they won't donate any more!
You SURELY cannot be thinking of a JUPITER Talisman...
Could you??
"And in some very real and quite mysterious sense, this particular Table of Jupiter was the most appropriate talisman for Joseph Smith to possess."
http://mormoncurtain.com/topic_josephsmith_seerstones_section1.html
Here ya go...
Get a grain of salt ready...
http://www.millennialstar.org/lds-church-releases-video-about-temple-clothing-and-garments-including-photos/
Indeed!
http://www.tldm.org/News19/PowerOfTheRosary.htm
Yeah; he counts how many bananas you've picked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMigXnXMhQ4
I am reminded of a 2012 post written by an Antiochian Orthodox priest during that Chik-Fil-A affair.
Using the Bible Against Christians: Sola Scriptura Atheism
It has some advice to "sola scriptura atheists" about how not to use the Bible, and this advice, among other things, is based on the idea that the Bible is properly read within an authoritative "interpretive community."
What is "sola scriptura atheism," though? It's found in one set of responses to the idea of "the biblical definition of the family unit":
Perhaps you saw it, too: We were treated to a trotting-out of biblical polygamists, rapists, provisions of levitical law that require a widow to marry her husband’s brother, et cetera, ad nauseam. A-ha! There’s “biblical” for you! Look at all those sorry miscreants in the Bible, presenting an image of marriage and family life that would make the chicken-and-pickle-chomping Christian suburbanite shudder! Ha! We got ’em! And while we’re at it, let’s also mention that God hates shrimp, that God starts wars, and so on. The idea, of course, is to delegitimize the Bible or at least to claim that people who follow the “biblical” model of this or that are ignoring vast portions of Scripture to suit their own purposes.What struck me about all this is that these atheists and various other assorted anti-Christians were reading the Bible essentially as sola scriptura fundamentalists. In essence, they presume to claim that their own reading of the Bible is the only possible one, that their reading is also quite obvious (perspicuity), and that the Bible is the sole basis for Christian doctrine, life and legitimacy. If the Bible can be made unpalatable even to Christians, then it just shows that the whole Christian enterprise is bunk.
And, true to form, I saw plenty of sola scriptura Protestants arguing with these atheist fundamentalists on exactly the same grounds. The exchanges just got shriller and shriller, with each side claiming that the other must be stupid, evil or uneducated, which is what brought about their fallacious reading of the Bible.
As his view is not necessarily my view, no one should assume that I am his mouthpiece and reply accordingly. For example, I would've used different wording for his characterization of "sola scriptura." But I noticed some things of interest and relevance here. (I don't follow that site and didn't find his piece until this year. Although I don't remember the precise search terms, I actually found this piece after doing a search occasioned by a FR thread.)
Any beginning bible student KNOWs that she 'gave' nothing to the ANGEL that TOLD her what was going to happen to her.
GMTA...
...somewhere down in the recesses...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.