The Worship of Mary? (An Observation)

Some of you will remember my recent decision to become a Catholic. I suppose I should be surprised it ended getting derailed into a 'Catholic vs. Protestant' thread, but after going further into the Religion forum, I suppose it's par for the course.

There seems to be a bit of big issue concerning Mary. I wanted to share an observation of sorts.

Now...although I was formerly going by 'Sola Scriptura', my father was born and raised Catholic, so I do have some knowledge of Catholic doctrine (not enough, at any rate...so consider all observations thusly).

Mary as a 'co-redeemer', Mary as someone to intercede for us with regards to our Lord Jesus.

Now...I can definitely see how this would raise some hairs. After all, Jesus Himself said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that none come to the Father but through Him. I completely agree.

I do notice a bit of a fundamental difference in perception though. Call it a conflict of POV. Do Catholics worship Mary (as I've seen a number of Protestants proclaim), or do they rather respect and venerate her (as I've seen Catholics claim)? Note that it's one thing to regard someone with reverence; I revere President Bush as the noted leader of the free world. I revere my father. I revere Dr. O'Neil, a humorous and brilliant math teacher at my university. It's an act of respect.

No. Big difference between respecting/revering and worshiping. At least, that's how I view it.

I suppose it's also a foible to ask Mary to pray for us, on our behalf...but don't we tend to also ask other people to pray for us? Doesn't President Bush ask for people to pray for him? Don't we ask our family members to pray for us for protection while on a trip? I don't see quite a big disconnect between that and asking Mary to help pray for our wellbeing.

There is some question to the fact that she is physically dead. Though it stands to consider that she is still alive, in Heaven. Is it not common practice to not just regard our physical life, but to regard most of all our spirit, our soul? That which survives the flesh before ascending to Heaven or descending to Hell after God's judgment?

I don't think it's that big of a deal. I could change my mind after reading more in-depth, but I don't think that the Catholic Church has decreed via papal infallibility that Mary is to be placed on a higher pedestal than Jesus, or even to be His equal.

Do I think she is someone to be revered and respected? Certainly. She is the mother of Jesus, who knew Him for His entire life as a human on Earth. Given that He respected her (for He came to fulfill the old laws; including 'Honor Thy Father and Mother'), I don't think it's unnatural for other humans to do the same. I think it's somewhat presumptuous to regard it on the same level as idolatry or supplanting Jesus with another.

In a way, I guess the way Catholics treat Mary and the saints is similar to how the masses treated the Apostles following the Resurrection and Jesus's Ascension: people who are considered holy in that they have a deep connection with Jesus and His Word, His Teachings, His Message. As the Apostles spread the Good News and are remembered and revered to this day for their work, so to are the works of those sainted remembered and revered. Likewise with Mary. Are the Apostles worshiped? No. That's how it holds with Mary and the saints.

At least, that's how my initial thoughts on the subject are. I'll have to do more reading.

Calvinists suggest that Man has “free will” but insist that an outside agent “makes the will make its choices” If something or someone “makes the will make its choices,” free will is not free. The Calvinist states the unregenerated man is depraved having neither desire nor capacity to come to Christ until they are regenerated and “the Father and the Holy Spirit cause the renewed sinner to embrace the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior.” One surely should see the grave contradiction!

If Calvinism were true, God mocks the vast majority of mankind. The literally hundreds of times in the Bible that God calls men to repent, weeping over Israel through His prophets are a further mockery. And He damns forever in the Lake of Fire those not believing the gospel; those who can’t believe unless He regenerates them and gives them the faith — and yet He refuses to do so? Is this the “God” in whom you believe? I hope not.

“God is love” (I Jno 4:8,16), but what kind of love is that? He assures us that He loves the entire world (Jno 3:16) and would “have all men to be saved” (I Tim 2:4). The biblical God does all He can to bring all men to Himself, but each one must choose. Of Israel, He laments, “What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?” (Isa 5:4). Jesus wept, “How often would I...and ye would not!” (Luk 13:34). But the Calvinist God damns multitudes He could have otherwise save. Again I ask, what love is that?

The Bible states, “Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely” (Rev 22:17); “being born again (‘regenerated’)...by the word of God...which by the gospel is preached...” (I Pet 1:23-25); “that believing ye might have life [i.e., be regenerated] through his name” (Jno 20:31). The Bible teaches a new birth through believing the gospel. Morover, the word “freewill” appears 17 times in the Old Testament.

Nevertheless, and that notwithstanding, Calvinists insist that only those whom God causes to repent and believe the gospel will do so. Only after He has “regenerated” the sinner can God supposedly, by “irresistible grace,” give him faith to believe. That is clearly neither biblical nor “hyper-Calvinism”, but the Calvinism of “moderates” such as John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, John Piper, D. James Kennedy, et al. They say that God loves all men—but has a “different love” toward those for whom Christ didn’t die and does not want in heaven and thus will not regenerate. If it could be, and I suggest that it hardly can be, construed as love, just what love is that? Does God really want all mankind to be saved (as the Bible says) or just a select elect? Did Christ die for all (as the Bible says) or just for a select group?

That everything that happens has all been predetermined by God based upon His foreknowledge doesn’t even make sense. God wouldn’t need foreknowledge to predetermine everything. He would just predetermine it. But God has not predetermined everything that happens in our world. That is Calvinist doctrine predicated on a denial of a man’s fundamental free will which makes a holy God the author of all evil. Both Paul and Peter link election and predestination with God’s foreknowledge but not the way the Calvinist suggests. Paul wrote, “Whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Rom 8:29). Peter declares, “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father...unto obedience...” (1 Pet 1:2). Those whom God, by foreknowledge, knew would receive Christ were elected/predestined to certain blessings. The Bible does not teach that God causes some to believe and refuses to give saving faith to others. I can’t fathom how someone could deny that everyone must have free will. If we don’t have it, what was Jesus talking about in Jno 5:40, when He said: ‘But you are not willing to come to me that you may have life.’”

Nevertheless, the fundamental reason for Calvinist thinking is understandable. It has to do with, whether we can say yes or no to the gospel, whether we have the option of receiving or rejecting Christ. If one can decide their own eternal fate, then God is at the sinner’s mercy. You know, Christ came and died, but it’s all in vain unless people believe, so therefore, they have limited atonement, of course, so that Christ’s blood is not wasted, as Calvinists would say, shed for people who are going to reject him anyway. And so for God to be sure that somebody is going to go to heaven, and not just an empty place up there, he is going to have to cause some people to believe. So then, they would go to scriptures like, except the Father draw them, and so forth, you cannot come to me. They forget that Jesus does say, Come unto me, and so forth.

We know that there could be no love between husband and wife, parent and child and between man and God, without the power of choice. You can’t make someone love you! And the power to love someone is meaningless without the power to hate them, or at least ignore them or not love them. We know that every day we make so many choices. You can’t say that we are just puppets on a string. But then, wait a minute! But then how can I say that you can say, Yes, to Jesus, or No, to Jesus, wouldn’t we all be personally responsible for our individual eternal destinies? Well, there is no way to get around it, we do make choices, and it does say, “Whosoever will may come!” Jesus says, “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.” Now that’s one hell of a misleading statement to say the least, or wait, it’s even worse than that if a person can’t come to Christ unless he makes them come to him. Why does He implore “Come unto me?” Why does God plead all through the Bible with his people to repent, and he says, Don’t do this abominable thing that I hate, I don’t want to punish you. He sends his prophets day and night crying out. Take Psa 81, “If my people had harkened to my voice I would have fed them with the finest wheat”, or Jesus weeping over Jerusalem: “How often would I have gathered you together, but you would not”, or Joshua saying: “Choose you this day whom you will serve”. All of those statements would be nonsense, a mockery, by telling a person who (according to the tenets of Calvinism is totally depraved), can’t make any choice except for evil, and one keeps pleading with them to repent. God, however, withholding, what Calvinists call Irresistible Grace, the very thing the individual needs for the very volition of repentand, and yet STILL keeps pleading and berating them for not doing what the individual hasn’t the least capacity to even conceive of (let alone do), which God could cause him to do if he wanted to.

Whe one reads through the scripture, verse after verse suggest that people can make a choice. Jesus said we’re not willing to come to me, so there must be a choice to be willing. Otherwise the Gospel and all of scripture is a charade, but the charade really hits deep into the solar plexus - you know, like the climactic charade at the Great White Throne of judgment. What in the hell is going on there? What is God saying to those, you know, the unregenerated, the lost, how is he holding them accountable for something? According to Calvinism, they couldn’t do anything but sin, and now God is going to damn them? What love is that?

There’s no excaping the conclusion that God is the ultimate cause of sin — or let’s not go that far, some would say that’s hyper Calvinism — but any way you try to get around it, it ultimately comes down to that. Why does Jesus ask us to pray, “Thy kingdom come, they will be done”, if everything is already according to God’s will, and if everything is already according to God’s will, man having no power of choice, all the rape, murder, crime, wars and evil, evil thoughts and so forth, is something that everybody can squarely point one’s finger at God for. Oh look! There he is, sitting all high and mighty on his judgment seat of Christ saying: “I could have caused you to believe in me, I could have caused you to repent, but I didn’t.” Well, then because He didn’t intervene, the only conclusion is that he wanted to damn YOU. What kind of love is that? I’ll tell you what kind of love that is: its the love of the demon called Allah. Quite frankly there’s no other way around it. Mohammad states in the Q’uran that he has no clue about his salvation. Even he has no assurance. Because that’s what God is: a capricious, arbitrary, vindictive God wallowing with glee in his sovereignty at the expense of the lesser mortals. It gets pretty tedious being an omneiscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being; need something to liven’ up the day, ya know? Need some yuck-yucks every now and then.

I think one of the most powerful passages concerning the matter is Isa 5:4, where he says: “What more could I have done for my vineyard than I did? I did everything I could to make them fruitful and to bring them to me, and they rebelled against me”. One risks turning the Bible into a charade with the premise man has no choice and God mocks him, Choose you this day-—Come to me, but you can’t come!

I don't think I've nailed it yet.

The only time free-will might be reasonably asserted to have existed was in Adam before the fall. Adam could have resisted if he would, since he fell merely by his own will. In this integrity man was endowed with free-will, by which, if he had chosen, he might have obtained eternal life. Nevertheless, there is no reality in the free-will thus attributed to man, in as much as God had decreed the fall, and therefore must have in some wise already biased Adam’s will. It was not left in neutral equilibrium, nor was his future ever in suspense or uncertainty. It was certain that sooner or later Adam would fall into evil, and with that inevitable fall there disappeared every trace of the free-will which man may have had. From that time the will became corrupt along with the whole of nature. Man no longer possessed the capacity to choose between good and evil - John Calvin¹

In Genesis 2, Adam (before the fall) is told by God to keep His commandment, "…of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Genesis 2:17). Would God require Adam to obey His command if Adam had no ability to obey? If God had, according to Calvin’s teachings, "biased Adam’s will" to disobey God, then God would be the responsible agent of man’s sin!

Gleason Archer in his commentary on the book of Romans writes,

The choice of accepting or rejecting God’s grace is made by each individual without prior causation. Since man is created in the image of God and God’s own moral choices are not caused by any outside predetermined force, it is fair to conclude that men too retain the prerogative of uncaused choice²

God’s biasing of Adam’s will is not found in Scripture, rather it is a presupposition by Calvin to support his errant teaching.

If man lacks free-will to carry out any decision between good and evil other than those determined in eternity past, then man has no choice but to carry out an already determined plan. It is important to realize that the teaching of Calvinism regarding free-will is actually no different than what is taught by ungodly materialists, fatalists, and others who deny any free-will in man. For example, materialistic psychology teaches that man is at the mercy of whatever stimuli that would appear in his environment. Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus, puts this view into perspective,

"The materialistic interpretation of nature, as the term implies, entails viewing all signs as the manifestations of physiochemical processes, such as human beings observe when they look at nature. Joy and sadness, fear and elation, anger, greed. . .all human aspirations and passions. . .are thus interpreted as the manifestations of unintentional, amoral, biochemical processes. In such a world, nothing is willed; everything happens.³

This kind of thinking is no different than the evolutionist’s idea that man is simply a product of nature; that is, nature has determined for him to act a certain way. Interestingly, the idea that man has no free-will is also the teaching of the New Age and other false religious systems that say man is simply an agent by which a greater power (cosmic conscience) acts out its will in the life of man to bring him into a "perfect oneness." This is known as determinism (the doctrine that outer events and human choices are the results of antecedent conditions, physical or psychological).

Moreover, I find it exceedingly odd, that purported Christians would adhere to the same philosophies, i.e., pertaining to predestination and free-will, as that proponents of Hinduism and Islam declare. Both of those religions promote the secular doctrine of fatalism. Fatalism is the teaching that all things are subject to fate, or that they take place by inevitable necessity. Samuel M. Zwemer, drawing from a vast knowledge of the Muslim mind, said,

The terminology of their teaching is Calvinistic, but its practical effect is pure fatalism. Most Muslim sects ‘deny all free agency in man and say that man is necessarily constrained by the force of God’s eternal and immutable decree to act as he does.’ God wills both good and evil; there is no escaping from the caprice of His decree…. Fatalism has paralyzed progress; hope perishes under the weight of this iron bondage…⁴

A.S. Geden writes,

The Muslim is a fatalist…. The Divine will is irresistible, and has decreed in every detail the entire course of the universe which He governs, and the fate each moment of every creature therein…. The only attitude possible for man is that of complete and passive resignation…. Its dogma of predestination and of fate is based upon its conception of the Divine nature…. The Divine government…leaves no room for human free-will, forethought or choice⁵

J.N.D. Anderson, an authority on Islam, says, "A Muslim is required to believe in God’s Decrees. As we have already seen, the orthodox belief is that everything. . .good or evil. . .proceeds directly from the divine will, being irrevocably recorded"⁶

From Genesis to Revelation man is continually shown to be exercising his God-given ability to choose, even after the fall of Adam. In Isaiah 5:20, the people were certainly capable of choosing between good and evil. The Scripture reveals how they changed good for evil and evil for good: "Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter." They had the ability to discern between good and evil, otherwise how could they have changed it? Romans 1:17-32 is clear that man has chosen evil and is not predetermined to do so. Romans 1:28 clearly says, "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind…."

British Authors Forster and Marsten point out, The doctrine of ‘free-will’ seems to have been universally accepted in the early church. Not a single church figure in the first 300 years rejected it and most of them stated it clearly…. The only ones to reject it were heretics⁷

Throughout the Bible man is seen to be responsible for his actions and accountable for his response’s to God’s overtures. All of this indicates that man has a free-will. That this is so obvious in both the Old and New Testaments little more needs to be said about it. To do so would be to recount the story of man from Genesis to Revelation. In closing it would do well to ponder the words of M. R. Vincent, a gifted Presbyterian scholar and writer,

That the factor of human freedom [free-will] has full scope in the divine economy is too obvious to require proof. It appears in numerous utterances…and in the entire drift of Scripture, where man’s power of moral choice is both asserted, assumed, and appealed to.⁸

--------------------
Notes:

1. Calvin’s Institutes II, chapter iv, page 8

2. The Epistle to the Romans, p. 61

3. Insanity. . .The Idea and Its Consequences, p. 350

4. Religions of Mission Fields, pp. 224, 245

5. Comparative Religion, pp. 102,103

6. The World’s Religions, p. 82

7. God’s Strategy In Human History, p. 244.

8. Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. III, p. 136

There are at least 4 major implication to Calvinist doctrine. The first, and most profound, implication of Calvinist doctrine of predestination to consider deals with death and when this death occurred. The second implication of Calvinist doctrine, i.e., free-will, has already been addressed at length in prior posts. According to John Calvin,

The reprobate like the elect are appointed to be so by the secret council of God’s will¹
…their doom was fixed from all eternity and nothing in them could transfer them to a contrary class…²
…Not all men are created with similar destiny but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the other of these ends, we say, he is either predestined either to life or death"³

Genesis 2:17 states, "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." It was at the time of Adam’s fall that God placed death (physical and spiritual) upon the human race, not before the creation of man, and certainly not before man’s fall into sin. The Bible says, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12). Death did not pass unto men until man’s sin, "For since by man came death…" (1 Cor. 15:21). Notice also that at the time of Adam’s sin, death (physical and spiritual) passed "upon all men" not a "class" of men as Calvin taught. It is worth noting that the Bible clearly teaches that men will suffer God’s eternal judgment of their sin after they are righteously judged by God at the future Great White Throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15). Nowhere does the Scripture teach that God has appointed certain men to perdition prior to their creation by Him.

The biblical record states that all of God’s creation was good including man, "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good…" (Gen. 1:31). We also know that God created all men for His pleasure as Revelation 4:11 states, "For thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Ezekiel 18:23,32 and 33:11 teach that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God would not have placed eternal death upon men and separation from Him before He created them, and at the same time say He created them for His pleasure. Much less would God pronounce His creation good if before its existence He had plagued His creation with the death of certain men. The tenets of John Calvin and his followers are illogical.

Ezekiel 33:11, the Lord makes a very interesting statement about Himself. He says, "Say unto them, as I live, sayeth the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked…." Notice that God prefaces His statement with, "As I live." How long has God lived? The Scriptures teach that God is eternal and immutable. . .that is, He changes not. Therefore, from eternity past (that is throughout all of eternity and even before the creation of man) God has never had any pleasure in the death of the wicked. It is illogical to speculate that prior to the foundation of the Universe, it pleased God to appoint some to damnation.

When man fell into sin, the two-pronged dagger of death (physical and spiritual) entered the human race. These two points of the dagger are not mutually exclusive of one another and never have been. To say that God applied spiritual death to certain men prior to the fall of man not only makes God a liar regarding His statements about His creation work, but also displays a significant lack of trust in God’s revealed word. It is also doctrinal error since predestination in the Scripture only concerns itself with making a believer’s future adoption certain. Dr. H. A. Ironside wrote concerning predestination,

It is the Father who has predestinated us to the adoption of children. Nowhere in the Bible are people ever predestinated to go to hell, and nowhere are people ever predestinated to go to heaven. Look it up and see. We are chosen in Christ to share His glory for eternity, but predestination is always to some special place of blessing. Turn to Romans 8:29. Predestinated to what? Predestinated ‘to be conformed to the image of His Son.’ You see, predestination is not God from eternity saying ‘This man goes to Heaven and this man goes to hell.’ No, but predestination teaches me that when I have believed in Christ, when I have trusted Him as my Saviour, I may know on the authority of God that it is settled forever that some day I am to become exactly like my Saviour⁴

Dr. W. L. Pettingill wrote about Rom 8:29,

"Whosoever will may come. He [man] is only to come, and God does all the rest. God will undertake for him, and thereafter see to it that all things work together for good unto him. This is His eternal purpose which He purposed before the world was…. The word ‘for’ in verse 29, has the force of ‘because’ and it introduces the reason for our assurance that all things are working together for our good…. The past tense continues through the whole passage, although the glorification is yet future, for God is able to count things done even when they have not been done. Our glorification is according to His purpose, and nothing is to be suffered to thwart His purpose. Having been foreknown and predestinated and called and justified, we shall also be glorified"⁵

Predestination has nothing whatsoever to do with sending certain people to heaven and others to damnation as Calvin taught. Predestination’s purpose (according to Scripture) is to conform the believer to the image of God’s Son. Mark G. Camron, a Baptist leader and professor wrote,

"Scripture teaches that God has predestinated those who have believed (and those who will believe) to be conformed to the image of His Son. In other words, it is the plan of God, determined beforehand, that every believer is going to be made like unto the Lord Jesus Christ…. God has determined that those who are saved are going to be like His Son"⁶

C. H. Spurgeon declared, "Mark then, with care, that OUR CONFORMITY TO CHRIST IS THE SACRED OBJECT OF PREDESTINATION"⁷

Romans 8:23 says, "And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." Ephesians 1:5 says, "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will." This verse explains that the believer is predestined to adoption. However, as mentioned, adoption is defined for us in Romans 8:23 as future, occurring at the redemption of our body. Adoption is what we are predestined for. Adoption is receiving the full privileges of being a child of God, whereas presently we only have the firstfruits of the Spirit. Adoption is not our salvation. We are born again into the family of God, not adopted. The belief that adoption and the new birth are the same thing is error and is not the teaching of God’s Word. Adoption takes place when a believer receives his glorified body and is conformed to the image of God’s Son.

Writing on the subject of adoption the well known Baptist pastor I. M. Haldeman explained,

"There are great facts concerning us as believers which relate us to the dispensation of the fullness of times…. He has predestinated us to the place of sons in that dispensation, as it is written (Ephesians one)…. The expression, ‘the adoption of children’ in the Greek is uiothesia…. The compound word, therefore, signifies ‘son placing. . .the place of a son.’ Thus, as believers, we have been predestinated in that coming dispensation to the place of sons"⁸

Recognizing there are only two chapters in Scripture where the words predestinate or predestinated are found (Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:5,11) and understanding that there is no reference in these four verses to Heaven or hell, but only to believers ultimate conformity to Jesus Christ, John Calvin’s teaching on predestination must be rejected. Sometimes one must make certain to nail it WELL. Because once its been nailed well, there can be no nattering over neither ignorance, nor willfull-ignorance, instead it becomes an issue of deliberate, stubborn, mulish, stiff-neckedness.

--------------------------------------------
NOTES:

1) Calvin’s Institutes II, chapter xxii, page 11

2) Calvin’s Institutes III, chapter iii, page 4

3) Calvin’s Institutes III, chapter xxiii.

4) In the Heavenlies, Expository Addresses on Ephesians, pp. 34-35.

5) Bible Questions Answered, p. 374

6) The New Testament. . .A Book-by-Book Survey, pp. 200-201

7) Treasury of the New Testament, Vol. II, p. 72; emphasis Spurgeon’s

8) The Book of the Heavenlies, pp. 4-5

FK: Then can you show me the exception for Mary in the Bible?

Can you show me sola scriptura in the Bible?

Yes, sure. Here are a few passages that individually support the doctrine, and when put together proclaim it:

Acts 17:10-11 : 10 As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (Scriptures are final authority)

2 Tim 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (SO THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE THOROUGHLY EQUIPPED - thoroughly equipped means everything we need)

Isa 8:19-20 : 19 When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living? 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn. (No light unless according to God's word.)

John 20:30-31 : 30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (All that we need to know for salvation is written in scriptures.)

Prov 30:5-6 : 5 "Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. 6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar. (God's word is enough, it is not good to add to it.)

John 5:39-40 : 39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. KJV (We should go where Jesus tells us, to the place that testifies about Him.)

1 Cor 4:6-7 : 6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. (Self explanatory.)

All of these, along with other passages lead us Bible-believing Christians to the inescapable conclusion that Sola Scriptura is true and taught by God's word.

Now, can you show me exceptions, of the same quality as these verses, for Mary in the Bible?

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.