I don't mind saying I've heard no less creative rationalization anywhere. Some equal but none more.
Paul, in discussing faith before Jesus came, pointed to the faith of Abraham, and others, as an example of the faith that Jesus preached. Nowhere did he mention Mary.
If Mary is so important, why was she not mentioned in all of the New Testament beyond when she was alive, even beyond when Jesus gave her to John to take care of her?
But Mary's divinity wasn't recognized by Peter, Paul and the rest of the teachers and disciples? Until the Catholic ecumenical council realized the truth? You probably should examine this very closely.
You have no Biblical authority for deification of the lady - you have already capitalized an pronoun that refers to her ("Who she was"), mother of Jesus or not. I note she was the mother of Jesus, as God commanded, which she willingly submitted. But nowhere in scripture is there anything even resembling what the Catholic church teaches about her. Nothing, nada, zilch, zero.
The church has made all this up out of whole cloth.
Why would the church do that? I have one theory. To reach the women. To create a female principle to balance the male principle, because Jesus was male, and a female symbol focuses attracts and binds women, especially those not already attached to a man.
It is a marketing technique, but technique it is. And Catholic leadership is composed of brilliant men. I've read some apologies translated from the Latin on social issues. Tight and right.
In the spirit of believing that they're The Church charged with the salvation of all souls, compose exclusively the Body of Christ and have the divine authority to accomplish that mission, it is not a great mental leap to presume they would use any tactic to do their Biblical duty to their legacy from monarchical lineage from Jesus to Peter.
The problem as I see it is that this is not the way Jesus said to do it. And I believe paganistic goddess worship has consequences personal and social.
The scriptures, in Jesus' words, said that He is the truth and the life, and no one goes to the Father except by Him. Where is Mary shoehorned into to that? Show me. Point it out.
What church doctrine is or is not matters little when it follows scripture, written by those who were witnesses, close to the time it happened. It must not conflict with what is already written, or it is false doctrine. Paul was clear on this more than once.
You don't need to follow my logic. Read the scriptures. I think the church needs correcting, and that's the member's job.
WT,
I had said that I was ready to finish this exchange with you, but I feel compelled to come back and correct you about something.
I didn’t capitalize “Who” for Mary—it was for JESUS. I said “Who she was bearing”. The Who is Jesus. How can you miscontrue that? Why did you leave out that crucial word “bearing” and then put an erroneous twist on what I wrote?
Next-—”female principle” and “marketing technique”.
“Attracts women, especially those not associated with a man”.
For crying out loud—what a stretch.
You call it your “one theory”. I suggest you prove it. Theories can come right and left and out of nowhere and it doesn’t make them Truth.
It’s truth that we should wish to seek and serve.
You go on to say that “it doesn’t take a great mental leap to presume that they (the Church) would use any tactic”. A great mental leap—yes, I guess it doesn’t take a GREAT mental leap to “PRESUME”——but I do think that it would take logic and good/correct information based on provable facts. Other than doing it that way, I surely can see that it’s not a great mental leap.
Then you go on to write that the problem as I see it”—and that you “believe paganistic goddess worship has consequences personal and social....”.
These are your theories, mental leaps, presumptions and beliefs. I understand that.
I also think you have used hyperbole, exaggerration, incorrect information, presumption and theories to present your viewpoint and I’m not one bit swayed.
Whatever you want to say in reply I will most likely not read and will not make any further replies to you.
I wish you blessings.
ROE
“But Mary’s divinity wasn’t recognized by Peter, Paul and the rest of the teachers and disciples? Until the Catholic ecumenical council realized the truth? You probably should examine this very closely.”(WT)
I’d love to. Please tell me where you think it is. (Or is this just another protestant lie?)
“The scriptures, in Jesus’ words, said that He is the truth and the life, and no one goes to the Father except by Him. Where is Mary shoehorned into to that? Show me. Point it out.”(WT)
How about: His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye. John 2-5
“Why would the church do that? I have one theory.”(WT)
I love this form of “argument.” Don’t prove something, but assume it’s wrong and explain why your opponent made such a severe psychological error. You have repeated a lie that you have been corrected on several times, and though you can’t substantiate what you’ve said, you need to explain why somebody else might be lying.You need to read something posted in FR a while back
http://www.barking-moonbat.com/God_in_the_Dock.html