Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nuts and Bolts - By Tim Staples: Mary Worshippers Need Not Apply
Envoy ^ | Tim Staples

Posted on 02/15/2010 9:07:17 AM PST by GonzoII

The Scenario:

Ever have one of those days when you’re feeling full of energy and vigor? I mean, you’re feeling just obnoxiously happy? Well, this is one of those days.

Driving home from work, you switch on the radio to see what’s happening, and you tune in to a local Protestant radio station just in time to hear a preacher speaking against various Catholic doctrines concerning Mary. The show is called Pastor Bob’s Bible Hour. Pastor Bob proclaims: “Jesus knew Catholics would come along and begin to worship His mother and call her perpetual virgin and absurd things like that. But the Bible says: ‘Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brethren James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all of His sisters with us?’ (Matt. 13:55-56a). And isn’t it sad, my brothers and sisters?”

Pastor Bob goes on to say: “Jesus dealt with these Mary worshippers in His day. In Luke 11:27-28, the Bible says, ‘A woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts that You sucked!” But He said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”’”

On a normal day you would probably just listen, take a few mental notes and drive on. But not this time. You’re feeling a little bit too saucy. You take the first exit you see and head for a phone. This is just one more reason why you need to buy that cell phone you’ve been talking about getting.

Step One:

(Excerpt) Read more at envoymagazine.com ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History
KEYWORDS: bvm; catholic; mariolatry; moapb; ourlady
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,581-1,594 next last
To: Petronski
ROTFLOL. The POINT is that YOU brought up Ratzinger's past, NOT ME. And you have now admitted to that fact TWICE!

Refer to all and any of my posts on this thread. They will confirm the fact YOU BROUGHT UP RATZINGER, NOT ME.

441 posted on 02/17/2010 7:57:42 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
Of course he was. His police unit, of which he was head, was absorbed into the SS, thus making him a member.

Deny history all you want. Just don't expect everyone to swallow the (recent) propaganda.

442 posted on 02/17/2010 7:59:48 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Every knee shall bend (except for the Calvinists, who aren’t really praying to God anyway so...)


443 posted on 02/17/2010 8:00:54 PM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
His police unit, of which he was head, was absorbed into the SS, thus making him a member.

FALSE.

Despite what Goebbels taught you, repeating a lie will not make it true.

444 posted on 02/17/2010 8:02:10 PM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
The POINT is... almost never what you say it is.

You claimed I was the only one talking about it, but that was not true.

Then you state that I brought it up on this thread first, which is precisely what I have stated all along.

They will confirm the fact YOU BROUGHT UP RATZINGER, NOT ME.

And so what? This is a fact not at issue or dispute and completely irrelevant to lies about Pope Benedict's father and the SS.

445 posted on 02/17/2010 8:05:28 PM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: annalex; RnMomof7; HarleyD; blue-duncan
But how, do you think, the saints protect us if not by their prayer?

That is so peculiar. Why would you even want the saints to protect you when we have Jesus Christ as our advocate before God? Jesus /Christ, our Shepherd, our Redeemer, our Protector, our Deliverer.

"O LORD my God, in thee do I put my trust: save me from all them that persecute me, and deliver me" -- Psalms 7:1


"And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." -- 2 Timothy 4:18

Therefore, to whom be the glory?

To God alone be the glory.

446 posted on 02/17/2010 8:19:43 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 413 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
I said you brought the discussion of Ratzinger onto this thread. Which you did.

Trying to stay on topic with you on the thread is nearly impossible.

Nearly.

You argue like a four-year-old. And after this post, you're posting without my participation on this thread.

447 posted on 02/17/2010 8:25:50 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
Amen.

"Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints." -- Psalm 116:15

448 posted on 02/17/2010 8:30:00 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Dr. Eckleburg
“Blue Duncan doesn’t go by the text of it, characteristically for Protestants’ fear and disdain for the Holy Scripture as written.”

What I quoted is the way it is written. Mary was no mediator, at most she was a concerned invitee and pointing out an embarrassing situation. She did not know Jesus had any extraordinary power to miraculously turn water into wine so she could not be asking for a miracle. At most she was looking for the political messiah that was the hope of all Jewish women.

After the wedding feast at the beginning of his ministry there are only two times in all of the gospels where Mary is mentioned in proximity to Jesus; when she and his brothers tried to pull rank on those listening to his teaching and at the cross. The first incident Jesus didn't acknowledge her but simply said those that followed him were his mother and brethren. After the cross she is not mentioned until in the upper room after the ascension. She is not among those who ministered to him during his ministry and was not among those who were at the tomb for the burial protocols nor is she mentioned at any of the appearances before the ascension or at the ascension.

What Mary gave to him died when he died; nothing of hers survived his grave. His human spirit was given to him at conception by the Father and he always had his divine spirit. The Father raised him from the dead and gave him a glorified body and the exalted position he now has. That is the scripture; not some fanciful extra-canonical fiction.

The apostles are mentioned as having special places in heaven and believers are mentioned as having special places in heaven. But the scriptures are silent as to Mary. One would think that at least John, the one who was entrusted with her welfare at the cross, would have mentioned her in Revelation as having an exalted position along with the elders and those worshiping the Lamb and yet he is silent.

Mary's position now is no different than it was while Jesus was on earth. Mark 3:34, “And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!”

449 posted on 02/17/2010 9:16:58 PM PST by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

LOL. INDEED.


450 posted on 02/17/2010 9:29:55 PM PST by Quix ( POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 TRAITORS http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Petronski
You also appear to have an unhealthy preoccupation with Ratzinger's shady past as a Hitler Youth and a prisoner of war.

No, it's pretty much a running joke how long you'll wait in any Catholic thread to pound the "Ratzinger's a Nazi" drum.

What difference does it make who brings up the accusation? So far, until this thread, it's been the anti-Catholic bigots who bring it up, usually when they are losing an argument. The general topic of the thread doesn't seem to matter.

451 posted on 02/17/2010 10:27:40 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
lol. So you criticize people if they do bring up Ratzinger's past. And now you criticize people when they dont' bring up Ratzinger's past.

"A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." -- James 1:8

Far be it from me to stop you guys from mentioning Ratzinger's shady past on every thread on the forum. Go for it.

452 posted on 02/17/2010 11:19:27 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

Googling, “Was Pope Benedict a Nazi?” produces interesting results. Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Maureen Dowd, and Robin Williams all said so, in spite of the actual history of the Ratzinger family. Of course, Bill Maher later apologized, but now, of course, he’s busy trashing Sarah Palin.

Fine bunch of folks there, putting out that slander. /sarc


453 posted on 02/17/2010 11:19:28 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
So you criticize people if they do bring up Ratzinger's past. And now you criticize people when they dont' bring up Ratzinger's past.

No, I said it was pretty much a running joke as to how long you would wait, in any Catholic thread, to bring up the slander against the Holy Father. And that's true.

454 posted on 02/17/2010 11:23:11 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 452 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan
After the wedding feast at the beginning of his ministry there are only two times in all of the gospels where Mary is mentioned in proximity to Jesus; when she and his brothers tried to pull rank on those listening to his teaching and at the cross. The first incident Jesus didn't acknowledge her but simply said those that followed him were his mother and brethren. After the cross she is not mentioned until in the upper room after the ascension. She is not among those who ministered to him during his ministry and was not among those who were at the tomb for the burial protocols nor is she mentioned at any of the appearances before the ascension or at the ascension.

What Mary gave to him died when he died; nothing of hers survived his grave. His human spirit was given to him at conception by the Father and he always had his divine spirit. The Father raised him from the dead and gave him a glorified body and the exalted position he now has. That is the scripture; not some fanciful extra-canonical fiction.

AMEN!

God willing, our Roman Catholic FRiends will be able to see the Scriptural truth of your post and shed the idolatry that is Rome's unseemly elevation of a nice Jewish girl to "co-redeemer."

455 posted on 02/17/2010 11:26:46 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 449 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
I said it was pretty much a running joke as to how long you would wait, in any Catholic thread, to bring up the slander against the Holy Father.

But jokes are supposed to be funny, and this one is just weird.

See, I didn't "bring up" anything about Ratzinger on this thread. Petronski did. Continually. Relentlessly. Endlessly.

And none of that was funny (or accurate) either.

456 posted on 02/17/2010 11:31:19 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 454 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
God willing, our Roman Catholic FRiends will be able to see the Scriptural truth of your post and shed the idolatry that is Rome's unseemly elevation of a nice Jewish girl to "co-redeemer."

No, we're all pretty much wise to that Sola Scriptura junk.

457 posted on 02/17/2010 11:33:06 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
But jokes are supposed to be funny, and this one is just weird.

Yeah, anything more than knock-knock jokes pretty much goes over the Calvinists' heads.

458 posted on 02/17/2010 11:34:37 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
See, I didn't "bring up" anything about Ratzinger on this thread.

A simile about ducks and june bugs somes to mind....

459 posted on 02/17/2010 11:36:03 PM PST by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

Wrong on all counts.


460 posted on 02/17/2010 11:37:57 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 457 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,581-1,594 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson