Posted on 12/14/2014 11:57:21 AM PST by ealgeone
The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.
Hmmm...better let the guys who write your Catechism know that:
Paragraph 1670 - ARTICLE 1 SACRAMENTALS 1670 Sacramentals do not confer the grace of the Holy Spirit in the way that the sacraments do, but by the Church’s prayer, they prepare us to receive grace and dispose us to cooperate with it.
Paragraph 155 - III. The Characteristics of Faith In faith, the human intellect and will cooperate with divine grace: “Believing is an act of the intellect assenting to the divine truth by command of the will moved by God through grace.”27 (2008
Paragraph 2022 - IV. Christian Holiness The divine initiative in the work of grace precedes, prepares, and elicits the free response of man. Grace responds to the deepest yearnings of human freedom, calls freedom to cooperate with it, and perfects freedom.
Paragraph 1993 - I. Justification Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent: (2008, 2068)
Paragraph 1811 - I. The Human Virtues It is not easy for man, wounded by sin, to maintain moral balance. Christ’s gift of salvation offers us the grace necessary to persevere in the pursuit of the virtues. Everyone should always ask for this grace of light and strength, frequent the sacraments, cooperate with the Holy Spirit, and follow his calls to love what is good and shun evil. (2015)
Paragraph 1477 - X. Indulgences “This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission the Father entrusted to them. In this way they attained their own salvation and at the same time cooperated in saving their brothers in the unity of the Mystical Body.”89 (969)
His yoke is easy because He's doing most of the pulling.
(I don't think Mary is doing much of that . . .)
I think that once you understand this point, your confusion will clear up. GOD says that NO ONE is righteous, ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. What He obviously means is Godly perfection - Godly holiness - Godly righteousness. This is impossible for fallen man to attain and without the Redeemer, we would ALL be lost no matter how humanly good, righteous or holy we are. David's psalm is speaking of that person who follows after God, who obeys what God commands, who loves God. But, no man could claim to be God-good, God-righteous, God-holy. Everyone has sinned. NO ONE is righteous before God. Jesus, alone, was the ONLY humanly perfect, righteous and holy person and that was because He was GOD. Mary is not God, Mary is a human, Mary's righteousness had to come FROM Christ's righteousness just like all those who will be saved do. He took ALL our sins upon Himself and died in our place so that we might be found in Him and become as righteous as Christ. That is the ONLY way anyone can be saved.
Luke 2:52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.Are you prepared to say "favor" here diminishes the stature of Jesus Himself, Son of God? Yet not so, because as to His developing human nature there was more and more in Him that brought the favor of both God and man.
Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.What is interesting about these and a number of OT references that use the same term, "favor," is that they depict the relationship a sovereign or a group of people had with a particular individual. I am not an expert on Elizabethan psycholinguistics, but it would be interesting to find and interview such a person regarding this data, because it may well turn out the translators saw "favor" as a good and commendatory way to express these special grants of good will toward certain individuals.
Acts 7:9-10 And the patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt: but God was with him, (10) And delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house.
Acts 7:44-46 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen. (45) Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David; (46) Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob.
Acts 25:2-3 Then the high priest and the chief of the Jews informed him [Festus] against Paul, and besought him, (3) And desired favour against him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem, laying wait in the way to kill him.
You say we are not saved by faith alone.....
Yet...We see this clearly in Saint Paul’s question to the Corinthians:
....”What have you that you did not receive?” (1 Cor 4:7)
This was at the very heart of Paul’s debate with the Pharisees: ....the issue of whether salvation is attained by faith or by the works of the law.... Paul ‘rejects’ the attitude of those who would consider themselves justified before God on the basis of their own works. ...Such people, even when they obey the commandments and do good works, are centred on themselves; they fail to realize that goodness comes from God..... Those who live this way, who want to be the source of their own righteousness, find that the latter is soon depleted and that they are unable even to keep the law..... They become closed in on themselves and isolated from the Lord and from others;... their lives become futile and their works barren, like a tree far from water....
Salvation by faith means recognizing the primacy of God’s gift. As Saint Paul puts it: “By grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8).
ENCYCLICAL LETTER
LUMEN FIDEI
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS
TO THE BISHOPS PRIESTS AND DEACONS CONSECRATED PERSONS AND THE LAY FAITHFUL
ON FAITH
Than? Perhaps you intended to use the word then?
Where is that little grammar nazi when duty calls, anyway?
Is he on a coffee break or something?
When he gets back, allow me to introduce the two of you to one another.
Grammar nazi, meet spelin' nazi.
Spelin' nazi, meet grammar polizia.
Penalties offset, but play does not go over (loss of down).
As far as "worshiping Mary" goes however, regardless of the restraint of some, perhaps even many Roman Catholics in regards of their own imaginations (speaking of imaginations) towards Mary, there is plentiful evidence in writing (speaking of words meaning something) that the "hyper" regard for this "Mary" entity being so much like worship any real difference is often more a matter of semantics (and denial of the truth of the matter) for in reality and practice "Mary" has been so widely given place only slightly lesser than the Trinitarian God (apparently, in the imaginations of many) as for her abilities to hear prayers and even perform miracles from on High --- she has been for all effects promoted into being something of a goddess, if but a demi-goddess for whom it is alleged, is only and always in the service of Jesus...
In RCC theology Mary has become identified as co-redemtrix, and not "a" one of those, but even "The" co-redeemer...in all but most official finality, of which those such as the Blue Army still presses and agitates to be done, (to include that description of "Mary" as being dogmatic).
Jesus promised that the Father would send the Spirit of truth -- but did not there name 'Him' Mary.
15 “If you love Me, keep[d] My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.Was it not enough for those of the Church of Rome to have insisted upon changing the Filioque to include the phrase "and the Son" in regards to where precisely it should be said the Spirit proceeds (or comes from), but that such persons as DeMontfort and an apparition of "St. Dominic" be believed when those make it out to be that "Mary" is as a governess of the (Holy) Spirit also?Footnotes
d. John 14:15 NU-Text reads you will keep.
From the supplied link to "Blue Army", there speaking of themselves, their cause and of "Mary";
and speaking of even the Eucharist itself, which is said to be central to true worship (not mere 'veneration');
This suggests nothing less than being "born into intimate union with" Jesus by way of having consecrated themselves to "Mary" while mixing all of that with taking communion also. Yet Catholics cannot see the problems in that sort of conceptualization which makes of Mary a heavenly shepherd of God Himself condescending to men of low estate by Himself bodily becoming the bread & the wine?
Such a subtle (Christian religious) confusion that is, by way of a fuzziness and blurring of distinct roles and identity.
Repeat after me; "The Holy Spirit is not Mary. Mary is not the Holy Spirit". Mary, nor anyone else (other than God) is fully part of the tripartite Godhead which is One...and [ahem] perhaps..."thou shalt not confuse nor conflate the two"?
Exodus 20:1-6 reviewed again in full in Deuteronomy 5:6-10
And God spoke all these words, saying:2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
Yet the great Marionist wrote in his "Secret of Mary" under sub-heading A TRUE DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN IS INDISPENSABLE;
23. "...It is very true that God, who is absolute Master, can give the graces which he now ordinarily dispenses through Mary, directly. It would be rash to deny that not only can he dispense his grace directly but he always did so in the past, and he also sometimes does so now. For example, God directly illumined the Magi, the wise men from the east. So too did he directly sanctify all the saints of the old testament; especially Moses, St. John the Baptist, and St. Joseph. However, St. Thomas assures us that now, a new order of dispensation of grace has been established by the divine Wisdom for the Church, which is the mystical body of Christ. Now, God ordinarily imparts his graces to men through Mary.
Can you see what is going on in that writing, those "words that mean things"? There and elsewhere throughout that so-called 'saint's' writings Mary is [rhetorically] made into being the conduit of the Holy Spirit, or else there be some other "grace" which DeMontfort is speaking of ? -- yet what could that be, if it be the same which "illumined the Magi" and directly sanctified all the saints of the old testament -- especially Moses.
Where was Mary when the Spirit descended upon Jesus as a doveas Jesus suffered John the Baptist to baptize himself -- and as the spirit of the Lord(?) had previously conveyed to that Baptist ‘Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’
Shall we focus upon the difference between the word "grace" and what we identify as the Holy Spirit? Should we do that, giving Mary an 'out' so to speak, for I am turning to these passages as test and comparison of Scripture with DeMontfort's written theology regarding Mary, and of "grace".
How strenuous will be the protection of Mariolotry be today, I do wonder...
Even then, if we were to forget about how DeMontfort's own descriptions just previously tended by default (due to other solid enough theology regarding the interaction of the Spirit with men) towards identifying the Spirit being that grace he wrote of, or conveyance of grace as was experienced in old testament era, and narrow our focus upon the word differences here, in light of what DeMontfort claims is Mary's role for "grace" (font of all graces, generally speaking) then how did the Spirit proceed from the Father -- without flowing through "Mary" -- first, if we are to be consistent in application of DeMontfort's theology, that is...
Setting those tangles momentarily aside;
As Paul more and less conceptually conveyed; that to die is to be "with Christ" the Scripture passages 2 Corinthians 5:6-9 , Philippians 1:21-23, Romans 14:8-9 alone are enough to allow us to confidently assume that Mary herself (God bless her soul) is now present with Christ, and therefor "with the Lord".
How then can the advice of DeMonfort (whom the RCC has declared be a "saint") over-ride OT teachings? And seemingly bypass Paul's own singular emphasis upon principle that each and every soul within the ekklesia (the Church) focus directly upon the Christ, looking to Him and none other as the means of our own salvation?
Does Christ no longer baptize with the Spirit? According to the insistence of the RCC, the Son does have a hand in it, so to speak -- just ask the Orthodox?
DeMontfort appears to be, in all his imaginative expansion of an ongoing, now heavenly(?) role of "Mary" in regards to our salvation, to ignore also the words of Peter, (that fisher of men, as Christ referred that He would make Simon Peter into being) Peter being attributed in the book of Acts 4 a verse 12 to have said of the one whom we know as Jesus;
But now...after centuries of doctrinal development (and then some) there is "Mary" along with Christ, coupled with Him rather inseparably, another name by which we are saved -- also? Oh, that's right, only in conjunction with Jesus, and only for her to Point towards Him, and those of the Roman Catholic ecclesiastical body merely asking "her" to "pray for us", etc., or at least that's the sort of excuse making that comes to the fore whenever Mariolatry is exposed -- for what it is -- which quite frankly is some other Gospel.
Is Mary not now in the heavens above?
What then of making images of that which is in the heavens above --- which it has been prohibited from times of old to bow down to, nor which should be served (even without 'bowing', I take it)
A few selections from DeMontfort;
The Church says of Mary: "You alone have destroyed every heresy in the whole world."
13. (7) In the new dispensation of grace, the Holy Spirit continues to produce every day, in a mysterious but very real manner, the souls of the elect in her and through her. These souls make up the mystical body of Christ.
14. (8) Mary received from God a unique dominion over souls which enables her to nourish them and make them more and more godlike. St. Augustine went so far as to say that even in this world all the elect are enclosed in the womb of Mary, and that their real birthday is when this good mother brings them forth to eternal life.
Whoa. time-out. stop everything.
He said that "Mary" has "a unique dominion over souls" and the it is she who "nourish(es) them" to "make them more and more godlike."??? And then DeMontfort alleges that Augustine said that it was "Mary" who brings people [forth] to eternal life? As for that last part, the Augustine quote, perhaps that man was speaking esoterically, and poetically (as an RCC apologist on this thread #3633 also suggested be the case). I would take it that way, while also arguing that DeMontfort was presenting that as more literal in support of his own gnosticism in regards to"Mary"
Excuse me, but Mary herself, regardless of what praises may legitimately be heaped upon her, was and is herself a mere created being, herself like our own selves being born a human being in every sense of the word/phrase, not sired from on high as was her own son Jesus was, but herself, as does every human being who has ever lived (that we know of) have earthly parentage on both her mother and father's side --- or else --- Jesus Christ is not the Only Begotten Son of God (unless we are to now be squeezing in a daughter to have been born of God, in manner similar to how Jesus was conceived within the womb of the virgin, Mary?).
Going back to DeMontfort's breathless promotion of Mary to status of Divinity (but without openly admitting to doing so, even as he does so);
Yet somehow this sort of talk does not equate with Mary herself sharing top billing (and worship) with God the Father, even though she is said to be "administrator and dispenser of all [His] graces". All this worshipful talk concerning Mary -- but -- no Roman Catholic actual worships her, if only right alongside Jesus, Himself.
I do not believe that. To insult persons on this forum, calling them "ignorant" and accusing them of merely imagining that at least *some* Roman Catholics, such as DeMontfort do not in actuality worship what they conceive in their own imaginations to be "Mary", is to show your own ignorance.
All the bluff and bluster (and denials) in the world cannot change the truth of the wider overall situation --- that yes, some Catholics do worship Mary, in all but exact-word open confession of committing that precise prohibited-by-the-Creator error.
Ha! ...and I have but to barely scratch the surface of the available evidences towards the existence of Mariolatry with Roman Catholicism. But you shoot out the lip and jeer about "overly active imaginations" and ignorance? pffft.
26. The second consists in entertaining for our Lady deeper feelings of esteem and love, of confidence and veneration. This devotion inspires us to join the confraternities of the Holy Rosary and the Scapular, to say the five or fifteen decades of the Rosary, to venerate our Lady's pictures and shrines, to make her known to others, and to enroll in her sodalities.
... ... ... 65. The fifth is the wearing of a blessed Medal around the neck. The Miraculous Medal given to St. Catherine Laboure, also called the Medal of the Immaculate Conception, is most suitable for this purpose. Our Lady herself promised great graces to those who would wear it. It is the first sacramental given to the Church to have ever been granted extraordinary promises of both sanctifying and actual grace from heaven.
"Blessed medals" alleged by "Mary" herself to have extraordinary promises, or --- both sanctifying and actual grace? Really?
The grace of God being first -- funneled through "Mary", from her on or to "inside/within" talisman-like charms? Is that not how pagans have long gone about their own religious affairs? Yet somehow that type of semi-idolatrous practice is not only okey-dokey as a choice, a way to be or become ever yet more "spiritual" and in tune with God -- this type of thing has been periodically, highly recommended from highest levels of the RCC too.
But it's all right since it has seemingly "Christian" sounding themes associated with the attitudes & practices, nevermind those attitudes and practices are otherwise forbidden, lead away from, alternatives towards have been provided in Scripture as it is written, such as John 3:5, with that being 'born from above' (as you have in the past insisted it must be translated as) requires one whom herself was and yet still is a created being herself.
How did Mary 'bring forth' the rebirth from above that the first Apostles (should not we assume?) had themselves undergone/experienced while she was yet living upon the earth? How come no one noticed such things? Did Mary give birth (from above) to the Apostle Paul also? Paul wrote of Jesus being as "new Adam", yet he wrote not one word about "Mary" being a new Eve. Was Paul (along with the rest whom gave Mary no such 'heavenly' credit or role) a son ungrateful to his own "spirit" mother? That would have to be the case if things such as DeMontfort (the "Mary" worshiper) were much at all true.
I'll stick with Paul, who himself enjoyed truly Apostolic approval and ratification.
If one declares that they (Catholics, and some Orthodox too -- when they 'venerate' icons) are not bowing down to or serving the image or object itself which is representative of the entity/object of the devotions, pagans the world over can and do say the same for their own representative 'art objects' which are looked upon as mere image or likeness of whichever spirit being they are directing their worship towards...thus the objects/images are not the "thing" itself which is being worshiped.
So-- so much for those kind of excuses also -- which serve as deflection of sorts towards speaking of the images (or statues) themselves, as if the 1st commandment was only about the images themselves --- instead of being about the entities having veneration & worship directed towards themselves, or else it would be OK to worship things or entities in the heavens above and the earth below, as long as a graven image was not associated with the devotions.
The end results of focusing prayer/veneration and yes -- even worship (of a sort) towards "Mary" and others perceived to be now in heavenly spirit realms can smack so directly reminiscent of pagan notions and imaginings of there being a pantheon (multiple gods and goddesses), and primitive ancestor worship also, that regardless of this result being [rhetorically] barely contained by notions that somehow these [now] celestial beings whom are not the One God, act only in full accord and agreement with Him --- still leaves the imagined results be that heavenly realms are now occupied by various spirit entities who can; receive unto themselves "veneration" and high praise, and can or will act on their accord to interact with those of us still living in this earthly realm...
The problem here is not that there are not angelic beings and such, or even that there is not now presently (from our own time-perspectives) those whom were not themselves created as human beings (rather than 'angels') yet having passed on from this earthly realm to the next, and are most likely now (so we hope) in some fashion abiding with Him in heavenly 'spirit' realms, but that humans here on earth are being directed to direct their own prayers towards anyone other than the Creator, Himself.
If He so desires, and it be according to His own holy intents for any of these lesser & created beings, be they once previous have been men (or woman) who had once walked the earth, or angels whom are more widely perceived as being not having been once 'human beings' themselves, to be sent to any now upon the earth, then so be it.
Yet if He would desire for them to be sent to interact with those of us still remaining here upon earth --- then they better not be preaching some other Gospel than the one Paul wrote to the Galatians that he himself had preached to them previous, or else Paul is no real Apostle much at all, and would himself be something more of a false prophet.
As Paul wrote;
"But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed."So aah, go jump in the river, the two-sies of ya'?And take all your assembled hatreds, insults and condemnation for
ProtestantsEvangelicals, along with actual Mary worshipers the likes of the so-called "Saint" Louis DeMonfort with you.If one would provide for themselves some water-wings, and/or strap an outboard across their own backsides...then maybe...just maybe one could make it across the Tiber so to speak, reach the other side, and clamber onto terra firma rather than the shifty sands of ongoing Romish supported identity confusion crises.
Speaking of the real world, and words that mean things...
I'm glad you mentioned that. Thanks.
And ignore the "inconvenient" parts.
I wonder if other people in the Bible are described as righteous (Hint: Being Catholic I already know that there are).
Gen_6:9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God.
Well over a hundred times are individuals, groups, and nations described as righteous in Psalms, and Proverbs. Ecclesiastes also described many as righteous.
But wait those are OT they don't count under the New Covenant (According to some of you all)
Let's see if any in the NT are described as righteous.
Mat_1:19 And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
Mat_10:41 He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward: and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward.
Mat_13:17 For verily I say unto you, that many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which ye see, and saw them not; and to hear the things which ye hear, and heard them not.
Hold on Jesus is describing righteous people from the OT I guess they do count.
Mar_6:20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was much perplexed; and he heard him gladly.
Luk 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
Luk_2:25 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Spirit was upon him.
Luk_23:50 And behold, a man named Joseph,(of Arimathaea) who was a councillor, a good and righteous man
Act_10:22 And they said, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous man and one that feareth God, and well reported of by all the nation of the Jews, was warned of God by a holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words from thee.
2Pe_2:7 and delivered righteous Lot, sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked (Another righteous from the OT)
1Jn_3:12 not as Cain was of the evil one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his works were evil, and his brother's righteous. (Abel is described as righteous)
I wonder if other people in the Bible are described as righteous (Hint: Being Catholic I already know that there are).
Gen_6:9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God.
Well over a hundred times are individuals, groups, and nations described as righteous in Psalms, and Proverbs. Ecclesiastes also described many as righteous.
But wait those are OT they don't count under the New Covenant (According to some of you all)
Let's see if any in the NT are described as righteous.
Mat_1:19 And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
Mat_10:41 He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward: and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward.
Mat_13:17 For verily I say unto you, that many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which ye see, and saw them not; and to hear the things which ye hear, and heard them not.
Hold on Jesus is describing righteous people from the OT I guess they do count.
Mar_6:20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was much perplexed; and he heard him gladly.
Luk 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
Luk_2:25 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Spirit was upon him.
Luk_23:50 And behold, a man named Joseph,(of Arimathaea) who was a councillor, a good and righteous man
Act_10:22 And they said, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous man and one that feareth God, and well reported of by all the nation of the Jews, was warned of God by a holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words from thee.
2Pe_2:7 and delivered righteous Lot, sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked (Another righteous from the OT)
1Jn_3:12 not as Cain was of the evil one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his works were evil, and his brother's righteous. (Abel is described as righteous)
Definitions from HELPS Word-studies
And a knowledge of Judaism helps even more. When the Jews celebrate a memorial/ remembrance they are simply recalling a previous event. They are actually participating in that singular forensic activity. When they celebrate the Passover it is an actual participation in the events described in the Book of Exodus. Since Jesus was engaging in the Passover with His Jewish Apostles they all knew that this was not just a simple meal. They were participating in the actual original Paschal event and were expected to participate in the Paschal event at His command.
Look at the Book of Exodus the Lamb must be consumed, just as Jesus (the Lamb of God) told them to consume His body.
Now I don't expect you to believe my explanation of the Passover. Go to AskMoses.com and speak to one of the Orthodox Rabbis and ask if what I said is true.
BTW still waiting on you to tell me your degree since I revealed mine.
What difference does it make, when anyone with the internet has the wisdom of the world at his/her fingertips. We can parse every participle and every verb of the extant Greek and Hebrew, but that won't get you past the early childhood indoctrination of a cult. Your constant harping about it only illustrates the inanity of it. It reveals nothing except pride (which is a listed sin, I believe!).
A degree just proves that you have sat in on some classes, and passed whatever they decided to tested you with. But, in the course of conversations here on FreeRepublic concerning spiritual things, some of us prefer to provide the answers provided by Scripture. without the misapplication and diversion from the truth, which usually comes from the Roman Catholic cultists. We define things according to how the Holy Spirit leads us, and find the answers ENTIRELY independent of any fancily dressed poseurs telling us what it says (usually opposite of the original texts and intent!).
Of course, the Roman cultists posting on this thread usually fall back on their indoctrination. They start giving you milk shakes, instead of milk. The chocolate or strawberry flavorings help hide the poison from perception. By the time you reach adulthood, or an age of responsibility, it has soaked into every pore and reeks of smells, and tolled with bells. Ritual replaces spiritual connections, and habit becomes SOP.
Sorry, but you win no prize with God, with whatever degree you may have earned. He is not a respecter of persons, and I have the greatest respect for those that have blind faith, as led by the Holy Spirit. YMMV!
Jesus says it best...
John 14: 26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. ...
And, Paul expands the thought...
1 Corinthians 2: 9 However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him" -- 10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
(BB)Be honest now, if Metmom had advanced degrees in Theology and ancient Greek and Hebrew languages, would it make any difference to you if she disputed something Roman Catholicism teaches?
You already showed your hand when you claimed:
(Mine) The thing I try to keep in mind is that protestantism is a vast intellectual wasteland.
Prots have difficulty accepting truth.
(BB) Among other equally bigoted ad hominem attacks towards non-Catholic Freepers when they disagreed with RC doctrines. So, what is your motivation for asking anyone for their scholastic credentials when you have already revealed it won't make a bit of difference?
You need to understand the meaning of the Latin phrase Ad hominem: ad ho-mi-nem in Culture ad hominem [(ad hom -uh-nem, ad hom -uh-nuhm)] A Latin expression meaning “to the man.” An ad hominem argument is one that relies on personal attacks rather than reason or substance.
Ad Hom are not allowed on FR and are pulled by the mods and we all had posts pulled. It is perfectly fine to make general statements, those are allowed. Your own comments "FRoman Catholics" in post 3689 are a perfect example.
I have had long polite discussions both on and off list with a number of non Catholics including both SR and AMPU. AMPU even gave me assistance with a Greek translation on a personal matter that I needed a Non Catholic perspective on. He spent a number of hours verifying that my translation was correct and I am most grateful for that as well as the discussion we had about the matter.
A degree would certainly give her opinions more weight. It is not the degree that matters in her case. It is the anti intellectual bigotry that is constantly presented. As well as the complete ignorance of the Catholic faith by someone, like yourself, that has claimed to be an ex-Catholic
When you Are questioned both of you dodge.
Perfect example: Earlier on the thread I asked both of you "Where did you learn to worship Mary?" I wanted to know specifically who taught you that Mary was divine. MM refused to answer and your response was to the effect of: It is difficult to say...
It isn't difficult to say. It is simply a matter of Fr. Brown during Mass, Sister Mary Joseph in 3rd grade CCD, My parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, taught me during......
The fact is that it never happened.
Cut this down to two or three paragraphs if you really want time to read it. Your posts meander too much for me to waste my time on.
Do you go to the internet to have your appendix removed, or that open heart surgery? No you go to a Doctor, someone who has a degree and proven experience.
Do you go to the internet when the police charge you with a crime? No you go to a Lawyer, someone that went to Law School and passed the Bar exam and has experience dealing with the type of case before.
So it is a legitimate question that I will keep asking when someone says something stupid.
What is your degree in?
In other words, it seems cannot refute the truth, so you try another diversion tactic.
I can answer it is just a few words...
MARY IS DEAD. We are all Saints... and the Roman Catholic cult is deceptive when it proclaims the dead can help get you to God's ear.. So are Mormons and Muslims! AND, they all define things by earthly standards rather than through the Scriptures as revealed through the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
But, that doesn't just fit the cultic standards, it defines them and declares their opposition to revealed truth!
... Hebrews 4: 14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. 16 Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.
You have no response to the question, so again try diversionary tactics... and make a request with no standing.
Look! Squirrel! (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain TRUTH!)
See now that wasn’t difficult. It want worth reading and doesn’t deserve more of a response, but it wasn’t difficult.
Funny, sad, little person.
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.